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>As the death toll from Hurricane Harvey rises and Americans live through the devastation, some are using the natural disaster to score political points against President Donald Trump.</p>
<p>On Sunday, an assistant sociology professor at the University of Tampa took to Twitter to suggest that Texans deserved the wrath of Hurricane Harvey because they voted for Trump.</p>
<p>In the tweet that has since been deleted, Kenneth Storey said: “I don’t believe in instant karma but this kinda feels like it for Texas. Hopefully this will help them realize the GOP doesn’t care about them.”</p>
<p>One of Storey’s followers questioned his comments, reminding him that there are “lots of good people in Texas,” and asking Storey to “rethink this one.”</p>
<p>However, Storey doubled down, saying that “the good people there need to do more to stop the evil their state pushes” and specifically stated that those who voted for Trump in Florida “deserve it as well.”</p>
<p>The university quickly condemned Story’s comments. In a statement released Tuesday, the institution said they “understand the pain this irresponsible act has caused.”</p>
<p>“As Floridians, we are well aware of the destruction and suffering associated with tropical weather. Our thoughts and prayers are with all impacted by Hurricane Harvey,” the university said.</p>
<p>The school announced that Storey was relieved of his position for his comments, and other faculty members will take over his classes.</p>
<p>Harris County, which encompasses Houston, went to Hillary Clinton during the 2016 presidential elections. She won 55 percent and Trump got 42 percent of the vote.</p>
<p>Before deleting his Twitter account, Storey posted an apology.</p>
<p>“I deeply regret a statement I posted yesterday,” Storey tweeted, according to the <a href="http://www.tampabay.com/news/education/college/ut-condemns-teacher-whose-tweet-blames-harvey-on-texas-gop-vote/2335504" type="external">Tampa Bay Times</a>. “I never meant to wish ill will upon any group. I hope all affected by Harvey recover quickly.”</p>
<p>On Friday, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) released a <a href="https://www.aclu.org/news/aclu-comment-border-patrol-checkpoints-during-texas-hurricane" type="external">statement</a> which claimed that US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) was “putting undocumented people and mixed-status families at risk out of fear of deportations” by not closing checkpoints in Texas during the storm.</p>
<p>“This is a disgusting move from the Border Patrol that breaks with past practices. The Border Patrol should never keep checkpoints open during any natural disasters in the United States,” Lorella Praeli, ACLU’s director of immigration policy and campaigns, said. “Everyone, no matter the color of their skin or background, is worth saving.”</p>
<p />
<p>If you don’t want people to risk their lives, don’t make undocumented and mixed status families choose between safety and checkpoints. <a href="https://t.co/xOQkMgoRME" type="external">https://t.co/xOQkMgoRME</a></p>
<p>— ACLU National (@ACLU) <a href="https://twitter.com/ACLU/status/901100589047840768" type="external">August 25, 2017</a></p>
<p />
<p>Praeli claims that people seeking refuge from the storm would “have to go north or west of Texas and would have to go through a checkpoint.”</p>
<p>Read more</p>
<p><a href="https://www.rt.com/usa/400915-hurricane-harvey-texas-coast/" type="external" /></p>
<p>However, the <a href="http://thefederalist.com/2017/08/28/fake-news-border-patrol-checkpoints-hurricane-harvey-americans-hate-media/" type="external">Intercept</a> noted that “there are no checkpoints in the areas affected by the storm, and no one fleeing Hurricane Harvey will encounter a Border Patrol checkpoint.”</p>
<p>The closest checkpoints are 80 and 50 miles from Corpus Christi, and no one would use those roads to flee from the storm since they do not lead to higher ground inland, according to the Intercept.</p>
<p>On Friday, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and CBP released a <a href="https://www.ice.gov/news/releases/joint-statement-ice-and-cbp-regarding-hurricane-harvey" type="external">joint statement</a> that said “routine non-criminal immigration enforcement operations will not be conducted at evacuation sites, or assistance centers such as shelters or food banks.”</p>
<p>“The Department’s law enforcement components will be at the ready to help anyone in need of assistance,” ICE and CBP wrote. They added: “The laws will not be suspended, and we will be vigilant against any effort by criminals to exploit disruptions caused by the storm.”</p>
<p>As Trump headed to Texas to meet with local leaders and relief organizers, First Lady Melania Trump was photographed boarding Air Force One wearing designer high heels.</p>
<p>The fashion choice quickly went viral, with critics taking the opportunity to mock the First Lady for being “out of touch” for wearing designer shoes to a disaster zone.</p>
<p>By the time the First Lady landed in Texas, she had swapped her heels for a pair of white sneakers. She was also wearing a white button up shirt and a black baseball hat that read “FLOTUS” in white letters.</p>
<p>Stephanie Grisham, the First Lady’s communications director, said the attention Melania received from her wardrobe choice was “sad.”</p>
<p>“It’s sad that we have an active and ongoing natural disaster in Texas, and people are worried about her shoes,” Grisham said in a statement released to CNN.</p>
<p />
<p>from <a href="https://twitter.com/FLOTUS" type="external">@FLOTUS</a> comms dir: “It’s sad that we have an active and ongoing natural disaster in Texas, and people are worried about her shoes.”</p>
<p>— Kate Bennett (@KateBennett_DC) <a href="https://twitter.com/KateBennett_DC/status/902546145993523200" type="external">August 29, 2017</a></p>
<p />
<p>Some news organizations also used the opportunity to criticize Trump’s decision to roll back Obama-era regulations, including the Federal Flood Risk Management Standard, which Trump said was “a massive, self-inflicted wound on our country.”</p>
<p>The regulation never went into effect. It would have required federally-funded infrastructure projects to “address current and future flood risk and ensure that projects funded with taxpayer dollars last as long as intended.”</p>
<p>Trump announced the regulation would be repealed by <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2017/08/15/presidential-executive-order-establishing-discipline-and-accountability" type="external">executive order</a> during a news conference last month on reforming “the nation’s badly broken infrastructure permitting process.”</p>
<p>When he arrived in Texas, Trump was met by large crowds who reportedly greeted him cheering “Trump!” and “USA!”</p>
<p>Texas Governor Greg Abbott praised Trump for his support, saying his efforts had made the emergency response “more effective.”</p> | false | 1 | death toll hurricane harvey rises americans live devastation using natural disaster score political points president donald trump sunday assistant sociology professor university tampa took twitter suggest texans deserved wrath hurricane harvey voted trump tweet since deleted kenneth storey said dont believe instant karma kinda feels like texas hopefully help realize gop doesnt care one storeys followers questioned comments reminding lots good people texas asking storey rethink one however storey doubled saying good people need stop evil state pushes specifically stated voted trump florida deserve well university quickly condemned storys comments statement released tuesday institution said understand pain irresponsible act caused floridians well aware destruction suffering associated tropical weather thoughts prayers impacted hurricane harvey university said school announced storey relieved position comments faculty members take classes harris county encompasses houston went hillary clinton 2016 presidential elections 55 percent trump got 42 percent vote deleting twitter account storey posted apology deeply regret statement posted yesterday storey tweeted according tampa bay times never meant wish ill upon group hope affected harvey recover quickly friday american civil liberties union aclu released statement claimed us customs border protection cbp putting undocumented people mixedstatus families risk fear deportations closing checkpoints texas storm disgusting move border patrol breaks past practices border patrol never keep checkpoints open natural disasters united states lorella praeli aclus director immigration policy campaigns said everyone matter color skin background worth saving dont want people risk lives dont make undocumented mixed status families choose safety checkpoints httpstcoxoqkmgorme aclu national aclu august 25 2017 praeli claims people seeking refuge storm would go north west texas would go checkpoint read however intercept noted checkpoints areas affected storm one fleeing hurricane harvey encounter border patrol checkpoint closest checkpoints 80 50 miles corpus christi one would use roads flee storm since lead higher ground inland according intercept friday immigration customs enforcement ice cbp released joint statement said routine noncriminal immigration enforcement operations conducted evacuation sites assistance centers shelters food banks departments law enforcement components ready help anyone need assistance ice cbp wrote added laws suspended vigilant effort criminals exploit disruptions caused storm trump headed texas meet local leaders relief organizers first lady melania trump photographed boarding air force one wearing designer high heels fashion choice quickly went viral critics taking opportunity mock first lady touch wearing designer shoes disaster zone time first lady landed texas swapped heels pair white sneakers also wearing white button shirt black baseball hat read flotus white letters stephanie grisham first ladys communications director said attention melania received wardrobe choice sad sad active ongoing natural disaster texas people worried shoes grisham said statement released cnn flotus comms dir sad active ongoing natural disaster texas people worried shoes kate bennett katebennett_dc august 29 2017 news organizations also used opportunity criticize trumps decision roll back obamaera regulations including federal flood risk management standard trump said massive selfinflicted wound country regulation never went effect would required federallyfunded infrastructure projects address current future flood risk ensure projects funded taxpayer dollars last long intended trump announced regulation would repealed executive order news conference last month reforming nations badly broken infrastructure permitting process arrived texas trump met large crowds reportedly greeted cheering trump usa texas governor greg abbott praised trump support saying efforts made emergency response effective | 537 |
<p>Two days after the federal government reopened following <a href="https://sinclairstoryline.com/news/connect-to-congress/house-republicans-democrats-blame-each-other-as-possible-shutdown-approaches" type="external">a weekend shutdown over immigration policy</a>, senators on Capitol Hill seemed to still be far from reaching a consensus on the fate of immigrants who were brought to the U.S. illegally as children.</p>
<p>The so-called Dreamers, beneficiaries of the Obama-era Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, face the loss of their protection from deportation in early March after President Donald Trump announced in September that it will end unless Congress acts.</p>
<p>Senate Democrats had <a href="https://sinclairstoryline.com/news/local/at-heart-of-government-shutdown-dreamers-call-on-congress-to-protect-young-immigrants" type="external">demanded that permanent status for the Dreamers</a> be addressed before they agreed to a continuing resolution to fund the government into February. Republicans insisted that immigration be dealt with separately from keeping the government open.</p>
<p>The standoff led to a 69-hour shutdown <a href="https://sinclairstoryline.com/news/nation-world/senate-talks-fall-short-shutdown-extends-into-workweek" type="external">lasting from midnight Saturday to early evening Monday</a>, before Democrats agreed to funding through Feb. 8 in exchange for assurances from Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., that he intends to take up the Dreamer issue before then or allow a vote on the Senate floor.</p>
<p>Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., expressed skepticism that McConnell will keep his word rather than kicking the issue down the road as lawmakers have in the past.</p>
<p>“You’ve got another one of these, ‘Well, let’s see what happens in the next few weeks,’” he said. “The track record particularly of Mitch McConnell on these matters is not too great.”</p>
<p>Wyden also criticized McConnell for setting up a “false choice” between protecting Dreamers and extending the Children’s Heath Insurance Program, which the continuing resolution reauthorized for six years.</p>
<p>“The false choice was you can either be for sick children or you could be for young people who have spent their entire lives in the United States and just want a path to citizenship,” he said.</p>
<p>President Trump has called for any legislation that gives Dreamers legal status to also include funding for a border wall and the elimination of extended-family-based immigration and the diversity lottery. He already rejected a bipartisan Senate proposal that the White House said did not provide enough concessions on those issues.</p>
<p>Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., had reportedly offered Trump authorization for the $20 billion the administration is seeking for the border wall in a bid to keep the government open last week, but Schumer said Tuesday the wall is now off the table.</p>
<p>“Oregonians told me they want us to be serious about roads and bridges and transportation systems,” Wyden said. “They want us to build schools, not walls.”</p>
<p>Given the brevity of the shutdown and the fact that most of it occurred over a weekend, Sen. Jim Risch, R-Idaho, indicated its impact was likely minimal, but he still takes issue with the concept of one party holding the government hostage.</p>
<p>“Look, nobody likes it,” he said. “We were elected to govern, not to not govern…. The country wants governance and you need governance.”</p>
<p>He has sponsored a bill that would prevent shutdowns, with funding just continuing at the same levels if budget agreements are not reached and decreasing slowly over time.</p>
<p>Signaling the difficulty of crafting an immigration compromise palatable to both sides, Risch objected to dealing with the Dreamers’ status on its own, which is what Democrats would prefer.</p>
<p>“What I would say no to would be just a bill that nothing but give citizenship to the people that are here illegally,” Risch said. “All that does is work on the symbol, it doesn’t work on the problem.”</p>
<p>The problem, he added, is people coming to the country illegally, and new border security measures would prevent that. He also agrees with Trump that chain migration and the diversity lottery need to go, and he wants to see a guest worker program that benefits both businesses and foreign workers.</p>
<p>Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Ark., also called for a comprehensive approach that includes all of these elements.</p>
<p>“I think if we approach this problem of illegal immigrants who were brought here through no fault of their own, we need to be generous and humane but we have to be responsible as well,” he said.</p>
<p>According to Sen. Gary Peters, D-Mich., lawmakers are now working hard to find a bipartisan solution that treats the Dreamers fairly.</p>
<p>“They are American in any way that you can describe it, but many of them are going to deported if we don’t take action by March 5,” he said.</p>
<p>Though protections do ostensibly expire on March 5, Cotton pointed to a federal court ruling in California that has allowed the administration to start renewing DACA permits. The government is appealing that ruling, but absent a stay on the order, it currently provides a temporary reprieve.</p>
<p>“That’s not a good solution in the long term. We want a legislative solution, but that’s the status quo right now,” Cotton said.</p>
<p>Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, one of two Republicans to vote against the continuing resolution reopening the government Monday, said his opposition was meant to register disapproval with the process.</p>
<p>“This has got to change,” he said. “It’s never going to change as long as people vote yes for them.”</p>
<p>Without a functional budgeting process, he fears Congress will inevitably continue to find itself on the brink of shutdowns again and again, which is bad for the country and the government.</p>
<p>“This is something based on a concern that the American people are harmed and made more distant every time we do it this way,” he said.</p>
<p>As he has <a href="https://sinclairstoryline.com/news/nation-world/trump-blames-democrats-for-playing-shutdown-politics" type="external">when faced with Senate gridlock before</a>, President Trump tweeted out a demand that the chamber eliminate the legislative filibuster, which enables the minority to block bills that do not have the support of 60 members.</p>
<p>Wyden bluntly dismissed that suggestion.</p>
<p>“I think it was clear that was a non-starter,” he said. “You do that and all of a sudden you turn the U.S. Senate into a body without real debate.”</p>
<p>However, Risch observed that Democrats killed the filibuster for most appointments under Obama and Republicans nuked it for Supreme Court nominees last year. Getting rid of it, at least for government funding legislation, makes some sense to him.</p>
<p>“It’s becoming more and more apparent the majority party needs to be able to, with a 51-vote instead of a 60-vote, fund the government,” he said.</p>
<p>Risch added that this is something lawmakers have been discussing for a while.</p>
<p>“If the Republicans don’t do it, I have every confidence the Democrats are going to do it when they’re in charge,” he said.</p> | false | 1 | two days federal government reopened following weekend shutdown immigration policy senators capitol hill seemed still far reaching consensus fate immigrants brought us illegally children socalled dreamers beneficiaries obamaera deferred action childhood arrivals program face loss protection deportation early march president donald trump announced september end unless congress acts senate democrats demanded permanent status dreamers addressed agreed continuing resolution fund government february republicans insisted immigration dealt separately keeping government open standoff led 69hour shutdown lasting midnight saturday early evening monday democrats agreed funding feb 8 exchange assurances majority leader mitch mcconnell rky intends take dreamer issue allow vote senate floor sen ron wyden dore expressed skepticism mcconnell keep word rather kicking issue road lawmakers past youve got another one well lets see happens next weeks said track record particularly mitch mcconnell matters great wyden also criticized mcconnell setting false choice protecting dreamers extending childrens heath insurance program continuing resolution reauthorized six years false choice either sick children could young people spent entire lives united states want path citizenship said president trump called legislation gives dreamers legal status also include funding border wall elimination extendedfamilybased immigration diversity lottery already rejected bipartisan senate proposal white house said provide enough concessions issues senate minority leader chuck schumer dny reportedly offered trump authorization 20 billion administration seeking border wall bid keep government open last week schumer said tuesday wall table oregonians told want us serious roads bridges transportation systems wyden said want us build schools walls given brevity shutdown fact occurred weekend sen jim risch ridaho indicated impact likely minimal still takes issue concept one party holding government hostage look nobody likes said elected govern govern country wants governance need governance sponsored bill would prevent shutdowns funding continuing levels budget agreements reached decreasing slowly time signaling difficulty crafting immigration compromise palatable sides risch objected dealing dreamers status democrats would prefer would say would bill nothing give citizenship people illegally risch said work symbol doesnt work problem problem added people coming country illegally new border security measures would prevent also agrees trump chain migration diversity lottery need go wants see guest worker program benefits businesses foreign workers sen tom cotton rark also called comprehensive approach includes elements think approach problem illegal immigrants brought fault need generous humane responsible well said according sen gary peters dmich lawmakers working hard find bipartisan solution treats dreamers fairly american way describe many going deported dont take action march 5 said though protections ostensibly expire march 5 cotton pointed federal court ruling california allowed administration start renewing daca permits government appealing ruling absent stay order currently provides temporary reprieve thats good solution long term want legislative solution thats status quo right cotton said sen mike lee rutah one two republicans vote continuing resolution reopening government monday said opposition meant register disapproval process got change said never going change long people vote yes without functional budgeting process fears congress inevitably continue find brink shutdowns bad country government something based concern american people harmed made distant every time way said faced senate gridlock president trump tweeted demand chamber eliminate legislative filibuster enables minority block bills support 60 members wyden bluntly dismissed suggestion think clear nonstarter said sudden turn us senate body without real debate however risch observed democrats killed filibuster appointments obama republicans nuked supreme court nominees last year getting rid least government funding legislation makes sense becoming apparent majority party needs able 51vote instead 60vote fund government said risch added something lawmakers discussing republicans dont every confidence democrats going theyre charge said | 580 |
<p><a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0060892889/104-4919343-7332714?ie=UTF8&amp;tag=wwweppcorg-20&amp;linkCode=xm2&amp;camp=1789&amp;creativeASIN=0060892889" type="external">Human</a> by Michael S. Gazzaniga (Ecco, 447 pages, $27.50)</p>
<p>What is it that makes us human — that sets us apart from other animals? What drives us to act altruistically? Why do we gossip and flirt and empathize? How do we judge beauty, and why are we impelled to create works of art?</p>
<p>In <a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0060892889/104-4919343-7332714?ie=UTF8&amp;tag=wwweppcorg-20&amp;linkCode=xm2&amp;camp=1789&amp;creativeASIN=0060892889" type="external">Human: The Science Behind What Makes Us Unique</a>, Michael S. Gazzaniga argues that modern neuroscience is on the brink of offering us real answers to these questions — answers more reliable and truthful than those that centuries of philosophy, religious tradition and literature have offered. Thanks to advances in brain research, Mr. Gazzaniga believes, “things have changed.” We can at last set aside vague speculation and get down to facts. We can finally understand love and courtship and the roots of morality. We can put an end to the “long windbag discussions about art.” If we want answers, science has them.</p>
<p>What science tells us is simple and, by now, familiar: Who we are today is the result of eons of evolutionary adaptations serving our basic biological impulses to survive and reproduce. Evolutionary pressures shaped our bodies and minds as well as our social behaviors. There is almost nothing in human social life, Mr. Gazzaniga says, that cannot ultimately be explained by recourse to evolution.</p>
<p>“All those social relationships we now worry about so intensely,” he writes, “are merely byproducts of behavior originally selected to avoid our being eaten by predators.” Our social instincts were formed by “hunting, herding, hiding, and hustling.” Mr. Gazzaniga even takes a stab at explaining the supposed biological origins of religious belief, although that section of his argument is (blessedly) brief. In essence, he claims that religious practices and beliefs satisfy certain “moral modules” — innate affinities for things like hierarchy, purity and coalitions.</p>
<p>Mr. Gazzaniga is at his best when he is describing his own research with brain-damaged and split-brain patients — that is, patients in whom the tissue between the left and right brain hemispheres has been severed. He tells of one woman who, “although she was being examined in my office at New York Hospital, claimed we were in her home in Freeport, Maine.” A lesion on her brain had left her so convinced that she was really at home that she subordinated any conflicting information. When Mr. Gazzaniga asked her why, if she really were in her house, there were elevators outside the door, she responded: “Doctor, do you know how much it cost me to have those put in?”</p>
<p>By demonstrating the organic origins of our most basic sense of our selves, such stories can challenge our understanding of personhood, agency and identity. Unfortunately, Mr. Gazzaniga buries such provocative anecdotes amid the clutter of too-familiar findings from the evolutionary-psychology crowd. How many times must we be told that symmetrical faces, suggesting health, tend to be more attractive?</p>
<p>The whole effort is hindered by Mr. Gazzaniga's quippy writing style (“Are you saying the big brain is for flirting? Does that mean that Frenchmen have the biggest brains?”) and his tendency to plod from one study to the next. Science is, to be sure, a vast collaborative enterprise, but Mr. Gazzaniga's book at times reads like an interminable bibliography or faculty directory. He quotes so often, and at such length, from a few researchers — e.g., social psychologist Jonathan Haidt, primate researcher Richard Wrangham and Palm Pilot inventor Jeff Hawkins — that even a patient reader might be tempted to put down Mr. Gazzaniga's book and pick up theirs.</p>
<p>More important, Mr. Gazzaniga does little to explore the implications of the research he describes. Once we have been armed with the latest scientific findings about how our brains came to be and how they function, how ought we to act? The findings of neuroscience do not immediately penetrate to the most intimate levels of personal experience. If you are scared of heights, it will make you no less afraid to hear that the “actual cause” of your feeling is a catecholamine rush. But neuroscience is increasingly playing a role in marketing, education and the law, and Mr. Gazzaniga offers no insights into whether this growing influence is justified or appropriate.</p>
<p>To the extent that Mr. Gazzaniga provides any guidance about the future, it is that he believes the evolution of our brains isn't over yet. Throughout Human, he describes the brain with the computer lingo that saturates so much neuroscience writing: circuits, programs, wiring and so on. In the last and longest chapter, he takes the analogy further by exploring the “interface” between minds and machines — both the researchers who are trying to simulate the human mind through artificial intelligence and those who have sought to use implants to get information into or out of the brain. “Who needs flesh?” he asks.</p>
<p>Mr. Gazzaniga is far too credulous in this closing chapter, especially regarding the extravagant claims of some robotics researchers. But worse, he doesn't consider what the coming age of mind enhancement and neural implants might mean. He concedes that tweaking human biology could have unintended consequences, just as tinkering with the natural world has sometimes gone awry. But he does not acknowledge that science alone cannot judge where our powers over our world and our selves should be limited.</p>
<p>The basic assumption of Human is that biological science is superior to every other way of thinking about human life. But that assumption leaves us unable to judge when science itself has gone too far. We may, in the end, feel compelled to turn to the very sources of wisdom — philosophy, tradition, faith and even “long windbag discussions” — that Mr. Gazzaniga scorns.</p>
<p>— Mr. Keiper is the editor of The New Atlantis and a fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center.</p> | false | 1 | human michael gazzaniga ecco 447 pages 2750 makes us human sets us apart animals drives us act altruistically gossip flirt empathize judge beauty impelled create works art human science behind makes us unique michael gazzaniga argues modern neuroscience brink offering us real answers questions answers reliable truthful centuries philosophy religious tradition literature offered thanks advances brain research mr gazzaniga believes things changed last set aside vague speculation get facts finally understand love courtship roots morality put end long windbag discussions art want answers science science tells us simple familiar today result eons evolutionary adaptations serving basic biological impulses survive reproduce evolutionary pressures shaped bodies minds well social behaviors almost nothing human social life mr gazzaniga says ultimately explained recourse evolution social relationships worry intensely writes merely byproducts behavior originally selected avoid eaten predators social instincts formed hunting herding hiding hustling mr gazzaniga even takes stab explaining supposed biological origins religious belief although section argument blessedly brief essence claims religious practices beliefs satisfy certain moral modules innate affinities things like hierarchy purity coalitions mr gazzaniga best describing research braindamaged splitbrain patients patients tissue left right brain hemispheres severed tells one woman although examined office new york hospital claimed home freeport maine lesion brain left convinced really home subordinated conflicting information mr gazzaniga asked really house elevators outside door responded doctor know much cost put demonstrating organic origins basic sense selves stories challenge understanding personhood agency identity unfortunately mr gazzaniga buries provocative anecdotes amid clutter toofamiliar findings evolutionarypsychology crowd many times must told symmetrical faces suggesting health tend attractive whole effort hindered mr gazzanigas quippy writing style saying big brain flirting mean frenchmen biggest brains tendency plod one study next science sure vast collaborative enterprise mr gazzanigas book times reads like interminable bibliography faculty directory quotes often length researchers eg social psychologist jonathan haidt primate researcher richard wrangham palm pilot inventor jeff hawkins even patient reader might tempted put mr gazzanigas book pick important mr gazzaniga little explore implications research describes armed latest scientific findings brains came function ought act findings neuroscience immediately penetrate intimate levels personal experience scared heights make less afraid hear actual cause feeling catecholamine rush neuroscience increasingly playing role marketing education law mr gazzaniga offers insights whether growing influence justified appropriate extent mr gazzaniga provides guidance future believes evolution brains isnt yet throughout human describes brain computer lingo saturates much neuroscience writing circuits programs wiring last longest chapter takes analogy exploring interface minds machines researchers trying simulate human mind artificial intelligence sought use implants get information brain needs flesh asks mr gazzaniga far credulous closing chapter especially regarding extravagant claims robotics researchers worse doesnt consider coming age mind enhancement neural implants might mean concedes tweaking human biology could unintended consequences tinkering natural world sometimes gone awry acknowledge science alone judge powers world selves limited basic assumption human biological science superior every way thinking human life assumption leaves us unable judge science gone far may end feel compelled turn sources wisdom philosophy tradition faith even long windbag discussions mr gazzaniga scorns mr keiper editor new atlantis fellow ethics public policy center | 512 |
<p />
<p>The Zionist organization UN Watch has cited a commentary by Professor Richard Falk on the Boston bombings in a letter to U.N.&#160; Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon demanding that that Prof. Falk be reprimanded for it. Mr. Falk, who serves as the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Palestinian territories occupied since 1967, <a href="https://richardfalk.wordpress.com/2013/04/19/a-commentary-on-the-marathon-murders/" type="external">originally posted</a> the commentary on his blog and I republished it, as I often do his writings, with his kind permission, in <a href="" type="internal">Foreign Policy Journal</a>, which version UN Watch cites in its letter. As one should expect, <a href="http://blog.unwatch.org/index.php/2013/04/22/exclusive-un-official-blames-america-for-boston-marathon-terror-attacks/" type="external">the letter</a> from UN Watch is characterized by its dishonesty and vain attacks on Prof. Falk’s character that deflect attention away from and fail to address the substance of what he wrote.</p>
<p>The UN Watch letter begins with the lie that Prof. Falk in his article “justifies the Boston terrorist attacks”. The UN Watch letter also falsely claims that Prof. Falk blamed the Boston terrorist attacks on Israel and characterized the attacks as “due ‘retribution’ for American sins”. Where Mr. Falk discusses Israel in the article, it is in the larger context of blowback for U.S. foreign policies, including the 9/11 attacks, which, as the 9/11 Commission noted in its report, were motivated in no small part by U.S. support for Israel’s oppression of the Palestinians. Nowhere in his commentary did Mr. Falk blame Israel for or otherwise connect Israel to the bombings in Boston.</p>
<p>Mr. Falk has since written <a href="https://richardfalk.wordpress.com/2013/04/25/clarifying-boston-marathon-post/" type="external">a follow-up post</a> on his blog clarifying, “I had no intention whatsoever to connect any dots as to whether there was a causal linkage between what the U.S. or Israel have done in the world and what happened in Boston. My only effort was to suggest that in addition to grieving and bringing the perpetrators to justice, this could also become an occasion for collective self-scrutiny as a nation and as a people.”</p>
<p>As for the word “retribution”, where it appears in Mr. Falk’s article, it is in the context of a quote from someone else. What Falk actually wrote was:</p>
<p>Listening to a PBS program hours after the Boston event, I was struck by the critical attitudes of several callers to the radio station: …. Another caller asked “is this not a kind of retribution for torture inflicted by American security forces acting under the authority of the government, and verified for the world by pictures of the humiliation of Iraqi prisoners at Abu Ghraib?”</p>
<p>Nowhere did Falk say the attack was “due” or “justified”. The letter goes on this way with its fabricated charges against Falk’s character.</p>
<p>At the UN Watch blog, the letter is prefaced with the remark that Falk “was recently&#160; <a href="http://blog.unwatch.org/index.php/2012/12/28/youre-fired-richard-falk-expelled-from-human-rights-watch/" type="external">expelled</a>&#160;by the Human Rights Watch [HRW] organization”. The link directs readers to a video embedded in another UN Watch blog post claiming that Falk was “Removed For Anti-Semitism”, the source for that claim being none other than Hillel Neuer, the Executive Director of UN Watch and author of the letter to the Secretary-General. In fact, <a href="https://www.nlg.org/news/letter-regarding-attacks-uns-palestine-rapporteur" type="external">the reason</a> Mr. Falk left HRW’s local support committee in Santa Barbara, California, was because of HRW’s “longstanding policy, applied many times, that no official from any government or UN agency can serve on any Human Rights Watch committee or its Board. It was an oversight on our part that we did not apply that policy in Richard Falk’s case several years ago when he assumed his UN position.” But the truth just doesn’t serve Neuer’s or his organization’s agenda, so he prefers to make up lies to demonize an honorable man.</p>
<p>The UN Watch’s lies have been parroted elsewhere by unscrupulous so-called “journalists” who don’t let little things like honesty or integrity get in the way of an opportunity to manufacture a sensational headline.</p>
<p>Anne Beyefsky, for example, at Breitbart, <a href="http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2013/04/22/UN-Human-Rights-Official-Says-Boston-Got-What-It-Deserved" type="external">unashamedly lies</a> that “Richard Falk has published a statement saying Bostonians got what they deserved in last week’s terror attack” before accusing him of “antisemitism” for his criticisms of Israeli policies in his role as Special Rapporteur for the U.N. The fact that Mr. Falk is himself Jewish shouldn’t cause anyone to be surprised that he would face such a charge; indeed, this kind of intellectually and morally bankrupt accusation is standard fare for apologists of Israel’s constant violations of international law. It certainly comes as no surprise that Beyefsky is unable to produce any quotes from Mr. Falk to back up any of her disgraceful lies about him.</p>
<p>Bayefsky also wrote <a href="http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2013/04/23/antisemitism-anti-americanism-in-falk-job-description-at-human-rights-council/" type="external">another piece</a> for Fox News titled “Antisemitism, anti-Americanism are UN Human Rights Council official’s job description”, where she repeats the lie that Falk “announced that Boston had it coming” and denounces his true sin of describing the bombing as “blowback”.</p>
<p>Fox News elsewhere <a href="http://www.foxnews.com/world/2013/04/23/watchdog-group-blasts-un-official-for-blaming-boston-bombings-on-american/" type="external">repeated</a> the falsehood that “Falk also blamed Israel for the unrest he believes prompted” the Boston attacks.</p>
<p>A Washington D.C. CBS affiliate <a href="" type="internal">ran the sensational headline</a>, “Falk: Boston Marathon Victims ‘Have To Die’ Because of American-Israeli Relations”. The quoted words, “have to die” do appear in Mr. Falk’s article, where he asks how many more innocent civilians have to die as a result of terrorist attacks motivated by the U.S. government’s criminal foreign policies (e.g., the illegal war on Iraq, etc.). The CBS hit piece then leads with the lie that Falk “said that Bostonians who were injured or killed in the Boston Marathon bombing were deserving of their collective fate.”</p>
<p>Curiously, CBS links to Mr. Falk’s actual article at Foreign Policy Journal, but cites Global Dispatch as the source for this false claim, indicating that the anonymous author(s) of the CBS piece never bothered to check for themselves what Falk actually wrote, while repeating the lie <a href="http://www.theglobaldispatch.com/un-official-richard-falk-says-boston-got-what-it-deserves-quotes-whom-evil-is-done-do-evil-in-return-12930/" type="external">headlined</a> by Global Dispatch that Falk “Says Boston Got What It Deserves” as a fact. So it isn’t clear whether those responsible at CBS are incompetently lazy or just willfully dishonesty like the rest of them.</p>
<p>Sohrab Ahmari in the Wall Street Journal likewise jumps on the bandwagon and <a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324874204578441033895673750.html" type="external">repeats the lie</a> that Falk blamed Israel for the Boston bombings while denouncing him for “political lunacy”.</p>
<p>In an online Journal <a href="http://live.wsj.com/video/opinion-uns-resident-anti-semite/1FF4D417-8811-4BAB-BA9D-36276C9FF355.html#!1FF4D417-8811-4BAB-BA9D-36276C9FF355" type="external">video</a> titled “U.N.’s Resident Anti Semite”, Ahmari talks with editorial board member Mary Kissel about the latest “embarrassment” for the U.N. from Falk, who “has been active for years saying all sorts of crazy things, your typical anti-American demagogue of the academic sort.” Kissel quotes Falk as saying, “(A)s long as Tel Aviv has the compliant ear of the American political establishment, those who wish for peace and justice in the world should not rest easy”, which the video displays under the words “Falk on the Boston Bombings”. However, this quote was not in reference to the Boston attacks. The sentence from which it was pulled in fact began, “The war drums are beating at this moment in relation to both North Korea and Iran, and as long as Tel Aviv….” This context was willfully omitted by the dishonest Ms. Kissel and Mr. Ahmari, who proceed with their show of manufactured controversy. Kissel, after reading the quote out of its context, feigns shock: “So let me get this straight. So, he’s linking Israel to the terror attacks in Boston?” To which Ahmari replies, “That’s right.” No, that’s not right. It a deliberate lie, as can easily be seen simply by placing the quote back into its actual context. The duo proceeds from there to blast Falk for his heresy of describing the Boston bombing as blowback for U.S. foreign policies and accusing him of “anti-Americanism” and “anti-Semitism”.</p>
<p>(When <a href="https://twitter.com/jeremyrhammond/status/327430272880607234" type="external">I confronted the pair on Twitter about their lies</a>, asking “Don’t you have any real journalism to be doing?” the best Ahmari could do in reply was, “Don’t you have crackpot theories about Jews and the NWO to be formulating?” Kissel’s response was, “I think exposing crackpot theories about Israel is a very worthy use of time”. Ahmari then added, “The trouble is that Mr. <a href="https://twitter.com/jeremyrhammond" type="external">@jeremyrhammond</a> is an originator of such theories”, to which I replied, “I sense a strawman argument coming on. Come on, then, let’s have it.” He proceeded to block me on Twitter, and Kissel did not respond to my further reply, “Do you think making up lies to demonize <a href="https://twitter.com/search?q=%23RichardFalk&amp;src=hash" type="external">#RichardFalk</a> is a very worthy use of your time?”)</p>
<p>Michael Goodwin in the New York Post <a href="https://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/oh_terrorists_we_re_so_sorry_CUSBtINNAC7pjcR0n79FQN" type="external">calls</a> Mr. Falk’s commentary “a rancid piece of trash” and repeats the lie that he “basically calls the Boston terror attack just deserts”. As for his real sin, Mr. Falk committed the heinous apostasy of urging “politicians to ‘connect the dots’ between US foreign policy and terrorism at home”. (Mr. Falk’s “new assault appears in Foreign Policy Journal”, Goodwin adds, “where nearly every other article attacks Israel.” Perhaps he had some of my own articles, such as “ <a href="" type="internal">Rogue State: Israeli Violations of U.N. Security Council Resolutions</a>” or “ <a href="" type="internal">The Myth of the U.N. Creation of Israel</a>”, in mind?)</p>
<p>The New York Daily News <a href="http://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/beneath-contempt-article-1.1326653" type="external">repeats the lie</a> that “Falk blames Boston Marathon attack on Israel” while calling him a “Jew-basher”, “United Nations anti-Semite-in-chief”, and “a loon”.</p>
<p>Mitch Wolfe in The Huffington Post <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/mitch-wolfe/boston-bombing-root-causes-foreign-policy_b_3136414.html" type="external">criticizes</a> Mr. Falk for daring to suggest that the Boston bombings were motivated by U.S. foreign policies; never mind that, as the Washington Post <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/boston-bombing-suspect-cites-us-wars-as-motivation-officials-say/2013/04/23/324b9cea-ac29-11e2-b6fd-ba6f5f26d70e_story.html" type="external">has reported</a>, “The 19-year-old suspect in the Boston Marathon bombings has told interrogators that the American wars in Iraq and Afghanistan motivated him and his brother to carry out the attack”.</p>
<p>Not to be outdone, Lauren Izso in the Jerusalem Post <a href="http://www.jpost.com/International/UNs-Falk-ties-Boston-bombs-to-Obamas-Israel-trip-310832" type="external">takes the lie a step further</a>, writing that Falk “implies” that the bombings were “largely due to Obama’s recent trip to Israel”.</p>
<p>A JTA (Jewish Telegraph Agency) <a href="http://www.jta.org/news/article/2013/04/23/3124931/un-official-blames-boston-marathon-bombing-on-tel-aviv" type="external">headline repeats the lie</a> that Falk “pins blame for Boston Marathon bombing on ‘Tel Aviv’” and the falsehood that Falk “called the Boston attack ‘retribution’ for the actions of the U.S. military in Afghanistan, Iraq and Pakistan”, which leads one to wonder whether the author of the JTA story even bothered to read Falk’s article or relied entirely on UN Watch’s distortions of it for its own reporting.</p>
<p>The Times of Israel also <a href="http://www.timesofisrael.com/un-official-says-us-had-boston-attack-coming/" type="external">picked up the story</a>, stating that Falk “has a history of provocative and outrages [sic, i.e., “outrageous”] statements, both supporting Islamic terror and bashing Israel.” The Times of Israel would have a very hard time indeed finding any substantiation for its lie that Falk has made statements “supporting Islamic terror”; and “bashing” Israel is the usual euphemism for legitimately criticizing Israel’s constant violations of international law. Just as instructively, the “outrageous” statement referred to in this case is Falk’s remark that “The American global domination project is bound to generate all kinds of resistance… the United States has been fortunate not to experience worse blowbacks”. The Times of Israel spins this observation into the dishonest headline, “UN official says US had Boston attack coming”; the <a href="http://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/have+it+coming" type="external">idiom</a> “to have it coming” meaning, of course, that the outcome is deserved. This headline is just another lie. Yet Mr. Falk neither said nor implied that the U.S. deserved the attacks in Boston.</p>
<p>An Arutz Sheva (Israel National News) <a href="http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/167446#.UXlWPLXU_6Y" type="external">headline</a> also repeated the falsehood, “UN Official Attempts to Blame Boston Bombings ‘On Tel Aviv’. The article quotes Anti-Defamation League (ADL) National Director Abraham H. Foxman decrying Falk as “a wildly conspiratorial and highly biased extremist” with a “notorious record of anti-Israel and anti-American propaganda.”</p>
<p>Dr. Phlip Brodie, in an Arutz Sheva op-ed, <a href="http://www.israelnationalnews.com/Articles/Article.aspx/13206#.UXlUpLXU_6Y" type="external">condemns Falk</a> for daring to point out that U.S. foreign policy, including its support for Israel, increases the threat of terrorism and results in blowback such as the 9/11 attacks.</p>
<p>The JC <a href="http://www.thejc.com/news/world-news/106337/us-israel-ties-factor-boston-bombing-says-un-man" type="external">ran a headline</a> repeating the lie, “US-Israel ties factor in Boston bombing, says UN man”.</p>
<p>Mark Leon Goldberg at UN Dispatch <a href="http://www.undispatch.com/on-richard-falk" type="external">calls Falk’s commentary</a> a “dumb” “diatribe” and feigns not to understand Mr. Falk’s rather elementary point that the U.S. government’s policies create hatred towards the country and result in blowback such as the 9/11 attacks.</p>
<p>John Hinderaker at the Power Line blog <a href="http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2013/04/did-boston-have-it-coming-the-united-nations-says-yes.php" type="external">repeats the lie</a> that Mr. Falk said “Boston had it coming”. Hinderaker reveals his remarkable ignorance by saying that Falk’s statement that “the neocon presidency of George W. Bush, was in 2001 prior to the attacks openly seeking a pretext to launch a regime-changing war against Saddam Hussein’s Iraq”, among others, is “false” (the truth of that and other of Mr. Falk’s statements is hardly a secret and not in the least bit controversial). Hinderaker goes on to dismiss Falk as “a lousy writer”, “insane”, “a psychopath” who has a “demented frame of reference, that we associate with mental illness”, “a nut; a crank”, “a mental case”, someone who “should seek treatment for his mental illness.”</p>
<p>Bryan Preston at PJ Media similarly <a href="http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2013/04/23/un-human-rights-official-justifies-boston-bombing-as-retribution/" type="external">repeats the lies</a> that Falk “Justifies” the bombing in his article and said that the U.S. “had this coming”.</p>
<p>Noga Gur-Arieah at The JewishJournal.com begins an article on the matter <a href="" type="internal">by lying</a>, “Richard Falk, a UN official, referred to the Boston Marathon in a column he wrote for the Foreign Policy Journal, saying the US ‘had it coming’ because of its policy around the world and specifically in the Middle East, Iraq and Afghanistan. Yes, that’s right.” No, that’s a deliberate lie, complete with fabricated quote.</p>
<p>U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Susan Rice <a href="https://twitter.com/jeremyrhammond/status/327430627714543618" type="external">tweeted</a> in response to Mr. Falk’s article, “Outraged by Richard Falk’s highly offensive Boston comments. Someone who spews such vitriol has no place at the UN. Past time for him to go.” Whether Ms. Rice is outraged over things Mr. Falk never actually said or the truth he did tell isn’t entirely clear, though we may perhaps reasonably assume both.</p>
<p>A spokesperson for Ban Ki-moon, meanwhile, instead of rejecting the deliberate distortions of Mr. Falk’s piece, said that “The Secretary-General is hopeful that special rapporteurs such as Mr. Falk understand that while they have independent status, their public comments can undermine the credibility and the work of the United Nations.” This was reported by Reuters in <a href="http://forward.com/articles/175403/richard-falk-chided-for-linking-boston-bombings-to/" type="external">a rare objective and honest piece</a>, which accurately states that Falk “suggested the Boston bombings were a response to U.S. foreign policy” before pointing out that federal law enforcement officials have indeed told reporters “that the Tsarnaev brothers had been motivated by the U.S. wars in Afghanistan and Iraq”—in other words, that Mr. Falk is correct in his observation.</p>
<p>One is just not supposed to tell the public that U.S. foreign policy results in what intelligence analysts call “blowback”. This is a forbidden truth, reminiscent of the 2007 presidential debate <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xKITUOl0NBc" type="external">when Rudy Giuliani condemned Ron Paul</a> for making the completely uncontroversial statement that the 9/11 attacks were “blowback” for U.S. foreign policy, to which Dr. Paul replied by standing firm and repeating the uncomfortable truth before the audience. It is a point that Michael Scheuer, former head of the CIA’s Osama bin Laden unit, Alec Station, has also made in a commentary on the Boston bombings published at Foreign Policy Journal, <a href="" type="internal">in which he remarks</a> that “it is blatantly obvious from the evidence the authorities have presented to date that the attackers were motivated by what the U.S. government does in the Muslim world”.</p>
<p>It is clear from the hysterical reactions to Mr. Falk’s commentary on the Boston bombings that his own sin is in speaking uncomfortable truths many Americans don’t want to hear about their government’s policies, as well as for his courageous stand against Israel’s lawlessness in the face of such demonization by its Zionist apologists.</p>
<p>This is an updated and extended version of an article originally published in <a href="http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/04/25/the-demonization-of-richard-falk/" type="external">Counterpunch</a>.</p> | false | 1 | zionist organization un watch cited commentary professor richard falk boston bombings letter un160 secretarygeneral ban kimoon demanding prof falk reprimanded mr falk serves united nations special rapporteur situation human rights palestinian territories occupied since 1967 originally posted commentary blog republished often writings kind permission foreign policy journal version un watch cites letter one expect letter un watch characterized dishonesty vain attacks prof falks character deflect attention away fail address substance wrote un watch letter begins lie prof falk article justifies boston terrorist attacks un watch letter also falsely claims prof falk blamed boston terrorist attacks israel characterized attacks due retribution american sins mr falk discusses israel article larger context blowback us foreign policies including 911 attacks 911 commission noted report motivated small part us support israels oppression palestinians nowhere commentary mr falk blame israel otherwise connect israel bombings boston mr falk since written followup post blog clarifying intention whatsoever connect dots whether causal linkage us israel done world happened boston effort suggest addition grieving bringing perpetrators justice could also become occasion collective selfscrutiny nation people word retribution appears mr falks article context quote someone else falk actually wrote listening pbs program hours boston event struck critical attitudes several callers radio station another caller asked kind retribution torture inflicted american security forces acting authority government verified world pictures humiliation iraqi prisoners abu ghraib nowhere falk say attack due justified letter goes way fabricated charges falks character un watch blog letter prefaced remark falk recently160 expelled160by human rights watch hrw organization link directs readers video embedded another un watch blog post claiming falk removed antisemitism source claim none hillel neuer executive director un watch author letter secretarygeneral fact reason mr falk left hrws local support committee santa barbara california hrws longstanding policy applied many times official government un agency serve human rights watch committee board oversight part apply policy richard falks case several years ago assumed un position truth doesnt serve neuers organizations agenda prefers make lies demonize honorable man un watchs lies parroted elsewhere unscrupulous socalled journalists dont let little things like honesty integrity get way opportunity manufacture sensational headline anne beyefsky example breitbart unashamedly lies richard falk published statement saying bostonians got deserved last weeks terror attack accusing antisemitism criticisms israeli policies role special rapporteur un fact mr falk jewish shouldnt cause anyone surprised would face charge indeed kind intellectually morally bankrupt accusation standard fare apologists israels constant violations international law certainly comes surprise beyefsky unable produce quotes mr falk back disgraceful lies bayefsky also wrote another piece fox news titled antisemitism antiamericanism un human rights council officials job description repeats lie falk announced boston coming denounces true sin describing bombing blowback fox news elsewhere repeated falsehood falk also blamed israel unrest believes prompted boston attacks washington dc cbs affiliate ran sensational headline falk boston marathon victims die americanisraeli relations quoted words die appear mr falks article asks many innocent civilians die result terrorist attacks motivated us governments criminal foreign policies eg illegal war iraq etc cbs hit piece leads lie falk said bostonians injured killed boston marathon bombing deserving collective fate curiously cbs links mr falks actual article foreign policy journal cites global dispatch source false claim indicating anonymous authors cbs piece never bothered check falk actually wrote repeating lie headlined global dispatch falk says boston got deserves fact isnt clear whether responsible cbs incompetently lazy willfully dishonesty like rest sohrab ahmari wall street journal likewise jumps bandwagon repeats lie falk blamed israel boston bombings denouncing political lunacy online journal video titled uns resident anti semite ahmari talks editorial board member mary kissel latest embarrassment un falk active years saying sorts crazy things typical antiamerican demagogue academic sort kissel quotes falk saying long tel aviv compliant ear american political establishment wish peace justice world rest easy video displays words falk boston bombings however quote reference boston attacks sentence pulled fact began war drums beating moment relation north korea iran long tel aviv context willfully omitted dishonest ms kissel mr ahmari proceed show manufactured controversy kissel reading quote context feigns shock let get straight hes linking israel terror attacks boston ahmari replies thats right thats right deliberate lie easily seen simply placing quote back actual context duo proceeds blast falk heresy describing boston bombing blowback us foreign policies accusing antiamericanism antisemitism confronted pair twitter lies asking dont real journalism best ahmari could reply dont crackpot theories jews nwo formulating kissels response think exposing crackpot theories israel worthy use time ahmari added trouble mr jeremyrhammond originator theories replied sense strawman argument coming come lets proceeded block twitter kissel respond reply think making lies demonize richardfalk worthy use time michael goodwin new york post calls mr falks commentary rancid piece trash repeats lie basically calls boston terror attack deserts real sin mr falk committed heinous apostasy urging politicians connect dots us foreign policy terrorism home mr falks new assault appears foreign policy journal goodwin adds nearly every article attacks israel perhaps articles rogue state israeli violations un security council resolutions myth un creation israel mind new york daily news repeats lie falk blames boston marathon attack israel calling jewbasher united nations antisemiteinchief loon mitch wolfe huffington post criticizes mr falk daring suggest boston bombings motivated us foreign policies never mind washington post reported 19yearold suspect boston marathon bombings told interrogators american wars iraq afghanistan motivated brother carry attack outdone lauren izso jerusalem post takes lie step writing falk implies bombings largely due obamas recent trip israel jta jewish telegraph agency headline repeats lie falk pins blame boston marathon bombing tel aviv falsehood falk called boston attack retribution actions us military afghanistan iraq pakistan leads one wonder whether author jta story even bothered read falks article relied entirely un watchs distortions reporting times israel also picked story stating falk history provocative outrages sic ie outrageous statements supporting islamic terror bashing israel times israel would hard time indeed finding substantiation lie falk made statements supporting islamic terror bashing israel usual euphemism legitimately criticizing israels constant violations international law instructively outrageous statement referred case falks remark american global domination project bound generate kinds resistance united states fortunate experience worse blowbacks times israel spins observation dishonest headline un official says us boston attack coming idiom coming meaning course outcome deserved headline another lie yet mr falk neither said implied us deserved attacks boston arutz sheva israel national news headline also repeated falsehood un official attempts blame boston bombings tel aviv article quotes antidefamation league adl national director abraham h foxman decrying falk wildly conspiratorial highly biased extremist notorious record antiisrael antiamerican propaganda dr phlip brodie arutz sheva oped condemns falk daring point us foreign policy including support israel increases threat terrorism results blowback 911 attacks jc ran headline repeating lie usisrael ties factor boston bombing says un man mark leon goldberg un dispatch calls falks commentary dumb diatribe feigns understand mr falks rather elementary point us governments policies create hatred towards country result blowback 911 attacks john hinderaker power line blog repeats lie mr falk said boston coming hinderaker reveals remarkable ignorance saying falks statement neocon presidency george w bush 2001 prior attacks openly seeking pretext launch regimechanging war saddam husseins iraq among others false truth mr falks statements hardly secret least bit controversial hinderaker goes dismiss falk lousy writer insane psychopath demented frame reference associate mental illness nut crank mental case someone seek treatment mental illness bryan preston pj media similarly repeats lies falk justifies bombing article said us coming noga gurarieah jewishjournalcom begins article matter lying richard falk un official referred boston marathon column wrote foreign policy journal saying us coming policy around world specifically middle east iraq afghanistan yes thats right thats deliberate lie complete fabricated quote us ambassador un susan rice tweeted response mr falks article outraged richard falks highly offensive boston comments someone spews vitriol place un past time go whether ms rice outraged things mr falk never actually said truth tell isnt entirely clear though may perhaps reasonably assume spokesperson ban kimoon meanwhile instead rejecting deliberate distortions mr falks piece said secretarygeneral hopeful special rapporteurs mr falk understand independent status public comments undermine credibility work united nations reported reuters rare objective honest piece accurately states falk suggested boston bombings response us foreign policy pointing federal law enforcement officials indeed told reporters tsarnaev brothers motivated us wars afghanistan iraqin words mr falk correct observation one supposed tell public us foreign policy results intelligence analysts call blowback forbidden truth reminiscent 2007 presidential debate rudy giuliani condemned ron paul making completely uncontroversial statement 911 attacks blowback us foreign policy dr paul replied standing firm repeating uncomfortable truth audience point michael scheuer former head cias osama bin laden unit alec station also made commentary boston bombings published foreign policy journal remarks blatantly obvious evidence authorities presented date attackers motivated us government muslim world clear hysterical reactions mr falks commentary boston bombings sin speaking uncomfortable truths many americans dont want hear governments policies well courageous stand israels lawlessness face demonization zionist apologists updated extended version article originally published counterpunch | 1,494 |
<p>Some big investors are getting so antsy about corporate&#160;junk debt that once-unloved mortgage bonds look safe in comparison.</p>
<p>Pacific Investment Management Co., Goldman Sachs Asset Management, Columbia Threadneedle and others are snatching up bonds tied to subprime mortgages and other home loans made before the housing crisis, while selling speculative-grade company debt. They say&#160;junk yields are too low for the risk investors are taking, and securities backed by mortgages — which have&#160;already gained as much as 6.9 percent this year according to Bank of America Corp. data —&#160;offer higher potential returns given the risk.</p>
<p>These switches in portfolios are the latest sign that a bull market in corporate credit may be losing steam. In the decade after a financial crisis caused by the U.S. subprime meltdown, many investors dialed down their exposure to mortgage bonds and ramped up their holdings of corporate debt, which performed well in late 2008 and 2009 and often seemed safer.&#160;Now the U.S. mortgage market is showing signs of strength, and&#160;at this stage&#160;in the credit cycle buying securities linked to home loans may make sense, even if it may mean giving up some yield, investors said.</p>
<p>‘Highest Conviction’</p>
<p>“Housing has got legs,” said Mark Kiesel, chief investment officer of global credit at Pacific Investment Management Co, which manages $1.6 trillion. “It’s the sector we probably have the highest conviction on.”</p>
<p>Kiesel said he expects housing prices to appreciate, which will help non-agency mortgage securities, or bonds backed by home loans without government guarantees. If instead home values falter in a mild recession, the securities can still eke out positive returns. Pimco recommended trimming exposure to high-yield bonds and equities and shifting to less risky assets like mortgage-backed securities and Treasuries in an asset allocation report this month.</p>
<p>The market for non-agency mortgage-backed securities has shrunk dramatically since the financial crisis. There were about $800 billion outstanding in the middle of 2017, down from $2.8 trillion a decade ago, according to the Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association, a trade group.&#160;</p>
<p>Bank of America, using a different data set, says about 37 percent of the securities are backed by subprime loans. The rest are supported by&#160;other mortgages ineligible for government guarantees, such as “jumbo” loans that are too big for U.S. backing. While some firms have issued these notes in recent years, the majority of the securities outstanding were originally sold before the financial crisis.</p>
<p>“There’s lots of demand and shrinking supply,” said Mike Swell,&#160;co-head of global fixed-income portfolio management at Goldman Sachs Asset Management, which manages more than $1 trillion and has been reducing high-yield exposure in favor of mortgage-backed securities and other structured products. “We think it will be much better protected in the event that volatility picks up and you see risk assets like high yield do poorly.”</p>
<p>Higher Gains</p>
<p>Bonds backed by “Alt-A” mortgages, which were often taken out by borrowers unable to document their income, have gained around 6.3 percent this year, and those backed by subprime home loans have returned about 6.9 percent, according to Bank of America, outpacing&#160;junk’s 5.5 percent gain and investment-grade’s 4.8 percent increase. Even bonds backed by relatively safe jumbo loans have risen 5.5 percent.</p>
<p>Gene Tannuzzo, a money manager at Columbia Threadneedle, which oversees $473 billion, said that after those gains, non-agency mortgage bonds still offer better returns given the risk. He’s been buying mortgage-backed securities rated BBB, which can yield 4 percent to 4.5 percent. He’s less attracted to high-yield debt, where average yields have sunk to as low as 5.4 percent this month, far below their five-year average of 6.3 percent, according to Bloomberg Barclays index data.</p>
<p>“A percent or less is not that much of a give-up when you’re talking about going from a speculative-grade asset class to a higher-quality one,” Tannuzzo said.</p>
<p>Investors are betting on housing&#160;after years of mortgage credit having been relatively tight. The absolute level of mortgages outstanding has fallen since the crisis, to $8.7 trillion from $9.3 trillion, according to the Federal Reserve Bank of New York.&#160;And U.S. home prices have risen an average of 45 percent off their lowest levels, making the collateral for the loans more valuable. Mortgage default rates have been falling since peaking at 5.7 percent in 2009, according to data from S&amp;P Global Ratings and Experian. It hit a post-crisis low of 0.6 percent earlier this year.</p>
<p>In junk bonds, meanwhile, protections for corporate lenders and bond investors have eroded. Junk-rated borrowers tend to have less subordinated debt now, meaning there are fewer other creditors to absorb losses when a company fails. Debt levels have risen relative to assets, which also weighs on how much investors recover if a corporate borrower goes under. With the Federal Reserve scaling down its balance sheet, there will be less demand for riskier assets like junk bonds, Morgan Stanley strategists said in an Aug. 9 note.</p>
<p>Some investors have to hold their noses to convince themselves to buy non-agency mortgage bonds again. “There’s still a level of concern that the past is never quite the past,” said Eric Johnson, chief investment officer of CNO Financial Group, which has $33 billion in assets. Even so, he said he’s been adding mortgage bonds and other structured products, while cutting his exposure to high-yield debt.</p>
<p>That crisis-era taint can help investors, said Ashish Shah, head of fixed income and chief investment officer of global credit at AllianceBernstein, which manages $517 billion.&#160;</p>
<p>“I think that’s why there’s good value that remains in that space,” Shah said.</p> | false | 1 | big investors getting antsy corporate160junk debt onceunloved mortgage bonds look safe comparison pacific investment management co goldman sachs asset management columbia threadneedle others snatching bonds tied subprime mortgages home loans made housing crisis selling speculativegrade company debt say160junk yields low risk investors taking securities backed mortgages have160already gained much 69 percent year according bank america corp data 160offer higher potential returns given risk switches portfolios latest sign bull market corporate credit may losing steam decade financial crisis caused us subprime meltdown many investors dialed exposure mortgage bonds ramped holdings corporate debt performed well late 2008 2009 often seemed safer160now us mortgage market showing signs strength and160at stage160in credit cycle buying securities linked home loans may make sense even may mean giving yield investors said highest conviction housing got legs said mark kiesel chief investment officer global credit pacific investment management co manages 16 trillion sector probably highest conviction kiesel said expects housing prices appreciate help nonagency mortgage securities bonds backed home loans without government guarantees instead home values falter mild recession securities still eke positive returns pimco recommended trimming exposure highyield bonds equities shifting less risky assets like mortgagebacked securities treasuries asset allocation report month market nonagency mortgagebacked securities shrunk dramatically since financial crisis 800 billion outstanding middle 2017 28 trillion decade ago according securities industry financial markets association trade group160 bank america using different data set says 37 percent securities backed subprime loans rest supported by160other mortgages ineligible government guarantees jumbo loans big us backing firms issued notes recent years majority securities outstanding originally sold financial crisis theres lots demand shrinking supply said mike swell160cohead global fixedincome portfolio management goldman sachs asset management manages 1 trillion reducing highyield exposure favor mortgagebacked securities structured products think much better protected event volatility picks see risk assets like high yield poorly higher gains bonds backed alta mortgages often taken borrowers unable document income gained around 63 percent year backed subprime home loans returned 69 percent according bank america outpacing160junks 55 percent gain investmentgrades 48 percent increase even bonds backed relatively safe jumbo loans risen 55 percent gene tannuzzo money manager columbia threadneedle oversees 473 billion said gains nonagency mortgage bonds still offer better returns given risk hes buying mortgagebacked securities rated bbb yield 4 percent 45 percent hes less attracted highyield debt average yields sunk low 54 percent month far fiveyear average 63 percent according bloomberg barclays index data percent less much giveup youre talking going speculativegrade asset class higherquality one tannuzzo said investors betting housing160after years mortgage credit relatively tight absolute level mortgages outstanding fallen since crisis 87 trillion 93 trillion according federal reserve bank new york160and us home prices risen average 45 percent lowest levels making collateral loans valuable mortgage default rates falling since peaking 57 percent 2009 according data sampp global ratings experian hit postcrisis low 06 percent earlier year junk bonds meanwhile protections corporate lenders bond investors eroded junkrated borrowers tend less subordinated debt meaning fewer creditors absorb losses company fails debt levels risen relative assets also weighs much investors recover corporate borrower goes federal reserve scaling balance sheet less demand riskier assets like junk bonds morgan stanley strategists said aug 9 note investors hold noses convince buy nonagency mortgage bonds theres still level concern past never quite past said eric johnson chief investment officer cno financial group 33 billion assets even said hes adding mortgage bonds structured products cutting exposure highyield debt crisisera taint help investors said ashish shah head fixed income chief investment officer global credit alliancebernstein manages 517 billion160 think thats theres good value remains space shah said | 593 |
<p>Kurt Andersen may be right in supposing that what looks like Americans’ increasing inability to distinguish fantasy from reality is the big topic of our times, and there are at least 2 or 3 of his 46 chapters in&#160;Fantasyland&#160;in which he does justice to his subject. His rapid&#160;tour d’ horizon&#160;on New Age spirituality, homeopathic medicine, pseudoscience and the paranormal, the psychiatric vogue for “recovered memory syndrome,” and the legal craze in the 1980s and early ’90s for prosecutions of imaginary, “Satanist”-inspired child abuse is a valuable compendium, particularly for young people who didn’t live through the period when such things were taken seriously. Above all, we should be glad of his documentation of how those false-belief fads—and other species of hokum, such as the anti-vaccine hysteria of the early 2000s—were treated with seriousness by the media about whose traditional role as gatekeepers to “reality” he is otherwise so solicitous.</p>
<p>Andersen is also sound on some other sorts of crazy and socially harmful fantasies that are still very much with us, such as conspiracy theories, pornography, the infantilization of pop culture, celebrity culture, reality TV, violent video games, legalized gambling, and the boom in plastic surgery. Yet he casts his net so wide that, along with these things, he pulls up Civil War reenactors and war-gamers who are a different kind of thing altogether. Imaginative re-creation of a known reality for the sake of knowing it better is surely something to be distinguished from the fanciful invention of non-realities that are then treated as real. You could even argue that cosmetic surgery is not qualitatively different from cosmetics, which have been around (along with condemnations of them) forever.</p>
<p>It would be an interesting argument to have, anyway. But Andersen—a novelist and the host of the public-radio show&#160;Studio 360—is not much interested in the hard work of argument, since he is not really writing for anyone who doesn’t already agree with him. He is obviously not interested in selling his thesis, for example, to the “huge national audience” to which, as he asserts without bothering to demonstrate, Rush Limbaugh daily brings “a sociopolitical alternate reality.” It is one thing to say that you disagree with somebody, but Andersen’s way of saying he disagrees with you, like that of so many other polemicists nowadays, is to tell you that you are living in an “alternate reality.” No evidence, argument, or persuasion is required.In the book’s subtitle, which is&#160;How America Went Haywire: A 500-Year History, the word “America” does not really denote the country lying between Canada and Mexico. Nor is “America” the country of which Kurt Andersen himself is a citizen. No, the country that allegedly started going “haywire” 500 years ago, even before it was a country, is itself a&#160; <a href="http://www.amazon.com/dp/1400067219/&amp;tag=theweesta-20" type="external">fantasyland</a>, a simulacrum of the real America but comprising only an admittedly large population of suckers and the marginally cleverer con men and women who have preyed on them for centuries and are still preying on them. Andersen may describe himself as an American, but he writes about America as if he and the class of enlightened sophisticates to which he belongs stand outside it, laughing at the monkeyshines of those credulous Americans he purports to describe.</p>
<p>It is a familiar posture, pioneered a century ago by H. L. Mencken and since adopted by the academic left with such unanimity as to be almost a requirement for admission to the number of those who belong, or aspire to belong, to our ruling elites—as they occasionally let slip when, like Peter Jennings in 1994, they describe the electorate as being&#160; <a href="https://books.google.com/books?id=2NNJAgAAQBAJ&amp;lpg=PA294&amp;dq=%22peter%20jennings%22%20%22tantrum%22&amp;pg=PA276#v=onepage&amp;q&amp;f=false" type="external">a 2-year-old having a temper tantrum</a>&#160;or, like Barack Obama in 2008, as clinging “ <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DTxXUufI3jA" type="external">to guns or religion or antipathy toward people who aren’t like them</a>.” Hillary Clinton may have apologized for saying “half of Trump supporters” could be put in a “ <a href="https://youtu.be/idrgiAEk2Vs?t=1m30s" type="external">basket of deplorables</a>,” but no one can have doubted that it was what she really thought of them. It’s what the whole class to which she belongs thinks of them, as their support for Trump, if nothing else, shows they very well know.</p>
<p>It is also the class to which Andersen belongs, as he acknowledges when he quotes Obama on the bitter clingers and comments: “Sure, it was condescending, but it was also true.” His book amounts to little more than an elite attempt to justify its author’s perception of the America for which he harbors such contempt. Remarkably, for a book that’s all about the blurred lines between reality and fantasy, it never troubles to define what “reality” is. Why? Apparently because it never occurred to Andersen to doubt his readers will be as sure as he is that they already know what reality is and that it must be coterminous with the progressive narrative of the last 50 years, culminating in the enthronement of that ultimate fantasist, Donald Trump.</p>
<p>The delightful discovery with which Andersen hopes to entertain readers is that the predominantly right-wing (as he sees it) and American addiction to the merely fantastical actually goes back 10 times as far—in fact to the very beginnings of the European settlement of the continent. In effect, he has started with Trump and worked backward—until he suddenly found that it’s been Trump and Trumpism (or as good as) all along. His start date of 1517 appears to have been chosen in honor of Martin Luther’s launching the Protestant Reformation in that year. To Andersen, “the disagreements dividing Protestants from Catholics were about the internal consistency of the magical rules within their common fantasy scheme.”</p>
<p>In his view, Luther’s real revolution was the invention of a kind of “DIY Christianity” that a century later issued in the “nutty religious cult” that settled Massachusetts and so paved the way for such natural successors three or four centuries later as Billy Sunday, Billy Graham, Pat Robertson, the Pentecostal movement, Jim Jones of the People’s Temple and cyanide-laced Kool-Aid fame, and, of course, Donald Trump. The rhetorical temptation must have been very great here, but even Mencken might have balked at the historical obtuseness of finding no important difference between 17th-century English Puritans in Massachusetts and such latter-day successors as these. On more than one occasion Andersen even implies that Americans and their forebears are comparable to Islamist terrorists.</p>
<p>To a man with a hammer, they say, everything looks like a nail, and Andersen’s hammer is&#160;fantasy, whether of God or of gold, of show-business or suburbia. Writing history backward by analyzing a contemporary phenomenon like the Disneyfication of culture (“the fantasy-industrial complex”) and then projecting it onto the past can be done only by not making elementary distinctions, especially between religion as a historical phenomenon and the fantasy-mania we are observing today, which has also affected religion.</p>
<p>As it has everything else, very much including Andersen’s sort of historiography, which seeks to translate historical phenomena into contemporary pop-cultural terms with which they can have had nothing to do. To him there are no difficulties, no mysteries in the past, just stuff that we’ve all seen already on TV and that the superior among us have always laughed at. Thus, Joseph Smith’s Mormonism—and perhaps Christianity itself—is described as biblical “fan fiction.” “We’ll give Jehovah a&#160;son,” he writes of the authors of the New Testament, “part god and part human!” Yeah, that must be how it happened: just like a Hollywood superhero pitch session. Elsewhere, trying to be witty, he writes of the biblical account of Jesus’ 40 days in the wilderness as the time when “Satan tried to make Jesus prove he had superpowers and come to the dark side.”</p>
<p>Talk about fantasy! Talk about (as he also does) anti-intellectualism! Yet Andersen has no fear of not being taken seriously by an audience that presumably eats such stuff up. Likewise, he has no fear of contradiction in gratuitously treating as fantasies things like “gun rights hysteria,” “free-market fundamentalism,” or the ideas (unspecified) of the “hysterical true believers” who made up the Tea Party—things that are fantastical only by virtue of belonging to the politically disfavored. Andersen apparently thinks that climate change “denialism” is equally the fantasy of those who regard it as a “hoax” and those who merely dissent from the economically ruinous left-wing consensus as to what to do about it.</p>
<p>Andersen leaves out certain fantasies of the left that might prove inconvenient to his thesis. He has much to say, for instance, about right-wing “McCarthyism” back in the 1950s, but next to nothing about the biggest fantasy of the 20th century, that of Marxist communism, which, though not American in origin, once enjoyed a considerable vogue in this country, especially among the privileged classes, and is now enjoying a resurgence among the academic left. Andersen is all over cosmetic surgery but has not a word to say about the much more drastic (and arguably much more fantastical) idea of sex-reassignment surgery that has lately become all the rage among progressives and in the media.</p>
<p>In the fantasyland environment of today, it is ill-advised to make fantasy a partisan subject, the property of one political party almost to the exclusion of the other. If Andersen is right in thinking that it is primarily Republicans who have gone off the deep end for fantasy, then he cannot also be right in thinking that it is the salient feature of our&#160;whole&#160;culture today, including our political culture, let alone something that has been present in American culture since the beginning. He ends up suggesting that only the things (or political parties) he likes are immune to the fantasy bug—or, when you get right down to it, that only he himself is. In other words, he might as well be calling himself, as Rush Limbaugh does himself, the “mayor of Real-ville.”</p>
<p>Andersen periodically makes little self-deprecatory gestures, such as admitting that he once played a video game often enough to get good at it and that, in writing about what he sees as the middle-class fantasy of the SUV and the pickup (it goes with the Frank Lloyd Wright fantasy of the suburbs), he owns a Land Rover. But the only fleeting moment of real self-awareness comes a few pages from the end of the book, where he writes: “Mix the Protestant impulse to find the magical meaning and purpose in&#160;everything&#160;with the Enlightenment’s empiricism, and you get our American mania for connecting all the dots, irrationality in rationalist drag”—and then he footnotes the bit about “connecting all the dots” thus: “I realize: given this book, I’m one to talk.”</p>
<p>And yet this momentary flash of insight doesn’t translate into any overall awareness that he himself and the book he has written are at least as much a part of the fantasy culture he describes as those benighted religious nuts and gun nuts and free-market nuts. To claim, as Andersen does, that our country is a “fantasyland” is an obvious mistake, since in order to be able to identify it as such, you would also have to be able to identify reality as such, and that is just what we cannot do in a world in which reality has come to mean whatever we want it to mean. In other words, Andersen is just as much in thrall to&#160;his&#160;vision of reality as any of the alleged fantasists he attacks, and calling it “rationalist” no more validates his certainty than their calling theirs God-given validates theirs.</p>
<p>Since Andersen never gets around to it, let me attempt to define “reality.” Reality is what any two debaters or controversialists have in common—or, to put it in another way, reality is what is, if anything is, uncontroversial. Since there is very little if anything in our public discourse today that is uncontroversial, it follows that there is little or no reality anymore. Andersen does not know this, though knowing it would seem to be the minimum requirement for writing a book like&#160;Fantasyland. That makes&#160;Fantasyland&#160;itself a fantasy, though an all-too-familiar one. It is the fantasy of the intellectual that of all the rival systems competing for our attention his alone is reality-based.</p>
<p>James Bowman, resident scholar at the Ethics and Public Policy Center, is the author of&#160;Honor: A History.</p> | false | 1 | kurt andersen may right supposing looks like americans increasing inability distinguish fantasy reality big topic times least 2 3 46 chapters in160fantasyland160in justice subject rapid160tour horizon160on new age spirituality homeopathic medicine pseudoscience paranormal psychiatric vogue recovered memory syndrome legal craze 1980s early 90s prosecutions imaginary satanistinspired child abuse valuable compendium particularly young people didnt live period things taken seriously glad documentation falsebelief fadsand species hokum antivaccine hysteria early 2000swere treated seriousness media whose traditional role gatekeepers reality otherwise solicitous andersen also sound sorts crazy socially harmful fantasies still much us conspiracy theories pornography infantilization pop culture celebrity culture reality tv violent video games legalized gambling boom plastic surgery yet casts net wide along things pulls civil war reenactors wargamers different kind thing altogether imaginative recreation known reality sake knowing better surely something distinguished fanciful invention nonrealities treated real could even argue cosmetic surgery qualitatively different cosmetics around along condemnations forever would interesting argument anyway andersena novelist host publicradio show160studio 360is much interested hard work argument since really writing anyone doesnt already agree obviously interested selling thesis example huge national audience asserts without bothering demonstrate rush limbaugh daily brings sociopolitical alternate reality one thing say disagree somebody andersens way saying disagrees like many polemicists nowadays tell living alternate reality evidence argument persuasion requiredin books subtitle is160how america went haywire 500year history word america really denote country lying canada mexico america country kurt andersen citizen country allegedly started going haywire 500 years ago even country a160 fantasyland simulacrum real america comprising admittedly large population suckers marginally cleverer con men women preyed centuries still preying andersen may describe american writes america class enlightened sophisticates belongs stand outside laughing monkeyshines credulous americans purports describe familiar posture pioneered century ago h l mencken since adopted academic left unanimity almost requirement admission number belong aspire belong ruling elitesas occasionally let slip like peter jennings 1994 describe electorate being160 2yearold temper tantrum160or like barack obama 2008 clinging guns religion antipathy toward people arent like hillary clinton may apologized saying half trump supporters could put basket deplorables one doubted really thought whole class belongs thinks support trump nothing else shows well know also class andersen belongs acknowledges quotes obama bitter clingers comments sure condescending also true book amounts little elite attempt justify authors perception america harbors contempt remarkably book thats blurred lines reality fantasy never troubles define reality apparently never occurred andersen doubt readers sure already know reality must coterminous progressive narrative last 50 years culminating enthronement ultimate fantasist donald trump delightful discovery andersen hopes entertain readers predominantly rightwing sees american addiction merely fantastical actually goes back 10 times farin fact beginnings european settlement continent effect started trump worked backwarduntil suddenly found trump trumpism good along start date 1517 appears chosen honor martin luthers launching protestant reformation year andersen disagreements dividing protestants catholics internal consistency magical rules within common fantasy scheme view luthers real revolution invention kind diy christianity century later issued nutty religious cult settled massachusetts paved way natural successors three four centuries later billy sunday billy graham pat robertson pentecostal movement jim jones peoples temple cyanidelaced koolaid fame course donald trump rhetorical temptation must great even mencken might balked historical obtuseness finding important difference 17thcentury english puritans massachusetts latterday successors one occasion andersen even implies americans forebears comparable islamist terrorists man hammer say everything looks like nail andersens hammer is160fantasy whether god gold showbusiness suburbia writing history backward analyzing contemporary phenomenon like disneyfication culture fantasyindustrial complex projecting onto past done making elementary distinctions especially religion historical phenomenon fantasymania observing today also affected religion everything else much including andersens sort historiography seeks translate historical phenomena contemporary popcultural terms nothing difficulties mysteries past stuff weve seen already tv superior among us always laughed thus joseph smiths mormonismand perhaps christianity itselfis described biblical fan fiction well give jehovah a160son writes authors new testament part god part human yeah must happened like hollywood superhero pitch session elsewhere trying witty writes biblical account jesus 40 days wilderness time satan tried make jesus prove superpowers come dark side talk fantasy talk also antiintellectualism yet andersen fear taken seriously audience presumably eats stuff likewise fear contradiction gratuitously treating fantasies things like gun rights hysteria freemarket fundamentalism ideas unspecified hysterical true believers made tea partythings fantastical virtue belonging politically disfavored andersen apparently thinks climate change denialism equally fantasy regard hoax merely dissent economically ruinous leftwing consensus andersen leaves certain fantasies left might prove inconvenient thesis much say instance rightwing mccarthyism back 1950s next nothing biggest fantasy 20th century marxist communism though american origin enjoyed considerable vogue country especially among privileged classes enjoying resurgence among academic left andersen cosmetic surgery word say much drastic arguably much fantastical idea sexreassignment surgery lately become rage among progressives media fantasyland environment today illadvised make fantasy partisan subject property one political party almost exclusion andersen right thinking primarily republicans gone deep end fantasy also right thinking salient feature our160whole160culture today including political culture let alone something present american culture since beginning ends suggesting things political parties likes immune fantasy bugor get right words might well calling rush limbaugh mayor realville andersen periodically makes little selfdeprecatory gestures admitting played video game often enough get good writing sees middleclass fantasy suv pickup goes frank lloyd wright fantasy suburbs owns land rover fleeting moment real selfawareness comes pages end book writes mix protestant impulse find magical meaning purpose in160everything160with enlightenments empiricism get american mania connecting dots irrationality rationalist dragand footnotes bit connecting dots thus realize given book im one talk yet momentary flash insight doesnt translate overall awareness book written least much part fantasy culture describes benighted religious nuts gun nuts freemarket nuts claim andersen country fantasyland obvious mistake since order able identify would also able identify reality world reality come mean whatever want mean words andersen much thrall to160his160vision reality alleged fantasists attacks calling rationalist validates certainty calling godgiven validates since andersen never gets around let attempt define reality reality two debaters controversialists commonor put another way reality anything uncontroversial since little anything public discourse today uncontroversial follows little reality anymore andersen know though knowing would seem minimum requirement writing book like160fantasyland makes160fantasyland160itself fantasy though alltoofamiliar one fantasy intellectual rival systems competing attention alone realitybased james bowman resident scholar ethics public policy center author of160honor history | 1,035 |
<p>A group of MEPs have urged Cyprian authorities not to cooperate with Russia on an inquiry against the man behind the Magnitsky Act, William Browder. Now, a Russian lawyer claims that Browder himself arranged this petition to hide data on his operations.</p>
<p>Browder, a US-born British investor and the founder of Hermitage Capital Management, fears that his fraudulent investment schemes involving offshore assets in Cyprus would be revealed to European authorities if Cyprus continues to cooperate with Moscow on its probe against him, Natalya Veselnitskaya, a Russian lawyer who conducted her own investigation into Browder’s operations, told RT. She added that Browder is actively trying to paint the investigation against him as politically motivated.</p>
<p>Read more</p>
<p><a href="https://www.rt.com/politics/407647-chief-russian-prosecutor-asks-us/" type="external" /></p>
<p>“He [Browder] is afraid of the Russian probe that has conclusive evidence of his financial crimes and proof that his theory of Magnitsky’s death is an absolute fake. That’s why Browder is ready to stage any provocation,”&#160;Veselnitskaya said. She went on to say that the investor’s decision to intervene was particularly&#160;“influenced by the fact that the entire network of offshore companies that make up his organized criminal group is located on the territory of Cyprus.”</p>
<p>The incident that Veselnitskaya was referring to took place in late October 2017. At that time, 17 members of the European Parliament appealed to Cypriot President Nikos Anastasiades in an open letter, in which they called on him to stop assisting Russia in its investigation against Browder.</p>
<p>The MEPs particularly expressed their concerns over the fact that&#160;“the Cypriot government is actively assisting the Russian government in furthering human rights violations through assistance with politically motivated prosecutions, in contravention of its obligations under European conventions,”&#160;as&#160; <a href="http://cyprus-mail.com/2017/10/29/17-meps-slam-cyprus-aiding-putin-browder-laundering/" type="external">reported&#160;</a>by the local Cyprus Mail daily.&#160;</p>
<p>Even though the letter carried absolutely no legal weight and could not force Anastasiades to take any measures, the MEPs still sought to exert pressure on the Cypriot authorities by stating that&#160;“the conduct of Cyprus in this case will have implications that go far beyond this case.”&#160;The letter also explicitly stated that the investigation against Browder was of a&#160;“political nature.”</p>
<p>“While every other European country, Interpol and the Council of Europe have deemed the Russian proceedings against Browder to be politically motivated, your country has taken a contrary position, and agreed to provide assistance to a Russian politically-motivated process, clearly in violation of your obligations under the rule of law,” the signatories to the letter said.&#160;</p>
<p>Read more</p>
<p><a href="https://www.rt.com/news/407044-veselnitskaya-browder-fraud-lobby/" type="external" /></p>
<p>Just weeks before the MEPs sent their letter to the Cypriot president, Browder himself filed a request to the court of Nicosia, asking for an emergency injunction against the transfer of any data concerning his activities in the island country to Russia. According to Veselnitskaya, the letter and the application filed by Browder were&#160;“a double gambit by the criminal union between Browder and his lawyers: an attempt to interrupt the course of the investigation and interfere in the judicial process.”</p>
<p>Notably, as many as 12 out of 17 European lawmakers who signed the letter, were mentioned in the so-called&#160;“Soros list”&#160;– a document prepared for the Open Society European Policy Institute, which itself is part of the Open Society Foundations run by the US investor and hedge fund manager George Soros. The&#160; <a href="https://legacy.gscdn.nl/archives/images/soroskooptbrussel.pdf" type="external">document&#160;</a>published on the Internet after the mail server of the Open Society Foundations was hacked in 2016 lists those, whom it calls&#160;“reliable allies in the European Parliament.”&#160;</p>
<p>The letter’s signatories who are also&#160;“reliable allies”&#160;of Soros include socialists Ana Gomes, Pier Antonio Panzeri, and Juan Fernando Lopez Aguilar; member of the European Conservatives and Reformists Group Monica Macovei; liberals Maite Pagazaurtundua Ruiz, Petras Austrevicius and Fredrick Federley; greens Rebecca Harms and Judith Sargentini; and members of the European People’s Party Christofer Fjellner, Lars Adaktusson, and Gunnar Hokmark. Two more signatories to the letter are Anna Fotyga and Sandra Kalniete, former foreign ministers of Poland and Latvia respectively, known for their initiatives to&#160;“counteract Russian influence”&#160;in Europe.</p>
<p>In mid-October, even before the letter signed by the European lawmakers reached the Cypriot president, the Prosecution Office of Cyprus actually suspended cooperation with Russia on the investigation into the allegations against Browder. In particular, Cypriot authorities banned a Russian delegation from coming to the island in pursuit of the investigative procedures, citing the application filed by Browder, in which he claimed that the Russian investigation was politically motivated.</p>
<p>Read more</p>
<p><a href="https://www.rt.com/politics/373187-russian-mps-bewildered-and-angered/" type="external" /></p>
<p>The Russian Foreign Ministry suspected the Cypriot authorities’ decision was influenced from abroad.&#160;“We have serious doubts regarding the legality of that decision, which was made public before the court issued a decision on Mr Browder’s action, as well as to whether Cyprus took the decision independently,”&#160;the ministry&#160; <a href="http://www.mid.ru/foreign_policy/news/-/asset_publisher/cKNonkJE02Bw/content/id/2894700" type="external">said&#160;</a>in a statement.&#160;</p>
<p>Browder became known for his role in the adoption of the so-called Magnitsky Act – the 2012 US regulation that imposes sanctions on Russian individuals and companies over alleged violations of human rights. Browder actively lobbied the act in the US and then also encouraged the European countries to follow suit and also imposed sanctions on Russia over alleged human rights violations.&#160;</p>
<p>The investor, however, has a long history of animosity against Russia. In 2013, he was sentenced to nine years in prison in absentia for tax evasion. According to the 2013 court verdict, Browder together with his Russian auditor Sergey Magnitsky failed to pay over 552 million rubles in taxes (about $16 million). The businessman was also found guilty of illegally buying shares in the country’s natural gas giant Gazprom. According to the law enforcers, that cost Russia at least 3 billion rubles ($100 million).</p>
<p>Magnitsky died in pre-trial custody in 2009 after being detained as part of investigation in Browder’s fraudulent financial schemes in Russia. His death allowed Browder to present the whole case as political persecution and lobby for the adoption of the Magnitsky Act in the US.</p> | false | 1 | group meps urged cyprian authorities cooperate russia inquiry man behind magnitsky act william browder russian lawyer claims browder arranged petition hide data operations browder usborn british investor founder hermitage capital management fears fraudulent investment schemes involving offshore assets cyprus would revealed european authorities cyprus continues cooperate moscow probe natalya veselnitskaya russian lawyer conducted investigation browders operations told rt added browder actively trying paint investigation politically motivated read browder afraid russian probe conclusive evidence financial crimes proof theory magnitskys death absolute fake thats browder ready stage provocation160veselnitskaya said went say investors decision intervene particularly160influenced fact entire network offshore companies make organized criminal group located territory cyprus incident veselnitskaya referring took place late october 2017 time 17 members european parliament appealed cypriot president nikos anastasiades open letter called stop assisting russia investigation browder meps particularly expressed concerns fact that160the cypriot government actively assisting russian government furthering human rights violations assistance politically motivated prosecutions contravention obligations european conventions160as160 reported160by local cyprus mail daily160 even though letter carried absolutely legal weight could force anastasiades take measures meps still sought exert pressure cypriot authorities stating that160the conduct cyprus case implications go far beyond case160the letter also explicitly stated investigation browder a160political nature every european country interpol council europe deemed russian proceedings browder politically motivated country taken contrary position agreed provide assistance russian politicallymotivated process clearly violation obligations rule law signatories letter said160 read weeks meps sent letter cypriot president browder filed request court nicosia asking emergency injunction transfer data concerning activities island country russia according veselnitskaya letter application filed browder were160a double gambit criminal union browder lawyers attempt interrupt course investigation interfere judicial process notably many 12 17 european lawmakers signed letter mentioned socalled160soros list160 document prepared open society european policy institute part open society foundations run us investor hedge fund manager george soros the160 document160published internet mail server open society foundations hacked 2016 lists calls160reliable allies european parliament160 letters signatories also160reliable allies160of soros include socialists ana gomes pier antonio panzeri juan fernando lopez aguilar member european conservatives reformists group monica macovei liberals maite pagazaurtundua ruiz petras austrevicius fredrick federley greens rebecca harms judith sargentini members european peoples party christofer fjellner lars adaktusson gunnar hokmark two signatories letter anna fotyga sandra kalniete former foreign ministers poland latvia respectively known initiatives to160counteract russian influence160in europe midoctober even letter signed european lawmakers reached cypriot president prosecution office cyprus actually suspended cooperation russia investigation allegations browder particular cypriot authorities banned russian delegation coming island pursuit investigative procedures citing application filed browder claimed russian investigation politically motivated read russian foreign ministry suspected cypriot authorities decision influenced abroad160we serious doubts regarding legality decision made public court issued decision mr browders action well whether cyprus took decision independently160the ministry160 said160in statement160 browder became known role adoption socalled magnitsky act 2012 us regulation imposes sanctions russian individuals companies alleged violations human rights browder actively lobbied act us also encouraged european countries follow suit also imposed sanctions russia alleged human rights violations160 investor however long history animosity russia 2013 sentenced nine years prison absentia tax evasion according 2013 court verdict browder together russian auditor sergey magnitsky failed pay 552 million rubles taxes 16 million businessman also found guilty illegally buying shares countrys natural gas giant gazprom according law enforcers cost russia least 3 billion rubles 100 million magnitsky died pretrial custody 2009 detained part investigation browders fraudulent financial schemes russia death allowed browder present whole case political persecution lobby adoption magnitsky act us | 570 |
<p>Fun as yesterday’s results <a href="http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/392145/winners-and-losers-yuval-levin" type="external">most assuredly were</a>, it is important for Republicans to recognize that this is an election that the Democrats lost far more than an election that Republicans won. The promising young stars joining the ranks of congressional Republicans have the potential to help the party shape its agenda and its substantive message to American voters about how conservatism can improve their lives and their country, but they generally did not run on such a message in this campaign. (One of the notable exceptions, Ed Gillespie, came remarkably close to winning in Virginia thanks to his extraordinarily smart campaign but appears not to have made it.) Their arrival is cause for hope, but not satisfaction.</p>
<p>This campaign was about Barack Obama — about the fact that most voters seem to agree with Republicans that the Obama presidency is a failure at this point, and the fact that Democrats could not find anything to say about that and could not find any way to change the subject. But the fact that the election was about the president actually makes it difficult for both parties to learn some of the lessons it offers them — lessons that are about how to think about the post-Obama era soon to begin.</p>
<p>For Democrats, the election should in part be a warning about their overwhelming intellectual exhaustion. They have very nearly nothing to say to or offer the country at this point, and their approach to politics has been reduced to little more than a series of tired rote gestures and slogans disconnected from the present and the future. The cupboard is bare and the energy is depleted. That is President Obama’s fault in part, but it is also the fault of the Left’s broader failure (shared in common with the Right to some extent of course) to think seriously about some basic realities of&#160;21st-century America.</p>
<p>This exhaustion is powerfully evident in the Democrats’ preparations for 2016, which at this point are astonishingly lacking in energy and intensity. The Democrats appear to have just one reasonably plausible presidential contender and may be embarking on an essentially uncontested and content-free primary in a non-incumbent year. This kind of extended yet empty process — no excitement and no tussle, just the long, grim coronation march of an uninspiring leader whose followers dearly hope is in fact “likable enough” — could seriously exacerbate their problems.</p>
<p>Hillary Clinton has some enormous structural advantages as a general-election candidate, to be sure: basically the benefits of incumbency (no real primary challenge and no bar of presidential plausibility to clear) without the key disadvantage of incumbency (being responsible for everything people don’t like). And she has some personal advantages: She is smart, tough, and savvy and has a capacity to learn from failure and adjust. But she does have other disadvantages of incumbency (people are bored of her and feel like she has been talking at them forever) and some disadvantages all her own: She is a dull, grating, inauthentic, over-eager, insipid elitist with ideological blinders yet no particular vision and is likely to be reduced to running on a dubious promise of experience and competence while faking idealism and hope—a very common type of presidential contender in both parties, but one that almost always loses. And as things stand now, she will have little of substance to run on, which makes it even harder for such a politician to win. The Democrats seem only vaguely aware of this problem. Yesterday’s results should wake them up.</p>
<p>For Republicans contemplating the coming years, meanwhile, the challenge in the wake of this election is to think beyond defining themselves against Obama. Both the intensity of the party’s confrontation with the president and the sheer power and centrality of the modern presidency in our system of government make that difficult.</p>
<p>The challenge brings to mind the peculiar victory speech that John Boehner&#160; <a href="http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/house-republican-leader-john-boehner-delivers-remarks-election/story?id=12040162" type="external">delivered</a>&#160;almost exactly four years ago, on the night Republicans regained a House majority in 2010. After laying out some of the general goals the new majority would pursue, Boehner told the audience:</p>
<p>While our new majority will serve as your voice in the people’s House, we must remember it is the president who sets the agenda for our government. The American people have sent an unmistakable message to him tonight, and that message is: “change course.”</p>
<p>Presumably, Boehner would offer the same caution in the wake of yesterday’s extraordinary Republican gains. The president controls the agenda, and hopefully the election will lead him to change course. That sentiment is to begin with a mark of the degree to which our political system has come to be dominated by the executive. Next January, Republicans will control both houses of Congress, three fifths of the nation’s governorships, and about 70 of its 99 state legislative chambers. That should mean the Republican Party is basically the nation’s governing party. But Republicans give every impression of still understanding themselves as the opposition party, because they do not control the presidency.</p>
<p>And it is true, of course, that without a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate (let alone a veto proof majority in both houses) Republicans can’t really get any laws enacted that Democrats are not willing to abide. But that does not mean that “it is the president who sets the agenda” in American politics. In fact, setting the agenda—provided they recognize they won’t be able to achieve much of it—is precisely what a reasonably unified Republican congress could do, and should try to do. They could play the key role in determining the questions that everyone in national politics has to answer, even if they could not determine the answers.</p>
<p>To do that well, Republicans will need to understand and to describe their efforts in these terms—to be clear that they are working to set the right agenda rather than that they are trying either to “prove they can govern” from Congress alone or to “sketch clear contrasts” with a president who will never be on the ballot again. Understanding their role as putting forward an agenda and pursuing it would help Republicans do both of those things while helping them avoid unrealistic expectations about either.</p>
<p>The key difference between the divided congress we have had and the divided government we will now have is that Republicans can now set the agenda, require Democrats to vote on the best of their ideas, and see which of them Democrats might agree with enough (or find painful enough to oppose) to actually bring them to fruition. That doesn’t mean that lots of Republican ideas get enacted, or even reach the president. The filibuster will prevent that. It means, rather, that those ideas get killed in Senate votes instead of getting killed by the Senate’s unwillingness to vote. And that’s a significant difference, because it puts both Republicans and (for the first time) Democrats on the record in a meaningful way.</p>
<p>There will be some things (like the Keystone Pipeline and repeal of some of the most unpopular elements of Obamacare, but maybe also patent reform and trade reform and other meaningful but less prominent measures the House has passed and the Senate has ignored) that the Democrats will find much harder to vote against in public than to kill in private, and so might reach President Obama and perhaps even get signed. That would be great, because it would do some good and start to show the public what the Republican agenda consists of and that some elements of it are now getting somewhere.</p>
<p>There will be other things (like the full and most partial Obamacare repeals and any replacement proposals, but also most energy, anti-poverty, education, tax, entitlement, regulatory, and other reforms Republicans might plausibly advance) that the Democrats would filibuster and stop. That would be good too, because it would further show the public what the Republican agenda consists of and that Democrats oppose things voters might like. All of that would help Republicans better formulate their policy agenda, make what substantive progress they can, and define themselves and their opponents on their terms.</p>
<p>That’s the sort of power that control of the Senate could give them if they decide to see what kind of agenda could get enough Republicans behind it. It’s real power and could be very important. But there is no reason to define the use of that power as “showing we can govern” or as “contrasting with the president,” as various Republicans seem inclined to do. It seems to me that people who choose these two ways of speaking may actually be talking about basically the same thing while thinking they are disagreeing, and may be picking two ways of describing it that are both less politically potent than simply saying that Republicans will pursue a conservative agenda and see where Democrats can join them.</p>
<p>The one means by which it would be possible to get Republican proposals through the Senate without a filibuster threat is the budget reconciliation process, which allows some kinds of legislation with budgetary implications to pass with 51 votes instead of 60. This process has therefore been particularly prominent in the arguments of people who describe the task of a Republican senate in terms of drawing contrasts with the president. That process has its uses in the circumstances Republicans will likely find themselves in next year, but these uses mostly have to do with giving a bit more prominence to some elements of a Republican agenda. It is very hard to imagine the president signing any legislation passed through reconciliation. If it is odious enough to Democrats to fail to get 60 votes, it will be odious enough to Obama to get vetoed. And if it’s not so odious to Democrats and can get 60 votes then it doesn’t need to be done through reconciliation. So the difference between regular order and reconciliation is the difference between getting a proposal killed in the Senate and getting it killed at the White House.</p>
<p>That makes it largely a public-relations question, and makes reconciliation less substantively significant than some seem to suggest. A veto of a reconciliation bill will get a good deal more attention than a filibuster of other legislation, so reconciliation should consist of those things Republicans most want to argue about in front of the public. If that means, for instance, that it includes repeals of the most obnoxious and unpopular elements of Obamacare rather than the whole of it (which probably couldn’t qualify for reconciliation in its entirety anyhow) that’s fine — force those fights that will do the most good for the cause of repealing and replacing that law going forward.</p>
<p>That’s how Republicans should think about reconciliation more generally. As a substantive matter, reconciliation is not more important than other legislation that will not become law. As a political matter, it might play a somewhat different and more prominent role than other legislation, and it should be thought about accordingly. Contrasting themselves with the president in particular should no longer be a higher priority for Republicans than contrasting themselves with Democrats in general and, more important, defining themselves and their agenda more clearly. So they need not stuff everything they care about into a reconciliation bill, or treat that mechanism as more important than it is.</p>
<p>Making effective use of the peculiar power they will now have won’t be easy, and Republicans will no doubt screw it up in various ways at various times. That’s unavoidable, particularly in the budget process. And of course, the president will also use his power to force some issues onto the table. If he goes ahead with an executive amnesty, for instance, Republicans should use the CR and budget process to stop him, forcing Democrats to decide whether they will publicly endorse his actions and forcing him to decide if he will risk a shutdown on behalf of such a brazen overreach after the shellacking his party has just taken from the public. But as a general matter, Republicans should not think that the president controls the agenda, or that the agenda should consist of just fighting the president.</p>
<p>Instead, while advancing what measures they can, they should see that this new arrangement of powers in Washington allows them (and requires them) to spend the next two years putting forward elements of their public case and policy agenda and preparing the ground to take the presidency and more fully assume the mantle of America’s governing party.</p>
<p>That doesn’t mean a leadership-led agenda in Congress, which would be very difficult to pull off anyway. If the House passed some of its key bills from the last Congress and the Senate now passed them too, Republicans would be well on their way to helping the public see the virtues of a conservative agenda, and could build on it from there. Is it so crazy to suggest that then different members with ideas could actually be allowed to have those ideas voted on and see if they go somewhere in committee and on the floor? Or that different Obamacare alternatives might be taken up, for instance? That a higher-ed agenda might take shape from the bottom up? That alternative tax reform ideas could be tried out on the members? That an anti-cronyist agenda might take shape even if some leaders didn’t vote for it?</p>
<p>That doesn’t amount to governing from Congress and it doesn’t amount to merely sketching contrasts. It amounts to doing the job of legislators, and daring legislators and a president of the other party to do their own jobs too for a change.</p>
<p>—&#160;Yuval Levin is the Hertog Fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center</p> | false | 1 | fun yesterdays results assuredly important republicans recognize election democrats lost far election republicans promising young stars joining ranks congressional republicans potential help party shape agenda substantive message american voters conservatism improve lives country generally run message campaign one notable exceptions ed gillespie came remarkably close winning virginia thanks extraordinarily smart campaign appears made arrival cause hope satisfaction campaign barack obama fact voters seem agree republicans obama presidency failure point fact democrats could find anything say could find way change subject fact election president actually makes difficult parties learn lessons offers lessons think postobama era soon begin democrats election part warning overwhelming intellectual exhaustion nearly nothing say offer country point approach politics reduced little series tired rote gestures slogans disconnected present future cupboard bare energy depleted president obamas fault part also fault lefts broader failure shared common right extent course think seriously basic realities of16021stcentury america exhaustion powerfully evident democrats preparations 2016 point astonishingly lacking energy intensity democrats appear one reasonably plausible presidential contender may embarking essentially uncontested contentfree primary nonincumbent year kind extended yet empty process excitement tussle long grim coronation march uninspiring leader whose followers dearly hope fact likable enough could seriously exacerbate problems hillary clinton enormous structural advantages generalelection candidate sure basically benefits incumbency real primary challenge bar presidential plausibility clear without key disadvantage incumbency responsible everything people dont like personal advantages smart tough savvy capacity learn failure adjust disadvantages incumbency people bored feel like talking forever disadvantages dull grating inauthentic overeager insipid elitist ideological blinders yet particular vision likely reduced running dubious promise experience competence faking idealism hopea common type presidential contender parties one almost always loses things stand little substance run makes even harder politician win democrats seem vaguely aware problem yesterdays results wake republicans contemplating coming years meanwhile challenge wake election think beyond defining obama intensity partys confrontation president sheer power centrality modern presidency system government make difficult challenge brings mind peculiar victory speech john boehner160 delivered160almost exactly four years ago night republicans regained house majority 2010 laying general goals new majority would pursue boehner told audience new majority serve voice peoples house must remember president sets agenda government american people sent unmistakable message tonight message change course presumably boehner would offer caution wake yesterdays extraordinary republican gains president controls agenda hopefully election lead change course sentiment begin mark degree political system come dominated executive next january republicans control houses congress three fifths nations governorships 70 99 state legislative chambers mean republican party basically nations governing party republicans give every impression still understanding opposition party control presidency true course without filibusterproof majority senate let alone veto proof majority houses republicans cant really get laws enacted democrats willing abide mean president sets agenda american politics fact setting agendaprovided recognize wont able achieve much itis precisely reasonably unified republican congress could try could play key role determining questions everyone national politics answer even could determine answers well republicans need understand describe efforts termsto clear working set right agenda rather trying either prove govern congress alone sketch clear contrasts president never ballot understanding role putting forward agenda pursuing would help republicans things helping avoid unrealistic expectations either key difference divided congress divided government republicans set agenda require democrats vote best ideas see democrats might agree enough find painful enough oppose actually bring fruition doesnt mean lots republican ideas get enacted even reach president filibuster prevent means rather ideas get killed senate votes instead getting killed senates unwillingness vote thats significant difference puts republicans first time democrats record meaningful way things like keystone pipeline repeal unpopular elements obamacare maybe also patent reform trade reform meaningful less prominent measures house passed senate ignored democrats find much harder vote public kill private might reach president obama perhaps even get signed would great would good start show public republican agenda consists elements getting somewhere things like full partial obamacare repeals replacement proposals also energy antipoverty education tax entitlement regulatory reforms republicans might plausibly advance democrats would filibuster stop would good would show public republican agenda consists democrats oppose things voters might like would help republicans better formulate policy agenda make substantive progress define opponents terms thats sort power control senate could give decide see kind agenda could get enough republicans behind real power could important reason define use power showing govern contrasting president various republicans seem inclined seems people choose two ways speaking may actually talking basically thing thinking disagreeing may picking two ways describing less politically potent simply saying republicans pursue conservative agenda see democrats join one means would possible get republican proposals senate without filibuster threat budget reconciliation process allows kinds legislation budgetary implications pass 51 votes instead 60 process therefore particularly prominent arguments people describe task republican senate terms drawing contrasts president process uses circumstances republicans likely find next year uses mostly giving bit prominence elements republican agenda hard imagine president signing legislation passed reconciliation odious enough democrats fail get 60 votes odious enough obama get vetoed odious democrats get 60 votes doesnt need done reconciliation difference regular order reconciliation difference getting proposal killed senate getting killed white house makes largely publicrelations question makes reconciliation less substantively significant seem suggest veto reconciliation bill get good deal attention filibuster legislation reconciliation consist things republicans want argue front public means instance includes repeals obnoxious unpopular elements obamacare rather whole probably couldnt qualify reconciliation entirety anyhow thats fine force fights good cause repealing replacing law going forward thats republicans think reconciliation generally substantive matter reconciliation important legislation become law political matter might play somewhat different prominent role legislation thought accordingly contrasting president particular longer higher priority republicans contrasting democrats general important defining agenda clearly need stuff everything care reconciliation bill treat mechanism important making effective use peculiar power wont easy republicans doubt screw various ways various times thats unavoidable particularly budget process course president also use power force issues onto table goes ahead executive amnesty instance republicans use cr budget process stop forcing democrats decide whether publicly endorse actions forcing decide risk shutdown behalf brazen overreach shellacking party taken public general matter republicans think president controls agenda agenda consist fighting president instead advancing measures see new arrangement powers washington allows requires spend next two years putting forward elements public case policy agenda preparing ground take presidency fully assume mantle americas governing party doesnt mean leadershipled agenda congress would difficult pull anyway house passed key bills last congress senate passed republicans would well way helping public see virtues conservative agenda could build crazy suggest different members ideas could actually allowed ideas voted see go somewhere committee floor different obamacare alternatives might taken instance highered agenda might take shape bottom alternative tax reform ideas could tried members anticronyist agenda might take shape even leaders didnt vote doesnt amount governing congress doesnt amount merely sketching contrasts amounts job legislators daring legislators president party jobs change 160yuval levin hertog fellow ethics public policy center | 1,138 |
<p>Netflix has proven a creative playground for nearly every genre of television. With “ <a href="http://variety.com/t/godless/" type="external">Godless</a>,” the streamer is debuting its first western. The seven-episode limited series, which stars <a href="http://variety.com/t/michelle-dockery/" type="external">Michelle Dockery</a> (“Downton Abbey”), <a href="http://variety.com/t/jeff-daniels/" type="external">Jeff Daniels</a> (“The Newsroom”) and Jack O’Connell (“Unbroken”), bows November 22. It tells the story of the town of La Belle, a rundown mining town in New Mexico, being run by women in the wake of a mining accident that claimed the lives of nearly all of the town’s men.</p>
<p>“ <a href="http://variety.com/2016/film/news/godless-locarno-film-festival-winners-1201837166/" type="external">Godless</a>” hails from creator <a href="http://variety.com/t/scott-frank/" type="external">Scott Frank</a>, who’d teamed up with Steven Soderbergh and Casey Silver before on “Out of Sight.” “I’ve always wanted to write a western,” says Frank. “I had no idea what the story was. I didn’t know anything. I just knew I wanted to write a western.”</p>
<p>He’d originally intended it as a movie, spending two years on the script. Soderbergh passed on directing it (“He was concerned about directing horses,” says Frank, “and it wasn’t a place he wanted to go creatively”) but given his experiences on “The Knick,” he suggested that Frank turn it into a miniseries. Frank readily agreed — and decided to take on directing duties himself. “TV is taking more risks than movies are now,” he says. “And movies are resistant to make a western because they just don’t travel well and it’s hard to make money overseas.”</p>
<p>Netflix’s VP of content Cindy Holland heard that Frank was working on a western, and asked to read the script. Less than 12 hours later, he reports, she said she wanted to make it for Netflix as their first in-house limited series. “I couldn’t believe it because I was so used to studios going, ‘Oh, you wrote a western. I really hope someone else makes it.’” he says. “Netflix kept every promise they made.”</p>
<p>Now he says he’s grateful that he waited. “I’m really glad it didn’t get made as a feature because I got to tell so much more story this way,” he says. “We compromised nothing visually. I was able to go deeper with all of the characters. It was almost a reverse adaptation.”</p>
<p>During his research on the script, he’d come across reports of mining towns in the Southwest. “Sometimes all of the men would die in a single day in an accident, and the women would be left there,” he says. “Sometimes they would all leave, and sometimes they would be stranded and have to make the town work. I thought, ‘Oh, that’s it. That’s the movie. That’s where I began.”</p>
<p>It’s been called a feminist western, but Frank disputes that label. “I wasn’t interested in making a giant feminist statement,” he says. “I don’t know that I have the right to. What I really wanted to do was focus on characters who never get their stories told, women chief among them. My favorite theme is identity and people being stuck in lives they never planned on living. Most of the characters in this story fit that.”</p>
<p>So while the story focuses on the women, Frank says he still considers it a classic western. “I really worked hard to embrace all of the clichés, if you will,” he says. “I wanted to have the breaking of the wild horse, the two guys facing each other in a gunfight, the train robbery. All the things that you’re used to seeing in westerns.”</p>
<p>Netflix also gave him free rein on casting — which Frank says he couldn’t be more grateful for. “It was a very liberating thing to be able to cast the best actors we could find, rather than what their value in Japan might be,” he says.</p>
<p>Daniels signed on immediately as Frank Griffin, the “despicable” outlaw mercilessly on the hunt for O’Connell’s Roy Goode, Griffin’s ex-protégé on the run from him. “Everyone wants to do a western at least once,” says Frank, who’d worked with Daniels on “Lookout.” “All of the actors would come up to me at some point and say ‘I always wanted to do a western,’ including the women.”</p>
<p>Including Dockery, who plays twice-widowed Alice Fletcher: “It’s not a sandbox you get to play in often,” she says. That might seem a surprise given that she’s perhaps best known for playing Lady Mary on “Downton Abbey.” Frank admits it took him some convincing. “I made the same mistake everyone makes and assumed she’s too prim and proper to play a role like this,” he says. Then she sent in an audition tape which he calls “probably the best I’ve ever seen.”</p>
<p>“After watching it once, I couldn’t see anybody else play the part,” he says.</p>
<p />
<p>“The real <a href="http://variety.com/2016/tv/news/michelle-dockery-good-behavior-tnt-downton-abbey-1201918423/" type="external">Michelle Dockery</a> is in real life nowhere near Lady Mary,” he says with a laugh. “She couldn’t be further from Lady Mary. I wish I could tell you it was a lot of work, but it was really easy to get that performance out of her because that tougher, more raw aspect of her is closer to who she is.”</p>
<p>Daniels relished the opportunity to play the villain. “He’s a very dysfunctional, confused, mentally unstable person wandering around the 1880s,” says Daniels of Frank Griffin. “That’s Frank’s normal: Put a bullet in the guy’s head, and then quote the Bible. Just another Thursday.”</p>
<p>As Soderbergh had warned, directing proved the bigger challenge for Frank. “It’s a nightmare directing horses!” he says. “I love horses. I’ve ridden with them my whole life. But getting them to perform on camera and hit their marks is impossible.” He reports they’d often have to use different horses to play the same horse — sometimes even dying them a different color. “You can plan how you’re going to shoot it,” he admits, “but ultimately, you’re chasing after the horses.”</p>
<p>And as much as the actors went through intensive training to prepare (“If you weren’t in shape, you were going to be in shape by the end of it because of all of the horse riding. It’s a workout,” says Daniels), nothing could prepare them for the willful nature of the horses.</p>
<p>“When you’re on horses and you’re galloping across a prairie, things can go wrong real fast,” says Daniels. “The horses all want to win; they all think it’s the Kentucky Derby. That’s an 800-pound horse underneath you that you have to control. And, by the way, act.”</p>
<p>Adds the actor,&#160;“It becomes this thing of, are you going to be able to get through the entire shoot without being thrown from the horse? Not all of us made it.”</p>
<p>Including him. On the second-to-last day of shooting, Daniels fell off the horse and broke his wrist. But he soldiered on, getting through the last day so everyone could wrap before he headed to the hospital for treatment. “That will be a day I won’t forget,” he says.</p>
<p>Daniels wasn’t the only one — one of the actors was thrown off his horse on the first day. Jokes Daniels, “ You know when you’re in a western when you say action, and the ambulance starts its engine.”</p>
<p>Dockery had plenty of equestrian experience, thanks to her days on “Downton.” But she had to learn a new style: “English riding is very different from Western,” she says. “You’re only holding your reins with one hand because the other hand is always ready to pull out your rifle.”</p>
<p>She also had to get pretty filthy for the part — the dust that defines the cinematography creeped into every pore. “Our faces were just covered with dirt,” she says. And the hair-and-makeup team did their part, too” “She would get me to squint and put fake dirt in the cracks around my eyes,” reports Dockery. “Because that was what it was like: If a wind blew up, you would have dirt in your face the whole time.” (That’s not to say she was entirely unused to it: “Don’t forget Mary fell over in the pigsty,” she adds with a laugh.)</p>
<p>And while the 1800’s set series finds her back in period clothes, “I didn’t have to wear a corset thankfully,” she says.</p>
<p>Both Daniels and Dockery praises Frank’s scripts, crediting his “singular voice” as a writer/director. “Scott is really good at moving the story in directions that you can’t anticipate. And that’s interesting,” says Daniels. “It’s what’s keeping me interested in acting, to be challenged like that.”</p>
<p>Daniels’ next project is another limited series — the 9/11 docudrama “The Looming Tower” for Hulu. “I absolutely love it,” he says of working in TV. “The production value on Netflix and Hulu and HBO, what’s the difference? Show me the difference. The writing is better. You get to do more….For actors who want to be challenged, these streaming shows, the limited series fell out of the sky for guys like me.”</p>
<p>He compares it to filmmaking back in the 1970s. “They were making different movies back then, they were allowed to,” he says. “They didn’t have to just sell as many tickets as possible. It allows us to do what we want. It puts the control back with the artists. We’re not always right. But man, with no interference, <a href="http://variety.com/2016/tv/news/steven-soderbergh-scott-frank-netflix-godless-1201719509/" type="external">Scott Frank</a> gets to make what Scott Frank wants to make. That’s what I want to see.”</p>
<p>And with his first TV series under his belt (buckle), Frank says he’s a convert to the medium. “I would definitely come back and do another TV series like this,” he says. “I would definitely do another western. I wish I could do this one now that I know how to do it.”</p> | false | 1 | netflix proven creative playground nearly every genre television godless streamer debuting first western sevenepisode limited series stars michelle dockery downton abbey jeff daniels newsroom jack oconnell unbroken bows november 22 tells story town la belle rundown mining town new mexico run women wake mining accident claimed lives nearly towns men godless hails creator scott frank whod teamed steven soderbergh casey silver sight ive always wanted write western says frank idea story didnt know anything knew wanted write western hed originally intended movie spending two years script soderbergh passed directing concerned directing horses says frank wasnt place wanted go creatively given experiences knick suggested frank turn miniseries frank readily agreed decided take directing duties tv taking risks movies says movies resistant make western dont travel well hard make money overseas netflixs vp content cindy holland heard frank working western asked read script less 12 hours later reports said wanted make netflix first inhouse limited series couldnt believe used studios going oh wrote western really hope someone else makes says netflix kept every promise made says hes grateful waited im really glad didnt get made feature got tell much story way says compromised nothing visually able go deeper characters almost reverse adaptation research script hed come across reports mining towns southwest sometimes men would die single day accident women would left says sometimes would leave sometimes would stranded make town work thought oh thats thats movie thats began called feminist western frank disputes label wasnt interested making giant feminist statement says dont know right really wanted focus characters never get stories told women chief among favorite theme identity people stuck lives never planned living characters story fit story focuses women frank says still considers classic western really worked hard embrace clichés says wanted breaking wild horse two guys facing gunfight train robbery things youre used seeing westerns netflix also gave free rein casting frank says couldnt grateful liberating thing able cast best actors could find rather value japan might says daniels signed immediately frank griffin despicable outlaw mercilessly hunt oconnells roy goode griffins exprotégé run everyone wants western least says frank whod worked daniels lookout actors would come point say always wanted western including women including dockery plays twicewidowed alice fletcher sandbox get play often says might seem surprise given shes perhaps best known playing lady mary downton abbey frank admits took convincing made mistake everyone makes assumed shes prim proper play role like says sent audition tape calls probably best ive ever seen watching couldnt see anybody else play part says real michelle dockery real life nowhere near lady mary says laugh couldnt lady mary wish could tell lot work really easy get performance tougher raw aspect closer daniels relished opportunity play villain hes dysfunctional confused mentally unstable person wandering around 1880s says daniels frank griffin thats franks normal put bullet guys head quote bible another thursday soderbergh warned directing proved bigger challenge frank nightmare directing horses says love horses ive ridden whole life getting perform camera hit marks impossible reports theyd often use different horses play horse sometimes even dying different color plan youre going shoot admits ultimately youre chasing horses much actors went intensive training prepare werent shape going shape end horse riding workout says daniels nothing could prepare willful nature horses youre horses youre galloping across prairie things go wrong real fast says daniels horses want win think kentucky derby thats 800pound horse underneath control way act adds actor160it becomes thing going able get entire shoot without thrown horse us made including secondtolast day shooting daniels fell horse broke wrist soldiered getting last day everyone could wrap headed hospital treatment day wont forget says daniels wasnt one one actors thrown horse first day jokes daniels know youre western say action ambulance starts engine dockery plenty equestrian experience thanks days downton learn new style english riding different western says youre holding reins one hand hand always ready pull rifle also get pretty filthy part dust defines cinematography creeped every pore faces covered dirt says hairandmakeup team part would get squint put fake dirt cracks around eyes reports dockery like wind blew would dirt face whole time thats say entirely unused dont forget mary fell pigsty adds laugh 1800s set series finds back period clothes didnt wear corset thankfully says daniels dockery praises franks scripts crediting singular voice writerdirector scott really good moving story directions cant anticipate thats interesting says daniels whats keeping interested acting challenged like daniels next project another limited series 911 docudrama looming tower hulu absolutely love says working tv production value netflix hulu hbo whats difference show difference writing better get morefor actors want challenged streaming shows limited series fell sky guys like compares filmmaking back 1970s making different movies back allowed says didnt sell many tickets possible allows us want puts control back artists always right man interference scott frank gets make scott frank wants make thats want see first tv series belt buckle frank says hes convert medium would definitely come back another tv series like says would definitely another western wish could one know | 841 |
<p>WASHINGTON — Yucca Mountain continues to be considered by a Republican lawmaker on a key congressional panel to be part of a comprehensive solution to the continuing problem of storing nuclear waste generated by power plants.</p>
<p>But some Nevada officials say it will take more than money to bring the designated facility north of Las Vegas into compliance to store waste that is being temporarily held at plants across the country.</p>
<p>Earlier this month, U.S. Rep. John Shimkus, R-Ill., chairman of the House Energy and Commerce subcommittee on environment, said that the federal government’s failure to take possession of spent nuclear fuel has cost taxpayers $30 billion.</p>
<p>Following a tour of the San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station near San Diego, Shimkus, whose subommittee overseas nuclear waste issues, said he planned to act during this Congress to resolve the problem.</p>
<p>Shimkus said he would “push for a comprehensive solution to nuclear waste management that would move spent nuclear fuel out of these communities in a timely manner and toward permanent disposal at Yucca Mountain, as decided by the federal government 30 years ago.”</p>
<p>Nevada Gov. Brian Sandoval and the state’s two U.S. Sens., Dean Heller and Catherine Cortez Masto, and U.S. Reps. Dina Titus, Ruben Kihuen and Jacky Rosen all oppose efforts to bring nuclear waste to Yucca Mountain, which is located just 90 miles north of Las Vegas.</p>
<p>U.S. taxpayers spent $15 billion on the Yucca Mountain nuclear repository before former Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., enlisted the help of then-President Barack Obama to kill the project.</p>
<p>Cortez Masto, a member of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, said efforts to restart the project would be futile because of legal challenges, public opposition and cost.</p>
<p>“It will be a further waste of dollars if they are going to try to go down the path of opening Yucca Mountain, which is a hole in the ground,” she told the Review-Journal.</p>
<p>“People seem to think that if you put the dollars back, you can flip the switch and all of a sudden you can put the waste there. That’s not going to happen,” she said. “ It’s not primed or ready to receive the waste.”</p>
<p>President Donald Trump has nominated former Texas Gov. Rick Perry to head the Department of Energy.</p>
<p>During his confirmation hearing, Perry would not rule out Yucca Mountain as part of plans to store nuclear waste, but acknowledged opposition in the state to the facility. During his tenure as governor, Perry supported nuclear waste storage at a West Texas facililty.</p>
<p>The Senate is expected to vote on the nomination by early next month. And the new adminstration’s plans on nuclear waste storage would likely be unveiled in the proposed federal budget for fiscal year 2018, which is expected to be released soon.</p>
<p>Last month, a Nevada commission on nuclear waste sent a report to Sandoval warning that Congress would likely seek funding to revive the Yucca Mountain repository this year.</p>
<p>The 35-page report, prepared by Bob Halstead, executive director of the Nevada Agency for Nuclear Projects, said it was unsure whether the Trump administration would support storing 77,000 tons of radioactive waste inside the Nye County mountain.</p>
<p>That report also noted that the Yucca Mountain project faces many hurdles before it could be granted a license by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission.</p>
<p>The state of Nevada still has 218 “contentions” challenging the science of the repository plan before the NRC’s licensing panel that have been filed since the Obama administration defunded the project in 2011.</p>
<p>Two Nye County commissioners plan to meet with the state’s congressional delegation and key lawmakers later this month to discuss efforts to revive Yucca Mountain, to urge an expedited process that would allow the NRC to hear the science that is being challenged.</p>
<p>“We don’t advocate for Yucca Mountain, we advocate for the science,” said Dan Schinhofen, Nye County Commission chairman.</p>
<p>“We need to hear the science and follow the rule of law, and then we can discuss whether the project is safe or not,” he said.</p>
<p>Schinhofen of Pahrump and Nye County Commissioner Lorinda Wichman of Round Mountain will be in Washington this month.</p>
<p>Cortez Masto, a former state attorney general, said she brought many of the lawsuits challenging the disposal of waste at Yucca Mountain. She said the challenges alone will stop any development at the Nye County site, for the time being.</p>
<p>“The idea that this is something that is viable,” she said of restarting Yucca Mountain, is “mistaken.”</p>
<p>“We need to work with states that would be willing to accept some of this waste,” she said.</p>
<p>Even though Obama defunded construction, under a federal law passed in 1987, the Nye County site remains designated as the permanent repository for the waste.</p>
<p>Shimkus said the $30 billion spent to temporarily store the waste will continue to grow.</p>
<p>“This number will continue to rapidly increase until the federal government fulfills its promise to local communities and ratepayers to permanently dispose of this material,” Shimkus said.</p>
<p>Contact Gary Martin at [email protected] or 202-662-7390. Follow <a href="https://twitter.com/garymartindc" type="external">@garymartindc</a> on Twitter.</p>
<p>RELATED</p>
<p><a href="" type="internal">Yucca Mountain won’t be site for nuclear waste, energy secretary says</a></p>
<p><a href="" type="internal">Many obstacles remain before Yucca Mountain could accept first nuclear waste shipments</a></p>
<p><a href="" type="internal">Congress likely to seek funding for Yucca Mountain nuclear waste project, state report says</a></p>
<p /> | false | 1 | washington yucca mountain continues considered republican lawmaker key congressional panel part comprehensive solution continuing problem storing nuclear waste generated power plants nevada officials say take money bring designated facility north las vegas compliance store waste temporarily held plants across country earlier month us rep john shimkus rill chairman house energy commerce subcommittee environment said federal governments failure take possession spent nuclear fuel cost taxpayers 30 billion following tour san onofre nuclear generating station near san diego shimkus whose subommittee overseas nuclear waste issues said planned act congress resolve problem shimkus said would push comprehensive solution nuclear waste management would move spent nuclear fuel communities timely manner toward permanent disposal yucca mountain decided federal government 30 years ago nevada gov brian sandoval states two us sens dean heller catherine cortez masto us reps dina titus ruben kihuen jacky rosen oppose efforts bring nuclear waste yucca mountain located 90 miles north las vegas us taxpayers spent 15 billion yucca mountain nuclear repository former senate majority leader harry reid dnev enlisted help thenpresident barack obama kill project cortez masto member senate energy natural resources committee said efforts restart project would futile legal challenges public opposition cost waste dollars going try go path opening yucca mountain hole ground told reviewjournal people seem think put dollars back flip switch sudden put waste thats going happen said primed ready receive waste president donald trump nominated former texas gov rick perry head department energy confirmation hearing perry would rule yucca mountain part plans store nuclear waste acknowledged opposition state facility tenure governor perry supported nuclear waste storage west texas facililty senate expected vote nomination early next month new adminstrations plans nuclear waste storage would likely unveiled proposed federal budget fiscal year 2018 expected released soon last month nevada commission nuclear waste sent report sandoval warning congress would likely seek funding revive yucca mountain repository year 35page report prepared bob halstead executive director nevada agency nuclear projects said unsure whether trump administration would support storing 77000 tons radioactive waste inside nye county mountain report also noted yucca mountain project faces many hurdles could granted license us nuclear regulatory commission state nevada still 218 contentions challenging science repository plan nrcs licensing panel filed since obama administration defunded project 2011 two nye county commissioners plan meet states congressional delegation key lawmakers later month discuss efforts revive yucca mountain urge expedited process would allow nrc hear science challenged dont advocate yucca mountain advocate science said dan schinhofen nye county commission chairman need hear science follow rule law discuss whether project safe said schinhofen pahrump nye county commissioner lorinda wichman round mountain washington month cortez masto former state attorney general said brought many lawsuits challenging disposal waste yucca mountain said challenges alone stop development nye county site time idea something viable said restarting yucca mountain mistaken need work states would willing accept waste said even though obama defunded construction federal law passed 1987 nye county site remains designated permanent repository waste shimkus said 30 billion spent temporarily store waste continue grow number continue rapidly increase federal government fulfills promise local communities ratepayers permanently dispose material shimkus said contact gary martin gmartinreviewjournalcom 2026627390 follow garymartindc twitter related yucca mountain wont site nuclear waste energy secretary says many obstacles remain yucca mountain could accept first nuclear waste shipments congress likely seek funding yucca mountain nuclear waste project state report says | 556 |
<p>The double standard shown by the European Union in its dealings with Croatia and Serbia represent yet another example of the moral hypocrisy of the European Union.</p>
<p>Over the past several years, analysts and commentators have <a href="https://www.euractiv.com/section/elections/news/pro-nazi-nostalgia-flourishes-under-new-croatia-government/" type="external">noticed</a> a rising tide of domestic support for the Croatian homegrown Nazi movement of the Second World War, the Ustashe, which actively exterminated Serbs, Jews, and Roma in the territory it controlled from 1941-45. Far from condemning this alarming development, the Croatian government, the European Union, and non-state actors within it have tacitly and actively supported the rising tide of sympathy towards the Ustashe.</p>
<p>This disconnect between the ostensible “European values” of human rights and tolerance that the European Union claims to represent and its tacit support of trends towards extremist politics in Croatia will have a significant impact on the <a href="http://www.balkaninsight.com/en/article/serbian-citizen-s-biggest-eu-sceptics-in-the-region-08-06-2015" type="external">increasing trend of Euroscepticism</a> in Serbia and other Balkan states. Furthermore, the Union’s unabashed condemnation of legitimate populist movements in Europe, including but not limited to the Brexit campaign, as “racist” and “xenophobic,” while quietly supporting genuinely extremist political elements will contribute to the increasingly popular perception of the EU as a morally bankrupt and <a href="https://pjmedia.com/blog/the-hypocritical-elites-deserved-brexit/" type="external">hypocritical</a>entity.</p>
<p>The Republic of Croatia has, since its independence, often reverted to the imagery of its Second World War predecessor; the Independent State of Croatia (NDH). The NDH was a puppet state sponsored by Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy, and was administered by the Ustashe. During its brief four-year lifespan, the NDH made use of a form of clerical fascism built on the basis of discrimination and systematized liquidation of non-Croatian elements within its boundaries. It was <a href="https://books.google.ca/books?id=hpVo-cu8wNUC&amp;pg=PA124&amp;redir_esc=y#v=onepage&amp;q&amp;f=false" type="external">responsible for the deaths</a> of anywhere between 300,000 to 600,000 Serbs and tens of thousands of Jews and Roma.</p>
<p>While restricted by law, Ustashe symbolism is freely exhibited at sporting events, political rallies, and all manners of public gatherings. The penalties for these displays are often restricted to a small monetary fine. By comparison, German law (Strafgesetzbuch section 86a) <a href="http://www.iuscomp.org/gla/statutes/StGB.htm#86a" type="external">stipulates</a> that a fine and/or a sentence of up to three years imprisonment will be administered.</p>
<p>Ustasha support among football hooligans (including a recent <a href="https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/croatia-election-swastika-on-pitch-during-euro-2016-qualifier-with-italy-is-symbolic-of-the-rise-of-10340358.html" type="external">event</a>during Euro 2016 where Croatian fans openly brandished swastikas) has been popular for decades; a more alarming trend is the active and tacit support of the Ustashe movement and legacy coming from the Croatian government. Earlier this year, the government of Croatia was condemned <a href="http://www.b92.net/eng/news/region.php?yyyy=2016&amp;mm=02&amp;dd=03&amp;nav_id=96918" type="external">for appointing</a> Zlatko Hasanbegovic, a prominent and open admirer of the Ustashe regime to be the country’s minister of culture. Croatia’s president, Kolinda Grabar-Kitarovic, is an <a href="http://www.b92.net/eng/news/region.php?yyyy=2016&amp;mm=06&amp;dd=10&amp;nav_id=98285" type="external">avid fan</a> of the pro-Ustashe musician Marko Perkovic “Thompson” and, while describing the Ustashe regime as “criminal”, also <a href="http://www.jutarnji.hr/vijesti/hrvatska/kolinda-grabar-kitarovic-ndh-je-bila-najmanje-nezavisna-i-najmanje-je-stitila-interese-hrvata-a-ustaski-rezim-bio-je-zlocinacki/3709554/" type="external">stated</a> in the past that the NDH “at least protect[ed] the interests of the Croatian people” during its short and incredibly violent reign.</p>
<p>Despite <a href="https://www.amnesty.org/en/countries/europe-and-central-asia/croatia/report-croatia/" type="external">ongoing reports</a> by international NGO’s of state-sponsored discrimination against Croatian Serbs and routine <a href="http://www.b92.net/eng/news/region.php?yyyy=2016&amp;mm=07&amp;dd=06&amp;nav_id=98544" type="external">desecrations</a> of Serbian churches and cultural monuments at the hands of pro-Ustashe elements in the country, the European Union has remained almost completely silent on the issue of growing pro-Ustashe sympathies in the Croatian government and political scene.</p>
<p>Rather than condemn the rising tide of Ustashe sympathy in the country or denounce the appointment of Ustashe sympathizers to some of the Croatian government’s highest ministries, the European Union has chosen to tacitly support the creeping return of political extremism to Croatia. On June 15, an exhibition dedicated to Cardinal Alojzije Stepinac was held at the European Parliament, one of the EU’s most important institutions of governance. Cardinal Stepinac, who served as the Croatian Catholic Archbishop of Zagreb from 1937 to 1960, was an active supporter of the Ustashe regime and <a href="https://books.google.ca/books?id=qMZaPjrHqYYC&amp;lpg=PP1&amp;pg=PA284#v=onepage&amp;q=284&amp;f=false" type="external">according to</a> prominent Balkan historian Bernd Jurgen Fischer “had close association with the Ustashe leaders as the archbishop of the capital city, had issued proclamations celebrating independent Croatia, and welcomed the Ustashe leaders.”</p>
<p>The European Union has yet to respond to any of the <a href="http://www.b92.net/eng/news/politics.php?yyyy=2016&amp;mm=06&amp;dd=15&amp;nav_id=98324" type="external">criticisms</a> lodged against it for hosting an event dedicated to a key supporter of a Nazi-backed regime that murdered hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians during the Second World War.</p>
<p>A recent definition (pictured below) of the Ustashe regime in the leading German language dictionary ‘Duden’ as a “movement which fought against ‘Serbian centralism’” has also provoked a firestorm of controversy and a rapidly growing <a href="http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/stop-covering-up-nazi-ustasa-crimes-on-serbs-jews/" type="external">online petition</a> sponsored by the humanitarian organization <a href="https://www.28jun.org/" type="external">28 Jun.</a> (Full disclosure: we are both members of this organization.) The definition makes no reference to any of the Ustashe’s well-documented and numerous crimes against civilian populations, giving it the appearance of a legitimate political movement with reasonable aims. These recent events are contributing to the growing sentiment among many Serbs who feel alienated by the European Union,&#160;and as if a double standard is being applied with regards to Serbia.</p>
<p>Since Serbia attained candidate status in 2011, the European Union has imposed on it a host of requirements and stipulations that ostensibly deal with human rights and unresolved issues stemming from the Yugoslav Conflicts of the 1990’s. The Serbian government has largely complied with the conditions imposed on it by the European Union and has committed itself to the EU through acts such as extraditing members of its own government and “normalizing” relations with the Republic of Kosovo (a self-declared state which unilaterally declared independence from Serbia in 2008) at the behest of the European Union. Additionally, many EU states <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/serbia/11694089/British-UN-resolution-on-Srebrenica-massacre-could-destabilise-the-region.html" type="external">voted in favor</a> of a failed UN resolution that sought to classify the controversial events in Srebrenica in 1995 as “genocide”.</p>
<p>Given the fact that the European Union has both passively supported the rising tide of extremist political inclinations in one of its member states by refusing to condemn it and actively supported it by hosting exhibitions in its honor, Serbs’ enthusiasm for joining the EU will likely <a href="http://www.voanews.com/content/brexit-dampens-zeal-for-serbias-eu-bid/3407552.html" type="external">continue</a> to wane. The European Union has demonstrated a lack of integrity and even-handedness in upholding its stated human rights values by enforcing relatively harsh standards for Serbia while imposing virtually none on Croatia, even going as far as openly supporting some of Croatia’s worst historical human rights abusers. Coupled with growing Eurosceptic sentiments in both Serbia and Europe as a whole, the European Union’s quiet support of radicalized politics in Croatia could jeopardize the EU’s strategic goals of acquiring Serbia as a member.</p>
<p>Furthermore, the double standard shown by the European Union in its dealings with Croatia and Serbia represent yet another example of the moral hypocrisy of the European Union. While top EU officials were quick to denounce legitimate populist movements such as the Brexit campaign as racist and xenophobic, those same officials and institutions have done nothing but tacitly support genuinely extremist politics in Croatia. Eurosceptic parties such as Front Nationale and the Austrian Freedom Party are routinely branded as “far right” and “radical” while political extremism in Croatia is allowed to flourish. If the European Union does not take steps to meaningfully combat this moral hypocrisy, then it is likely that the trend of increasing skepticism towards the Union will continue to rise unabated.</p> | false | 1 | double standard shown european union dealings croatia serbia represent yet another example moral hypocrisy european union past several years analysts commentators noticed rising tide domestic support croatian homegrown nazi movement second world war ustashe actively exterminated serbs jews roma territory controlled 194145 far condemning alarming development croatian government european union nonstate actors within tacitly actively supported rising tide sympathy towards ustashe disconnect ostensible european values human rights tolerance european union claims represent tacit support trends towards extremist politics croatia significant impact increasing trend euroscepticism serbia balkan states furthermore unions unabashed condemnation legitimate populist movements europe including limited brexit campaign racist xenophobic quietly supporting genuinely extremist political elements contribute increasingly popular perception eu morally bankrupt hypocriticalentity republic croatia since independence often reverted imagery second world war predecessor independent state croatia ndh ndh puppet state sponsored nazi germany fascist italy administered ustashe brief fouryear lifespan ndh made use form clerical fascism built basis discrimination systematized liquidation noncroatian elements within boundaries responsible deaths anywhere 300000 600000 serbs tens thousands jews roma restricted law ustashe symbolism freely exhibited sporting events political rallies manners public gatherings penalties displays often restricted small monetary fine comparison german law strafgesetzbuch section 86a stipulates fine andor sentence three years imprisonment administered ustasha support among football hooligans including recent eventduring euro 2016 croatian fans openly brandished swastikas popular decades alarming trend active tacit support ustashe movement legacy coming croatian government earlier year government croatia condemned appointing zlatko hasanbegovic prominent open admirer ustashe regime countrys minister culture croatias president kolinda grabarkitarovic avid fan proustashe musician marko perkovic thompson describing ustashe regime criminal also stated past ndh least protected interests croatian people short incredibly violent reign despite ongoing reports international ngos statesponsored discrimination croatian serbs routine desecrations serbian churches cultural monuments hands proustashe elements country european union remained almost completely silent issue growing proustashe sympathies croatian government political scene rather condemn rising tide ustashe sympathy country denounce appointment ustashe sympathizers croatian governments highest ministries european union chosen tacitly support creeping return political extremism croatia june 15 exhibition dedicated cardinal alojzije stepinac held european parliament one eus important institutions governance cardinal stepinac served croatian catholic archbishop zagreb 1937 1960 active supporter ustashe regime according prominent balkan historian bernd jurgen fischer close association ustashe leaders archbishop capital city issued proclamations celebrating independent croatia welcomed ustashe leaders european union yet respond criticisms lodged hosting event dedicated key supporter nazibacked regime murdered hundreds thousands innocent civilians second world war recent definition pictured ustashe regime leading german language dictionary duden movement fought serbian centralism also provoked firestorm controversy rapidly growing online petition sponsored humanitarian organization 28 jun full disclosure members organization definition makes reference ustashes welldocumented numerous crimes civilian populations giving appearance legitimate political movement reasonable aims recent events contributing growing sentiment among many serbs feel alienated european union160and double standard applied regards serbia since serbia attained candidate status 2011 european union imposed host requirements stipulations ostensibly deal human rights unresolved issues stemming yugoslav conflicts 1990s serbian government largely complied conditions imposed european union committed eu acts extraditing members government normalizing relations republic kosovo selfdeclared state unilaterally declared independence serbia 2008 behest european union additionally many eu states voted favor failed un resolution sought classify controversial events srebrenica 1995 genocide given fact european union passively supported rising tide extremist political inclinations one member states refusing condemn actively supported hosting exhibitions honor serbs enthusiasm joining eu likely continue wane european union demonstrated lack integrity evenhandedness upholding stated human rights values enforcing relatively harsh standards serbia imposing virtually none croatia even going far openly supporting croatias worst historical human rights abusers coupled growing eurosceptic sentiments serbia europe whole european unions quiet support radicalized politics croatia could jeopardize eus strategic goals acquiring serbia member furthermore double standard shown european union dealings croatia serbia represent yet another example moral hypocrisy european union top eu officials quick denounce legitimate populist movements brexit campaign racist xenophobic officials institutions done nothing tacitly support genuinely extremist politics croatia eurosceptic parties front nationale austrian freedom party routinely branded far right radical political extremism croatia allowed flourish european union take steps meaningfully combat moral hypocrisy likely trend increasing skepticism towards union continue rise unabated | 687 |
<p>Well, here goes. The following, I know, is an invitation to hate-mail, but I have to say that Star Wars Episode One: The Phantom Menace, written and directed by George Lucas, demonstrates a remarkable paucity of imagination. The thought first came to me in the scene where Senator Palpatine (Ian McDiarmid) explains to Queen Amidala (Natalie Portman) the state of political life on the home city-planet of Couresan: “No civility,” he says; “only politics.” Inwardly I groaned. Here the most brainless journalistic cliché of our times, as specific to 1990s America as Bill Clinton or O.J. Simpson, is lovingly transported to a galaxy far away as if it were a universal category of humanoid behavior, like love or treachery or heroism, and not a mere linguistic tic, based on the patently false assumption that civility and politics are disjunctive terms. The anachronistic effect is akin to that of watching the Jedi knights break into the macarena.</p>
<p>Nor is that all. The Senate is said to be paralysed by an investigation into groundless charges of corruption against a good leader, Chancellor Valorum (Terence Stamp). Could this, by chance, be our Bill? At any rate, the film has by implication adopted the Clintonite formula about the absolute importance of “moving on” by positing this same legislative inactivity as the reason why sinister “bureaucrats” have been allowed to take over the government. Their suzerainty, in turn, allows a mysterious bad guy—who appears only as a hologram and remains unidentified at the end of the film—and his evil henchman, Darth Maul (Ray Park), to seize control of Trade Federation troops for an invasion of Queen Amidala’s planet, Naboo. Are we meant to suppose that Slobodan Milosevic was likewise emboldened by Clinton’s embroilment in Senate impeachment proceedings to undertake his campaign in Kosovo?</p>
<p>If so, the roles of the antagonists are here reversed. It is the Slobo-like bad guy (who also resembles his prototype in launching an ethnic cleansing campaign against the underwater cities of the harmless and comic Gunga) who controls thousands of useless war-machines. These are robots with dust-buster headpieces and collapsible bodies who are fiction’s most incompetent enemy since Fenimore Cooper’s Indians. Not only are they astonishingly poor marksmen with their integral ray-guns, their metal parts seem to fit together like Lego blocks. As they obligingly walk upright and very slowly, they fall before the light-sabres of the good guys, the seemingly outgunned ground troops Qui-Gon Jinn (Liam Neeson) and Obi-Wan Kenobi (Ewan McGregor), like ripe wheat before the reaper’s scythe. Only the Sith lord, Darth Maul, who has learned the Jedi ways and has a double-edged light sabre, proves a worthy opponent.</p>
<p>Boring! We don’t even have any sense of the latter’s brand of villainy, which is advertised by his painted face and dark cowl but which otherwise remains completely inarticulate. He says nothing and dumbly follows orders from the hologram. Meanwhile, the heroes’ comic sidekick, a cross between a floppy-eared dog and a dinosaur who is called not Dino but Jar Jar Binks (Ahmed Best), can never shut up. Moreover, he talks a kind of baby talk—“Dis am berry bad!”—that gets on the nerves. At one point during the climactic battle with the Hoover-headed robots (“Ouch time,” says Jar Jar cutely) he is briefly imperilled: “Jar Jar! Use your boobah!” cries out a companion.</p>
<p>“No have-a da boobah!” says Jar Jar, whereupon the companion tosses him a little blue ball that, as almost anything larger than a golf-ball would be, is instantly fatal to his pursuers.</p>
<p>In short, it’s the Teletubbies in space, an impression further reinforced by the fact that the youngest hero, Anakin Skywalker (Jake Lloyd)—who, we are given to understand, will grow up to be Darth Vader—is about six years old. But, although he is only two or three years out of diapers, this prodigy is said to be able to “fix anything.” Do we sense another cliché here? Ah yes, it is the by-now famous tyke who must program the VCR for his technically incompetent parents. Long after VCRs have presumably joined mangles and steam engines in the technological graveyard, here he still is, tinkering away with the fabulously sophisticated machines of the future. Though a slave, he has not only managed to build a championship “pod” racer out of spare parts in his back yard, he is also allowed to race it at considerable risk to his life against the champion pod racer of Tattooine, the villainous-looking and blatantly cheating Sebulba.</p>
<p>Anakin’s mother (Pernilla August) appears to be under heavy sedation throughout her brief appearance in the picture. She easily consents to Anakin’s racing his pod and then to his going off with the two Jedi, Qui-Gon and Obi-Wan, to learn how to be a Jedi himself. “Will I ever see you again?” the little fellow asks her.</p>
<p>“What do you think?” she replies.</p>
<p>“I. . .hope so,” he hesitates.</p>
<p>And when Qui-Gon half-heartedly suggests that she might like to come with them, she replies with unusual firmness: “My place is here; my future is here.” Huh? She prefers to remain a slave? Oh well, perhaps she has a boyfriend. Yet she also solemnly assures the Jedi that Anakin has no father, and the suggestion of a virgin birth, together with the unprecedented number of the genetic Jedi-markers called midicloriants (or something) in his bloodstream, lends weight to Qui-Gon’s conviction that he is “the chosen one,” come into the universe to “balance the force”—a suspiciously Manichaean-sounding enterprise. I expect we shall find out more about this if we can bear to drag ourselves to the two promised sequels, which are also “prequels” to the original Star Wars saga of 22 years ago.</p>
<p>But what surprised and delighted us with its wit and cinematic originality back in 1977 has not worn well. The exotic creatures from other galaxies have now become all-too-familiar creatures from other movies, even when they have been repackaged and cosmetically redesigned, and the timeless story of heroism comes to seem merely silly and exploitative when the hero is a six-year-old playing computer games. This is a Star Wars that seems to exist for the sake of the spin-offs—the hats, the T-shirts, the action figures, the computer games and so forth that made it profitable before it was even released. Like the pod race and the battles in the movie itself, the movie’s triumph in the marketplace seems rigged. Star Wars Inc., a division of LucasFilms, is beginning to look less like the fun planet Naboo, with its quaint medieval trappings, and more like the Evil Empire.</p> | false | 1 | well goes following know invitation hatemail say star wars episode one phantom menace written directed george lucas demonstrates remarkable paucity imagination thought first came scene senator palpatine ian mcdiarmid explains queen amidala natalie portman state political life home cityplanet couresan civility says politics inwardly groaned brainless journalistic cliché times specific 1990s america bill clinton oj simpson lovingly transported galaxy far away universal category humanoid behavior like love treachery heroism mere linguistic tic based patently false assumption civility politics disjunctive terms anachronistic effect akin watching jedi knights break macarena senate said paralysed investigation groundless charges corruption good leader chancellor valorum terence stamp could chance bill rate film implication adopted clintonite formula absolute importance moving positing legislative inactivity reason sinister bureaucrats allowed take government suzerainty turn allows mysterious bad guywho appears hologram remains unidentified end filmand evil henchman darth maul ray park seize control trade federation troops invasion queen amidalas planet naboo meant suppose slobodan milosevic likewise emboldened clintons embroilment senate impeachment proceedings undertake campaign kosovo roles antagonists reversed slobolike bad guy also resembles prototype launching ethnic cleansing campaign underwater cities harmless comic gunga controls thousands useless warmachines robots dustbuster headpieces collapsible bodies fictions incompetent enemy since fenimore coopers indians astonishingly poor marksmen integral rayguns metal parts seem fit together like lego blocks obligingly walk upright slowly fall lightsabres good guys seemingly outgunned ground troops quigon jinn liam neeson obiwan kenobi ewan mcgregor like ripe wheat reapers scythe sith lord darth maul learned jedi ways doubleedged light sabre proves worthy opponent boring dont even sense latters brand villainy advertised painted face dark cowl otherwise remains completely inarticulate says nothing dumbly follows orders hologram meanwhile heroes comic sidekick cross floppyeared dog dinosaur called dino jar jar binks ahmed best never shut moreover talks kind baby talkdis berry badthat gets nerves one point climactic battle hooverheaded robots ouch time says jar jar cutely briefly imperilled jar jar use boobah cries companion havea da boobah says jar jar whereupon companion tosses little blue ball almost anything larger golfball would instantly fatal pursuers short teletubbies space impression reinforced fact youngest hero anakin skywalker jake lloydwho given understand grow darth vaderis six years old although two three years diapers prodigy said able fix anything sense another cliché ah yes bynow famous tyke must program vcr technically incompetent parents long vcrs presumably joined mangles steam engines technological graveyard still tinkering away fabulously sophisticated machines future though slave managed build championship pod racer spare parts back yard also allowed race considerable risk life champion pod racer tattooine villainouslooking blatantly cheating sebulba anakins mother pernilla august appears heavy sedation throughout brief appearance picture easily consents anakins racing pod going two jedi quigon obiwan learn jedi ever see little fellow asks think replies hope hesitates quigon halfheartedly suggests might like come replies unusual firmness place future huh prefers remain slave oh well perhaps boyfriend yet also solemnly assures jedi anakin father suggestion virgin birth together unprecedented number genetic jedimarkers called midicloriants something bloodstream lends weight quigons conviction chosen one come universe balance forcea suspiciously manichaeansounding enterprise expect shall find bear drag two promised sequels also prequels original star wars saga 22 years ago surprised delighted us wit cinematic originality back 1977 worn well exotic creatures galaxies become alltoofamiliar creatures movies even repackaged cosmetically redesigned timeless story heroism comes seem merely silly exploitative hero sixyearold playing computer games star wars seems exist sake spinoffsthe hats tshirts action figures computer games forth made profitable even released like pod race battles movie movies triumph marketplace seems rigged star wars inc division lucasfilms beginning look less like fun planet naboo quaint medieval trappings like evil empire | 601 |
<p>Big ideas and hot-button social issues fueled conversation between “Get Out” star <a href="http://variety.com/tag/daniel-kaluuya/" type="external">Daniel Kaluuya</a>, “The Big Sick” lead <a href="http://variety.com/tag/kumail-nanjiani/" type="external">Kumail Nanjiani</a>, and other emerging talents during a panel discussion with Variety’s <a href="http://variety.com/tag/10-actors-to-watch/" type="external">10 Actors to Watch</a> on Saturday at the 25th annual Hamptons International Film Festival, moderated by Variety executive editor Steven Gaydos and IndieWire deputy editor Eric Kohn. But no matter the social or artistic merit of the topic, all were upstaged by a single question: What’s it like to have sex with a peach?</p>
<p>The answer fell to Timothée Chalamet, star of the new film “Call Me By Your Name,” in which he follows a path blazed by Jason Biggs in “American Pie.” “I’ve been looking for a project to have sex with fruit in for a long time,” Chalamet deadpanned. He plays teenage Elio, who falls for Armie Hammer’s college-age Oliver in director Luca Guadagnino’s film, which has drawn raves from festival crowds. In fantasizing about his older flame, Elio employs the fruit, a technique both the young actor and director experimented with to make sure it could actually be done.</p>
<p>Chalamet almost missed his opportunity to comment on the scene, as he arrived late to East Hampton’s Rowdy Hall due to an unexpected delay. “I apologize — there’s a huge dog festival or something,” Chalamet said. “I’m not making this up, there’s a huge dog parade!”</p>
<p>“You use that excuse every time! It’s always a dog parade,” quipped former stand-up comedian Nanjiani, who also co-stars in HBO’s “Silicon Valley.” Nanjiani’s first leading film role, in “The Big Sick,” which he also wrote, was based on a real-life experience. He had been dating a woman for a few months when she fell ill and slipped into a coma. Unsure of what he should do, he wound up spending 10 days with her parents while she recovered.</p>
<p>This had pros and cons for an actor: “It was good because I didn’t have to imagine what it was like, I just had to remember what it was like,” he said. “But was bad because you’re kind of forcing yourself to relive the most traumatic experience of your life.”</p>
<p>The relationship that inspired the film turned out OK in the end: Nanjiani wound up marrying Emily Gordon and she co-wrote “The Big Sick” with him. Gordon was seated in the audience during the talk, prompting another bon mot from Nanjiani: “Actors to watch are up here. Writers to watch are out there.”</p>
<p><a href="http://variety.com/tag/grace-van-patten/" type="external">Grace Van Patten</a>, daughter of “Sopranos” director Tim Van Patten, said all her time growing up in Hollywood didn’t prepare her for director Noah Baumbach’s audition strategy. When she went to read for a part in the upcoming “The Meyerowitz Stories (New and Selected),” she was handed 15 pages of sides and given 10 minutes to prepare. “You’ve just got to tell yourself that everybody is in the same position,” she said. “You just gotta breathe.”</p>
<p>It wasn’t until Baumbach told her that she had the part that she learned who her co-stars would be: Adam Sandler, Ben Stiller, Dustin Hoffman and Emma Thompson, among other luminaries. “He gave me all four names at once,” she said. “I couldn’t handle myself.” Like many of Baumbach’s previous films, “The Meyerowitz Stories” depicts a complicated family relationship that is at turns harrowing and hilarious. It won the Palm D’or at Cannes in May.</p>
<p><a href="http://variety.com/tag/danielle-macdonald/" type="external">Danielle Macdonald</a>, star of “Patti Cake$,” faced two challenges in portraying a budding New Jersey rap star known as Killa P in director Geremy Jasper’s film. First, she’s from Australia, not the Tri-State Area. Second, she claims, “I’m not musical at all. It was a very big challenge for me to be a rapper. I was terrified.” She did pretty well for herself. The film sparked a bidding war at Sundance, where it was picked up by Fox Searchlight for $9.5 million.</p>
<p>The ethnically diverse panel addressed racial tension in both Hollywood and the nation. <a href="http://variety.com/tag/hong-chau/" type="external">Hong Chau</a>, who grew up in a Vietnamese refugee community in New Orleans, saw progress in director Alexander Payne casting her in a significant role in his sci-fi satire “Downsizing,” about a worldwide movement to counteract overpopulation by actually shrinking people. “You don’t often see a person of color from Vietnam in a lead role opposite Matt Damon,” she explained. “That’s not a very obvious choice.”</p>
<p>Kaluuya saw his starring turn in Jordan Peele’s horror satire “Get Out,” about a young black man’s creepy first visit with his white girlfriend’s parents, inspire major discussions about race in America. “It felt like [the film] really connected to the people, and people got creative with it,” said Kaluuya, referencing “The Get Out Challenge,” in which thousands have posted re-creations of a crucial scene to YouTube. “It resonated because it articulated an experience that hadn’t really been put to film yet. It was poignant and it was fun. There’s joy in ‘Get Out.’”</p>
<p><a href="http://variety.com/tag/daveed-diggs/" type="external">Daveed Diggs</a>, who has parlayed his Tony Award from Broadway’s “Hamilton” into steady film and television work including Stephen Chbosky’s upcoming “Wonder,” was asked about the night the “Hamilton” cast came out after curtain and directly requested that then-Vice President-elect Mike Pence treat all Americans with equal respect. Diggs had already left the cast at that point, but his girlfriend was touring with the production in Chicago. “What people don’t know is that the crazy backlash of that night happened mostly to the Chicago company,” Diggs said. “The day after that, there was somebody in the audience yelling, ‘Get these ni—— off the stage.’ The country is f—–! It’s crazy right now.”</p>
<p>Nanjiani had an unusual take on how new generations shoulder the challenges of a tumultuous society. “I have a theory,” he said. “I think young people who grow up playing video games are more resilient. Because there’s a goal in the video game — you have to defeat nazis. And now, in real life, you have to defeat nazis.”</p>
<p>Isaac Guzmán is the editor-in- chief of MexFlix.org</p> | false | 1 | big ideas hotbutton social issues fueled conversation get star daniel kaluuya big sick lead kumail nanjiani emerging talents panel discussion varietys 10 actors watch saturday 25th annual hamptons international film festival moderated variety executive editor steven gaydos indiewire deputy editor eric kohn matter social artistic merit topic upstaged single question whats like sex peach answer fell timothée chalamet star new film call name follows path blazed jason biggs american pie ive looking project sex fruit long time chalamet deadpanned plays teenage elio falls armie hammers collegeage oliver director luca guadagninos film drawn raves festival crowds fantasizing older flame elio employs fruit technique young actor director experimented make sure could actually done chalamet almost missed opportunity comment scene arrived late east hamptons rowdy hall due unexpected delay apologize theres huge dog festival something chalamet said im making theres huge dog parade use excuse every time always dog parade quipped former standup comedian nanjiani also costars hbos silicon valley nanjianis first leading film role big sick also wrote based reallife experience dating woman months fell ill slipped coma unsure wound spending 10 days parents recovered pros cons actor good didnt imagine like remember like said bad youre kind forcing relive traumatic experience life relationship inspired film turned ok end nanjiani wound marrying emily gordon cowrote big sick gordon seated audience talk prompting another bon mot nanjiani actors watch writers watch grace van patten daughter sopranos director tim van patten said time growing hollywood didnt prepare director noah baumbachs audition strategy went read part upcoming meyerowitz stories new selected handed 15 pages sides given 10 minutes prepare youve got tell everybody position said got ta breathe wasnt baumbach told part learned costars would adam sandler ben stiller dustin hoffman emma thompson among luminaries gave four names said couldnt handle like many baumbachs previous films meyerowitz stories depicts complicated family relationship turns harrowing hilarious palm dor cannes may danielle macdonald star patti cake faced two challenges portraying budding new jersey rap star known killa p director geremy jaspers film first shes australia tristate area second claims im musical big challenge rapper terrified pretty well film sparked bidding war sundance picked fox searchlight 95 million ethnically diverse panel addressed racial tension hollywood nation hong chau grew vietnamese refugee community new orleans saw progress director alexander payne casting significant role scifi satire downsizing worldwide movement counteract overpopulation actually shrinking people dont often see person color vietnam lead role opposite matt damon explained thats obvious choice kaluuya saw starring turn jordan peeles horror satire get young black mans creepy first visit white girlfriends parents inspire major discussions race america felt like film really connected people people got creative said kaluuya referencing get challenge thousands posted recreations crucial scene youtube resonated articulated experience hadnt really put film yet poignant fun theres joy get daveed diggs parlayed tony award broadways hamilton steady film television work including stephen chboskys upcoming wonder asked night hamilton cast came curtain directly requested thenvice presidentelect mike pence treat americans equal respect diggs already left cast point girlfriend touring production chicago people dont know crazy backlash night happened mostly chicago company diggs said day somebody audience yelling get ni stage country f crazy right nanjiani unusual take new generations shoulder challenges tumultuous society theory said think young people grow playing video games resilient theres goal video game defeat nazis real life defeat nazis isaac guzmán editorin chief mexflixorg | 563 |
<p>MANKATO, Minn. — When the remnants of a recently good roster all arrived here at Minnesota State University Wednesday (July 26), the theme will be hello and goodbye.</p>
<p>First, this will be the last time the Vikings hold training camp here as the team moves into its luxurious new headquarters in the Twin Cities this year and will have future summer camps there, well until further notice. So, hello and goodbye to MSU-Mankato.</p>
<p>It was without notice last year that quarterback <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Teddy-Bridgewater/" type="external">Teddy Bridgewater</a> was sidelined with a serious, non-contact knee injury and is on the PUP list as training camp began while <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Sam_Bradford/" type="external">Sam Bradford</a>, acquired in a trade from Philadelphia last year, is the starting quarterback, until further notice.</p>
<p>And this will be the first time in 11 years the designated starting running back will not be <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Adrian_Peterson/" type="external">Adrian Peterson</a>, who signed with the <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/New-Orleans-Saints/" type="external">New Orleans Saints</a>.</p>
<p>Even his potential heir apparent, <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Latavius-Murray/" type="external">Latavius Murray</a>, signed as a free agent (Oakland), is already on PUP, recovering from ankle surgery in March.</p>
<p>Also on PUP is rookie linebacker Shaan Washington, while fifth-year veteran defensive tackle Sharrif Floyd is on the non- <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/John_Walker/" type="external">football</a> injury list with nerve damage to his knee, and his career may be over.</p>
<p>The Vikings also got a key contract done as camp opened with the signing of a four-year extension for defensive end Everson Griffen.</p>
<p>Top Summer Battle</p>
<p>–Running back. For the first time since 2006, the Vikings head into a season without Peterson. Granted, they will use their top three backs in various situations as they transition away from an offense built around the best running back of this generation. But someone will emerge as the No. 1 back who gets more playing time.</p>
<p>It appears that battle will come down to rookie second-round draft pick <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Dalvin-Cook/" type="external">Dalvin Cook</a> and Murray.</p>
<p>Cook is the quick, fast and explosive player no one expected to fall out of the first round. Murray is the bigger, powerful back who, for now, is more polished in pass protection. <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Jerick-McKinnon/" type="external">Jerick McKinnon</a>, a third-round pick in 2014, is a talent the team will take advantage of. But he’s more suited for a third-down role.</p>
<p>THE FACTS:</p>
<p>TRAINING CAMP: Minnesota State University, Mankato, MN</p>
<p>HEAD COACH: <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Mike_Zimmer/" type="external">Mike Zimmer</a></p>
<p>4th season as Vikings/NFL head coach</p>
<p>26-23 overall; postseason 0-1</p>
<p>THE BREAKDOWN</p>
<p>2016 finish: 3rd NFC North (8-8)</p>
<p>STATISTICS</p>
<p>TOTAL OFFENSE: 315.1 (28th)</p>
<p>RUSHING: 75.3 (32nd)</p>
<p>PASSING: 239.8 (18th)</p>
<p>TOTAL DEFENSE: 314.9 (3rd)</p>
<p>RUSHING: 106.9 (20th)</p>
<p>PASSING: 207.9 (3rd)</p>
<p>2017 PRESEASON SCHEDULE</p>
<p>All times Central</p>
<p>Aug. 10, at Buffalo (Thu), 6:00</p>
<p>Aug. 18, at Seattle (Fri), 9:00</p>
<p>Aug. 27, SAN FRANCISCO, 7:00</p>
<p>Aug. 31, MIAMI (Thu), 7:00</p>
<p>UNIT-BY-UNIT ANALYSIS</p>
<p>QUARTERBACKS: Starter – Sam Bradford. Backups – Teddy Bridgewater, <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Case_Keenum/" type="external">Case Keenum</a>, Taylor Heinicke, Wes Lunt.</p>
<p>Bradford is the undisputed starter heading into camp because Bridgewater likely needs another year to recover from the devastating knee injury that sidelined him for all of last season. Bradford would have the upper hand even if Bridgewater were healthy enough to compete. Despite arriving a week before last season began, Bradford became the starter in Week 2 – helping beat the Packers at home in his debut – and went on to set the NFL pass completion record despite the offense being ravaged by injuries. He should be even better with a full offseason to prepare. Keenum will start the season as the backup since Bridgewater is expected to begin on PUP. Keenum is a new face, but has experience in offensive coordinator <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Pat-Shurmur/" type="external">Pat Shurmur</a>‘s system. Heinicke is the front-runner for the No. 3 job.</p>
<p>RUNNING BACKS: Starters – Latavius Murray, FB C.J. Ham. Backups – Dalvin Cook, Jerick McKinnon, Terrell Newby, Bishop Sankey.</p>
<p>There will be a good battle between Murray, the new free-agent acquisition, and Cook, the explosive rookie second-round draft pick. Both will be used regardless of who wins the starting job. Murray missed offseason workouts while recovering from ankle surgery. Cook needs work in pass protection and ball security, but is a solid pass catcher. Ham is a converted running back, but is more suited to play fullback at 5-foot-11, 235. McKinnon will be used as a third-down weapon. He’s a shifty back with strong receiving skills.</p>
<p>TIGHT ENDS: Starter – <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Kyle-Rudolph/" type="external">Kyle Rudolph</a>. Backups – <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/David_Morgan/" type="external">David Morgan</a>, Bucky Hodges, Kyle Carter, Josiah Price, Nick Truesdell.</p>
<p>Rudolph is a matchup headache for defenses. He’s also in his prime and should be used better in Shurmur’s offense now that Rudolph and Bradford are more comfortable together. Hodges is a rookie sixth-round draft pick and a guy to keep an eye on. He offers very little as a blocker, but his ceiling as a receiver is very high. He’s 6-foot-6, 257 pounds and is faster and longer than the typical tight end. Morgan is the blocking tight end that replaces Rhett Ellison, who left in free agency. Morgan is versatile and willing as a blocker. He’s likely the No. 2 tight end when the Vikings go to two-tight end sets.</p>
<p>WIDE RECEIVERS: Starters — <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Stefon-Diggs/" type="external">Stefon Diggs</a>, <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Adam-Thielen/" type="external">Adam Thielen</a>. Backups – Laquon Treadwell, Jarius Wright, <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Michael-Floyd/" type="external">Michael Floyd</a>, Rodney Adams, Moritz Bohringer, Stacy Coley, Isaac Fruechte, Cayleb Jones, R.J. Shelton.</p>
<p>Diggs isn’t the typical No. 1 receiver at 6-foot, 191. But if he can stay healthy, he can put up big numbers in this offense. He’s developed a chemistry with Bradford. Last year, Diggs had back-to-back games with 13 catches. But then nagging leg injuries overcame him down the stretch. Thielen is the ultimate rags-to-riches NFL story. An overachiever from Division II who goes from the practice squad to starter to big contract. Treadwell enters a pivotal season and is sitting on the hottest seat on the team. The 2016 first-round draft pick caught only one pass as a rookie. He looked slow and unable to separate. The team’s spin is Treadwell was still recovering from injuries suffered in college. We’ll see. He’s fighting for the No. 3 receiver spot. But he has to hold off Michael Floyd, the native Minnesotan who returned home with a truckload of personal baggage. Floyd was suspended for the first four games of the season. If he gets his act together, he’ll give the Vikings the big receiver they’ve lacked for a long time. Wright, the veteran of the unit, is an underrated weapon that is most dangerous out of the slot position. He’s quick, smart in his route running and deceptively fast.</p>
<p>OFFENSIVE LINEMEN: Starters – LT Riley Reiff, LG <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Alex-Boone/" type="external">Alex Boone</a>, C Nick Easton, RG <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Joe-Berger/" type="external">Joe Berger</a>, RT Mike Remmers. Backups – G/T Jeremiah Sirles, C <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Pat-Elflein/" type="external">Pat Elflein</a>, G/T T.J. Clemmings, G Willie Beavers, T Aviante Collins, T Reid Fragel, T Rashod Hill, G Danny Isidora, G Zac Kerin, T Austin Shepherd, G Freddie Tagaloa.</p>
<p>The assumption is the offensive line will be better than the unit that was devastated by injuries last season. Of course, that’s not saying much considering the Vikings went through 12 linemen total and five left tackles. The Vikings were desperate in free agency, knowing that there were no tackles of any value in the draft. So they jumped in full force and signed Reiff from Detroit and Remmers from Carolina. The good news is they’re young and durable. The bad news is neither of their former teams felt they were good enough to keep despite being young and durable. Reiff is a former first-round pick of the Lions. The Lions wanted him to be their long-term answer at left tackle, but moved him to right tackle after spending another first-round pick on a tackle. Then the Lions let him walk after they dipped into free agency for his replacement this offseason. Boone didn’t live up to the hype last season after arriving as the team’s prized free-agent signing. But he’ll benefit from some stability on the line. Center is up for grabs between young veteran Easton and rookie third-round pick Eflein. Reliable veteran Berger keeps going strong at 35. He can start at any of the three interior positions, but seems set at right guard baring injuries. Sirles is a valuable, experienced backup at all positions except center. Clemmings was a starter in his first two seasons, but that was more out of desperation than anything else. He’ll move to guard and work to provide depth.</p>
<p>DEFENSIVE LINEMEN: Starters – DLE Danielle Hunter, DT Datone Jones, NT Linval Joseph, DRE Everson Griffen. Backups – DLE Brian Robison, DT <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Tom_Johnson/" type="external">Tom Johnson</a>, NT Shamar Stephen, DT Sharrif Floyd, DE Stephen Weatherly, DE Tashawn Bower, DT Dylan Bradley, DT Jaleel Johnson, DE Caleb Kidder, DE Sam McCaskill, DE Ifeadi Odenigbo, DT Will Sutton.</p>
<p>Hunter had only one start in his first two seasons, but posted 20.5 sacks as a situational pass rusher. He’ll most likely relegate 34-year-old veteran Robison to backup and part of the nickel packages as an interior rusher. Joseph can be a force in the middle. He’s tough to move in the running game and has quick enough feet to disrupt the passing game. Jones, the former first-round pick of the Packers, is being moved from end to the three-technique, where the Vikings and Jones believe he’s better suited to play. If he can’t win the starting job, the Vikings can fall back on 33-year-old Tom Johnson. Johnson is still a force as a nickel pass rusher, but the team would prefer to limit his reps against the run. Griffen is equally strong against the run and pass from the right edge. He has All-Pro potential. Floyd, a force at the three-technique during the rare times he’s been healthy, missed all but last season because of a knee injury. Nerve damage in the leg will keep him off the field heading into the season, and probably will end his career.</p>
<p>LINEBACKERS: Starters – WLB Emmanuel Lamur, MLB <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Eric-Kendricks/" type="external">Eric Kendricks</a>, SLB Anthony Barr. Backups – MLB Kentrell Brothers, WLB Edmond Robinson, OLB Ben Gedeon, OLB Elijah Lee, LB Shaan Washington, OLB Eric Wilson.</p>
<p>Kendricks is the leader of the group. He has led the team in tackles in both of his seasons. If he stays healthy, he’ll make it three in a row. He’s undersized for the middle, but fast, quick and very instinctive. Barr is All-Pro material when he pushes himself. He tends to coast, which is something the team is trying to shake him out of. He had few flash plays last season, but is capable of being one of the best and most versatile linebackers in the league. The weak-side ‘backer spot in the base is up for grabs with Chad Greenway now retired. The position plays only about 40 percent of the time, but is important against the run. Robinson, a backup to Barr on the strong side, could make a serious run at the position. Lamur, who has been in this defense going back to when head coach Mike Zimmer was defensive coordinator in Cincinnati, would seem to have the inside track.</p>
<p>DEFENSIVE BACKS: Starters – LCB Trae Waynes, RCB <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Xavier-Rhodes/" type="external">Xavier Rhodes</a>, FS Harrison Smith, SS Andrew Sendejo. Backups – CB <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Terence_Newman/" type="external">Terence Newman</a>, CB Mackensie Alexander, S Antone Exum Jr., S Anthony Harris, S Jayron Kearse, CB Jabari Price, CB Marcus Sherels, CB Horace Richardson, CB Tre Roberson, CB Terrell Sinkfield, S Jack Tocho, CB Sam Brown.</p>
<p>Rhodes and Smith are Pro Bowlers who will make a push for All-Pro status at ages 26 and 28, respectively. Rhodes has the size, length, instincts and swagger to be one of the best shutdown corners in the league. Smith has all that and the versatility and nasty streak to be a force at the line of scrimmage and in deep coverage. Waynes, a first-round pick in 2014, is ready to start at left corner. But Newman, who turns 39 before the season, isn’t ready to just sit around. He’ll compete for the starting job, and could end up being the nickel back in the slot now that Captain <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Munnerlyn/" type="external">Munnerlyn</a> is gone. Alexander was drafted in the second round last year to take Munnerlyn’s job this year. Whether he’s ready for that assignment full-time remains to be seen. Sendejo once again heads into camp looking to fend off competition from many others. Exum, Harris and Kearse will make a run at the 29 year old. But Sendejo is a scrappy overachiever who just refuses to let go of his starting job.</p>
<p>SPECIAL TEAMS: K Kai Forbath, K Marshall Koehn, P Ryan Quigley, P Taylor Symmank, LS Kevin McDermott, KOR Rodney Adams, KR Stacy Coley, PR Marcus Sherels.</p>
<p>There’s much that needs to be settled on special teams before the Vikings open the regular season. There will be open competition at kicker, punter and kickoff returner. At kicker, Forbath returns after settling the waters midseason a year ago. When <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Blair-Walsh/" type="external">Blair Walsh</a>‘s confidence completely bottomed out, it was Forbath who came in and made all 15 of his field-goal attempts. But Forbath lacks the leg strength the team prefers for longer attempts and kickoffs. Koehn has no regular-season experience, but has a much bigger leg than Forbath. At punter, the Vikings are looking to replace Jeff Locke, who was inconsistent throughout his four-year career before moving on in free agency. Quigley was signed in free agency. He has the experience. Symmank has no regular-season experience but does have a big leg. At kickoff returner, the Vikings will miss Cordarrelle Patterson, who led the league in returns three of the past four seasons. The leading candidates to replace him are rookie receivers Adams and Coley. They were drafted in the fifth and seventh rounds in large part for their return skills. Sherels continues to be one of the steadiest and deceptively quick punt returners in the league.</p> | false | 1 | mankato minn remnants recently good roster arrived minnesota state university wednesday july 26 theme hello goodbye first last time vikings hold training camp team moves luxurious new headquarters twin cities year future summer camps well notice hello goodbye msumankato without notice last year quarterback teddy bridgewater sidelined serious noncontact knee injury pup list training camp began sam bradford acquired trade philadelphia last year starting quarterback notice first time 11 years designated starting running back adrian peterson signed new orleans saints even potential heir apparent latavius murray signed free agent oakland already pup recovering ankle surgery march also pup rookie linebacker shaan washington fifthyear veteran defensive tackle sharrif floyd non football injury list nerve damage knee career may vikings also got key contract done camp opened signing fouryear extension defensive end everson griffen top summer battle running back first time since 2006 vikings head season without peterson granted use top three backs various situations transition away offense built around best running back generation someone emerge 1 back gets playing time appears battle come rookie secondround draft pick dalvin cook murray cook quick fast explosive player one expected fall first round murray bigger powerful back polished pass protection jerick mckinnon thirdround pick 2014 talent team take advantage hes suited thirddown role facts training camp minnesota state university mankato mn head coach mike zimmer 4th season vikingsnfl head coach 2623 overall postseason 01 breakdown 2016 finish 3rd nfc north 88 statistics total offense 3151 28th rushing 753 32nd passing 2398 18th total defense 3149 3rd rushing 1069 20th passing 2079 3rd 2017 preseason schedule times central aug 10 buffalo thu 600 aug 18 seattle fri 900 aug 27 san francisco 700 aug 31 miami thu 700 unitbyunit analysis quarterbacks starter sam bradford backups teddy bridgewater case keenum taylor heinicke wes lunt bradford undisputed starter heading camp bridgewater likely needs another year recover devastating knee injury sidelined last season bradford would upper hand even bridgewater healthy enough compete despite arriving week last season began bradford became starter week 2 helping beat packers home debut went set nfl pass completion record despite offense ravaged injuries even better full offseason prepare keenum start season backup since bridgewater expected begin pup keenum new face experience offensive coordinator pat shurmurs system heinicke frontrunner 3 job running backs starters latavius murray fb cj ham backups dalvin cook jerick mckinnon terrell newby bishop sankey good battle murray new freeagent acquisition cook explosive rookie secondround draft pick used regardless wins starting job murray missed offseason workouts recovering ankle surgery cook needs work pass protection ball security solid pass catcher ham converted running back suited play fullback 5foot11 235 mckinnon used thirddown weapon hes shifty back strong receiving skills tight ends starter kyle rudolph backups david morgan bucky hodges kyle carter josiah price nick truesdell rudolph matchup headache defenses hes also prime used better shurmurs offense rudolph bradford comfortable together hodges rookie sixthround draft pick guy keep eye offers little blocker ceiling receiver high hes 6foot6 257 pounds faster longer typical tight end morgan blocking tight end replaces rhett ellison left free agency morgan versatile willing blocker hes likely 2 tight end vikings go twotight end sets wide receivers starters stefon diggs adam thielen backups laquon treadwell jarius wright michael floyd rodney adams moritz bohringer stacy coley isaac fruechte cayleb jones rj shelton diggs isnt typical 1 receiver 6foot 191 stay healthy put big numbers offense hes developed chemistry bradford last year diggs backtoback games 13 catches nagging leg injuries overcame stretch thielen ultimate ragstoriches nfl story overachiever division ii goes practice squad starter big contract treadwell enters pivotal season sitting hottest seat team 2016 firstround draft pick caught one pass rookie looked slow unable separate teams spin treadwell still recovering injuries suffered college well see hes fighting 3 receiver spot hold michael floyd native minnesotan returned home truckload personal baggage floyd suspended first four games season gets act together hell give vikings big receiver theyve lacked long time wright veteran unit underrated weapon dangerous slot position hes quick smart route running deceptively fast offensive linemen starters lt riley reiff lg alex boone c nick easton rg joe berger rt mike remmers backups gt jeremiah sirles c pat elflein gt tj clemmings g willie beavers aviante collins reid fragel rashod hill g danny isidora g zac kerin austin shepherd g freddie tagaloa assumption offensive line better unit devastated injuries last season course thats saying much considering vikings went 12 linemen total five left tackles vikings desperate free agency knowing tackles value draft jumped full force signed reiff detroit remmers carolina good news theyre young durable bad news neither former teams felt good enough keep despite young durable reiff former firstround pick lions lions wanted longterm answer left tackle moved right tackle spending another firstround pick tackle lions let walk dipped free agency replacement offseason boone didnt live hype last season arriving teams prized freeagent signing hell benefit stability line center grabs young veteran easton rookie thirdround pick eflein reliable veteran berger keeps going strong 35 start three interior positions seems set right guard baring injuries sirles valuable experienced backup positions except center clemmings starter first two seasons desperation anything else hell move guard work provide depth defensive linemen starters dle danielle hunter dt datone jones nt linval joseph dre everson griffen backups dle brian robison dt tom johnson nt shamar stephen dt sharrif floyd de stephen weatherly de tashawn bower dt dylan bradley dt jaleel johnson de caleb kidder de sam mccaskill de ifeadi odenigbo dt sutton hunter one start first two seasons posted 205 sacks situational pass rusher hell likely relegate 34yearold veteran robison backup part nickel packages interior rusher joseph force middle hes tough move running game quick enough feet disrupt passing game jones former firstround pick packers moved end threetechnique vikings jones believe hes better suited play cant win starting job vikings fall back 33yearold tom johnson johnson still force nickel pass rusher team would prefer limit reps run griffen equally strong run pass right edge allpro potential floyd force threetechnique rare times hes healthy missed last season knee injury nerve damage leg keep field heading season probably end career linebackers starters wlb emmanuel lamur mlb eric kendricks slb anthony barr backups mlb kentrell brothers wlb edmond robinson olb ben gedeon olb elijah lee lb shaan washington olb eric wilson kendricks leader group led team tackles seasons stays healthy hell make three row hes undersized middle fast quick instinctive barr allpro material pushes tends coast something team trying shake flash plays last season capable one best versatile linebackers league weakside backer spot base grabs chad greenway retired position plays 40 percent time important run robinson backup barr strong side could make serious run position lamur defense going back head coach mike zimmer defensive coordinator cincinnati would seem inside track defensive backs starters lcb trae waynes rcb xavier rhodes fs harrison smith ss andrew sendejo backups cb terence newman cb mackensie alexander antone exum jr anthony harris jayron kearse cb jabari price cb marcus sherels cb horace richardson cb tre roberson cb terrell sinkfield jack tocho cb sam brown rhodes smith pro bowlers make push allpro status ages 26 28 respectively rhodes size length instincts swagger one best shutdown corners league smith versatility nasty streak force line scrimmage deep coverage waynes firstround pick 2014 ready start left corner newman turns 39 season isnt ready sit around hell compete starting job could end nickel back slot captain munnerlyn gone alexander drafted second round last year take munnerlyns job year whether hes ready assignment fulltime remains seen sendejo heads camp looking fend competition many others exum harris kearse make run 29 year old sendejo scrappy overachiever refuses let go starting job special teams k kai forbath k marshall koehn p ryan quigley p taylor symmank ls kevin mcdermott kor rodney adams kr stacy coley pr marcus sherels theres much needs settled special teams vikings open regular season open competition kicker punter kickoff returner kicker forbath returns settling waters midseason year ago blair walshs confidence completely bottomed forbath came made 15 fieldgoal attempts forbath lacks leg strength team prefers longer attempts kickoffs koehn regularseason experience much bigger leg forbath punter vikings looking replace jeff locke inconsistent throughout fouryear career moving free agency quigley signed free agency experience symmank regularseason experience big leg kickoff returner vikings miss cordarrelle patterson led league returns three past four seasons leading candidates replace rookie receivers adams coley drafted fifth seventh rounds large part return skills sherels continues one steadiest deceptively quick punt returners league | 1,416 |
<p>By Renee Maltezou</p>
<p>ATHENS (Reuters) – Greek Prime Minister Alexis Tsipras has found a precious commodity he hopes can help him and the nation turn a corner after years of crisis and austerity — time.</p>
<p>Since taking power in early 2015, he has spent most of his days and nights in firefighting mode, battling Greece’s creditors to renegotiate the harsh terms of a series of bailout deals.</p>
<p>Now, though, Tsipras and his ministers have more time at last to function like the government of a normal country, pinning their hopes for recovery from a long depression on more investment and jobs, after negotiating a ceasefire with the European Union and International Monetary Fund in June.</p>
<p>Despite scepticism among voters, investors and Greece’s lenders, Tsipras is trying hard to position himself as a post-crisis leader who can steer the country out of the bailout program next year in time for elections due in 2019.</p>
<p>The 43-year-old leftist acknowledged this week that the crisis was not over, but expressed optimism about the rest of his term. “In a year from now … we will have left the bailout behind and we will have one more year, the most creative of our term, to materialize our plan for&#160;a ‘new’ Greece,” he said.</p>
<p>Still, two final rounds of negotiations remain before the current bailout deal ends in August 2018. Many Greeks, worn down by austerity policies including pension cuts and tax increases dictated by the creditors, have yet to be convinced. Tsipras’s Syriza party is trailing in the opinion polls.</p>
<p>Nevertheless, Tsipras has been using a calm that Greece has rarely enjoyed since 2015, when he was first elected on promises to end austerity, to push through reforms other than those prescribed by the lenders and to schmooze with investors.</p>
<p>Foreign direct investment hit a seven-year high in 2016, while Greek bonds and stocks have rallied 12 and 18 percent respectively so far this year. The IMF and the EU forecast the economy will grow by more than two percent both this year and next after the depression wiped a quarter off Greek GDP.</p>
<p>For all his pre-election pledges to scrap the bailout, Tsipras has ended up imposing more belt-tightening.</p>
<p>At least Greeks are starting to see improvements in long neglected infrastructure, largely funded by the EU. The government has opened two motorways this year, including a link to Patras, a major ferry port for trade with Italy and the rest of the EU. This completed a project that had been stalled for years and replaced one of Greece’s most dangerous roads.</p>
<p>The jobless rate has also dropped, but is still the euro zone’s highest.</p>
<p>OUT OF THE BASEMENT</p>
<p>Until June, when Athens struck the deal with the lenders on reforms and debt relief, the cabinet met infrequently; debate was dominated by the bailout talks and ministers with portfolios not directly connected to them rarely got a word in edgeways, one government official said. Since then ministers have found time to work on bills including education and health reforms.</p>
<p>“It’s liberating,” one minister said. Many cabinet colleagues and officials had spent much of the past two years holed up in bailout talks at the Athens Hilton hotel. “You need to emerge from the Hilton basement at some point.”</p>
<p>The government has also stepped up private meetings with potential investors, officials said, while Tsipras created a task force this month to free up more projects tangled in red tape.</p>
<p>Some investors nevertheless still doubt Tsipras can pull off an economic turnaround.</p>
<p>“There is an inconsistency in the message the prime minister is delivering and the actions of the ministries,” George Burns, chief executive of Canadian miner Eldorado Gold Corp (TO:), one of Greece’s biggest new foreign investors, told Reuters.</p>
<p>Eldorado threatened to halt further investment unless a permit row over its mines in northern Greece was resolved this week. It postponed this after the government granted some licenses, but scepticism runs deep among other investors.</p>
<p>CLEAN EXIT</p>
<p>Tsipras would like to be remembered as the man who restored Greece’s finances and ended international supervision of the economy. He wants the next creditors’ review completed as early as December and to achieve “a clean bailout exit”, without a standby credit line that would come in return for more reforms.</p>
<p>Athens made its first bond issue in three years in July and plans at least two more in the next seven months, aiming to fund itself by market borrowing in place of bailout money next year.</p>
<p>His conservative predecessor had a similar exit strategy as long ago as 2014 and seemed on course to achieve it. Instead Tsipras beat him and presided over the chaotic summer of 2015, when banks were closed for weeks as the financial system came close to collapse.</p>
<p>Tsipras has much political ground to recover. Support for Syriza has crumbled from around 35 percent in 2015 to 16 percent now, leaving it at least six percentage points behind the conservative New Democracy party, which has promised tax cuts.</p>
<p>A lot can go wrong as Tsipras tries to turn the political and economic tide. Time may be as much his enemy as his friend. The bailout reviews could derail or drag on for months, leading to renewed crisis. The second&#160;such review&#160;lasted half a year, and the delays hurt economic activity.</p>
<p>For their part, the lenders worry Greece may backtrack on agreed reforms, which would delay the conclusion of the review. Labor reforms that parliament passed during the summer lull were viewed by lenders as backtracking on promises.</p>
<p>“The gap between Tsipras’s actions and his words, the shortcoming in his actions, that’s what may trap him,” a person close to the lenders told Reuters, warning that Greece may not manage to regain full market access and conclude the reviews.</p>
<p>After two years’ experience of power, the government still struggles to deal with some practical problems. It has been trying for 10 days to contain an oil spill from a tanker which polluted popular beaches near Athens, angering residents.</p>
<p>Tsipras has been on a charm offensive, ranging from pep talks at ministries to photo opportunities with investors and young entrepreneurs and trips across the country.</p>
<p>Still, the lenders remain cautious. “We fully understand the government’s desire for a clean exit,” the European Central Bank’s mission chief in Greece, Francesco Drudi, said.</p>
<p>But he told Proto Thema newspaper: “This will require a lot of effort to convince markets, investors and depositors that the momentum for reform will not abate and that no reversal of actions taken during the program will occur.”</p>
<p>Greece: an economic hotspot – http://tmsnrt.rs/2hlsKlx</p> | false | 1 | renee maltezou athens reuters greek prime minister alexis tsipras found precious commodity hopes help nation turn corner years crisis austerity time since taking power early 2015 spent days nights firefighting mode battling greeces creditors renegotiate harsh terms series bailout deals though tsipras ministers time last function like government normal country pinning hopes recovery long depression investment jobs negotiating ceasefire european union international monetary fund june despite scepticism among voters investors greeces lenders tsipras trying hard position postcrisis leader steer country bailout program next year time elections due 2019 43yearold leftist acknowledged week crisis expressed optimism rest term year left bailout behind one year creative term materialize plan for160a new greece said still two final rounds negotiations remain current bailout deal ends august 2018 many greeks worn austerity policies including pension cuts tax increases dictated creditors yet convinced tsiprass syriza party trailing opinion polls nevertheless tsipras using calm greece rarely enjoyed since 2015 first elected promises end austerity push reforms prescribed lenders schmooze investors foreign direct investment hit sevenyear high 2016 greek bonds stocks rallied 12 18 percent respectively far year imf eu forecast economy grow two percent year next depression wiped quarter greek gdp preelection pledges scrap bailout tsipras ended imposing belttightening least greeks starting see improvements long neglected infrastructure largely funded eu government opened two motorways year including link patras major ferry port trade italy rest eu completed project stalled years replaced one greeces dangerous roads jobless rate also dropped still euro zones highest basement june athens struck deal lenders reforms debt relief cabinet met infrequently debate dominated bailout talks ministers portfolios directly connected rarely got word edgeways one government official said since ministers found time work bills including education health reforms liberating one minister said many cabinet colleagues officials spent much past two years holed bailout talks athens hilton hotel need emerge hilton basement point government also stepped private meetings potential investors officials said tsipras created task force month free projects tangled red tape investors nevertheless still doubt tsipras pull economic turnaround inconsistency message prime minister delivering actions ministries george burns chief executive canadian miner eldorado gold corp one greeces biggest new foreign investors told reuters eldorado threatened halt investment unless permit row mines northern greece resolved week postponed government granted licenses scepticism runs deep among investors clean exit tsipras would like remembered man restored greeces finances ended international supervision economy wants next creditors review completed early december achieve clean bailout exit without standby credit line would come return reforms athens made first bond issue three years july plans least two next seven months aiming fund market borrowing place bailout money next year conservative predecessor similar exit strategy long ago 2014 seemed course achieve instead tsipras beat presided chaotic summer 2015 banks closed weeks financial system came close collapse tsipras much political ground recover support syriza crumbled around 35 percent 2015 16 percent leaving least six percentage points behind conservative new democracy party promised tax cuts lot go wrong tsipras tries turn political economic tide time may much enemy friend bailout reviews could derail drag months leading renewed crisis second160such review160lasted half year delays hurt economic activity part lenders worry greece may backtrack agreed reforms would delay conclusion review labor reforms parliament passed summer lull viewed lenders backtracking promises gap tsiprass actions words shortcoming actions thats may trap person close lenders told reuters warning greece may manage regain full market access conclude reviews two years experience power government still struggles deal practical problems trying 10 days contain oil spill tanker polluted popular beaches near athens angering residents tsipras charm offensive ranging pep talks ministries photo opportunities investors young entrepreneurs trips across country still lenders remain cautious fully understand governments desire clean exit european central banks mission chief greece francesco drudi said told proto thema newspaper require lot effort convince markets investors depositors momentum reform abate reversal actions taken program occur greece economic hotspot httptmsnrtrs2hlsklx | 646 |
<p>By Lawrence White</p>
<p>LONDON (Reuters) – Ever wondered what your shopping habits say about your driving? Britain’s big supermarkets have.</p>
<p>The two biggest, Tesco (L:) and Sainsbury’s (L:), are offering discounts on financial products such as car insurance based on the predictability of people’s shopping, a step beyond the traditional route of price cuts in return for brand loyalty.</p>
<p>Banks and insurance companies around the world are exploring using customers’ data to better price financial products but few have links to supermarkets accounting for almost half of a country’s grocery market as Tesco and Sainsbury’s do.</p>
<p>Sainsbury’s Bank Chief Executive Peter Griffiths told Reuters the supermarket chain’s bank customers, of which there are 1.8 million, can get cheaper offers on products such as home and car insurance based on what else they buy and how they shop.</p>
<p>“Our strategy is to be the bank for the Sainsbury’s shopper, and we’re uniquely placed to use the power of data to offer better prices and products,” Griffiths said.</p>
<p>The supermarket chain said in one example it uses data from its Nectar card loyalty scheme to track shoppers whose regular, predictable pattern of visits to stores shows they plan ahead, characteristics associated with being a more cautious and safer driver.</p>
<p>Such people are offered cheaper car insurance.</p>
<p>The practice is entirely legal but some experts say it is too intrusive.</p>
<p>“People like me have been warning about this sort of thing for a very long time; we’d been talking about it as a theoretical for a while and waiting for real examples,” said Paul Bernal, an expert in internet privacy and companies’ use of personal data at the University of East Anglia.</p>
<p>Bernal said the trend rings a number of alarm bells. If the data provide an overly accurate picture of the customer’s lifestyle and behavior, that could breach their privacy, while if the data are, conversely, misleading, that could lead to the customer being unfairly treated, he said.</p>
<p>The retailer does not look at individual items purchased when pricing insurance policies, but rather a range of ‘anonymised’ purchases that can collectively show behavioral tendencies, Sally Marshak, a spokeswoman for Sainsbury’s, said.</p>
<p>Tesco, Britain’s largest retailer whose bank holds 8 million accounts, similarly uses data from its Clubcard loyalty scheme to offer discounts of up to 25 percent on car, home and pet insurance products.</p>
<p>“We use a range of data and criteria when assessing a customer’s eligibility for our products, however, as an extra help for customers, for some of our products we also use Clubcard data to offer them even better value,” Chris Sibbald, a spokesman for the company, said.</p>
<p>Campaigners like Bernal said the practice could leave some customers worse off based on their behavior, in ways they might not understand. For example, those who do not buy the right products or shop in the right way could miss out on discounts without realizing.</p>
<p>The retailers said they took that into account. “We’re not just looking at how people fill up cars at Tesco petrol stations and whether they do that at night, because they might be a taxi driver for example and there’s a reason for it, but together with other data you can build a picture,” Sibbald said.</p>
<p>Both supermarket groups said data are only used to offer discounts to some shoppers, never to increase prices.</p>
<p>“We’re trying to understand people’s shopping habits, and then see how can you use that to tailor the products and offer some of them a better price. The key thing is we don’t use it to up-price people,” Sibbald said.</p>
<p>POWER OF DATA</p>
<p>Tesco and Sainsbury’s are Britain’s two biggest retail chains, with a combined market share of the 192 billion pounds ($256.76 billion) a year grocery market of 45 percent, according to consumer research company Kantar Worldpanel.</p>
<p>They both have long-established loyalty schemes allowing customers to earn points and rewards for spending on groceries, giving them a rich database of shopping habits to help with marketing. Sainsbury’s, for example, offers shoppers who buy pet food discounts of up to 12.5 percent on pet insurance.</p>
<p>It is not unusual for companies to gather and use information in this way.</p>
<p>Life insurers are exploring analyzing social media to lower rates for people who are upbeat on Twitter, for example, while some motor insurers offer discounts to motorists who exhibit safe driving behavior after installing a tracking device.[nL8N1CR2O4]</p>
<p>But campaigners say the supermarket chains could end up with an unfair advantage due to the power of the data they hold.</p>
<p>The retailers’ banking units offer in-store shoppers a range of banking products such as credit cards, insurance and loans, taking advantage of the regular contact with potential customers at a time when Britain’s big banks are slashing branches.</p>
<p>“The thing people don’t understand about big data is that it is fertile and generates new data, so the more a company knows about your spending habits, the more valuable each new piece of information is in predicting your actions,” said Joe McNamee, executive director at European Digital Rights (EDRi), a Brussels-based association of civil rights organizations focused on digital rights and freedoms.</p>
<p>NEW RULES</p>
<p>One potential source of protection is a new set of laws, the European General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) which is aimed at overhauling how companies handle customer data and comes into force in May 2018.</p>
<p>Britain’s government published a draft bill in September that would implement the bulk of GDPR.</p>
<p>While the rules are intended to harmonize data protection laws across Europe, they also give people better access to data held on them by companies and oblige companies to do more to get permission to obtain such data.</p>
<p>GDPR includes some restrictions on companies ‘profiling’ customers by using data about them to predict their preferences or actions, requiring customers to offer their consent.</p>
<p>Supermarket chains comply with the rules by including a privacy policy in the terms and conditions of loyalty card schemes that customers consent to when signing up.</p>
<p>UEA’s Bernal said most shoppers likely do not realize those implications.</p>
<p>“There is an issue around informed consent here, I don’t think people realize what they are signing up to, if they even read the terms and conditions at all,” he said.</p>
<p>It remains to be seen whether the implementation of the new rules will do enough to stave off concerns about privacy and competition as big companies benefit exponentially with each new recorded purchase.</p>
<p>“I’ve not seen many examples like this,” said EDRi’s McNamee about the supermarkets’ use of data to price financial products. “The issue of big data is something that society hasn’t got to grips with yet, but there are big companies now that know more about you than you know about yourself.”</p>
<p>($1 = 0.7478 pounds)</p> | false | 1 | lawrence white london reuters ever wondered shopping habits say driving britains big supermarkets two biggest tesco l sainsburys l offering discounts financial products car insurance based predictability peoples shopping step beyond traditional route price cuts return brand loyalty banks insurance companies around world exploring using customers data better price financial products links supermarkets accounting almost half countrys grocery market tesco sainsburys sainsburys bank chief executive peter griffiths told reuters supermarket chains bank customers 18 million get cheaper offers products home car insurance based else buy shop strategy bank sainsburys shopper uniquely placed use power data offer better prices products griffiths said supermarket chain said one example uses data nectar card loyalty scheme track shoppers whose regular predictable pattern visits stores shows plan ahead characteristics associated cautious safer driver people offered cheaper car insurance practice entirely legal experts say intrusive people like warning sort thing long time wed talking theoretical waiting real examples said paul bernal expert internet privacy companies use personal data university east anglia bernal said trend rings number alarm bells data provide overly accurate picture customers lifestyle behavior could breach privacy data conversely misleading could lead customer unfairly treated said retailer look individual items purchased pricing insurance policies rather range anonymised purchases collectively show behavioral tendencies sally marshak spokeswoman sainsburys said tesco britains largest retailer whose bank holds 8 million accounts similarly uses data clubcard loyalty scheme offer discounts 25 percent car home pet insurance products use range data criteria assessing customers eligibility products however extra help customers products also use clubcard data offer even better value chris sibbald spokesman company said campaigners like bernal said practice could leave customers worse based behavior ways might understand example buy right products shop right way could miss discounts without realizing retailers said took account looking people fill cars tesco petrol stations whether night might taxi driver example theres reason together data build picture sibbald said supermarket groups said data used offer discounts shoppers never increase prices trying understand peoples shopping habits see use tailor products offer better price key thing dont use upprice people sibbald said power data tesco sainsburys britains two biggest retail chains combined market share 192 billion pounds 25676 billion year grocery market 45 percent according consumer research company kantar worldpanel longestablished loyalty schemes allowing customers earn points rewards spending groceries giving rich database shopping habits help marketing sainsburys example offers shoppers buy pet food discounts 125 percent pet insurance unusual companies gather use information way life insurers exploring analyzing social media lower rates people upbeat twitter example motor insurers offer discounts motorists exhibit safe driving behavior installing tracking devicenl8n1cr2o4 campaigners say supermarket chains could end unfair advantage due power data hold retailers banking units offer instore shoppers range banking products credit cards insurance loans taking advantage regular contact potential customers time britains big banks slashing branches thing people dont understand big data fertile generates new data company knows spending habits valuable new piece information predicting actions said joe mcnamee executive director european digital rights edri brusselsbased association civil rights organizations focused digital rights freedoms new rules one potential source protection new set laws european general data protection regulation gdpr aimed overhauling companies handle customer data comes force may 2018 britains government published draft bill september would implement bulk gdpr rules intended harmonize data protection laws across europe also give people better access data held companies oblige companies get permission obtain data gdpr includes restrictions companies profiling customers using data predict preferences actions requiring customers offer consent supermarket chains comply rules including privacy policy terms conditions loyalty card schemes customers consent signing ueas bernal said shoppers likely realize implications issue around informed consent dont think people realize signing even read terms conditions said remains seen whether implementation new rules enough stave concerns privacy competition big companies benefit exponentially new recorded purchase ive seen many examples like said edris mcnamee supermarkets use data price financial products issue big data something society hasnt got grips yet big companies know know 1 07478 pounds | 664 |
<p>A delicate effort to reach a young girl buried in the rubble of her school stretched into a new day on Thursday, a vigil broadcast across the nation as rescue workers struggled in rain and darkness to pick away unstable debris and reach her.</p>
<p>The sight of her wiggling fingers early Wednesday became a symbol for the hope that drove thousands of professionals and volunteers to work frantically at dozens of wrecked buildings across the capital and nearby states looking for survivors of the magnitude 7.1 quake that killed at least 245 people in central Mexico and injured over 2,000.</p>
<p>Mexico City Mayor Miguel Angel Mancera said the number of confirmed dead in the capital had risen from 100 to 115. An earlier federal government statement had put the overall toll at 230, including 100 deaths in Mexico City.</p>
<p>Mancera also said two women and a man had been pulled alive from a collapsed office building in the city’s center Wednesday night, almost 36 hours after the quake.</p>
<p>President Enrique Pena Nieto declared three days of mourning while soldiers, police, firefighters and everyday citizens kept digging through rubble, at times with their hands gaining an inch at a time, at times with cranes and backhoes to lift heavy slabs of concrete.</p>
<p>“There are still people groaning. There are three more floors to remove rubble from. And you still hear people in there,” said Evodio Dario Marcelino, a volunteer who was working with dozens of others at a collapsed apartment building.</p>
<p>A man was pulled alive from a partly collapsed apartment building in northern Mexico City more than 24 hours after the Tuesday quake and taken away in a stretcher, apparently conscious</p>
<p>In all, 52 people had been rescued alive since the quake, the city’s Social Development Department said, adding in a tweet: “We won’t stop.” It was a race against time, Pena Nieto warned in a tweet of his own saying that “every minute counts to save lives.”</p>
<p>But the country’s attention focused on the collapsed Enrique Rebsamen school on the city’s south side, where 21 children and four adults had been confirmed dead.</p>
<p>Hopes rose Wednesday when workers told local media they had detected signs that one girl was alive and she speaking to them through a hole dug in the rubble. Thermal imaging suggested several more people might be in the airspace around her.</p>
<p>A volunteer rescue worker, Hector Mendez, said cameras lowered into the rubble suggested there might be four people still inside, but he added that it wasn’t clear if anyone beside the girl was alive.</p>
<p>Dr. Alfredo Vega, who was working with the rescue team, said that a girl who he identified only as “Frida Sofia” had been located alive under the pancaked floor slabs.</p>
<p>Vega said “she is alive, and she is telling us that there are five more children alive” in the same space.</p>
<p>Education Secretary Aurelio Nuno confirmed that the girl was alive, but said it was still not confirmed if other children were also alive under the rubble. Strangely, Nuno said, no relatives of a girl named Frida could be found.</p>
<p>While optimism ran strong for the girl’s rescue effort, only four corpses had been found in the wreckage during the day, Mendez said, and workers were still trying to get to the girl as the operation crossed into a new day.</p>
<p>The debris removed from the school changed as crews worked their way deeper, from huge chunks of brick and concrete to pieces of wood that looked like remnants of desks and paneling to a load that contained a half dozen sparkly hula-hoops.</p>
<p>Rescuers carried in lengths of wide steel pipe big enough for someone to crawl through, apparently trying to create a tunnel into the collapsed slabs of the three-story school building. But a heavy rain fell during the night, and the tottering pile of rubble had to be shored up with hundreds of wooden beams.</p>
<p>People have rallied to help their neighbors in a huge volunteer effort that includes people from all walks of life in Mexico City, where social classes seldom mix. Doctors, dentists and lawyers stood alongside construction workers and street sweepers, handing buckets of debris or chunks of concrete hand-to-hand down the line.</p>
<p>At a collapsed factory building closer to the city’s center, giant cranes lifted huge slabs of concrete from the towering pile of rubble, like peeling layers from an onion. Workers with hand tools would quickly move in to look for signs of survivors and begin attacking the next layer.</p>
<p>Government rescue worker Alejandro Herrera said three bodies had been found Wednesday afternoon at the factory.</p>
<p>“There are sounds (beneath the rubble), but we don’t know if they are coming from inside or if it is the sound of the rubble,” Herrera said.</p>
<p>Not only humans were pulled out.</p>
<p>Mexico City police said rescue workers clearing wreckage from a collapsed medical laboratory in the Roma neighborhood found and removed 40 lab rabbits and 13 lab rats used by the firm that had occupied the building, now a pile of beams and rubble.</p>
<p>In addition to those killed in Mexico City, the federal civil defense agency said 69 died in Morelos state just south of the capital and 43 in Puebla state to the southeast, where the quake was centered. The rest of the deaths were in Mexico State, which borders Mexico City on three sides, Guerrero and Oaxaca states.</p>
<p>In Atzala in Puebla state, villagers mourned 11 family members who died inside a church when it crumbled during a baptism for a 2-month-old girl. People at the wake said the only ones to survive were the baby’s father, the priest and the priest’s assistant.</p>
<p>Power was being restored in some Mexico City neighborhoods that already spent a day without power. The mayor said there were 38 collapsed buildings in the capital, down from the 44 he had announced previously.</p> | false | 1 | delicate effort reach young girl buried rubble school stretched new day thursday vigil broadcast across nation rescue workers struggled rain darkness pick away unstable debris reach sight wiggling fingers early wednesday became symbol hope drove thousands professionals volunteers work frantically dozens wrecked buildings across capital nearby states looking survivors magnitude 71 quake killed least 245 people central mexico injured 2000 mexico city mayor miguel angel mancera said number confirmed dead capital risen 100 115 earlier federal government statement put overall toll 230 including 100 deaths mexico city mancera also said two women man pulled alive collapsed office building citys center wednesday night almost 36 hours quake president enrique pena nieto declared three days mourning soldiers police firefighters everyday citizens kept digging rubble times hands gaining inch time times cranes backhoes lift heavy slabs concrete still people groaning three floors remove rubble still hear people said evodio dario marcelino volunteer working dozens others collapsed apartment building man pulled alive partly collapsed apartment building northern mexico city 24 hours tuesday quake taken away stretcher apparently conscious 52 people rescued alive since quake citys social development department said adding tweet wont stop race time pena nieto warned tweet saying every minute counts save lives countrys attention focused collapsed enrique rebsamen school citys south side 21 children four adults confirmed dead hopes rose wednesday workers told local media detected signs one girl alive speaking hole dug rubble thermal imaging suggested several people might airspace around volunteer rescue worker hector mendez said cameras lowered rubble suggested might four people still inside added wasnt clear anyone beside girl alive dr alfredo vega working rescue team said girl identified frida sofia located alive pancaked floor slabs vega said alive telling us five children alive space education secretary aurelio nuno confirmed girl alive said still confirmed children also alive rubble strangely nuno said relatives girl named frida could found optimism ran strong girls rescue effort four corpses found wreckage day mendez said workers still trying get girl operation crossed new day debris removed school changed crews worked way deeper huge chunks brick concrete pieces wood looked like remnants desks paneling load contained half dozen sparkly hulahoops rescuers carried lengths wide steel pipe big enough someone crawl apparently trying create tunnel collapsed slabs threestory school building heavy rain fell night tottering pile rubble shored hundreds wooden beams people rallied help neighbors huge volunteer effort includes people walks life mexico city social classes seldom mix doctors dentists lawyers stood alongside construction workers street sweepers handing buckets debris chunks concrete handtohand line collapsed factory building closer citys center giant cranes lifted huge slabs concrete towering pile rubble like peeling layers onion workers hand tools would quickly move look signs survivors begin attacking next layer government rescue worker alejandro herrera said three bodies found wednesday afternoon factory sounds beneath rubble dont know coming inside sound rubble herrera said humans pulled mexico city police said rescue workers clearing wreckage collapsed medical laboratory roma neighborhood found removed 40 lab rabbits 13 lab rats used firm occupied building pile beams rubble addition killed mexico city federal civil defense agency said 69 died morelos state south capital 43 puebla state southeast quake centered rest deaths mexico state borders mexico city three sides guerrero oaxaca states atzala puebla state villagers mourned 11 family members died inside church crumbled baptism 2monthold girl people wake said ones survive babys father priest priests assistant power restored mexico city neighborhoods already spent day without power mayor said 38 collapsed buildings capital 44 announced previously | 583 |
<p>Israel’s strategic, political and military tactics, as it stands today, will not allow Gaza to live with a minimal degree of dignity.</p>
<p>It is not true that only three wars have taken place since Hamas won parliamentary elections in 2006 in the Occupied Palestinian Territories. Other wars that were deemed insignificant or ‘skirmishes’ also took place. Operation Returning Echo in March 2012, for example, killed and wounded over 100 people. But since the death toll, relative to the other major onslaughts seemed trivial, it was not cited as ‘war’, per se.</p>
<p>According to this logic, so-called operations Cast Lead (2008-9), Pillar of Defense (2012) and the deadliest of them all, Protective Edge (2014) were serious enough to be included in any relevant discussion, especially when the prospective new Israeli war on Gaza is considered.</p>
<p>It is important to denote that most of the media, mainstream or other, adheres to Israel’s designations of the war, not those of Palestinians. For example, Gazans refer to their last confrontation with Israel as the ‘Al-Furqan Battle’, a term we almost never hear repeated with reference to the war.</p>
<p>Observing the Israeli war discourse as the central factor in understanding the war against the Resistance surpasses that of language into other areas. The suffering in Gaza has never ceased, not since the last war, the previous one or the one before that. But only when Israel begins to mull over war as a real option, do many of us return to Gaza to discuss the various violent possibilities that lie ahead.</p>
<p>The problem of relegating Gaza until Israeli bombs begin to fall is part and parcel of Israeli collective thinking—government and society, alike. Gideon Levy, one of the very few sympathetic Israeli journalists in mainstream newspapers wrote about this <a href="http://www.haaretz.com/opinion/.premium-1.701213" type="external">in a recent article in Haaretz</a>.</p>
<p>“The addiction to fear and the eternal wallowing in terror in Israel suddenly reminded one of the existence of the neighboring ghetto,” he wrote in reference to Gaza and <a href="http://www.thejc.com/news/israel-news/152576/israelis-fear-next-gaza-war-not-far" type="external">sounding of Israeli war drums</a>. “Only thus are we here reminded of Gaza. When it shoots, or at least digs … (only then) we recall its existence. Iran dropped off the agenda. Sweden isn’t scary enough. Hezbollah is busy. So we return to Gaza.”</p>
<p>In fact, Israel’s exceedingly violent past in Gaza does not hinge on Hamas’ relative control of the <a href="http://www.timeslive.co.za/world/2016/02/04/Top-UN-official-says-war-hit-Gaza-on-disastrous-trajectory" type="external">terribly poor and besieged place</a>, nor is it, as per conventional wisdom, also related to <a href="http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2016/01/hamas-fatah-palestinian-elections-postponement.html" type="external">Palestinian factionalism</a>.&#160; Certainly, Hamas’ strength there is hardly an incentive for Israel to leave Gaza alone, and Palestinians’ pitiful factionalism rarely help the situation. However, Israel’s problem is with the very idea that there is a single Palestinian entity that dares challenge Israel’s dominance, and dares to resist.</p>
<p>Moreover, the argument that armed resistance, in particular, infuriates Israel the most is also incorrect. <a href="http://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/.premium-1.701343" type="external">Violent resistance</a> may speed up Israel’s retaliation and the intensity of its violence, but as we are currently witnessing in the West Bank, <a href="https://electronicintifada.net/content/israelis-execute-injured-palestinian-video-and-eyewitness/14966" type="external">no form of resistance has ever been permissible</a>, not now, not since the Palestinian Authority was essentially contracted to control the Palestinian population, and certainly not since the start of the Israeli military occupation in 1967.</p>
<p>Israel wants to have <a href="http://mondoweiss.net/2015/11/israel-violence-palestinians/" type="external">complete monopoly over violence</a>, and that is the bottom line. <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/23/world/middleeast/israel-gaza-report.html?_r=0" type="external">A quick scan</a> of Israel’s history against Palestinian Resistance in all of its forms is indicative that the Israel vs. Hamas narrative has always be reductionist, due partly to it being politically convenient for Israel, but also useful in the Palestinians’ own infighting.</p>
<p>Fatah, which was Palestine’s largest political party until Hamas won 76 out of the legislative council’s 132 seats in the early 2006 elections, has played a major rule in constructing that misleading narrative, one that sees the past wars and the current conflict as an exclusive fight between Hamas, as political rival, and Israel.</p>
<p>When seven of Hamas fighters were recently killed after a tunnel collapsed—which was destroyed during the 2014 war by Israel and was being rebuilt— <a href="http://www.jpost.com/Middle-East/Fatah-lashes-out-at-Hamas-war-merchants-after-7-killed-in-tunnel-collapse-443152" type="external">Fatah issued a statement</a> that appeared on Facebook. The statement did not declare solidarity with the various resistance movements which have operated under horrendously painful circumstances and unremitting siege for years, but chastised the ‘war merchants’ – in reference to Hamas—who, according to Fatah, “know nothing but burying their young people in ashes.”</p>
<p>But what other options does the Resistance in Gaza actually have?</p>
<p>The unity government which was agreed on by both Fatah and Hamas in the Beach Refugee Camp agreement in the summer of 2014 yielded no practical outcomes, leaving Gaza with no functioning government, and a worsening siege. That reality, for now, seals the fate of a political solution involving a unified Palestinian leadership.</p>
<p>Submitting to Israel is the worst possible option. If the Resistance in Gaza was to lay down its arms, Israel would attempt to recreate the post-1982 Lebanon war scenario, when they pacified their enemies using extreme violence and then entrusted their collaborating allies to rearrange the subsequent political landscape. While some Palestinians could readily offer to fill that disreputable role, the Gaza society is likely to shun them entirely.</p>
<p>A third scenario in which Gaza is both free and the Palestinian people’s political wishes are respected is also unlikely to materialize soon, considering the fact that Israel has no reason to submit to this option, at least for now.</p>
<p>This leaves the war option as the only real, tragic possibility. Israeli analyst, Amost Harel highlighted in his article “ <a href="http://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/.premium-1.696899" type="external">Hamas’ Desire to Increase West Bank Attacks Could Trigger New Gaza War</a>” the reasoning behind this logic:</p>
<p>“To date, Israel and Palestinian Authority security forces have succeeded in scuttling most of Hamas’ schemes,” he wrote, referring to his allegations that Hamas is attempting to co-opt the ongoing uprising in the West Bank.</p>
<p>In one of several scenarios he offered, “The first is that a successful Hamas attack in the West Bank will spur an Israeli response against the group in Gaza, which will lead the parties into a confrontation.”</p>
<p>In most of Israeli media analyses, there is almost total disregard for Palestinian motives, aside from some random inclination to commit acts of ‘terror.’ Of course, reality is rarely close to Israel’s self-centered version of events, as <a href="http://www.haaretz.com/opinion/.premium-1.701213" type="external">rightly pointed out by Israeli writer Gideon Levy</a>.</p>
<p>After <a href="http://www.timeslive.co.za/world/2016/02/04/Top-UN-official-says-war-hit-Gaza-on-disastrous-trajectory" type="external">his most recent visit to Gaza</a>, Robert Piper, UN envoy and humanitarian coordinator for the Occupied Territories, left the Strip with a grim assessment: only 859 of homes destroyed in the last war have been rebuilt. He blamed the blockade for Gaza’s suffering, but also the lack of communication between the Ramallah-based government and Hamas movement in Gaza.</p>
<p>“There’s no changes to the underlying fragility of Gaza,” he told AFP, and the situation “remains on a frankly disastrous trajectory of de-development and radicalization, as far as I can tell.”</p>
<p>Of the blockade, he said, “It is a blockade that prevents students from getting to universities to further their studies in other places. It’s a blockade that prevents sick people from getting the health care that they need.”</p>
<p>Under these circumstance, it is difficult to imagine that another war is not looming. Israel’s <a href="https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/articles/middle-east/23763-is-gaza-paying-the-price-of-the-cypriot-israeli-greek-alliance" type="external">strategic</a>, political and military tactics, as it stands today, will not allow Gaza to live with a minimal degree of dignity. On the other hand, the history of Gaza’s resistance makes it impossible to imagine a scenario in which the Strip raises a white flag and awaits its allotted punishment.</p> | false | 1 | israels strategic political military tactics stands today allow gaza live minimal degree dignity true three wars taken place since hamas parliamentary elections 2006 occupied palestinian territories wars deemed insignificant skirmishes also took place operation returning echo march 2012 example killed wounded 100 people since death toll relative major onslaughts seemed trivial cited war per se according logic socalled operations cast lead 20089 pillar defense 2012 deadliest protective edge 2014 serious enough included relevant discussion especially prospective new israeli war gaza considered important denote media mainstream adheres israels designations war palestinians example gazans refer last confrontation israel alfurqan battle term almost never hear repeated reference war observing israeli war discourse central factor understanding war resistance surpasses language areas suffering gaza never ceased since last war previous one one israel begins mull war real option many us return gaza discuss various violent possibilities lie ahead problem relegating gaza israeli bombs begin fall part parcel israeli collective thinkinggovernment society alike gideon levy one sympathetic israeli journalists mainstream newspapers wrote recent article haaretz addiction fear eternal wallowing terror israel suddenly reminded one existence neighboring ghetto wrote reference gaza sounding israeli war drums thus reminded gaza shoots least digs recall existence iran dropped agenda sweden isnt scary enough hezbollah busy return gaza fact israels exceedingly violent past gaza hinge hamas relative control terribly poor besieged place per conventional wisdom also related palestinian factionalism160 certainly hamas strength hardly incentive israel leave gaza alone palestinians pitiful factionalism rarely help situation however israels problem idea single palestinian entity dares challenge israels dominance dares resist moreover argument armed resistance particular infuriates israel also incorrect violent resistance may speed israels retaliation intensity violence currently witnessing west bank form resistance ever permissible since palestinian authority essentially contracted control palestinian population certainly since start israeli military occupation 1967 israel wants complete monopoly violence bottom line quick scan israels history palestinian resistance forms indicative israel vs hamas narrative always reductionist due partly politically convenient israel also useful palestinians infighting fatah palestines largest political party hamas 76 legislative councils 132 seats early 2006 elections played major rule constructing misleading narrative one sees past wars current conflict exclusive fight hamas political rival israel seven hamas fighters recently killed tunnel collapsedwhich destroyed 2014 war israel rebuilt fatah issued statement appeared facebook statement declare solidarity various resistance movements operated horrendously painful circumstances unremitting siege years chastised war merchants reference hamaswho according fatah know nothing burying young people ashes options resistance gaza actually unity government agreed fatah hamas beach refugee camp agreement summer 2014 yielded practical outcomes leaving gaza functioning government worsening siege reality seals fate political solution involving unified palestinian leadership submitting israel worst possible option resistance gaza lay arms israel would attempt recreate post1982 lebanon war scenario pacified enemies using extreme violence entrusted collaborating allies rearrange subsequent political landscape palestinians could readily offer fill disreputable role gaza society likely shun entirely third scenario gaza free palestinian peoples political wishes respected also unlikely materialize soon considering fact israel reason submit option least leaves war option real tragic possibility israeli analyst amost harel highlighted article hamas desire increase west bank attacks could trigger new gaza war reasoning behind logic date israel palestinian authority security forces succeeded scuttling hamas schemes wrote referring allegations hamas attempting coopt ongoing uprising west bank one several scenarios offered first successful hamas attack west bank spur israeli response group gaza lead parties confrontation israeli media analyses almost total disregard palestinian motives aside random inclination commit acts terror course reality rarely close israels selfcentered version events rightly pointed israeli writer gideon levy recent visit gaza robert piper un envoy humanitarian coordinator occupied territories left strip grim assessment 859 homes destroyed last war rebuilt blamed blockade gazas suffering also lack communication ramallahbased government hamas movement gaza theres changes underlying fragility gaza told afp situation remains frankly disastrous trajectory dedevelopment radicalization far tell blockade said blockade prevents students getting universities studies places blockade prevents sick people getting health care need circumstance difficult imagine another war looming israels strategic political military tactics stands today allow gaza live minimal degree dignity hand history gazas resistance makes impossible imagine scenario strip raises white flag awaits allotted punishment | 687 |
<p>“END NOW!” shouts President Donald Trump’s most recent twitter tirade against the filibuster in the Senate. The case he presents is that “With the ridiculous Filibuster Rule in the Senate, Republicans need 60 votes to pass legislation, rather than 51. Can’t get votes…”</p>
<p>Trump has repeatedly harangued the Senate on Twitter. Back in May, he wrote, “The U.S. Senate should switch to 51 votes, immediately, and get Healthcare and TAX CUTS approved, fast and easy.”</p>
<p>In August, he declared on Twitter, “If Republican Senate doesn’t get rid of the Filibuster Rule &amp; go to a simple majority, which the Dems would do, they are just wasting time!”</p>
<p>Just last week, by tweet, he specifically addressed the Republicans in the Senate, “I’ve been hearing about Repeal &amp; Replace for 7 years, didn’t happen! Even worse, the Senate Filibuster Rule will…. never allow the Republicans to pass even great legislation. 8 Dems control – will rarely get 60 (vs. 51) votes. It is a Repub Death Wish!”</p>
<p>Even as he makes fledgling overtures on immigration and tax reform to the congressional Democrats, the president appears to believe that if only the GOP majority in the Senate would steamroll the minority in that body, twist the Senate rules out of shape, and legislate without any need for negotiation with the Democrats, great things would happen.</p>
<p>Trump’s insistence, however, seems to be making the squashing of the “ridiculous” filibuster rule less likely, not more.</p>
<p>Senate Republicans led by Mitch McConnell have shown no enthusiasm for the idea. Majority Leader McConnell has pointedly told the media, “There’s not a single senator in the majority who thinks we ought to change the legislative filibuster. Not one.”</p>
<p>If the interests of Republicans and their policy objectives are so clear, why resist a measure which would please a Republican president, avoid the GOP “death wish,” and make it easier to overrun minority views? Why keep the filibuster?</p>
<p>More than 200 years ago, in 1793, John Adams wrote, “Mankind will in time discover, that unbridled majorities are as tyrannical and cruel as unlimited despots.” This captures the argument for preserving the role of the Senate in protecting legislative minorities.</p>
<p>Democracy is something more than simply majority rule. Majority rule must be balanced by the rights of minorities. Unlike the House of Representatives where majorities can legislate without consideration for the minority, in the Senate, the minority can almost always have some influence on legislative outcomes.</p>
<p>This is important not only because it protects against overzealous majorities, but it fosters negotiation and encourages compromise. This matters most when the president’s party controls both the House and the Senate as it does now.</p>
<p>At the heart of the Senate’s unique place in our government are two critical factors. The Senate is characterized by unlimited debate and unfettered amendments. The principal tool for protecting these rights is the filibuster.</p>
<p>Under the Senate rules, a filibuster can only be cut off by cloture. This requires 60 votes (three-fifths of all senators “duly chosen and sworn”). This means that in order to pass most matters of consequence, a part of the minority must be willing to work with the majority.</p>
<p>It is this supermajority requirement which makes the filibuster such a potent driver of compromise. All senators know for their legislative proposals to succeed, they must seek support from colleagues on the other side of the aisle. This is in the DNA of the Senate.</p>
<p>In recent years, first one party and then the other have abused the filibuster. Minorities have seized on the filibuster and other procedures and used them for purposes of obstruction. This naturally frustrates majorities.</p>
<p>Too often, the majority rather than working with the minority have sought to freeze them out. One example is the misuse of the reconciliation rules under the Budget Act to circumvent the filibuster in an effort to accomplish major legislative objectives like the repeal of Obamacare, (so far unsuccessfully.)</p>
<p>Senators through most of the Senate’s history have recognized the potential for abuse of the filibuster to lead to efforts to eviscerate it. Senators who value the filibuster have protected the rule for more than a century. Without it, the majority in the Senate will do what majorities do: take full control. The Senate would become another House of Representatives.</p>
<p>Nonetheless, the filibuster is threatened.</p>
<p>In 2013, Democrats, led by former Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-NV,&#160;used a parliamentary ploy, the controversial “nuclear option,” to twist the rules and permit cloture to be invoked by a simple majority on presidential nominations. At the time Supreme Court nominations were exempted.</p>
<p>Earlier this year, after blocking President Obama’s nominee to the Supreme Court for nearly a year, Republican Majority Leader McConnell rolled out the Reid precedent and extended it to Supreme Court nominations. This permitted Republicans to end the Democrats filibuster and confirm Neil Gorsuch to the Court.</p>
<p>Use of the nuclear option has freed future presidents with a majority in the Senate to select partisan and ideologically pure nominees and to ignore the views of the minority. I believe that this will greatly and permanently politicize the Supreme Court.</p>
<p>Perhaps the greater damage done by these actions is the danger that the legislative filibuster has been put on a slippery slope.</p>
<p>Most recent presidents have disliked the filibuster rule, even those who previously defended it, like Barrack Obama, when he was in the Senate and Trump who in 2013 tweeted, “Thomas Jefferson wrote the Senate filibuster rule. Harry Reid &amp; Obama killed it yesterday. Rule was in effect for over 200 years.”</p>
<p>Presidents simply want to see their legislative agenda adopted and it’s easier if they can rely on their own party alone. No Republicans voted for Obamacare in the Senate and no Democrats voted to repeal it. This is hardly a formula for wise public policy.</p>
<p>President Trump wants the Senate to twist its rules and precedents in order to make it easier for him to accomplish what he wants. The Senate, however, historically dislikes being told how to write its own rules. The Constitution, in Article I Section 5, gives that power to the Senate itself. As Majority Leader McConnell has said, “There is an overwhelming majority on a bipartisan basis not interested in changing the way the Senate operates on the legislative calendar.” Earlier this year, a bipartisan group of 61 senators wrote to the leadership opposing further change to the filibuster.</p>
<p>It was Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis who wrote, “The greatest dangers to liberty lurk in insidious encroachment by men of zeal, well-meaning, but without understanding.” The Trump tweets probably make destruction of the filibuster less likely because his bombastic demands, his unpredictability, and the seemingly constant chaotic atmosphere that he creates may reinforce the conviction of many Republican senators that the virtues of the filibuster are worth preserving.</p>
<p><a href="https://www.richarenberg.com/" type="external">Richard A. Arenberg</a> worked for Sens. Paul Tsongas (D-Mass.), <a href="http://thehill.com/people/carl-levin" type="external">Carl Levin</a>(D-Mich.) and Majority Leader George Mitchell (D-Maine) for 34 years and is co-author of the award-winning “Defending the Filibuster: The Soul of the Senate.” He is a visiting lecturer of political science, and international and public affairs, at Brown University. His work has appeared in The New York Times, The Washington Post and The Boston Globe. Follow him on Twitter <a href="https://twitter.com/richarenberg" type="external">@richarenberg</a>.</p> | false | 1 | end shouts president donald trumps recent twitter tirade filibuster senate case presents ridiculous filibuster rule senate republicans need 60 votes pass legislation rather 51 cant get votes trump repeatedly harangued senate twitter back may wrote us senate switch 51 votes immediately get healthcare tax cuts approved fast easy august declared twitter republican senate doesnt get rid filibuster rule amp go simple majority dems would wasting time last week tweet specifically addressed republicans senate ive hearing repeal amp replace 7 years didnt happen even worse senate filibuster rule never allow republicans pass even great legislation 8 dems control rarely get 60 vs 51 votes repub death wish even makes fledgling overtures immigration tax reform congressional democrats president appears believe gop majority senate would steamroll minority body twist senate rules shape legislate without need negotiation democrats great things would happen trumps insistence however seems making squashing ridiculous filibuster rule less likely senate republicans led mitch mcconnell shown enthusiasm idea majority leader mcconnell pointedly told media theres single senator majority thinks ought change legislative filibuster one interests republicans policy objectives clear resist measure would please republican president avoid gop death wish make easier overrun minority views keep filibuster 200 years ago 1793 john adams wrote mankind time discover unbridled majorities tyrannical cruel unlimited despots captures argument preserving role senate protecting legislative minorities democracy something simply majority rule majority rule must balanced rights minorities unlike house representatives majorities legislate without consideration minority senate minority almost always influence legislative outcomes important protects overzealous majorities fosters negotiation encourages compromise matters presidents party controls house senate heart senates unique place government two critical factors senate characterized unlimited debate unfettered amendments principal tool protecting rights filibuster senate rules filibuster cut cloture requires 60 votes threefifths senators duly chosen sworn means order pass matters consequence part minority must willing work majority supermajority requirement makes filibuster potent driver compromise senators know legislative proposals succeed must seek support colleagues side aisle dna senate recent years first one party abused filibuster minorities seized filibuster procedures used purposes obstruction naturally frustrates majorities often majority rather working minority sought freeze one example misuse reconciliation rules budget act circumvent filibuster effort accomplish major legislative objectives like repeal obamacare far unsuccessfully senators senates history recognized potential abuse filibuster lead efforts eviscerate senators value filibuster protected rule century without majority senate majorities take full control senate would become another house representatives nonetheless filibuster threatened 2013 democrats led former majority leader harry reid dnv160used parliamentary ploy controversial nuclear option twist rules permit cloture invoked simple majority presidential nominations time supreme court nominations exempted earlier year blocking president obamas nominee supreme court nearly year republican majority leader mcconnell rolled reid precedent extended supreme court nominations permitted republicans end democrats filibuster confirm neil gorsuch court use nuclear option freed future presidents majority senate select partisan ideologically pure nominees ignore views minority believe greatly permanently politicize supreme court perhaps greater damage done actions danger legislative filibuster put slippery slope recent presidents disliked filibuster rule even previously defended like barrack obama senate trump 2013 tweeted thomas jefferson wrote senate filibuster rule harry reid amp obama killed yesterday rule effect 200 years presidents simply want see legislative agenda adopted easier rely party alone republicans voted obamacare senate democrats voted repeal hardly formula wise public policy president trump wants senate twist rules precedents order make easier accomplish wants senate however historically dislikes told write rules constitution article section 5 gives power senate majority leader mcconnell said overwhelming majority bipartisan basis interested changing way senate operates legislative calendar earlier year bipartisan group 61 senators wrote leadership opposing change filibuster supreme court justice louis brandeis wrote greatest dangers liberty lurk insidious encroachment men zeal wellmeaning without understanding trump tweets probably make destruction filibuster less likely bombastic demands unpredictability seemingly constant chaotic atmosphere creates may reinforce conviction many republican senators virtues filibuster worth preserving richard arenberg worked sens paul tsongas dmass carl levindmich majority leader george mitchell dmaine 34 years coauthor awardwinning defending filibuster soul senate visiting lecturer political science international public affairs brown university work appeared new york times washington post boston globe follow twitter richarenberg | 680 |
<p>Discrimination is an ugly accusation, especially when leveled against the Church. Last month, Jionni Conforti — who identifies as a transgender man — filed a lawsuit accusing St. Joseph’s Regional Medical Center in New Jersey of “unlawful discrimination on the basis of sex,” a violation of New Jersey law and the Affordable Care Act. Why discrimination? Because St. Joseph’s refused to let Conforti’s surgeon schedule a hysterectomy to complete her gender reassignment, female to male. (Conforti underwent a mastectomy years before in Texas.) As a Catholic hospital, St. Joseph’s does not do hysterectomies for purposes of gender reassignment.</p>
<p>Although this case involves one plaintiff in one diocese, it highlights several emerging problems for Catholic institutions as the “gender revolution” unfolds.</p>
<p>The conflict underscores how quickly our national landscape has shifted. Increasingly, across the culture, transgender identities are normalized and conscientious objections stigmatized. The business community, for instance, has embraced the transgender agenda; many of America’s largest companies have taken a stand against state-level religious liberty protections. Moreover, 82 percent of Fortune 500 companies provide gender identity protections and benefits, gender and sexual diversity training for employees and donate to LGBT causes. Today’s culture “leans in” to affirm, not discriminate against, transgender identities.</p>
<p>In fact, specific protections for sexual orientation and gender identity are designed to create a legal and cultural environment that requires civil society to affirm LGBT identities and behaviors. The New Jersey complaint, for example, seeks not only monetary damages for “emotional distress, humiliation, embarrassment and a loss of dignity,” but also, more ominously, a permanent injunction ordering the Catholic hospital to change its policies and provide transgender individuals with “gender confirmation” treatments. Put differently, Conforti’s lawyers want to force Catholic institutions to jettison Catholic doctrine and surrender to gender ideology.</p>
<p>Catholic identity matters greatly. Institutional commitments to the Catholic mission must be reflected consistently at every level, from CEOs to ground-level communicators. Conforti’s complaint contains troubling, though unproven, allegations that St. Joseph’s looked the other way while physicians performed procedures typically prohibited in Catholic facilities, including elective hysterectomies and tubal ligations for contraceptive purposes, in apparent violation of the Ethical and Religious Directives for Catholic Health Care Services. Those allegations may or may not prove true.</p>
<p>St. Joseph’s, for example, publishes a patient’s bill of rights, stating that the hospital provides care “in accordance with the moral teaching of the Roman Catholic Church.”Strong institutional practices demonstrate authenticity, but require regular reviews and practical reinforcement to remain effective. A Catholic facility may publicize its Catholic identity, but does the institution explain its Catholic mission and equip employees to implement it?</p>
<p>According to the complaint, however, Conforti confirmed plans for the hysterectomy with a senior member of the hospital nursing staff, who allegedly said the hysterectomy could go forward, as long as documentation showed it was “medically necessary” for gender dysphoria.</p>
<p>“Medically necessary,” though, means one thing to transgender activists and another to Catholic ethicists. Father Martin Rooney, the hospital’s director of mission services, decided differently, and informed Conforti that the surgery could not be scheduled.</p>
<p>Language is another important consideration. The gender revolution has triggered an avalanche of new terms and tricky definitions — and the resulting terrain is tough to navigate. It redefines basic words like marriage and sex in order to “subvert” the “hetero-normative, cisgender norms” imposed by patriarchal institutions (or so their theory goes).</p>
<p>In Spain, for example, transgender activists recently tried to change the meaning of two basic words: “boy” and “girl.” They distributed posters in several cities showing naked children with opposite-sex genitals. Their slogan? “Some girls have penises, some boys have vaginas.” By redefining the term “girl” to include a biological boy who thinks he’s a girl, transgender advocates inject new assumptions and meanings into the public discourse.</p>
<p>Similarly, the New Jersey lawsuit attempts to redefine “sex” as “gender identity.” The plaintiff was born a woman but now identifies as a man and wants to be rid of “female parts.” The hospital basically said, no, we don’t remove healthy reproductive organs just because a woman says they remind her that she was born a woman.</p>
<p>Besides redefining terms, transgender activists have generally controlled how gender issues are framed. It’s easier to win the public’s sympathy, for example, by fighting for a vulnerable person than by defending an abstract idea (“religious liberty”) or a “biased” institution (the Church). They put the vulnerable people at the center of their narrative, assert their “rights” to trans-specific services and then interpret the religious believer’s unwillingness to provide those services as an expression of bias or hatred toward the person. Conforti’s complaint accuses the hospital of refusing “medically necessary” care because of “who he is”— a transgender man. (Ironically, Conforti’s complaint also says that Conforti’s family relied on St. Joseph’s for care, for years — which suggests St. Joseph’s doesn’t have a problem with “who he is,” but instead provided care precisely because of who Conforti is, a person made in God’s image.)The complaint employs “doublespeak” to justify the demand. It asserts that Conforti’s male “gender identity” is the patient’s “true sex,” and conversely, that “sex” is determined mainly by subjective experience of gender identity. In unilaterally redefining essential terms, progressives obscure the truth, confuse good people, and render dialogue nearly impossible. So Catholic institutions must tread carefully.</p>
<p>The hospital’s unwillingness to be a venue for gender reassignment has nothing to do with who Conforti is, and everything to do with what the surgery entails (removing a healthy uterus) and why it was requested (to reassign gender and reduce feelings of gender dysphoria).</p>
<p>Jionni Conforti found another surgeon — at another hospital — to perform the gender reassignment as desired. But the narratives of the gender revolution are not going somewhere else anytime soon. Mary Rice Hasson directs the Catholic Women’s Forum at the Ethics and Public Policy Center in Washington, D.C.</p> | false | 1 | discrimination ugly accusation especially leveled church last month jionni conforti identifies transgender man filed lawsuit accusing st josephs regional medical center new jersey unlawful discrimination basis sex violation new jersey law affordable care act discrimination st josephs refused let confortis surgeon schedule hysterectomy complete gender reassignment female male conforti underwent mastectomy years texas catholic hospital st josephs hysterectomies purposes gender reassignment although case involves one plaintiff one diocese highlights several emerging problems catholic institutions gender revolution unfolds conflict underscores quickly national landscape shifted increasingly across culture transgender identities normalized conscientious objections stigmatized business community instance embraced transgender agenda many americas largest companies taken stand statelevel religious liberty protections moreover 82 percent fortune 500 companies provide gender identity protections benefits gender sexual diversity training employees donate lgbt causes todays culture leans affirm discriminate transgender identities fact specific protections sexual orientation gender identity designed create legal cultural environment requires civil society affirm lgbt identities behaviors new jersey complaint example seeks monetary damages emotional distress humiliation embarrassment loss dignity also ominously permanent injunction ordering catholic hospital change policies provide transgender individuals gender confirmation treatments put differently confortis lawyers want force catholic institutions jettison catholic doctrine surrender gender ideology catholic identity matters greatly institutional commitments catholic mission must reflected consistently every level ceos groundlevel communicators confortis complaint contains troubling though unproven allegations st josephs looked way physicians performed procedures typically prohibited catholic facilities including elective hysterectomies tubal ligations contraceptive purposes apparent violation ethical religious directives catholic health care services allegations may may prove true st josephs example publishes patients bill rights stating hospital provides care accordance moral teaching roman catholic churchstrong institutional practices demonstrate authenticity require regular reviews practical reinforcement remain effective catholic facility may publicize catholic identity institution explain catholic mission equip employees implement according complaint however conforti confirmed plans hysterectomy senior member hospital nursing staff allegedly said hysterectomy could go forward long documentation showed medically necessary gender dysphoria medically necessary though means one thing transgender activists another catholic ethicists father martin rooney hospitals director mission services decided differently informed conforti surgery could scheduled language another important consideration gender revolution triggered avalanche new terms tricky definitions resulting terrain tough navigate redefines basic words like marriage sex order subvert heteronormative cisgender norms imposed patriarchal institutions theory goes spain example transgender activists recently tried change meaning two basic words boy girl distributed posters several cities showing naked children oppositesex genitals slogan girls penises boys vaginas redefining term girl include biological boy thinks hes girl transgender advocates inject new assumptions meanings public discourse similarly new jersey lawsuit attempts redefine sex gender identity plaintiff born woman identifies man wants rid female parts hospital basically said dont remove healthy reproductive organs woman says remind born woman besides redefining terms transgender activists generally controlled gender issues framed easier win publics sympathy example fighting vulnerable person defending abstract idea religious liberty biased institution church put vulnerable people center narrative assert rights transspecific services interpret religious believers unwillingness provide services expression bias hatred toward person confortis complaint accuses hospital refusing medically necessary care transgender man ironically confortis complaint also says confortis family relied st josephs care years suggests st josephs doesnt problem instead provided care precisely conforti person made gods imagethe complaint employs doublespeak justify demand asserts confortis male gender identity patients true sex conversely sex determined mainly subjective experience gender identity unilaterally redefining essential terms progressives obscure truth confuse good people render dialogue nearly impossible catholic institutions must tread carefully hospitals unwillingness venue gender reassignment nothing conforti everything surgery entails removing healthy uterus requested reassign gender reduce feelings gender dysphoria jionni conforti found another surgeon another hospital perform gender reassignment desired narratives gender revolution going somewhere else anytime soon mary rice hasson directs catholic womens forum ethics public policy center washington dc | 622 |
<p>The prisoners held captive in Israeli jails are a depiction of the life of every Palestinian.</p>
<p>Gaza is the <a href="https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/tales-from-gaza-what-is-life-really-like-in-the-worlds-largest-outdoor-prison-8567611.html" type="external">world’s largest open air prison</a>. The West Bank is a prison, too, <a href="http://america.aljazeera.com/multimedia/2014/7/west-bank-security.html" type="external">segmented</a> into various wards, known as areas A, B and C. In fact, all Palestinians are subjected to varied degrees of military restrictions. At some level, they are all prisoners.</p>
<p>East Jerusalem is <a href="https://www.un.org/press/en/2014/gapal1296.doc.htm" type="external">cut off from the West Bank</a>, and those in the West Bank are separated from one another.</p>
<p>Palestinians in Israel are treated slightly better than their brethren in the Occupied Territories, but subsist in degrading conditions compared to the first-class status given to Israeli Jews, as per the virtue of their ethnicity alone.</p>
<p>Palestinians ‘lucky’ enough to escape the handcuffs and shackles are still trapped in different ways.</p>
<p>Palestinian refugees in Lebanon’s <a href="http://www.pbs.org/pov/aworldnotours/video/ain-el-helweh/" type="external">Ein el-Hilweh</a>, like millions of Palestinian refugees in ‘shattat’ (Diaspora), are prisoners in refugee camps, carrying precarious, meaningless identification, cannot travel and are denied access to work. They languish in refugee camps, waiting for life to move forward, however slightly—as their fathers and grandfathers have done before them for nearly seventy years.</p>
<p>This is why the issue of prisoners is a very sensitive one for Palestinians. It is a real and metaphorical representation of all that Palestinians have in common.</p>
<p>The <a href="http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2017/04/palestinians-strike-solidarity-prisoners-170427041901617.html" type="external">protests igniting</a> across the Occupied Territories to support 1,500 hunger strikers are not merely an act of ‘solidarity’ with the incarcerated and abused men and women who are demanding improvements to their conditions.</p>
<p>Sadly, prison is the most obvious fact of Palestinian life; it is the status quo; the everyday reality.</p>
<p>The prisoners held captive in Israeli jails are a depiction of the life of every Palestinian, trapped behind walls, checkpoints, in refugee camps, in Gaza, in cantons in the West Bank, segregated Jerusalem, waiting to be let in, waiting to be let out. Simply waiting.</p>
<p>There are 6,500 prisoners in Israeli jails. This number includes hundreds of children, women, elected officials, journalists and administrative detainees, who are held with no charges, no due process. But these numbers hardly convey the reality that has transpired under Israeli occupation since 1967.</p>
<p>According to prisoners’ rights group, ‘Addameer’, more than 800,000 Palestinians have been imprisoned under military rule since Israel commenced its occupation of Palestinian territories in June 1967.</p>
<p>That is 40 percent of the entire male population of the Occupied Territories.</p>
<p>Israeli jails are prisons within larger prisons. In times of protests and upheaval, especially during the uprisings of 1987-1993 and 2000-2005, hundreds of thousands of Palestinians were subjected to prolonged military curfews, sometimes lasting weeks, even months.</p>
<p>Under military curfews, people are not allowed to leave their homes, with little or no breaks to even purchase food.</p>
<p>Not a single Palestinian who has lived (or is still living) through such conditions is alien to the experience of imprisonment.</p>
<p>But some Palestinians in that large prison have been granted VIP cards. They are deemed the ‘moderate Palestinians’, thus granted special permits from the Israeli military to leave the Palestinian prison and return as they please.</p>
<p>While former Palestinian leaders Yasser Arafat was <a href="http://edition.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/meast/03/29/holmes.ramallah/index.html" type="external">holed up</a> in his office in Ramallah for years, until his death in November 2004, current Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas is free to travel.</p>
<p>While Israel can, at times, be critical of Abbas, he rarely deviates far from the acceptable limits set by the Israeli government.</p>
<p>This is why Abbas is free and Fatah leader, Marwan Barghouti, (along with thousands of others) is jailed.</p>
<p>The current prisoners’ hunger strike began on April 17, in commemoration of ‘Prisoner Day’ in Palestine.</p>
<p>On the eighth day of the strike, as the health of Marwan Barghouti <a href="http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2017/04/marwan-barghouti-health-decline-ngo-hunger-strike-170424135826074.html" type="external">deteriorated</a>, Abbas was in Kuwait meeting a group of <a href="https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/20170425-hunger-strike-day-8-abbas-in-kuwait-meeting-arab-singers/" type="external">lavishly dressed Arab singers</a>.</p>
<p>The reports, published in ‘Safa News Agency’ and elsewhere, generated much attention on social media. The tragedy of the dual Palestinian reality is an inescapable fact.</p>
<p>Barghouti is far more popular among supporters of Fatah, one of the two largest Palestinian political movements. In fact, he is the <a href="http://www.pcpsr.org/en/node/658" type="external">most popular</a> leader amongst Palestinians, regardless of their ideological or political stances.</p>
<p>If the PA truly cared about prisoners and the well-being of Fatah’s most popular leader, Abbas would have busied himself forging a strategy to galvanize the energy of the hungry prisoners, and millions of his people who rallied in their support.</p>
<p>But mass mobilization has always scared Abbas and his Authority. It is too dangerous for him, because popular action often challenges the established status quo, and could hinder his Israeli-sanctioned rule over occupied Palestinians.</p>
<p>While Palestinian media is ignoring the rift within Fatah, Israeli media is exploiting it, placing it within the larger political context.</p>
<p>Abbas is scheduled to meet US President Donald Trump on May 3.</p>
<p>He wants to leave a good impression on the impulsive president, especially as Trump is decreasing foreign aid worldwide, but <a href="https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/donald-trump-cut-foreign-aid-worldwide-increase-assistance-palestinians-us-president-a7701136.html" type="external">increasing US assistance to the PA</a>. That alone should be enough to understand the US administration’s view of Abbas and its appreciation of the role of his Authority in ensuring Israel’s security and in preserving the status quo.</p>
<p>But not all Fatah supporters are happy with Abbas’ subservience. The youth of the Movement want to reassert a strong Palestinian position through mobilizing the people; Abbas wants to keep things quiet.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.haaretz.com/middle-east-news/palestinians/1.783911" type="external">Amos Harel argued in ‘Haaretz</a>‘ that the hunger strike, called for by Barghouti himself, was the latter’s attempt at challenging Abbas and “rain(ing) on Trump’s peace plan.”</p>
<p>However, Trump has no plan. He is giving Israeli Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, carte blanche to do as he pleases. His solution is: one state, two states, whichever ‘both parties like.’ But both sides are far from being equal powers. Israel has nuclear capabilities and a massive army, while Abbas needs permission to leave the Occupied West Bank.</p>
<p>In this unequal reality, only Israel decides the fate of Palestinians.</p>
<p>On his recent visit to the US, Netanyahu articulated his future vision.</p>
<p>“Israel must retain the overriding security control over the entire area west of the Jordan River,” he said.</p>
<p>Writing in the ‘Nation’, Professor <a href="https://www.thenation.com/article/trumps-middle-east-deal-leaves-out-one-vital-player-palestinians/" type="external">Rashid Khalidi</a> expounded the true meaning of Netanyahu’s statement.</p>
<p>By uttering these words, “Netanyahu proclaimed a permanent regime of occupation and colonization, ruling out a sovereign independent Palestinian state, whatever fiction of ‘statehood’ or ‘autonomy’ are dreamed up to conceal this brutal reality,” he wrote.</p>
<p>“Trump’s subsequent silence amounts to the blessing of the US government for this grotesque vision of enduring subjugation and dispossession for the Palestinians.”</p>
<p>Why then, should Palestinians be quiet?</p>
<p>Their silence can only contribute to this gross reality, the painful present circumstances, where Palestinians are perpetually imprisoned under an enduring Occupation, while their ‘leadership’ receives both a nod of approval from Israel and accolades and more funds from Washington.</p>
<p>It is under this backdrop that the hunger strike becomes far more urgent than the need to improve the conditions of incarcerated Palestinians.</p>
<p>It is a revolt within Fatah against their disengaged leadership, and a frantic attempt by all Palestinians to demonstrate their ability to destabilize the Israeli-American-PA matrix of control that has extended for many years.</p>
<p>“Rights are not bestowed by an oppressor,” <a href="https://medium.com/@thepalestineproject/barghouti-why-we-are-on-hunger-strike-in-israels-prisons-49afc8220fe4" type="external">wrote Marwan Barghouti</a> from his jail on the first day of the hunger strike.</p>
<p>In truth, his message was directed at Abbas and his cronies, as much as it was directed at Israel.</p> | false | 1 | prisoners held captive israeli jails depiction life every palestinian gaza worlds largest open air prison west bank prison segmented various wards known areas b c fact palestinians subjected varied degrees military restrictions level prisoners east jerusalem cut west bank west bank separated one another palestinians israel treated slightly better brethren occupied territories subsist degrading conditions compared firstclass status given israeli jews per virtue ethnicity alone palestinians lucky enough escape handcuffs shackles still trapped different ways palestinian refugees lebanons ein elhilweh like millions palestinian refugees shattat diaspora prisoners refugee camps carrying precarious meaningless identification travel denied access work languish refugee camps waiting life move forward however slightlyas fathers grandfathers done nearly seventy years issue prisoners sensitive one palestinians real metaphorical representation palestinians common protests igniting across occupied territories support 1500 hunger strikers merely act solidarity incarcerated abused men women demanding improvements conditions sadly prison obvious fact palestinian life status quo everyday reality prisoners held captive israeli jails depiction life every palestinian trapped behind walls checkpoints refugee camps gaza cantons west bank segregated jerusalem waiting let waiting let simply waiting 6500 prisoners israeli jails number includes hundreds children women elected officials journalists administrative detainees held charges due process numbers hardly convey reality transpired israeli occupation since 1967 according prisoners rights group addameer 800000 palestinians imprisoned military rule since israel commenced occupation palestinian territories june 1967 40 percent entire male population occupied territories israeli jails prisons within larger prisons times protests upheaval especially uprisings 19871993 20002005 hundreds thousands palestinians subjected prolonged military curfews sometimes lasting weeks even months military curfews people allowed leave homes little breaks even purchase food single palestinian lived still living conditions alien experience imprisonment palestinians large prison granted vip cards deemed moderate palestinians thus granted special permits israeli military leave palestinian prison return please former palestinian leaders yasser arafat holed office ramallah years death november 2004 current palestinian authority president mahmoud abbas free travel israel times critical abbas rarely deviates far acceptable limits set israeli government abbas free fatah leader marwan barghouti along thousands others jailed current prisoners hunger strike began april 17 commemoration prisoner day palestine eighth day strike health marwan barghouti deteriorated abbas kuwait meeting group lavishly dressed arab singers reports published safa news agency elsewhere generated much attention social media tragedy dual palestinian reality inescapable fact barghouti far popular among supporters fatah one two largest palestinian political movements fact popular leader amongst palestinians regardless ideological political stances pa truly cared prisoners wellbeing fatahs popular leader abbas would busied forging strategy galvanize energy hungry prisoners millions people rallied support mass mobilization always scared abbas authority dangerous popular action often challenges established status quo could hinder israelisanctioned rule occupied palestinians palestinian media ignoring rift within fatah israeli media exploiting placing within larger political context abbas scheduled meet us president donald trump may 3 wants leave good impression impulsive president especially trump decreasing foreign aid worldwide increasing us assistance pa alone enough understand us administrations view abbas appreciation role authority ensuring israels security preserving status quo fatah supporters happy abbas subservience youth movement want reassert strong palestinian position mobilizing people abbas wants keep things quiet amos harel argued haaretz hunger strike called barghouti latters attempt challenging abbas raining trumps peace plan however trump plan giving israeli prime minister benjamin netanyahu carte blanche pleases solution one state two states whichever parties like sides far equal powers israel nuclear capabilities massive army abbas needs permission leave occupied west bank unequal reality israel decides fate palestinians recent visit us netanyahu articulated future vision israel must retain overriding security control entire area west jordan river said writing nation professor rashid khalidi expounded true meaning netanyahus statement uttering words netanyahu proclaimed permanent regime occupation colonization ruling sovereign independent palestinian state whatever fiction statehood autonomy dreamed conceal brutal reality wrote trumps subsequent silence amounts blessing us government grotesque vision enduring subjugation dispossession palestinians palestinians quiet silence contribute gross reality painful present circumstances palestinians perpetually imprisoned enduring occupation leadership receives nod approval israel accolades funds washington backdrop hunger strike becomes far urgent need improve conditions incarcerated palestinians revolt within fatah disengaged leadership frantic attempt palestinians demonstrate ability destabilize israeliamericanpa matrix control extended many years rights bestowed oppressor wrote marwan barghouti jail first day hunger strike truth message directed abbas cronies much directed israel | 707 |
<p>Democratic activists and European intellectuals are ecstatic about Barack Obama’s trip to Europe. Europeans see a man they hope will win the presidency (a recent poll found 72% of Germans backing Sen. Obama). U.S. Democratic activists see their nominee gaining the experience of a continent whose policies–more pacifist, statist and secular than America’s–they would prefer to emulate. Both sets of people hope Mr. Obama will be influenced by what he sees and emerge a man whose message of change will be informed by stereotypical European aspirations and experiences.</p>
<p>But the Europe Mr. Obama will visit is quite different from the one Americans often hear about. Over the last decade, much of Europe has very quietly embraced market-based reforms that either draw inspiration from American successes or–on issues like retirement security–are even more market-oriented than many U.S. Republicans support.</p>
<p>What’s more, these changes have been adopted and implemented by parties left and right. This Europe is a shining example of exactly the sort of postpartisan government action that the Obama campaign says it is about.</p>
<p>The cutting of corporate income-tax rates is an excellent example of European market-friendly bipartisanship. Germany’s right-left coalition of Christian and Social Democrats implemented a large rate cut earlier this year, reducing the top marginal corporate rate to about 30% from 39%. Spain’s Socialist and Britain’s Labor governments have followed suit, reducing their countries’ top corporate rates.</p>
<p>These traditionally left-of-center parties understand that in a globalized economy, wealth and investment are mobile, flowing to those countries that provide hospitable investment climates. As part of a European Union where center-right governments in Greece, Denmark, Ireland and Eastern Europe have dramatically reduced corporate tax rates, they understand that they cannot help workers if they drive away the capital that employs and pays them.</p>
<p>Many European countries are also ahead of America when it comes to pension reform. Mr. Obama’s main solution to the looming Social Security bankruptcy is to raise taxes on the well-off. To date, he has eschewed other solutions such as raising the retirement age or creating private Social Security accounts. But European center-left parties have no such reservations.</p>
<p>Take Sweden, for example. In the 1990s, a series of center-right and Social Democratic governments reached agreement on wide ranging pension reforms that include a private account option not too different than the one proposed by President George W. Bush.</p>
<p>Under the Swedish plan, workers can put aside up to 2.5% of their salary into one or more of nearly 800 competing private-sector accounts. Swedish workers own these accounts and direct their investment options, earning the rewards if their investment choices increase faster than do average wages. Both political coalitions now support the basic contour of this approach, and retirement policy was not a contentious issue in Sweden’s 2006 elections.</p>
<p>Sweden is not the only European example of market-friendly, bipartisan entitlement reform. In the 1990s, Holland had one of the most generous disability insurance systems in the world. At its height, about one in 10 Dutch working-age adults were drawing government disability checks rather than working. Recognizing this was unsustainable, Christian Democrats, Liberals and Social Democrats came together to cut benefits and tighten eligibility criteria.</p>
<p>The intent was to cut the disability rolls and push people back into the workforce, much like America’s 1996 welfare-reform law. The effect has been dramatic: Disability rolls have dropped by almost 20% since 2002.</p>
<p>This new European consensus is founded, like all political calculations, partly on conviction and partly on necessity. European center-left politicians have slowly come to respect the power of markets. Much like the so-called “Rubin Democrats,” they recognize that the energy and innovation of market actors can better produce wealth than more traditional social democratic economic theory.</p>
<p>They have also come to the recognition that the task of center-left governments is to minimize the negative externalities of market action while using government to more equitably distribute the resulting economic gains. These progressives believe in reforming and guiding, not restricting or reviling, the private sector.</p>
<p>European center-left approval of market reforms is also rooted in economic and political necessity. Even social democratic countries benefit from a global economy and hence must compete in it. Experience has proven that center-left parties obtain and keep power if they emphasize the center rather than the left. They have found that their electorates want redistribution of a growing economic pie.</p>
<p>Again, Sweden is an excellent example of this. Since 1932, Social Democrats have governed the country mostly without significant coalition partners, with the exception of the years when Sweden’s economy stalled and they had to cede power–1976-82, 1991-94 and again in 2006 when the current center-right government took over. Even in egalitarian Sweden, voters will turn to the right if jobs are scarce and incomes stagnant.</p>
<p>Mr. Obama’s postpartisan, “let us all come together” message is perhaps the most important reason for his meteoric rise. Many conservatives and Republicans fear this rhetoric is divorced from reality and that an Obama presidency with a Democratic Congress would soon drop the mantle of unity and press for a purely liberal agenda.</p>
<p>By adopting the modern European model, a President Obama would go a long away toward alleviating those fears and fulfilling his promise.</p>
<p>Henry Olsen is a senior fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center.</p> | false | 1 | democratic activists european intellectuals ecstatic barack obamas trip europe europeans see man hope win presidency recent poll found 72 germans backing sen obama us democratic activists see nominee gaining experience continent whose policiesmore pacifist statist secular americasthey would prefer emulate sets people hope mr obama influenced sees emerge man whose message change informed stereotypical european aspirations experiences europe mr obama visit quite different one americans often hear last decade much europe quietly embraced marketbased reforms either draw inspiration american successes oron issues like retirement securityare even marketoriented many us republicans support whats changes adopted implemented parties left right europe shining example exactly sort postpartisan government action obama campaign says cutting corporate incometax rates excellent example european marketfriendly bipartisanship germanys rightleft coalition christian social democrats implemented large rate cut earlier year reducing top marginal corporate rate 30 39 spains socialist britains labor governments followed suit reducing countries top corporate rates traditionally leftofcenter parties understand globalized economy wealth investment mobile flowing countries provide hospitable investment climates part european union centerright governments greece denmark ireland eastern europe dramatically reduced corporate tax rates understand help workers drive away capital employs pays many european countries also ahead america comes pension reform mr obamas main solution looming social security bankruptcy raise taxes welloff date eschewed solutions raising retirement age creating private social security accounts european centerleft parties reservations take sweden example 1990s series centerright social democratic governments reached agreement wide ranging pension reforms include private account option different one proposed president george w bush swedish plan workers put aside 25 salary one nearly 800 competing privatesector accounts swedish workers accounts direct investment options earning rewards investment choices increase faster average wages political coalitions support basic contour approach retirement policy contentious issue swedens 2006 elections sweden european example marketfriendly bipartisan entitlement reform 1990s holland one generous disability insurance systems world height one 10 dutch workingage adults drawing government disability checks rather working recognizing unsustainable christian democrats liberals social democrats came together cut benefits tighten eligibility criteria intent cut disability rolls push people back workforce much like americas 1996 welfarereform law effect dramatic disability rolls dropped almost 20 since 2002 new european consensus founded like political calculations partly conviction partly necessity european centerleft politicians slowly come respect power markets much like socalled rubin democrats recognize energy innovation market actors better produce wealth traditional social democratic economic theory also come recognition task centerleft governments minimize negative externalities market action using government equitably distribute resulting economic gains progressives believe reforming guiding restricting reviling private sector european centerleft approval market reforms also rooted economic political necessity even social democratic countries benefit global economy hence must compete experience proven centerleft parties obtain keep power emphasize center rather left found electorates want redistribution growing economic pie sweden excellent example since 1932 social democrats governed country mostly without significant coalition partners exception years swedens economy stalled cede power197682 199194 2006 current centerright government took even egalitarian sweden voters turn right jobs scarce incomes stagnant mr obamas postpartisan let us come together message perhaps important reason meteoric rise many conservatives republicans fear rhetoric divorced reality obama presidency democratic congress would soon drop mantle unity press purely liberal agenda adopting modern european model president obama would go long away toward alleviating fears fulfilling promise henry olsen senior fellow ethics public policy center | 546 |
<p>As Obamacare heads into its third full year of implementation and the 2016 presidential election campaign kicks into high gear, expect the law’s leading intellectual authors and defenders to shift their tactics from defense to offense. They want to solidify Obamacare’s reach and fulfill their original vision. Their continued aim is to cement the federal government’s control over American health care and the practice of medicine.</p>
<p>Hillary Clinton, the front-runner for the Democratic nomination for president in 2016 and the former secretary of state in the Obama administration, is the logical champion of the sequel to the Affordable Care Act because she paved the way for Obamacare with the plan she pushed as first lady in 1993 and 1994. She provided its intellectual origin.</p>
<p>The similarities between the original Hillarycare and Obamacare are striking.</p>
<p>Both plans were built around the concept of “exchanges” — originally called “Health Insurance Purchasing Cooperatives” in Hillarycare.</p>
<p>Both plans relied on an employer mandate.</p>
<p>Both had minimum federal benefit requirements, and federal preemption of the traditional state role in the regulation of health insurance.</p>
<p>Both saw an extensive role for federal agencies in establishing the health benefits that a consumer must have access to, and those services that wouldn’t be available.</p>
<p>The only real daylight that has ever been visible between Clinton and Obama on health care occurred in 2008, over the individual mandate. Clinton, campaigning for president, supported a mandate as part of her health-care plan. Then–senator Obama, also campaigning for president, opposed it and vigorously attacked Clinton over the issue, only to drop his opposition after getting elected. With that flip-flop, Obamacare became indistinguishable in all of its key features from the plan pushed by Hillary Clinton 15 years earlier.</p>
<p>So it is not surprising that Clinton is now campaigning to “build upon” Obamacare, mostly by trying to blunt the high cost of Obamacare’s regulatory excess with yet more costly regulation. Nor is it surprising that what she is promising sounds an awful lot like what Obama promised nearly seven years ago — free health care, with no consequences. In recent days, she proposed a $250 annual limitation on what people must pay for pharmaceutical products (with insurers presumably covering all costs above that amount and charging higher premiums as a result). She also wants to give everyone in the United States three free trips to the doctor each year, along with a $2,500 tax credit ($5,000 for couples) for people with high out-of-pocket expenditures. Who would pay for all of this?</p>
<p>She claims it would be paid by cost savings from painless government-imposed cost controls, especially on drug companies. But, of course, price controls are never “costless.” Access to new drugs will suffer. By definition, with price controls there will be less innovation and fewer new products to address the many ailments that afflict millions of patients every year.</p>
<p>And Clinton’s agenda will not stop there. She has signaled that she will continue the Obama administration’s plans to <a href="https://www.advisory.com/daily-briefing/2015/09/24/hillary-clinton-health-care-plan" type="external">impose more government control</a> on the provision of services, as well as adopt the cost-control agenda of the Democratic party’s top thinkers.</p>
<p>In a New England Journal of Medicine op-ed from January 2015, Health and Human Services Secretary <a href="http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp1500445" type="external">Sylvia Burwell provided the roadmap for what lies ahead</a>. Burwell announced that, as insurance enrollment was expanding due to Obamacare, it was time for her department to take the lead and “shape the way care is delivered” across the United States to cut costs and improve efficiency. In other words, HHS is launching more intrusive micromanagement of how providers organize themselves to care for patients.</p>
<p>HHS’s plan to &#160;“shape” how health care is delivered centers on using Medicare’s purchasing power to coerce doctors and hospitals to conform to the government’s plans. The names of the various pieces of the initiative can sound benign – such as Accountable Care Organizations (ACOs), “bundled payments,” and “paying for performance” — but their effect is to force practitioners into government-sanctioned care arrangements. In the case of ACOs, which are government-regulated managed-care plans, doctors are now being coerced into joining them to get higher Medicare-reimbursement rates.</p>
<p>At the same time, Medicare’s beneficiaries are also being “automatically enrolled” into ACOs — forced to become patients of these networks, without their explicit consent. If their physician is in an ACO, so are they — by default. Thus, the Medicare bureaucracy has created a new vehicle built entirely on coercion rather than choice. Over time, it is quite predictable that ACOs will become the mechanism for more micromanagement of physician practices.</p>
<p>It will be far easier for HHS to regulate how providers deliver medical care when physicians mainly practice in large groups. Right now, it’s hard to control the nation’s doctors from a remote bureaucracy in Washington, because physicians still mainly practice medicine in small groups. There are too many of these small-group practices for HHS to control easily. But by coercing doctors to join large, and usually hospital-based, health systems — or by forcing them to become employees of ACOs — it will be much easier to control how care is delivered, because HHS will be able to impose rules on a much smaller number of health systems. It will then be up to the ACO or hospital to enforce HHS’s rules on their affiliated providers.</p>
<p>Some of the key architects of Obamacare, who are also advisers to Hillary Clinton, have come forward with explicit plans for giving the government even greater cost-control authority. Former Obama official Ezekiel Emanuel, along with a lengthy list of co-authors, has recommended <a href="http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMsb1205901" type="external">more explicit, governmentally imposed cost controls on both public and private-sector health care</a>, all in the name of cost control. The overall concept is called a “global budget,” and the implicit enforcement mechanism is the extension of the government’s regulated payment rates in Medicare to the rest of the health system.</p>
<p>The effect of this approach to cost control would be to export out of Medicare to employer plans and other insurance arrangements the many perverse incentives now embedded in Medicare’s regulated rates. The government has no real way to determine the right price for medical services, so it invents technocratic schemes to create the illusion of competence. The reality is a system that both overpays and underpays frequently — and thus misallocates resources.</p>
<p>These same themes were prevalent in Clinton’s last campaign for president, in 2008. Speaking at a <a href="http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=77057" type="external">campaign stop at the Broadlawns Medical Center</a> in Des Moines, Iowa, she said:</p>
<p>It is time that we put patients, not drug companies and insurance companies, first. That means changing the way they do business.&#160;.&#160;.&#160;.&#160;Because ultimately, the American taxpayer pays for the development of a lot of these drugs through NIH grants and other kinds of research grants; we pay for the clinical trials, and then we pay the highest prices in the world. And we’re going to begin to rein that in.</p>
<p>She would go back to this line or argument often during the 2008 campaign and has brought it back again in her current quest for the White House.</p>
<p>Her populist message will have some political appeal, of course. There is a pervasive anti-business mood taking shape in the electorate. But the pandering should fall flat with many Americans. They were already promised reduced costs with Obamacare, and now most Americans are paying much more for their health care. They should be skeptical of more promises of cost-free health care courtesy of the federal government.</p>
<p>Moreover, Americans remain rightly uneasy about the massive expansion of the government’s overall role in the health system. Polls continue to show that more voters oppose Obamacare than support it for this very reason. They are right to have these concerns.</p>
<p>The central, driving theme of Obamacare is a massive shift of power and authority from states, employers, physicians, and individuals to the federal government. Only a small portion of that authority has been exercised to date by the federal bureaucracy. If Hillary Clinton is elected president, she will push her campaign proposals, but she will also build upon the Obama administration’s current plans to have the federal government run every aspect of medical care. That was the unfinished piece from her original vision, which formed the intellectual inspiration for Obamacare. Whatever remaining autonomy there is for private initiative in the health system would be wiped away.</p>
<p>An effective counter to this agenda must begin with a relentless critique of the disastrous consequences of government-run health care. The public agrees that the quality of health care would suffer greatly with the government fully in charge.</p>
<p>But opponents cannot just offer up critiques of Obamacare. The public wants effective health-care reform, just not the kind that passed in 2010 or what Hillary Clinton will promise. However, if there is no politically viable alternative in sight, it will not be possible to block the sequel to Obamacare, much less roll back what is already in place from Obamacare 1.0.</p>
<p>It is crucial, therefore, that the 2016 GOP presidential nominee offers a plan to the country that provides access to secure insurance to everyone in the United States without handing to the federal government all power and authority over the health system.</p>
<p>Fortunately, most of the work to develop such a plan has already been done. Senators Richard Burr and Orrin Hatch and Representative Fred Upton have introduced <a href="http://energycommerce.house.gov/sites/republicans.energycommerce.house.gov/files/114/20150205-PCARE-Act-Plan.pdf" type="external">a credible health-care proposal</a>, as has <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">House Budget Committee Chairman Tom Price</a>. These plans would broaden insurance enrollment, give those with preexisting conditions affordable options for coverage, and slow rising costs by introducing intense price competition and consumer choice. They would meet these key objectives without the massive expense and governmental overreach of Obamacare. The GOP candidate should build upon the themes and ideas developed in these plans.</p>
<p>There’s reason for optimism, despite the many challenges with rolling back a law that was enacted more than five years ago. Hillarycare perished in 1994 when Americans realized it would introduce too much governmental control into the health system. The public remains wary of Obamacare for the same reason.</p>
<p>There is still an opening to offer a better way forward. But that window of opportunity will close after 2016. So now is the time for the GOP candidates to begin countering Obamacare and Hillarycare with plans of their own.</p>
<p>— Scott Gottlieb is a physician and <a href="https://www.aei.org/scholar/scott-gottlieb/" type="external">resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute</a>. 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 | obamacare heads third full year implementation 2016 presidential election campaign kicks high gear expect laws leading intellectual authors defenders shift tactics defense offense want solidify obamacares reach fulfill original vision continued aim cement federal governments control american health care practice medicine hillary clinton frontrunner democratic nomination president 2016 former secretary state obama administration logical champion sequel affordable care act paved way obamacare plan pushed first lady 1993 1994 provided intellectual origin similarities original hillarycare obamacare striking plans built around concept exchanges originally called health insurance purchasing cooperatives hillarycare plans relied employer mandate minimum federal benefit requirements federal preemption traditional state role regulation health insurance saw extensive role federal agencies establishing health benefits consumer must access services wouldnt available real daylight ever visible clinton obama health care occurred 2008 individual mandate clinton campaigning president supported mandate part healthcare plan thensenator obama also campaigning president opposed vigorously attacked clinton issue drop opposition getting elected flipflop obamacare became indistinguishable key features plan pushed hillary clinton 15 years earlier surprising clinton campaigning build upon obamacare mostly trying blunt high cost obamacares regulatory excess yet costly regulation surprising promising sounds awful lot like obama promised nearly seven years ago free health care consequences recent days proposed 250 annual limitation people must pay pharmaceutical products insurers presumably covering costs amount charging higher premiums result also wants give everyone united states three free trips doctor year along 2500 tax credit 5000 couples people high outofpocket expenditures would pay claims would paid cost savings painless governmentimposed cost controls especially drug companies course price controls never costless access new drugs suffer definition price controls less innovation fewer new products address many ailments afflict millions patients every year clintons agenda stop signaled continue obama administrations plans impose government control provision services well adopt costcontrol agenda democratic partys top thinkers new england journal medicine oped january 2015 health human services secretary sylvia burwell provided roadmap lies ahead burwell announced insurance enrollment expanding due obamacare time department take lead shape way care delivered across united states cut costs improve efficiency words hhs launching intrusive micromanagement providers organize care patients hhss plan 160shape health care delivered centers using medicares purchasing power coerce doctors hospitals conform governments plans names various pieces initiative sound benign accountable care organizations acos bundled payments paying performance effect force practitioners governmentsanctioned care arrangements case acos governmentregulated managedcare plans doctors coerced joining get higher medicarereimbursement rates time medicares beneficiaries also automatically enrolled acos forced become patients networks without explicit consent physician aco default thus medicare bureaucracy created new vehicle built entirely coercion rather choice time quite predictable acos become mechanism micromanagement physician practices far easier hhs regulate providers deliver medical care physicians mainly practice large groups right hard control nations doctors remote bureaucracy washington physicians still mainly practice medicine small groups many smallgroup practices hhs control easily coercing doctors join large usually hospitalbased health systems forcing become employees acos much easier control care delivered hhs able impose rules much smaller number health systems aco hospital enforce hhss rules affiliated providers key architects obamacare also advisers hillary clinton come forward explicit plans giving government even greater costcontrol authority former obama official ezekiel emanuel along lengthy list coauthors recommended explicit governmentally imposed cost controls public privatesector health care name cost control overall concept called global budget implicit enforcement mechanism extension governments regulated payment rates medicare rest health system effect approach cost control would export medicare employer plans insurance arrangements many perverse incentives embedded medicares regulated rates government real way determine right price medical services invents technocratic schemes create illusion competence reality system overpays underpays frequently thus misallocates resources themes prevalent clintons last campaign president 2008 speaking campaign stop broadlawns medical center des moines iowa said time put patients drug companies insurance companies first means changing way business160160160160because ultimately american taxpayer pays development lot drugs nih grants kinds research grants pay clinical trials pay highest prices world going begin rein would go back line argument often 2008 campaign brought back current quest white house populist message political appeal course pervasive antibusiness mood taking shape electorate pandering fall flat many americans already promised reduced costs obamacare americans paying much health care skeptical promises costfree health care courtesy federal government moreover americans remain rightly uneasy massive expansion governments overall role health system polls continue show voters oppose obamacare support reason right concerns central driving theme obamacare massive shift power authority states employers physicians individuals federal government small portion authority exercised date federal bureaucracy hillary clinton elected president push campaign proposals also build upon obama administrations current plans federal government run every aspect medical care unfinished piece original vision formed intellectual inspiration obamacare whatever remaining autonomy private initiative health system would wiped away effective counter agenda must begin relentless critique disastrous consequences governmentrun health care public agrees quality health care would suffer greatly government fully charge opponents offer critiques obamacare public wants effective healthcare reform kind passed 2010 hillary clinton promise however politically viable alternative sight possible block sequel obamacare much less roll back already place obamacare 10 crucial therefore 2016 gop presidential nominee offers plan country provides access secure insurance everyone united states without handing federal government power authority health system fortunately work develop plan already done senators richard burr orrin hatch representative fred upton introduced credible healthcare proposal house budget committee chairman tom price plans would broaden insurance enrollment give preexisting conditions affordable options coverage slow rising costs introducing intense price competition consumer choice would meet key objectives without massive expense governmental overreach obamacare gop candidate build upon themes ideas developed plans theres reason optimism despite many challenges rolling back law enacted five years ago hillarycare perished 1994 americans realized would introduce much governmental control health system public remains wary obamacare reason still opening offer better way forward window opportunity close 2016 time gop candidates begin countering obamacare hillarycare plans scott gottlieb physician resident fellow american enterprise institute james c capretta senior fellow ethics public policy center visiting fellow american enterprise institute | 988 |
<p>With the main stream media caught up in bitcoin hype as the cryptocurrency smashes another all-time high this week, few stories cover the possible dangers of the phenomenon.</p>
<p>Anonymity is not always right</p>
<p>In the most recent incident last week, hackers demanded a ransom of at least $6 million in bitcoin from HBO to stop leaking spoilers and episodes from the new season of Game of Thrones. Bitcoin transactions are ideal for criminals because they are hard to track. While some may not sympathize with a TV channel with a multibillion dollar market cap, the same blackmail technique could be used against any of us, and there is little likelihood the criminals would be caught.</p>
<p>The defenders of anonymous payments say any currency can be used for illegal means.</p>
<p>“Demanding bitcoin in an extortion is just a new version of an old problem. Kidnappers and extortionists have demanded cash in the past as a way of remaining undetected. Most crime is still conducted with US dollars. I imagine that HBO can still attempt to fight the extortion the old fashion way,”&#160;American economist at the Ludwig von Mises Institute Mark Thornton told RT.</p>
<p>No one understands it</p>
<p>There are thousands of articles and FAQs about mining and transferring bitcoins, but let’s be honest. The technology is extremely hard to understand and experts do a terrible job of trying to explain it.</p>
<p>“Many people have heard of bitcoin now, but I agree that the vast majority–99%–don’t know what it really is. Of course, bitcoin can be dangerous. It is certainly very volatile. Most people who own bitcoin do so as an investment rather than as money–a medium of exchange. However, I would not recommend investing in it unless you understand it and know the risks,”&#160;Thornton said.</p>
<p>The market speculation aspect of cryptocurrencies is easy to understand with traders trying to make a quick buck. Whether it is rational or safe to invest in something that few understand is mostly ignored by the mainstream media.</p>
<p>Max Keiser of RT’s Keiser Report offers a different view on the subject.</p>
<p>“The problem describing bitcoin is twofold. First, you have to throw out what you think you know about money. Second, you have to become moderately fluent in a few technologies. The beauty of bitcoin is that as the price of bitcoin rises, more people are incentivized to tackle the learning curve out of self-interest. When the price was $3 – when Keiser Report first covered bitcoin – you could afford to ignore it. But as price heads to $5,000 and higher, you can’t afford to ignore the technology and accept the fact that your preconceptions about money are probably wrong,”&#160;Keiser told RT.</p>
<p>Cryptocurrencies have no real value</p>
<p>Read more</p>
<p><a href="https://www.rt.com/business/399564-bitcoin-record-high-cryptocurrency/" type="external" /></p>
<p>The value of bitcoin has hit an all-time high of above $4,000 this week. A single token is now worth more than three troy ounces of gold. The total value of all cryptocurrencies has surged this year from $17.5 billion to around $120 billion, more than Goldman Sachs and the Royal Bank of Scotland combined.</p>
<p>This phenomenon raises the question of what intrinsic value of something is, whether it’s gold or bitcoin.</p>
<p>“Bitcoin has intrinsic value the same way a gold mine has intrinsic value When you own bitcoin, you own a piece of a network that, like a gold mine, has intrinsic value,”&#160;Keiser explains.&#160;“This is a bit misleading in that gold supply is worth trillions and bitcoin is worth billions. The real question is, what price would bitcoin need to get to the equal value of gold. The answer is, well into the $100,000 per bitcoin. Will it get there? I think so, yes”.</p>
<p>Cryptocurrencies are a speculative bubble</p>
<p>To other investors and analysts, the digital currencies market is just another tulip mania. The period during the Dutch Golden Age is considered the first recorded speculative bubble. The price of tulip bulbs reached extraordinarily high levels. At its peak, a person could buy a home for two bulbs, before prices collapsed in 1637.</p>
<p>Read more</p>
<p><a href="https://www.rt.com/business/397683-howard-marks-cryptocurrencies-not-real/" type="external" /></p>
<p>“Bitcoin can certainly become a ‘bubble.’ The bubble will form in opposition to central bank policies and government threats. A bubble would encourage governments to pop it with new interventionists policies or shutting down the exchanges. So governments do not care about the exchange rate for now, but they easily could as bitcoin continues to increase in value relative to paper currencies,”&#160;Thornton told RT.</p>
<p>You could argue the same things can be said about bank notes. However, they are backed by governments, which are interested in keeping their value more or less stable. Governments don’t care about the bitcoin exchange rate.</p>
<p>Max Keiser disagrees.</p>
<p>“No. The US dollar, stocks, bonds, and property are all in bubbles. Bitcoin (and gold) are underpriced vs. these other assets that are in bubbles. bitcoins are very cheap vs. government bonds – that are trading at multi-hundred-year highs – for example,”&#160;said Keiser.</p>
<p>Lost cryptocurrency is almost impossible to recover</p>
<p>In 2014, Welshman James Howells says he accidentally tossed a hard drive with 7,500 mined bitcoins. At the time he had mined them, they were worth very little. But today they would be worth almost $25 million. While there are many tutorials to recover bitcoins in case of a technical difficulty, if you don’t know where are your bitcoins are physically, you will likely lose them forever.</p>
<p>“It’s extremely improbable, and effectively impossible [to recover lost coins]. This is what the security of bitcoin is actually based on. If you’ve lost your private key, the system is so secure that you may not be able to recover it,”&#160;says Greg Schvey, a bitcoin researcher.</p>
<p>Risk of unknown technical flaws in system</p>
<p>The bitcoin system is still relatively new and could contain unexploited flaws. If such a flaw is found, the exploiter could steal a vast amount of money and even destroy the bitcoin economy. Last month, one of the world’s largest bitcoin exchanges Bithumb was hacked, compromising 30,000 accounts with several million dollars in bitcoin stolen. It is just a fraction of the robbery of the Mt. Gox exchange, where $460 million in bitcoin (at then current prices) disappeared in 2014.</p>
<p>Bitcoin is overhyped</p>
<p>In terms of the main stream media’s responsibility when covering the bitcoin phenomenon, Max Keiser offers a final thought.</p>
<p>“It’s impossible to overhype bitcoin. The way bitcoin is changing society is as profound as Gutenberg’s printing press or Edison’s light bulb,”&#160;he said.</p> | false | 1 | main stream media caught bitcoin hype cryptocurrency smashes another alltime high week stories cover possible dangers phenomenon anonymity always right recent incident last week hackers demanded ransom least 6 million bitcoin hbo stop leaking spoilers episodes new season game thrones bitcoin transactions ideal criminals hard track may sympathize tv channel multibillion dollar market cap blackmail technique could used us little likelihood criminals would caught defenders anonymous payments say currency used illegal means demanding bitcoin extortion new version old problem kidnappers extortionists demanded cash past way remaining undetected crime still conducted us dollars imagine hbo still attempt fight extortion old fashion way160american economist ludwig von mises institute mark thornton told rt one understands thousands articles faqs mining transferring bitcoins lets honest technology extremely hard understand experts terrible job trying explain many people heard bitcoin agree vast majority99dont know really course bitcoin dangerous certainly volatile people bitcoin investment rather moneya medium exchange however would recommend investing unless understand know risks160thornton said market speculation aspect cryptocurrencies easy understand traders trying make quick buck whether rational safe invest something understand mostly ignored mainstream media max keiser rts keiser report offers different view subject problem describing bitcoin twofold first throw think know money second become moderately fluent technologies beauty bitcoin price bitcoin rises people incentivized tackle learning curve selfinterest price 3 keiser report first covered bitcoin could afford ignore price heads 5000 higher cant afford ignore technology accept fact preconceptions money probably wrong160keiser told rt cryptocurrencies real value read value bitcoin hit alltime high 4000 week single token worth three troy ounces gold total value cryptocurrencies surged year 175 billion around 120 billion goldman sachs royal bank scotland combined phenomenon raises question intrinsic value something whether gold bitcoin bitcoin intrinsic value way gold mine intrinsic value bitcoin piece network like gold mine intrinsic value160keiser explains160this bit misleading gold supply worth trillions bitcoin worth billions real question price would bitcoin need get equal value gold answer well 100000 per bitcoin get think yes cryptocurrencies speculative bubble investors analysts digital currencies market another tulip mania period dutch golden age considered first recorded speculative bubble price tulip bulbs reached extraordinarily high levels peak person could buy home two bulbs prices collapsed 1637 read bitcoin certainly become bubble bubble form opposition central bank policies government threats bubble would encourage governments pop new interventionists policies shutting exchanges governments care exchange rate easily could bitcoin continues increase value relative paper currencies160thornton told rt could argue things said bank notes however backed governments interested keeping value less stable governments dont care bitcoin exchange rate max keiser disagrees us dollar stocks bonds property bubbles bitcoin gold underpriced vs assets bubbles bitcoins cheap vs government bonds trading multihundredyear highs example160said keiser lost cryptocurrency almost impossible recover 2014 welshman james howells says accidentally tossed hard drive 7500 mined bitcoins time mined worth little today would worth almost 25 million many tutorials recover bitcoins case technical difficulty dont know bitcoins physically likely lose forever extremely improbable effectively impossible recover lost coins security bitcoin actually based youve lost private key system secure may able recover it160says greg schvey bitcoin researcher risk unknown technical flaws system bitcoin system still relatively new could contain unexploited flaws flaw found exploiter could steal vast amount money even destroy bitcoin economy last month one worlds largest bitcoin exchanges bithumb hacked compromising 30000 accounts several million dollars bitcoin stolen fraction robbery mt gox exchange 460 million bitcoin current prices disappeared 2014 bitcoin overhyped terms main stream medias responsibility covering bitcoin phenomenon max keiser offers final thought impossible overhype bitcoin way bitcoin changing society profound gutenbergs printing press edisons light bulb160he said | 598 |
<p>In 1987, a group of treasure hunters discovered a steamboat buried deep in a Kansas cornfield. This was the Arabia, a side-wheeler whose hull was pierced by a submerged tree on Sept. 5, 1856, near Parkville, Mo., 6 miles north of Kansas City. The ship, just three years old, had embarked from St. Louis, steaming westward on the Missouri to deliver merchandise to 16 frontier towns. The cargo included 20,000 feet of lumber, 4,000 shoes and boots, two prefab homes destined for Logan, Neb., a sawmill and fixtures, and a case of Otard Dupuy &amp; Co. cognac.</p>
<p>Although the Arabia went down in 15 feet of water, all of its 130 passengers reached shore on the ship’s skiff—the only fatality was a mule tied to the deck. Within days, the Missouri’s silt began to engulf the wreck; within weeks the ship had sunk from sight.</p>
<p>On a recent trip to Kansas City, I marveled at the thousands of objects from the side-wheeler on display in the fascinating Steamboat Arabia Museum here. The story of how they got there is almost as enthralling as the objects themselves.</p>
<p>It all began when treasure hunters Bob Hawley and his sons David and Greg began to search for the wreck after hearing tales of its sinking. From the Arabia’s manifest, which a crewmember gave to a St. Louis newspaper shortly after the sinking, the Hawleys learned the locations the steamboat was to visit, what it was carrying and the names of the merchants awaiting its goods. They then consulted a 19th-century map marking the sites of shipwrecks on the river and zeroed in on a cornfield in Parkville, the location where they thought the Arabia was buried. Over the years, the Missouri had meandered half a mile from where the ship went down and the river’s thick silt had turned the site into farmland.</p>
<p>A metal detector located the iron boilers and then test bores found the perimeters of the ship. Around them the Hawleys dug a series of wells to 65 feet and began pumping out huge amounts of ground water; 20 pumps ran day and night for four months, removing 20,000 gallons a minute until the excavation was able to fully uncover the Arabia.</p>
<p>Amazingly, the mud covering the boat had created an oxygen-free environment that had perfectly preserved the cargo, providing a unique time capsule of the American West on the eve of the Civil War.</p>
<p>After the last box was dug out of the ship’s hold and the backbreaking months of labor in the freezing, waterlogged wintertime excavation ended, the Hawleys realized that they could not bring themselves to sell off the Arabia’s contents. They became caretakers instead of treasure hunters, as they understood that “the real wealth of the collection was not about selling it to somebody—it’s keeping it together.”</p>
<p>That meant creating a museum large enough to display the tons of rescued cargo. They consulted museum design firms; the lowest estimate was a staggering $5.5 million. The Hawleys didn’t have that kind of money, so with the help of extended family, friends and money borrowed from the bank, they built a 35,000-square-foot museum for less than half a million dollars with the can-do entrepreneurial spirit that characterizes the entire enterprise. And they did it without any state or federal support, something they are proud of.</p>
<p>The museum, near the landing where the Arabia made its last stop on its final voyage, now has 20 employees and about 80,000 visitors annually from around the world, but it’s still very much of a family affair. The Hawleys kept their day jobs as refrigerator repairmen, but father Bob and son David are often at the museum to welcome visitors, and Florence Hawley, Bob’s wife, runs the gift shop. Unfortunately, Greg passed away in 2009.</p>
<p>But before the new museum could open, the objects, now exposed to air and in danger of rapid deterioration, had to be conserved. While the Hawleys sought advice on how to do this, they stored objects in huge water-filled tubs, in caves and even in restaurant freezers. The U.S. curatorial and conservation establishment sniffed at these outsiders. But help was at hand in several conservation labs in Sweden, Canada and the United Kingdom, from which the Hawleys learned how to preserve the Arabia’s contents. In turn, they taught volunteer conservators who still work on thousands of items yet to be treated, and their lab is now part of the museum tour.</p>
<p>The museum’s collection is an Aladdin’s cave of objects from the year 1856, ranging from the Arabia’s towering paddlewheel and huge boilers to thousands of tiny buttons in countless patterns and colors. Rather than paying for high-price museum design consultants, the entrepreneurial Hawleys studied department-store design to display the Arabia’s goods in the most eye-appealing manner.</p>
<p>Much of what was needed to build the American West is on exhibition: a carpentry shop; axes, wood planes, window glass, nails, locks, door knobs. There are pistols, rifles—possibly being smuggled to abolitionists in the Kansas Territory—hundreds of pocket knifes, and innumerable Indian trade beads.</p>
<p>Here also are the pioneers’ daily needs. To clothe them: boots and shoes—including some made of rubber, the earliest ever found—bolts of cloth, hundreds of beaver hats, pants and dresses, all looking like they were made yesterday. To light their houses: 3,000 tallow candles and faceted-glass whale-oil lamps and flasks. To cook their food: pots, pans, muffin tins, and skillets. To sate their hunger and thirst: spiced pigs’ feet and sardines, pie fillings, pickles (still-edible), kegs of ale, whiskey. To stock their medicine cabinets: castor oil, Barrell’s Indian Liniment, and dozens of medicine bottles still filled with unknown liquids of dubious curative value.</p>
<p>Along with the necessities, the Arabia carried luxury goods not usually associated with life on the frontier. Bottles of still-fragrant perfumes, champagne, silk cloth and brandied cherries from France, along with hundreds of beautiful pieces of patterned porcelain tableware from England, show the desire for international finery, even on the remote Missouri. Other luxury goods, including jewelry and silk dresses, were produced in the U.S. and brought to St. Louis for shipment up river.</p>
<p>Thanks to the Hawleys’ extraordinary discovery and selflessness, these objects from Arabia’s hold now revivify history with an exceptional intensity. Most are the simple things touched by the adventurous men and women of 1856, for whom the frontier held the bright promise of a new life somewhere along the Missouri’s watery highway to the edge of America.</p>
<p>Bruce Cole is a senior fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center.&#160;</p> | false | 1 | 1987 group treasure hunters discovered steamboat buried deep kansas cornfield arabia sidewheeler whose hull pierced submerged tree sept 5 1856 near parkville mo 6 miles north kansas city ship three years old embarked st louis steaming westward missouri deliver merchandise 16 frontier towns cargo included 20000 feet lumber 4000 shoes boots two prefab homes destined logan neb sawmill fixtures case otard dupuy amp co cognac although arabia went 15 feet water 130 passengers reached shore ships skiffthe fatality mule tied deck within days missouris silt began engulf wreck within weeks ship sunk sight recent trip kansas city marveled thousands objects sidewheeler display fascinating steamboat arabia museum story got almost enthralling objects began treasure hunters bob hawley sons david greg began search wreck hearing tales sinking arabias manifest crewmember gave st louis newspaper shortly sinking hawleys learned locations steamboat visit carrying names merchants awaiting goods consulted 19thcentury map marking sites shipwrecks river zeroed cornfield parkville location thought arabia buried years missouri meandered half mile ship went rivers thick silt turned site farmland metal detector located iron boilers test bores found perimeters ship around hawleys dug series wells 65 feet began pumping huge amounts ground water 20 pumps ran day night four months removing 20000 gallons minute excavation able fully uncover arabia amazingly mud covering boat created oxygenfree environment perfectly preserved cargo providing unique time capsule american west eve civil war last box dug ships hold backbreaking months labor freezing waterlogged wintertime excavation ended hawleys realized could bring sell arabias contents became caretakers instead treasure hunters understood real wealth collection selling somebodyits keeping together meant creating museum large enough display tons rescued cargo consulted museum design firms lowest estimate staggering 55 million hawleys didnt kind money help extended family friends money borrowed bank built 35000squarefoot museum less half million dollars cando entrepreneurial spirit characterizes entire enterprise without state federal support something proud museum near landing arabia made last stop final voyage 20 employees 80000 visitors annually around world still much family affair hawleys kept day jobs refrigerator repairmen father bob son david often museum welcome visitors florence hawley bobs wife runs gift shop unfortunately greg passed away 2009 new museum could open objects exposed air danger rapid deterioration conserved hawleys sought advice stored objects huge waterfilled tubs caves even restaurant freezers us curatorial conservation establishment sniffed outsiders help hand several conservation labs sweden canada united kingdom hawleys learned preserve arabias contents turn taught volunteer conservators still work thousands items yet treated lab part museum tour museums collection aladdins cave objects year 1856 ranging arabias towering paddlewheel huge boilers thousands tiny buttons countless patterns colors rather paying highprice museum design consultants entrepreneurial hawleys studied departmentstore design display arabias goods eyeappealing manner much needed build american west exhibition carpentry shop axes wood planes window glass nails locks door knobs pistols riflespossibly smuggled abolitionists kansas territoryhundreds pocket knifes innumerable indian trade beads also pioneers daily needs clothe boots shoesincluding made rubber earliest ever foundbolts cloth hundreds beaver hats pants dresses looking like made yesterday light houses 3000 tallow candles facetedglass whaleoil lamps flasks cook food pots pans muffin tins skillets sate hunger thirst spiced pigs feet sardines pie fillings pickles stilledible kegs ale whiskey stock medicine cabinets castor oil barrells indian liniment dozens medicine bottles still filled unknown liquids dubious curative value along necessities arabia carried luxury goods usually associated life frontier bottles stillfragrant perfumes champagne silk cloth brandied cherries france along hundreds beautiful pieces patterned porcelain tableware england show desire international finery even remote missouri luxury goods including jewelry silk dresses produced us brought st louis shipment river thanks hawleys extraordinary discovery selflessness objects arabias hold revivify history exceptional intensity simple things touched adventurous men women 1856 frontier held bright promise new life somewhere along missouris watery highway edge america bruce cole senior fellow ethics public policy center160 | 634 |
<p>WASHINGTON — In the latest intensification of partisan hostilities, Republicans passed President Donald Trump’s picks to be Treasury and health secretaries through a Senate committee Wednesday <a href="" type="internal">with no Democrats present</a> after unilaterally suspending panel rules that would have otherwise prevented the vote.</p>
<p>By a pair of 14-0 roll calls, the Senate Finance Committee approved Rep. Tom Price, R-Ga., to be Health and Human Services secretary and banker Steve Mnuchin to be Treasury secretary. Both nominations must be confirmed by the full Senate.</p>
<p>The GOP’s show of brute political muscle came shortly before a testy session of the Senate Judiciary Committee at which lawmakers approved Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., to be attorney general. Later Wednesday, the full Senate planned to vote on confirming Rex Tillerson, the former Exxon Mobil CEO, as secretary of state.</p>
<p>Republicans and Democrats have battled virtually nonstop since Trump entered the White House 12 days ago over his refugee ban, his firing of the acting attorney general and GOP plans to erase former President Barack Obama’s health care law.</p>
<p>With Republicans controlling both the White House and Congress for the first time in a decade, the GOP display of strength seemed to signal that the party will do all it can to block Democratic attempts to frustrate them.</p>
<p>Democrats had boycotted Wednesday’s abruptly called Finance Committee meeting, as they’d done for a session a day earlier, demanding more time to question the two men about their past financial practices.</p>
<p>Before approving the two nominees, the committee’s Republicans voted 14-0 to temporarily suspend a rule requiring at least one Democrat to be present for any votes. Committee Chairman Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, said the Senate parliamentarian had approved the extraordinary tactic and blamed it on Democrats, saying their boycott was “one of the most pathetic things I’ve ever seen” and “a nefarious breach of protocol.”</p>
<p>In a written statement, top Finance panel Democrat Ron Wyden of Oregon said, “It’s deeply troubling to me that Republicans on the Finance Committee chose to break the rules in the face of strong evidence of two nominees’ serious ethical problems</p>
<p>In a letter, Finance panel Democrats sent to Hatch early Wednesday, they wrote that they were not attending meetings because “both nominees have yet to answer important questions that impact the American people” about their financial backgrounds and submitted questions for them to answer. They also cited “significant concerns that both Mr. Mnuchin and Congressman Price gave inaccurate and misleading testimony and responses to questions to the Committee.”</p>
<p>In confirmed by the full Senate, Price would lead Republican efforts to erase Obama’s health law. Democrats cited a newspaper report that officials of an Australian biomed company said Price received a special offer to buy their stock at a reduced cost, despite Price’s congressional testimony that the offer was available to all investors.</p>
<p>Democrats also said a bank run by Mnuchin used a process for handling home foreclosures that critics have associated with fraud.</p>
<p>Both men and congressional Republicans said they’d done nothing wrong.</p>
<p>Separately, the Judiciary committee used a party-line 11-9 vote to sendSessions’ nomination to be attorney general to the full Senate. At that session, Sens. Al Franken, D-Minn., and John Cornyn, R-Texas, argued angrily over previous committee testimony and Franken complained that his integrity had been abused.</p>
<p>Democrats had scuttled a planned vote Tuesday in the wake of Trump’s decision to fire Acting Attorney General Sally Yates. Several Democrats said they had no confidence Sessions would be able to stand up to Trump.</p>
<p>Wednesday was just the latest instance of building tensions among Republicans and Democrats over Trump’s executive order on immigrants and refugees.</p>
<p>But Democrats lack the numbers in the Senate to block Tillerson from becoming the nation’s chief diplomat. Republicans hold a four-seat advantage and during a procedural vote Monday on the nomination, Democrats Joe Manchin of West Virginia, Heidi Heitkamp of North Dakota and Mark Warner of Virginia cast their ballots for Tillerson. They’re unlikely to change their minds.</p>
<p>Democrats boycotted a planned vote in the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee on Scott Pruitt, Oklahoma’s state attorney general in line to lead the Environmental Protection Agency. The vote was postponed.</p>
<p>In his current position, Pruitt has frequently sued the agency he hopes to lead, including a multistate lawsuit opposing the Obama administration’s plan to limit planet-warming carbon emissions from coal-fired power plants.</p>
<p>Like Trump, Pruitt has cast doubt on the extensive body of scientific evidence showing that the planet is warming and man-made carbon emissions are to blame. Pressed by Democrats in his Senate confirmation hearing in January, however, Pruitt said he disagreed with Trump’s earlier claims that global warming is a hoax created by the Chinese to harm the economic competitiveness of the United States.</p>
<p>Another panel postponed a vote on Trump’s pick to head the White House Budget Office, tea party Rep. Mick Mulvaney, R-S.C., as Democrats asked for more time to read the nominee’s FBI file.</p> | false | 1 | washington latest intensification partisan hostilities republicans passed president donald trumps picks treasury health secretaries senate committee wednesday democrats present unilaterally suspending panel rules would otherwise prevented vote pair 140 roll calls senate finance committee approved rep tom price rga health human services secretary banker steve mnuchin treasury secretary nominations must confirmed full senate gops show brute political muscle came shortly testy session senate judiciary committee lawmakers approved sen jeff sessions rala attorney general later wednesday full senate planned vote confirming rex tillerson former exxon mobil ceo secretary state republicans democrats battled virtually nonstop since trump entered white house 12 days ago refugee ban firing acting attorney general gop plans erase former president barack obamas health care law republicans controlling white house congress first time decade gop display strength seemed signal party block democratic attempts frustrate democrats boycotted wednesdays abruptly called finance committee meeting theyd done session day earlier demanding time question two men past financial practices approving two nominees committees republicans voted 140 temporarily suspend rule requiring least one democrat present votes committee chairman orrin hatch rutah said senate parliamentarian approved extraordinary tactic blamed democrats saying boycott one pathetic things ive ever seen nefarious breach protocol written statement top finance panel democrat ron wyden oregon said deeply troubling republicans finance committee chose break rules face strong evidence two nominees serious ethical problems letter finance panel democrats sent hatch early wednesday wrote attending meetings nominees yet answer important questions impact american people financial backgrounds submitted questions answer also cited significant concerns mr mnuchin congressman price gave inaccurate misleading testimony responses questions committee confirmed full senate price would lead republican efforts erase obamas health law democrats cited newspaper report officials australian biomed company said price received special offer buy stock reduced cost despite prices congressional testimony offer available investors democrats also said bank run mnuchin used process handling home foreclosures critics associated fraud men congressional republicans said theyd done nothing wrong separately judiciary committee used partyline 119 vote sendsessions nomination attorney general full senate session sens al franken dminn john cornyn rtexas argued angrily previous committee testimony franken complained integrity abused democrats scuttled planned vote tuesday wake trumps decision fire acting attorney general sally yates several democrats said confidence sessions would able stand trump wednesday latest instance building tensions among republicans democrats trumps executive order immigrants refugees democrats lack numbers senate block tillerson becoming nations chief diplomat republicans hold fourseat advantage procedural vote monday nomination democrats joe manchin west virginia heidi heitkamp north dakota mark warner virginia cast ballots tillerson theyre unlikely change minds democrats boycotted planned vote senate environment public works committee scott pruitt oklahomas state attorney general line lead environmental protection agency vote postponed current position pruitt frequently sued agency hopes lead including multistate lawsuit opposing obama administrations plan limit planetwarming carbon emissions coalfired power plants like trump pruitt cast doubt extensive body scientific evidence showing planet warming manmade carbon emissions blame pressed democrats senate confirmation hearing january however pruitt said disagreed trumps earlier claims global warming hoax created chinese harm economic competitiveness united states another panel postponed vote trumps pick head white house budget office tea party rep mick mulvaney rsc democrats asked time read nominees fbi file | 529 |
<p>ALAMEDA, Calif. — <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Derek-Carr/" type="external">Derek Carr</a> understands there’s risk in involved in returning to the field so soon after fracturing a bone in his back.</p>
<p>Carr also knows the <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Oakland-Raiders/" type="external">Oakland Raiders</a> are 2-3, having lost three straight games, and that his team needs him.</p>
<p>“The thing that pushed me to want to play is I wanted to win,” Carr said Wednesday as the Raiders began preparations to host the Los Angeles Chargers. “I wanted to show my teammates and my coaches that no matter what, I’m going to do anything I can for my team, to show our city and our organization that it doesn’t matter what happens, I’m going to do everything I can to be out there.”</p>
<p>Carr sustained a fractured transverse process in his back on Oct. 1 in a 16-10 loss to Denver. He sat out a 30-17 loss to the <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Baltimore-Ravens/" type="external">Baltimore Ravens</a> with EJ Manuel starting at quarterback, the Raiders’ third loss in a row.</p>
<p>But not before pushing head coach <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Jack_Del_Rio/" type="external">Jack Del Rio</a> about the possibility of playing.</p>
<p>“I was ready to play last week in my head,” Carr said. “I think that’s how I always think. We’ll let the coach make that decision. My job is to show up every day. Nothing changes for us. I just have to go out and practice hard, show him I’m ready.”</p>
<p>At one point during the Ravens loss, Manuel took a vicious shot in the back on a sack. Carr was asked about the play and the risk associated with playing and cited his own experiences with broken bones.</p>
<p>“You know, I think any time you take a hit like that there’s always a chance for anything,” Carr said. “There’s the risk that we take every time we take the field. It’s a violent game we play. More violent than people realize watching on TV. You could get hit. You could break your ankle, too. You could break your finger.”</p>
<p>Del Rio said Carr would be watched closely during the week, but anticipated the quarterback would be ready to go.</p>
<p>“We have to make good decisions, sound decisions, for the quarterback,” Del Rio said. “Nothing changes. If the doctors give him the green light and he’s prepared to play and protect himself, then he’s going to go.”</p>
<p>Of concern other than Carr’s health is the fact that he wasn’t playing up to his 2016 standard before he was injured. He was 19 of 31 for 118 yards, a touchdown and two interceptions in a 27-10 loss to Washington, and then 10 of 18 for 143 yards against Denver – with 64 of those yards coming on a single touchdown pass to Johnny Holton.</p>
<p>“You look back at Washington and felt that was an anomaly,” Carr said. “Then you look at the Denver game and we did some good things against a real good defense. We had a chance to win; against that defense all you can ask for is a chance.”</p>
<p>The challenge against the Chargers will be pain tolerance.</p>
<p>“I mean, it just hurts,” Carr said. “There’s really nothing much more to it. It’s not like, ‘Oh, man, if I take a hit, I’m worried.’ It’s not a worry. It’s just one of those things you deal with. Just like everybody in the NFL right now.”</p>
<p>SERIES HISTORY: 115th regular-season meeting, Raiders lead series, 62-50-2 and have won the last four meetings. The Raiders won the last meeting 19-16 at Qualcomm Stadium as <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Sebastian_Janikowski/" type="external">Sebastian Janikowski</a> kicked four field goals and Derek Carr threw a 13-yard touchdown pass to <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Michael_Crabtree/" type="external">Michael Crabtree</a>. The Raiders won the last meeting in Oakland 34-31 with Carr completing 25 of 40 passes for 317 yards and two touchdowns and <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Amari-Cooper/" type="external">Amari Cooper</a> had six catches for 138 yards and a touchdown. Chargers last win was Nov. 16, 2014 in San Diego, prevailing 13-6 with the Raiders falling to 0-10. They would win their next game against Kansas City and finish 3-13.</p>
<p>–A big problem for the Raiders has been getting off to slow starts, having been outscored 38-17 in the first quarter. Over the last three games, that margin is 31-3.</p>
<p>“We’re so uptight,” left tackle Donald Penn said. “We expected to have a different start to these first five games. I think we need to take a deep breath and relax. We’re so on edge. We don’t want to make a mistake. We just want everything to be perfect, and in this game, it’s not going to be that way.”</p>
<p>–Cornerback Demetrius McCray, who last played in 2015 for Jacksonville, was signed as the Raiders battle depth issues at cornerback.</p>
<p>Starting cornerback <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/David-Amerson/" type="external">David Amerson</a> missed the Baltimore game with concussion symptoms and Gareon Conley has been inactive the last two games with a shin injury.</p>
<p>Antonio Hamilton was the latest casualty with a knee injury. The position is so thin that <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Sean_Smith/" type="external">Sean Smith</a>, who has struggled all season, can’t be taken from the lineup.</p>
<p>McCray went through training camp with Seattle before being put on injured reserve and then getting an injury settlement to become a free agent.</p>
<p>“I tried to keep an open mind to all teams, but (when I) saw the injuries I had a good idea I’d be a Raider,” McCray said.</p>
<p>–The protracted slump of wide receiver Amari Cooper isn’t because the wide receiver is failing to get open, according to head coach Jack Del Rio.</p>
<p>“I saw five wide-open (looks), shook his guy, was open in space,” Del Rio said. “I would have loved to see that ball get to him delivered there. Not every play is designed to go to him. You can’t see everybody at one time.</p>
<p>“Sometimes you start your read somewhere else and you don’t make it back for whatever reason. He was doing his part to create space and opportunity for the quarterback. We just missed him.”</p>
<p>Cooper confirmed he was indeed open, but has no plans to campaign for some extra looks.</p>
<p>“The ball will find me,” Cooper said.</p>
<p>–Probably most galling to the Raiders in their three-game losing streak is that they’ve been out-muscled for the most part at the line of scrimmage on both sides of the ball. Both Del Rio and general manager Reggie McKenzie are firm believers in being bigger and stronger at the point of attack.</p>
<p>That was most definitely the case against Washington, and, surprisingly, against Baltimore.</p>
<p>“I thought they were better than us in the trenches,” Del Rio said. “They were a little more physical, which is unusual. We have really good offensive and defensive lines, but they were more physical.</p>
<p>“We lean on our trenches. I thought our linebackers and D-linemen, their offensive line got the best of us. Our offensive line gave some sacks. We generated some run game, but I don’t think we’re playing quite to the level we expect. That’s the core of what we’re going to be.”</p>
<p>–North Bay wildfires made the air quality so poor Wednesday that practice was cut short with no individual drills.</p>
<p>A series of fires have burned 42,000 acres with 21 deaths and hundreds missing. Cliff Branch, the former Raiders wide receiver, lost his home of 22 years to the fire in Santa Rosa.</p>
<p>The fires brought out a sense of perspective in Derek Carr, who spent his press session mostly talking about his back injury and the Raiders’ struggles.</p>
<p>“That kind of stuff, that’s real life,” Carr said. “That’s hard. Being 2-3 is not hard when you really think about it. Doing that kind of stuff, that’s really hard. Our prayers are with them that they can have peace and encouragement.”</p>
<p>NOTES: LB Cory James did not practice with a knee injury and his status is uncertain for the Chargers. … LB Marquel Lee did not practice with an ankle injury and his status is uncertain for the Chargers. … CB Gareon Conley did not practice with a shin injury and his status is uncertain for the Chargers. … FB Jamize Olawale did not practice and is in concussion protocol. … CB David Amerson was limited with a shoulder injury and has cleared concussion protocol. … TE <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Lee_Smith/" type="external">Lee Smith</a> did not participate in practice with a knee injury.</p> | false | 1 | alameda calif derek carr understands theres risk involved returning field soon fracturing bone back carr also knows oakland raiders 23 lost three straight games team needs thing pushed want play wanted win carr said wednesday raiders began preparations host los angeles chargers wanted show teammates coaches matter im going anything team show city organization doesnt matter happens im going everything carr sustained fractured transverse process back oct 1 1610 loss denver sat 3017 loss baltimore ravens ej manuel starting quarterback raiders third loss row pushing head coach jack del rio possibility playing ready play last week head carr said think thats always think well let coach make decision job show every day nothing changes us go practice hard show im ready one point ravens loss manuel took vicious shot back sack carr asked play risk associated playing cited experiences broken bones know think time take hit like theres always chance anything carr said theres risk take every time take field violent game play violent people realize watching tv could get hit could break ankle could break finger del rio said carr would watched closely week anticipated quarterback would ready go make good decisions sound decisions quarterback del rio said nothing changes doctors give green light hes prepared play protect hes going go concern carrs health fact wasnt playing 2016 standard injured 19 31 118 yards touchdown two interceptions 2710 loss washington 10 18 143 yards denver 64 yards coming single touchdown pass johnny holton look back washington felt anomaly carr said look denver game good things real good defense chance win defense ask chance challenge chargers pain tolerance mean hurts carr said theres really nothing much like oh man take hit im worried worry one things deal like everybody nfl right series history 115th regularseason meeting raiders lead series 62502 last four meetings raiders last meeting 1916 qualcomm stadium sebastian janikowski kicked four field goals derek carr threw 13yard touchdown pass michael crabtree raiders last meeting oakland 3431 carr completing 25 40 passes 317 yards two touchdowns amari cooper six catches 138 yards touchdown chargers last win nov 16 2014 san diego prevailing 136 raiders falling 010 would win next game kansas city finish 313 big problem raiders getting slow starts outscored 3817 first quarter last three games margin 313 uptight left tackle donald penn said expected different start first five games think need take deep breath relax edge dont want make mistake want everything perfect game going way cornerback demetrius mccray last played 2015 jacksonville signed raiders battle depth issues cornerback starting cornerback david amerson missed baltimore game concussion symptoms gareon conley inactive last two games shin injury antonio hamilton latest casualty knee injury position thin sean smith struggled season cant taken lineup mccray went training camp seattle put injured reserve getting injury settlement become free agent tried keep open mind teams saw injuries good idea id raider mccray said protracted slump wide receiver amari cooper isnt wide receiver failing get open according head coach jack del rio saw five wideopen looks shook guy open space del rio said would loved see ball get delivered every play designed go cant see everybody one time sometimes start read somewhere else dont make back whatever reason part create space opportunity quarterback missed cooper confirmed indeed open plans campaign extra looks ball find cooper said probably galling raiders threegame losing streak theyve outmuscled part line scrimmage sides ball del rio general manager reggie mckenzie firm believers bigger stronger point attack definitely case washington surprisingly baltimore thought better us trenches del rio said little physical unusual really good offensive defensive lines physical lean trenches thought linebackers dlinemen offensive line got best us offensive line gave sacks generated run game dont think playing quite level expect thats core going north bay wildfires made air quality poor wednesday practice cut short individual drills series fires burned 42000 acres 21 deaths hundreds missing cliff branch former raiders wide receiver lost home 22 years fire santa rosa fires brought sense perspective derek carr spent press session mostly talking back injury raiders struggles kind stuff thats real life carr said thats hard 23 hard really think kind stuff thats really hard prayers peace encouragement notes lb cory james practice knee injury status uncertain chargers lb marquel lee practice ankle injury status uncertain chargers cb gareon conley practice shin injury status uncertain chargers fb jamize olawale practice concussion protocol cb david amerson limited shoulder injury cleared concussion protocol te lee smith participate practice knee injury | 746 |
<p>LAKE FOREST, Ill. — <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Chicago_Bears/" type="external">Chicago Bears</a> quarterback <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Mitchell-Trubisky/" type="external">Mitchell Trubisky</a> spoke tongue in cheek during his first press conference since the postgame press conference after last week’s preseason, opener against Denver.</p>
<p>“I don’t know what you’re talking about,” Trubisky said when asked about last week’s hype over an 18-for-25 effort for 166 yards and a touchdown.</p>
<p>Trubisky put more weight on what he heard from family and friends.</p>
<p>“A couple more people texted me after the game – family congratulating me,” Trubisky said. “I think it’s just a small step in the right direction. I’ve still got a lot of work to do.</p>
<p>“I was pleased with how I played, but plenty more mistakes are going on during practice for me that I need to work on and continue to improve in my game and make sure when I go out there that I’m doing my job to help other people do their job.”</p>
<p>On Saturday, he might show more of what he can do against a blitz in the game against the Cardinals. The Broncos did blitz Trubisky a handful of times and he made them pay twice. However, Arizona lives by the blitz on defense.</p>
<p>“It’s tougher in practice than it was in the last game just because I don’t think in the preseason they wanted to throw a lot at us or show a lot per se,” Trubisky said. “But in practice, I’m seeing a lot of different blitzes and I think game-planning on a week-to-week basis will help picking up the blitzes and everything.</p>
<p>“But I’m doing a lot better job with the protection and getting it set, helping out my backs, making sure they’re either in protection or I’m getting them out in a route to help in the progression of the play. It’s all about getting set and getting the protection. So, I feel like I’m doing a lot better job of that.”</p>
<p>While Trubisky’s efforts made for some hysteria in Chicago, as if a long-awaited quarterback savior had finally arrived, it did something else for the Bears’ first-round draft pick.</p>
<p>“I think it just showed me that I’m making progress, that I could go out there and lead and do my job like I wanted to show,” Trubisky said. “But it was just a small sample; it was the first game; and you just gotta continue to be consistent in reproducing it. that’s why we’re out here working and practicing.”</p>
<p>–It’s been a long road back for running back <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Jeremy-Langford/" type="external">Jeremy Langford</a>, and now the Bears’ running back situation looks like more of a real roster battle.</p>
<p>Langford left with an ankle injury after three games last year as the starting running back, returned less than 100 percent, failed to finish, and hadn’t been seen on the field for any extent of time again until Wednesday’s first practice back at Halas Hall.</p>
<p>“It’s good to be back out there,” Langford said. “I count the blessings and it’s good to be back out there on the field with my pads on, with my teammates again.”</p>
<p>Langford had appeared ready to play, but suffered his ankle sprain during a walk-through. He had ankle surgery at the end of last season and has been out ever since, leaving it for <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Jordan-Howard/" type="external">Jordan Howard</a> to not only become the starter but one of the more highly rated running backs in the league.</p>
<p>“I guess I kind of was just worried about it too much and slipped and it got caught underneath me and sprained it,” Langford said.</p>
<p>Now he’ll compete with Ka’Deem Carey, Benny Cunningham and Tarik Cohen for what likely will be two or three roster spots.</p>
<p>“It’s very competitive,” Langford said. “It’s no worse than last year, no better than last year, but all of us in there are competing. We got some good players in there, good running backs.”</p>
<p>–Head coach <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/John_Fox/" type="external">John Fox</a> labeled <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Kyle-Long/" type="external">Kyle Long</a> remorseful after the Pro-Bowl guard was involved in two fights at the final Bourbonnais camp practice Monday (Aug. 14).</p>
<p>“It was obvious there was some remorse there,” Fox said. “He was embarrassed for himself and for the team. Those things happen. Our guys, we’ve got a bond and he’s one of our family and he’ll be treated as such, like any kind of thing that happens in a family.</p>
<p>“Guys adapt and respond and I think everything’s fine.”</p>
<p>Long had expressed frustration over being unable to practice at camp due to his recovery from extensive ankle surgery.</p>
<p>“I think any time a player’s injured, they get something that they love taken away from them,” Fox said. “There’s some pain and suffering that goes along with it and I’m sure those are things. But we have a lot of resources here. Kyle knows he’s loved here by his teammates and by everyone in the building.</p>
<p>“He’ll get through it and we talked about that and I think he feels confident in that.”</p>
<p>Long on Wednesday was sent to a doctor for examination of the ankle. At times, the Bears have given him one or two straight days off during camp because of the injury.</p>
<p>On Monday (Aug. 14), Long had expressed his frustration with watching while he was trying to learn a new guard spot on the left side.</p>
<p>“Well, I’ll tell you, it sucks,” Long said. “It sucks when you can’t be out there every team rep when you’re used to running off the field after a team period with the rest of the (first team) and I’m sitting over there in a hat watching. It sucks.</p>
<p>“I’m not going to sit here and lie to you. I love the game of <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/John_Walker/" type="external">football</a> and when it’s taken away from you and when you’re limited to just practicing against other O-linemen during individual (work), it’s tough.</p>
<p>“So, the more I can get on the field the better off I’ll be and I think that will be the way it is until I’m done playing the game.”</p>
<p>–Rookie running back Tarik Cohen is unique with his hands and ability to stop and start in the open field. But he isn’t one of a kind. Cohen has a twin brother, Tyrell, who used to play football.</p>
<p>Tyrell and his young family came to see Tarik at North Carolina A&amp;T after the Bears drafted him and Tyrell issued a challenge after Tarik did an interview.</p>
<p>“He was like, ‘Man, I still think I’m faster than you,'” Cohen recalled.</p>
<p>Tyrell challenged Tarik to a race.</p>
<p>“And we just got on the field and took our shoes off, barefoot, just racing down the field,” Tarik said. “Oh yeah, I won.”</p>
<p>–The Bears’ kicking battle is being billed as <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Connor-Barth/" type="external">Connor Barth</a>– <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Roberto-Aguayo/" type="external">Roberto Aguayo</a>, the fight that should have been. Barth was cut by the Bucs last year three days after they drafted Aguayo in the second round without a camp battle.</p>
<p>But Aguayo missed 7-of-11 from 40 yards or longer last year and when he struggled in the first preseason game, the Bucs were willing to admit they’d made a mistake by trading up to take a kicker in Round 2.</p>
<p>Barth has been extremely sharp in practice since Aguayo signed and became his competition for a job.</p>
<p>“There’s two ways you can take it,” Barth said. “You can either have a mental breakdown and go into a hole and it’s over, or you can step up and, like I’ve said, my parents have always said, ‘Bring on the competition.’ And that’s what I’ve always done.”</p>
<p>Barth insisted he had pressure anyway.</p>
<p>“It doesn’t matter if he’s here or not,” Barth said. “If he wasn’t here today, I still need to go out and make my kicks. At the end of the day, you’ve got to be 85 or 90 percent or better to stay in this league. So, you just have to go out there and make kicks.”</p> | false | 1 | lake forest ill chicago bears quarterback mitchell trubisky spoke tongue cheek first press conference since postgame press conference last weeks preseason opener denver dont know youre talking trubisky said asked last weeks hype 18for25 effort 166 yards touchdown trubisky put weight heard family friends couple people texted game family congratulating trubisky said think small step right direction ive still got lot work pleased played plenty mistakes going practice need work continue improve game make sure go im job help people job saturday might show blitz game cardinals broncos blitz trubisky handful times made pay twice however arizona lives blitz defense tougher practice last game dont think preseason wanted throw lot us show lot per se trubisky said practice im seeing lot different blitzes think gameplanning weektoweek basis help picking blitzes everything im lot better job protection getting set helping backs making sure theyre either protection im getting route help progression play getting set getting protection feel like im lot better job trubiskys efforts made hysteria chicago longawaited quarterback savior finally arrived something else bears firstround draft pick think showed im making progress could go lead job like wanted show trubisky said small sample first game got ta continue consistent reproducing thats working practicing long road back running back jeremy langford bears running back situation looks like real roster battle langford left ankle injury three games last year starting running back returned less 100 percent failed finish hadnt seen field extent time wednesdays first practice back halas hall good back langford said count blessings good back field pads teammates langford appeared ready play suffered ankle sprain walkthrough ankle surgery end last season ever since leaving jordan howard become starter one highly rated running backs league guess kind worried much slipped got caught underneath sprained langford said hell compete kadeem carey benny cunningham tarik cohen likely two three roster spots competitive langford said worse last year better last year us competing got good players good running backs head coach john fox labeled kyle long remorseful probowl guard involved two fights final bourbonnais camp practice monday aug 14 obvious remorse fox said embarrassed team things happen guys weve got bond hes one family hell treated like kind thing happens family guys adapt respond think everythings fine long expressed frustration unable practice camp due recovery extensive ankle surgery think time players injured get something love taken away fox said theres pain suffering goes along im sure things lot resources kyle knows hes loved teammates everyone building hell get talked think feels confident long wednesday sent doctor examination ankle times bears given one two straight days camp injury monday aug 14 long expressed frustration watching trying learn new guard spot left side well ill tell sucks long said sucks cant every team rep youre used running field team period rest first team im sitting hat watching sucks im going sit lie love game football taken away youre limited practicing olinemen individual work tough get field better ill think way im done playing game rookie running back tarik cohen unique hands ability stop start open field isnt one kind cohen twin brother tyrell used play football tyrell young family came see tarik north carolina aampt bears drafted tyrell issued challenge tarik interview like man still think im faster cohen recalled tyrell challenged tarik race got field took shoes barefoot racing field tarik said oh yeah bears kicking battle billed connor barth roberto aguayo fight barth cut bucs last year three days drafted aguayo second round without camp battle aguayo missed 7of11 40 yards longer last year struggled first preseason game bucs willing admit theyd made mistake trading take kicker round 2 barth extremely sharp practice since aguayo signed became competition job theres two ways take barth said either mental breakdown go hole step like ive said parents always said bring competition thats ive always done barth insisted pressure anyway doesnt matter hes barth said wasnt today still need go make kicks end day youve got 85 90 percent better stay league go make kicks | 668 |
<p />
<p>Long ago, Qaddafi forfeited the legitimacy of his rule, creating the political conditions for an appropriate revolutionary challenge. Recently, he has confirmed this assessment, referring to his own people as ‘rats and dogs’ or ‘cockroaches,’ and employing the bloodthirsty and vengeful language of a demented tyrant. Such a tragic imposition of political abuse on the Libyan experience is a painful reality that exists beyond any reasonable doubt; but does it validate a UN authorized military intervention carried out by a revived partnership of those old colonial partners, France and Britain, and their post-colonial American imperial overseer? I think not.</p>
<p>Let us begin with the unknowns and uncertainties. There is no coherent political identity that can be confidently ascribed to the various anti-Qaddafi forces, loosely referred to as ‘rebels.’ Just who are they, whom do they represent, and what are their political aspirations? It is worth observing that unlike the other regional events of 2011, the Libyan rising did not start as a popular movement of a spontaneous character, or a specific reaction to some incident as in Tunisia. It seemed, although there is some ambiguity in the media reports, that the Libyan oppositional movement was violent from the start, and was more in the nature of a traditional insurrection against the established order than a popular revolution inspired by democratic values. Such a political reaction to Qaddafi’s regime seems fully justified as an expression of Libyan self-determination, and likely deserves encouragement from world public opinion. By and large, the international community did not resort to interventionary threats and actions until the domestic tide turned in favor of Tripoli, which means that intervention was called upon to overcome the apparent growing likelihood that Qaddafi would reestablish order in his favor.</p>
<p>The main pretext given for the intervention was the vulnerability of Libyan civilians to the wrath of the Qaddafi regime. But there was little evidence of such wrath beyond the regime’s expected defense of the established order, although admittedly being here undertaken in a brutal manner, which itself is not unusual in such situation. How is this different than the tactics relied upon by the regimes in Yemen and Bahrain, and in the face of far less of a threat to the status quo, and even that taking the form of political resistance, not military action? In Libya the opposition forces were relying almost from the outset on heavy weapons, while elsewhere in the region the people were in the streets in massive numbers, and mostly with no weapons, and in a few instances, with very primitive ones (stones, simple guns) that were used in retaliation for regime violence. It may have been the case that the Libyan governmental response was predictably brutal and militarist, and that the rebel opposition felt that it had no choice. But it should have been clear from the experiences in Iraq and Afghanistan that military intervention against a hated and brutal regime is not the end of the story, and before the ending is reached violence cascades to heights far beyond what would have likely resulted had there been no intervention producing heavy civilian casualties and massive displacements among the population. In effect, overall historical trends vindicate trust in the dynamics of self-determination, even if short-term disasters may and do occur, and similarly underscores the problematic character of intervention, even given the purest of motivations, which rarely, if ever, exists in world politics.</p>
<p>But it can be asked, what about Rwanda, Bosnia (especially, the massacre at Srebrenica)? Are not these instances where humanitarian intervention should have been undertaken and was not? And didn’t the NATO War in Kosovo demonstrate that humanitarian intervention does sometimes spare a vulnerable population from the ordeal of genocidal ethnic cleansing? With respect to Rwanda and Bosnia, the threat of genocidal behavior was clearly established, and could likely have been prevented by a relatively small-scale intervention, and should have been undertaken despite the uncertainties. The facts surrounding the alleged genocidal threat in Kosovo remain contested, but there was a plausible basis for taking it seriously given what had happened a few years earlier in Bosnia. But just as the Libyan rebels raise some suspicion by seeking Euro-American military intervention, so did the KLA in Kosovo engage in terrorist provocations that led to violent Serb responses, allegedly setting the stage in 1999 for NATO’s ‘coalition of the willing.’ NATO went ahead in Kosovo without the benefit of a Security Council mandate, as here, for military action ‘by all necessary means.’ But with respect to Libya, there is no firm evidence of a genocidal intention on Qaddafi’s, no humanitarian catastrophe in the making, and not even clear indications of the extent of civilian casualties resulting from the fighting. We should be asking: why did Russia signal its intention to veto such authorization in relation to Kosovo, but not with respect to Libya? Perhaps, the Russian sense of identification with Serb interests goes a long way to explain its opportunistic pattern of standing in the way or standing aside when interventionary forces gather a head of steam.</p>
<p>One of the mysteries surrounding the Libyan intervention is why China and Russia expressed their opposition by abstaining rather than using their veto, why South Africa voted with the majority, and why Germany, India, and Brazil were content to abstain, yet seemed to express reservations sufficient to cast ‘no’ votes that would have deprived the interventionists of the nine affirmative votes that they needed to obtain authorization. Generally, the veto is used promiscuously, as recently by the United States to shield Israel from condemnation for their settlement policy; but here the veto could have prevented a non-defensive and destructive military action that at this stage seems imprudent and almost certain in the future to be regarded as a poor precedent.</p>
<p>The American debate on the use of force was more complex than usual, and cut across party lines. Three positions are worth distinguishing: realists, moral interventionists, moral and legal anti-interventionists. The realists, who usually carry the day when military issues arise in foreign policy debates, on this occasion warned against the intervention, saying it was too uncertain in its effects and costs, that the U.S. was already overstretched in its overseas commitments, and that there were few American strategic interests involved.</p>
<p>The moral interventionists, who were in control during the Bush II years, triumphantly reemerged in the company of hawkish Democrats such as Hillary Clinton and Joseph Biden, eventually prevailed in the debate,&#160; probably thanks to the push from London and Paris, the acquiescence of the Arab neighbors, and the loss of will on the part of Moscow and Beijing. It is hard to find a war that Republicans do not endorse, especially if the enemy can be personalized and demonized as Qaddafi has been, and there is some oil in the ground! The anti-interventionists, who doubt the current effectiveness of hard power tactics, especially under Western auspices, were outmaneuvered, especially at the United Nations and in the sensationalist media that confused the Qaddafi horror show for no brainer/slam dunk reasoning as to the question of intervention, treating it as a question of ‘how,’ rather than ‘whether,’ again failing to fulfill their role in a democratic society by giving no attention to the anti-intervention viewpoint.</p>
<p>Finally, there arises the question of the UN authorization. The way international law is generally understood, there is no doubt that the Security Council vote, however questionable on political grounds, resolves the legal debate within the UN. An earlier World Court decision, ironically involving Libya, concluded that even when the UN Security Council disregards relevant norms of international law, its decisions are binding and authoritative. Here, the Security Council has reached a decision supportive of military intervention that is legal, but not legitimate, being neither politically prudent nor morally acceptable. The states that abstained acted irresponsibly, or put differently, did not uphold either the spirit or letter of the Charter. The Charter in Article 2(7) accepts the limitation on UN authority to intervene in matters ‘essentially within the domestic jurisdiction’ of member states unless there is a genuine issue of international peace and security present, which there was not, even in the claim, which was supposedly motivated solely to protect the civilian population of Libya. But such a claim was patently misleading and disingenuous, as the obvious goals, manifest from the scale and character of military actions taken, were minimally to protect the armed rebels from being defeated, and possibly destroyed, and maximally, to achieve a regime change resulting in a new governing leadership that was friendly to the West, including buying fully into its liberal economic geopolitical policy compass.</p>
<p>Using a slightly altered language, the UN Charter embedded a social contract with its membership that privileged the politics of self-determination and was heavily weighted against the politics of intervention. Neither position is absolute, but what seems to have happened with respect to Libya is that intervention was privileged and self-determination cast aside. It is an instance of normatively dubious practice trumping the legal/moral ethos of containing geopolitical discretion with binding rules governing the use of force and the duty of non-intervention.&#160; We do not know yet what will happen in Libya, but we do know enough to oppose such a precedent that exhibits so many unfortunate characteristics.&#160; It is time to restore the global social contract between territorial sovereign states and the organized international community, which not only corresponds with the outlawry of aggressive war but also reflect the movement of history in support of the soft power struggles of the non-Western peoples of the world.</p> | false | 1 | long ago qaddafi forfeited legitimacy rule creating political conditions appropriate revolutionary challenge recently confirmed assessment referring people rats dogs cockroaches employing bloodthirsty vengeful language demented tyrant tragic imposition political abuse libyan experience painful reality exists beyond reasonable doubt validate un authorized military intervention carried revived partnership old colonial partners france britain postcolonial american imperial overseer think let us begin unknowns uncertainties coherent political identity confidently ascribed various antiqaddafi forces loosely referred rebels represent political aspirations worth observing unlike regional events 2011 libyan rising start popular movement spontaneous character specific reaction incident tunisia seemed although ambiguity media reports libyan oppositional movement violent start nature traditional insurrection established order popular revolution inspired democratic values political reaction qaddafis regime seems fully justified expression libyan selfdetermination likely deserves encouragement world public opinion large international community resort interventionary threats actions domestic tide turned favor tripoli means intervention called upon overcome apparent growing likelihood qaddafi would reestablish order favor main pretext given intervention vulnerability libyan civilians wrath qaddafi regime little evidence wrath beyond regimes expected defense established order although admittedly undertaken brutal manner unusual situation different tactics relied upon regimes yemen bahrain face far less threat status quo even taking form political resistance military action libya opposition forces relying almost outset heavy weapons elsewhere region people streets massive numbers mostly weapons instances primitive ones stones simple guns used retaliation regime violence may case libyan governmental response predictably brutal militarist rebel opposition felt choice clear experiences iraq afghanistan military intervention hated brutal regime end story ending reached violence cascades heights far beyond would likely resulted intervention producing heavy civilian casualties massive displacements among population effect overall historical trends vindicate trust dynamics selfdetermination even shortterm disasters may occur similarly underscores problematic character intervention even given purest motivations rarely ever exists world politics asked rwanda bosnia especially massacre srebrenica instances humanitarian intervention undertaken didnt nato war kosovo demonstrate humanitarian intervention sometimes spare vulnerable population ordeal genocidal ethnic cleansing respect rwanda bosnia threat genocidal behavior clearly established could likely prevented relatively smallscale intervention undertaken despite uncertainties facts surrounding alleged genocidal threat kosovo remain contested plausible basis taking seriously given happened years earlier bosnia libyan rebels raise suspicion seeking euroamerican military intervention kla kosovo engage terrorist provocations led violent serb responses allegedly setting stage 1999 natos coalition willing nato went ahead kosovo without benefit security council mandate military action necessary means respect libya firm evidence genocidal intention qaddafis humanitarian catastrophe making even clear indications extent civilian casualties resulting fighting asking russia signal intention veto authorization relation kosovo respect libya perhaps russian sense identification serb interests goes long way explain opportunistic pattern standing way standing aside interventionary forces gather head steam one mysteries surrounding libyan intervention china russia expressed opposition abstaining rather using veto south africa voted majority germany india brazil content abstain yet seemed express reservations sufficient cast votes would deprived interventionists nine affirmative votes needed obtain authorization generally veto used promiscuously recently united states shield israel condemnation settlement policy veto could prevented nondefensive destructive military action stage seems imprudent almost certain future regarded poor precedent american debate use force complex usual cut across party lines three positions worth distinguishing realists moral interventionists moral legal antiinterventionists realists usually carry day military issues arise foreign policy debates occasion warned intervention saying uncertain effects costs us already overstretched overseas commitments american strategic interests involved moral interventionists control bush ii years triumphantly reemerged company hawkish democrats hillary clinton joseph biden eventually prevailed debate160 probably thanks push london paris acquiescence arab neighbors loss part moscow beijing hard find war republicans endorse especially enemy personalized demonized qaddafi oil ground antiinterventionists doubt current effectiveness hard power tactics especially western auspices outmaneuvered especially united nations sensationalist media confused qaddafi horror show brainerslam dunk reasoning question intervention treating question rather whether failing fulfill role democratic society giving attention antiintervention viewpoint finally arises question un authorization way international law generally understood doubt security council vote however questionable political grounds resolves legal debate within un earlier world court decision ironically involving libya concluded even un security council disregards relevant norms international law decisions binding authoritative security council reached decision supportive military intervention legal legitimate neither politically prudent morally acceptable states abstained acted irresponsibly put differently uphold either spirit letter charter charter article 27 accepts limitation un authority intervene matters essentially within domestic jurisdiction member states unless genuine issue international peace security present even claim supposedly motivated solely protect civilian population libya claim patently misleading disingenuous obvious goals manifest scale character military actions taken minimally protect armed rebels defeated possibly destroyed maximally achieve regime change resulting new governing leadership friendly west including buying fully liberal economic geopolitical policy compass using slightly altered language un charter embedded social contract membership privileged politics selfdetermination heavily weighted politics intervention neither position absolute seems happened respect libya intervention privileged selfdetermination cast aside instance normatively dubious practice trumping legalmoral ethos containing geopolitical discretion binding rules governing use force duty nonintervention160 know yet happen libya know enough oppose precedent exhibits many unfortunate characteristics160 time restore global social contract territorial sovereign states organized international community corresponds outlawry aggressive war also reflect movement history support soft power struggles nonwestern peoples world | 851 |
<p />
<p>For the most part, these were gross exaggerations or convenient fictions aimed to allow him to make a point he couldn't otherwise support. How to answer the charge that he and Obama voted for a budget resolution that called for taxing Americans making $42,000? Assert that John McCain voted for it too, although he didn't. How to argue that we're paying no attention to Afghanistan? Claim repeatedly that we spend more in Iraq in three weeks than we have spent in Afghanistan in seven years, although that's very far from true. How to explain his vote for the Iraq war in light of his subsequent views? Say it wasn't a war resolution, though it was. And on and on Joe went.</p>
<p>One set of distortions in particular, however, seemed like more than extemporaneous exaggeration. Biden offered several criticisms of John McCain's health-care plan which tracked precisely with the line of attack the Obama campaign has taken up against the plan in recent days, and which are flatly untrue and deceptive. The Deregulation CanardThe approach involved two basic elements. First, after (somehow) implicitly attributing the current financial crisis to deregulation, Biden argued that McCain wants to do the same thing to the health care sector and so presumably send it into a similar crisis. “As a matter of fact,” Biden said, “John recently wrote an article in a major magazine saying that he wants to do for the health-care industry deregulate it and let the free market move like he did for the banking industry.” The same argument is advanced in a new Obama campaign <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XWX6d7r-bpk" type="external">commercial</a>. Over images of Fannie and Freddie logos, the ad asserts that McCain wants to do to health care what “Bush/McCain policies have done to our economy,” by which they mean deregulation. The ad says:</p>
<p>McCain just published an article praising Wall Street deregulation; said he'd reduce oversight of the health insurance industry too, “just as we have done over the last decade in banking.”</p>
<p>The line they quote comes from an <a href="http://www.contingencies.org/septoct08/mccain.pdf" type="external">article</a> by John McCain (i.e by his campaign) about the McCain health plan in the latest issue of Contingencies magazine. In a passage arguing for more competition to lower the cost of health insurance, McCain writes:</p>
<p>I would also allow individuals to choose to purchase health insurance across state lines, when they can find more affordable and attractive products elsewhere that they prefer. Opening up the health insurance market to more vigorous nationwide competition, as we have done over the last decade in banking, would provide more choices of innovative products less burdened by the worst excesses of state-based regulation. Consumer-friendly insurance policies will be more available and affordable when there is greater competition among insurers on a level playing field.</p>
<p>The Obama ad of course doesn't quote all of that, but merely suggests McCain is endorsing some supposed deregulation of Wall Street. In fact, McCain is very plainly talking about the <a href="http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d103:HR3841:" type="external">Riegle-Neal Interstate Banking Act</a>, passed in 1994, which permitted banks to establish branches nationwide by eliminating the requirement for separate subsidiaries in each state and the prohibition against banks accepting deposits from customers out of their home states. This very sensible reform updated a 1956 law to modernize American banking, and there is simply no question it has been successful and useful. It <a href="http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=103&amp;session=2&amp;vote=00298" type="external">passed</a> the Senate 94 to 4, and Sen. Biden voted for it.</p>
<p>That important act of deregulation had exactly nothing whatsoever to do with the economic crisis we now face, and on the contrary has contributed to American prosperity and competitiveness. The Obama campaign could raise questions about how close an analogy there might be to that law in allowing health insurers, like banks, to work across state lines. But the tack they have actually taken — accepting the analogy and asserting it reflects poorly on McCain's plan — is either dishonest or ignorant. Either way, it makes no sense.</p>
<p>The Tax DistortionThe second leg of the Obama-Biden critique is directed at McCain's proposal to provide a tax credit to individuals and families for the purchase of health insurance while counting employer-based coverage as taxable income. Biden himself was the first to launch this particular charge. At a rally in Pennsylvania on September 18, Biden <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Px5YXs788uM" type="external">told</a> the assembled audience that John McCain, through his health-care plan, is:</p>
<p>proposing the largest increase on middle class taxpayers in American history….It will cost the middle class over one trillion dollars in additional taxes. So ladies and gentlemen it's almost unbelievable, you almost don't believe what I'm telling you, because it sounds so wrong.</p>
<p>It does sound wrong, because it is. The Washington Post a few days later <a href="http://voices.washingtonpost.com/fact-checker/2008/09/four_pinocchios_for_bidens_tax.html" type="external">described</a> Biden's claim as a “fabrication,” explaining that McCain's plan takes the existing tax break for employer-purchased health coverage and gives it to individuals as a credit to use in purchasing health insurance they select — whether they get their insurance through their employer or not. The plan doesn't provide the tax benefit twice — before and after the employer purchases coverage — but once, the way it is provided today. The difference is that individuals get the benefit as individuals, rather than through their employer's payroll, and regardless of how they purchase their health insurance. It's true that this means more taxable income, but the amount of additional taxes paid on that income would be made up for and then some by the tax credit itself. The Post quotes Eric Toder of the non-partisan (if slightly left-leaning) Tax Policy Center saying “It is not fair to pull out just one part of the McCain proposal. It is a package. They are giving back more than they are taking away.”</p>
<p>In fact, as the Post further noted,</p>
<p>By most independent calculations, the McCain plan will leave most taxpayers better off in strictly financial terms, at least until 2013. After 2013, the benefits will begin to diminish. By 2018, taxpayers in the top quintile will be slightly worse off, but middle-income taxpayers will either break even or be slightly ahead.</p>
<p>More importantly, they will have more reliable, affordable, and portable health coverage as well. In Thursday's debate, Biden added an even more deceptive element to his earlier fabrication. He said:</p>
<p>Now, with regard to the — to the health care plan, you know, it's with one hand you giveth, the other you take it. You know how Barack Obama — excuse me, do you know how John McCain pays for his $5,000 tax credit you're going to get, a family will get? He taxes as income every one of you out there, every one of you listening who has a health care plan through your employer. That's how he raises $3.6 trillion, on your — taxing you r health care benefit to give you a $5,000 plan, which his Web site points out will go straight to the insurance company. And then you're going to have to replace a $12,000 — that's the average cost of the plan you get through your employer — it costs $12,000. You're going to have to pay — replace a $12,000 plan, because 20 million of you are going to be dropped. Twenty million of you will be dropped. So you're going to have to place — replace a $12,000 plan with a $5,000 check you just give to the insurance company. I call that the “Ultimate Bridge to Nowhere.”</p>
<p>The beginning portion of this mass of confusion is simply the same false claim he had made in Pennsylvania in September: implying the plan results in a net tax when it actually results in a net credit. On Friday, the Obama campaign even echoed this assertion with a new television <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MI0IXwiBbIY" type="external">ad</a> showing Biden making this claim in the debate. The ad, like the claim, is patently dishonest.</p>
<p>Biden then argues that it's problematic that the tax credit McCain offers could go directly to the insurance company to pay for health coverage. Yet <a href="http://192.168.168.14/exchweb/bin/redir.asp?URL=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H6vnHmAfJCY" type="external">another</a> dishonest new Obama ad on Friday made the same point too (while yet again repeating out of context the misleading point about taxing health-care benefits). But what exactly is the problem? Offering the option of having the money go directly to an insurer of your choice is a simple convenience — it doesn't mean the money doesn't belong to the individual taxpayer. And as the McCain plan makes clear, Americans with insurance coverage that costs them less than their new tax credit can deposit the remainder in a Health Savings Account for future needs.</p>
<p>The notion that Americans would need to “replace a $12,000 plan with a $5,000 check,” meanwhile, ignores the simple fact that the money employers now spend on employees' insurance belongs to the employees. It is a part of your wages that you never see. If it wasn't spent on health care by your employer but was given to you as cash wages, you would not be replacing a $12,000 plan with a $5,000 check, but rather with something approaching $12,000 in additional income and that $5,000 check. You would pay income taxes on that additional $12,000, but what you would pay would be less than the extra $5,000, so, again, nearly all taxpayers (except those at the very top of the income scale) would come out ahead.</p>
<p>And finally Biden asserts that 20 million people are going to be “dropped” from their insurance coverage under McCain's plan. It's hard to be sure just what he has in mind, but it may well be a distortion of the Tax Policy Center's <a href="http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/UploadedPDF/411749_updated_candidates.pdf" type="external">analysis</a> of the plan, which says that under the McCain plan about 20 million people would move into the individual insurance market by 2018 (since the plan would make it much more appealing), but does not distinguish between those who would do so by choice to pursue coverage that better suits their health and economic needs and those who would do so because they were “dropped” by their employer. Either way, people would not find themselves in the position Biden describes, since he leaves the effect on net wages out of his description entirely. Distorting the Health-Care Debate There is no question that part of the aim of the McCain plan is to build a more functional non-group insurance market so as to slowly and gradually sever the link between employment and insurance. That would help make health insurance more portable and reliable, and allow people to feel secure about their coverage regardless of changes in their employment and their lives. The insecurity of employer-provided coverage is one of the chief problems bedeviling American health care and the middle class, and McCain's proposal would help address it without creating a powerful incentive to push people into government run insurance — as Obama's plan <a href="" type="internal">would do</a>. Biden's deceptive description notwithstanding, that is an important part of the appeal of the plan, from the point of view of both the average American family, and the broader American economy.</p>
<p>Under the McCain plan, workers would get more cash wages, a federal tax credit, and control over their health insurance that would make it more affordable, portable, and reliable.&#160;Giving a tax break to individuals and families, rather than through their employers' payroll, is one crucial element of that approach. Fostering more competition to lower costs and improve quality is another. The Obama campaign's new lines of attack against the plan don't argue otherwise. They just employ crude fictions and distortions to confuse the issue.</p>
<p>— Yuval Levin is a fellow at the <a href="" type="internal">Ethics and Public Policy Center</a> and senior editor of <a href="http://www.thenewatlantis.com/" type="external">The New Atlantis</a>. His new book <a href="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1594032092/ref=nosim/the-new-atlantis-20" type="external">Imagining the Future: Science and American Democracy</a>, will be published later this month.</p> | false | 1 | part gross exaggerations convenient fictions aimed allow make point couldnt otherwise support answer charge obama voted budget resolution called taxing americans making 42000 assert john mccain voted although didnt argue paying attention afghanistan claim repeatedly spend iraq three weeks spent afghanistan seven years although thats far true explain vote iraq war light subsequent views say wasnt war resolution though joe went one set distortions particular however seemed like extemporaneous exaggeration biden offered several criticisms john mccains healthcare plan tracked precisely line attack obama campaign taken plan recent days flatly untrue deceptive deregulation canardthe approach involved two basic elements first somehow implicitly attributing current financial crisis deregulation biden argued mccain wants thing health care sector presumably send similar crisis matter fact biden said john recently wrote article major magazine saying wants healthcare industry deregulate let free market move like banking industry argument advanced new obama campaign commercial images fannie freddie logos ad asserts mccain wants health care bushmccain policies done economy mean deregulation ad says mccain published article praising wall street deregulation said hed reduce oversight health insurance industry done last decade banking line quote comes article john mccain ie campaign mccain health plan latest issue contingencies magazine passage arguing competition lower cost health insurance mccain writes would also allow individuals choose purchase health insurance across state lines find affordable attractive products elsewhere prefer opening health insurance market vigorous nationwide competition done last decade banking would provide choices innovative products less burdened worst excesses statebased regulation consumerfriendly insurance policies available affordable greater competition among insurers level playing field obama ad course doesnt quote merely suggests mccain endorsing supposed deregulation wall street fact mccain plainly talking riegleneal interstate banking act passed 1994 permitted banks establish branches nationwide eliminating requirement separate subsidiaries state prohibition banks accepting deposits customers home states sensible reform updated 1956 law modernize american banking simply question successful useful passed senate 94 4 sen biden voted important act deregulation exactly nothing whatsoever economic crisis face contrary contributed american prosperity competitiveness obama campaign could raise questions close analogy might law allowing health insurers like banks work across state lines tack actually taken accepting analogy asserting reflects poorly mccains plan either dishonest ignorant either way makes sense tax distortionthe second leg obamabiden critique directed mccains proposal provide tax credit individuals families purchase health insurance counting employerbased coverage taxable income biden first launch particular charge rally pennsylvania september 18 biden told assembled audience john mccain healthcare plan proposing largest increase middle class taxpayers american historyit cost middle class one trillion dollars additional taxes ladies gentlemen almost unbelievable almost dont believe im telling sounds wrong sound wrong washington post days later described bidens claim fabrication explaining mccains plan takes existing tax break employerpurchased health coverage gives individuals credit use purchasing health insurance select whether get insurance employer plan doesnt provide tax benefit twice employer purchases coverage way provided today difference individuals get benefit individuals rather employers payroll regardless purchase health insurance true means taxable income amount additional taxes paid income would made tax credit post quotes eric toder nonpartisan slightly leftleaning tax policy center saying fair pull one part mccain proposal package giving back taking away fact post noted independent calculations mccain plan leave taxpayers better strictly financial terms least 2013 2013 benefits begin diminish 2018 taxpayers top quintile slightly worse middleincome taxpayers either break even slightly ahead importantly reliable affordable portable health coverage well thursdays debate biden added even deceptive element earlier fabrication said regard health care plan know one hand giveth take know barack obama excuse know john mccain pays 5000 tax credit youre going get family get taxes income every one every one listening health care plan employer thats raises 36 trillion taxing r health care benefit give 5000 plan web site points go straight insurance company youre going replace 12000 thats average cost plan get employer costs 12000 youre going pay replace 12000 plan 20 million going dropped twenty million dropped youre going place replace 12000 plan 5000 check give insurance company call ultimate bridge nowhere beginning portion mass confusion simply false claim made pennsylvania september implying plan results net tax actually results net credit friday obama campaign even echoed assertion new television ad showing biden making claim debate ad like claim patently dishonest biden argues problematic tax credit mccain offers could go directly insurance company pay health coverage yet another dishonest new obama ad friday made point yet repeating context misleading point taxing healthcare benefits exactly problem offering option money go directly insurer choice simple convenience doesnt mean money doesnt belong individual taxpayer mccain plan makes clear americans insurance coverage costs less new tax credit deposit remainder health savings account future needs notion americans would need replace 12000 plan 5000 check meanwhile ignores simple fact money employers spend employees insurance belongs employees part wages never see wasnt spent health care employer given cash wages would replacing 12000 plan 5000 check rather something approaching 12000 additional income 5000 check would pay income taxes additional 12000 would pay would less extra 5000 nearly taxpayers except top income scale would come ahead finally biden asserts 20 million people going dropped insurance coverage mccains plan hard sure mind may well distortion tax policy centers analysis plan says mccain plan 20 million people would move individual insurance market 2018 since plan would make much appealing distinguish would choice pursue coverage better suits health economic needs would dropped employer either way people would find position biden describes since leaves effect net wages description entirely distorting healthcare debate question part aim mccain plan build functional nongroup insurance market slowly gradually sever link employment insurance would help make health insurance portable reliable allow people feel secure coverage regardless changes employment lives insecurity employerprovided coverage one chief problems bedeviling american health care middle class mccains proposal would help address without creating powerful incentive push people government run insurance obamas plan would bidens deceptive description notwithstanding important part appeal plan point view average american family broader american economy mccain plan workers would get cash wages federal tax credit control health insurance would make affordable portable reliable160giving tax break individuals families rather employers payroll one crucial element approach fostering competition lower costs improve quality another obama campaigns new lines attack plan dont argue otherwise employ crude fictions distortions confuse issue yuval levin fellow ethics public policy center senior editor new atlantis new book imagining future science american democracy published later month | 1,061 |
<p>COSTA MESA, Calif. — Friday arrived and it delivered a thankful <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Anthony-Lynn/" type="external">Anthony Lynn</a>. The Los Angeles Chargers head coach was picking over the tasty leftovers of Thursday’s 28-6 thumping of the <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Dallas-Cowboys/" type="external">Dallas Cowboys</a>.</p>
<p>Only those under his command were more thankful than him.</p>
<p>“We gave the players the weekend off,” Lynn said. “Today they can be with their family and enjoy a late Thanksgiving dinner. We’ll bring them back on Monday and get the normal routine rolling.”</p>
<p>For the streaking Chargers, they are fine with keeping their recent play on track. After stumbling from the gate at 0-4, they have won five of their past seven.</p>
<p>They put an impressive bookend on their recent demolition of the <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Buffalo-Bills/" type="external">Buffalo Bills</a> with a carving of the Cowboys.</p>
<p>“We knew we had to play two games in 11 days and the guys focused in and the coaches did a helluva job getting them ready to play,” Lynn said.</p>
<p>Play they did as quarterback <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Philip_Rivers/" type="external">Philip Rivers</a> had one of the most impressive games of his stellar career, the defense caused havoc once again, and despite having their punter handle placekicks, the Chargers left Dallas with a big, fat W.</p>
<p>“This can give us a boost of confidence although this group has always been confident,” Lynn said. “But this certainly can’t hurt in finishing up this third quarter (of the season) and going into its fourth quarter.”</p>
<p>The rest of the season sets up nicely for the Chargers, starting with the winless <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Cleveland-Browns/" type="external">Cleveland Browns</a> visiting the StubHub Center next Sunday. Los Angeles is within two losses of the AFC West-leading <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Kansas-City-Chiefs/" type="external">Kansas City Chiefs</a> and smack dab in the middle of AFC wild-card conversation.</p>
<p>“It was an all-around team win and one that we needed to stay in the mix,” said Rivers, who threw for three touchdowns and 424 yards. “We’ve still got a ways to go.”</p>
<p>But if nothing else, they are headed in the right direction. That’s a blessing that Lynn was being thankful for on Friday.</p>
<p>—</p>
<p>Head coach Anthony Lynn said wide receiver <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Mike_Williams/" type="external">Mike Williams</a> didn’t sustain damage to his ACL when exiting Thursday’s game with a knee injury. Lynn, though, was unclear if he suffered any other ligament damage. Williams, their top pick, had missed the first five games with a back injury before making strides in recent weeks.</p>
<p>“Until the doctors are done with him and do a thorough evaluation, then I will know how to get him through the week,” Lynn said. “But the ACL has been ruled out and that is very, very good news for me.”</p>
<p>—</p>
<p>Right tackle Joe Barksdale not only started, but made it through the entire game on Thursday. Barksdale had missed four starts with a turf toe injury. His play on the perimeter, along with left tackle Russell Okung, helped prevent the Cowboys from recording a sack.</p>
<p>REPORT CARD VS. COWBOYS</p>
<p>—PASSING OFFENSE: A — The Chargers didn’t punt against the Cowboys and gained more than 500 yards for the first time since Oct. 18, 2015. Much of that was because of the phenomenal game turned in by Philip Rivers. He missed on just six of his 33 passes as he dominated the Cowboys’ pass defense. Kudos to the front line that kept him from harm’s way — zero sacks. That allowed Rivers to toy with the defense as he clicked with <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Keenan-Allen/" type="external">Keenan Allen</a> for 172 yards and a score on 11 catches. Tight end <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Hunter-Henry/" type="external">Hunter Henry</a> is back and so is the mojo in the Chargers’ offense.</p>
<p>—RUSHING OFFENSE: C — The Chargers can throw it, but they sure couldn’t run it on Thursday. Luckily, they got off the run and it was more of what Rivers could do than <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Melvin-Gordon/" type="external">Melvin Gordon</a> and Co. Run-blocking suffered and the Chargers managed but 81 yards. It took Gordon 21 carries to get 65 yards. There’s still work to be done here.</p>
<p>—PASS DEFENSE: A — Two more picks and one of them being returned for a touchdown gives this unit high marks. Desmond King brought one back for a score and Casey Hayward continues to find the ball as he had his third interception in two games. The pass rush never did let <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Dak-Prescott/" type="external">Dak Prescott</a> get comfortable and he looked every bit like a second-year quarterback. DEs <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Joey-Bosa/" type="external">Joey Bosa</a> made his presence known, as did <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Melvin-Ingram/" type="external">Melvin Ingram</a>. Unlikely tackles Corey Liuget and Tenny Palepoi had sacks.</p>
<p>—RUSH DEFENSE: B — Run-stuffers continue to have more success as it seems everyone is getting more comfortable in coordinator <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Gus-Bradley/" type="external">Gus Bradley</a>‘s scheme. The Cowboys, behind their vaunted offensive line but minus <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Ezekiel-Elliott/" type="external">Ezekiel Elliott</a> in the backfield, could run for but 79 yards. The front four for the Chargers, in particular, made gaining yards difficult on the ground.</p>
<p>—SPECIAL TEAMS: C — The Chargers missed a field goal and an extra-point as back issues derailed kicker <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Nick_Novak/" type="external">Nick Novak</a>. Punter Drew Kaser took over on kicks and kickoffs and the results were better than what Novak would provide. <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Travis-Benjamin/" type="external">Travis Benjamin</a> continues to make head-scratching decisions as a punt returner. The Chargers were fortunate to win on a day in which their kicker was hurt so early in a game.</p>
<p>—COACHING: A — The Chargers couldn’t run the ball so head coach Anthony Lynn quit trying, which was smart. Instead, he put the ball in the hands of Philip Rivers and that was a wise decision. Lynn deserves credit for stepping around the land mines this game had with no running attack and questions all over his special-teams units. But he let Rivers do his thing and defensive coordinator Gus Bradley’s schemes did the rest.</p> | false | 1 | costa mesa calif friday arrived delivered thankful anthony lynn los angeles chargers head coach picking tasty leftovers thursdays 286 thumping dallas cowboys command thankful gave players weekend lynn said today family enjoy late thanksgiving dinner well bring back monday get normal routine rolling streaking chargers fine keeping recent play track stumbling gate 04 five past seven put impressive bookend recent demolition buffalo bills carving cowboys knew play two games 11 days guys focused coaches helluva job getting ready play lynn said play quarterback philip rivers one impressive games stellar career defense caused havoc despite punter handle placekicks chargers left dallas big fat w give us boost confidence although group always confident lynn said certainly cant hurt finishing third quarter season going fourth quarter rest season sets nicely chargers starting winless cleveland browns visiting stubhub center next sunday los angeles within two losses afc westleading kansas city chiefs smack dab middle afc wildcard conversation allaround team win one needed stay mix said rivers threw three touchdowns 424 yards weve still got ways go nothing else headed right direction thats blessing lynn thankful friday head coach anthony lynn said wide receiver mike williams didnt sustain damage acl exiting thursdays game knee injury lynn though unclear suffered ligament damage williams top pick missed first five games back injury making strides recent weeks doctors done thorough evaluation know get week lynn said acl ruled good news right tackle joe barksdale started made entire game thursday barksdale missed four starts turf toe injury play perimeter along left tackle russell okung helped prevent cowboys recording sack report card vs cowboys passing offense chargers didnt punt cowboys gained 500 yards first time since oct 18 2015 much phenomenal game turned philip rivers missed six 33 passes dominated cowboys pass defense kudos front line kept harms way zero sacks allowed rivers toy defense clicked keenan allen 172 yards score 11 catches tight end hunter henry back mojo chargers offense rushing offense c chargers throw sure couldnt run thursday luckily got run rivers could melvin gordon co runblocking suffered chargers managed 81 yards took gordon 21 carries get 65 yards theres still work done pass defense two picks one returned touchdown gives unit high marks desmond king brought one back score casey hayward continues find ball third interception two games pass rush never let dak prescott get comfortable looked every bit like secondyear quarterback des joey bosa made presence known melvin ingram unlikely tackles corey liuget tenny palepoi sacks rush defense b runstuffers continue success seems everyone getting comfortable coordinator gus bradleys scheme cowboys behind vaunted offensive line minus ezekiel elliott backfield could run 79 yards front four chargers particular made gaining yards difficult ground special teams c chargers missed field goal extrapoint back issues derailed kicker nick novak punter drew kaser took kicks kickoffs results better novak would provide travis benjamin continues make headscratching decisions punt returner chargers fortunate win day kicker hurt early game coaching chargers couldnt run ball head coach anthony lynn quit trying smart instead put ball hands philip rivers wise decision lynn deserves credit stepping around land mines game running attack questions specialteams units let rivers thing defensive coordinator gus bradleys schemes rest | 529 |
<p>On Sunday night, Comedian <a href="http://variety.com/t/hari-kondabolu/" type="external">Hari Kondabolu</a> hosts an one-hour special on TruTV about Apu&#160;Nahasapeemapetilon, “The Simpsons’” neighborhood convenience store owner and operator who’s been voiced by <a href="http://variety.com/t/hank-azaria/" type="external">Hank Azaria</a> for nearly 30 years.</p>
<p>“ <a href="http://variety.com/t/the-problem-with-apu/" type="external">The Problem with Apu</a>” interviews South Asian-Americans in the media about their experience of growing up with Apu as the only representative of their culture on American television. Kondabolu’s mission to dissect the subtext of Apu comes from his own love for “The Simpsons,” which was always marred by Azaria’s character; he was bullied with the character’s signature line, “Thank you come again,” and credits his frustration with Apu as one of the reasons he pursued comedy.</p>
<p>“The Problem with Apu” features conversations with comedians and actors Aziz Ansari, Kal Penn, Sakina Jaffrey, and Whoopi Goldberg, as well as an interview with Kondabolu’s parents, “The Simpsons” writer and producer Dana Gould — and several thwarted attempts to track down Azaria.&#160;Variety&#160;spoke to Kondabolu about making the documentary and what to do with the character of Apu after nearly 30 years.</p>
<p>There are conflicting reports in the documentary about Apu’s creation. What do you think happened in “The Simpsons’” writers’ room on the day Apu was introduced?</p>
<p>I think that they started laughing hysterically, and they said, “Yes, put that in.” Part of the question the documentary asks is, did Hank [Azaria] come up with the character and did he say it in that accent? According to Mike Reiss, a “The Simpsons” writer, it wasn’t supposed to be an Indian character. It was supposed to be just a clerk, and he specifically said, “It’s a cliché if you make him Indian. Don’t make him Indian.” [In the documentary, Azaria tells an interviewer that he was asked to make Apu Indian.]</p>
<p>The one thing I know for sure, regardless of how it got there: Those writers laughed and they thought the character was funny, and that’s why it stayed in there. That’s the only reason why things stay in the script like that — because they made people laugh, and they were convinced other people would laugh, too.</p>
<p>You must think about this a lot as a comedian: What do you do with the fact that people are going to laugh? So many people in your documentary talk about why Apu is flawed. And then on the other hand, as you point out yourself, people like it. People think it’s funny.</p>
<p>Yeah. I think funny and right are not the same thing. How often do you hear people say, that’s not funny, it’s offensive, as if those two things can’t exist in the same space. If anything, something can be wrong and funny. And if it’s funny, it’s actually better — people are going to ignore the meaning of it because it made them laugh. When you don’t laugh, you have to confront it for what it is.</p>
<p>So that’s the struggle. I don’t like the idea that the laugh justifies everything. I don’t believe that, because I think there’s different kinds of laughs. That’s the famous [comedian Dave] Chappelle quandary, right? Are you laughing at me or are you laughing with me? Am I making things better or am I making things worse? I don’t think all laughs are equal, because if that is the case, you could probably put the most racist stuff in the world constantly in things — like the old days — and people would still laugh. People stopped doing it because it was seen as less funny or uncomfortable, and there wasn’t a net gain out of it. But there was still a net gain out that accent.</p>
<p>You pursue an interview with Azaria for so much of the piece, and then it’s sort of like a “Waiting for Godot” thing — he never shows up.</p>
<p>The only reason I don’t like that analogy is Godot, I think, is interpreted usually as God. [Laughs.] I don’t want to give Hank that power. If it was Matt Groening, maybe I’d be a little more into that.</p>
<p>Did you try to talk to Groening?</p>
<p>Of course. Because I think Matt, in addition to being the creator of the show — I’ve read about how there were certain portrayals he didn’t want, certain jokes he didn’t want on the show. Like, we’re not going to make fun of people with disabilities. We’re not going to do this or that. There was some kind of ethos. I’d like to know what his ethos was and how he felt about it after a while, about some of the choices that were made. And what he decided to do with “Futurama,” which he didn’t want to repeat from “The Simpsons.” So, certainly, a lot of questions for Matt.</p>
<p>With Hank, it’s like, he’s the most direct to the character. If he says, “I don’t want to do it anymore,” that’s an issue. If he says, “I don’t think this is right. We need to stop,” that’s an issue.</p>
<p>I’m asking someone to rock the boat. Is that fair when it’s someone’s job? If this was year one, that’s one thing. This is year, what, 29? 28? You’ve made your money and you’ve gotten your Emmy nominations. Maybe it’s time to say something. Maybe it’s time to think about changing how it’s done. At the end of the day, him doing the voice or not is just kind of irrelevant. It’s been 30 years.</p>
<p>What do you hope “The Simpsons” might do differently?</p>
<p>To me, what can we do to salvage that character and at least create some positive spin? People say there’s truth in the stereotype — and a lot of South Asians are convenience store owners or work in convenience stores, that’s true, I suppose. But, if you want the full stereotype, it’s that a lot of the South Asians work in convenience stores — and then buy the stores, and then buy other stores, and then employ other people. Why don’t we give [Apu] upward mobility? There’s a bunch of different ways to make this still in the spirit, I suppose, of what you wanted while still moving him up. It’s a cartoon. You can do anything! Characters have died, they’ve changed. There are creative solutions to this that don’t erode the show. It’s 30 years in. Plots are repeating. I don’t think it hurts to have a few new angles.</p>
<p>The interview you did with Dana Gould was so revealing in a kind of unintentional way. I think he genuinely didn’t understand why you didn’t understand, if that makes sense.</p>
<p>I give Dana a lot of credit for doing the interview, because everyone else refused. They didn’t have the guts to be like, “I’ll do it.” And not only that, he was blunt. He was being extremely honest.</p>
<p>I know that many white Americans find that accent funny. That’s kind of the issue, isn’t it? I also know the systematic nature of writing a show and what gets lost in the creation of a product, so that wasn’t shocking. All that was very consistent with what I thought.</p>
<p>I got thrown, I think, when he said, “Can I call you out on something? Do you think Mr. Burns is one-dimensional?” When he said that, my mouth started salivating. Like, you do realize what you just stepped into?</p>
<p>That shocked me, too.</p>
<p>If there’s one thing I can explain, it’s exactly that. In my belief, you should be going after people with more power, not people with less, who can’t fight back. That’s the difference between Burns and going after an immigrant who works at a convenience store. That actual figure in the world has very little power, very little say.</p>
<p>So when he said that, I was like: Is that all the writers on “The Simpsons”? Because he was a producer and a key writer. Was he the only one who had that blind spot? Again, I’m grateful that he did the interview, and again, it means a lot that someone had guts. But it was telling. It did tell me a lot.</p>
<p>You joke a bit in the documentary: If I don’t get this character taken off the show, then what was the point of doing this? Do you still feel that way now?</p>
<p>No. Because at the end of the day, this wasn’t really about Apu and “The Simpsons.” This was about the bigger issues. I found a very accessible way to talk about representation — the impact of representation — using my journey as an example of one person of color’s journey, when you have limited options in how you’re represented.</p>
<p>Whatever happens with Apu, to be perfectly honest, I don’t care. It’s been there 30 years. I’m filling a gap. Nobody talked about it all those years. If this is a show that’s one of the most important shows of all time, it has certainly influenced and informed other people. This, to me, is to acknowledge where we were and where we need to be. But whether or not they change the character, whether [Azaria’s] willing to drop the accent or not, that’s not really the issue.</p>
<p>It was interesting to learn that Azaria had not thought about what actual Indian people might think of Apu’s accent until, apparently, 2013, when <a href="https://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/09/20/the-simpsons-apu-racist_n_3956603.html" type="external">he did that interview</a> with the Huffington Post.</p>
<p>Yeah. Also, because he grew up in Queens! I’m like, what part of Queens did you grow up in? The whole thing was so strange to me. And then that <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l_gv-dj8C80" type="external">Tufts speech</a> after the fact was just, like, come on. There’s a difference between hiding behind the cartoon and seeing him do it. When you see him do it, it feels like every bully you grew up with. It feels like everybody who made fun of your parents. You see it for what it is, because that’s exactly what it is. It’s shocking.</p>
<p>The through-line of interviewees discussing how Apu diminished their parents’ experiences — and your decision to interview your own parents about him — was very moving.</p>
<p>Yeah. Because it’s not really about us. It was really an impression of our parents. He was the stand-in for their lives — and when you hear about how complicated and hard their lives are, you’re going to make fun of that? When you see that interview with Hank [in the documentary], he’s frustrated with the convenience store owner. [Azaria tells a story about an Indian man behind the counter repeatedly telling him not to drink his Gatorade before he’s purchased it.] But it’s like, maybe people have drank the Gatorade and spilled it. Maybe it makes his life harder. There’s no empathy, just annoyance. That comes through in the character. It’s like a lack of understanding and care, [directed toward] folks you don’t get to hear because our parents didn’t want to make a scene, they didn’t want to make noise. They just wanted to have their kids be safe and educated. They wanted their lives to be easier.</p>
<p>The other cost of it, in addition to that ugliness and insult, is that a lot of us — and I’ll admit this — were insecure about our parents and their accents because it was seen as a joke. I didn’t want people to come over to my house to hear them talk and see what we ate. I didn’t want to give them any more ammunition. It made me feel less American. It made me feel not like an equal. That’s an awful feeling, especially because I’m growing up in Queens. That’s absurd, to feel that in a place like that, but that’s what happens when you’re made to feel like you’re the one that’s not normal. You’re the one that’s the freak.</p>
<p>These are white writers, and a white voice actor’s impression of a South Asian person. This is who they think we are. The jokes are not for us to laugh at. Whenever Apu would come on and I would hear something corny — or clearly it’s just the accent that’s the joke — those are the moments I was taken out of the show because I knew this wasn’t for me. This was written for another audience, and I stumbled upon the show, and all of a sudden, I have to wait a second to get back into it. It was very weird.&#160;</p>
<p>The constant renegotiation.</p>
<p>Yes, absolutely, Somebody asked me today, How does it make you feel knowing that people are going to be uncomfortable with Apu? It’ll change how they see the show. I’m like: “Oh, you mean they’re going to watch the show like I did? They’re going to feel a little weird about it, and question why that decision was made in almost every episode — while also feeling ambivalent because it’s a funny character? Yes. That’s okay. I’m OK with that.”</p>
<p>Was there anything that you discovered while making the documentary that really surprised you?</p>
<p>Yes. There’s something that we left out of the movie that drives me nuts. It speaks a lot about the nature of racism.</p>
<p>We talk about how [director] Satyajit Ray, his Apu trilogy is the basis of the name Apu, and how Peter Sellers’ voice is the basis of <a href="http://variety.com/2016/tv/news/kids-show-mack-and-moxy-1201743516/" type="external">Hank Azaria</a>’s voice. He acknowledged that. Doing research we found out that Peter Sellers and Satyajit Ray knew each other, and Ray actually tried to make a movie called “The Alien.” It was his first attempt at a Hollywood film. He liked Peter Sellers’ work, and he asked Peter Sellers to be in the movie. They met each other, they became friends, and Sellers saw some of his work and agreed to be in the movie.</p>
<p>Then, some time passed, and Satyajit Ray saw “The Party” with Peter Sellers, and he saw that accent. And he was horrified. He said, it’s brown-face, the whole thing. And he’s like, this is the guy I wanted in the film? This is the guy? This is how he disrespects my people? And Sellers’ character has a pet monkey in the movie, and the monkey’s name is Apu. Like a direct slap in the face.</p>
<p>So when you see Apu, the character in “The Simpsons,” in the context of that — it’s even uglier. It tells you that if you don’t squash racism at the source, it mutates and it shows up in ways you don’t expect. It doesn’t show up in brown-face the way we used to see it. It shows up in a cartoon. It shows up in the name. It shows up in a voice and how he’s portrayed. It’s the same basic idea.</p>
<p>Peter Sellers was a comedian who built his career on doing accents, and Azaria is to some degree, too. Maybe that’s not such a good idea anymore.</p>
<p>It depends on context. Russell Peters’ audience, it’s heavily South Asian and East Asian. There’s a context there, and he’s very much a community figure. Like Aasif [Maandvi] says, we should be able to control our voices and our experiences. That belongs to us, and I don’t think we should shy away.</p>
<p>People have parents, you know what I mean? That’s part of the experience of all of this, and there’s a history of Jewish comedians talking about their parents. That’s all part of it. But it’s not done with the, look at this outsider. It’s done with love. This is my family. The intent is completely different and the audience knows that.</p>
<p>I don’t think there’s any absolutes with how this was done. But I think who does it and who gets paid to do it and the context it comes in is very important.</p>
<p>I think “The Simpsons” audience knows that Apu isn’t a sensitive portrayal. That’s one of the reasons it’s so frustrating.</p>
<p>Especially when they know it’s not a South Asian that does the voice. Not everybody knows that. That’s huge. Does it make it better if a South Asian did it? No. The character would still have sucked! But at least I would know a brown person was getting paid.</p> | false | 1 | sunday night comedian hari kondabolu hosts onehour special trutv apu160nahasapeemapetilon simpsons neighborhood convenience store owner operator whos voiced hank azaria nearly 30 years problem apu interviews south asianamericans media experience growing apu representative culture american television kondabolus mission dissect subtext apu comes love simpsons always marred azarias character bullied characters signature line thank come credits frustration apu one reasons pursued comedy problem apu features conversations comedians actors aziz ansari kal penn sakina jaffrey whoopi goldberg well interview kondabolus parents simpsons writer producer dana gould several thwarted attempts track azaria160variety160spoke kondabolu making documentary character apu nearly 30 years conflicting reports documentary apus creation think happened simpsons writers room day apu introduced think started laughing hysterically said yes put part question documentary asks hank azaria come character say accent according mike reiss simpsons writer wasnt supposed indian character supposed clerk specifically said cliché make indian dont make indian documentary azaria tells interviewer asked make apu indian one thing know sure regardless got writers laughed thought character funny thats stayed thats reason things stay script like made people laugh convinced people would laugh must think lot comedian fact people going laugh many people documentary talk apu flawed hand point people like people think funny yeah think funny right thing often hear people say thats funny offensive two things cant exist space anything something wrong funny funny actually better people going ignore meaning made laugh dont laugh confront thats struggle dont like idea laugh justifies everything dont believe think theres different kinds laughs thats famous comedian dave chappelle quandary right laughing laughing making things better making things worse dont think laughs equal case could probably put racist stuff world constantly things like old days people would still laugh people stopped seen less funny uncomfortable wasnt net gain still net gain accent pursue interview azaria much piece sort like waiting godot thing never shows reason dont like analogy godot think interpreted usually god laughs dont want give hank power matt groening maybe id little try talk groening course think matt addition creator show ive read certain portrayals didnt want certain jokes didnt want show like going make fun people disabilities going kind ethos id like know ethos felt choices made decided futurama didnt want repeat simpsons certainly lot questions matt hank like hes direct character says dont want anymore thats issue says dont think right need stop thats issue im asking someone rock boat fair someones job year one thats one thing year 29 28 youve made money youve gotten emmy nominations maybe time say something maybe time think changing done end day voice kind irrelevant 30 years hope simpsons might differently salvage character least create positive spin people say theres truth stereotype lot south asians convenience store owners work convenience stores thats true suppose want full stereotype lot south asians work convenience stores buy stores buy stores employ people dont give apu upward mobility theres bunch different ways make still spirit suppose wanted still moving cartoon anything characters died theyve changed creative solutions dont erode show 30 years plots repeating dont think hurts new angles interview dana gould revealing kind unintentional way think genuinely didnt understand didnt understand makes sense give dana lot credit interview everyone else refused didnt guts like ill blunt extremely honest know many white americans find accent funny thats kind issue isnt also know systematic nature writing show gets lost creation product wasnt shocking consistent thought got thrown think said call something think mr burns onedimensional said mouth started salivating like realize stepped shocked theres one thing explain exactly belief going people power people less cant fight back thats difference burns going immigrant works convenience store actual figure world little power little say said like writers simpsons producer key writer one blind spot im grateful interview means lot someone guts telling tell lot joke bit documentary dont get character taken show point still feel way end day wasnt really apu simpsons bigger issues found accessible way talk representation impact representation using journey example one person colors journey limited options youre represented whatever happens apu perfectly honest dont care 30 years im filling gap nobody talked years show thats one important shows time certainly influenced informed people acknowledge need whether change character whether azarias willing drop accent thats really issue interesting learn azaria thought actual indian people might think apus accent apparently 2013 interview huffington post yeah also grew queens im like part queens grow whole thing strange tufts speech fact like come theres difference hiding behind cartoon seeing see feels like every bully grew feels like everybody made fun parents see thats exactly shocking throughline interviewees discussing apu diminished parents experiences decision interview parents moving yeah really us really impression parents standin lives hear complicated hard lives youre going make fun see interview hank documentary hes frustrated convenience store owner azaria tells story indian man behind counter repeatedly telling drink gatorade hes purchased like maybe people drank gatorade spilled maybe makes life harder theres empathy annoyance comes character like lack understanding care directed toward folks dont get hear parents didnt want make scene didnt want make noise wanted kids safe educated wanted lives easier cost addition ugliness insult lot us ill admit insecure parents accents seen joke didnt want people come house hear talk see ate didnt want give ammunition made feel less american made feel like equal thats awful feeling especially im growing queens thats absurd feel place like thats happens youre made feel like youre one thats normal youre one thats freak white writers white voice actors impression south asian person think jokes us laugh whenever apu would come would hear something corny clearly accent thats joke moments taken show knew wasnt written another audience stumbled upon show sudden wait second get back weird160 constant renegotiation yes absolutely somebody asked today make feel knowing people going uncomfortable apu itll change see show im like oh mean theyre going watch show like theyre going feel little weird question decision made almost every episode also feeling ambivalent funny character yes thats okay im ok anything discovered making documentary really surprised yes theres something left movie drives nuts speaks lot nature racism talk director satyajit ray apu trilogy basis name apu peter sellers voice basis hank azarias voice acknowledged research found peter sellers satyajit ray knew ray actually tried make movie called alien first attempt hollywood film liked peter sellers work asked peter sellers movie met became friends sellers saw work agreed movie time passed satyajit ray saw party peter sellers saw accent horrified said brownface whole thing hes like guy wanted film guy disrespects people sellers character pet monkey movie monkeys name apu like direct slap face see apu character simpsons context even uglier tells dont squash racism source mutates shows ways dont expect doesnt show brownface way used see shows cartoon shows name shows voice hes portrayed basic idea peter sellers comedian built career accents azaria degree maybe thats good idea anymore depends context russell peters audience heavily south asian east asian theres context hes much community figure like aasif maandvi says able control voices experiences belongs us dont think shy away people parents know mean thats part experience theres history jewish comedians talking parents thats part done look outsider done love family intent completely different audience knows dont think theres absolutes done think gets paid context comes important think simpsons audience knows apu isnt sensitive portrayal thats one reasons frustrating especially know south asian voice everybody knows thats huge make better south asian character would still sucked least would know brown person getting paid | 1,256 |
<p>Considering the damage that the neocons have already done, surely no good can come from the policy recommendations of John Bolton and his clique.</p>
<p>John Bolton is a tarnished character. The once United States Ambassador to the United Nations is now promoted as a ‘scholar’ in the pro-Israel lobby group, the American Enterprise Institute (AEI).</p>
<p>Bolton is not a peacemaker, nor, in his defense, did he ever try to appear as if one. When he was appointed as the US Ambassador to the UN by George W. Bush, his stint lasted for only one year, starting August 2005. His time in this position was marked with discord and conflict. <a href="https://content.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28804,1872508_1872490_1872488,00.html" type="external">He stole the limelight</a> with such statements as “The (UN) Secretariat building in New York has 38 stories. If it lost ten stories, it wouldn’t make a bit of difference.”</p>
<p>When the Iraq war failed to achieve any of its objectives, thus signaling an American retreat in the Middle East, neo-conservative politicians like Bolton retreated to their right-wing, neo-conservative institutions. Those who did not have one, established an organization of their own and began issuing press releases at random, hailing Israel at times, and chastising their President, Barack Obama, for one thing or another.</p>
<p>When the so-called ‘Arab Spring’ took place, neocons, like Bolton, saw in it an opportunity, but one that was difficult to discern. On one hand, they understood little of the mechanisms that propelled popular actions, for they are used to operating at the highest level of power with total disconnect from the people. On the other hand, it was clear for them from the start that Obama was taking no chances by stepping back into a Middle East quagmire that was originally designed by his predecessor.</p>
<p>Unable to affect much change in the region, as they once envisioned under the leadership of the likes of Richard Perle and his <a href="http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article1665.htm" type="external">Project for the New American Century</a> (PNAC), the neocons mounted a strategy predicated mostly on discrediting their administration’s lack of strategy.</p>
<p>In a sense the ‘Arab Spring’ invigorated the neocons, but also reminded them of their political impotence. Gone were the days of concocting foreign policies from neo-conservative think tanks such as the Washington Institute for Near East Policy (WINEP), the Center for Security Policy (CSP) and the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs (JINSA), of which, among others, Perle is an active member.</p>
<p>In fact, Perle is quite a cherished member of the American Enterprise Institute, where Bolton often mounts his occasional articles in mainstream US media, offering a ‘vision’ regarding <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/03/opinion/the-iran-deals-dangerous-precedent.html?ref=opinion" type="external">how to take on Iran</a>, how to reform Arab states and how to redraw the map of the&#160; Middle East&#160; in ways that are conducive to US foreign policy interests.</p>
<p>The latest of such intellectual charges by Bolton was published in the New York Times on November 24. Under the title, “ <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/25/opinion/john-bolton-to-defeat-isis-create-a-sunni-state.html?_r=0" type="external">To Defeat ISIS, Create a Sunni State</a>,” he theorized once more, raging against “Obama’s ineffective efforts” to destroy ISIS and demanding, instead, a “clear view shared by NATO allies.” The main drive behind his logic is that once ISIS is destroyed, the region that the militant group designated as a ‘state’ should be turned into a Sunni state, which, as a working title he called “Sunni-Stan.”</p>
<p>Bolton’s reasoning is as predictable as it is arrogant. It is predictable in the sense that, like other neocon initiatives in the past, it has no respect for the wishes of the people of the Middle East. His arguments are constructed upon the same world view that sees conflict as an opportunity and warring nations as pawns in a larger game aimed at subduing people to achieve ‘security’ and ‘stability’ for the US and its supposed allies.</p>
<p>It is also arrogant for the obvious reason that he believes the world should be designed to fit the narrow, self-serving, and often violent visions of failed politicians like himself, who, alas, has access to the US’s most respected newspapers.</p>
<p>Bolton’s conceit has completely blinded him to the failures of the Bush administration and the entire collapse of the neo-conservative’s intellectual discourse during, and following the Iraq war. On the contrary, he is asking to repeat exactly what went wrong in Iraq.</p>
<p>“As we did in Iraq with the 2006 ‘Anbar Awakening,’ the counter-insurgency operation that dislodged Al Qaeda from its stronghold in that Iraqi province, we and our allies must empower viable Sunni leaders, including tribal authorities, who prize their existing social structure,” he wrote.</p>
<p>Only an unreasonable person cannot appreciate <a href="http://america.aljazeera.com/opinions/2014/8/iraq-sectarianismshiassunniskurdsnourialmalaki.html" type="external">how the sectarian seed that the US has sowed in Iraq</a>, based on the recommendations of the likes of Bolton, has resulted in the disfiguring of the Iraqi nation. This massive tampering with the social, cultural, religious and political fabric of society – by first empowering the Shia, oppressing the Sunni, then turning the Sunnis against one another, and so forth – has paved the way for unity among various Sunni groups, which ultimately formed ISIS.</p>
<p>It is the grand experimentations of Bolton and his peers that made ISIS the ‘state’ that it is today, which he is proposing to replace with yet another sectarian state, thus slicing up two Arab countries that were once the seats of the two most prominent Caliphate civilizations in history, the Abbasid and the Umayyad.</p>
<p>But for what purpose and at what price? If meddling at a relatively small scale has turned the Middle East into a perpetual inferno and roped in regional and international rivals into a war that seems to be in constant expansion, one can only imagine what such a large scale reconfiguration of the region could lead to; and for what? So that Bolton can ensure the complete dismantling of the region in favor of Israel and that a buffer state can be established to block the Iranian influence in Syria and Lebanon? So that his country could gain access to more oil supplies? So that Russia’s attempt at having a stake in the future Middle East would be thwarted?</p>
<p>Whatever it is, the neo-conservatives should never be allowed access to the Middle East discourse, and their visions, those of doom and destruction, should remain confined to their ever mushrooming think tanks.</p>
<p>True, it is the perpetual war and horrific rivalries in the Middle East that have finally empowered the neocons to stage a comeback; but considering the damage that these groups have already done, one is certain that no good can possibly come from Bolton and his clique.</p> | false | 1 | considering damage neocons already done surely good come policy recommendations john bolton clique john bolton tarnished character united states ambassador united nations promoted scholar proisrael lobby group american enterprise institute aei bolton peacemaker defense ever try appear one appointed us ambassador un george w bush stint lasted one year starting august 2005 time position marked discord conflict stole limelight statements un secretariat building new york 38 stories lost ten stories wouldnt make bit difference iraq war failed achieve objectives thus signaling american retreat middle east neoconservative politicians like bolton retreated rightwing neoconservative institutions one established organization began issuing press releases random hailing israel times chastising president barack obama one thing another socalled arab spring took place neocons like bolton saw opportunity one difficult discern one hand understood little mechanisms propelled popular actions used operating highest level power total disconnect people hand clear start obama taking chances stepping back middle east quagmire originally designed predecessor unable affect much change region envisioned leadership likes richard perle project new american century pnac neocons mounted strategy predicated mostly discrediting administrations lack strategy sense arab spring invigorated neocons also reminded political impotence gone days concocting foreign policies neoconservative think tanks washington institute near east policy winep center security policy csp jewish institute national security affairs jinsa among others perle active member fact perle quite cherished member american enterprise institute bolton often mounts occasional articles mainstream us media offering vision regarding take iran reform arab states redraw map the160 middle east160 ways conducive us foreign policy interests latest intellectual charges bolton published new york times november 24 title defeat isis create sunni state theorized raging obamas ineffective efforts destroy isis demanding instead clear view shared nato allies main drive behind logic isis destroyed region militant group designated state turned sunni state working title called sunnistan boltons reasoning predictable arrogant predictable sense like neocon initiatives past respect wishes people middle east arguments constructed upon world view sees conflict opportunity warring nations pawns larger game aimed subduing people achieve security stability us supposed allies also arrogant obvious reason believes world designed fit narrow selfserving often violent visions failed politicians like alas access uss respected newspapers boltons conceit completely blinded failures bush administration entire collapse neoconservatives intellectual discourse following iraq war contrary asking repeat exactly went wrong iraq iraq 2006 anbar awakening counterinsurgency operation dislodged al qaeda stronghold iraqi province allies must empower viable sunni leaders including tribal authorities prize existing social structure wrote unreasonable person appreciate sectarian seed us sowed iraq based recommendations likes bolton resulted disfiguring iraqi nation massive tampering social cultural religious political fabric society first empowering shia oppressing sunni turning sunnis one another forth paved way unity among various sunni groups ultimately formed isis grand experimentations bolton peers made isis state today proposing replace yet another sectarian state thus slicing two arab countries seats two prominent caliphate civilizations history abbasid umayyad purpose price meddling relatively small scale turned middle east perpetual inferno roped regional international rivals war seems constant expansion one imagine large scale reconfiguration region could lead bolton ensure complete dismantling region favor israel buffer state established block iranian influence syria lebanon country could gain access oil supplies russias attempt stake future middle east would thwarted whatever neoconservatives never allowed access middle east discourse visions doom destruction remain confined ever mushrooming think tanks true perpetual war horrific rivalries middle east finally empowered neocons stage comeback considering damage groups already done one certain good possibly come bolton clique | 573 |
<p>The new Congress has taken a wise step to start throttling back its propensity to churn out new and often dangerously flawed criminal laws. Under a rules change adopted on Jan. 6, the House Judiciary Committee now has the opportunity to review and improve the language of any bill that creates a new federal crime or modifies an existing one.</p>
<p>The rules change makes eminent sense. The House Judiciary Committee was created to review and amend “defective” laws during James Madison ’s administration. Since 1880 the Judiciary Committee’s jurisdiction has, at least officially, included all federal criminal laws and penalties. But in recent years, a problematic referral practice prevented Judiciary Committee review of some bills creating or modifying crimes.</p>
<p>Criminal punishment is the greatest power that government routinely uses against its own people. When employed justly and appropriately, it is vital to any safe and productive society. But when employed too frequently and aggressively based on a superabundance of overly broad and otherwise flawed laws, the criminal justice system unnecessarily destroys lives, livelihoods and families. Creating criminal laws without meaningful Judiciary Committee oversight is legislative recklessness, akin to Congress regulating Wall Street without meaningful involvement by the House and Senate financial services committees.</p>
<p>The danger is widely recognized. A growing chorus of federal judges, practicing attorneys, policy experts and law professors has for years been decrying the confused and confusing legal morass created by the thousands of federal criminal laws already on the books. An increasing number of Democratic and Republican officials, such as Rep. Bobby Scott (D., Va.) and Rep. Bob Goodlatte (R., Va.), and organizations on the left and the right, such as the Heritage Foundation and the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, agree.</p>
<p>In 1989, a Justice Department <a href="http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/BF01096585#page-1]" type="external">study</a> found it impossible to provide a definitive number of all the statutory criminal offenses in the U.S. Code. The study estimated there were about 3,000 such offenses; but that estimate excluded the thousands of crimes created by the far more extensive code of federal regulations. Worse, federal crimes constitute no coherent, systematic body of law; instead they are randomly scattered throughout all but one of the U.S. Code’s 50 titles.</p>
<p>The number of federal crimes has only increased since 1989. Law professor John S. Baker ’s <a href="http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2008/06/revisiting-the-explosive-growth-of-federal-crimes" type="external">research</a> concluded that by 2008 the number of statutory federal crimes had increased to about 4,450.</p>
<p>In 2010, the Heritage Foundation and the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers published a joint report, “ <a href="http://www.nacdl.org/withoutintent" type="external">Without Intent</a>,” focused on the number, committee oversight and quality of criminal laws proposed and created during a single two-year Congress. We found that in 2005 and 2006 alone, Congress proposed 446 nonviolent, nondrug criminal offenses and enacted 36 into law.</p>
<p>Yet the House and Senate together granted their respective judiciary committees oversight for less than half of the proposed criminal offenses. More than half of the offenses proposed, and more than three out of five of the offenses actually enacted into law, lacked an adequate criminal-intent requirement. Criminal intent—or, in lawyer-speak, mens rea —is a fundamental and an essential requirement of justice in criminal law. Among other innocent people, it protects an individual who has no reason to know that his conduct is prohibited by some very obscure criminal law buried in one of the dozens of oversize volumes of the U.S. Code.</p>
<p>The good news is that the House rules change capitalizes on promising data. Our 2010 research also showed that referring a criminal law proposal to the House Judiciary Committee has a statistically significant likelihood of improving the quality of the law’s criminal-intent requirement.</p>
<p>The House Judiciary Committee now has jurisdiction over all “criminalization.” The rules have left the term undefined. However, the House rules committee used a broad term in order to signify that the House Judiciary Committee now has jurisdiction over all proposed statutory “criminalization” regardless of whether the language defining the penalty is already in existing law. This is an important step toward weaning Congress off its overcriminalization addiction, but the amendment does not automatically ensure committee review. Further reform will be needed to make such review mandatory, both in the House and the Senate.</p>
<p>With the indispensable support of the nation’s legal and policy communities, the Judiciary Committee’s job will be to ensure that any new criminalization is actually necessary—that means that it is narrowly tailored to solve a specific problem not already addressed by the thousands of existing federal criminal laws. Any new or amended criminalization must have an adequate criminal-intent requirement. And Congress must take steps to ensure that all criminal penalties are proportionate to the harm and wrongfulness of the prohibited conduct.</p>
<p>This early action by the 114th Congress is a heartening signal that members of both parties may at long last be prepared to roll up their sleeves and get down to the long-overdue business of reforming America’s bloated criminal law and criminal justice system.</p>
<p>Mr. Walsh is a scholar and attorney at the Ethics and Public Policy Center. Ms. Joslyn is counsel, White Collar Crime Policy, at the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers.</p> | false | 1 | new congress taken wise step start throttling back propensity churn new often dangerously flawed criminal laws rules change adopted jan 6 house judiciary committee opportunity review improve language bill creates new federal crime modifies existing one rules change makes eminent sense house judiciary committee created review amend defective laws james madison administration since 1880 judiciary committees jurisdiction least officially included federal criminal laws penalties recent years problematic referral practice prevented judiciary committee review bills creating modifying crimes criminal punishment greatest power government routinely uses people employed justly appropriately vital safe productive society employed frequently aggressively based superabundance overly broad otherwise flawed laws criminal justice system unnecessarily destroys lives livelihoods families creating criminal laws without meaningful judiciary committee oversight legislative recklessness akin congress regulating wall street without meaningful involvement house senate financial services committees danger widely recognized growing chorus federal judges practicing attorneys policy experts law professors years decrying confused confusing legal morass created thousands federal criminal laws already books increasing number democratic republican officials rep bobby scott va rep bob goodlatte r va organizations left right heritage foundation national association criminal defense lawyers agree 1989 justice department study found impossible provide definitive number statutory criminal offenses us code study estimated 3000 offenses estimate excluded thousands crimes created far extensive code federal regulations worse federal crimes constitute coherent systematic body law instead randomly scattered throughout one us codes 50 titles number federal crimes increased since 1989 law professor john baker research concluded 2008 number statutory federal crimes increased 4450 2010 heritage foundation national association criminal defense lawyers published joint report without intent focused number committee oversight quality criminal laws proposed created single twoyear congress found 2005 2006 alone congress proposed 446 nonviolent nondrug criminal offenses enacted 36 law yet house senate together granted respective judiciary committees oversight less half proposed criminal offenses half offenses proposed three five offenses actually enacted law lacked adequate criminalintent requirement criminal intentor lawyerspeak mens rea fundamental essential requirement justice criminal law among innocent people protects individual reason know conduct prohibited obscure criminal law buried one dozens oversize volumes us code good news house rules change capitalizes promising data 2010 research also showed referring criminal law proposal house judiciary committee statistically significant likelihood improving quality laws criminalintent requirement house judiciary committee jurisdiction criminalization rules left term undefined however house rules committee used broad term order signify house judiciary committee jurisdiction proposed statutory criminalization regardless whether language defining penalty already existing law important step toward weaning congress overcriminalization addiction amendment automatically ensure committee review reform needed make review mandatory house senate indispensable support nations legal policy communities judiciary committees job ensure new criminalization actually necessarythat means narrowly tailored solve specific problem already addressed thousands existing federal criminal laws new amended criminalization must adequate criminalintent requirement congress must take steps ensure criminal penalties proportionate harm wrongfulness prohibited conduct early action 114th congress heartening signal members parties may long last prepared roll sleeves get longoverdue business reforming americas bloated criminal law criminal justice system mr walsh scholar attorney ethics public policy center ms joslyn counsel white collar crime policy national association criminal defense lawyers | 514 |
<p>By Alastair Macdonald</p>
<p>BRUSSELS (Reuters) – Britain will guarantee rights for as yet unborn children who join EU parents after Brexit and accept EU judges’ rulings on such rights, according to a draft European Parliament resolution seen by Reuters on Thursday.</p>
<p>The document, drafted on Monday for a vote next week before an EU summit that may launch talks on a future EU-UK free trade pact, also confirms that British Prime Minister Theresa May has secured agreement from Brussels that British citizens in the EU will be able to live freely in any member state after Brexit.</p>
<p>The resolution was prepared on the basis of an agreement May was about to sign on Monday before objections from her allies in Northern Ireland forced a postponement due to concerns on a plan to keep “regulatory alignment” between the province and the EU “to ensure no hardening of the border on the island of Ireland”.</p>
<p>It also lays out demands from the legislature, which must approve any treaty. These include limiting British benefits from any future agreement and an insistence London continue to abide by the European human rights convention. It also insists that Britain automatically adopt any new EU legislation passed after it loses its vote during a transition period after March 2019.</p>
<p>The draft makes no mention of a point under discussion on Monday when talks were interrupted that would end supervision of EU citizens’ rights by the European Court of Justice after a certain number of years. Two EU sources said that a compromise of 10 years – midway between a British offer of five and an EU demand of 15 years – appears the most likely solution.</p>
<p>One EU source said the compromise may be presented as two years during the transition period plus eight years after that.</p>
<p>May has insisted that the ECJ hold no more sway in Britain but the European Parliament has made the court’s involvement one of its priorities in safeguarding the position of some 3 million citizens of other EU states now living in Britain.</p>
<p>The parliamentary resolution, drafted by five parties which hold the vast majority in the chamber, notes British agreement in detail to honor financial commitments to the bloc and to avoid a “hard” Irish border, two of three conditions on which the EU wants “sufficient progress” toward a divorce deal before it will launch the negotiations May wants on a free trade pact.</p>
<p>CITIZENS’ RIGHTS</p>
<p>It goes into more detail on citizens’ rights, notably on issues where London had been resisting lawmakers’ demands.</p>
<p>These included that “core family members and persons in a durable relationship currently residing outside (Britain) shall be protected by the Withdrawal Agreement and that this is also the case for children born in the future and outside (Britain)”.</p>
<p>London, which does not grant its own citizens automatic rights to bring in foreign spouses, had sought to apply that to EU citizens after Brexit and also wanted to deny rights to British residence to any children born abroad after Brexit.</p>
<p>Britain has also, according to the draft, accepted that EU citizens can “export all exportable benefits” as defined by EU legislation after the country leaves the European Union.</p>
<p>And it has “accepted the competence of the (ECJ) in relation to the interpretation of the Withdrawal Treaty”.</p>
<p>“Citizens’ rights will be guaranteed through a declaratory, light touch, proportionate procedure, consisting of a single form per family,” the resolution stated — going some way to addressing lawmakers’ complaints that costs of hundreds of euros could be incurred by families making several declarations.</p>
<p>Lawmakers are still pressing for the procedure to be free.</p>
<p>In five months of negotiation, May has largely given way on EU demands. In one sign of a concession from Brussels, the resolution states that British citizens living in an EU state on Brexit Day, March 29, 2019, would retain their “right … to reside and move freely in the whole EU”. Previously, the EU had said their residence rights might only be guaranteed in the particular member state in which they were living at the time.</p>
<p>TRANSITION PERIOD</p>
<p>Setting out demands for the new phase of negotiations to be launched at the Dec. 15 summit if May confirms her offers, the parliament stressed that any transition period — of “not more than three years” — to avoid a “cliff edge scenario” depends on a deal on the whole divorce package and would mean Britain being bound by all EU structures while no longer having a say on them.</p>
<p>It ruled out “any trade off” in negotiations between British contributions to EU security and economic benefits for Britain and said the latter could not be as good as membership of the EU or of the EEA, whose members include Norway and Iceland.</p>
<p>In any free trade agreement, “market access to services” — a big part of British exports, notably in finance — “will always be subject to exclusions, reservations and exceptions”.</p>
<p>Any security and defense cooperation would be subject to EU rules on data protection, the resolution added, reflecting concern among lawmakers that Britain will seek an exception in return for sharing its recognized prowess in intelligence.</p>
<p>Seeking to meet a end-of-the-week EU deadline for a deal on divorce terms in order to give EU states time before the summit to agree their offer on opening trade talks, May plans to present tweaked proposals on the Irish border in the coming day, the Irish prime minister said.</p>
<p>Should she miss it, senior EU officials say, it could be February before they return to the issue — raising concern that businesses will start switching more investment out of Britain.</p>
<p>That delay, EU officials believe, could put May’s own weak position in jeopardy, and throw new doubt on the process. A senior official closely involved in the talks said however that member states, including power couple Germany and France, seem in no mood to ease demands on Britain to ensure a quick accord.</p>
<p>(Alistair Macdonald; editing by Clive McKeef)</p> | false | 1 | alastair macdonald brussels reuters britain guarantee rights yet unborn children join eu parents brexit accept eu judges rulings rights according draft european parliament resolution seen reuters thursday document drafted monday vote next week eu summit may launch talks future euuk free trade pact also confirms british prime minister theresa may secured agreement brussels british citizens eu able live freely member state brexit resolution prepared basis agreement may sign monday objections allies northern ireland forced postponement due concerns plan keep regulatory alignment province eu ensure hardening border island ireland also lays demands legislature must approve treaty include limiting british benefits future agreement insistence london continue abide european human rights convention also insists britain automatically adopt new eu legislation passed loses vote transition period march 2019 draft makes mention point discussion monday talks interrupted would end supervision eu citizens rights european court justice certain number years two eu sources said compromise 10 years midway british offer five eu demand 15 years appears likely solution one eu source said compromise may presented two years transition period plus eight years may insisted ecj hold sway britain european parliament made courts involvement one priorities safeguarding position 3 million citizens eu states living britain parliamentary resolution drafted five parties hold vast majority chamber notes british agreement detail honor financial commitments bloc avoid hard irish border two three conditions eu wants sufficient progress toward divorce deal launch negotiations may wants free trade pact citizens rights goes detail citizens rights notably issues london resisting lawmakers demands included core family members persons durable relationship currently residing outside britain shall protected withdrawal agreement also case children born future outside britain london grant citizens automatic rights bring foreign spouses sought apply eu citizens brexit also wanted deny rights british residence children born abroad brexit britain also according draft accepted eu citizens export exportable benefits defined eu legislation country leaves european union accepted competence ecj relation interpretation withdrawal treaty citizens rights guaranteed declaratory light touch proportionate procedure consisting single form per family resolution stated going way addressing lawmakers complaints costs hundreds euros could incurred families making several declarations lawmakers still pressing procedure free five months negotiation may largely given way eu demands one sign concession brussels resolution states british citizens living eu state brexit day march 29 2019 would retain right reside move freely whole eu previously eu said residence rights might guaranteed particular member state living time transition period setting demands new phase negotiations launched dec 15 summit may confirms offers parliament stressed transition period three years avoid cliff edge scenario depends deal whole divorce package would mean britain bound eu structures longer say ruled trade negotiations british contributions eu security economic benefits britain said latter could good membership eu eea whose members include norway iceland free trade agreement market access services big part british exports notably finance always subject exclusions reservations exceptions security defense cooperation would subject eu rules data protection resolution added reflecting concern among lawmakers britain seek exception return sharing recognized prowess intelligence seeking meet endoftheweek eu deadline deal divorce terms order give eu states time summit agree offer opening trade talks may plans present tweaked proposals irish border coming day irish prime minister said miss senior eu officials say could february return issue raising concern businesses start switching investment britain delay eu officials believe could put mays weak position jeopardy throw new doubt process senior official closely involved talks said however member states including power couple germany france seem mood ease demands britain ensure quick accord alistair macdonald editing clive mckeef | 584 |
<p><a href="" type="internal">The Faith Angle Forum</a>&#160;is a semi-annual conference which brings together a select group of 20 nationally respected journalists with 3-5 distinguished scholars on areas of religion, politics &amp; public life.</p>
<p>“To Change the World: The Irony, Tragedy, &amp; Possibility of Christianity in the Late Modern World”</p>
<p>South Beach, Florida</p>
<p>Speaker:</p>
<p>Dr. James Davison Hunter, LaBrosse-Levinson Distinguished Professor of Religion, Culture &amp; Social Theory, University of Virginia</p>
<p>Respondents:</p>
<p>Ross Douthat, Columnist, The New York Times</p>
<p>Amy Sullivan, Contributing Editor, Time</p>
<p>Moderator:</p>
<p>Michael Cromartie, Vice-President, Ethics &amp; Public Policy Center</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>Michael Cromartie</p>
<p>MICHAEL CROMARTIE: We’ve been doing this conference for&#160;10 years now. For those of you who have never been to this conference, let me tell you why it exists. America’s preeminent religious historian is a man named Martin Marty from the University of Chicago.&#160; Marty once said there’s no news in the news today that’s not somehow related to religion news. Whether it’s the rise of the Christian right in politics or the religious motivations for terrorist attacks, or declarations from the Catholic bishops on war and peace or on the economy, or the nature of marriage, or bioethical concerns, or what is a mega-church, or what do Mormons believe, presidential faith-based initiatives, religion and foreign policy, or the global revival of Pentecostalism. All of these issues are related to religious convictions and religious actors in the public square, and everywhere we turn the relationship of religion and politics, and religion and rhetoric, the question of the “faith angle” keeps coming up. So we came up with this idea to hold these conferences to help reporters, and not just religion reporters, but political reporters, to understand different aspects of religion in American public life, and religion and international affairs. Our purpose in these programs is simply to bring you into contact and conversation with some of the best scholars in American life today on these questions, in order to help you understand more clearly these important issues.</p>
<p>Professor James Hunter’s new book To Change the World is just out from Oxford University Press. James is the LaBrosse-Levinson Distinguished Professor of Religion, Culture and Social Theory at the University of Virginia. He is the author of eight books, the editor of three books, and has published a wide range of essays and reviews all variously concerned with the problem of meaning and moral order in a time of political and cultural change in American life. James we are delighted you can join us.</p>
<p>James Davison Hunter</p>
<p>DR. JAMES DAVISON HUNTER: Thanks, Mike. You know one of the unofficial status symbols of popular culture is how many times you get to host Saturday Night Live. Well, in academia it’s how many times you are invited as an academic to this conference. This is my third time. Mike, thanks for keeping me in the game here.</p>
<p>I’ve got way, way too much material, but I’ll talk really fast. This is a new book that’s comprised of three essays that address the question of how Christians in America engaged the late-modern world. I never set out to write this book, and once I wrote it I didn’t think I would publish it, and then when I decided to publish it I thought maybe I would even publish it anonymously. Well, here it is.</p>
<p>All of my work tends to range between social theory, history, moral philosophy and political sociology, but this project I also move into theology, and it was a surprise to me. It’s a new territory for me, because I have no formal training in it and very little expertise. But I moved in this direction largely borne out of my own long frustration with the disparities between my understanding of Christian faith and a range of initiatives actively promoted in the name of Christian engagement. And I guess that frustration reached the breaking point. And so I started putting pen to paper.</p>
<p>The point of continuity with my previous work is the ongoing questions of meaning and moral order. How do we make sense of the late modern world? How do people live in the late modern world with any integrity, coherence? How do they do it, and is it possible to do it? So there are points of continuity. I’m still trying to answer these questions.</p>
<p>Again, there are three essays, and I want to focus on the second essay. The whole project is framed in terms of Christianity and&#160;world changing, and the first essay essentially looks at how the implicit social theory that underwrites the ways in which Christians of all stripes, all varieties, engage the world.&#160; I make a case that the social theory that animates their engagement with the world is very&#160;flawed and&#160;deeply problematic, and all their ambitions for changing the world will fail precisely because they don’t understand the nature of culture and how it changes.</p>
<p>But the ambition to change the world is still there and so the second essay addresses the obvious issue of power, which is that to change the world implies influence, and influence implies power. So the second essay is called “Rethinking Power,” and it’s an attempt to again unpack the implicit view of power that underwrites their attempts to change the world.&#160;The means of influence and change is overwhelmingly the instrumentalities of politics.</p>
<p>In getting at what I think is most interesting in this second essay, I don’t focus on political theory. I focus on a realm that I call political culture. By political culture what I mean is, the&#160;framework of moral claims and narratives within which ideals,&#160; attitudes, institutions, and actions, operate.</p>
<p>By comparison to political theory and political science, the dynamics of political culture aren’t often discussed in academic circles, but it seems to me critically important. It brings into relief the nature and character of politics as opposed to simply the form and process or the ideals and ends of politics.</p>
<p>So I begin the second essay with a reflection on one of the great puzzles of modern social theory, the problem of social solidarity.</p>
<p>How do societies hold together? The classic answer to that question was that traditional societies, that is agrarian, economically underdeveloped and non-urban societies were held together mainly by beliefs held in common by all of its members. Modern societies by contrast are held together through social and economic interdependence.</p>
<p>Now, the reason why this question remains a puzzle is that just as people and associations and so-called traditional societies depended heavily upon each other for the sake of survival, so too in modern societies we depend upon at least some common beliefs, some shared ideals, some collective myths to function smoothly. The question of how societies hold together gains new poignancy in a world like ours where even a minimal consensus of sensibilities, dispositions and attitudes seems elusive.</p>
<p>Where there are even fewer beliefs, ideals, commitments, and hopes held deeply in common and where there are few if any real meaningful traditions observed, or binding public rituals practiced, what else is there to hold such a society together? What remains to bind together its innumerable fragments? The answer in large part is power, the exercise of coercion with a threat of its use.</p>
<p>Now, in a democratic regime individuals and communities can’t exercise force themselves willy-nilly. Rather the final repository of legitimate force is found in the state. Clearly the state is not the exclusive domain of power in the modern world, nor is its instrumentalities the only means for ordering social life. But it is the final repository of legitimate force, and in this way it plays an exceedingly important role in modern societies. In its ability to make law, the state has the ability to assert its power positively or negatively on people and communities, to confer privileges or impose sanctions, to provide assistance or create difficulty, to bestow rights or to inflict punishment, harm, injury and loss.</p>
<p>Part of what I want to argue, and part of what I do argue in this book at this level is that in the context of late modernity, power does the work that culture used to do. Now, the reason for this excursion into social and political theory is that it seems to me to provide a starting point for some important developments in American political culture over the last century, and especially since the New Deal.</p>
<p>There is a tendency towards the politicization of everything. If modern politics is the sphere of leadership, influence and activity surrounding the state, politicization is the turn toward law and politics, that is, the instrumentality of the state to find solutions to public problems. The big problem is how to create or reinforce social consensus where little exists, or none could be generated organically.</p>
<p>And this is demonstrated by the simple fact that the amount of law that exists in any society is always inversely related to the coherence and stability of its common culture. The amount of law increases as cultural consensus decreases. By these lights the fabric of the common culture in modern America has worn even more thin in the last several decades, and the extraordinary amount of litigation we have seen in recent decades is just one place in which we see this. Much of that litigation and policy formation simply represents the attempts by institutions and groups to clarify its position, or jockey for position in the larger social world.</p>
<p>Politics it seems to me has become so central in our time that institutions, groups and issues are now defined relative to the state, its laws and procedures. Institutions such as popular and higher education, philanthropy, science, the arts, and even the family understand their identity and function according to what the state does or does not permit. Groups, women, minorities, gays, Christians, and so on, have validity not only but increasingly through the rights conferred by the state. Issues gain legitimacy only when recognized by law and public policy. It’s only logical then that problems affecting society are increasingly if not primarily seen through the prism of the state. That is in terms of how law, policy and politics can solve them.</p>
<p>So democratic ideals, principles and reasoning, provide a framework for making sense of and justifying the bend toward politicization in public life. When you boil it all down, politicization means that the final arbiter within most of social life is the coercive power of the state. I&#160;realized this is in my early work in the 1990s on culture wars, and the book I wrote of the same title, about 18 years ago.</p>
<p>It seemed to me that in all of these disputes, the first recourse in trying to resolve conflict was through litigation. And the reason why was that each of these special interest groups or factions, or aggrieved parties, was looking for the patronage of the state to simply resolve things. Persuasion was out the window. It was all about the patronage of the state.</p>
<p>So when politicization is oriented toward furthering the specific interests of the group without an appeal to the common good, when its means of mobilizing the uncommitted is through fear, and when the pursuit of agendas depends more upon the vilification of opponents than on the affirmation of higher ideals, power is stripped to its most elemental forms.</p>
<p>Even democratic justifications are not much more than a veneer over the will to power. The actions themselves may be within the bounds of legitimate democratic participation, yet the basic intent and desire is to dominate, control and rule. What adds pathos to our situation is the presence of what Nietzsche called ressentiment, a political psychology of resentment, anger, envy, hate, rage, and revenge as the motive of political action.</p>
<p>The ressentiment has historical precedence. It has become the distinguishing characteristic of politics in modern cultures. Nowhere does it find a more conducive home than among the disadvantaged or mistreated as directed against the strong, the privileged, or the gifted. That was Nietzsche’s argument. But here’s an important qualification. Perception is everything.</p>
<p>It’s not the weak or aggrieved, per se, though it could be, but rather those that perceive themselves as such. Ressentiment is grounded in a narrative of injury, or at least perceived injury, a strong belief that one has been or is being wronged. It’s the sense of injury that’s key. Over time the perceived injustice becomes central to the persons or the group’s identity.</p>
<p>In that logic it’s only natural that wrongs need to be righted and so it is that the injury, real or perceived, leads the aggrieved to accuse, blame, vilify, and then seek revenge upon those who they see as responsible. The adversary has to be shown for who they are, exposed for their corruption, and put in their place.</p>
<p>Ressentiment then is expressed as a discourse of negation, the condemnation and denigration of enemies and the effort to subjugate and dominate those who are culpable. So, what am I saying about contemporary political culture? My sense is that Nietzsche was mostly right, that while the will to power has always been present, American democracy increasingly operates within a political culture that is a framework of meaning and of myth and so on that sanctions a will to domination.</p>
<p>This in turn is fueled by a political psychology of fear, anger, negation and revenge over perceived wrongs. I don’t want to overstate the case here. Clearly what I describe are not fully and comprehensively established realities. All is not power and all is not ressentiment. There are generally public spirited people on all sides of all issues. We know this.</p>
<p>Indeed most people are not resentment filled and power-hungry, but the key analytical point is this: That the motives of individuals and the structure of culture are not the same things. In terms of the structures of our political culture, these dynamics are clearly present and represent increasingly significant tendencies.</p>
<p>So with that backdrop the question is how do Christians stand in relation to the present configurations in our political culture? That’s the question I try to answer in the second essay of this book. There is no simple answer, for Christians, like any other social group, are not monolithic. Christians approach politics differently. So in this part of the book I focus on just three of these key positions, the conservatives, the progressives, and what I call the neo-Anabaptist positions because in contemporary America, these are the most prominent.</p>
<p>They are in effect political theologies and they are powerful in part because each is shrouded by compelling myths that give voice to the ideals and public identities of different parts of the Christian community. And though the political landscape is changing, and I hope we are able to talk in detail about some of that, these myths provide a source of continuity and the language and logic of their competing positions.</p>
<p>In their broad contours then these myths and the political theologies that emanate from them provide the primary scripts for thinking and discussing faith in public life for most Christians. These myths and scripts that derive from them cut across denominational and confessional traditions and principled Catholics, Evangelicals, fundamentalists, mainliners, Orthodox and Pentecostals could all be found, and are in fact often found, giving voice to each of these three public theologies.</p>
<p>So, what I try to demonstrate in the empirical heart of this, and using the voices of the key players in each of these three political theologies, is that all tell very different stories about America and the world, what’s wrong with it, of what needs to be changed, and yet for all of their differences, they all more or less share a common narrative structure. What is it?</p>
<p>One, there are problems in our historical moment that the community of faith worries about deeply and over which they have suffered injury. The fear that is experienced and the injury born by Christians of all commitments are not rooted in misapprehension, but have a basis in the historical realities of our time.</p>
<p>For one, for Christian conservatives, the forces of secularity in contemporary America within such institutions as higher education, public education, the news media, advertising, popular entertainment and so on, are very powerful, and their agenda, deliberately or not, is fundamentally at odds with certain traditional Christian morality and spirituality. Whatever positive contributions one may find in it, much of the secularity is a solvent, unsettled convictions and ways of life. What remains of a traditional culture therefore is threatened with extinction and Christian conservatives are right to worry about the effects of this on their descendents.</p>
<p>It’s also true that among various Christian groups the Christian right has held disproportionate political power since the early 1980s. From the vantage point of progressives, their concerns are narrowly conceived and do not at all represent the spectrum of Christian conviction. One result of this is that the interests and concerns of Christian progressives have been eclipsed.</p>
<p>Christian progressives are right to be alarmed and distressed by that fact. By the same token, the fear of the neo-Anabaptist of a Christian community unthinkingly assimilated to the worst aspects of consumer culture and complicit in the perpetuation of a Constantinian alliance with the secular state and super capitalism is undoubtedly well grounded.</p>
<p>The effectiveness of the church is certainly compromised by those alliances, especially when they proceed without any consideration for the standards of Scripture and their tradition. So the neo-Anabaptists are right to be uneasy with the present situation.</p>
<p>Barbara Bradley Hagerty</p>
<p>BARBARA BRADLEY HAGERTY, NPR: Can you tell us what neo-Anabaptists are?</p>
<p>DR. HUNTER: The neo-Anabaptists are the neo-pacifist tradition. It was made most prominent in recent history by John Howard Yoder, who wrote a series of books, but most importantly The Politics of Jesus written toward the end of the Vietnam War, but it’s been picked up by again many others, but most importantly Stanley Hauerwas and Richard Hays at Duke Divinity School, and&#160;a number of others.</p>
<p>They’re the smallest of the three traditions of political theology, but what makes them so interesting is that they’re the most intellectually serious and an entire cohort of younger Christians, I think in the Catholic as well as Protestant traditions, are turning in that direction in a way given the ineffectiveness and given the exhaustion of what they see within the Christian right and left.</p>
<p>So the first thing they do is they’ve got fears. They do sense real injury, but what do they do in the face of it? Well, they politicize their concern. This is not all they do, but it is the strategy of choice for collective and public engagement. And though there are changes in the political landscape that are taking place even now, the propensity of certain Christian organizations and their leadership to politicize their engagement with the world isn’t likely to diminish any time soon.</p>
<p>To use Charles Taylor’s helpful concept, politics has become a social imaginary that defines the horizon of understanding and the parameters for action. Myth and history provide narrative context, but in each of the three dominant perspectives on the church’s engagement with the culture, politics is the way in which social life and its problems are imagined and it provides the framework for how Christians envision solutions to those problems.</p>
<p>This is especially true for the largest factions, the Christian right and the Christian left, but it’s even true for the neo-pacifist, the neo-Anabaptists. Most people think that what matters is the ideological direction of one’s politics. Are you conservative, are you liberal? These differences occupy most of our attention and argument, but what’s never challenged is the proclivity to think of the Christian faith in its engagement with the culture around political terms. This proclivity has been both ubiquitous and unquestioned for a long time.</p>
<p>Okay, so politicization is the second thing that they all hold in common. Here’s the third, and it’s the way that Christians in their variety have assimilated to the dominant political culture of ressentiment. Contemporary political culture in America is marked by a ressentiment, manifested by a narrative of injury and in turn a discourse of negation toward all they perceive to be the blame.</p>
<p>Though each expresses this ressentiment differently and in different degrees and to different ends, it is present in all of these political theologies. It’s especially prominent of course among Christian conservatives which may be why they have been so effective over the years in mobilizing their rank and file to political action.</p>
<p>Ressentiment is also essentially present among Christian progressives and it’s clearly a major source of their new solidarity and the motive behind their recent assertiveness in Democratic Party politics. Both the right and the left ground their positions in biblical authority and they both appeal to Democratic ideals and practices to justify their actions, but the ressentiment that marks the way they operate makes it clear that a crucial part of what motivates them is a will to dominate.</p>
<p>The neo-Anabaptists are different in this regard. It’s true that they participate fully in the discourse of negation, but domination is not their intent. So let me just say a couple of things, long concluding observations. I want to touch on a few ironies. The problem is that there are no political solutions to the problems that most people care about.</p>
<p>Politics can provide a platform for dissent and procedures for establishing public order. And the state can address administrative problems. This is what it’s designed to accomplish, but this only happens through accommodation, compromise and conciliation. The state can also address some of the legal and administrative aspects of these problems and in this way help or hinder the resolution of value-based problems.</p>
<p>Laws that prohibit discrimination against minorities are one important illustration of the constructive influence of the state. And while politics can only do so much, it’s also true that bad politics can do truly horrific things. These are all good reasons to be involved in the work of creating and maintaining good government.</p>
<p>The issue is really one of the appropriate expectations one should have of the state and its instrumentalities. What the state can’t do is provide fully satisfying solutions to the problem of values in our society. There are no comprehensive political solutions to the deterioration of family values, the desire for equity, or the challenge of achieving consensus and solidarity in a cultural context of fragmentation and polarization. There are no real political solutions to the absence of decency, or to the spread of vulgarity.</p>
<p>Because the state is a clumsy instrument and finally rooted in coercion, it will always fail to adequately or directly address the human elements of these problems, the elements that make them poignant in the first place. As a rule, when the state does become involved in such matters, its actions can often create more problems through unintended consequences, not fewer problems. At best, the state’s role addressing human problems is partial and limited.</p>
<p>It’s not nearly as influential as the expectations most people have of it. It is true that laws are not neutral. They do reflect values, but laws cannot generate values or instill values, or settle the conflict over values. The belief that the state could help us care more for the poor and the elderly, slow the disintegration of traditional values, generate respect among different groups, or create civic pride is mostly illusory.</p>
<p>It imputes far too much capacity to the state and to the political process. There is irony here. Values cannot be achieved politically because politics is finally and invariably about power. It’s not only about power, but finally about power. For politics to be about more than power it depends upon a realm that is independent of the political sphere. It depends upon moral criteria, institutionalized and practiced in the social order that are largely autonomous from the realm of politics.</p>
<p>The problem is that the impulse toward politicization extends to the politicization of values. This means that the autonomy of moral criteria, upon which a higher practice of politics depends is increasingly lost. Today most of the ideals and values that are discussed in public have acquired political content and connotation. Fairness, justice, equity, liberty, these have come to have little or no meaning outside the realm of politics. The other ideals and values that are discussed in public are largely reduced to instruments for one side or another in the quest for power.</p>
<p>Decency, morality, hope, marriage, family, children, are all important values, but they too have become political slogans. The irony of course is that no group in American society has done more to politicize values over the last half-century and therefore undermined their renewal than Christians, both on the right, since the early 1980s, and on the left during the 1960s and 70s, and in a way more recently.</p>
<p>Both sides are implicated and remain implicated today. The deeper irony is that in the Christian faith, one has the possibility of autonomous institutions and practices, both in judgment and in affirmation that could be a source of ideals and values that could elevate politics to more than a quest for power, but the consequence of the whole hearted and uncritical embrace of politics by Christians has been in effect to reduce Christian faith to a political ideology and various Christian denominations and para-church organizations to special interest groups. The political engagement of the various Christian groups is certainly legal, but in ways that are undoubtedly unintended, it has also been counterproductive to the ends to which they aspire. But there is also tragedy here.</p>
<p>With the reduction of the public to the political, and the subsequent politicization of so much of human experience, there is an assimilation to late modernity that has made politics the dominant witness of the church to the world. And then there is Christianity’s embrace of certain key characteristics of the political culture, a culture that privileges injury and grievance, that valorizes speech acts of negation and that legitimates the will to power. There is variation throughout the Christian community, and that the loudest public voices are all implicated in these distinct ways, especially Christian conservatives.</p>
<p>Let me dwell on them just for a moment. To be sure there’s significant spiritual vitality in Christianity and all of its communities, and not least within the evangelical and fundamentalist wings, at the same time key leaders and factions within American Christianity have cultivated collective identities that are constituted in distinct ways by that sense of injury to the faith and to America itself. The histories from which this narrative is drawn are always selective and sometimes just plain wrong, and yet the injuries sustained are not a complete fiction, as I’ve argued. There is a basis in fact for the claims made by each of these groups.</p>
<p>Yet an identity rooted in resentment and hostility is an inherently weak identity precisely because it is established negatively by accentuating the boundaries between insiders and outsiders and the wrongs done by those outsiders. Christian leaders, para-church organizations and denominations didn’t create that political culture, at least not by themselves. These patterns of understanding and engagement are fixed deeply in the larger structure of contemporary political culture.</p>
<p>Both established political parties depend on the culture war, for example, on their political, internal cohesion. The problem is that many prominent Christian leaders and Christian organizations in America have been at the corrupting center of this kind of tribalism, Christian conservatives most prominently. Christians may not have created that tapestry but they are certainly a fabric with it. What’s even more striking than the negational character of that political culture is the absence of robust and constructive affirmations. Vibrant cultures, healthy cultures, makes space for leisure, philosophical reflection, scientific and intellectual mastery, artistic and literary expression, among other things.</p>
<p>Within the larger Christian community in America, one can find such vitality in pockets here and there, and yet where they do exist, they tend to be eclipsed by the greater prominence and vast resources of the political activists and their organizations. Once more, there are few if any places in the pronouncements and actions of the Christian right or left, where I could find these kinds of affirmations, those kinds of gifts and so on are acknowledged, affirmed or celebrated. What this means is that rather than being defined by its cultural achievements, its intellectual and artistic vitality, its service to the needs of others, Christianity is defined to the outside world by its rhetoric of resentment and the ambitions of a will in opposition to others. To suffer is one thing. How one bears that suffering is quite another.</p>
<p>Among all factions within contemporary American Christianity, one can readily find an anger and resentment about what suffering they do endure. We know of course that bitterness can provide its own consolations. For one, it creates the gratifying sense of being winners, and on the right side of history. Indeed one cannot deny that prophetic judgment is part of the biblical narrative and the tradition of God’s people, but is the kingdom of God to be known predominantly by its negations?</p>
<p>To the extent that collective identity rooted in ressentiment has been cultivated and then nurtured through a message of negation toward the other, many of the most prominent Christian leaders and organizations in America have fashioned an identity and witness for the church that is, to say to the least, antithetical to its highest calling. The political options taken by the Christian right, the Christian left and the neo-Anabaptists, are perfectly legal, of course, but that doesn’t mean that the ways many of them engage their politics is either salutary or constructive. Not least it creates a dense fog through which it is difficult to recognize each other as fellow human beings and impossible to recognize the good that still is in the world.</p>
<p>The final tragedy is that in the name of resisting the internal deterioration of faith and the corruption of the world around them, many Christians, and Christian conservatives most significantly, unwittingly embrace some of the most corrosive aspects of the cultural disintegration they decry. By nurturing its resentments, sustaining them through a discourse of negation toward outsiders, and in cases pursuing their will to power, they become functional nihilists, participating in the very cultural breakdown they so ardently and passionately strive to resist. I’ll end it there.</p>
<p>MR. CROMARTIE:&#160;Thank you.&#160; James, I think that’s the first time we had anybody clap after a presentation. You’ve put a lot out there. You can understand why in light of this presentation I decided to ask two of the most gifted political journalists and writers in America to respond to this argument about politics, and about the law, and we’re delighted that Ross Douthat could join us, and Amy Sullivan. Ross is a columnist for the New York Times. He previously was a senior editor of The Atlantic and a blogger at Atlantic.com.</p>
<p>Right after he got out of Harvard he wrote a book called Privileged: Harvard and the Education of the Ruling Class. He’s also the co-author with Reihan Salam who is here with us. He’s the co-author of a book called Grand New Party: How Republicans Can Win the Working Class and Save the American Dream.</p>
<p>Welcome, Ross.</p>
<p>Ross Douthat</p>
<p>ROSS DOUTHAT: Thank you, Mike. I’m a repeat offender at this conference but this is the first time I’ve been up here, and it’s a very different experience. The difficulty with being respondent to a critique with which you substantially agree is figuring out exactly how to respond, and I’m going to use the trick of basically taking Prof. Hunter’s argument and reframing it (a sort of classic respondent’s trick) by going much further back in time.</p>
<p>I think that if we’re talking about Christianity specifically, and Christianity and its relationship to power, it’s useful to think of it this way: Christians are very comfortable having lots of power and very comfortable having no power at all. And there’s a historical reason for this, which is the way that the Christian faith developed specifically in the Roman Empire. You had a long period of Christianity as an essentially politically powerless minority that suddenly pivoted in the post-Constantinian era to becoming an enormously powerful effectively ruling class dominant majority and so on, without really a period in between.</p>
<p>I think part of what we’re seeing in America today is the challenges of this kind of in between-ness and figuring out where Christians go in that situation. So it’s useful, actually, to go back to the pre-Constantinian debates within Christianity, where you had a couple of views of how Christians should proceed in their relationship to power if they were powerless. One was I think essentially the sort of third and fourth century version of the neo-Anabaptists, the idea that basically Christians should have no part in what was effectively a corrupt, decadent, pagan society and so on.</p>
<p>And so you have people like Tertullian, for instance, one of the more stringent voices in early Christianity, saying —</p>
<p>MR. CROMARTIE: He’s never been quoted here before.</p>
<p>MR. DOUTHAT: Never been quoted before? All right. This is the first Tertullian quote. So he’s talking about the idea, can Christians legitimately serve in the Roman military, for instance. He says, “Shall the son of peace take part in the battle when it does not even become him to sue at law, and shall he apply the chain and the prison and the torture and the punishment who is not the avenger even of his own wrongs?”</p>
<p>So here you have — and this is me now and not Tertullian — here you have essentially a very stringent model of what obedience to the message of Jesus means in the political sphere. It means absenting yourself from anything that lends even the possibility of corruption. And that’s really I think the earliest narrative in the Christian church, but then later, especially as you enter this sort of transitional period in the third and fourth centuries, you have what you might call a more nuanced view — or what Tertullian would probably call the sellout view — which is basically the idea that Christians can legitimately participate in non-Christian institutions of power, but they should do so without any dreams of transforming the world, of remaking pagan culture and so on. They should serve because the world is worth serving, but they should be aware of the difficulties involved.</p>
<p>I’m oversimplifying here, but that’s roughly St. Augustine’s view: With Augustine you get a kind of real tolerance for things that I think we wouldn’t expect Christians to tolerate in terms of political action. One of the most famous examples is when Augustine writes about the duties of the magistrate in the Roman Empire, and of course the duties of the magistrate included overseeing — well, you could call them enhanced interrogations, but overseeing the use of torture to extract concessions and so on. And Augustine mounts a somewhat famous defense of Christians serving in this kind of magistrate capacity. He says that for the Christian magistrate in that situation, “human society, which he thinks it a wickedness to abandon, constrains him and compels him to this duty.” And you can see the implications following from that: Christians can enter the public realm and recognize that they’re going to do things that in some sense aren’t Christian because of their service to the world, but you don’t have the idea that the goal of Christians is to abolish torture, abolish slavery, etc.</p>
<p>All of that comes much later in Christian life, and it comes much later because over time, as Christians become more and more accustomed to the idea that they are affectively in charge, you get Christians beginning to have real ambitions, not only as being the salt of the earth, but of actually transforming the city of man, the political systems and cultures in which they are embedded. And you can cite specific examples of this from the attempts to create the truces of God in the Middle Ages to diminish warfare and make medieval society, which was obviously very warlike, more pacifistic and thus more Christian, down to the arguments against slavery advanced from Christian premises in the 16th century. Bartolome De Las Casas where — right. Has he been mentioned here before?</p>
<p>MR. CROMARTIE: No.</p>
<p>MR. DOUTHAT: Okay. Good.</p>
<p>MR. CROMARTIE: You got two new ones in.</p>
<p>MR. DOUTHAT: I got two new ones in. You can pick these specific issues, warfare in the middle ages, slavery in the early modern world, and so on, but you can also just see the overall architecture, the idea that’s born and eventually taken for granted that you would have legal norms and cultural norms shaped by Christian principles. It reaches its high point at various moments in the middle ages and early modern world where you have the Catholic Church assuming that it’s appropriate to have the civil law enforcing the moral and theological norms of Christianity.</p>
<p>Now, in its more totalistic form, this idea of a Christian politics in the Christian society basically disappeared after the wars of religion, the spread of religious toleration and so on. But in a more limited way I think it persists well into the 20th century, even or especially in the United States, where for all of our wild religious diversity, we retained a real Christian canopy, or at least a kind of mainline Protestant canopy for much of our history, that establishes the parameters for our major debates. If you look at these sort of spasms of Christian influence, political reform in the United States, down to the abolitionist era down to the social Gospel, Prohibition, the civil rights movement and so on, and including foreign-policy debates as well, there’s always a sense that a generic Christianity that provides a shared moral framework for these political debates. And there’s a general consensus that however much we may disagree about the specifics, society should be shaped by Christian principles. And so you have debates about what that means, not debates about whether it would be a good thing if American law and culture lived up to the highest Christian standards.</p>
<p>These are the traditions that both the Christian left and the Christian right in different ways I think emerge from, but I think everything that Prof. Hunter said about the nature of the late modern world is essentially correct. That the world has changed. America has changed. Larger proportions of Americans obviously still believe in God, call themselves Christian, et cetera, but Christianity as a canopy of shared assumptions is vastly weaker than it used to be and more — I never know how to pronounce this, which means I shouldn’t have written it down — fissiparous. Anyway, it has a much weaker purchase in particular on American elite, intellectual, political and so on, than it did even 50, certainly 100 or 150 years ago and so on. The most vibrant and vigorous forms of Christianity in the US in the last 30 years tend to be Pentecostal and Evangelical, which are scorned I think in different ways at the highest levels of American society, and there’s also obviously much more room for non-Christians and much more self-conscious efforts to make them feel welcome in American society, make American political debates, not just be shaped by a sort of narrow Christian approach and so on.</p>
<p>So this creates a problem for a Christian politics that came out of an age when there was an assumption that, you know, okay, we’re all Christian and we’re just debating about how to put these ideas into practice. And it leads I think to all of the kind of traps that are implicit or explicit in what Prof. Hunter is talking about. For one thing it means that you try and do more with politics — because if the canopy has fallen apart, the thing is all that we have left to repair the canopy with is politics. So you get this idea that the decline of Christianity in America can be reversed if only we vote for the right candidate and so forth. And you get this weird spillover effect that I think the professor gestured to where the political and cultural bleed together. I think you can see this very potently in the reactions on both sides of the political divide, a figure like Sarah Palin where the&#160;policy position she takes, matter left than for good or ill, the sort of idea of American culture that she represents. And it’s like a vote for Sarah Palin is a vote for restoring this lost idea of American society, or it’s a vote for defeating the return of this evil archaism or something.</p>
<p>So that’s one problem, the “do more with politics” problem. The second problem is the idea that you’re always fighting to win, dominate, to control. When I was a teenager my parents were involved with a very small Evangelical Church at Yale University and what I remember most visibly about it is the rhetoric of some of the people involved with it, where it was always “we are going to win Yale for Christ. We’re going to take back Yale for Christ.”</p>
<p>MR. CROMARTIE: How’s it going?</p>
<p>MR. DOUTHAT: You know, baby steps. We left and converted to Catholicism, but I’m sure they’re still there. The struggle for Yale is not an explicitly political situation, but the language of political victory bleeds into it. You see it in the way evangelical Christians have often approached Hollywood and the movie industry, where there’s this idea that if we can just get this great film made somewhere outside of Hollywood and blessed by the Holy Spirit, then we’ll show them. Then we’ll beat them. Then it will make $500 million. (That only happens when Mel Gibson is directing your film, it turns out.)</p>
<p>And finally, the other thing that happens when you’re strong enough to be influential but not actually strong enough to set the terms of debate is that you end up getting co-opted in politics. And you see this I think with both the Christian left and the Christian right in different ways. The Christian right is more politically powerful within the conservative coalition in the United States than the Christian left is within the liberal coalition. In some ways this gives the Christian right more independence. So you’re much more likely to hear Christian conservatives — the professor quotes some of them in his book — threatening to take their ball and go home, basically James Dobson is famous for doing this thing. If the Republicans don’t deal with our issues, then they’ll lose 40 million evangelical votes next year and so on. And you’re less likely to hear that kind of rhetoric — I mean you hear some of it, but from people on the religious left I think because they’re more conscious of their weaker position within the liberal coalition —</p>
<p>MR. CROMARTIE: And less money.</p>
<p>MR. DOUTHAT: Right, and less numbers. But what happens within the Republican coalition, with the religious right, is that religious conservatives have their set of issues and all they care about is — again, this is grossly over-generalized — but all they seem to care about is getting the Republican Party to pay attention to their issues, and all of the issues that aren’t their issues, they’re just happy to go along with whatever — whatever movement conservatism broadly understood is doing.</p>
<p>So you get this weird situation where, you know, if you listen to leading Christian conservatives you would think that their religion has nothing to say about healthcare that hasn’t already been said by AEI or Heritage, and it doesn’t have anything to say about foreign policy that hasn’t already been said by Dick Cheney, which I think is a peculiar state of affairs for American Christians to get into. So these are the problems which the professor has stated, and which I have just restated.</p>
<p>You don’t want to be too prescriptive, I think, at an event like this. But broadly speaking what Prof. Hunter talks about —</p>
<p>MR. CROMARTIE: Prof. Hunter said you can call him James.</p>
<p>MR. DOUTHAT: I can call him James.</p>
<p>MR. CROMARTIE: Yes.</p>
<p>MR. DOUTHAT: Okay. Part of the obvious answer, I think, is for Christian engagement in American life is a kind of depoliticization and both a shift in focus away to some extent from politics and toward family, community, and culture, and also a shift away from a language of power and towards the language of influence. At the beginning of your talk you said the need for influence leads to the need for power, and I think that’s true, but I think it’s possible to shift back. This is especially true I think in the cultural arenas. If you think about sort of a vibrant Christian presence in American culture, whether it’s in the university, in Hollywood and so on, it could be achieved by people in positions of influence who aren’t trying to retake Yale for Christ or conquer Hollywood for Christ, but who are trying to have some good Christian professors at Ivy League institutions, or a place for talented Christians to make movies influenced by 2000 years of Christian culture in Hollywood and so on.</p>
<p>So broadly speaking I think we’re in agreement, so I’ll just throw out a little one tension for the sake of having some kind of tension in my response, and here I’m going to cheat a little and quote from the third essay in James’s book, which he wasn’t talking about. So it’s a little unfair on my part.</p>
<p>At one point he says Christians must recognize that “it clearly benefited in many extraordinary ways from people of faith and the good ideals of the Christian tradition, America was never in any theologically serious way a Christian nation, nor the West a Christian civilization. Neither will they become so in the future. Ours is now emphatically a post-Christian culture and the community of Christian believers are now more than ever spiritually speaking exiles in the land of exile. Christians, as with the Israelites in Jeremiah’s account, must come to terms with this exile.”</p>
<p>Now, to a certain extent, that is very good Christian theology. I mean it is true that there is no such thing in a deep sense as a Christian nation, under the sort of broad theological premises of Christianity.</p>
<p>That being said, there are nations that are more Christian or more influenced culturally and politically by Christianity than others. And I think America remains such a nation, and the fact that it remains such a nation makes it hard for Christians to take quite as large a leap as I think James sometimes suggests they should. I think in certain ways, and I’ll be curious to hear your thoughts on this, you were suggesting that Christians should take more of what I suggested with St. Augustine’s position: A kind of participation that, you know, does seek change but involves a much greater withdrawal from politics than I think is actually possible for Christians in a society where there remains so many live debates, major political debates, that touch on issues of grave Christian concern.</p>
<p>In a way, if you compare the United States to Europe, Europe is closer to the kind of truly post-Christian society, especially Western Europe, that James is talking about. And I think in a way that makes things easier for Christians in dealing with European politics. I’ll take a sort of conservative issue, the issue of abortion for instance. Abortion is much more of a settled issue in a lot of Western European societies. It is much less of a political issue than it is in the United States, and there is much less room for Christians to hope that certain frankly ancient Christian ideas about abortion could influence law and public policy than there is in the United States. Now there’s some paradoxes here, and the actual existing laws in many European countries are actually more restrictive on abortion than those in the US, but in terms of the liveliness of the debate and the potential for further change, I think it’s clear that there’s more space for Christian ideas to affect politics in the US — to affect the politics of abortion in the US than there is in Europe. But this leaves Christians in the US in a much harder position, where I think you are sort of forced at some point to make choices. If you feel like you’re 3% of the country in Great Britain for instance, you don’t have to make some of these hard choices about ultimately siding with one political coalition over the other.</p>
<p>And I think that that problem — the problem of being not so powerful that you can ever hope to dominate the culture, and not having your religion be the kind of canopy that it used to, but at the same time not being so weak that you feel like you can just pull back from some of the political debate — I think that’s the challenge for Christians and the problem that’s driving a lot of this problem that you legitimately cite. Thank you.</p>
<p>MR. CROMARTIE: Thank you, Ross. We’re going to hear now from Amy Sullivan who is a contributing writer on religion for Time magazine. Amy is a graduate of the University of Michigan. She went to Harvard Divinity School. She worked as an editorial director at the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life, and then she was an editor at the Washington Monthly, but more importantly, Amy has written a very important book that got a lot of attention called The Party Faithful: How and Why Democrats Are Closing the God Gap. Amy, thank you so much for joining us.</p>
<p>Amy Sullivan</p>
<p>AMY SULLIVAN: Well, thank you. It’s such a pleasure to be here. Although I have to say it is more work when you’re at one of these things and you have to be up here. But I’m especially happy to be talking about James’s book, which I know he felt somewhat ambivalent about writing, but I think it’s a very important book, and if there’s any justice, it will get discussed widely within both Christian traditions that we’re discussing here today.</p>
<p>And I also hope this means that he has forgiven me for not coming to Virginia to work with him as a doctoral student. Eight years ago, in a misguided effort encouraged by EJ Dionne to get a PhD in sociology, I was looking at Virginia, but ended up going to another program where they kept telling me that I wrote like a journalist. It took me about a year and a half to realize that they didn’t mean that as a compliment –[Laughter]– which led me into journalism happily enough. So I’m sorry that I didn’t get a chance to work with you, but kind of not, because I think I would have enjoyed it too much to get into journalism. This is much more fun to be here.</p>
<p>One of the things that James does that I really appreciated in the book is go through the myths and the self narratives that religious traditions tell about themselves. He kind of outlined them a bit in his presentation, but I want to spend a little more on that because I think it’s important to understand if you want to understand how religious traditions conceive of their relationship to power, and where their position is, particularly in the political structure.</p>
<p>I’m going on the assumption that we’re all somewhat familiar with the narrative that the Christian right tells, and particularly the victim-based narrative that Ross talked about as well. Although I do hope we’ll have a chance to get into perhaps some questions about that. I’ve always wondered how the Christian right is able to reconcile what I see as something of a hole in the narrative, which is: We were a Christian country, everybody agreed on the same Christian values, the same Christian morality, and then the secular elite snatched it from us. That is the language that comes up over and over. “They took it away. They stole our country. They stole our values.”</p>
<p>There seems to be a hole there in the middle between “It was our country to begin with” and “Now we’re on the defensive and we’re trying to take it back.” So that’s something I hope we can fill in, but it’s on the whole a better understood narrative than what has happened on the Christian left.</p>
<p>This is going to be outlined in very broad strokes and probably getting a lot of things wrong. But in general, the Christian left traces its roots back to the oldest strands of Christianity, which is to say that it likes to focus on the teachings of Jesus, and Jesus as a role model. A few years ago Jim Wallis started up a group called the Red Letter Christians, and the idea there was these were Christians who paid attention to the red letters in the Bible, the words of Jesus that are usually printed in red ink. You see this as well in the reference to verses like Matthew 25, which I think has become the most popular political verse in Democratic circles. If you hear a Democrat quoting Scripture, it is probably Matthew 25 talking about caring for the least of these. And there’s a good reason why that is used as kind of a key verse for a lot of progressive Christians.</p>
<p>I should also step back here and say that in general I think it’s most accurate when you’re looking at American politics to speak of the religious left instead of the Christian left these days. But because there are specific aspects of the Christian left that you discuss and I think are worth talking about here, I’m going to focus on how the Christian left sees itself and some of the challenges there.</p>
<p>This self-identity goes back to the idea that the Christian left is looking to bring about God’s kingdom on earth. “Thy kingdom come, on earth as it is in heaven.” And because of that, they have been very involved in social causes, but ones that have kind of risen within the history of the Christian left to canonical status include the fight for abolition, the progressive era efforts, the social Gospel, antiwar efforts leading back to World War I, but certainly opposition to the war in Vietnam, and then civil rights, which was what a lot of folks on the Christian left see as a high water point for themselves. And then after that high water point there came what I think is best described as forty years in the wilderness, declining visibility and certainly declining influence for the Christian left, both in the political world but in larger culture in general, where they were rendered somewhat invisible.</p>
<p>There are some good questions to be asked about why that was. One of the theories that James puts forward in the book is that the Christian left simply achieved most of its goals, and it was hard to find a motivating mission, particularly after the civil rights movement was over. I think there’s something to that. You would have to deal with the fact that poverty has continued to be the driving topic that has occupied a lot of groups on the Christian left and we’re obviously not in a world where poverty has been alleviated or eliminated. But I think it’s also the case that a fair number of groups on the Christian left, and certainly the denominations themselves, were very distracted after the 1960s by internal issues.</p>
<p>Some of these were fights over whether to ordain women in certain denominations. Some of it grew out of the civil rights movement itself and struggles within denominations about race relations and about how active some denominational leaders had been in the civil rights movement, and in opposition to Vietnam as well. You saw within a lot of denominations a split between the leadership-which was much more likely to be opposed to the war-and the people in the pews, who were not necessarily of the same mind when it came to looking at the war.</p>
<p>These groups were somewhat distracted, preoccupied, and perhaps felt less urgency in terms of the issues that had been driving their agenda. And it was also the case that they were somewhat slow to recognize the rise of the Religious Right. I think they failed to recognize the fact that they didn’t have the prominence they had had 50 years earlier, that there was not the same sort of mainline Protestant establishment that could issue an editorial in the Christian Century that would then reverberate around different news outlets and actually have a voice in debates in society.</p>
<p>One of the stories that I found when I was writing my book that really seemed to illustrate this best for me was an account of a debate that William Sloan Coffin at Yale and Jerry Falwell had on the Phil Donahue show early in the 1980s. It’s hard to imagine people tuning in to see that these days, but the two of them debated for a good hour, and the essence of the debate was Jerry Falwell running circles around Coffin, whose demeanor was such that he couldn’t understand why he was paired against this guy who just seemed to be spouting nonsense. He couldn’t be bothered to even respond to most of the points that Falwell was making and just seemed completely unaware that this man was driving an extremely powerful movement in the country. And that kind of characterized the Christian left in general. They were right and the folks from the Religious Right were maybe temporary interlopers, but certainly didn’t need to be engaged with at all. Well, obviously we know what the upshot of that was.</p>
<p>Jerry Falwell and other leaders in other Religious Right were extremely successful at capturing media attention, political attention, and over the course of 20, 25 years, established the conventional wisdom that if you were Christian you must be conservative, and you probably were a Republican. Now, James spoke of resentment. This certainly did foster quite a bit of resentment on the Christian left.</p>
<p>Somebody like Jim Wallis has been preaching basically the same message since the early 1970s, and yet only seemed to get through about six or seven years ago. There’s certainly a healthy dose of resentment that comes with speaking into the wind for that long. But it was a diffuse resentment. There was resentment at the media for not noticing that the Christian left existed. There was resentment with the Democratic Party itself for not forming close relationships with these leaders who seemed to have common interests and common goals. And there was certainly resentment with conservative Christianity for purporting to speak for Christians in general, and yet presenting just a very specific kind of Christianity and Christian goals.</p>
<p>Now, that’s kind of the narrative in broad brush strokes and it ended around 2004, for various reasons, including the fact that the Democratic Party decided that nothing else seemed to be working, so maybe they should try talking to some religious leaders on the left. As EJ likes to say, Democrats found God in exit polls in 2004 and thought, well, we’ll give this a shot.</p>
<p>I think at this point it’s worth spending a little time talking about the effect of resentment as a motivator and a characteristic of our politics. When you look at the Christian right, there’s no question that the movement is driven by the idea that these Christians are a persecuted minority, that they are fighting against the culture, they’re fighting against the political system, that now the enemy is a secular elite that wants to undermine their values.</p>
<p>That’s not only a part of their narrative. It is key to their narrative. And it always has been, so it’s nearly impossible to understand the Religious Right without understanding that part of the scenario.</p>
<p>It’s different with the Christian left. Resentment provides some motivation these days, but it plays a slightly different role, which is to say if you listen to a lot of leaders of the Christian left these days, and a lot of the rhetoric, it’s about how the Christian right doesn’t speak for us all. In fact, there was a website that was started up during the 2008 campaign called Jamesdobsondoesn’tspeakforme.org, and it was pretty effective, after Dobson had gone after Obama and said that he didn’t think he was a real Christian.</p>
<p>They got tens of thousands of people to sign up, and it really pushed some buttons for people who had looked at the religious and political landscape for years and had seen the same picture we all had seen-if you were religious you were supposed to be conservative, and if you weren’t, well, maybe you weren’t religious. Or maybe you weren’t really as liberal as you thought you were, but regardless, there was no real space for you. And so after 2004 when somebody like Jim Wallis started to get more prominence, he served as an inspiring figure for a lot of folks who weren’t necessarily responding to him so much as the idea that it was okay for them to be religious and not look like Ralph Reed, or sound like James Dobson.</p>
<p>So that kind of resentment has been a very effective tool at kind of bringing a lot of folks on the Christian left out of the closet and bringing them into contact with each other. But I think that that’s really what it is-a tool. It’s most certainly a recent part of the Christian left narrative, but it is not something that has been part of their self identity going back, and I would suspect that it’s probably temporary as well.</p>
<p>It’s been an extremely effective kind of media narrative for Wallis and others to get the attention of people in the news business, to get Jim on Meet the Press, to be able to present this new, crazy idea that you can be religious and not be conservative. So they are aware of that and they’re running with it. And probably appropriately so, because it’s hard to get people to listen to what you stand for if they don’t recognize that you exist. Certainly if they don’t recognize that you exist and you represent a pretty sizable population. I think there will be a period of time-maybe it’s a decade, maybe it’s 15 years-during which you see folks on the Christian left continuing to push this idea that the Religious Right inappropriately stole the Christian identity, that they’ve been hurting the faith, that the Christian left wants to reclaim its tradition, its face. But I do think that that will end up being a temporary part of their narrative.</p>
<p>What is not so temporary is the struggle and the tensions that they are dealing with now that there is a Democrat in the White House who knows that they exist, and who spent much of the 2008 campaign reaching out to people of faith, talking to religious leaders, and who has in fact not only disbanded the office of the faith-based initiatives, but expanded it and added an advisory council with 25 faith leaders.</p>
<p>I think more than anything that has led to a bit of an identity crisis on the Christian left, for a number of reasons. One is that it raises expectations. The faith-based office is a much more visible-and at least in the structure of the White House-of a higher rank than just the religious liaison office that folks on the Christian left had during the Clinton years. With that carries an expectation that perhaps they will have the ear of the president, or at least the ear of somebody who has the ear of the president.</p>
<p>We’re only a year in, so the verdict is still out, but there has already been a significant amount of grumbling, particularly in terms of how much can actually be seen in a tangible form of what the council has done versus what the impact has been, particularly with the president and some of his more senior advisers. And I think we’ll still need to wait to see if this is anything more than Joshua Dubois running a very effective liaison operation, but not in fact having himself the power to turn that into policy recommendations to be implemented.</p>
<p>Again, I say that as the recommendations I believe just went out last week. It’s too early to say that they’ve been ignored but-and I hope David Saperstein will jump in some time in the question period to give us some sense of what’s been going on on the inside and his sense of that.</p>
<p>Leaders in the Christian left have also had 30 years to see the Religious Right establish and navigate a relationship with the Republican Party, and not necessarily do it well. They have been able to see from the outside the challenges of being close to power, of being inside the room, but trying to retain still your own prophetic identity. That doesn’t necessarily mean that they can avoid succumbing to the same challenges, and I think that also can be observed right now. But it does mean that they are aware of what the challenges and what some of the risks are.</p>
<p>Again, in the book, James points out that already some of the leaders have failed to avoid succumbing to these temptations, that it is very easy to use the same kind of demonizing language against opponents that they have rightly complained about the Religious Right using in the past, to use the same construction of, you know, what would Jesus do. Well, Jesus apparently no longer would try to outlaw gay marriage but he would make sure that we had universal health care for everybody. I think it’s as difficult to claim that you know what Jesus would do about both of those and yet that is kind of the same line of argument that many groups end up falling back on.</p>
<p>And there’s also no question that the temptation to align yourself with the party in power, particularly when the party in power is listening to you, is extremely strong. Somebody like Jim Wallis continues to say God is not a Democrat or a Republican, and yet there’s no question that Jim’s access is very good in the Democratic Party, and that is where most of his time is spent. He says once he is off the council-because the council members rotate every year-that it will be easier for him to kind of fight from the outside, and that was certainly how he sees the Clinton years. He had almost constructed a self-narrative of how he had access during the early years and then he agitated too much and was kicked out and then became kind of the Crusader from the outside, particularly critiquing welfare reform. So I’m personally interested to follow him and the story that he tells during the Obama administration, as that continues.</p>
<p>And lastly, I think there is a tension that the Christian left has got the Christian right just never had, and that they accept more of the legitimacy of government to solve some social problems. It is the case that many on the Christian left think that they should be working in concert with government, that there is an appropriate partnership between faith-based groups and the government to solve social problems, and so that makes it difficult to just throw up their hands and say, well, we’re not going to have anything to do with you. Because at the end of the day, they do believe that you can do good by changing laws. As you say, you can’t make people believe in equity, but you can give children health insurance, and that’s something that some of these leaders believe very strongly in.</p>
<p>I want to end by throwing out one suggestion that kept occurring to me as I was reading the book, which is that there’s no question, when you read this, and particularly the second section, that this is an extremely personal book for James, borne out of very deep frustration with how both the Christian left and the Christian right have navigated their own power, have aspired to power, have tried to live up to the Christian commission to change the world.</p>
<p>And so I’m very sympathetic to how strongly he feels about this. I wonder however if it’s a frustration you feel with a generation that may be passing, and an approach to politics that may in fact turn out to be limited to a certain period in time. I may be overly optimistic here, as somebody who thinks that it can be both inappropriate but certainly can lead to some bad theology for religious groups to be too closely intertwined with the political system. But in my reporting particularly on young evangelicals, I think I’m seeing some trends that suggest that perhaps this model is changing.</p>
<p>Just to throw out a couple of examples here, young evangelicals by and large continue to vote for Republicans-in 2008, they were strong McCain voters. But they don’t tend to have the same strong identification with a political party that their parents’ and grandparents’ generation did. I think that’s in large part because neither political party really matches up with what their priorities are. If you are concerned about abortion, and maybe have questions about gay marriage or civil unions, but you also think that the government should be doing more to protect the environment, you think there should be a stronger social safety net, you think that diplomacy maybe is a better way to go about sorting out problems than military intervention, there is not a clear answer for you when you go to the voting booth of which party matches up best with your priorities.</p>
<p>That wasn’t necessarily the case for their parents’ generation and I think it is maybe detaching them a bit from politics in a way that their parents always talked about but is a little more natural for them. There is also something I have talked to Mike about, which is that the dichotomy of the sacred and the secular that really was a very strong debate that a lot of their parents and their grandparents had about whether it was even appropriate to get involved with politics.</p>
<p>That debate simply doesn’t even exist for young evangelicals. The argument has been ended. It’s okay to be involved in the political structure. And in a way, even though that argument was kind of taken care of by the religious right, I think it’s led to a post-religious right mentality among a lot of young evangelicals. I kind of think of them as the faith-based generation, and I wonder what the effect of eight years of Bush making an argument that it’s okay for a faith-based organization to be in partnership with government, will have on this generation of evangelicals.</p>
<p>They don’t necessarily accept the argument that government is an inappropriate partner to solve problems like third world poverty or global AIDS. They see government as having a much broader reach, much greater resources. They know their churches have been working for decades to try to help on these issues. And they can only get so far. So that then makes it much harder for them to be reached by Republican rhetoric of “government is bad, we should only focus on the private sector and charities and churches to do this kind of work.”</p>
<p>A lot of these evangelicals have been going on short-term missions, you know, either through their colleges, and that’s just changing their sense of the scope of the problems that they’re facing, again, in a way that their parents’ generation just couldn’t see.</p>
<p>My time is apparently up and I’m going to take a minute just to say that this may also be something we’re seeing with young Catholics. First of all, you are seeing some resentment play out there with the idea that the bishops don’t speak for all Catholics. A group like Catholics United is presenting a Catholic faith that we just haven’t seen before in terms of pushing back and being willing to stand up for a set of different issues. On an issue like healthcare, you really saw Catholics United in particular walking this fine line, and not necessarily saying, well, because the Democrats are for this health-care package, health reform package, we’re going to sign onto it. They in fact had huge concerns about what the funding of abortion was going to look like and we won’t know whether they would have been willing to oppose health reform in the final consideration if things like the Senate language from Ben Nelson hadn’t been in there. But it was a very large concern of theirs, and now that that’s there, they’ve been pushing the bishop’s conference and they are gathering all their members to flood the bishop’s conference with phone calls and e-mails urging them to support healthcare reform and taking a very vocal, different stand on this health reform bill than the bishop’s conference has.</p>
<p>So that is just to say that perhaps the next generation will have a different model of pursuing political engagement, and perhaps that will make you a little less concerned.</p>
<p>MR. CROMARTIE: I do want to mention that in James Hunter’s book he dealt with the section on power. The whole first third of the book is about cultures and how cultures change over time. And so it may be that you’re going to ask a question about that chapter not knowing that he’s addressed it in the book. So James, be prepared to answer that question because I thought it was one of the most fascinating parts of your book. Mike Gerson, you’re first and then John Fund. Do you want to respond quickly?</p>
<p>DR. HUNTER: It will be very brief. It will be two comments. First of all, I’m very grateful for the comments that both of you offered. I could elaborate at great length, but thank you for the time that you put into this, and I’ll try to address some of the things woven into some of the comments and responses of others. The second, the one point I really can’t let pass is the question, is this passing? Is it a temporary thing? Three things very quickly, under this heading.</p>
<p>In my larger work and the way I am oriented as a scholar, I speak about the difference between climate and weather. Most people think about current events, about politics, about the things that are going on in our world, in light of the weather. Today it’s sunny, tomorrow it’s rainy, it’s cold, but it’s going to get warmer, those kinds of things. That tends to be our orientation, and it tends to focus our attention on the surface.</p>
<p>The work that I do tends to be oriented and framed in terms of climatological changes that are taking place, for which the weather could or could not be indications of what’s going on at that deeper and more implicit level of social and cultural change. Why is this not going to pass? Three reasons. The first reason has to do with solidarity. Unless the issue of solidarity and a deeper more common culture is found to replace the dynamics of power, we’re not going to see any diminution of the dynamics of power in a highly and irrevocably pluralistic world like ours.</p>
<p>The second is that a notion of the public has been subsumed by politics, and conflated it so that until we disaggregate the public from the political, it seems to me the only way to think about the common good or common problems, is through political means.</p>
<p>The third issue, and again this is addressed more in the first essay, has to do with the nature of culture itself. Is it about attitudes and opinions of individuals even if they’re collective, or is it about powerful institutions that frame our understanding of time and space of identity and of purpose and all of these kinds of things that operate again below the surface? My argument is that culture is most powerful when it’s unstated, not when it’s conscious. And there is a fundamental difference between the attitudes of say in this case young evangelicals and very powerful institutions like the party system, and the special interest organizations that surround these.</p>
<p>So on those three different levels that are operating at the level of climatological change, I don’t see this passing anytime soon.</p>
<p>MR. CROMARTIE: Michael Gerson.</p>
<p>Michael Gerson</p>
<p>MICHAEL GERSON, The Washington Post: I don’t think I have heard a presentation that I agreed with more and that I also bristled at more, in a certain way. I mean this is — I realize it’s a corrective, but you talked a lot about the will to power and resentment and fear, and very little about justice, which is also one of the most powerful of the political theology kind of concepts that’s guided Christians over the years in the way they approach these things.</p>
<p>And it strikes me that the historical context for this politicization is not just liberalism or other things. I mean it’s a lot of that in international relations was because of the Holocaust, okay, where you have the growth of natural right theory and universal human rights, and kind of the political claim to universal human rights after in reaction to Nazi Germany, a lot of that informed by the way by mainline Christian thought.</p>
<p>Mary Anne Glendon points out a lot of influence from Catholic social thought, on the universal declaration of human rights, and all those kind of categories. And of course, the tremendous indictment of the church in Germany, for not opposing a political paganism, may be the greatest scandal in the history of Christianity, taking place just 60 years ago. Amy and others have mentioned that there’s central role that the civil rights movement played in this which was an indication of a traditional community that was firmly bound, that had rules, that had gone over for a long amount of time that was deeply unjust, that violated human rights, and that law had to intervene in order to, you know, guarantee those rights.</p>
<p>And we often talk about culture being upstream from politics. That is just a huge example of law being upstream from social change and that we have all gone through. And it was the very message of the letter from the Birmingham jail. I mean that’s what Martin Luther King was fighting against in this context. So I completely buy the critique that whenever the Christians act as a group to defend their own institution and ideals as opposed to other institutions and ideals, becomes a special interest group in a political setting, that it both undermines its influence and its own authority and background.</p>
<p>But the history that we have seen over the last 60 years is really the predominant history in many ways Christians not doing that, but taking a Christian anthropology seriously, a theory of human beings, their rights and values, okay, which is their greatest contribution in a lot of ways in the modern world.</p>
<p>That’s the way people who are pro-life view themselves for the most part. That’s the way people who want universal healthcare view themselves, and you can argue about prudential matters that relates to how you do that and other things, but you can’t argue that the law is not related to the protection of basic human rights and dignity.</p>
<p>There are plenty of abuses, but I’m not sure that at least the presentation, and I’m anxious to read the book, takes that element of political theology seriously enough.</p>
<p>MR. CROMARTIE: John Fund, you’re up next.</p>
<p>John Fund</p>
<p>JOHN FUND, The Wall Street Journal: I couldn’t agree more with Amy. I talk to people many of whom say that they’re increasingly disenchanted with parties for whom their adherence to principles is so weak that you could walk through their deepest principles and not get your ankles wet. So they increasingly are going more and more towards organizations they trust more, including at the neighborhood and local level, people and organizations they can deliberately impact.</p>
<p>But what struck me, and I certainly agree with you that the Catholic left was ignored very much by the media for far too long, but I think also a subset of the Catholic left was also even more ignored and that’s pro-life Democrats, and then you mentioned them at the end and I think it’s particularly relevant because we may be days away from universal healthcare being defeated, perhaps solely by the votes of pro-life Democrats.</p>
<p>And I admit, I do not come out of a direct pro-life tradition. I didn’t spend a whole lot of time talking with them until recently, but in talking with them, you get a real sense of alienation and resentment just beneath the surface as to how long their concerns were — they still hark back to Gov. Casey being denied a speaking role in the 1992 Democratic convention, and just as we talk about the alienation and perhaps the anger of some of the people in the Christian right, I think we may be seeing another news story coming up in the near future, which is that if you look at Democratic primary voters, and you look at the actual people who cast the votes for Democratic candidates as opposed to Democratic representatives, you’re probably dealing with a population of about 30%, especially even in minority communities.</p>
<p>So I think this tension between religious communities and political parties is only going to grow because they have found the avenue to influence the local parties, but they’ve also found that there is a glass ceiling effectively put on them. A bunch of politicians that want to pat them on the head and say thank you very much for your vote, thank you very much for your support, but why don’t you just go sit in a corner and be quiet. We’ve seen that certainly with Republicans and Christian right recently.</p>
<p>We may be on the verge of seeing that depending on how much the leverage on the health-care bill goes and how influential they suddenly become, we may be seeing that on the Democratic side in the near future, too.</p>
<p>MR. CROMARTIE: Okay. Barbara Bradley Haggerty and then John Siniff.</p>
<p>MS. HAGERTY: Who are the Anabaptists?</p>
<p>MR. CROMARTIE: Quakers and Mennonites.</p>
<p>Barbara Bradley Hagerty</p>
<p>MS. HAGERTY: Got it. Okay. I don’t really think of them as a political force, but I really actually have two questions. The first is aimed at all of you, and the second is probably more at Amy. I’m just curious what you think the future of the religious right is. We see the old guard dying off. We see Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson who isn’t dead but he has said so many outrageous things he’s practically dead in terms of influence.</p>
<p>All these guys are getting old and in their place you have folks like obviously Rick Warren or Joel Osteen, who is very influential but really isn’t influential politically. Then you see young people who seem to be less engaged with some of the hot button political issues like, for example, gay marriage. Religious conservatives, young religious conservatives don’t get hopped up about gay marriage. Maybe they do about abortion but they seem to be more engaged on issues that are kind of the less family values, moral issues. Like, you know, they’re interested in the environment.</p>
<p>So what I’m wondering is do you think they are able to galvanize the next generation politically, or do you think that this next generation, as Amy kind of alluded to, is becoming detached from religious institutions. For example, there was a recent study that showed that young Catholics have become much more disengaged from the Catholic Church, even though they subscribe to the values of the Catholic Church.</p>
<p>So, I’m just wondering what’s going to happen to the religious right. And the other thing I wondered is I’m&#160;curious about whether religious progressives are disillusioned with the Obama administration because I hear that a lot, and I would love your take on that, too, David. They were so effective in the political campaign, but it feels like they’re not getting any payback. And I’m just wondering what you all think about that?</p>
<p>MR. DOUTHAT: I would associate myself with Mike Gerson’s comment. I mean I think that, you know, one, you can easily get too caught up in critique of any kind of religiously infused political movement. As you get further and further away from a sort of galvanizing justice based moment, I think it becomes easier and easier for a movement to sort of get into ruts and shift into darker patterns and so on but, yeah, I think the kind of semi-withdrawalism that you sometimes seem to be counseling I think isn’t going to be a sufficient answer for Christians on both the left and the right.</p>
<p>I don’t know what the future of the religious right is. One of the fascinating things about our politics now is that the election we just had was fought in such a different socioeconomic climate than America is in right now., I mean, just take the case of the idea that young Americans are much more concerned about the environment and global poverty and so on, and that this would be one, a galvanizing force within the Democratic Party and, two, something that conservatives, religious conservatives would have to speak to going forward — this would become a big part of our politics. This seemed true during the campaign when you had Obama affectively co-opting religious language, co-opting maybe seems like a pejorative term, using religious language and McCain seemed uncomfortable with it and you could see this kind of sea change happening and so on.</p>
<p>Then the economy collapsed. Now, some of the religious-based, cultural water-based issues are still very much in play as John says in the health care debate. Obviously abortion has been very much in play and so on. But, you know, if you look at the polls, nobody cares about the environment right now. Nobody cares about fighting AIDS in Africa right now. These issues that seem to be so crucial to understanding shifting patterns of religion, religious-based voting and American life may become crucial again in three years or five years or 10 years or 15 years, but American politics has undergone a shift. We have a culture war in this country right now that isn’t about religion. For the first time in my lifetime — you know, you could argue it’s a little bit like this with Perot in the early 90s — we have a culture war about the future of the size of government. Basically that’s driven by these economic changes. And I think it makes it very hard — we’re going to come out of that debate at some point, but it makes it very hard to say what will the religious right and the religious left landscape look like when we come out of that. So that’s my way of not answering the question.</p>
<p>MR. CROMARTIE: Certainly. Thank you. Amy and then James.</p>
<p>MS. SULLIVAN: They’re trying. Obviously at Focus on the Family, they replaced James Dobson when he retired with Jim Daly who is there in order to appeal to young evangelicals. The Super Bowl ad with Jim Tebow, I think, was part of their media campaign to try to put a different face on Focus on the Family and on the Christian right in general. At the end of the day, I think it’s going to be very, very tough for them, though.</p>
<p>On abortion, I think you’re right. There is no question that young evangelicals continue to be extremely pro-life and in fact often more pro-life than their parents. But gay marriage is a very, very different issue, and in the long run, it’s going to be very hard to appeal to this generation of young evangelicals by focusing on things like preventing gay marriage without picking up some of these other issues that-as we’ve seen with Richard Cizik getting kicked out of the NAE, are still extremely controversial within the evangelical community.</p>
<p>And I would also say there is one other thing, and I’ll continue to push back at James here. He talks in his first chapter about how you think about how to change the world. I think one of the things about young evangelicals is they don’t necessarily see it as doing it through politics and electing the right people, but they also don’t see it as a matter of changing hearts and minds one at a time.</p>
<p>A lot of them, and not a majority yet, but a significant portion of them see it as through service. You see an increase in the number of young evangelicals ending up in Teach for America, or in the Peace Corps. They’re giving money to Invisible Children. This is the way that they think they can change, and it may not end up changing culture because these aren’t institutions, but it is a very different way of conceiving of what their role as Christians is and then how they change things.</p>
<p>Just very briefly, religious progressives I think are frustrated. Democrats are frustrated with them. That’s one of the interesting things here. You know, one of the things that Obama promised during the 2008 campaign was: when I get in the White House, I’m going to end this executive order that allows faith-based groups to discriminate in their hiring. It turned out maybe they should have vetted that with their friends because not all of their friends in the religious progressive community were okay with that. So it’s been one of the underreported stories of this year, I think, that that rule has gone untouched and it is supposedly being handled by the Justice Department.</p>
<p>It was taken off the plate for the faith advisory council to deal with and I think it’s one example of several, and probably the most extreme example, where these two groups aren’t necessarily lining up perfectly and they’re having to kind of navigate what that means and how they deal with each other.</p>
<p>MR. CROMARTIE: Before we get others in the discussion, we will let James respond to the various questions.</p>
<p>DR. HUNTER: The questions were coming from various angles, and I would like to respond to them at least briefly, but I don’t know if I can do it in a way that tries to integrate, but I do want to echo a point that I made earlier as an attempt to provide some integration. Journalists, by the very nature of what they do, by the very nature of what you do for a living, you study the weather. You report on the weather, and the give-and-take of politics, it’s a sphere of social life that operates at that level, and politics is very important.</p>
<p>Don’t get me wrong, but at least in terms of what I’m trying to do, and the book certainly in that particular essay, is to reframe the discussion, to see politics from a slightly different perspective. Again, not political theory, which would be a robust discussion about justice, for example.</p>
<p>MR. CROMARTIE: Which you’re for.</p>
<p>DR. HUNTER: Which I’m all for, and not about political science per se because that really is the most granular level of the weather here, but again, in terms of political culture, trying to see some larger — and largely, I don’t want to say completely invisible, but largely implicit because they tend to move slowly and they don’t move as quickly. We see manifestation of the political culture all the time, but seeing the patterns and how they relate, it’s a different analytical process, and that’s what I’m trying to do in all three essays, but not least the second essay which deals with power.</p>
<p>Let me make a brief comment in my own defense. It sounded like I was being just relentlessly hostile and negative toward politics, but I think the book in its totality is an attempt to be very constructive. I don’t think that the tone is negative at all, and for reasons that I explained in the book. If this is simply a critique, then it participates in the culture of negation that I think is so deeply problematic.</p>
<p>And so, what I presented today was a distillation of a big argument that in its presentation sounds really negative, I think. I do leave out a lot of detail, a lot of nuance and a lot that I hope would respond, Michael, to much of what you’re concerned with. There’s no question about it. The universal declaration of human rights and the civil rights movement, were spectacularly important achievements, in my opinion.</p>
<p>The problem is that the political culture in which achievements like that could take place has changed. It’s different now than it was in the 1960s, at the height of the civil rights movement, and it’s different from the time when the universal declaration of human rights was written. In our political culture, the concept of justice itself is divided and politicized, in my opinion.</p>
<p>James Davison Hunter</p>
<p>On competing sides of the culture war there are those who view justice as right and wrong, you know, law and order. That’s how they understand justice, and on the other side justice is largely understood as equity. And the more robust and capacious and satisfying understanding of justice, it seems to me is less and less available to us in our culture. And it less and less informs our political debate. It’s not that it’s not there. It’s just less and less available to us. It’s thinned out.</p>
<p>So from my vantage point the biggest part of the challenge, at least as it bears on the things we’re talking about right now, is our ability to imagine a public realm that is not merely subsumed by the political. A public realm in which the common good is not merely sought through political means. A public realm in which we have the capacity to develop deeper and more integrated and cohesive notions of human justice that can inform political debate, but that’s only going to happen if the climate changes.</p>
<p>Politics can’t get us there. Precisely the things that you want, that I want, that we’ve seen achieved in the past, our political culture has taken us further away from that I think than we wanted. And so again — we have fewer resources to accomplish those kinds of things. They’re there, they can be retrieved, but not under the current conditions. We have to disaggregate the public from the political.</p>
<p>On this point, just very briefly, and I’ll mention something about the third essay. I mean what it finally leads to is a reframing of how Christians engage their world and a reframing of how they engage the culture and how they engage politics in particular. It’s about a reframing that will in fact create the possibilities of stronger institutions that allows for that deepening; for a retrieval for what has been lost to our memory, or at least for the most part, at least in practice.</p>
<p>I argue that the three dominant political theologies are really just the political edge of larger paradigms of engaging the culture. And I call those paradigms of engaging the culture “defensive against,” “relevance to,” and “purity from.” “Defensive against,” “relevance to,” and “purity from.”</p>
<p>What I argue, as I pushed toward the end of the book, is for a fourth paradigm, which I call “Faithful Presence Within.” But the heart of that paradigm depends upon an understanding of climate and weather, of the difference between the two, of the dynamics of culture versus the dynamics of politics. And how the culture itself, and the way in which Christians engage it, can engage those things in ways that are truer to their own tradition and that will in fact finally make their politics far more substantive, far less polarized, far better, and that will in fact lead us in ways that will finally speak to the common good.</p>
<p>And the heart of “Faithful Presence” quite frankly, is a theology and practice that is fundamentally committed to human flourishing, not just for the community of Christian believers, but for everyone, all right? That is the heart of it. And until it seems to me we frame things along that line, in these terms, or some terms something like that, we’re not going to be able to change the frame.</p>
<p>So Barbara, very quickly, you talk about the neo-Anabaptists not being a political force. You’re absolutely right. They’re not, which is part of the point. The younger generation we’re talking about is so deeply disaffected from the right and the left and from party politics, that they’re looking for an alternative, and where do they find it? They find it in Stanley Hauerwas. They find it in the neo-Anabaptist tradition because nonetheless it’s intellectually serious.</p>
<p>It’s very self-consciously rooted in historic traditions of the faith, but what it does is to lead people to isolation. It doesn’t move them toward a different kind of politics. So your comment was actually exactly right, but it’s really significant. What is the future of the religious right? Very quickly, the old Christian right is dead, in my opinion. What we saw in the manifesto produced this past fall, the Manhattan Declaration, it seems to me is the spasms of especially a dead body. You know, there are a few brain waves, but it’s essentially the spasms of a dead body. I’m sorry. I apologize for that. I mean to me it was an empty speech act, to use a little bit more sophisticated language. It was a largely empty speech act that was intended to galvanize, to renew the Christian right, but it didn’t, and I don’t think it will. You know, on their webpage people kept saying, what do we do, what do we do? This is great. I really agree with this. What do we do, and the only thing that Charles&#160;Colson could say is sign on the dotted line. You know, add your name to the list. This shows a profound lack of imagination, right? That’s why I say it’s largely an empty speech act, just in sociological terms. The future of the religious right is that it is in fact rooted in the recognition that politics isn’t the answer, but it’s really culture, all right? It’s really the arts. It’s really about all these — it’s about schools, okay, but because the myth that animates the Christian right is still the myth of a Christian America, the pungent story that follows from that and the need to take over, sort of the win it back, as Ross was saying.</p>
<p>The terms of&#160;the strategy, or I take it back, the tactics will be different, but the overall orientation will be just the same. It’s still a narrative of decline, of resentment, and finally of the desire for conquest. And you find this in fact — I mean there are documents I reference in the book that show exactly this, the seven mountains of culture. We’ve got to take over, you know, these seven mountains of culture, but it’s the same paradigm, okay?</p>
<p>Ross, just very quickly, and this just echoes something I said before in response to Michael’s concern. Semi-withdrawal, absolutely not. That’s really not the point. Maybe from politics, as we’ve understood it, but the only reason I say in that one little section, sort of maybe the time is to step back from politics because my sense is that Christians don’t know how to do politics any other way. And until they figure out how to do politics better, maybe it’s time to step back a little bit.</p>
<p>The real point is, and the whole point of the third essay is to reengage public life much more robustly and in ways that are integrated, and it’s the exact opposite of withdrawal. It’s something quite different. So young people, the tension between religious communities and political parties, what is it that we are learning from young people and their disaffection from party politics? Well, I think things are in flux. Again, if we want to talk about climate versus weather, one of the climatological changes that’s taken place over the last 50 years has been a detachment from basically an anti-institutionalism where people no longer feel strong attachments to parties or denominations, or all sorts of things.</p>
<p>And I think that the comment, John, that you made, about people stepping back and wanting to be engaged in service things, this is constructive action. But it represents in a way an alternative to politics, but it’s an alternative that doesn’t finally change the frame. In the first essay I talk about, you know, in the Christian tradition, the three ways in which they want to change the world is basically evangelism, politics and then civil society.</p>
<p>Don Eberly is the key spokesman for that. Young people are turning to the Eberly model essentially, and these are all good things. They do constructive works in the world. No question about it, but it doesn’t change the frame. So it doesn’t address the frame.</p>
<p>MR. CROMARTIE: John Siniff, you’re up.</p>
<p>John Siniff</p>
<p>JOHN SINIFF, USA Today: What would be the alternative without politicization, and wouldn’t just walking away from it&#160;or changing this religious/political culture hasten our transition into a European like post-Christian nation?</p>
<p>DR. HUNTER: I have a short answer for that and it’s something we can talk about further. I think the alternative is a different way of thinking about public life altogether. Would that hasten the move to a more European way of doing politics? It might or it might not. It depends if there’s a robust alternative. And you know, in conventional terms, if you were to take the third essay and want to reframe it the way Ross reframed some of what I did earlier,&#160; one could use Tocqueville language, to get at some of the things that I’m trying to get at in that third essay. And it seems to me to use that language. If there’s a robust Tocqueville alternative.</p>
<p>MR. CROMARTIE: Meaning what?</p>
<p>DR. HUNTER: Basically strong institutions of civil society. There are mediating structures that stand between the market and the individual, or the state and the individual, that are also semi-autonomous from them, not beholding to them, not simply an extension of the interests of one side or another. They’re not factionalized. But again, partly because I think about climate rather than weather, I’m looking at the next 50 years, 50 to 100 years. I’m not looking at the next 3 to 5 years, or the next election.</p>
<p>I do believe that to the extent that our political rhetoric can begin to tap into some of those things, we will find a language of a common good that might begin to reframe our politics. I think Obama has tried that, but mostly has failed. Part of the story of the last 13 months has been that the political culture is bigger than Obama, and that he just hasn’t been able to succeed in that.</p>
<p>Dan Gilgoff</p>
<p>DAN GILGOFF, CNN: I’m wondering if you could reconcile some of the major developments in Christianity that various folks here have spoken to that seem to point to a depoliticizing trend and how you reconcile that with the trend, the climate that you speak to of politicization of everything ,and for our purposes of Christianity and religion.&#160; All the Christian leaders that we’ve mentioned politically here for the most part are either dead or we’ve seen their influence wane mightily from James Dobson, Jerry Falwell, Ralph Reed, all the people that we’ve mentioned are really leaders of yesteryear.</p>
<p>And a place like Focus on the Family is arguably the most important Christian right working in the country. We’ve seen, just in the last couple of weeks, the handing of the baton to a new leader there, a new president, who is very self-consciously depoliticizing the organization and I think really sees James Dobson for all of his successes politically, one of his failures being to connect to a younger generation of Christians partly because he was seen as so political.</p>
<p>That speaks to another trend which Amy and some others here have spoken to and that is of&#160;millennial Christians, evangelicals in particular, moving&#160; away from politics, in massive numbers, but much more likely to sign up for at least years of service and mission trips. And I guess you add some of these trends, and it seems that to maybe equal a change in climate, and not just weather, and I’m wondering how you square those depoliticizing trends with what you see as this broader trend toward politicization.</p>
<p>Reihan Salam</p>
<p>REIHAN SALAM, Forbes: I actually wonder, and perhaps you do this more in the book, and I don’t want to prejudge, but I wonder if actually you’re giving enough regard to the climate.</p>
<p>So I actually wonder if the disenchantment of the world, you know, (inaudible) actually gone further than maybe the analysis suggests, and another thought is when you were talking about the politics of fear, this goes back to the question of kind of is climate actually the bigger driver. It reminded me of one of my favorite books, Risk and Culture by Mary Douglas and Aaron Wildavsky, and in that book, the suggestion is that actually the reason you have a politics of fear, and this book was published some decades ago, is actually not so much the kind of pervasive dynamics of power, but the fact that actually a society like ours that has to be governed by consent.</p>
<p>And because&#160;a society&#160;has to be governed by consent in order to actually get the kind of collective action, kind of achieve some kind of political outcome, you have to kind of actually introduce the idea of contamination, the idea of invisible danger. And so, you know, kind of a (inaudible) emergency weather, you know, kind of we must invade Iraq immediately or, you know, kind of there’s a climate threat that you actually cannot see. You cannot perceive immediately but it exists. So, in a funny way, it’s almost the opposite of your point&#160; and actually this is the product of the desire for domination but rather, you know, one could argue that actually it’s baking the cake and&#160; even if you actually aren’t seeking domination per se.</p>
<p>If you want to have any kind of action in a society governed by consent, you actually do need to use this kind of rhetoric of emergency. So I mean I wonder if that’s&#160;even worse than you’ve just described.</p>
<p>MR. CROMARTIE: Before we go to Lisa Miller, why don’t you, James, take on at least the last three.</p>
<p>DR. HUNTER: Yeah, I’ll do that, and I’ll do it in reverse order. We actually don’t disagree at all about the politics of fear and its sources. I do think it’s as bad as you think it is, and you know, part of my argument about culture wars was in the sociological and historical dynamics of cultural wars is that that actually comes right out of the tradition you’re talking about, Mary Douglas and Kai Erickson, Emile Dirkheim and so on.</p>
<p>Durkheim, Erickson and Douglas are basically addressing the issue of solidarity, right? When societies form identities and form solidarity, not only by the affirmations that they make, but by their oppositions as well, so boundaries are maintained.</p>
<p>With the disestablishment of the WASP establishment, you no longer sort of had a kind of consensual culture. With the decline and fall of the Soviet empire we no longer had enemies to oppose. While I think the roots of the culture war go back 200 years, the intensity that we’ve seen in the last 30, 35 years or so on, had to do with a turning inward for finding enemies.</p>
<p>And that turning inward was based upon the coalitions that you’re talking about, Lauren. It was evangelical and fundamentalist Protestants, conservative Catholics, Orthodox Jews forming coalitions that were as early as the 1980s. In part, against liberal Protestants, progressive Catholics, reformed and secular Jews and secularists. And the culture war actually goes into a lot of detail about those coalitions and their historical meaning.</p>
<p>We do need to pay attention to those because Islam is going to become a part of that conversation in a big way in the future, and certainly in global terms, as I think Prof. Jenkins might suggest anyway. The other point I want to make, concerns institutions. It’s the institutions that are politicized. The individuals are not. Christian Smith, a sociologist at Notre Dame, has spoken about what’s going on in evangelical culture as the growth of a kind of moralistic, therapeutic deism, and he’s absolutely right. So individuals aren’t becoming more polarized.</p>
<p>But I do think that to the extent that institutions remain involved in trying to shape public and common life, they’re not withdrawing — to the extent that they’re not retreating into the private sphere, like Focus on the Family might be, but to the extent that they are involved in public, I don’t think that there is an alternative at this point to the politicized way.</p>
<p>LISA MILLER, Newsweek: I have a very broad climate question. When I’m proposing a story to my editors there is a big why now, why do you want to write about this now, and especially in religion that comes up a lot, and I guess I’m wondering why you think the climate now is more corrosive, more destructive, more dangerous to the future of productive life giving Christianity than at any other time in history. I think of all our great religious traditions we’re actually born out of time of instability and chaos, not out of time of stability and unanimity. And there has never been any consensus among Christians or Jews about the right way to engage with culture. In fact there’s been great disagreement from Paul going forward about the best way to do that.</p>
<p>And then last I guess I wonder whether even the construction of this as an either or,&#160; either we’re productive, agreeing, moving forward Christians, or we’re grabbing for power. Either we care about human flourishing, or we care about who’s on top, is a kind of misconstruction because if you think about the Middle Ages,&#160;all the great things that came out of the middle ages, our universities, our cathedrals, our art, our music, blah, blah, blah, I don’t need to tell you, also came at a time where who is on top was the driving question of the church.</p>
<p>So that’s kind of a very broad question, but the why now urgency I guess is at the root of it.</p>
<p>DR. HUNTER: I’m not trying to make an argument about all of time in history. I’m talking about modern America. I don’t live with the conceit that a lot of intellectuals or others do that ours is the pivotal moment. &#160;I do think that there are urgencies but I don’t think necessarily that things ware worse for Christians. Things are different, definitely different.&#160;There are two&#160;things that&#160;animate my own thinking and my own desire to finally actually put pen to paper is, well, two things.</p>
<p>First, because I do believe that Christians in all traditions and confessions genuinely and deeply want to make the world a better place. Yet sincerity isn’t enough. I think at some point in the book I say “God save us from Christians who are sincere but not wise.” And the problem is that so many of the strategies that Christians – in their variety – have chosen to change the world, not only are ineffectual, not only are counterproductive to the things that they care about and want to do, but there are times and in certain areas where they bring about the exact opposite to the things that they care about most.</p>
<p>So I don’t know if that’s urgency or not. I just think that I begin with the recognition that Christians want to change the world for the better, and I end with an argument about a paradigm shift in which they, in their variety, can think more constructively about that. And hopefully in the meantime stop doing things that are destructive or ineffectual.</p>
<p>MR. CROMARTIE: Ross, you want to add to that?</p>
<p>MR. DOUTHAT: Is that okay? Quickly, I think that some of the answers to your question are suggested in part one of the book. One of the things that I found most interesting in part one of the book, which is partially an account of how cultures change, but it’s also an argument about the essential thinness of Christian culture in America, despite the fact that America is majority Christian, has thriving churches and is more religious than Western Europe.</p>
<p>When you start to drill down and look at sort of the cultural products of Christianity, there’s a stretch where you look at the budget of the sort of Christian foundation in the larger context of foundation work in the United States, and it’s very, very small. I think you could make the same point going through all this, going through the universities, going through the culture-making industries and so on. And what I found particularly potent about that argument is that if our period — there’s nothing wrong with polarization. I mean there can be things wrong with it but, you know, the Reformation was one of the most culturally and theologically rich periods in 2000 years of Christian history. That’s fantastic, if you have the kind of polarization that’s producing, you know, producing great, great culture.</p>
<p>MR. CROMARTIE: Yeah, but we’re looking at that in retrospect. I mean when you were living in England and the Reformation, you were probably having this exact same conversation.</p>
<p>MR. DOUTHAT: I disagree. I mean I think that, yes, they were probably having that same conversation there (like Hans Holbein the Younger, he’s no Fra Angelico, let me tell you …), but I think actually, no, I think that American — I think you can look — you know, yes, everything is clear in hindsight and so on, but I don’t think you have to go back very far in American history to find a much richer Christian culture, you really only have to go back 50 or 60 years, than the one we have right now.</p>
<p>Polarization is fine. It’s just when the polarization subsumes Christianity so that, you know, being a Christian conservative means being a Republican and being a Christian liberal just means being a Democrat and you’re watching Fox news, you’re watching MSNBC. I mean I think that’s the concern and I think it’s a persuasively articulated concern.</p>
<p>DR. HUNTER: One other thing very briefly, the longest chapter in that first essay is the historical chapter. It goes to precisely these epics, these moments that you’re talking about. And one other — it’s a shorter little reference, but I do make reference to the contribution to culture of the Jewish community. This tiny minority in America who have made unbelievable contributions to art and literature and to science and technology and medicine through most of the 20th century, and during periods of intense anti-Semitism.&#160;So it’s not about the larger cultural context. It’s about what you do as a community.</p>
<p>MR. CROMARTIE: To be fair to Prof. Hunter, we could’ve done three sessions, one this morning, one this afternoon and tomorrow morning on each of these — he calls them essays. They’re like little books within the book is what they really are, but we’ll get it out of him before lunch, all of it.</p>
<p>DR. HUNTER: On the first question very quickly, I think we are at a very interesting moment. You know, part of the disaffection of young Christians from the Christian right can be seen and should be seen within again a larger climatological pattern which has been growing over the last 40 to 50 years, since the polling has been invented we have seen the loss of confidence in political institutions, other major institutions, but political institutions not least.</p>
<p>MS. SULLIVAN: On the question of whether this younger generation is doing something more than service and taking the Don Eberly route-maybe even challenging institutions, challenging cultural norms-just one example is the Advent Conspiracy. It’s not an organization but a movement that has cropped up the last couple of years around Christmas, led by some young non-denominational pastors. And it’s really taken off across a lot of churches around the world.</p>
<p>The idea is to take on both the secular value of consumption around Christmas and the idea that the way you show love for people in your life is to buy them things, but also those values that have crossed over into the Christian community where there is also a focus on consumption, and more recently around the idea that it’s not really Christmas., you’re not really celebrating Jesus’ birthday if the greeter of Wal-Mart doesn’t say Merry Christmas to you but says Happy Holidays.</p>
<p>The reason I bring it up is because it’s not just, okay, I’m going to decide for my family that I’m going to spend less on gifts and what I save we’re going to use to donate to Living Water International and build wells in Africa. It is that, but it’s also a critique of the culture in the way that I think James would agree has to take place if you’re going to have larger cultural change. And again, I’m not arguing this is the majority of the younger evangelical generation, but the fact that it exists, it’s taking off, and it grows and moves like wildfire suggests that there is a hunger for some other sort of leadership and some cultural critique that just hasn’t taken place.</p>
<p>DR. HUNTER: My impression as a complete outsider is that the Obama White House has recognized that and that there was a strong element of calculation in some of the emphases that the Obama campaign made in 2008.</p>
<p>And as to the specifics of the president going to church, I wouldn’t speculate, but I think more broadly there has been a shift in how the White House is handling that.</p>
<p>MS. SULLIVAN: You’ll be shocked to hear I agree with you on that. Particularly if you look at the 2008 election results, it is impossible to conclude that Democrats engaged in more religious outreach and more robust religious outreach than they ever had before had any impact. Because the economy was the number one and the only issue for a lot of voters including Catholics who, you know, we could say came back to the Democratic Party but I don’t think that’s accurate. I think it was just the issues that drove them.</p>
<p>But on the question of the President’s personal faith, I wish it didn’t matter to anyone because I think what the result is from the fact that we still continue to believe that it does matter whether the President is a person of faith, is a playing up of things that don’t really matter and don’t in the end tell us much about a President and about what his or her moral foundation is.</p>
<p>During the Bush years we would hear things like, well, he would start each morning reading My Utmost for His Highest. Which is interesting. But it doesn’t really tell me how he gets from there to the policy about the Iraq war. We’re now hearing all sorts of things about the devotional messages that Joshua Dubois sends Barack Obama every morning on his Blackberry. Again, interesting. Doesn’t actually tell me about the content or the strength of his faith.</p>
<p>As far as church attendance goes, it’s interesting to me that Obama actually attends church as often and in the exact same place that George W. Bush did. They both go to the Evergreen Chapel at Camp David, a nondenominational chapel that’s actually right now run by a chaplain who is a Southern Baptist and a great nephew of Johnny Cash, I believe. So it’s interesting to me that when the President does go to church, he’s hearing a sermon from a Southern Baptist preacher, which is a little different then Jeremiah Wright.</p>
<p>LAUREN GREEN, Fox News: Dr. Hunter talked about looking out 30, 50 years. I don’t think I’ve heard anybody address this and it is the demographic changes that this country is facing. We expect to see a growth of 100 million, not through the maternity wards but people coming into this country. And I just wonder, will that inform in any way this debate, what changes have we seen. You know, when we look at places like California where we see the test kitchen of how the country is going to change and what do you see when you look out in terms of demographic changes, in terms of Christianity and politics?</p>
<p>DR. HUNTER: There’s no easy answer to that. Big changes are afoot and I’m not exactly sure what it all means. I think Prof. Jenkins is actually going to have a better bead on that than I am. It will affect the weather and the climate. It will affect both.</p>
<p>MS. GREEN: Do you know the religious orientation of these people that are coming? Do you have any data about where they’re all coming from?</p>
<p>MR. DOUTHAT: The one thing to keep in mind is that birth rates do matter, too, domestically. The hundred million isn’t just going to come from immigration. It’s going to come from the fact that the United States has more robust birthrates than the rest of the world — for native-born. And there are differential birth rights: Conservative religious believers have more children on average and Mormons have a lot more. This was also something that went back and forth a few years ago with a bunch of pieces about how this meant that&#160; we would see the return of patriarchy and so on as more conservative groups have more children. But then — again, I’m not going to really answer your question. It’s impossible because then you have to measure — you know, Mormons have really high birth rates but also have high — I’m not sure what the exact word is, but losses, basically apostasy. That’s the word. High levels of apostasy, but I think that’s it’s an important to keep in mind that it isn’t just that you’re going to have a lot more Hispanics which could lead to more Catholics, or it could lead to more Pentecostals because there is a very strong Hispanic Pentecostal community, but it’s also that the populations within the United States will change depending on which groups are having more children.</p>
<p>MR. CROMARTIE: Ladies and gentlemen, we’ve worked our speakers very hard. This session has gone on for almost 3 hours and so I think we ought to give them a hand for all of it.</p> | false | 1 | faith angle forum160is semiannual conference brings together select group 20 nationally respected journalists 35 distinguished scholars areas religion politics amp public life change world irony tragedy amp possibility christianity late modern world south beach florida speaker dr james davison hunter labrosselevinson distinguished professor religion culture amp social theory university virginia respondents ross douthat columnist new york times amy sullivan contributing editor time moderator michael cromartie vicepresident ethics amp public policy center 160 michael cromartie michael cromartie weve conference for16010 years never conference let tell exists americas preeminent religious historian man named martin marty university chicago160 marty said theres news news today thats somehow related religion news whether rise christian right politics religious motivations terrorist attacks declarations catholic bishops war peace economy nature marriage bioethical concerns megachurch mormons believe presidential faithbased initiatives religion foreign policy global revival pentecostalism issues related religious convictions religious actors public square everywhere turn relationship religion politics religion rhetoric question faith angle keeps coming came idea hold conferences help reporters religion reporters political reporters understand different aspects religion american public life religion international affairs purpose programs simply bring contact conversation best scholars american life today questions order help understand clearly important issues professor james hunters new book change world oxford university press james labrosselevinson distinguished professor religion culture social theory university virginia author eight books editor three books published wide range essays reviews variously concerned problem meaning moral order time political cultural change american life james delighted join us james davison hunter dr james davison hunter thanks mike know one unofficial status symbols popular culture many times get host saturday night live well academia many times invited academic conference third time mike thanks keeping game ive got way way much material ill talk really fast new book thats comprised three essays address question christians america engaged latemodern world never set write book wrote didnt think would publish decided publish thought maybe would even publish anonymously well work tends range social theory history moral philosophy political sociology project also move theology surprise new territory formal training little expertise moved direction largely borne long frustration disparities understanding christian faith range initiatives actively promoted name christian engagement guess frustration reached breaking point started putting pen paper point continuity previous work ongoing questions meaning moral order make sense late modern world people live late modern world integrity coherence possible points continuity im still trying answer questions three essays want focus second essay whole project framed terms christianity and160world changing first essay essentially looks implicit social theory underwrites ways christians stripes varieties engage world160 make case social theory animates engagement world very160flawed and160deeply problematic ambitions changing world fail precisely dont understand nature culture changes ambition change world still second essay addresses obvious issue power change world implies influence influence implies power second essay called rethinking power attempt unpack implicit view power underwrites attempts change world160the means influence change overwhelmingly instrumentalities politics getting think interesting second essay dont focus political theory focus realm call political culture political culture mean the160framework moral claims narratives within ideals160 attitudes institutions actions operate comparison political theory political science dynamics political culture arent often discussed academic circles seems critically important brings relief nature character politics opposed simply form process ideals ends politics begin second essay reflection one great puzzles modern social theory problem social solidarity societies hold together classic answer question traditional societies agrarian economically underdeveloped nonurban societies held together mainly beliefs held common members modern societies contrast held together social economic interdependence reason question remains puzzle people associations socalled traditional societies depended heavily upon sake survival modern societies depend upon least common beliefs shared ideals collective myths function smoothly question societies hold together gains new poignancy world like even minimal consensus sensibilities dispositions attitudes seems elusive even fewer beliefs ideals commitments hopes held deeply common real meaningful traditions observed binding public rituals practiced else hold society together remains bind together innumerable fragments answer large part power exercise coercion threat use democratic regime individuals communities cant exercise force willynilly rather final repository legitimate force found state clearly state exclusive domain power modern world instrumentalities means ordering social life final repository legitimate force way plays exceedingly important role modern societies ability make law state ability assert power positively negatively people communities confer privileges impose sanctions provide assistance create difficulty bestow rights inflict punishment harm injury loss part want argue part argue book level context late modernity power work culture used reason excursion social political theory seems provide starting point important developments american political culture last century especially since new deal tendency towards politicization everything modern politics sphere leadership influence activity surrounding state politicization turn toward law politics instrumentality state find solutions public problems big problem create reinforce social consensus little exists none could generated organically demonstrated simple fact amount law exists society always inversely related coherence stability common culture amount law increases cultural consensus decreases lights fabric common culture modern america worn even thin last several decades extraordinary amount litigation seen recent decades one place see much litigation policy formation simply represents attempts institutions groups clarify position jockey position larger social world politics seems become central time institutions groups issues defined relative state laws procedures institutions popular higher education philanthropy science arts even family understand identity function according state permit groups women minorities gays christians validity increasingly rights conferred state issues gain legitimacy recognized law public policy logical problems affecting society increasingly primarily seen prism state terms law policy politics solve democratic ideals principles reasoning provide framework making sense justifying bend toward politicization public life boil politicization means final arbiter within social life coercive power state i160realized early work 1990s culture wars book wrote title 18 years ago seemed disputes first recourse trying resolve conflict litigation reason special interest groups factions aggrieved parties looking patronage state simply resolve things persuasion window patronage state politicization oriented toward furthering specific interests group without appeal common good means mobilizing uncommitted fear pursuit agendas depends upon vilification opponents affirmation higher ideals power stripped elemental forms even democratic justifications much veneer power actions may within bounds legitimate democratic participation yet basic intent desire dominate control rule adds pathos situation presence nietzsche called ressentiment political psychology resentment anger envy hate rage revenge motive political action ressentiment historical precedence become distinguishing characteristic politics modern cultures nowhere find conducive home among disadvantaged mistreated directed strong privileged gifted nietzsches argument heres important qualification perception everything weak aggrieved per se though could rather perceive ressentiment grounded narrative injury least perceived injury strong belief one wronged sense injury thats key time perceived injustice becomes central persons groups identity logic natural wrongs need righted injury real perceived leads aggrieved accuse blame vilify seek revenge upon see responsible adversary shown exposed corruption put place ressentiment expressed discourse negation condemnation denigration enemies effort subjugate dominate culpable saying contemporary political culture sense nietzsche mostly right power always present american democracy increasingly operates within political culture framework meaning myth sanctions domination turn fueled political psychology fear anger negation revenge perceived wrongs dont want overstate case clearly describe fully comprehensively established realities power ressentiment generally public spirited people sides issues know indeed people resentment filled powerhungry key analytical point motives individuals structure culture things terms structures political culture dynamics clearly present represent increasingly significant tendencies backdrop question christians stand relation present configurations political culture thats question try answer second essay book simple answer christians like social group monolithic christians approach politics differently part book focus three key positions conservatives progressives call neoanabaptist positions contemporary america prominent effect political theologies powerful part shrouded compelling myths give voice ideals public identities different parts christian community though political landscape changing hope able talk detail myths provide source continuity language logic competing positions broad contours myths political theologies emanate provide primary scripts thinking discussing faith public life christians myths scripts derive cut across denominational confessional traditions principled catholics evangelicals fundamentalists mainliners orthodox pentecostals could found fact often found giving voice three public theologies try demonstrate empirical heart using voices key players three political theologies tell different stories america world whats wrong needs changed yet differences less share common narrative structure one problems historical moment community faith worries deeply suffered injury fear experienced injury born christians commitments rooted misapprehension basis historical realities time one christian conservatives forces secularity contemporary america within institutions higher education public education news media advertising popular entertainment powerful agenda deliberately fundamentally odds certain traditional christian morality spirituality whatever positive contributions one may find much secularity solvent unsettled convictions ways life remains traditional culture therefore threatened extinction christian conservatives right worry effects descendents also true among various christian groups christian right held disproportionate political power since early 1980s vantage point progressives concerns narrowly conceived represent spectrum christian conviction one result interests concerns christian progressives eclipsed christian progressives right alarmed distressed fact token fear neoanabaptist christian community unthinkingly assimilated worst aspects consumer culture complicit perpetuation constantinian alliance secular state super capitalism undoubtedly well grounded effectiveness church certainly compromised alliances especially proceed without consideration standards scripture tradition neoanabaptists right uneasy present situation barbara bradley hagerty barbara bradley hagerty npr tell us neoanabaptists dr hunter neoanabaptists neopacifist tradition made prominent recent history john howard yoder wrote series books importantly politics jesus written toward end vietnam war picked many others importantly stanley hauerwas richard hays duke divinity school and160a number others theyre smallest three traditions political theology makes interesting theyre intellectually serious entire cohort younger christians think catholic well protestant traditions turning direction way given ineffectiveness given exhaustion see within christian right left first thing theyve got fears sense real injury face well politicize concern strategy choice collective public engagement though changes political landscape taking place even propensity certain christian organizations leadership politicize engagement world isnt likely diminish time soon use charles taylors helpful concept politics become social imaginary defines horizon understanding parameters action myth history provide narrative context three dominant perspectives churchs engagement culture politics way social life problems imagined provides framework christians envision solutions problems especially true largest factions christian right christian left even true neopacifist neoanabaptists people think matters ideological direction ones politics conservative liberal differences occupy attention argument whats never challenged proclivity think christian faith engagement culture around political terms proclivity ubiquitous unquestioned long time okay politicization second thing hold common heres third way christians variety assimilated dominant political culture ressentiment contemporary political culture america marked ressentiment manifested narrative injury turn discourse negation toward perceive blame though expresses ressentiment differently different degrees different ends present political theologies especially prominent course among christian conservatives may effective years mobilizing rank file political action ressentiment also essentially present among christian progressives clearly major source new solidarity motive behind recent assertiveness democratic party politics right left ground positions biblical authority appeal democratic ideals practices justify actions ressentiment marks way operate makes clear crucial part motivates dominate neoanabaptists different regard true participate fully discourse negation domination intent let say couple things long concluding observations want touch ironies problem political solutions problems people care politics provide platform dissent procedures establishing public order state address administrative problems designed accomplish happens accommodation compromise conciliation state also address legal administrative aspects problems way help hinder resolution valuebased problems laws prohibit discrimination minorities one important illustration constructive influence state politics much also true bad politics truly horrific things good reasons involved work creating maintaining good government issue really one appropriate expectations one state instrumentalities state cant provide fully satisfying solutions problem values society comprehensive political solutions deterioration family values desire equity challenge achieving consensus solidarity cultural context fragmentation polarization real political solutions absence decency spread vulgarity state clumsy instrument finally rooted coercion always fail adequately directly address human elements problems elements make poignant first place rule state become involved matters actions often create problems unintended consequences fewer problems best states role addressing human problems partial limited nearly influential expectations people true laws neutral reflect values laws generate values instill values settle conflict values belief state could help us care poor elderly slow disintegration traditional values generate respect among different groups create civic pride mostly illusory imputes far much capacity state political process irony values achieved politically politics finally invariably power power finally power politics power depends upon realm independent political sphere depends upon moral criteria institutionalized practiced social order largely autonomous realm politics problem impulse toward politicization extends politicization values means autonomy moral criteria upon higher practice politics depends increasingly lost today ideals values discussed public acquired political content connotation fairness justice equity liberty come little meaning outside realm politics ideals values discussed public largely reduced instruments one side another quest power decency morality hope marriage family children important values become political slogans irony course group american society done politicize values last halfcentury therefore undermined renewal christians right since early 1980s left 1960s 70s way recently sides implicated remain implicated today deeper irony christian faith one possibility autonomous institutions practices judgment affirmation could source ideals values could elevate politics quest power consequence whole hearted uncritical embrace politics christians effect reduce christian faith political ideology various christian denominations parachurch organizations special interest groups political engagement various christian groups certainly legal ways undoubtedly unintended also counterproductive ends aspire also tragedy reduction public political subsequent politicization much human experience assimilation late modernity made politics dominant witness church world christianitys embrace certain key characteristics political culture culture privileges injury grievance valorizes speech acts negation legitimates power variation throughout christian community loudest public voices implicated distinct ways especially christian conservatives let dwell moment sure theres significant spiritual vitality christianity communities least within evangelical fundamentalist wings time key leaders factions within american christianity cultivated collective identities constituted distinct ways sense injury faith america histories narrative drawn always selective sometimes plain wrong yet injuries sustained complete fiction ive argued basis fact claims made groups yet identity rooted resentment hostility inherently weak identity precisely established negatively accentuating boundaries insiders outsiders wrongs done outsiders christian leaders parachurch organizations denominations didnt create political culture least patterns understanding engagement fixed deeply larger structure contemporary political culture established political parties depend culture war example political internal cohesion problem many prominent christian leaders christian organizations america corrupting center kind tribalism christian conservatives prominently christians may created tapestry certainly fabric whats even striking negational character political culture absence robust constructive affirmations vibrant cultures healthy cultures makes space leisure philosophical reflection scientific intellectual mastery artistic literary expression among things within larger christian community america one find vitality pockets yet exist tend eclipsed greater prominence vast resources political activists organizations places pronouncements actions christian right left could find kinds affirmations kinds gifts acknowledged affirmed celebrated means rather defined cultural achievements intellectual artistic vitality service needs others christianity defined outside world rhetoric resentment ambitions opposition others suffer one thing one bears suffering quite another among factions within contemporary american christianity one readily find anger resentment suffering endure know course bitterness provide consolations one creates gratifying sense winners right side history indeed one deny prophetic judgment part biblical narrative tradition gods people kingdom god known predominantly negations extent collective identity rooted ressentiment cultivated nurtured message negation toward many prominent christian leaders organizations america fashioned identity witness church say least antithetical highest calling political options taken christian right christian left neoanabaptists perfectly legal course doesnt mean ways many engage politics either salutary constructive least creates dense fog difficult recognize fellow human beings impossible recognize good still world final tragedy name resisting internal deterioration faith corruption world around many christians christian conservatives significantly unwittingly embrace corrosive aspects cultural disintegration decry nurturing resentments sustaining discourse negation toward outsiders cases pursuing power become functional nihilists participating cultural breakdown ardently passionately strive resist ill end mr cromartie160thank you160 james think thats first time anybody clap presentation youve put lot understand light presentation decided ask two gifted political journalists writers america respond argument politics law delighted ross douthat could join us amy sullivan ross columnist new york times previously senior editor atlantic blogger atlanticcom right got harvard wrote book called privileged harvard education ruling class hes also coauthor reihan salam us hes coauthor book called grand new party republicans win working class save american dream welcome ross ross douthat ross douthat thank mike im repeat offender conference first time ive different experience difficulty respondent critique substantially agree figuring exactly respond im going use trick basically taking prof hunters argument reframing sort classic respondents trick going much back time think talking christianity specifically christianity relationship power useful think way christians comfortable lots power comfortable power theres historical reason way christian faith developed specifically roman empire long period christianity essentially politically powerless minority suddenly pivoted postconstantinian era becoming enormously powerful effectively ruling class dominant majority without really period think part seeing america today challenges kind betweenness figuring christians go situation useful actually go back preconstantinian debates within christianity couple views christians proceed relationship power powerless one think essentially sort third fourth century version neoanabaptists idea basically christians part effectively corrupt decadent pagan society people like tertullian instance one stringent voices early christianity saying mr cromartie hes never quoted mr douthat never quoted right first tertullian quote hes talking idea christians legitimately serve roman military instance says shall son peace take part battle even become sue law shall apply chain prison torture punishment avenger even wrongs tertullian essentially stringent model obedience message jesus means political sphere means absenting anything lends even possibility corruption thats really think earliest narrative christian church later especially enter sort transitional period third fourth centuries might call nuanced view tertullian would probably call sellout view basically idea christians legitimately participate nonchristian institutions power without dreams transforming world remaking pagan culture serve world worth serving aware difficulties involved im oversimplifying thats roughly st augustines view augustine get kind real tolerance things think wouldnt expect christians tolerate terms political action one famous examples augustine writes duties magistrate roman empire course duties magistrate included overseeing well could call enhanced interrogations overseeing use torture extract concessions augustine mounts somewhat famous defense christians serving kind magistrate capacity says christian magistrate situation human society thinks wickedness abandon constrains compels duty see implications following christians enter public realm recognize theyre going things sense arent christian service world dont idea goal christians abolish torture abolish slavery etc comes much later christian life comes much later time christians become accustomed idea affectively charge get christians beginning real ambitions salt earth actually transforming city man political systems cultures embedded cite specific examples attempts create truces god middle ages diminish warfare make medieval society obviously warlike pacifistic thus christian arguments slavery advanced christian premises 16th century bartolome de las casas right mentioned mr cromartie mr douthat okay good mr cromartie got two new ones mr douthat got two new ones pick specific issues warfare middle ages slavery early modern world also see overall architecture idea thats born eventually taken granted would legal norms cultural norms shaped christian principles reaches high point various moments middle ages early modern world catholic church assuming appropriate civil law enforcing moral theological norms christianity totalistic form idea christian politics christian society basically disappeared wars religion spread religious toleration limited way think persists well 20th century even especially united states wild religious diversity retained real christian canopy least kind mainline protestant canopy much history establishes parameters major debates look sort spasms christian influence political reform united states abolitionist era social gospel prohibition civil rights movement including foreignpolicy debates well theres always sense generic christianity provides shared moral framework political debates theres general consensus however much may disagree specifics society shaped christian principles debates means debates whether would good thing american law culture lived highest christian standards traditions christian left christian right different ways think emerge think everything prof hunter said nature late modern world essentially correct world changed america changed larger proportions americans obviously still believe god call christian et cetera christianity canopy shared assumptions vastly weaker used never know pronounce means shouldnt written fissiparous anyway much weaker purchase particular american elite intellectual political even 50 certainly 100 150 years ago vibrant vigorous forms christianity us last 30 years tend pentecostal evangelical scorned think different ways highest levels american society theres also obviously much room nonchristians much selfconscious efforts make feel welcome american society make american political debates shaped sort narrow christian approach creates problem christian politics came age assumption know okay christian debating put ideas practice leads think kind traps implicit explicit prof hunter talking one thing means try politics canopy fallen apart thing left repair canopy politics get idea decline christianity america reversed vote right candidate forth get weird spillover effect think professor gestured political cultural bleed together think see potently reactions sides political divide figure like sarah palin the160policy position takes matter left good ill sort idea american culture represents like vote sarah palin vote restoring lost idea american society vote defeating return evil archaism something thats one problem politics problem second problem idea youre always fighting win dominate control teenager parents involved small evangelical church yale university remember visibly rhetoric people involved always going win yale christ going take back yale christ mr cromartie hows going mr douthat know baby steps left converted catholicism im sure theyre still struggle yale explicitly political situation language political victory bleeds see way evangelical christians often approached hollywood movie industry theres idea get great film made somewhere outside hollywood blessed holy spirit well show well beat make 500 million happens mel gibson directing film turns finally thing happens youre strong enough influential actually strong enough set terms debate end getting coopted politics see think christian left christian right different ways christian right politically powerful within conservative coalition united states christian left within liberal coalition ways gives christian right independence youre much likely hear christian conservatives professor quotes book threatening take ball go home basically james dobson famous thing republicans dont deal issues theyll lose 40 million evangelical votes next year youre less likely hear kind rhetoric mean hear people religious left think theyre conscious weaker position within liberal coalition mr cromartie less money mr douthat right less numbers happens within republican coalition religious right religious conservatives set issues care grossly overgeneralized seem care getting republican party pay attention issues issues arent issues theyre happy go along whatever whatever movement conservatism broadly understood get weird situation know listen leading christian conservatives would think religion nothing say healthcare hasnt already said aei heritage doesnt anything say foreign policy hasnt already said dick cheney think peculiar state affairs american christians get problems professor stated restated dont want prescriptive think event like broadly speaking prof hunter talks mr cromartie prof hunter said call james mr douthat call james mr cromartie yes mr douthat okay part obvious answer think christian engagement american life kind depoliticization shift focus away extent politics toward family community culture also shift away language power towards language influence beginning talk said need influence leads need power think thats true think possible shift back especially true think cultural arenas think sort vibrant christian presence american culture whether university hollywood could achieved people positions influence arent trying retake yale christ conquer hollywood christ trying good christian professors ivy league institutions place talented christians make movies influenced 2000 years christian culture hollywood broadly speaking think agreement ill throw little one tension sake kind tension response im going cheat little quote third essay jamess book wasnt talking little unfair part one point says christians must recognize clearly benefited many extraordinary ways people faith good ideals christian tradition america never theologically serious way christian nation west christian civilization neither become future emphatically postchristian culture community christian believers ever spiritually speaking exiles land exile christians israelites jeremiahs account must come terms exile certain extent good christian theology mean true thing deep sense christian nation sort broad theological premises christianity said nations christian influenced culturally politically christianity others think america remains nation fact remains nation makes hard christians take quite large leap think james sometimes suggests think certain ways ill curious hear thoughts suggesting christians take suggested st augustines position kind participation know seek change involves much greater withdrawal politics think actually possible christians society remains many live debates major political debates touch issues grave christian concern way compare united states europe europe closer kind truly postchristian society especially western europe james talking think way makes things easier christians dealing european politics ill take sort conservative issue issue abortion instance abortion much settled issue lot western european societies much less political issue united states much less room christians hope certain frankly ancient christian ideas abortion could influence law public policy united states theres paradoxes actual existing laws many european countries actually restrictive abortion us terms liveliness debate potential change think clear theres space christian ideas affect politics us affect politics abortion us europe leaves christians us much harder position think sort forced point make choices feel like youre 3 country great britain instance dont make hard choices ultimately siding one political coalition think problem problem powerful ever hope dominate culture religion kind canopy used time weak feel like pull back political debate think thats challenge christians problem thats driving lot problem legitimately cite thank mr cromartie thank ross going hear amy sullivan contributing writer religion time magazine amy graduate university michigan went harvard divinity school worked editorial director pew forum religion public life editor washington monthly importantly amy written important book got lot attention called party faithful democrats closing god gap amy thank much joining us amy sullivan amy sullivan well thank pleasure although say work youre one things im especially happy talking jamess book know felt somewhat ambivalent writing think important book theres justice get discussed widely within christian traditions discussing today also hope means forgiven coming virginia work doctoral student eight years ago misguided effort encouraged ej dionne get phd sociology looking virginia ended going another program kept telling wrote like journalist took year half realize didnt mean compliment laughter led journalism happily enough im sorry didnt get chance work kind think would enjoyed much get journalism much fun one things james really appreciated book go myths self narratives religious traditions tell kind outlined bit presentation want spend little think important understand want understand religious traditions conceive relationship power position particularly political structure im going assumption somewhat familiar narrative christian right tells particularly victimbased narrative ross talked well although hope well chance get perhaps questions ive always wondered christian right able reconcile see something hole narrative christian country everybody agreed christian values christian morality secular elite snatched us language comes took away stole country stole values seems hole middle country begin defensive trying take back thats something hope fill whole better understood narrative happened christian left going outlined broad strokes probably getting lot things wrong general christian left traces roots back oldest strands christianity say likes focus teachings jesus jesus role model years ago jim wallis started group called red letter christians idea christians paid attention red letters bible words jesus usually printed red ink see well reference verses like matthew 25 think become popular political verse democratic circles hear democrat quoting scripture probably matthew 25 talking caring least theres good reason used kind key verse lot progressive christians also step back say general think accurate youre looking american politics speak religious left instead christian left days specific aspects christian left discuss think worth talking im going focus christian left sees challenges selfidentity goes back idea christian left looking bring gods kingdom earth thy kingdom come earth heaven involved social causes ones kind risen within history christian left canonical status include fight abolition progressive era efforts social gospel antiwar efforts leading back world war certainly opposition war vietnam civil rights lot folks christian left see high water point high water point came think best described forty years wilderness declining visibility certainly declining influence christian left political world larger culture general rendered somewhat invisible good questions asked one theories james puts forward book christian left simply achieved goals hard find motivating mission particularly civil rights movement think theres something would deal fact poverty continued driving topic occupied lot groups christian left obviously world poverty alleviated eliminated think also case fair number groups christian left certainly denominations distracted 1960s internal issues fights whether ordain women certain denominations grew civil rights movement struggles within denominations race relations active denominational leaders civil rights movement opposition vietnam well saw within lot denominations split leadershipwhich much likely opposed warand people pews necessarily mind came looking war groups somewhat distracted preoccupied perhaps felt less urgency terms issues driving agenda also case somewhat slow recognize rise religious right think failed recognize fact didnt prominence 50 years earlier sort mainline protestant establishment could issue editorial christian century would reverberate around different news outlets actually voice debates society one stories found writing book really seemed illustrate best account debate william sloan coffin yale jerry falwell phil donahue show early 1980s hard imagine people tuning see days two debated good hour essence debate jerry falwell running circles around coffin whose demeanor couldnt understand paired guy seemed spouting nonsense couldnt bothered even respond points falwell making seemed completely unaware man driving extremely powerful movement country kind characterized christian left general right folks religious right maybe temporary interlopers certainly didnt need engaged well obviously know upshot jerry falwell leaders religious right extremely successful capturing media attention political attention course 20 25 years established conventional wisdom christian must conservative probably republican james spoke resentment certainly foster quite bit resentment christian left somebody like jim wallis preaching basically message since early 1970s yet seemed get six seven years ago theres certainly healthy dose resentment comes speaking wind long diffuse resentment resentment media noticing christian left existed resentment democratic party forming close relationships leaders seemed common interests common goals certainly resentment conservative christianity purporting speak christians general yet presenting specific kind christianity christian goals thats kind narrative broad brush strokes ended around 2004 various reasons including fact democratic party decided nothing else seemed working maybe try talking religious leaders left ej likes say democrats found god exit polls 2004 thought well well give shot think point worth spending little time talking effect resentment motivator characteristic politics look christian right theres question movement driven idea christians persecuted minority fighting culture theyre fighting political system enemy secular elite wants undermine values thats part narrative key narrative always nearly impossible understand religious right without understanding part scenario different christian left resentment provides motivation days plays slightly different role say listen lot leaders christian left days lot rhetoric christian right doesnt speak us fact website started 2008 campaign called jamesdobsondoesntspeakformeorg pretty effective dobson gone obama said didnt think real christian got tens thousands people sign really pushed buttons people looked religious political landscape years seen picture seenif religious supposed conservative werent well maybe werent religious maybe werent really liberal thought regardless real space 2004 somebody like jim wallis started get prominence served inspiring figure lot folks werent necessarily responding much idea okay religious look like ralph reed sound like james dobson kind resentment effective tool kind bringing lot folks christian left closet bringing contact think thats really isa tool certainly recent part christian left narrative something part self identity going back would suspect probably temporary well extremely effective kind media narrative wallis others get attention people news business get jim meet press able present new crazy idea religious conservative aware theyre running probably appropriately hard get people listen stand dont recognize exist certainly dont recognize exist represent pretty sizable population think period timemaybe decade maybe 15 yearsduring see folks christian left continuing push idea religious right inappropriately stole christian identity theyve hurting faith christian left wants reclaim tradition face think end temporary part narrative temporary struggle tensions dealing democrat white house knows exist spent much 2008 campaign reaching people faith talking religious leaders fact disbanded office faithbased initiatives expanded added advisory council 25 faith leaders think anything led bit identity crisis christian left number reasons one raises expectations faithbased office much visibleand least structure white houseof higher rank religious liaison office folks christian left clinton years carries expectation perhaps ear president least ear somebody ear president year verdict still already significant amount grumbling particularly terms much actually seen tangible form council done versus impact particularly president senior advisers think well still need wait see anything joshua dubois running effective liaison operation fact power turn policy recommendations implemented say recommendations believe went last week early say theyve ignored butand hope david saperstein jump time question period give us sense whats going inside sense leaders christian left also 30 years see religious right establish navigate relationship republican party necessarily well able see outside challenges close power inside room trying retain still prophetic identity doesnt necessarily mean avoid succumbing challenges think also observed right mean aware challenges risks book james points already leaders failed avoid succumbing temptations easy use kind demonizing language opponents rightly complained religious right using past use construction know would jesus well jesus apparently longer would try outlaw gay marriage would make sure universal health care everybody think difficult claim know jesus would yet kind line argument many groups end falling back theres also question temptation align party power particularly party power listening extremely strong somebody like jim wallis continues say god democrat republican yet theres question jims access good democratic party time spent says councilbecause council members rotate every yearthat easier kind fight outside certainly sees clinton years almost constructed selfnarrative access early years agitated much kicked became kind crusader outside particularly critiquing welfare reform im personally interested follow story tells obama administration continues lastly think tension christian left got christian right never accept legitimacy government solve social problems case many christian left think working concert government appropriate partnership faithbased groups government solve social problems makes difficult throw hands say well going anything end day believe good changing laws say cant make people believe equity give children health insurance thats something leaders believe strongly want end throwing one suggestion kept occurring reading book theres question read particularly second section extremely personal book james borne deep frustration christian left christian right navigated power aspired power tried live christian commission change world im sympathetic strongly feels wonder however frustration feel generation may passing approach politics may fact turn limited certain period time may overly optimistic somebody thinks inappropriate certainly lead bad theology religious groups closely intertwined political system reporting particularly young evangelicals think im seeing trends suggest perhaps model changing throw couple examples young evangelicals large continue vote republicansin 2008 strong mccain voters dont tend strong identification political party parents grandparents generation think thats large part neither political party really matches priorities concerned abortion maybe questions gay marriage civil unions also think government protect environment think stronger social safety net think diplomacy maybe better way go sorting problems military intervention clear answer go voting booth party matches best priorities wasnt necessarily case parents generation think maybe detaching bit politics way parents always talked little natural also something talked mike dichotomy sacred secular really strong debate lot parents grandparents whether even appropriate get involved politics debate simply doesnt even exist young evangelicals argument ended okay involved political structure way even though argument kind taken care religious right think led postreligious right mentality among lot young evangelicals kind think faithbased generation wonder effect eight years bush making argument okay faithbased organization partnership government generation evangelicals dont necessarily accept argument government inappropriate partner solve problems like third world poverty global aids see government much broader reach much greater resources know churches working decades try help issues get far makes much harder reached republican rhetoric government bad focus private sector charities churches kind work lot evangelicals going shortterm missions know either colleges thats changing sense scope problems theyre facing way parents generation couldnt see time apparently im going take minute say may also something seeing young catholics first seeing resentment play idea bishops dont speak catholics group like catholics united presenting catholic faith havent seen terms pushing back willing stand set different issues issue like healthcare really saw catholics united particular walking fine line necessarily saying well democrats healthcare package health reform package going sign onto fact huge concerns funding abortion going look like wont know whether would willing oppose health reform final consideration things like senate language ben nelson hadnt large concern thats theyve pushing bishops conference gathering members flood bishops conference phone calls emails urging support healthcare reform taking vocal different stand health reform bill bishops conference say perhaps next generation different model pursuing political engagement perhaps make little less concerned mr cromartie want mention james hunters book dealt section power whole first third book cultures cultures change time may youre going ask question chapter knowing hes addressed book james prepared answer question thought one fascinating parts book mike gerson youre first john fund want respond quickly dr hunter brief two comments first im grateful comments offered could elaborate great length thank time put ill try address things woven comments responses others second one point really cant let pass question passing temporary thing three things quickly heading larger work way oriented scholar speak difference climate weather people think current events politics things going world light weather today sunny tomorrow rainy cold going get warmer kinds things tends orientation tends focus attention surface work tends oriented framed terms climatological changes taking place weather could could indications whats going deeper implicit level social cultural change going pass three reasons first reason solidarity unless issue solidarity deeper common culture found replace dynamics power going see diminution dynamics power highly irrevocably pluralistic world like second notion public subsumed politics conflated disaggregate public political seems way think common good common problems political means third issue addressed first essay nature culture attitudes opinions individuals even theyre collective powerful institutions frame understanding time space identity purpose kinds things operate surface argument culture powerful unstated conscious fundamental difference attitudes say case young evangelicals powerful institutions like party system special interest organizations surround three different levels operating level climatological change dont see passing anytime soon mr cromartie michael gerson michael gerson michael gerson washington post dont think heard presentation agreed also bristled certain way mean realize corrective talked lot power resentment fear little justice also one powerful political theology kind concepts thats guided christians years way approach things strikes historical context politicization liberalism things mean lot international relations holocaust okay growth natural right theory universal human rights kind political claim universal human rights reaction nazi germany lot informed way mainline christian thought mary anne glendon points lot influence catholic social thought universal declaration human rights kind categories course tremendous indictment church germany opposing political paganism may greatest scandal history christianity taking place 60 years ago amy others mentioned theres central role civil rights movement played indication traditional community firmly bound rules gone long amount time deeply unjust violated human rights law intervene order know guarantee rights often talk culture upstream politics huge example law upstream social change gone message letter birmingham jail mean thats martin luther king fighting context completely buy critique whenever christians act group defend institution ideals opposed institutions ideals becomes special interest group political setting undermines influence authority background history seen last 60 years really predominant history many ways christians taking christian anthropology seriously theory human beings rights values okay greatest contribution lot ways modern world thats way people prolife view part thats way people want universal healthcare view argue prudential matters relates things cant argue law related protection basic human rights dignity plenty abuses im sure least presentation im anxious read book takes element political theology seriously enough mr cromartie john fund youre next john fund john fund wall street journal couldnt agree amy talk people many say theyre increasingly disenchanted parties adherence principles weak could walk deepest principles get ankles wet increasingly going towards organizations trust including neighborhood local level people organizations deliberately impact struck certainly agree catholic left ignored much media far long think also subset catholic left also even ignored thats prolife democrats mentioned end think particularly relevant may days away universal healthcare defeated perhaps solely votes prolife democrats admit come direct prolife tradition didnt spend whole lot time talking recently talking get real sense alienation resentment beneath surface long concerns still hark back gov casey denied speaking role 1992 democratic convention talk alienation perhaps anger people christian right think may seeing another news story coming near future look democratic primary voters look actual people cast votes democratic candidates opposed democratic representatives youre probably dealing population 30 especially even minority communities think tension religious communities political parties going grow found avenue influence local parties theyve also found glass ceiling effectively put bunch politicians want pat head say thank much vote thank much support dont go sit corner quiet weve seen certainly republicans christian right recently may verge seeing depending much leverage healthcare bill goes influential suddenly become may seeing democratic side near future mr cromartie okay barbara bradley haggerty john siniff ms hagerty anabaptists mr cromartie quakers mennonites barbara bradley hagerty ms hagerty got okay dont really think political force really actually two questions first aimed second probably amy im curious think future religious right see old guard dying see jerry falwell pat robertson isnt dead said many outrageous things hes practically dead terms influence guys getting old place folks like obviously rick warren joel osteen influential really isnt influential politically see young people seem less engaged hot button political issues like example gay marriage religious conservatives young religious conservatives dont get hopped gay marriage maybe abortion seem engaged issues kind less family values moral issues like know theyre interested environment im wondering think able galvanize next generation politically think next generation amy kind alluded becoming detached religious institutions example recent study showed young catholics become much disengaged catholic church even though subscribe values catholic church im wondering whats going happen religious right thing wondered im160curious whether religious progressives disillusioned obama administration hear lot would love take david effective political campaign feels like theyre getting payback im wondering think mr douthat would associate mike gersons comment mean think know one easily get caught critique kind religiously infused political movement get away sort galvanizing justice based moment think becomes easier easier movement sort get ruts shift darker patterns yeah think kind semiwithdrawalism sometimes seem counseling think isnt going sufficient answer christians left right dont know future religious right one fascinating things politics election fought different socioeconomic climate america right mean take case idea young americans much concerned environment global poverty would one galvanizing force within democratic party two something conservatives religious conservatives would speak going forward would become big part politics seemed true campaign obama affectively coopting religious language coopting maybe seems like pejorative term using religious language mccain seemed uncomfortable could see kind sea change happening economy collapsed religiousbased cultural waterbased issues still much play john says health care debate obviously abortion much play know look polls nobody cares environment right nobody cares fighting aids africa right issues seem crucial understanding shifting patterns religion religiousbased voting american life may become crucial three years five years 10 years 15 years american politics undergone shift culture war country right isnt religion first time lifetime know could argue little bit like perot early 90s culture war future size government basically thats driven economic changes think makes hard going come debate point makes hard say religious right religious left landscape look like come thats way answering question mr cromartie certainly thank amy james ms sullivan theyre trying obviously focus family replaced james dobson retired jim daly order appeal young evangelicals super bowl ad jim tebow think part media campaign try put different face focus family christian right general end day think going tough though abortion think youre right question young evangelicals continue extremely prolife fact often prolife parents gay marriage different issue long run going hard appeal generation young evangelicals focusing things like preventing gay marriage without picking issues thatas weve seen richard cizik getting kicked nae still extremely controversial within evangelical community would also say one thing ill continue push back james talks first chapter think change world think one things young evangelicals dont necessarily see politics electing right people also dont see matter changing hearts minds one time lot majority yet significant portion see service see increase number young evangelicals ending teach america peace corps theyre giving money invisible children way think change may end changing culture arent institutions different way conceiving role christians change things briefly religious progressives think frustrated democrats frustrated thats one interesting things know one things obama promised 2008 campaign get white house im going end executive order allows faithbased groups discriminate hiring turned maybe vetted friends friends religious progressive community okay one underreported stories year think rule gone untouched supposedly handled justice department taken plate faith advisory council deal think one example several probably extreme example two groups arent necessarily lining perfectly theyre kind navigate means deal mr cromartie get others discussion let james respond various questions dr hunter questions coming various angles would like respond least briefly dont know way tries integrate want echo point made earlier attempt provide integration journalists nature nature living study weather report weather giveandtake politics sphere social life operates level politics important dont get wrong least terms im trying book certainly particular essay reframe discussion see politics slightly different perspective political theory would robust discussion justice example mr cromartie youre dr hunter im political science per se really granular level weather terms political culture trying see larger largely dont want say completely invisible largely implicit tend move slowly dont move quickly see manifestation political culture time seeing patterns relate different analytical process thats im trying three essays least second essay deals power let make brief comment defense sounded like relentlessly hostile negative toward politics think book totality attempt constructive dont think tone negative reasons explained book simply critique participates culture negation think deeply problematic presented today distillation big argument presentation sounds really negative think leave lot detail lot nuance lot hope would respond michael much youre concerned theres question universal declaration human rights civil rights movement spectacularly important achievements opinion problem political culture achievements like could take place changed different 1960s height civil rights movement different time universal declaration human rights written political culture concept justice divided politicized opinion james davison hunter competing sides culture war view justice right wrong know law order thats understand justice side justice largely understood equity robust capacious satisfying understanding justice seems less less available us culture less less informs political debate less less available us thinned vantage point biggest part challenge least bears things talking right ability imagine public realm merely subsumed political public realm common good merely sought political means public realm capacity develop deeper integrated cohesive notions human justice inform political debate thats going happen climate changes politics cant get us precisely things want want weve seen achieved past political culture taken us away think wanted fewer resources accomplish kinds things theyre retrieved current conditions disaggregate public political point briefly ill mention something third essay mean finally leads reframing christians engage world reframing engage culture engage politics particular reframing fact create possibilities stronger institutions allows deepening retrieval lost memory least part least practice argue three dominant political theologies really political edge larger paradigms engaging culture call paradigms engaging culture defensive relevance purity defensive relevance purity argue pushed toward end book fourth paradigm call faithful presence within heart paradigm depends upon understanding climate weather difference two dynamics culture versus dynamics politics culture way christians engage engage things ways truer tradition fact finally make politics far substantive far less polarized far better fact lead us ways finally speak common good heart faithful presence quite frankly theology practice fundamentally committed human flourishing community christian believers everyone right heart seems frame things along line terms terms something like going able change frame barbara quickly talk neoanabaptists political force youre absolutely right theyre part point younger generation talking deeply disaffected right left party politics theyre looking alternative find find stanley hauerwas find neoanabaptist tradition nonetheless intellectually serious selfconsciously rooted historic traditions faith lead people isolation doesnt move toward different kind politics comment actually exactly right really significant future religious right quickly old christian right dead opinion saw manifesto produced past fall manhattan declaration seems spasms especially dead body know brain waves essentially spasms dead body im sorry apologize mean empty speech act use little bit sophisticated language largely empty speech act intended galvanize renew christian right didnt dont think know webpage people kept saying great really agree thing charles160colson could say sign dotted line know add name list shows profound lack imagination right thats say largely empty speech act sociological terms future religious right fact rooted recognition politics isnt answer really culture right really arts really schools okay myth animates christian right still myth christian america pungent story follows need take sort win back ross saying terms of160the strategy take back tactics different overall orientation still narrative decline resentment finally desire conquest find fact mean documents reference book show exactly seven mountains culture weve got take know seven mountains culture paradigm okay ross quickly echoes something said response michaels concern semiwithdrawal absolutely thats really point maybe politics weve understood reason say one little section sort maybe time step back politics sense christians dont know politics way figure politics better maybe time step back little bit real point whole point third essay reengage public life much robustly ways integrated exact opposite withdrawal something quite different young people tension religious communities political parties learning young people disaffection party politics well think things flux want talk climate versus weather one climatological changes thats taken place last 50 years detachment basically antiinstitutionalism people longer feel strong attachments parties denominations sorts things think comment john made people stepping back wanting engaged service things constructive action represents way alternative politics alternative doesnt finally change frame first essay talk know christian tradition three ways want change world basically evangelism politics civil society eberly key spokesman young people turning eberly model essentially good things constructive works world question doesnt change frame doesnt address frame mr cromartie john siniff youre john siniff john siniff usa today would alternative without politicization wouldnt walking away it160or changing religiouspolitical culture hasten transition european like postchristian nation dr hunter short answer something talk think alternative different way thinking public life altogether would hasten move european way politics might might depends theres robust alternative know conventional terms take third essay want reframe way ross reframed earlier160 one could use tocqueville language get things im trying get third essay seems use language theres robust tocqueville alternative mr cromartie meaning dr hunter basically strong institutions civil society mediating structures stand market individual state individual also semiautonomous beholding simply extension interests one side another theyre factionalized partly think climate rather weather im looking next 50 years 50 100 years im looking next 3 5 years next election believe extent political rhetoric begin tap things find language common good might begin reframe politics think obama tried mostly failed part story last 13 months political culture bigger obama hasnt able succeed dan gilgoff dan gilgoff cnn im wondering could reconcile major developments christianity various folks spoken seem point depoliticizing trend reconcile trend climate speak politicization everything purposes christianity religion160 christian leaders weve mentioned politically part either dead weve seen influence wane mightily james dobson jerry falwell ralph reed people weve mentioned really leaders yesteryear place like focus family arguably important christian right working country weve seen last couple weeks handing baton new leader new president selfconsciously depoliticizing organization think really sees james dobson successes politically one failures connect younger generation christians partly seen political speaks another trend amy others spoken of160millennial christians evangelicals particular moving160 away politics massive numbers much likely sign least years service mission trips guess add trends seems maybe equal change climate weather im wondering square depoliticizing trends see broader trend toward politicization reihan salam reihan salam forbes actually wonder perhaps book dont want prejudge wonder actually youre giving enough regard climate actually wonder disenchantment world know inaudible actually gone maybe analysis suggests another thought talking politics fear goes back question kind climate actually bigger driver reminded one favorite books risk culture mary douglas aaron wildavsky book suggestion actually reason politics fear book published decades ago actually much kind pervasive dynamics power fact actually society like governed consent because160a society160has governed consent order actually get kind collective action kind achieve kind political outcome kind actually introduce idea contamination idea invisible danger know kind inaudible emergency weather know kind must invade iraq immediately know kind theres climate threat actually see perceive immediately exists funny way almost opposite point160 actually product desire domination rather know one could argue actually baking cake and160 even actually arent seeking domination per se want kind action society governed consent actually need use kind rhetoric emergency mean wonder thats160even worse youve described mr cromartie go lisa miller dont james take least last three dr hunter yeah ill ill reverse order actually dont disagree politics fear sources think bad think know part argument culture wars sociological historical dynamics cultural wars actually comes right tradition youre talking mary douglas kai erickson emile dirkheim durkheim erickson douglas basically addressing issue solidarity right societies form identities form solidarity affirmations make oppositions well boundaries maintained disestablishment wasp establishment longer sort kind consensual culture decline fall soviet empire longer enemies oppose think roots culture war go back 200 years intensity weve seen last 30 35 years turning inward finding enemies turning inward based upon coalitions youre talking lauren evangelical fundamentalist protestants conservative catholics orthodox jews forming coalitions early 1980s part liberal protestants progressive catholics reformed secular jews secularists culture war actually goes lot detail coalitions historical meaning need pay attention islam going become part conversation big way future certainly global terms think prof jenkins might suggest anyway point want make concerns institutions institutions politicized individuals christian smith sociologist notre dame spoken whats going evangelical culture growth kind moralistic therapeutic deism hes absolutely right individuals arent becoming polarized think extent institutions remain involved trying shape public common life theyre withdrawing extent theyre retreating private sphere like focus family might extent involved public dont think alternative point politicized way lisa miller newsweek broad climate question im proposing story editors big want write especially religion comes lot guess im wondering think climate corrosive destructive dangerous future productive life giving christianity time history think great religious traditions actually born time instability chaos time stability unanimity never consensus among christians jews right way engage culture fact theres great disagreement paul going forward best way last guess wonder whether even construction either or160 either productive agreeing moving forward christians grabbing power either care human flourishing care whos top kind misconstruction think middle ages160all great things came middle ages universities cathedrals art music blah blah blah dont need tell also came time top driving question church thats kind broad question urgency guess root dr hunter im trying make argument time history im talking modern america dont live conceit lot intellectuals others pivotal moment 160i think urgencies dont think necessarily things ware worse christians things different definitely different160there two160things that160animate thinking desire finally actually put pen paper well two things first believe christians traditions confessions genuinely deeply want make world better place yet sincerity isnt enough think point book say god save us christians sincere wise problem many strategies christians variety chosen change world ineffectual counterproductive things care want times certain areas bring exact opposite things care dont know thats urgency think begin recognition christians want change world better end argument paradigm shift variety think constructively hopefully meantime stop things destructive ineffectual mr cromartie ross want add mr douthat okay quickly think answers question suggested part one book one things found interesting part one book partially account cultures change also argument essential thinness christian culture america despite fact america majority christian thriving churches religious western europe start drill look sort cultural products christianity theres stretch look budget sort christian foundation larger context foundation work united states small think could make point going going universities going culturemaking industries found particularly potent argument period theres nothing wrong polarization mean things wrong know reformation one culturally theologically rich periods 2000 years christian history thats fantastic kind polarization thats producing know producing great great culture mr cromartie yeah looking retrospect mean living england reformation probably exact conversation mr douthat disagree mean think yes probably conversation like hans holbein younger hes fra angelico let tell think actually think american think look know yes everything clear hindsight dont think go back far american history find much richer christian culture really go back 50 60 years one right polarization fine polarization subsumes christianity know christian conservative means republican christian liberal means democrat youre watching fox news youre watching msnbc mean think thats concern think persuasively articulated concern dr hunter one thing briefly longest chapter first essay historical chapter goes precisely epics moments youre talking one shorter little reference make reference contribution culture jewish community tiny minority america made unbelievable contributions art literature science technology medicine 20th century periods intense antisemitism160so larger cultural context community mr cromartie fair prof hunter couldve done three sessions one morning one afternoon tomorrow morning calls essays theyre like little books within book really well get lunch dr hunter first question quickly think interesting moment know part disaffection young christians christian right seen seen within larger climatological pattern growing last 40 50 years since polling invented seen loss confidence political institutions major institutions political institutions least ms sullivan question whether younger generation something service taking eberly routemaybe even challenging institutions challenging cultural normsjust one example advent conspiracy organization movement cropped last couple years around christmas led young nondenominational pastors really taken across lot churches around world idea take secular value consumption around christmas idea way show love people life buy things also values crossed christian community also focus consumption recently around idea really christmas youre really celebrating jesus birthday greeter walmart doesnt say merry christmas says happy holidays reason bring okay im going decide family im going spend less gifts save going use donate living water international build wells africa also critique culture way think james would agree take place youre going larger cultural change im arguing majority younger evangelical generation fact exists taking grows moves like wildfire suggests hunger sort leadership cultural critique hasnt taken place dr hunter impression complete outsider obama white house recognized strong element calculation emphases obama campaign made 2008 specifics president going church wouldnt speculate think broadly shift white house handling ms sullivan youll shocked hear agree particularly look 2008 election results impossible conclude democrats engaged religious outreach robust religious outreach ever impact economy number one issue lot voters including catholics know could say came back democratic party dont think thats accurate think issues drove question presidents personal faith wish didnt matter anyone think result fact still continue believe matter whether president person faith playing things dont really matter dont end tell us much president moral foundation bush years would hear things like well would start morning reading utmost highest interesting doesnt really tell gets policy iraq war hearing sorts things devotional messages joshua dubois sends barack obama every morning blackberry interesting doesnt actually tell content strength faith far church attendance goes interesting obama actually attends church often exact place george w bush go evergreen chapel camp david nondenominational chapel thats actually right run chaplain southern baptist great nephew johnny cash believe interesting president go church hes hearing sermon southern baptist preacher little different jeremiah wright lauren green fox news dr hunter talked looking 30 50 years dont think ive heard anybody address demographic changes country facing expect see growth 100 million maternity wards people coming country wonder inform way debate changes seen know look places like california see test kitchen country going change see look terms demographic changes terms christianity politics dr hunter theres easy answer big changes afoot im exactly sure means think prof jenkins actually going better bead affect weather climate affect ms green know religious orientation people coming data theyre coming mr douthat one thing keep mind birth rates matter domestically hundred million isnt going come immigration going come fact united states robust birthrates rest world nativeborn differential birth rights conservative religious believers children average mormons lot also something went back forth years ago bunch pieces meant that160 would see return patriarchy conservative groups children im going really answer question impossible measure know mormons really high birth rates also high im sure exact word losses basically apostasy thats word high levels apostasy think thats important keep mind isnt youre going lot hispanics could lead catholics could lead pentecostals strong hispanic pentecostal community also populations within united states change depending groups children mr cromartie ladies gentlemen weve worked speakers hard session gone almost 3 hours think ought give hand | 10,050 |
<p>WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump and Democratic leaders on Tuesday escalated their mutual blame game over the failure to reach a DACA compromise, raising the odds that the continuing war of scatological words could lead to a government shutdown at midnight Friday.</p>
<p>At one point during a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing, Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., who has been working with Democrats to pass a compromise spending bill, lamented that the debate has been sidetracked since Trump reportedly called Haiti and African nations “s—-hole” countries during a White House meeting on immigration last week. It’s become a real “s—-show,” he said, without pronouncing the “s” word.</p>
<p>At the same hearing, Sens. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., and Pat Leahy, D-Vt., grilled Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen over whether Trump used “profanity” or the “vulgar” word during the contentious meeting. ( <a href="" type="internal">Trump has denied</a> using the term.)</p>
<p>‘General profanity’</p>
<p>Nielsen testified she did not hear Trump say that particular swear word, but did say she heard “general profanity used in the room by almost everyone.”</p>
<p>Sen. Cory Booker, D-N.J., in particular, lit into Nielsen, saying Trump’s reported comment left him “frankly seething with anger.”</p>
<p>Booker, who is black, seemed incredulous that Nielsen could not recall hearing Trump use the word he reportedly uttered. He recited acts of violence committed by white supremacists, including last year’s automobile killing of an activist by a white nationalist in Charlottesville, Virginia, and the nine victims shot dead at the Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church in Charleston, South Carolina, in 2015.</p>
<p>He then berated what he called Nielsen’s silence and amnesia and declared, “You’re a threat to this country.”</p>
<p />
<p>Nielsen responded that she too abhors racial violence and said her department targets violent white supremacists.</p>
<p>The who-said-what debate deflected attention from the core issue that Democrats say they want in exchange for passage of a spending bill: a deal to protect participants in the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program who were brought to the U.S. illegally as children.</p>
<p>DACA ruling to Supreme Court</p>
<p>After conservatives questioned why the Department of Justice did not appeal <a href="" type="internal">a federal judge’s ruling last week</a> that Trump could not cancel former President Barack Obama’s 2012 DACA policy, Attorney General Jeff Sessions announced he would appeal directly to the U.S. Supreme Court.</p>
<p>“It defies both law and common sense for DACA — an entirely discretionary non-enforcement policy that was implemented unilaterally by the last administration after Congress rejected similar legislative proposals and courts invalidated the similar DAPA policy — to somehow be mandated nationwide by a single district court in San Francisco,” Sessions said in a statement.</p>
<p>Earlier in the day, the White House released a report by the Department of Homeland Security and Department of Justice that concluded that three out of every four individuals convicted of international terrorism-related charges were foreign born.</p>
<p />
<p />
<p />
<p>According to <a href="https://www.dhs.gov/news/2018/01/16/dhs-doj-report-three-out-four-individuals-convicted-international-terrorism-and" type="external">the report</a>, 549 individuals have been convicted in federal courts on international terrorism-related charges from Sept. 11, 2001, through 2016, 254 were not U.S. citizens, while 148 were naturalized. Also, 1,716 foreign-born aliens with national security concerns were removed from the United States.</p>
<p>Terrorism report draws fire</p>
<p>A senior administration official who briefed reporters on background said that the release of the report, which was supposed to be done in the fall, was “overdue” and that its timing in the midst of the heated debate over DACA was “merely coincidental.”</p>
<p>Ibrahim Hooper of the Council on American Islamic Relations argued that the report is more evidence that everything from this White House “has to be viewed through the prism of racism and white supremacy, and I don’t think this is any different.” The fact that the report collected information on international terrorism but not domestic terrorism, he argued, reinforced his opinion.</p>
<p>The Department of Justice responded that the executive order that prompted the report specifically concerned “protecting the nation from foreign terrorist entry into the United States.”</p>
<p>Press secretary Sarah Sanders noted in a statement that the report “does not contain information regarding the number of terrorism and terrorism-related offenses committed by individuals who are the children of foreign-born individuals.” It cited two examples: Omar Mateen, who killed 49 people in Orlando, Florida, and Syed Rizwan Farook who killed 14 in San Bernardino, California.</p>
<p>Officials did not respond when asked whether the White House wants to begin collecting such data.</p>
<p>Graham plays peacemaker</p>
<p>In the midst of the swirling immigration controversy, Graham has continued to try to play peacemaker. He has maintained that Trump could succeed in getting a comprehensive bipartisan reform passed where former Presidents Obama and George W. Bush tried but failed.</p>
<p>“You have created an opportunity in here, Mr. President, and you need to close the deal,” Graham said at the White House meeting last week at which Trump had said he would sign what Congress passed and that it would be a “bill of love.”</p>
<p>The problem, noted Chris Chmielenski of Numbers USA, which wants to reduce legal and illegal immigration, is that the Graham-Durbin bill didn’t give Republicans enough of what they want. Worse, he said, it expanded the pool of undocumented immigrants eligible for legal status.</p>
<p>“Between (outgoing GOP Arizona Sen. Jeff) Flake, Graham and Durbin, maybe it was a great deal, but I don’t see a whole lot of Republicans jumping on board that,” Chmielenski said.</p>
<p>Before Friday though, he expects Congress to pass a bill to put off spending and immigration lawmaking until later. A shutdown would be averted and lawmakers would have more time to pass a measure that is never going to come easily.</p>
<p>Contact Debra J. Saunders at <a href="" type="internal">[email protected]</a> or at 202-662-7391. Follow <a href="http://www.twitter.com/@DebraJSaunders" type="external">@DebraJSaunders</a> on Twitter.</p> | false | 1 | washington president donald trump democratic leaders tuesday escalated mutual blame game failure reach daca compromise raising odds continuing war scatological words could lead government shutdown midnight friday one point senate judiciary committee hearing sen lindsey graham rsc working democrats pass compromise spending bill lamented debate sidetracked since trump reportedly called haiti african nations shole countries white house meeting immigration last week become real sshow said without pronouncing word hearing sens dick durbin dill pat leahy dvt grilled homeland security secretary kirstjen nielsen whether trump used profanity vulgar word contentious meeting trump denied using term general profanity nielsen testified hear trump say particular swear word say heard general profanity used room almost everyone sen cory booker dnj particular lit nielsen saying trumps reported comment left frankly seething anger booker black seemed incredulous nielsen could recall hearing trump use word reportedly uttered recited acts violence committed white supremacists including last years automobile killing activist white nationalist charlottesville virginia nine victims shot dead emanuel african methodist episcopal church charleston south carolina 2015 berated called nielsens silence amnesia declared youre threat country nielsen responded abhors racial violence said department targets violent white supremacists whosaidwhat debate deflected attention core issue democrats say want exchange passage spending bill deal protect participants deferred action childhood arrivals daca program brought us illegally children daca ruling supreme court conservatives questioned department justice appeal federal judges ruling last week trump could cancel former president barack obamas 2012 daca policy attorney general jeff sessions announced would appeal directly us supreme court defies law common sense daca entirely discretionary nonenforcement policy implemented unilaterally last administration congress rejected similar legislative proposals courts invalidated similar dapa policy somehow mandated nationwide single district court san francisco sessions said statement earlier day white house released report department homeland security department justice concluded three every four individuals convicted international terrorismrelated charges foreign born according report 549 individuals convicted federal courts international terrorismrelated charges sept 11 2001 2016 254 us citizens 148 naturalized also 1716 foreignborn aliens national security concerns removed united states terrorism report draws fire senior administration official briefed reporters background said release report supposed done fall overdue timing midst heated debate daca merely coincidental ibrahim hooper council american islamic relations argued report evidence everything white house viewed prism racism white supremacy dont think different fact report collected information international terrorism domestic terrorism argued reinforced opinion department justice responded executive order prompted report specifically concerned protecting nation foreign terrorist entry united states press secretary sarah sanders noted statement report contain information regarding number terrorism terrorismrelated offenses committed individuals children foreignborn individuals cited two examples omar mateen killed 49 people orlando florida syed rizwan farook killed 14 san bernardino california officials respond asked whether white house wants begin collecting data graham plays peacemaker midst swirling immigration controversy graham continued try play peacemaker maintained trump could succeed getting comprehensive bipartisan reform passed former presidents obama george w bush tried failed created opportunity mr president need close deal graham said white house meeting last week trump said would sign congress passed would bill love problem noted chris chmielenski numbers usa wants reduce legal illegal immigration grahamdurbin bill didnt give republicans enough want worse said expanded pool undocumented immigrants eligible legal status outgoing gop arizona sen jeff flake graham durbin maybe great deal dont see whole lot republicans jumping board chmielenski said friday though expects congress pass bill put spending immigration lawmaking later shutdown would averted lawmakers would time pass measure never going come easily contact debra j saunders dsaundersreviewjournalcom 2026627391 follow debrajsaunders twitter | 584 |
<p>The Las Vegas Monorail Co. will seek Clark County commissioners’ permission this week to extend the monorail’s route from the MGM Grand to Mandalay Bay.</p>
<p>The 1-mile-long extension was a project marked for advancement in a traffic assessment report commissioned by the Nevada Department of Transportation board and released earlier this month. Along with the extension, a pedestrian bridge is proposed that would link the new monorail station to a proposed site on Russell Road for a new $1.9 billion stadium.</p>
<p>The monorail company, a privately held nonprofit, is asking the county for a maximum of two years to acquire funding and start construction on the extension of the elevated, 3.9-mile-long monorail, which has operated east of the Strip since 2004.</p>
<p>Construction on the monorail extension could start as soon as the second quarter of 2017, according to backup documents provided to the County Commission. At this time, no public money is being sought for the project.</p>
<p>The fashion trade show Men’s Apparel Guild in California, or MAGIC, held twice annually in Las Vegas, has propelled talks on the monorail extension, but the proposal hasn’t gotten to the point of possible advancement until now.</p>
<p>The convention is split between the Mandalay Bay and Las Vegas convention centers, and transportation between the two venues has proved pricey, time-consuming and cumbersome for the group that puts on the show.</p>
<p>CONNECTIVITY THE GOAL</p>
<p>Connectivity along the Strip, particularly between the multiple large-scale convention centers, became a big issue at the Southern Nevada Tourism Infrastructure Committee meetings, said County Commission Chairman Steve Sisolak, who served on that committee. The panel recommended the stadium, which supporters hope will be the new home of the NFL’s Oakland Raiders.</p>
<p>During those meetings, the industry leaders on the committee brought to the forefront the lack of connectivity from the Las Vegas Convention Center, the Sands Expo and Convention Center and the Mandalay Bay Convention Center, Sisolak said.</p>
<p>With traffic, shuttling conventioneers between venues sometimes can take an hour and a half, Sisolak said.</p>
<p>Extending the monorail also could serve as another way to transport people to the proposed stadium, Sisolak said.</p>
<p>At their Wednesday zoning meeting, scheduled for 9 a.m. in the commission chambers, commissioners will discuss whether to allow the expansion. The county Planning Commission approved a use permit for the project earlier this month.</p>
<p>Sisolak is hopeful that the measure will pass this week.</p>
<p>“I think it makes an awful lot of sense,” Sisolak said. “Something needs to be done with transportation on the Strip corridor and with the convention centers. There needs to be a better way to move some of these people.”</p>
<p>RIDERS WOULD PAY FOR BONDS</p>
<p>While previous estimates put the cost of the extension at $100 million, monorail spokeswoman Ingrid Reisman said last week that “we are not to the level of design at where we know the exact cost.”</p>
<p>Funding for the project is expected to come from bonds that would be paid back with revenue from paying riders, Reisman said. A single-ride ticket on the monorail costs $5, and an unlimited 24-hour pass is $12.</p>
<p>The Regional Transportation Commission of Southern Nevada previously considered using its credit rating to secure low-interest bonds for the expansion project. Those talks were suspended in August because of restrictions in the transportation commission’s governing statutes, an agency spokeswoman said.</p>
<p>The monorail company now is using about $1.9 million of investment earnings from a $6 million doomsday account to pay for expansion-related expenses. The fund has been in place since 2000, when the County Commission required the monorail company to set aside money to dismantle the monorail should it ever fail.</p>
<p>The monorail company has to pay back money borrowed from the doomsday account at a 4 percent interest rate.</p>
<p>It’s not yet clear how the bonds would be paid if ridership revenue is insufficient.</p>
<p>The monorail already runs from SLS Las Vegas to the MGM Grand and has seven stations, including stops at the Las Vegas Convention Center, Westgate, Bally’s/Paris Las Vegas, Flamingo/Caesars Palace and Harrah’s/the LINQ.</p>
<p>Stretching it farther would increase ridership and decrease traffic on the Strip, supporters said. Connecting to Mandalay Bay would give guests at 9,000 additional hotel rooms access to the monorail.</p>
<p>RIDERSHIP CHALLENGE</p>
<p>Ridership and revenue have been problems for the monorail, especially during and since the Great Recession.</p>
<p>The monorail company filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection in January 2010 after it failed to pay off $650 million in construction and startup costs. The company exited bankruptcy proceedings in 2012, leaving it with a 98 percent reduction of debt to $13 million and maintaining its nonprofit status.</p>
<p>From January through September of this year, monorail ridership averaged about 13,300 people a day. While ridership in 2015 was at 5.1 million, well higher than the 4.55 million in 2014, it’s still nowhere near the more than 7.9 million riders in 2007.</p>
<p>Monorail revenue through the third quarter of this year is estimated at $15.8 million, about $300,000 less than at the same time last year.</p>
<p>Earlier this month, the Legislature approved plans to build a 65,000-seat domed stadium in the county. A 62-acre site west of Mandalay Bay on Russell Road across Interstate 15 has been favored as the stadium’s future site.</p>
<p>Extending the monorail to Mandalay Bay could help drive foot traffic to the stadium if a proposed pedestrian bridge linking the two sites is built.</p>
<p>NFL commissioner Roger Goodell has said a study comparing Las Vegas with Oakland is the next step in the process of relocating the team.</p>
<p>Eventually, 24 of the NFL’s 32 team owners will need to vote to approve the team’s move for it to happen.</p>
<p>The stadium’s financing plan calls for $750 million in hotel room tax money, $500 million from the Raiders and $650 million from Las Vegas Sands Corp. Chairman and CEO Sheldon Adelson.</p>
<p>The Review-Journal is owned by the family of Las Vegas Sands Chairman and CEO Sheldon Adelson.</p>
<p>Review-Journal writer Jamie Munks contributed to this report. Contact Michael Scott Davidson at [email protected] or 702-477-3861. Follow <a href="http://www.twitter.com/davidsonlvrj" type="external">@davidsonlvrj</a> on Twitter.</p>
<p>&lt;img src="https://www.reviewjournal.com/sites/default/files/MONORAIL-EXTENSION-OCT31-16.jpg" style="margin: 1em 0; width:100%; max-width: 640px" alt="Proposed monorail extension, Las Vegas, Nevada (Gabriel Utasi/Las Vegas Review-Journal)" /&gt;</p> | false | 1 | las vegas monorail co seek clark county commissioners permission week extend monorails route mgm grand mandalay bay 1milelong extension project marked advancement traffic assessment report commissioned nevada department transportation board released earlier month along extension pedestrian bridge proposed would link new monorail station proposed site russell road new 19 billion stadium monorail company privately held nonprofit asking county maximum two years acquire funding start construction extension elevated 39milelong monorail operated east strip since 2004 construction monorail extension could start soon second quarter 2017 according backup documents provided county commission time public money sought project fashion trade show mens apparel guild california magic held twice annually las vegas propelled talks monorail extension proposal hasnt gotten point possible advancement convention split mandalay bay las vegas convention centers transportation two venues proved pricey timeconsuming cumbersome group puts show connectivity goal connectivity along strip particularly multiple largescale convention centers became big issue southern nevada tourism infrastructure committee meetings said county commission chairman steve sisolak served committee panel recommended stadium supporters hope new home nfls oakland raiders meetings industry leaders committee brought forefront lack connectivity las vegas convention center sands expo convention center mandalay bay convention center sisolak said traffic shuttling conventioneers venues sometimes take hour half sisolak said extending monorail also could serve another way transport people proposed stadium sisolak said wednesday zoning meeting scheduled 9 commission chambers commissioners discuss whether allow expansion county planning commission approved use permit project earlier month sisolak hopeful measure pass week think makes awful lot sense sisolak said something needs done transportation strip corridor convention centers needs better way move people riders would pay bonds previous estimates put cost extension 100 million monorail spokeswoman ingrid reisman said last week level design know exact cost funding project expected come bonds would paid back revenue paying riders reisman said singleride ticket monorail costs 5 unlimited 24hour pass 12 regional transportation commission southern nevada previously considered using credit rating secure lowinterest bonds expansion project talks suspended august restrictions transportation commissions governing statutes agency spokeswoman said monorail company using 19 million investment earnings 6 million doomsday account pay expansionrelated expenses fund place since 2000 county commission required monorail company set aside money dismantle monorail ever fail monorail company pay back money borrowed doomsday account 4 percent interest rate yet clear bonds would paid ridership revenue insufficient monorail already runs sls las vegas mgm grand seven stations including stops las vegas convention center westgate ballysparis las vegas flamingocaesars palace harrahsthe linq stretching farther would increase ridership decrease traffic strip supporters said connecting mandalay bay would give guests 9000 additional hotel rooms access monorail ridership challenge ridership revenue problems monorail especially since great recession monorail company filed chapter 11 bankruptcy protection january 2010 failed pay 650 million construction startup costs company exited bankruptcy proceedings 2012 leaving 98 percent reduction debt 13 million maintaining nonprofit status january september year monorail ridership averaged 13300 people day ridership 2015 51 million well higher 455 million 2014 still nowhere near 79 million riders 2007 monorail revenue third quarter year estimated 158 million 300000 less time last year earlier month legislature approved plans build 65000seat domed stadium county 62acre site west mandalay bay russell road across interstate 15 favored stadiums future site extending monorail mandalay bay could help drive foot traffic stadium proposed pedestrian bridge linking two sites built nfl commissioner roger goodell said study comparing las vegas oakland next step process relocating team eventually 24 nfls 32 team owners need vote approve teams move happen stadiums financing plan calls 750 million hotel room tax money 500 million raiders 650 million las vegas sands corp chairman ceo sheldon adelson reviewjournal owned family las vegas sands chairman ceo sheldon adelson reviewjournal writer jamie munks contributed report contact michael scott davidson sdavidsonreviewjournalcom 7024773861 follow davidsonlvrj twitter ltimg srchttpswwwreviewjournalcomsitesdefaultfilesmonorailextensionoct3116jpg stylemargin 1em 0 width100 maxwidth 640px altproposed monorail extension las vegas nevada gabriel utasilas vegas reviewjournal gt | 644 |
<p>The 2014 GOP tsunami is the fourth time since World War II that Republicans have picked up control of at least one house of Congress in what can be called a midterm “wave election.” In each previous case—1946, 1994, 2010—a Democrat held the White House and Republicans thought the wave presaged his subsequent defeat. Each time, however, the Democrat won reelection relatively easily.</p>
<p>Conservatives who want to prevent history from repeating itself with yet another Democratic victory should learn from these failures. In each case, conservative overreach and establishment complacency combined to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.</p>
<p>The period from 1946 to 1948 illustrates this pattern. The 1946 election gave the GOP control of Congress for the first time since 1930, with gains of 55 seats in the House and twelve in the Senate. Most of the House gains (41 seats) came from the manufacturing-based, working-class areas of the North and Midwest. Despite this, the GOP leadership immediately focused on making the nation’s major labor law much less favorable to unions, by passing the Taft-Hartley Act. It was a great piece of legislation, but, as a political matter, it was a classic example of biting the hands that fed you. Voters who had just supported the GOP for the first time since the Great Depression immediately found an institution they respected under assault.</p>
<p>Republicans were nonetheless expected to win the 1948 presidential election. The GOP establishment rallied behind the 1944 nominee, New York governor Tom Dewey, and procured his renomination. But Dewey pushed through a platform well to the left of his party and then failed to make a positive case for this platform on the campaign trail. Truman called the GOP Congress back into special session and dared it to pass the Republican platform. It refused, allowing Truman to label it the “Do-Nothing Congress” and present Democrats as the only sure defenders of the average man.</p>
<p>Election Night was a disaster for Republicans. Dewey received a smaller percentage of the vote than he had gotten four years earlier, even losing five states he had previously carried. The GOP Congress also was rejected: House Republicans lost 75 seats and Senate Republicans lost nine. House Republicans lost 27 seats in the Northeast and 26 more in the industrial Midwest, more than reversing their 1946 gains.</p>
<p>The 1994–96 and 2010–12 eras reprised this failed approach. In both cases, the new House Republican majority immediately made cutting entitlements and dramatically reducing discretionary domestic spending their main priorities. In both cases, the Democratic president fought back and improved his standing with the public compared with his standing just before the midterm. The GOP-establishment choice—Dole in 1996, Romney in 2012—won the Republican nomination both times, but both times ran a colorless campaign that neither defended the House Republican effort nor offered a cogent, principled, conservative alternative. Clinton and Obama were comfortably reelected.</p>
<p>Republicans have failed to capitalize on their midterm waves because each wing of the party has misinterpreted the voters’ verdict. Midterm waves are primarily negative verdicts. Voters are unhappy with what they see and they want it to stop.</p>
<p>The conservative wing of the party, however, tends to interpret such victories as positive endorsements of a new direction. It presumes that voters who two years ago voted for the Democratic incumbent but are unhappy with what they have seen since then will now endorse policies that they have already rejected. Going too far too fast, the conservatives cause new supporters to reconsider their allegiance, thereby setting up the Democratic nominee to pose as the defender of a comfortable status quo.</p>
<p>The establishment wing makes the opposite mistake. It understands that a midterm election is primarily a referendum on the administration, but it fails to understand that presidential elections are about new visions and new agendas. Moreover, the establishment tends to overreact to the conservative overreach, distancing itself from both the policy proposals and the enthusiasm for change that the base and the new supporters want. Running on “pale pastels” consisting of lukewarm endorsements of old policies and condemnations of the administration does not give the base or the swing voters the new alternative they desperately want.</p>
<p>Conservatives and establishmentarians who want to escape this cycle of disappointment should look carefully at the different lessons that this year’s races for the Senate and for the governorships can teach us.</p>
<p>Republican Senate campaigns were negative and based largely on tying the Democratic candidate to President Obama. This was a sound strategy to win seats for the GOP, since most of the states in play had gone heavily for Romney. There is little evidence, however, that this strategy added many voters to the GOP column. Republican candidates in eight of the 13 pickups or contested races ran even with or behind Romney’s 2012 performance. Since Romney lost the national popular vote by about four points, that’s not an encouraging sign for 2016.</p>
<p>Even those candidates who ran ahead of Romney tended not to run far enough ahead to indicate that the 2016 GOP nominee would win their state. Because the Electoral College tilts slightly to the Democrats, the nominee needs to run about 2.7 percentage points ahead of Romney in the popular vote to win an Electoral College majority. Only Iowa’s Joni Ernst bested that mark on Election Night, running six points ahead of Romney in the Hawkeye State.</p>
<p>Republican gubernatorial candidates fared much better. The ones in deep-blue states ran ten to 15 points ahead of Romney, winning the governor’s mansions in Maryland, Illinois, and Massachusetts. Incumbents in Nevada, New Mexico, Iowa, and Ohio, all purple states, did not even attract well-funded challengers, allowing them to cruise home. Most important, embattled Rick Snyder of Michigan and Scott Walker of Wisconsin won comfortably, each running close to 6.4 points ahead of Romney in his state.</p>
<p>Republican gubernatorial candidates in purple states tended to govern or run campaigns that neither overreached nor were complacent. Every Republican incumbent in a purple state either endorsed the Medicaid expansion or, in the case of Scott Walker, expanded the number of state-subsidized insurance enrollees by reforming an existing program. None of the purple-state governors tried to substantially restructure state versions of universal entitlements, such as K–12 education, higher ed, and Medicaid.</p>
<p>That does not mean they were simply “me too,” go-along governors. Most cut taxes for individuals and for businesses. Scott Walker defeated his state’s public-employee unions in an epic battle that garnered national attention. Rick Snyder signed a right-to-work bill sent to him by the GOP legislature, a politically risky move in the state that launched the auto-workers’ union.</p>
<p>A federal-government version of the governors’ model could be both substantive and appealing. It could propose to repeal Obamacare and offer a conservative, market-based alternative that increases coverage and deregulates health care. It could tackle limited entitlements—the ones, such as disability insurance, that serve only a minority of Americans and discourage work. Instead of a comprehensive tax reform that inevitably will be hard to understand, create millions of losers (those whose taxes will go up) and give most of the tax savings to the people who pay most of the taxes—the rich—it could focus on corporate-tax reduction and other reforms that will help business without creating losers among voters. And it could use federal financial power—by, for example, allowing students in non-traditional educational programs to have access to subsidized student loans and grants—to open the tenured-faculty cartel to competition from lower-cost, vocationally focused education providers.</p>
<p>“Repeal and replace” would increase the number of people who have health insurance and set market forces to work in reducing health-care costs over time for all Americans. Disability-insurance programs now cost the federal government over $200 billion a year; people receiving disability benefits also often receive Medicare. Reforming Social Security Disability Insurance along the lines of welfare reform would both increase the number of Americans leaving dependency for work and slow down the cost growth of Social Security and Medicare. Corporate-tax cuts and reform would help encourage business investment, thereby creating jobs, and—because corporate tax rates are less of a political lightning rod than individual rates—would avoid reinforcing the perception that the GOP is primarily the party of the wealthy. And higher-ed deregulation and reform would give people currently dropping out of college the type of education they really want while reducing the cost of college for everyone. These initiatives would advance conservative priorities and appeal to the swing voters who have supported both Obama and Republican governors.</p>
<p>When voters say no to one party, they want to say yes to the other party in a way that does not require them to reject the primary reasons for their earlier allegiance. Ronald Reagan was a master of helping them do that. In 1980, he offered a vision of an America that would be safer and more prosperous, but he did not reject the safety net that voters had grown to value. The wave that produced his election returned for his landslide reelection in 1984, setting the stage for conservative victories to come. Republicans today should not waste their opportunity to establish conditions for a similar long-term success.</p>
<p>– Mr. Olsen is a senior fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center.</p> | false | 1 | 2014 gop tsunami fourth time since world war ii republicans picked control least one house congress called midterm wave election previous case1946 1994 2010a democrat held white house republicans thought wave presaged subsequent defeat time however democrat reelection relatively easily conservatives want prevent history repeating yet another democratic victory learn failures case conservative overreach establishment complacency combined snatch defeat jaws victory period 1946 1948 illustrates pattern 1946 election gave gop control congress first time since 1930 gains 55 seats house twelve senate house gains 41 seats came manufacturingbased workingclass areas north midwest despite gop leadership immediately focused making nations major labor law much less favorable unions passing tafthartley act great piece legislation political matter classic example biting hands fed voters supported gop first time since great depression immediately found institution respected assault republicans nonetheless expected win 1948 presidential election gop establishment rallied behind 1944 nominee new york governor tom dewey procured renomination dewey pushed platform well left party failed make positive case platform campaign trail truman called gop congress back special session dared pass republican platform refused allowing truman label donothing congress present democrats sure defenders average man election night disaster republicans dewey received smaller percentage vote gotten four years earlier even losing five states previously carried gop congress also rejected house republicans lost 75 seats senate republicans lost nine house republicans lost 27 seats northeast 26 industrial midwest reversing 1946 gains 199496 201012 eras reprised failed approach cases new house republican majority immediately made cutting entitlements dramatically reducing discretionary domestic spending main priorities cases democratic president fought back improved standing public compared standing midterm gopestablishment choicedole 1996 romney 2012won republican nomination times times ran colorless campaign neither defended house republican effort offered cogent principled conservative alternative clinton obama comfortably reelected republicans failed capitalize midterm waves wing party misinterpreted voters verdict midterm waves primarily negative verdicts voters unhappy see want stop conservative wing party however tends interpret victories positive endorsements new direction presumes voters two years ago voted democratic incumbent unhappy seen since endorse policies already rejected going far fast conservatives cause new supporters reconsider allegiance thereby setting democratic nominee pose defender comfortable status quo establishment wing makes opposite mistake understands midterm election primarily referendum administration fails understand presidential elections new visions new agendas moreover establishment tends overreact conservative overreach distancing policy proposals enthusiasm change base new supporters want running pale pastels consisting lukewarm endorsements old policies condemnations administration give base swing voters new alternative desperately want conservatives establishmentarians want escape cycle disappointment look carefully different lessons years races senate governorships teach us republican senate campaigns negative based largely tying democratic candidate president obama sound strategy win seats gop since states play gone heavily romney little evidence however strategy added many voters gop column republican candidates eight 13 pickups contested races ran even behind romneys 2012 performance since romney lost national popular vote four points thats encouraging sign 2016 even candidates ran ahead romney tended run far enough ahead indicate 2016 gop nominee would win state electoral college tilts slightly democrats nominee needs run 27 percentage points ahead romney popular vote win electoral college majority iowas joni ernst bested mark election night running six points ahead romney hawkeye state republican gubernatorial candidates fared much better ones deepblue states ran ten 15 points ahead romney winning governors mansions maryland illinois massachusetts incumbents nevada new mexico iowa ohio purple states even attract wellfunded challengers allowing cruise home important embattled rick snyder michigan scott walker wisconsin comfortably running close 64 points ahead romney state republican gubernatorial candidates purple states tended govern run campaigns neither overreached complacent every republican incumbent purple state either endorsed medicaid expansion case scott walker expanded number statesubsidized insurance enrollees reforming existing program none purplestate governors tried substantially restructure state versions universal entitlements k12 education higher ed medicaid mean simply goalong governors cut taxes individuals businesses scott walker defeated states publicemployee unions epic battle garnered national attention rick snyder signed righttowork bill sent gop legislature politically risky move state launched autoworkers union federalgovernment version governors model could substantive appealing could propose repeal obamacare offer conservative marketbased alternative increases coverage deregulates health care could tackle limited entitlementsthe ones disability insurance serve minority americans discourage work instead comprehensive tax reform inevitably hard understand create millions losers whose taxes go give tax savings people pay taxesthe richit could focus corporatetax reduction reforms help business without creating losers among voters could use federal financial powerby example allowing students nontraditional educational programs access subsidized student loans grantsto open tenuredfaculty cartel competition lowercost vocationally focused education providers repeal replace would increase number people health insurance set market forces work reducing healthcare costs time americans disabilityinsurance programs cost federal government 200 billion year people receiving disability benefits also often receive medicare reforming social security disability insurance along lines welfare reform would increase number americans leaving dependency work slow cost growth social security medicare corporatetax cuts reform would help encourage business investment thereby creating jobs andbecause corporate tax rates less political lightning rod individual rateswould avoid reinforcing perception gop primarily party wealthy highered deregulation reform would give people currently dropping college type education really want reducing cost college everyone initiatives would advance conservative priorities appeal swing voters supported obama republican governors voters say one party want say yes party way require reject primary reasons earlier allegiance ronald reagan master helping 1980 offered vision america would safer prosperous reject safety net voters grown value wave produced election returned landslide reelection 1984 setting stage conservative victories come republicans today waste opportunity establish conditions similar longterm success mr olsen senior fellow ethics public policy center | 924 |
<p>INDIANAPOLIS — <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Indianapolis-Colts/" type="external">Indianapolis Colts</a> head coach <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Chuck-Pagano/" type="external">Chuck Pagano</a> is known for his easy-going personality.</p>
<p>But after his Colts squad dropped to 0-2 in the preseason after Saturday night’s loss at Dallas, Pagano’s Mr. Nice Guy persona is starting to show a few cracks.</p>
<p>In the loss to the Cowboys, Indianapolis continued to be its own worst enemy with ill-timed penalties and inconsistent play.</p>
<p>“We know we’ve got a lot to work on. We’ll look at the tape and evaluate the young guys. We only had one penalty in the first half. We had a bunch called in the first game, we made an emphasis on trying to clean that up. We had one in the first half and got a little sloppy in the second half,” Pagano said.</p>
<p>The Colts offense continues to sputter and the defense, which showed some promise in the preseason loss to Detroit last week, may have taken a step back.</p>
<p>“We can’t do that. Run defense, we didn’t tackle very good. We gave up too many rush yards. If we can’t get that fixed, it’s going to be a long year. So we’ve got to go to work on that. And, you’ve got to be able to move the ball, offensively. Put together some drives, get first downs, move the ball down the field and put points on the board. If you can’t put points on the board, it’s going to be hard to win games.”</p>
<p>With <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Andrew-Luck/" type="external">Andrew Luck</a> still in rehab mode, <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Scott_Tolzien/" type="external">Scott Tolzien</a> got the start at quarterback and played most of the first half before giving way to undrafted rookie Phillip Walker. Stephen Morris finished up and led Indianapolis to its only offensive touchdown of the game.</p>
<p>Of the three quarterbacks who have played in the first two preseason games, Morris has appeared to be the most consistent. Observers continue to wonder if the former Miami signal-caller will be given an opportunity to start in the preseason and see how he does with the first-team offense.</p>
<p>When asked about the quarterback position, Pagano used the opportunity to take his team to task.</p>
<p>“Like I told the team, (Morris is) a great pro. We went in and said, ‘This is what we’re going to do: Scott’s going to be in at one. We’re going to move Phillip Walker up and let him get the lion’s share with the twos, and (Morris) is going to come in and play in the fourth quarter,'” the Colts’ coach explained.</p>
<p>“He’s done it the last two weeks. He’s kept his head down, didn’t say a word. Great attitude, come to work every single day. It isn’t luck. Preparation meets opportunity and that’s why you succeed. He could have went the other way, but that’s not him. He’s a pro. He’s a man. We need a lot more grown men in that locker room, a lot more grown men on this <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/John_Walker/" type="external">football</a> team.”</p>
<p>It’s understandable why Pagano is not pleased with what he’s seen through the first two weeks of the preseason. Injuries are part of the problem, with the Colts missing several key players from the offensive and defensive lineups.</p>
<p>“We’re evaluating what’s out there. We’re missing some guys. It’s been a little bit of a challenge to get some continuity, some chemistry with any of the guys,” he explained.</p>
<p>If there has been a bright spot in the matchups with Detroit and Dallas, it’s been the ability of the Colts defense to force turnovers. Indianapolis has come up with three turnovers in the two games and scored on a fumble return against the Cowboys.</p>
<p>“We made it a huge emphasis, obviously. We were one of the worst teams in the league a year ago as far as taking the ball away; 25th, 26th, 27th. Whatever it was. We made a huge emphasis on it with the coaches. We’ve been practicing it,” Pagano said.</p>
<p>“Charting strip attempts, fumble recoveries, picking up loose balls day after day after day and it’s paying off. Right now, we’re going to have to create some short fields for our offense. Give them more opportunities to put some points on the board.”</p>
<p>The offense will get an opportunity to show improvement when the Colts play at Pittsburgh Saturday night.</p>
<p>Notes: Rookie running back Marlon Mack made his NFL debut against the Cowboys and showed a lot of promise. Mack’s ability to make people miss while also being a viable pass receiving option bodes well for the regular season. “I thought he was outstanding. He’s going to be a heck of a football player. I think he averaged nine yards a carry. Made a couple of nice catches,” head coach Chuck Pagano said. … Rookie cornerback Quincy Wilson (knee) was hurt against the Cowboys and was sidelined for the remainder of the game. The injury is not thought to be serious. His status for the Steelers game has not been determined. … Inside linebacker Jeremiah George (hamstring) left the Dallas game in the second half and did not return. George did not practice Monday. He is not expected to play Saturday night at Pittsburgh. … Cornerback Tevin Mitchel (abdominal) was hurt against the Cowboys in the second half and was sidelined for the rest of the night. Mitchell was held out of Monday’s workout. He probably won’t be available to the Steelers Saturday night.</p>
<p>Defensive end Margus Hunt blocked a field-goal attempt in the Dallas game. Hunt made a name for himself while with the <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Cincinnati-Bengals/" type="external">Cincinnati Bengals</a> as a kick blocker. … Rookie safety <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Malik-Hooker/" type="external">Malik Hooker</a> remains sidelined with a shoulder injury. Hooker has not practiced since the end of last week’s preseason game with Detroit. … Wide receiver Chester Rogers continues to nurse a hamstring injury. He had been held out of practice once last Monday. He probably won’t play at Pittsburgh Saturday night.</p> | false | 1 | indianapolis indianapolis colts head coach chuck pagano known easygoing personality colts squad dropped 02 preseason saturday nights loss dallas paganos mr nice guy persona starting show cracks loss cowboys indianapolis continued worst enemy illtimed penalties inconsistent play know weve got lot work well look tape evaluate young guys one penalty first half bunch called first game made emphasis trying clean one first half got little sloppy second half pagano said colts offense continues sputter defense showed promise preseason loss detroit last week may taken step back cant run defense didnt tackle good gave many rush yards cant get fixed going long year weve got go work youve got able move ball offensively put together drives get first downs move ball field put points board cant put points board going hard win games andrew luck still rehab mode scott tolzien got start quarterback played first half giving way undrafted rookie phillip walker stephen morris finished led indianapolis offensive touchdown game three quarterbacks played first two preseason games morris appeared consistent observers continue wonder former miami signalcaller given opportunity start preseason see firstteam offense asked quarterback position pagano used opportunity take team task like told team morris great pro went said going scotts going one going move phillip walker let get lions share twos morris going come play fourth quarter colts coach explained hes done last two weeks hes kept head didnt say word great attitude come work every single day isnt luck preparation meets opportunity thats succeed could went way thats hes pro hes man need lot grown men locker room lot grown men football team understandable pagano pleased hes seen first two weeks preseason injuries part problem colts missing several key players offensive defensive lineups evaluating whats missing guys little bit challenge get continuity chemistry guys explained bright spot matchups detroit dallas ability colts defense force turnovers indianapolis come three turnovers two games scored fumble return cowboys made huge emphasis obviously one worst teams league year ago far taking ball away 25th 26th 27th whatever made huge emphasis coaches weve practicing pagano said charting strip attempts fumble recoveries picking loose balls day day day paying right going create short fields offense give opportunities put points board offense get opportunity show improvement colts play pittsburgh saturday night notes rookie running back marlon mack made nfl debut cowboys showed lot promise macks ability make people miss also viable pass receiving option bodes well regular season thought outstanding hes going heck football player think averaged nine yards carry made couple nice catches head coach chuck pagano said rookie cornerback quincy wilson knee hurt cowboys sidelined remainder game injury thought serious status steelers game determined inside linebacker jeremiah george hamstring left dallas game second half return george practice monday expected play saturday night pittsburgh cornerback tevin mitchel abdominal hurt cowboys second half sidelined rest night mitchell held mondays workout probably wont available steelers saturday night defensive end margus hunt blocked fieldgoal attempt dallas game hunt made name cincinnati bengals kick blocker rookie safety malik hooker remains sidelined shoulder injury hooker practiced since end last weeks preseason game detroit wide receiver chester rogers continues nurse hamstring injury held practice last monday probably wont play pittsburgh saturday night | 532 |
<p />
<p>The advocacy of a Legitimacy War approach to the Palestinian National Movement for self-determination and a just peace is basically committed to Hegelian categories of conflict, shifting its energies away from Marxist forms of encounter based on material assessments of the balance of forces. Put less obscurely, the Palestinian shift toward Legitimacy Wars is a recognition that in this kind of conflict, the decisive battles are generally not won by the side with the superior weaponry and technology but rather by the side that prevails in the realm of ideas and symbols of just cause, especially those bearing on nationalist claims of rights based on international law and universal standards of morality. Since the outcome of the colonial wars, the collapse of the Soviet empire, and the failure of Western interventions, the tide of history is flowing favorably for indigenous forces able to win control over these normative heights. This does not imply a renunciation of violence or a guaranty of victory, but it does signify a massive shift in the balance of forces in favor of the side that most successfully uses soft power instruments in conflict situations.</p>
<p>Such a Hegelian view of historical process intends only to claim an altered emphasis, and does not imply a disregard of material circumstances. When Marx was active, his insights into the political economy of the day were brilliantly conceived, calling attention to the revolutionary vulnerabilities of industrial capitalism to a mobilized working class. Both Hegel and Marx, responsive to the alleged truth claims of science, purported to have discovered the laws governing change in the human condition, but only truly identified at most what were historical dispositions, and their claims of ‘determinism’ exaggerated what we are able to discern in the present about what will happen in the future. In the context of the Palestinian Legitimacy War there is only a sense that victory is likely to produce positive political results, but not a guaranty. The political outcome depends on many unknowable features of context, especially how the side losing a Legitimacy War responds.</p>
<p>The battlefields of a Legitimacy War are mainly symbolic and non-territorial. Their relation of forces cannot be measured, but should not be understood only as a battle of ideas. It is rather the conversion of ideas into people power in various forms along with a downplaying of relative technological proficiency. In relation to the Palestinian struggle, such soft power militancy is exhibited by such developments as the growth of the BDS Campaign, the decision by the Swarthmore Chapter of Hillel to defy institutional guidelines of its central body by allowing a forum to speakers critical of Israel, the decision of prominent Dutch companies to cut commercial ties with Israeli settlements because such relationships are understood to be problematic under international law, the decisions by the Association of Asian-American Studies and the American Studies Association to boycott Israeli academic institutions. In effect, a cascade of societal expressions of solidarity with the Palestinian quest for fundamental rights.</p>
<p>This surge of support for peace with justice has evoked a variety of dysfunctional Israeli responses, including vituperative dismissals and a variety of efforts to change the subject. Nothing is more suggestive of Israel’s loss of composure in this new atmosphere than the decision of its leaders, Netanyahu and Peres, to boycott the funeral of the globally sanctified figure of Nelson Mandela, presumably in retaliation for his frequent statements of support for the Palestinian struggle, and maybe for fear that Israel’s long record of collaboration with apartheid South Africa might finally be scrutinized in a transparent manner if they had showed up. Yet the symbolic&#160;impact of this deliberate disaffiliation from such a universal show of reverence for this beloved man has been lodged in the moral consciousness of humanity.</p>
<p>Israel’s more calculated responses to these various developments in the Legitimacy War are revealing. For instance, a Foreign Ministry representative, Yigal Palmor, complains that the ASA endorsement of the boycott of Israel’s academic institutions is part of a campaign to delegitimize the Jewish state of Israel and that it is morally misdirected as it fails to target states with the world’s most horrendous human rights records. The first response is significantly deceptive: the ASA boycott, and indeed all related initiatives, have been directed at Israel’s policies, and do not question the legitimacy of the Israeli state, although elsewhere there are serious questions raised about the insistence by Israeli leaders that others acknowledge Israel as a Jewish state. Such a demand is oblivious to the human rights of the Palestinian minority that consists of more than 1.6 million persons who have been living in a societal environment that includes numerous discriminatory laws regulating their behavior.</p>
<p>As for the contention that there is no idea of boycotting other states with horrendous human rights records, such an argument incorporates two kinds of misleading contentions—first, it deftly avoids the substantive accusations as to whether Israel’s treatment of Palestinians within the academic environment is as prejudicial as claimed by boycott advocates and whether the closeness of Israeli academicians and institutions to the military and political activities of the state is not sufficient grounds for singling out Israel. Add to this the failure of Israeli apologists to address the central ASA contention that singling out Israel is justified because of the existence of ‘significant’ American links to Israeli policies long violating fundamental Palestinian rights and contributing to violations of international law.</p>
<p>Israel’s ambassador to the United States, Ron Dermer, weighed in with a familiar riposte, ‘why Israel?’ Dermer advanced the familiar claim that Israel is the only democracy in the region: why should the ASA “as its first boycott choose to boycott Israel, the sole democracy in the Middle East, in which academics are free to say what they want, write what they want and research what they want.” (NYT, Dec. 17, 2013) Such an argument is questionable and unconvincing for many reasons, including the increasingly dubious claim of Israel to deserve the mantle of democracy considering its own chosen identity as an ‘ethnocracy’ (to borrow the label recently affixed by the respected Jewish leader, Henry Seigman). Also, acknowledging the existence of scholarly freedoms in Israel is besides the point. It does not even attempt to respond to the ASA main contention of prejudicial treatment of Palestinians in its educational system and the degree of collaboration of Israeli academic institutions with the state in relation to unlawful occupation policies and activities and the formulation of military strategy.</p>
<p>Harsh Israeli critique is combined with a dismissive attitude, claiming that the ASA boycott resolution, and indeed the wider BDS campaign, has had and will have no practical impact on Israel’s economic wellbeing and political stability, and that the resolution has no binding effect on even the members of the American Studies Association. What is at stake in such a debate is the meaning of ‘practical.’ Similar arguments were made in the context of the comparable campaign against apartheid South Africa and against those of us who favored boycott and sanctions in response to the barbarous policies of Pinochet’s Chile. In relation to both South Africa and Chile, the argument was also made that such acts of hostility only hurt the most vulnerable people in the targeted society rather than weaken its regime, although in both instances the most credible representatives of the people were unreservedly supporting maximum pressures deriving from external initiative of this character.</p>
<p>I remember being told in the late 1970s in a private meeting of a small group with the then president of the World Bank, Robert McNamara, that loans to the Pinochet regime were justifiable as denying funds to Chile would adversely affect the poor without harming the government. McNamara was claiming to be deeply opposed to the behavior of the Pinochet policies, and upholding the continuity of the World Bank relationship to Chile solely on humanitarian grounds. This interpretation by McNamara did not seem credible at the time. It was directly contrary to what we were being told by several leading diplomats and economists who were prominent in the Allende government, and led us to arrange this private meeting with the objective of persuading the World Bank to suspend financial assistance to Chile given the horrendous behavior of the Pinochet government.</p>
<p>The larger point here is not about the material impacts of such moves of disaffiliation and disapproval. We had no illusions that if the World Bank withheld a loan from Chile it would precipitate the collapse of the Pinochet regime. What we did believe, however, that such a step would strengthen the perception of delegitimacy, possibly influencing American foreign policy and certainly encouraging to the mounting opposition in Chile, but mainly important as a symbolic move. In a similar vein, we can reflect on why it is proper to celebrate the endorsement of this ASA resolution goes back to the essentially Hegelian nature of a Legitimacy War. A symbolic victory is not merely symbolic, although symbols should not be underestimated. The ASA outcome is part of a campaign to construct a new subjectivity surrounding the Israel/Palestine conflict. It is the sort of act that lends credibility to claims that a momentum is transforming the climate of opinion surrounding a conflict situation. Such a momentum is capable of breaking down a structure of oppression at any moment. Unlike a hard power encounter between arrayed military forces, the course of a Legitimacy War cannot be assessed in advance, partly because the defeats endured by the established order are intangible, will be denied up until an abrupt change of course. As Thoreau observed long ago, “It is not what you look at that matters, it’s what you see.”&#160; Hard power realists who rule over the peoples of the world, imperiling our destiny, tend to be dangerously shortsighted when it comes to seeing the course and effects of Legitimacy Wars.</p>
<p>Such a concealment of elite reassessment in South Africa seems relevant to notice. The transformative reassessment was kept secret until revealed in the startling announcement to the South African public of Nelson Mandela’s totally unexpected release from his Robben Island prison cell. It was a stunning reversal of strategy by the South African leadership. It seems appropriate in this context to recall Gandhi’s familiar comment about the cycle of struggle: “First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, and then you win.”</p>
<p>Of course, this is not a time for optimism about reaching a just end to the long Palestinian quest for realization of their fundamental rights. It is a time when genuine hope becomes plausible thanks to Palestinian successes in waging a multi-front Legitimacy War. The eventual political outcome remains obscure, and depends heavily on whether and how interests are reassessed in Washington and Tel Aviv. Such a process of reassessment is certain to be shrouded in secrecy until it is crosses a threshold of decision, and only then will it be revealed. This will occasion many expert explanations of why it had to happen! Pundits are far more convincing when operating in a retrospective mode than when attempting to predict or prescribe.</p> | false | 1 | advocacy legitimacy war approach palestinian national movement selfdetermination peace basically committed hegelian categories conflict shifting energies away marxist forms encounter based material assessments balance forces put less obscurely palestinian shift toward legitimacy wars recognition kind conflict decisive battles generally side superior weaponry technology rather side prevails realm ideas symbols cause especially bearing nationalist claims rights based international law universal standards morality since outcome colonial wars collapse soviet empire failure western interventions tide history flowing favorably indigenous forces able win control normative heights imply renunciation violence guaranty victory signify massive shift balance forces favor side successfully uses soft power instruments conflict situations hegelian view historical process intends claim altered emphasis imply disregard material circumstances marx active insights political economy day brilliantly conceived calling attention revolutionary vulnerabilities industrial capitalism mobilized working class hegel marx responsive alleged truth claims science purported discovered laws governing change human condition truly identified historical dispositions claims determinism exaggerated able discern present happen future context palestinian legitimacy war sense victory likely produce positive political results guaranty political outcome depends many unknowable features context especially side losing legitimacy war responds battlefields legitimacy war mainly symbolic nonterritorial relation forces measured understood battle ideas rather conversion ideas people power various forms along downplaying relative technological proficiency relation palestinian struggle soft power militancy exhibited developments growth bds campaign decision swarthmore chapter hillel defy institutional guidelines central body allowing forum speakers critical israel decision prominent dutch companies cut commercial ties israeli settlements relationships understood problematic international law decisions association asianamerican studies american studies association boycott israeli academic institutions effect cascade societal expressions solidarity palestinian quest fundamental rights surge support peace justice evoked variety dysfunctional israeli responses including vituperative dismissals variety efforts change subject nothing suggestive israels loss composure new atmosphere decision leaders netanyahu peres boycott funeral globally sanctified figure nelson mandela presumably retaliation frequent statements support palestinian struggle maybe fear israels long record collaboration apartheid south africa might finally scrutinized transparent manner showed yet symbolic160impact deliberate disaffiliation universal show reverence beloved man lodged moral consciousness humanity israels calculated responses various developments legitimacy war revealing instance foreign ministry representative yigal palmor complains asa endorsement boycott israels academic institutions part campaign delegitimize jewish state israel morally misdirected fails target states worlds horrendous human rights records first response significantly deceptive asa boycott indeed related initiatives directed israels policies question legitimacy israeli state although elsewhere serious questions raised insistence israeli leaders others acknowledge israel jewish state demand oblivious human rights palestinian minority consists 16 million persons living societal environment includes numerous discriminatory laws regulating behavior contention idea boycotting states horrendous human rights records argument incorporates two kinds misleading contentionsfirst deftly avoids substantive accusations whether israels treatment palestinians within academic environment prejudicial claimed boycott advocates whether closeness israeli academicians institutions military political activities state sufficient grounds singling israel add failure israeli apologists address central asa contention singling israel justified existence significant american links israeli policies long violating fundamental palestinian rights contributing violations international law israels ambassador united states ron dermer weighed familiar riposte israel dermer advanced familiar claim israel democracy region asa first boycott choose boycott israel sole democracy middle east academics free say want write want research want nyt dec 17 2013 argument questionable unconvincing many reasons including increasingly dubious claim israel deserve mantle democracy considering chosen identity ethnocracy borrow label recently affixed respected jewish leader henry seigman also acknowledging existence scholarly freedoms israel besides point even attempt respond asa main contention prejudicial treatment palestinians educational system degree collaboration israeli academic institutions state relation unlawful occupation policies activities formulation military strategy harsh israeli critique combined dismissive attitude claiming asa boycott resolution indeed wider bds campaign practical impact israels economic wellbeing political stability resolution binding effect even members american studies association stake debate meaning practical similar arguments made context comparable campaign apartheid south africa us favored boycott sanctions response barbarous policies pinochets chile relation south africa chile argument also made acts hostility hurt vulnerable people targeted society rather weaken regime although instances credible representatives people unreservedly supporting maximum pressures deriving external initiative character remember told late 1970s private meeting small group president world bank robert mcnamara loans pinochet regime justifiable denying funds chile would adversely affect poor without harming government mcnamara claiming deeply opposed behavior pinochet policies upholding continuity world bank relationship chile solely humanitarian grounds interpretation mcnamara seem credible time directly contrary told several leading diplomats economists prominent allende government led us arrange private meeting objective persuading world bank suspend financial assistance chile given horrendous behavior pinochet government larger point material impacts moves disaffiliation disapproval illusions world bank withheld loan chile would precipitate collapse pinochet regime believe however step would strengthen perception delegitimacy possibly influencing american foreign policy certainly encouraging mounting opposition chile mainly important symbolic move similar vein reflect proper celebrate endorsement asa resolution goes back essentially hegelian nature legitimacy war symbolic victory merely symbolic although symbols underestimated asa outcome part campaign construct new subjectivity surrounding israelpalestine conflict sort act lends credibility claims momentum transforming climate opinion surrounding conflict situation momentum capable breaking structure oppression moment unlike hard power encounter arrayed military forces course legitimacy war assessed advance partly defeats endured established order intangible denied abrupt change course thoreau observed long ago look matters see160 hard power realists rule peoples world imperiling destiny tend dangerously shortsighted comes seeing course effects legitimacy wars concealment elite reassessment south africa seems relevant notice transformative reassessment kept secret revealed startling announcement south african public nelson mandelas totally unexpected release robben island prison cell stunning reversal strategy south african leadership seems appropriate context recall gandhis familiar comment cycle struggle first ignore laugh fight win course time optimism reaching end long palestinian quest realization fundamental rights time genuine hope becomes plausible thanks palestinian successes waging multifront legitimacy war eventual political outcome remains obscure depends heavily whether interests reassessed washington tel aviv process reassessment certain shrouded secrecy crosses threshold decision revealed occasion many expert explanations happen pundits far convincing operating retrospective mode attempting predict prescribe | 982 |
<p>Fifteen Senate Democrats are now backing a single-payer healthcare plan which would expand Medicare coverage into a universal health insurance program for all Americans. Senator Bernie Sanders (I-Vermont) introduced the Medicare for All Act on Wednesday.</p>
<p>In a social media post, Sanders noted that 28 million Americans are still without health insurance, and took a swipe at Congressional Republicans for attempting to repeal the Affordable Care Act, also known as Obamacare, earlier this year.</p>
<p>“Our idea is to do what every other major country on earth is doing, and that is to guarantee health care to all people as a right, not a privilege,” Sanders said. “I know that taking on the health insurance companies and Wall Street and the drug companies and medical equipment suppliers, all those people who profit off our dysfunctional healthcare system is not going to be an easy fit. The only way we win this is when the American people stand up, as they are, and demand real change.”</p>
<p>If passed, the Medicare for All Act of 2017 would replace the current healthcare system with a public system paid for by higher taxes, covering everything from hospital stays, doctor visits, mental health program, dental, vision and reproductive care, including abortion.</p>
<p>Employers would pay higher taxes, but would longer have to cover insurance for workers, and there would still be private insurers for people who wanted elective treatments like plastic surgery. Doctors would be reimbursed by the government. Consumers may have to pay up to $250 out-of-pocket for prescription drugs, with incentives to use generic medications.</p>
<p>The bill calls for elimination of premiums for private health insurance, deductibles and co-pays.</p>
<p>Long-term care would not be included in bill but covered by separate legislation, an adviser to Sanders <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2017/09/13/politics/bernie-sanders-medicare-for-all-plan-details/index.html" type="external">told CNN</a>.</p>
<p>[embedded content]</p>
<p>Sanders’ proposal is a “horrible idea,” White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders (no relation to the senator) told reporters on Wednesday afternoon.</p>
<p>“I’m pretty sure that not only does the president not support it, America does not support it or Bernie Sanders would be sitting in the Oval Office right now,” she added.</p>
<p>Sanders <a href="https://www.rt.com/usa/311203-bernie-sanders-medicare-expansion/" type="external">campaigned on single-payer</a> in 2016, vying for the Democratic presidential nomination against Hillary Clinton.</p>
<p>“He didn’t make it through the primary, he didn’t make it into the Oval [Office],” the White House spokeswoman said. “I think that’s a pretty clear indication of what Americans want to see and it’s not single-payer.”</p>
<p>On the campaign trail, Sanders pitched a version of the bill with an estimated price tag of nearly $1.4 trillion, to be paid for in part by a proposed new 2.2 percent income tax on all Americans, a 6.2 percent levy on employers and further round of tax hikes on the wealthy.</p>
<p>Americans would be fine with paying more taxes in exchange for no longer having to fight with healthcare companies, Sanders told the Washington Post.</p>
<p>One of the tricky parts of the plan is how to transition from the current system which depends on employer-sponsored private plants, without creating a disruption in care. The plan is to roll it out over a four-year transition process.</p>
<p>In its first year Medicare would lower the eligibility age to 55. Children under 18 would be offered immediate access to the government-run plan. Over the next two years, Medicare enrollment would drop to 45 years, then 35 years old. By the fourth year, all would be eligible.</p>
<p>The bill will serve as a Senate counterpart to the House one proposed by Representative John Conyers, Jr. (D-Michigan), HR 676, which is co-sponsored by 117 representatives, mostly Democrats.</p>
<p>Some 53 percent of Americans support a national healthcare plan, according to a June poll by the Kaiser Family Foundation. That’s up 50 percent last year, and from 40 percent between 1998 and 2000.</p>
<p>Increased support for single-payer comes after the Republican-controlled Senate fell one vote short in July of adopting a narrow repeal of Obamacare, and as lawmakers express concern that insurance marketplaces could collapse without new government support.</p>
<p>Read more</p>
<p><a href="https://www.rt.com/usa/373904-americans-want-government-healthcare/" type="external" /></p>
<p>Republican lawmakers, who control both chambers of Congress, oppose a single-payer system.</p>
<p>“It seems that this complete government takeover of healthcare is becoming the litmus test for the liberal left,” said Senator John Barrasso, (R-Wyoming) told the <a href="http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/sep/12/bernie-sanders-medicare-for-all-gets-surge-of-libe/" type="external">Washington Times</a>. Barrasso said Sanders’ home state of Vermont abandoned a state-level push for single-payer over its high costs.</p>
<p>Single-payer will force Americans to wait for critical care and stress the Medicare program once it is extended to people younger than 65, Barrasso said.</p>
<p>Advocates for the plan said after today it will no longer be possible for an elected official to dismiss the idea of a single-payer plan on the ground that is it is not politically viable.</p>
<p>“They have to take a stand based on the merits. And the evidence makes an overwhelming case for single-payer,” said Robert Weissman, president of Public Citizen told Institute for Public Accuracy.</p>
<p>Medicare and Medicaid were passed into law in 1965, under President Lyndon B Johnson. Within a year of the law’s signing, 99 percent of the nation’s seniors were enrolled in the universal part of the program.</p> | false | 1 | fifteen senate democrats backing singlepayer healthcare plan would expand medicare coverage universal health insurance program americans senator bernie sanders ivermont introduced medicare act wednesday social media post sanders noted 28 million americans still without health insurance took swipe congressional republicans attempting repeal affordable care act also known obamacare earlier year idea every major country earth guarantee health care people right privilege sanders said know taking health insurance companies wall street drug companies medical equipment suppliers people profit dysfunctional healthcare system going easy fit way win american people stand demand real change passed medicare act 2017 would replace current healthcare system public system paid higher taxes covering everything hospital stays doctor visits mental health program dental vision reproductive care including abortion employers would pay higher taxes would longer cover insurance workers would still private insurers people wanted elective treatments like plastic surgery doctors would reimbursed government consumers may pay 250 outofpocket prescription drugs incentives use generic medications bill calls elimination premiums private health insurance deductibles copays longterm care would included bill covered separate legislation adviser sanders told cnn embedded content sanders proposal horrible idea white house press secretary sarah huckabee sanders relation senator told reporters wednesday afternoon im pretty sure president support america support bernie sanders would sitting oval office right added sanders campaigned singlepayer 2016 vying democratic presidential nomination hillary clinton didnt make primary didnt make oval office white house spokeswoman said think thats pretty clear indication americans want see singlepayer campaign trail sanders pitched version bill estimated price tag nearly 14 trillion paid part proposed new 22 percent income tax americans 62 percent levy employers round tax hikes wealthy americans would fine paying taxes exchange longer fight healthcare companies sanders told washington post one tricky parts plan transition current system depends employersponsored private plants without creating disruption care plan roll fouryear transition process first year medicare would lower eligibility age 55 children 18 would offered immediate access governmentrun plan next two years medicare enrollment would drop 45 years 35 years old fourth year would eligible bill serve senate counterpart house one proposed representative john conyers jr dmichigan hr 676 cosponsored 117 representatives mostly democrats 53 percent americans support national healthcare plan according june poll kaiser family foundation thats 50 percent last year 40 percent 1998 2000 increased support singlepayer comes republicancontrolled senate fell one vote short july adopting narrow repeal obamacare lawmakers express concern insurance marketplaces could collapse without new government support read republican lawmakers control chambers congress oppose singlepayer system seems complete government takeover healthcare becoming litmus test liberal left said senator john barrasso rwyoming told washington times barrasso said sanders home state vermont abandoned statelevel push singlepayer high costs singlepayer force americans wait critical care stress medicare program extended people younger 65 barrasso said advocates plan said today longer possible elected official dismiss idea singlepayer plan ground politically viable take stand based merits evidence makes overwhelming case singlepayer said robert weissman president public citizen told institute public accuracy medicare medicaid passed law 1965 president lyndon b johnson within year laws signing 99 percent nations seniors enrolled universal part program | 512 |
<p />
<p>In my own conversations with senior Vatican officials over the past 18 months, I have been struck by the fact that the debates of 2002-2003 are over. That there was serious disagreement between the U.S. government and the Holy See prior to the invasion of Iraq is, and was, obvious. Today, however, the page has been turned, and despite what Winters’s Vatican leakers may be telling him, the people who make the decisions tell me, as they have told the Bush administration, that a precipitous U.S. withdrawal from Iraq would be a disaster for both Iraq and the entire Middle East.</p>
<p>Pope Benedict will likely urge President Bush to demand that the Iraqi government be more assertive in defending the Christian minority population of Iraq; but that means more and stronger American involvement in the evolving politics of Iraq, not the end of an “occupation.” As for a papal “denunciation” at the U.N., Winters and his friends among Catholic Democrats are likely to be disappointed; Benedict XVI is far too shrewd to give fall campaign sound-bites to Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton (either of whose victory in November would cause nightmares for the Holy See at the U.N. and other international agencies).</p>
<p>Moreover, the pope is coming to the U.N., not to give a pontifically guided tour of the world scene, praising this and lamenting that. In this 60th anniversary year of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, he is far more likely to challenge the world body to take more seriously the moral truths that undergird the human dignity the U.N. was founded to defend — moral truths that can be known by reason.</p>
<p>Winters also argues that the Vatican’s “foreign policy” apparatus thinks rather like the Eurocrats in like Brussels. There is a truth here, but Winters misses it, badly. Yes, the default positions in the Second Section of the Holy See’s Secretariat of State (usually referred to as “the Vatican’s foreign ministry”) tend to reflect the default positions in chancelleries and foreign ministries in western Europe. But to conclude from this that those defaults are shared by Benedict XVI and his most senior advisers on world politics is to make a very serious mistake. If the permanent bureaucracy in the Vatican Secretariat of State had had anything to say about it, Benedict XVI would never have given his historic Regensburg Lecture on faith and reason in September 2006 — the lecture that caused a firestorm of protest in parts of the Islamic world.</p>
<p>Eighteen months later, however, Benedict has been thoroughly vindicated in his challenge to Islam to think seriously about religious freedom and the separation of spiritual and political authority in the state. For the Regensburg Lecture, as intended, dramatically reshaped the Catholic-Islamic conversation, focusing it on the issues where Islamist aggression makes pluralism and peace difficult, rather on the exchange of banalities that too often characterizes interreligious dialogue. The new Catholic-Muslim Forum that was established following last year’s “Letter of 138” Muslim leaders (itself a response to Regensburg) is one example; negotiations with the government of Saudi Arabia on the construction of a Catholic Church in the kingdom are another; King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia’s call for a new dialogue among the monotheistic religions is yet another. None of this would have happened had Benedict XVI deferred to those of his diplomats who “think Brussels.”</p>
<p>Nor would a pope who thought in Eurocrat terms about world politics have appointed as his “foreign minister” Archbishop Dominique Mamberti, a man who combines extensive experience of Islamist aggression (he was formerly papal nuncio in Khartoum) with a fondness for the United States and a clear-eyed view of the weaknesses and corruptions of the present U.N. (where he served for three years). Furthermore, Benedict XVI and Archbishop Mamberti are both fully aware that the “dictatorship of relativism” of which then-Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger warned just prior to his election as pope is not only being imposed across Europe by radically secularist governments like the Zapatero regime in Spain; it is also being imposed by the E.U. bureaucracy, the European Parliament, the European Commission, and the European human rights courts. Rather than the pope and Mamberti being driven by the “Brussels-think” in the permanent Vatican bureaucracy, it is far more likely that this pontificate will continue to challenge those default positions; it may even start the process by which the defaults are decisively changed.</p>
<p>Winters’s effort to set Benedict XVI at loggerheads with the present U.S. administration fails on another point: The Holy See’s gratitude to the Bush administration for its defense of religious freedom, its commitment to AIDS relief in Africa (including the administration’s tacit rejection of the salvation-through-latex approach to AIDS prevention characteristic of the multilateral aid agencies), and its stalwart pro-life position both domestically and in international arenas. As a very senior Vatican official told me recently, the people who actually make the decisions in Rome know that the future is unlikely to provide an American administration as comprehensively sympathetic to core Holy See concerns in international arenas as the Bush administration has been. There is, alas, a kind of Obama swoon going on in at least some parts of the Roman Curia at the moment; but once the Illinois senator’s positions on the life issues and the nature of marriage come into clearer focus along the Tiber, the honeymoon will be adjourned, quickly.</p>
<p>Americans interested in hearing what the pope actually has to say about the United States and its role in the world, and about the deeper issues of world politics, should pay particularly close attention to Benedict’s remarks at the White House welcoming ceremony on April 16 and his address to the U.N. General Assembly on April 18. Far from playing Jeremiah against the Great Satan Bush, Benedict XVI is going to teach the world a lesson about moral reason as the “grammar” by which the world can have a conversation about the world’s future. There are truths built into the world and into us, he will remind Americans and the U.N.; thinking together about those truths is one way to change noise into conversation and incomprehension into dialogue. I hope Mr. Winters, his sources, and the editors at “Outlook” are listening.</p>
<p>— George Weigel is distinguished senior fellow of the <a href="" type="internal">Ethics and Public Policy Center</a>, where he holds the William E. Simon Chair in Catholic Studies. He is the biographer of Pope John Paul II and the author of <a href="http://www.nationalreview.com/redirect/amazon.p?j=B000GPIL64" type="external">God’s Choice: Pope Benedict XVI and the Future of the Catholic Church</a>. His most recent book is <a href="http://www.nationalreview.com/redirect/amazon.p?j=0385523785" type="external">Faith, Reason, and the War Against Jihadism</a>.</p> | false | 1 | conversations senior vatican officials past 18 months struck fact debates 20022003 serious disagreement us government holy see prior invasion iraq obvious today however page turned despite winterss vatican leakers may telling people make decisions tell told bush administration precipitous us withdrawal iraq would disaster iraq entire middle east pope benedict likely urge president bush demand iraqi government assertive defending christian minority population iraq means stronger american involvement evolving politics iraq end occupation papal denunciation un winters friends among catholic democrats likely disappointed benedict xvi far shrewd give fall campaign soundbites barack obama hillary clinton either whose victory november would cause nightmares holy see un international agencies moreover pope coming un give pontifically guided tour world scene praising lamenting 60th anniversary year universal declaration human rights far likely challenge world body take seriously moral truths undergird human dignity un founded defend moral truths known reason winters also argues vaticans foreign policy apparatus thinks rather like eurocrats like brussels truth winters misses badly yes default positions second section holy sees secretariat state usually referred vaticans foreign ministry tend reflect default positions chancelleries foreign ministries western europe conclude defaults shared benedict xvi senior advisers world politics make serious mistake permanent bureaucracy vatican secretariat state anything say benedict xvi would never given historic regensburg lecture faith reason september 2006 lecture caused firestorm protest parts islamic world eighteen months later however benedict thoroughly vindicated challenge islam think seriously religious freedom separation spiritual political authority state regensburg lecture intended dramatically reshaped catholicislamic conversation focusing issues islamist aggression makes pluralism peace difficult rather exchange banalities often characterizes interreligious dialogue new catholicmuslim forum established following last years letter 138 muslim leaders response regensburg one example negotiations government saudi arabia construction catholic church kingdom another king abdullah saudi arabias call new dialogue among monotheistic religions yet another none would happened benedict xvi deferred diplomats think brussels would pope thought eurocrat terms world politics appointed foreign minister archbishop dominique mamberti man combines extensive experience islamist aggression formerly papal nuncio khartoum fondness united states cleareyed view weaknesses corruptions present un served three years furthermore benedict xvi archbishop mamberti fully aware dictatorship relativism thencardinal joseph ratzinger warned prior election pope imposed across europe radically secularist governments like zapatero regime spain also imposed eu bureaucracy european parliament european commission european human rights courts rather pope mamberti driven brusselsthink permanent vatican bureaucracy far likely pontificate continue challenge default positions may even start process defaults decisively changed winterss effort set benedict xvi loggerheads present us administration fails another point holy sees gratitude bush administration defense religious freedom commitment aids relief africa including administrations tacit rejection salvationthroughlatex approach aids prevention characteristic multilateral aid agencies stalwart prolife position domestically international arenas senior vatican official told recently people actually make decisions rome know future unlikely provide american administration comprehensively sympathetic core holy see concerns international arenas bush administration alas kind obama swoon going least parts roman curia moment illinois senators positions life issues nature marriage come clearer focus along tiber honeymoon adjourned quickly americans interested hearing pope actually say united states role world deeper issues world politics pay particularly close attention benedicts remarks white house welcoming ceremony april 16 address un general assembly april 18 far playing jeremiah great satan bush benedict xvi going teach world lesson moral reason grammar world conversation worlds future truths built world us remind americans un thinking together truths one way change noise conversation incomprehension dialogue hope mr winters sources editors outlook listening george weigel distinguished senior fellow ethics public policy center holds william e simon chair catholic studies biographer pope john paul ii author gods choice pope benedict xvi future catholic church recent book faith reason war jihadism | 606 |
<p />
<p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00EGMBK4I/ref=as_li_ss_il?ie=UTF8&amp;camp=1789&amp;creative=390957&amp;creativeASIN=B00EGMBK4I&amp;linkCode=as2&amp;tag=forepolijour-20" type="external">The Idea of Israel: A History of Power and Knowledge</a>. Ilan Pappe. Verso/New Left Books, London, 2014.</p>
<p>This is a powerfully written unsettling work that relates the story of Israel from the perspective of how ideas are changed and manipulated for the benefit of the state. Unfortunately, the majority of citizens of most countries are susceptible to the ideation/ideology of the mainstream of political thought as it is supported by the mainstream press. In the case of Israel, image and ideation, its narrative and ideology, are of paramount importance for the survival of the state beyond its military strength and relatively successful integration into the globalized corporate governed world.</p>
<p>For a brief decade, generally within the 1990s, the Israeli narrative, its foundational ideas, were challenged by a small group of academics known as the new historians. In a factual sense they brought forward many details about the story of Israel—using newly released and openly available IDF archives—that contradicted the narrative preferred by the Israeli government and its supporters.</p>
<p>They were successful at opening up a dialogue about the 1948 Nakba/“War of Independence”, the post 1967 settlement plans, and for both dates, the knowledge of expulsions, massacres, and ethnic cleansing. But that success had limited reach within Israel, as the new historians were an academic minority, and only in infrequent media presentations—stage, theatre, and film in particular—was there any other real arena of success.&#160;&#160; It did create some significant stirrings abroad, but the main feature in other countries, again apart from a few vocal academics, was a broad base of apathy and disinterest, cultivated by a corporate controlled media supporting—again, the corporate governed globalized world.</p>
<p>This is the story that is developed within Ilan Pappe’s latest work, The Idea of Israel.&#160;&#160; Pappe follows the historical timeline within this ideational confrontation, starting with the 1948 Nakba and its ‘traditional’ perspective before the age of the new historians.</p>
<p>In this original perspective, the ‘land without people’ became an insult to the Zionists by the very presence of the Palestinians. It involved the physical conflict between Palestinians and the Zionists, with the Palestinians—when they were acknowledged at all—denigrated as primitive and backwards, requiring ‘modernization.’&#160;&#160; Their resistance was a surprise, with unknown rational, arising “out of the blue” and being “tantamount to terrorism.”</p>
<p>As the discourse was written by the Israelis, the “unexplained violence was identified academically as an essential feature of Arab culture and life.” The violence as depicted in the cinema “need not be explained, merely described,” with an “absence of logical explanation” other than that of a “meaningless and cruel assault.” The cinematic representation was a “combination of a racist superiority complex intertwined with pathological hate.”</p>
<p>At first, the Post Zionist movement was represented by academics reacting with “disgust at abhorrent conduct” of the Israelis towards the Palestinians” and the “intellectual rejections of paradoxes and absurdities of ideological dogma.” During the 1970s and 1980s, undercurrents of criticism emerged which “exposed some basic Zionist truisms as doubtful at best and as fallacies at worst…. It became apparent … that society was ridden with tensions between various cultural and ethnic groups, and was only precariously cemented together by the lack of peace and the continual sense of crisis.”</p>
<p>The new historians discussed many myths concerning the 1948 Nakba. Pappe discusses the UN Partition plan, the lack of popularity of Grand Mufti al-Husayni, the desire of the Arab world to destroy Israel (in spite of their secret agreement with Jordan contradicting this), the exodus because the Palestinians were told to leave rather than being forced, the Israeli David versus the Arab Goliath, and the Israeli rejection of the offering of peace.</p>
<p>Later on these ideas were revitalized after the Second Intifada, the lack of success at Camp David, and the events of 9/11 and the al-Aqsa mosque. They have been revitalized with the Neo Zionist’s new discourse on Israeli history.</p>
<p>But before getting there, Pappe examines different aspects of the presentation of the new historians and Post Zionism in the 1990s.&#160;&#160; It was “a decade in which the entire idea of Israel was questioned and serves as a “convenient term for measuring the distance that these scholars travelled out of the Zionist camp” yet were “still close enough to the tribal space to return to its warm embrace.” It was in Pappe’ view, the “only positive result of these two monumental events [the Intifada, and Oslo].”</p>
<p>Topics of discussion covered the obvious history but also economic realities, nationalism in relation to biblical myths, settlers, exile, socialism and class distinctions, militarism, colonialism, and feminism and gender being “most influential.”</p>
<p>The next topic is the holocaust and its myths wherein the Israelis “perfected such manipulation as a diplomatic tool in its struggle against Palestinians,” which was “consensual and widespread.” Critics of holocaust ideation called it “excessive and abusive preoccupation,” with “perverted moral values and judgement.” It “prevented them from seeing the Palestinians in a more realistic light and impeded a reasonable political solution to the Arab-Israeli conflict.”</p>
<p>Within that context, Pappe examines early Jewish sympathy to the Nazis (anti-British, expulsion from Germany as a good, and a negation of the diaspora). He looks at the Warsaw uprising as represented as a distinctly Jewish event and not as one of several reactions to knowledge of one’s ultimate death at the hands of the Nazis. It was/is part of the “construction of a selective narrative that adapted the history of the holocaust to Israel’s strategies and ideological demands,” vis a vis the brave Jew versus the passive Jew, nationalizing the rebellion as “part of the history of modern genocide,” the survivors not fitting the mold of the tough Jew, most of whom wished to migrate to the UK or the US rather than Israel.&#160;&#160; Finally, it universalizes genocide to accept all genocides.</p>
<p>Another topic of concern to the Post Zionists is the presence of the Arab Jews. As above most immigrants wanted to immigrate to the UK or the US, not to Israel. They did not see themselves as residents nor did they want to colonize the country, they retained their patriotism for their home country, and were used as cheap labor and support for the ‘demographic problem.’&#160;&#160; This reflected that “life as a Jew in Arab and Islamic societies was a life of integration and co-existence.” To this day they “continue to pose some sort of challenge and alternative to the idea of Israel as presented by the establishment and as understood by the vast majority of Jews within the state.”</p>
<p>The media is given two chapters separated mainly as the written word and the spoken word. Due to self-imposed restrictions, “security considerations” with a consensual approach, the press “did not deviate from the Zionist consensus.” They were liberal but not unpatriotic, and did not pry into pre-1967 Israel or the 1948 Nakba.</p>
<p>While there were particular efforts at revealing the true nature of Israeli society, Pappe’s conclusion is that there was “no political impact” overall.&#160;&#160; Within a few movies there was a “tension between conformity and criticism,” that showed the reality of a nation “that was unstable and insecure, since state and society had failed to reconcile with the people whom they expelled, whose land they took, and whose culture they destroyed.”</p>
<p>One of the interesting aspects of Neo Zionism is that they did not deny the ‘facts’ as uncovered through the IDF archives and government documents, but that they incorporated them into a new paradigm.&#160;&#160; A “highly nationalistic, racist, and dogmatic version of Zionist values overrule all others in the society, and any attempt to challenge that interpretation of the idea of Israel is considered unpatriotic and in fact treasonous.”</p>
<p>Post Zionism was considered a “corrupting method and theory,” which was “gradually silenced and crushed,” allowing the traditional Zionists to “reassert their historiographical interpretation.”&#160;&#160; The main transition points, as indicated earlier, were the Second Intifada, the lack of success at Camp David, and the events of 9/11 and the al-Aqsa mosque.</p>
<p>The paradigm is one of both national and religious unity. It covers the ideation within politics, religion, and education, the latter being especially significant for its militarization role in society (IDF prep in schools). Education also plays the role of creating a racist, insular, ethnocentric perspective, a generalized “fear of the Other.” Apartheid becomes legalized, its argument relating to the always present Zionist concern about demographics. The Palestinians become invisible, culturally and geographically.</p>
<p>Pappe revisits the 1948 Nakba where the Neo Zionists accept the ‘facts’ interpreting them within a new paradigm. Themes of equal combatants (as per 1948) and victimhood (holocaust, 1967 war) combine with a “divine promise” for “existential survival”. Justification is provided for ethnic cleansing while the “moral defence of the war approaches messianic proportions.”&#160;&#160; The war is described in terms of a “just war”, “redemption,” “purity of arms,” an “eternal justification,” and is fully unapologetic for all the newly recognized actions that in humanitarian terms are war crimes and crimes against humanity.</p>
<p>Currently, the media war has been successful within Israel, the academics have retreated into the comfort of their nationalistic/religious paradigm of Neo Zionism. Outside Israel is the recognition that the ‘facts’ are a bit disturbing, and cannot be countered with argument. The response then is a PR campaign to sell Israel as a “heaven on earth…beauty, fun, and technological achievement.” Its success has been highly moderated by the awareness of current Israeli actions, the violence of its assault on Gaza and Lebanon and the nature of its apartheid system of containment/imprisonment of Palestinians.</p>
<p>The Idea of Israel is a complex work, and might be a difficult read without some other historical reference concerning the ‘facts.’ Ilan Pappe’s other main works, <a href="https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B005KR0M5Q/ref=as_li_ss_il?ie=UTF8&amp;camp=1789&amp;creative=390957&amp;creativeASIN=B005KR0M5Q&amp;linkCode=as2&amp;tag=forepolijour-20" type="external">The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine</a> (2007) and <a href="https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B009019YB6/ref=as_li_ss_il?ie=UTF8&amp;camp=1789&amp;creative=390957&amp;creativeASIN=B009019YB6&amp;linkCode=as2&amp;tag=forepolijour-20" type="external">A History of Modern Palestine: One Land, Two Peoples</a> (2006) provide that history. Given the nature of the topic, a reading of Israel’s history from the Israeli perspective would serve equally as well, as it will provide their perspective that can then be compared and contrasted to Pappe’s Post Zionist critique, and the ideas presented in this well thought out work.</p> | false | 1 | idea israel history power knowledge ilan pappe versonew left books london 2014 powerfully written unsettling work relates story israel perspective ideas changed manipulated benefit state unfortunately majority citizens countries susceptible ideationideology mainstream political thought supported mainstream press case israel image ideation narrative ideology paramount importance survival state beyond military strength relatively successful integration globalized corporate governed world brief decade generally within 1990s israeli narrative foundational ideas challenged small group academics known new historians factual sense brought forward many details story israelusing newly released openly available idf archivesthat contradicted narrative preferred israeli government supporters successful opening dialogue 1948 nakbawar independence post 1967 settlement plans dates knowledge expulsions massacres ethnic cleansing success limited reach within israel new historians academic minority infrequent media presentationsstage theatre film particularwas real arena success160160 create significant stirrings abroad main feature countries apart vocal academics broad base apathy disinterest cultivated corporate controlled media supportingagain corporate governed globalized world story developed within ilan pappes latest work idea israel160160 pappe follows historical timeline within ideational confrontation starting 1948 nakba traditional perspective age new historians original perspective land without people became insult zionists presence palestinians involved physical conflict palestinians zionists palestinianswhen acknowledged alldenigrated primitive backwards requiring modernization160160 resistance surprise unknown rational arising blue tantamount terrorism discourse written israelis unexplained violence identified academically essential feature arab culture life violence depicted cinema need explained merely described absence logical explanation meaningless cruel assault cinematic representation combination racist superiority complex intertwined pathological hate first post zionist movement represented academics reacting disgust abhorrent conduct israelis towards palestinians intellectual rejections paradoxes absurdities ideological dogma 1970s 1980s undercurrents criticism emerged exposed basic zionist truisms doubtful best fallacies worst became apparent society ridden tensions various cultural ethnic groups precariously cemented together lack peace continual sense crisis new historians discussed many myths concerning 1948 nakba pappe discusses un partition plan lack popularity grand mufti alhusayni desire arab world destroy israel spite secret agreement jordan contradicting exodus palestinians told leave rather forced israeli david versus arab goliath israeli rejection offering peace later ideas revitalized second intifada lack success camp david events 911 alaqsa mosque revitalized neo zionists new discourse israeli history getting pappe examines different aspects presentation new historians post zionism 1990s160160 decade entire idea israel questioned serves convenient term measuring distance scholars travelled zionist camp yet still close enough tribal space return warm embrace pappe view positive result two monumental events intifada oslo topics discussion covered obvious history also economic realities nationalism relation biblical myths settlers exile socialism class distinctions militarism colonialism feminism gender influential next topic holocaust myths wherein israelis perfected manipulation diplomatic tool struggle palestinians consensual widespread critics holocaust ideation called excessive abusive preoccupation perverted moral values judgement prevented seeing palestinians realistic light impeded reasonable political solution arabisraeli conflict within context pappe examines early jewish sympathy nazis antibritish expulsion germany good negation diaspora looks warsaw uprising represented distinctly jewish event one several reactions knowledge ones ultimate death hands nazis wasis part construction selective narrative adapted history holocaust israels strategies ideological demands vis vis brave jew versus passive jew nationalizing rebellion part history modern genocide survivors fitting mold tough jew wished migrate uk us rather israel160160 finally universalizes genocide accept genocides another topic concern post zionists presence arab jews immigrants wanted immigrate uk us israel see residents want colonize country retained patriotism home country used cheap labor support demographic problem160160 reflected life jew arab islamic societies life integration coexistence day continue pose sort challenge alternative idea israel presented establishment understood vast majority jews within state media given two chapters separated mainly written word spoken word due selfimposed restrictions security considerations consensual approach press deviate zionist consensus liberal unpatriotic pry pre1967 israel 1948 nakba particular efforts revealing true nature israeli society pappes conclusion political impact overall160160 within movies tension conformity criticism showed reality nation unstable insecure since state society failed reconcile people expelled whose land took whose culture destroyed one interesting aspects neo zionism deny facts uncovered idf archives government documents incorporated new paradigm160160 highly nationalistic racist dogmatic version zionist values overrule others society attempt challenge interpretation idea israel considered unpatriotic fact treasonous post zionism considered corrupting method theory gradually silenced crushed allowing traditional zionists reassert historiographical interpretation160160 main transition points indicated earlier second intifada lack success camp david events 911 alaqsa mosque paradigm one national religious unity covers ideation within politics religion education latter especially significant militarization role society idf prep schools education also plays role creating racist insular ethnocentric perspective generalized fear apartheid becomes legalized argument relating always present zionist concern demographics palestinians become invisible culturally geographically pappe revisits 1948 nakba neo zionists accept facts interpreting within new paradigm themes equal combatants per 1948 victimhood holocaust 1967 war combine divine promise existential survival justification provided ethnic cleansing moral defence war approaches messianic proportions160160 war described terms war redemption purity arms eternal justification fully unapologetic newly recognized actions humanitarian terms war crimes crimes humanity currently media war successful within israel academics retreated comfort nationalisticreligious paradigm neo zionism outside israel recognition facts bit disturbing countered argument response pr campaign sell israel heaven earthbeauty fun technological achievement success highly moderated awareness current israeli actions violence assault gaza lebanon nature apartheid system containmentimprisonment palestinians idea israel complex work might difficult read without historical reference concerning facts ilan pappes main works ethnic cleansing palestine 2007 history modern palestine one land two peoples 2006 provide history given nature topic reading israels history israeli perspective would serve equally well provide perspective compared contrasted pappes post zionist critique ideas presented well thought work | 907 |
<p>According to a bit of street wisdom that has worked its way into the national vocabulary, “You got to walk the walk, not just talk the talk.” But since the opposite of everything is frequently, if not always, true, we might, on the matter of explicitly Christian rhetoric and the American public square, consider reversing the injunction and asking the question: How do we talk the talk? How, that is, do we talk so that moral judgments born from Christian religious conviction can be heard and thoughtfully considered by all Americans-or at least by those Americans willing to concede that moral judgment plays a crucial role in the public policy process?</p>
<p>The question of how Christians “talk the talk” in American public life will not go away, because it cannot go away; this is a fact of demographics, as well as a reflection of the nation’s historic cultural core. For the foreseeable future the United States will remain at one and the same time a democracy, a deeply religious society, and a vibrantly, gloriously, maddeningly, and, in some respects, depressingly diverse culture. And thus, just as in decades if not centuries past, the 1990s will see a striking diversity of “vocabularies” in the American public square: many of them religious, others determinedly secular.</p>
<p>How, then, to begin with, can Christians of various theological persuasions talk with each other as they deliberate their public responsibilities within the household of faith? And how can those same diverse Christian communities contribute to a public moral discourse that would more closely resemble a reasonable argument than a cacophony? Is there, in other words, a grammar that can bring some discipline to the inevitably polyglot public debate over how we ought to live together?</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>These questions have been perennials in the garden of American public controversy. But they have been rendered more urgent over the past twenty years by two phenomena, distinct in their provenance but not unrelated in their public consequences.</p>
<p>The first is the return to the public square of conservative, evangelical, and fundamentalist Protestants from the cultural hinterlands to which they were consigned (and to which they often consigned themselves) in the aftermath of the Scopes Trial of 1925. For almost fifty years after that great trek to the margins of the public discourse, “the evangelicals” were content to remain in their enclaves, worshipping and educating their children as they saw fit, asking only to be left alone by the larger society. By the late 1970s, however, the Carter Administration’s Justice Department and Internal Revenue Service, by their assault on Christian day schools, had demonstrated the impossibility of sustaining that strategy; and the result was the defensive/offensive movement we have come to know as the “religious new right.” That this movement dramatically sharpened the debate over the place of Christian conviction in public discourse is too obvious to need further elaboration.</p>
<p>And second, the return of the evangelicals and fundamentalists from cultural exile was paralleled in the 1980s by a new assertiveness on the part of American Roman Catholics (and especially several prominent bishops). On issues such as abortion, pornography, school choice, and the claims of the gay/lesbian/bisexual movement, Catholic bishops, activists, and intellectuals who insisted on acting like Catholics in public soon found themselves engaged not simply in political or electoral battles, but in heated confrontations with several of the key idea-shaping and values-transmitting institutions in our society: among them the prestige press, the academy, and the popular entertainment industry. Perhaps the high (or low) point of this trajectory was reached on the 26th of November, 1989, when a New York Times editorial solemnly warned Catholic bishops that their resistance to abortion-on- demand threatened the “truce of tolerance” by which Catholics were permitted to play a part in American public life: a warning that was, even by Times’ standards, an exercise in brazen chutzpah.</p>
<p>Thus through the evangelical insurgency and the revitalization of the Catholics in the public square-through the activism and interaction of two groups who had long eyed each other with mutual suspicion (if not downright hostility) but who now found themselves in common cause on a host of fevered public issues-American democracy was faced, yet again, with the problem of how it could be a e pluribus unum in fact as well as in theory. And for their part, American Christians had to think through the question of how their most deeply held convictions could be brought to bear on public life in ways that were faithful both to those convictions and to the canons of democratic civility. Given that the United States remains, in Chesterton’s famous phrase, a nation with the soul of a church, the two questions were not unrelated.</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>So far as we know, the apostle Paul was not overly vexed about the public policy of Athens in the first century of the common era; but Paul’s struggle to “translate” the Christian Gospel into terms that the Athenians could understand and engage suggests that the issue confronting Christians has a venerable history. Paul’s invocation of the “unknown god” to the men gathered on the Areopagus was, of course, an evangelical tactic aimed at the religious conversion of his audience; the book of Acts does not suggest that Paul was very much concerned to reform deficit financing, health care, education, or defense appropriations in Greater Athens. But that evangelical instinct which led the apostle to seek a language-a grammar, if you will-through which the Athenians could grasp (and be grasped by) the claims of the Gospel is something on which we might well reflect, as we ponder such decidedly secondary and tertiary questions as deficit financing, health care reform, education, and defense appropriations in the American Republic.</p>
<p>Paul was a man at home with at least two moral-intellectual “grammars”: the Judaic, in which he had been rabbinically trained, and the Hellenistic, which dominated elite culture in the eastern Mediterranean at the time. We may be sure that Paul regarded the Judaic grammar as superior to the Hellenistic, but he did not hesitate to employ the latter when he deemed it necessary for the sake of the Gospel.</p>
<p>This grammatical ecumenicity, as we might call it, was memorably captured in Paul’s familiar boast, “I have become all things to all men, that I might by all means save some.” (1 Corinthians 9:22b) Again, the questions behind this present discussion are questions of considerably less consequence than the salvation of souls. But if, in such a grand cause, the apostle of the gentiles could appeal to his audiences through language and images with which they were most familiar-if, to get down to cases, Paul could expropriate an Athenian idol as an instrument for breaking open the Gospel of Christ, the Son of the Living God-then perhaps it is incumbent upon us, working in the far less dramatic precincts of public policy, to devise means of translating our religious convictions into language and images that can illuminate for all our fellow-citizens the truths of how we ought to live together, as we have come to understand them through faith and reason.</p>
<p>There is danger in this, of course, and it should be squarely faced: Christians eager to be heard in the public square today may, through an excess of grammatical ecumenicity, so attenuate their message that the sharp edge of truth gets blunted, and thus debased. Flaccidity in the cause of a misconceived public ecumenism has been one dimension of the decline of the academic study of religion in America, as it has been a dimension of the decline of mainline/oldline Protestantism. Some would suggest that a similar disposition to excessive public correctness, as that set of attitudes is defined by the tastemakers of our society, has also misshaped certain interpretations of the Roman Catholic “consistent ethic of life.”</p>
<p>Moreover, it can often seem as if our cultural moment demands uncompromising confrontation rather than polite dialogue. When unborn children have less legal standing than an endangered species of bird in a national forest; when any conceivable configuration of consenting adults sharing body parts is considered in enlightened circles to constitute a “marriage”; when senior United States senators bloviate about “sexual harassment” in kindergarten while national illegitimacy rates approach 30 percent of all births: one is reminded of Orwell’s observation, two generations ago, that “we have now sunk to a depth at which the restatement of the obvious is the first duty of intelligent men.” There are some hard, home truths to be told on the various Mars Hills of the American Republic, and one need not doubt that the telling of such truths, even in a publicly accessible grammar, is going to bring down upon one’s head the odium of those committed to the establishment of the Republic of the Imperial Autonomous Self. Under such circumstances, the old country saw which tells us that we may as well get hung for a sheep as for a goat retains its pertinence.</p>
<p>But the good news is that the bad news is not all the news there is. For in certain signs of these times we may also be seeing a new public recognition of the enduring realities of religious conviction and a new willingness to concede a place for religiously based moral argument in the American public square. The warm reception given Professor Stephen L. Carter’s recent critique of the secularism of our elite culture, our law, and our politics suggests that seeds first planted by Richard John Neuhaus in The Naked Public Square are beginning to flower, however variously or confusedly. The broad bipartisan, ecumenical, and interreligious support that made possible the passage last year of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act is also an important straw in the wind (although it remains to be seen just how the creative minds on the federal bench will bend RFRA to various agendas of their own devising).</p>
<p>Then there is the fact that we have a President who, unlike his predecessor, is unabashedly public about his Christian faith, and who seems to understand that the engagement of differing religious convictions within the bond of democratic civility is good for America. It is far from self-evident that President Clinton’s policies (and appointments) are entirely congruent with his religious and moral rhetoric; nor can one dismiss as mere partisanship the suggestion that the President’s rhetoric has been designed in part to divide the white evangelical vote and thus secure his reelection in 1996. But politicians will always be politicians, and those of us who take the bully pulpit seriously can still applaud the fact that the President of the United States publicly acknowledges that “we are a people of faith” and that “religion helps to give our people the character without which a democracy cannot survive.”* However wide the chasm between the President’s talk and his Administration’s walk, it surely means something that President Clinton experiences no embarrassment about using religious language in public.</p>
<p>At the very least, the President’s public appeal to biblical religion ought to remind us just how far from our roots we have strayed when the “naked public square” could even be considered a plausible embodiment of the American democratic experiment. In a nation whose coinage and currency contain the motto, “In God We Trust”; whose Supreme Court sessions open with the plea (admittedly, ever more poignant in recent years) that “God save this honorable court”; whose House of Representatives and Senate begin their daily work with prayer; whose Presidents have, without exception, invoked the blessing of God in their inaugural addresses-it is the proponents of established secularism who should be on the historical, cultural, constitutional, and moral defensive. If President Clinton’s use of explicitly religious language does nothing other than make clear who ought to be prosecuting and who defending in this matter of religion and public life, then the President will have done the country a service indeed.</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>Still, the sheer fact that religiously based public moral argument seems “okay” again in certain influential quarters does not suggest the end of our problem, any more than the widespread celebration of the film The Age of Innocence, with its celebration of the superiority of marital fidelity over extramarital sexual passion, suggests the end of the sexual revolution. What we may have today, through a confluence of forces (and not least because the crisis of the urban underclass has finally focused the elite culture on problems of moral formation), is an opening through which to begin the slow and laborious process of reclothing the naked public square. Save in some tenured bunkers where cultural vandals make merry while the cities burn and children shoot children over basketball shoes, it is now widely acknowledged that its nudity has been bad for the country. The question is how, and in what livery, the square will be reclothed.</p>
<p>Abraham Lincoln, and specifically his Second Inaugural Address, provides an important historical model. In this speech, remember, Lincoln interpreted the national agony of a violent and sanguinary civil war in explicitly biblical terms, citing Matthew’s Gospel (“Woe unto the world because of offenses; for it must needs be that offenses come; but woe to that man by whom the offense cometh”) and the Psalmist (“The judgments of the Lord are true and righteous altogether”) to buttress his general hermeneutic claim that the workings-out of the American democratic experiment were caught up in a divinely ordered plan for human history.</p>
<p>Now, can anyone reasonably argue that, in his deliberate choice of biblical language and in his appeal to the notion of a providential purpose in history, Lincoln was excluding anyone from the public debate over the meaning and purpose of the War Between the States? Can it be reasonably contended that Lincoln’s attempt to prepare the United States for reconciliation by offering a biblically based moral interpretation of the recent national experience constituted an unconstitutional “imposition” of belief and values on others?</p>
<p>We recognize Lincoln’s Second Inaugural as perhaps the greatest speech in American history precisely because, with singular eloquence and at a moment of unparalleled national trauma, it spoke to the entire country in an idiom that the entire country could understand. No one was excluded by Lincoln’s use of biblical language and imagery; all, irrespective of confessional conviction (or the lack thereof), were included in the great moral drama whose meaning the President was trying to fix in the national consciousness.</p>
<p>It is arguably true that, even in the midst of civil war, the United States (North and South) was a more culturally coherent nation than our America today; and it is certainly true that no statesman of Lincoln’s eloquence and moral imagination is on the horizon of our public life. Yet there is still an important lesson here. And the lesson is that biblical language and imagery in public discourse ought to be used, not to divide, but rather to unite: not to finish off an opponent with a rhetorical coup de grace, but to call him (and all of us) to a deeper reflection on the promise and perils of the American democratic experiment.</p>
<p>This principle does not preclude hard truth-telling (as the Second Inaugural amply attests). But Lincoln spoke as one who had understood the frailty of all things human, and especially of all things political; he did not suggest, even amidst a civil war, that all righteousness lay on one side, and all evil on another; he knew, and acknowledged, that the nation was under judgment; and he spoke not as a Republican, and not even as a Northerner, but as an American seeking to reach out to other Americans across chasms of division at least as broad and deep as any we face today.</p>
<p>Such an approach-in which Christian conviction speaks through and to the plurality of our national life, such that that plurality is enabled to become a genuine pluralism-ought to commend itself to us, first and foremost, on Christian theological, indeed doctrinal, grounds.</p>
<p>The treasure of the Gospel has been entrusted to the earthen vessels of our humanity for the salvation of the world, not for the securing of partisan advantage. We debase the Gospel and we debase the Body of Christ (which witnesses in history to God’s saving work in Christ) when we use the Gospel as a partisan trump card. Our first loyalty-our overriding loyalty-is to God in Christ, in the power of the Holy Spirit. Because of that loyalty, Christians are “resident aliens” in any polis in which they find themselves, as the second-century “Letter to Diognetus” puts it. But it is precisely because our ultimate allegiance is to a Kingdom not of this world that we can make a useful contribution to the working out of an American democratic experiment that has understood itself, from the outset, to be an experiment in limited government, judged by transcendent moral norms, and open to the participation of all men and women who affirm belief in certain “self- evident” truths about human persons and human community.</p>
<p>The experiment could fail; it requires a virtuous people in order to succeed. All of this was implied in the Second Inaugural, and that helps explain the enduring power of Lincoln’s address. None of us is Lincoln. But everything we say and do in public should make clear that our purposes are to reunite America through a new birth of freedom, not simply to throw their rascals out and get our rascals in.</p>
<p>And at a far more vulgar level, there are also practical considerations to be weighed here. Playing the Gospel as a trump card is not only offensive to Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, and secularists; it is also offensive to other Christians-even (perhaps especially) to those Christians who may be otherwise inclined to make common cause on public policy issues. In brief, playing the Gospel as a trump card makes us less effective witnesses to the truths we hold about the way in which we ought to live together. (Moreover, and to go back to our primary concern, the suggestion that Christian orthodoxy yields a single answer to virtually every contested issue of public policy is an offense, not simply against political common sense, but against . . . Christian orthodoxy.)</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>Lincoln’s Second Inaugural, and its unchallenged position in the pantheon of American public rhetoric, ought to have secured a place for biblical language and imagery in our public life, the frettings of radical secularists notwithstanding. But, having seen in Lincoln a model for the proper deployment of explicitly biblical language in American public discourse, perhaps a word about natural law is in order.</p>
<p>This is not the place to explore the differences among the various natural law theories, or the points of tangency (and distinction) between Roman Catholic natural law theory and Calvinist concepts of common grace. Rather, the question before us is how Christians contribute to the evolution of a genuine pluralism out of the plurality of vocabularies in American public moral discourse today; the question is how today’s cannonading is transformed, in John Courtney Murray’s pungent phrase, into a situation of “creeds at war, intelligibly.” And the issue is a serious one, for society will descend into a different kind of war, Hobbes’ dread war of “all against all,” unless we can talk to each other in such a way that we make sense to each other-or at least enough sense to conduct the public argument that is the lifeblood of a democracy.</p>
<p>“Natural law” here means the claim that, even under the conditions of the Fall, there is a moral logic built into the world and into us: a logic that reasonable men and women can grasp by disciplined reflection on the dynamics of human action. The grasping of that logic may be (and Christians would say, most certainly is) aided by the effects of grace at work in human hearts; and it may be the case that the Gospel draws out of the natural law certain behavioral implications that are not so readily discernible with the naked eye (so to speak). But that such a moral logic exists, that it is available to all men through rational reflection, and that it can be intelligibly argued in public, is, I think, a matter of moral common sense.</p>
<p>We saw that logic at work in the American public debate over possible U.S. military action in the Persian Gulf in the months between Iraq’s invasion of Kuwait and the beginning of Operation Desert Storm. From one end of the country to the other, and in venues ranging from radio talk shows to taxicabs to barber shops to bars to the halls of Congress, men and women instinctively argued in the natural law categories of the just war tradition in order to debate America’s responsibilities in the Gulf: Was ours a just cause? Who could properly authorize the use of force? Did we have a reasonable chance of success? Was military action a last resort? How could innocent civilian lives be protected? The country did not instinctively reach for these questions because the just war tradition had been effectively catechized in our schools over the past generation (alas); rather, we reached for those questions because those are the “natural” questions that any morally reflective person will ask when contemplating the use of lethal force for the common good. Moreover, the rather high level of public moral argument over the Gulf crisis (perhaps the highest since a similar natural law argument had been publicly engaged during the debate over the 1964 Civil Rights Act) suggests that this instinctive moral logic has the perhaps unique capacity to bring grammatical order to the deliberations of a diverse society.</p>
<p>To commend the development of the skills necessary for conducting public debate according to the grammar of the natural law is not to deny explicitly Christian (or Jewish, Muslim, or Buddhist) moral discourse a place in the American public square. All Americans have the right to bring their most deeply held convictions into play in our common life; that is-or rather, ought to be-the commonly accepted meaning of the First Amendment’s guarantee of “free exercise.” But those convictions will be most readily engaged which are translated into idioms that can be grasped by those whom we are trying to persuade. And one grammar capable of effecting that translation is the natural law tradition. Two examples may help illustrate the point.</p>
<p>The abortion license created by the Supreme Court in 1973 remains the single most bitterly contested issue in American public life. It is self-evident that Christian orthodoxy regards elective abortion as a grave moral evil: as a profound offense against the entire structure of Christian morals. And there is no doubt that the steady proclamation of that truth, in love, has been a crucial factor in the perdurance of the right-to-life movement over the past generation. The overwhelming majority of those active on behalf of the right to life of the unborn are committed to that cause, and have remained committed in the teeth of fierce opposition from the elite culture, because they understand that the Lord requires this of us.</p>
<p>But how are we to make our case to those who do not share that prior religious commitment, or to those Christians whose churches do not provide clear moral counsel on this issue? And how do we do this in a political-cultural-legal climate in which individual autonomy has been virtually absolutized?</p>
<p>The answer is, we best make our case by insisting that our defense of the right to life of the unborn is a defense of civil rights and of a generous, hospitable American democracy. We best make our case by insisting that abortion-on-demand gravely damages the American democratic experiment by drastically constricting the community of the commonly protected. We best make our case by arguing that the private use of lethal violence against an innocent is an assault on the moral foundations of any just society. In short, we best make our case for maximum feasible legal protection of the unborn by deploying natural law arguments that translate our Christian moral convictions into a public idiom more powerful than the idiom of autonomy.</p>
<p>A similar strategy commends itself in the face of the gay and lesbian insurgency. Again, the position of orthodox Christian morality is unambiguously clear: homosexual acts violate the structure of the divinely created form of love by which men and women are to exercise their sexuality in unitive and procreative responsibility. Thus “homosexual marriage” is an oxymoron, and other proposals to grant homosexuality “equal protection” with heterosexuality are an offense against biblical morality: what many would call, unblushingly, an abomination before the Lord.</p>
<p>But given the vast disarray wrought by the sexual revolution, by the plurality of moral vocabularies in America, and by the current confusions attending Fourteenth Amendment jurisprudence, we make a more powerful case against the public policy claims of the gay and lesbian insurgency by arguing on natural law grounds: by arguing that it is in the very nature of governments to make discriminations; that the relevant question is whether any proposed discrimination is invidiously unjust; and that the legal preference given to heterosexual marriage is good for society because it strengthens the basic unit of society, the family, and because it is good for children. Given the fantastic damage done to the urban underclass by the breakdown of family life, this is, alas, an easier argument to make today than it was, say, twenty years ago. But as that asphalt Via Dolorosa comes to impress itself more indelibly on the national conscience, we may well find that natural law- based appeals to public responsibility for the welfare of children and families give us a vocabulary superior in political potency to the rhetoric of autonomy. And we just may find a new possibility for building a conservative-liberal coalition on precisely these grounds, facing precisely these issues.</p>
<p>Similar models of argumentation can be developed for other “social issues,” including censorship, school curricula, school choice, sex education, and public health. In all these cases, it should be emphasized again, the goal is not to weaken the moral claims or judgments involved, but rather to translate them, through the grammar of natural law, into claims and judgments that can be heard, engaged, and, ultimately, accepted by those who do not share our basic Christian commitment (and, perhaps, even by some of the confused brethren who do).</p>
<p>Finally, a word about democratic etiquette. If patriotism is often the last refuge of scoundrels, then what currently passes for civility can be the last refuge of moral weakness, confusion, or cowardice. Moreover, as Mr. Dooley pointed out a while ago, “pollytics ain’t beanbag.” That enduring reality, and the gravity of the questions engaged in the American Kulturkampf, remind us that genuine civility is not the same as docility or “niceness.”</p>
<p>But there is a truth embedded in the habit of democratic etiquette, and we should frankly acknowledge it. The truth is that persuasion is better than coercion. And that is true because public moral argument is superior-morally and politically-to violence.</p>
<p>All law is, of course, in some measure coercive. But one of the moral superiorities of democracy is that our inevitably coercive laws are defined by a process of persuasion, rather than by princely ukase or politburo decree. And why is this mode of lawmaking morally superior? Because it embodies four truths: that men and women are created with intelligence and free will, and thus as subjects, not merely objects, of power; that genuine authority is the right to command, not merely the power to coerce; that those who are called to obey and to bear burdens have first the right to be heard and to deliberate on whether a proposed burden to be borne is necessary for the common good; and that there is an inherent sense of justice in the people, by which they are empowered to pass judgment on how we ought to live together.</p>
<p>Thus in observing, even as we refine, the rules of democratic etiquette, Christians are helping to give contemporary expression to certain moral understandings that have lain at the heart of the central political tradition of the West since that tradition first formed in Jerusalem, Athens, and Rome (to take symbolic reference points). And, not so inconsequentially, we are thereby taking a stand against the totalitarian temptation that lurks at the heart of every modern state, including every modern democratic state. To be sure, that is not the most important “public” thing we do as Christians. But it is an important thing to do, nonetheless.</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>Two sets of obstacles make the transition from plurality to genuine pluralism in contemporary America even more difficult than it necessarily is.</p>
<p>The first obstacle is the legal and cultural sediment of the Supreme Court’s jurisprudence about the First Amendment religion clause over the past fifty years. There is no space here to review this sorry history in detail. Suffice it to say that the Court’s strange decision to divide what is clearly one religion clause into two religion clauses, and its subsequent tortuous efforts to “balance” the claims of free exercise and no establishment through Rube Goldberg contraptions like the three-part “Lemon test,” have not only led the justices into a jurisprudential labyrinth of exceptional darkness and complexity; they have also created a legal and cultural climate in which the public exercise of religious conviction is too often understood as a quirk to be tolerated, rather than a fundamental human right that any just state is obliged to acknowledge. Which is to say, the justices’ increasingly bizarre balancing act has elevated no establishment and subordinated free exercise to the point where a new establishment, the establishment of secularism, threatens the constitutional order. And until the First Amendment’s religion clause is sutured together once again, in law and in the popular understanding of the law-until, that is, no establishment is understood as the means to the goal of free exercise-our law will remain profoundly confused and our political culture too often inhospitable to people of faith.</p>
<p>Thus, for example, one cannot applaud Professor Stephen Carter’s suggestion that the answer to the trivialization of religious belief and practice in contemporary American law and politics is something like maximum feasible toleration for religion in public life. No: the free and public exercise of religious conviction is not to be “tolerated”-it is to be accepted, welcomed, indeed celebrated as the first of freedoms and the foundation of any meaningful scheme of human rights. And until we reverse, both in law and in our popular legal-political culture, the inversion of the religion clause that the Court has effected since the Everson decision in 1947, the already difficult problem of bringing a measure of democratic order and civility into our public moral discourse will be endlessly exacerbated.</p>
<p>The second obstacle in the path to genuine pluralism is a certain lack of theological and political discipline on the part of the religious right.</p>
<p>Now this may seem a classic case of “blaming the victim”; after all, we have recently witnessed a campaign for lieutenant governor of Virginia in which the Democratic Party and much of the media portrayed the Republican candidate, an avowed Christian, as a high-tech Savonarola panting to impose a theocracy on the great Commonwealth, the Mother of Presidents, through such lurid policies as . . . well, school choice, informed consent prior to an elective abortion, parental notification of a minor’s intention to seek an abortion, equalization of the state’s personal income tax exemption with that allowed by the federal government, tort reform, and a lid on state borrowing. All of which took place eight brief months after a Washington Post reporter, in a magnificently revealing Freudian slip, unselfconsciously described evangelicals as “largely poor, uneducated, and easy to command.” Which in turn took place a mere seven months after the prestige press batted nary an eye when Jesse Jackson, at the 1992 Democratic National Convention, told the Christmas story in such a way as to criticize those who would have objected to Mary aborting Jesus. In these circumstances, in which fevered warnings are endlessly issued about the machinations of the religious right and not a word is written or said about the agenda of the religious left (and its influence on no less a personage than Hillary Rodham Clinton), it may seem passing strange to suggest that the necessary challenge to the imposition of an establishment of secularism in America must be complemented by a parallel demand for increased self- discipline on the part of the religious right. Yet that is what is needed. And here is why.</p>
<p>It is needed, first and foremost, for theological reasons. A partisan Gospel is an ideological Gospel; and as many of us insisted against the claims of liberation theology in the 1970s and 1980s, an ideologically driven Gospel is a debasement of the Gospel. “Christian voter scorecards” which suggest that the Gospel provides a “Christian answer” to President Clinton’s economic stimulus package, to the Administration’s tax proposals, to questions of voting rules in the House of Representatives, and to increasing the federal debt ceiling demean the Gospel by identifying it with an ideological agenda.</p>
<p>Another set of concerns arises from democratic theory. One can have no quarrel with describing our current circumstances as an American “culture war.” But the suggestion, offered by Patrick J. Buchanan at the 1992 Republican Convention, that a culture war is to be equated, willy- nilly, with a “religious war” must be stoutly resisted. The two are not the same. A culture war can be adjudicated, and a reasonable accommodation reached, through the processes (including electoral and juridical processes) of democratic persuasion; a religious war cannot.</p>
<p>Moreover, the very phrase “religious war” suggests that the answer to the issue at the heart of the culture war-namely, the establishment of officially sanctioned secularism as the American democratic creed-is an alternative sanctified creed. But under the conditions of plurality that seem to be written into the script of history (by God, some of us would say), such a substitution is not and cannot be the answer. The alternative to the naked public square is the reconstitution of civil society in America. And what is “civil society”? Civil society is the achievement of a genuine pluralism in which creeds are “intelligibly in conflict.” Genuine pluralism is, as Richard Neuhaus has written on many occasions, not the avoidance of our deepest differences, but the engagement of those differences within the bond of democratic civility.</p>
<p>No serious observer of the American political scene can doubt that any number of forces have declared war on the religious right. For its part, however, the religious right should decline that definition of the conflict, and get on with the task of rebuilding civil society in America-a strategy that is both theologically appropriate and, one suspects, very good politics.</p>
<p>Finally, a greater measure of theological and political self-discipline is to be urged on the religious right because it is just possible that the right might win, and thus it had better start thinking now about how it wants to win: as a force of reaction, or as a movement for the revitalization of the American experiment. The choice here is going to have a lot to do with how conservatives, evangelical Christian or otherwise, govern in the future.</p>
<p>To say that the religious right might just win is not necessarily to predict the outcome of, say, the 1996 presidential election, or the 1997 Virginia gubernatorial election, or the 1998 congressional elections. Nor can one overlook the possibility that the current moral-cultural ills in this country might lead to a kind of national implosion, perhaps in the next decade. Given the demographic realities and the current sad state of our politics and our law, that might yet happen.</p>
<p>To say that the religious right might win is, rather, to express an intuition about the current correlation of forces in the debate over how we ought to live together. One cannot get over the feeling that Irving Kristol was on to something when he argued (in the Wall Street Journal of February 1, 1993) that cultural conservatism is the wave of the future in the United States. The secularization project, for all that it dominates the network airwaves and the academy, has largely failed: Americans are arguably more religious today than they were fifty years ago. And this growth is not to be found in those precincts where mainline/oldline churches have been acquiescing, both morally and theologically, to this secularization. On the contrary, it is precisely the churches making the most serious doctrinal and moral demands on their congregants which are flourishing. All of this on the positive side, coupled with the undeniably disastrous effects of the sexual revolution, the welfare state, and the absolutization of individual autonomy on the negative side, suggests that the revival of “traditional moral values” as the common ethical horizon of our public life in the late twentieth and the early twenty-first century is not an impossibility.</p>
<p>In these circumstances, it is not only appropriate, but indeed obligatory, for the evangelical and fundamentalist components of the religious right to practice the public arts of grammatical ecumenicity: to learn how to translate religiously grounded moral claims into a public language and imagery capable of challenging the hegemony of what Mary Ann Glendon has styled “rights-talk.”</p>
<p>For the cultural-conservative coalition that can revitalize American civil society and American politics will be a coalition that includes Christians of Protestant, Roman Catholic, and Orthodox commitment; Jews who have broken ranks with the reflexive secularism and cultural liberalism that have come to inform so much of American Jewry’s approach to the public square; a few secular people; and, just perhaps, a considerable number of Muslims. Grammatical ecumenicity within this coalition is essential to maintaining its tensile strength in the cultural and political battles in which this coalition will be engaged. And such ecumenicity will if anything be even more essential in exercising the authority of governance such that the reconstitution of America as a nation e pluribus unum involves a deepening, rather than a theologically and democratically inappropriate narrowing, of the unum.</p>
<p>In talking the talk, in truth and in charity, with force and with wit, so that others can enter the great conversation over the “oughts” of our common life, the religious right can make a signal contribution to the reclothing of the naked public square in America. And in doing that, it will be serving the Lord who stands in judgment on all the works of our hands, but most especially on our politics. For orthodox Christians politics is, or ought to be, penultimate. Talking the talk in the terms suggested here helps keep politics in its place: and that, too, is no mean contribution to the reconstruction of civil society in America at the end of the twentieth century.</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 | according bit street wisdom worked way national vocabulary got walk walk talk talk since opposite everything frequently always true might matter explicitly christian rhetoric american public square consider reversing injunction asking question talk talk talk moral judgments born christian religious conviction heard thoughtfully considered americansor least americans willing concede moral judgment plays crucial role public policy process question christians talk talk american public life go away go away fact demographics well reflection nations historic cultural core foreseeable future united states remain one time democracy deeply religious society vibrantly gloriously maddeningly respects depressingly diverse culture thus decades centuries past 1990s see striking diversity vocabularies american public square many religious others determinedly secular begin christians various theological persuasions talk deliberate public responsibilities within household faith diverse christian communities contribute public moral discourse would closely resemble reasonable argument cacophony words grammar bring discipline inevitably polyglot public debate ought live together 160 questions perennials garden american public controversy rendered urgent past twenty years two phenomena distinct provenance unrelated public consequences first return public square conservative evangelical fundamentalist protestants cultural hinterlands consigned often consigned aftermath scopes trial 1925 almost fifty years great trek margins public discourse evangelicals content remain enclaves worshipping educating children saw fit asking left alone larger society late 1970s however carter administrations justice department internal revenue service assault christian day schools demonstrated impossibility sustaining strategy result defensiveoffensive movement come know religious new right movement dramatically sharpened debate place christian conviction public discourse obvious need elaboration second return evangelicals fundamentalists cultural exile paralleled 1980s new assertiveness part american roman catholics especially several prominent bishops issues abortion pornography school choice claims gaylesbianbisexual movement catholic bishops activists intellectuals insisted acting like catholics public soon found engaged simply political electoral battles heated confrontations several key ideashaping valuestransmitting institutions society among prestige press academy popular entertainment industry perhaps high low point trajectory reached 26th november 1989 new york times editorial solemnly warned catholic bishops resistance abortionon demand threatened truce tolerance catholics permitted play part american public life warning even times standards exercise brazen chutzpah thus evangelical insurgency revitalization catholics public squarethrough activism interaction two groups long eyed mutual suspicion downright hostility found common cause host fevered public issuesamerican democracy faced yet problem could e pluribus unum fact well theory part american christians think question deeply held convictions could brought bear public life ways faithful convictions canons democratic civility given united states remains chestertons famous phrase nation soul church two questions unrelated 160 far know apostle paul overly vexed public policy athens first century common era pauls struggle translate christian gospel terms athenians could understand engage suggests issue confronting christians venerable history pauls invocation unknown god men gathered areopagus course evangelical tactic aimed religious conversion audience book acts suggest paul much concerned reform deficit financing health care education defense appropriations greater athens evangelical instinct led apostle seek languagea grammar willthrough athenians could grasp grasped claims gospel something might well reflect ponder decidedly secondary tertiary questions deficit financing health care reform education defense appropriations american republic paul man home least two moralintellectual grammars judaic rabbinically trained hellenistic dominated elite culture eastern mediterranean time may sure paul regarded judaic grammar superior hellenistic hesitate employ latter deemed necessary sake gospel grammatical ecumenicity might call memorably captured pauls familiar boast become things men might means save 1 corinthians 922b questions behind present discussion questions considerably less consequence salvation souls grand cause apostle gentiles could appeal audiences language images familiarif get cases paul could expropriate athenian idol instrument breaking open gospel christ son living godthen perhaps incumbent upon us working far less dramatic precincts public policy devise means translating religious convictions language images illuminate fellowcitizens truths ought live together come understand faith reason danger course squarely faced christians eager heard public square today may excess grammatical ecumenicity attenuate message sharp edge truth gets blunted thus debased flaccidity cause misconceived public ecumenism one dimension decline academic study religion america dimension decline mainlineoldline protestantism would suggest similar disposition excessive public correctness set attitudes defined tastemakers society also misshaped certain interpretations roman catholic consistent ethic life moreover often seem cultural moment demands uncompromising confrontation rather polite dialogue unborn children less legal standing endangered species bird national forest conceivable configuration consenting adults sharing body parts considered enlightened circles constitute marriage senior united states senators bloviate sexual harassment kindergarten national illegitimacy rates approach 30 percent births one reminded orwells observation two generations ago sunk depth restatement obvious first duty intelligent men hard home truths told various mars hills american republic one need doubt telling truths even publicly accessible grammar going bring upon ones head odium committed establishment republic imperial autonomous self circumstances old country saw tells us may well get hung sheep goat retains pertinence good news bad news news certain signs times may also seeing new public recognition enduring realities religious conviction new willingness concede place religiously based moral argument american public square warm reception given professor stephen l carters recent critique secularism elite culture law politics suggests seeds first planted richard john neuhaus naked public square beginning flower however variously confusedly broad bipartisan ecumenical interreligious support made possible passage last year religious freedom restoration act also important straw wind although remains seen creative minds federal bench bend rfra various agendas devising fact president unlike predecessor unabashedly public christian faith seems understand engagement differing religious convictions within bond democratic civility good america far selfevident president clintons policies appointments entirely congruent religious moral rhetoric one dismiss mere partisanship suggestion presidents rhetoric designed part divide white evangelical vote thus secure reelection 1996 politicians always politicians us take bully pulpit seriously still applaud fact president united states publicly acknowledges people faith religion helps give people character without democracy survive however wide chasm presidents talk administrations walk surely means something president clinton experiences embarrassment using religious language public least presidents public appeal biblical religion ought remind us far roots strayed naked public square could even considered plausible embodiment american democratic experiment nation whose coinage currency contain motto god trust whose supreme court sessions open plea admittedly ever poignant recent years god save honorable court whose house representatives senate begin daily work prayer whose presidents without exception invoked blessing god inaugural addressesit proponents established secularism historical cultural constitutional moral defensive president clintons use explicitly religious language nothing make clear ought prosecuting defending matter religion public life president done country service indeed 160 still sheer fact religiously based public moral argument seems okay certain influential quarters suggest end problem widespread celebration film age innocence celebration superiority marital fidelity extramarital sexual passion suggests end sexual revolution may today confluence forces least crisis urban underclass finally focused elite culture problems moral formation opening begin slow laborious process reclothing naked public square save tenured bunkers cultural vandals make merry cities burn children shoot children basketball shoes widely acknowledged nudity bad country question livery square reclothed abraham lincoln specifically second inaugural address provides important historical model speech remember lincoln interpreted national agony violent sanguinary civil war explicitly biblical terms citing matthews gospel woe unto world offenses must needs offenses come woe man offense cometh psalmist judgments lord true righteous altogether buttress general hermeneutic claim workingsout american democratic experiment caught divinely ordered plan human history anyone reasonably argue deliberate choice biblical language appeal notion providential purpose history lincoln excluding anyone public debate meaning purpose war states reasonably contended lincolns attempt prepare united states reconciliation offering biblically based moral interpretation recent national experience constituted unconstitutional imposition belief values others recognize lincolns second inaugural perhaps greatest speech american history precisely singular eloquence moment unparalleled national trauma spoke entire country idiom entire country could understand one excluded lincolns use biblical language imagery irrespective confessional conviction lack thereof included great moral drama whose meaning president trying fix national consciousness arguably true even midst civil war united states north south culturally coherent nation america today certainly true statesman lincolns eloquence moral imagination horizon public life yet still important lesson lesson biblical language imagery public discourse ought used divide rather unite finish opponent rhetorical coup de grace call us deeper reflection promise perils american democratic experiment principle preclude hard truthtelling second inaugural amply attests lincoln spoke one understood frailty things human especially things political suggest even amidst civil war righteousness lay one side evil another knew acknowledged nation judgment spoke republican even northerner american seeking reach americans across chasms division least broad deep face today approachin christian conviction speaks plurality national life plurality enabled become genuine pluralismought commend us first foremost christian theological indeed doctrinal grounds treasure gospel entrusted earthen vessels humanity salvation world securing partisan advantage debase gospel debase body christ witnesses history gods saving work christ use gospel partisan trump card first loyaltyour overriding loyaltyis god christ power holy spirit loyalty christians resident aliens polis find secondcentury letter diognetus puts precisely ultimate allegiance kingdom world make useful contribution working american democratic experiment understood outset experiment limited government judged transcendent moral norms open participation men women affirm belief certain self evident truths human persons human community experiment could fail requires virtuous people order succeed implied second inaugural helps explain enduring power lincolns address none us lincoln everything say public make clear purposes reunite america new birth freedom simply throw rascals get rascals far vulgar level also practical considerations weighed playing gospel trump card offensive jews muslims buddhists secularists also offensive christianseven perhaps especially christians may otherwise inclined make common cause public policy issues brief playing gospel trump card makes us less effective witnesses truths hold way ought live together moreover go back primary concern suggestion christian orthodoxy yields single answer virtually every contested issue public policy offense simply political common sense christian orthodoxy 160 lincolns second inaugural unchallenged position pantheon american public rhetoric ought secured place biblical language imagery public life frettings radical secularists notwithstanding seen lincoln model proper deployment explicitly biblical language american public discourse perhaps word natural law order place explore differences among various natural law theories points tangency distinction roman catholic natural law theory calvinist concepts common grace rather question us christians contribute evolution genuine pluralism plurality vocabularies american public moral discourse today question todays cannonading transformed john courtney murrays pungent phrase situation creeds war intelligibly issue serious one society descend different kind war hobbes dread war unless talk way make sense otheror least enough sense conduct public argument lifeblood democracy natural law means claim even conditions fall moral logic built world us logic reasonable men women grasp disciplined reflection dynamics human action grasping logic may christians would say certainly aided effects grace work human hearts may case gospel draws natural law certain behavioral implications readily discernible naked eye speak moral logic exists available men rational reflection intelligibly argued public think matter moral common sense saw logic work american public debate possible us military action persian gulf months iraqs invasion kuwait beginning operation desert storm one end country venues ranging radio talk shows taxicabs barber shops bars halls congress men women instinctively argued natural law categories war tradition order debate americas responsibilities gulf cause could properly authorize use force reasonable chance success military action last resort could innocent civilian lives protected country instinctively reach questions war tradition effectively catechized schools past generation alas rather reached questions natural questions morally reflective person ask contemplating use lethal force common good moreover rather high level public moral argument gulf crisis perhaps highest since similar natural law argument publicly engaged debate 1964 civil rights act suggests instinctive moral logic perhaps unique capacity bring grammatical order deliberations diverse society commend development skills necessary conducting public debate according grammar natural law deny explicitly christian jewish muslim buddhist moral discourse place american public square americans right bring deeply held convictions play common life isor rather ought bethe commonly accepted meaning first amendments guarantee free exercise convictions readily engaged translated idioms grasped trying persuade one grammar capable effecting translation natural law tradition two examples may help illustrate point abortion license created supreme court 1973 remains single bitterly contested issue american public life selfevident christian orthodoxy regards elective abortion grave moral evil profound offense entire structure christian morals doubt steady proclamation truth love crucial factor perdurance righttolife movement past generation overwhelming majority active behalf right life unborn committed cause remained committed teeth fierce opposition elite culture understand lord requires us make case share prior religious commitment christians whose churches provide clear moral counsel issue politicalculturallegal climate individual autonomy virtually absolutized answer best make case insisting defense right life unborn defense civil rights generous hospitable american democracy best make case insisting abortionondemand gravely damages american democratic experiment drastically constricting community commonly protected best make case arguing private use lethal violence innocent assault moral foundations society short best make case maximum feasible legal protection unborn deploying natural law arguments translate christian moral convictions public idiom powerful idiom autonomy similar strategy commends face gay lesbian insurgency position orthodox christian morality unambiguously clear homosexual acts violate structure divinely created form love men women exercise sexuality unitive procreative responsibility thus homosexual marriage oxymoron proposals grant homosexuality equal protection heterosexuality offense biblical morality many would call unblushingly abomination lord given vast disarray wrought sexual revolution plurality moral vocabularies america current confusions attending fourteenth amendment jurisprudence make powerful case public policy claims gay lesbian insurgency arguing natural law grounds arguing nature governments make discriminations relevant question whether proposed discrimination invidiously unjust legal preference given heterosexual marriage good society strengthens basic unit society family good children given fantastic damage done urban underclass breakdown family life alas easier argument make today say twenty years ago asphalt via dolorosa comes impress indelibly national conscience may well find natural law based appeals public responsibility welfare children families give us vocabulary superior political potency rhetoric autonomy may find new possibility building conservativeliberal coalition precisely grounds facing precisely issues similar models argumentation developed social issues including censorship school curricula school choice sex education public health cases emphasized goal weaken moral claims judgments involved rather translate grammar natural law claims judgments heard engaged ultimately accepted share basic christian commitment perhaps even confused brethren finally word democratic etiquette patriotism often last refuge scoundrels currently passes civility last refuge moral weakness confusion cowardice moreover mr dooley pointed ago pollytics aint beanbag enduring reality gravity questions engaged american kulturkampf remind us genuine civility docility niceness truth embedded habit democratic etiquette frankly acknowledge truth persuasion better coercion true public moral argument superiormorally politicallyto violence law course measure coercive one moral superiorities democracy inevitably coercive laws defined process persuasion rather princely ukase politburo decree mode lawmaking morally superior embodies four truths men women created intelligence free thus subjects merely objects power genuine authority right command merely power coerce called obey bear burdens first right heard deliberate whether proposed burden borne necessary common good inherent sense justice people empowered pass judgment ought live together thus observing even refine rules democratic etiquette christians helping give contemporary expression certain moral understandings lain heart central political tradition west since tradition first formed jerusalem athens rome take symbolic reference points inconsequentially thereby taking stand totalitarian temptation lurks heart every modern state including every modern democratic state sure important public thing christians important thing nonetheless 160 two sets obstacles make transition plurality genuine pluralism contemporary america even difficult necessarily first obstacle legal cultural sediment supreme courts jurisprudence first amendment religion clause past fifty years space review sorry history detail suffice say courts strange decision divide clearly one religion clause two religion clauses subsequent tortuous efforts balance claims free exercise establishment rube goldberg contraptions like threepart lemon test led justices jurisprudential labyrinth exceptional darkness complexity also created legal cultural climate public exercise religious conviction often understood quirk tolerated rather fundamental human right state obliged acknowledge say justices increasingly bizarre balancing act elevated establishment subordinated free exercise point new establishment establishment secularism threatens constitutional order first amendments religion clause sutured together law popular understanding lawuntil establishment understood means goal free exerciseour law remain profoundly confused political culture often inhospitable people faith thus example one applaud professor stephen carters suggestion answer trivialization religious belief practice contemporary american law politics something like maximum feasible toleration religion public life free public exercise religious conviction toleratedit accepted welcomed indeed celebrated first freedoms foundation meaningful scheme human rights reverse law popular legalpolitical culture inversion religion clause court effected since everson decision 1947 already difficult problem bringing measure democratic order civility public moral discourse endlessly exacerbated second obstacle path genuine pluralism certain lack theological political discipline part religious right may seem classic case blaming victim recently witnessed campaign lieutenant governor virginia democratic party much media portrayed republican candidate avowed christian hightech savonarola panting impose theocracy great commonwealth mother presidents lurid policies well school choice informed consent prior elective abortion parental notification minors intention seek abortion equalization states personal income tax exemption allowed federal government tort reform lid state borrowing took place eight brief months washington post reporter magnificently revealing freudian slip unselfconsciously described evangelicals largely poor uneducated easy command turn took place mere seven months prestige press batted nary eye jesse jackson 1992 democratic national convention told christmas story way criticize would objected mary aborting jesus circumstances fevered warnings endlessly issued machinations religious right word written said agenda religious left influence less personage hillary rodham clinton may seem passing strange suggest necessary challenge imposition establishment secularism america must complemented parallel demand increased self discipline part religious right yet needed needed first foremost theological reasons partisan gospel ideological gospel many us insisted claims liberation theology 1970s 1980s ideologically driven gospel debasement gospel christian voter scorecards suggest gospel provides christian answer president clintons economic stimulus package administrations tax proposals questions voting rules house representatives increasing federal debt ceiling demean gospel identifying ideological agenda another set concerns arises democratic theory one quarrel describing current circumstances american culture war suggestion offered patrick j buchanan 1992 republican convention culture war equated willy nilly religious war must stoutly resisted two culture war adjudicated reasonable accommodation reached processes including electoral juridical processes democratic persuasion religious war moreover phrase religious war suggests answer issue heart culture warnamely establishment officially sanctioned secularism american democratic creedis alternative sanctified creed conditions plurality seem written script history god us would say substitution answer alternative naked public square reconstitution civil society america civil society civil society achievement genuine pluralism creeds intelligibly conflict genuine pluralism richard neuhaus written many occasions avoidance deepest differences engagement differences within bond democratic civility serious observer american political scene doubt number forces declared war religious right part however religious right decline definition conflict get task rebuilding civil society americaa strategy theologically appropriate one suspects good politics finally greater measure theological political selfdiscipline urged religious right possible right might win thus better start thinking wants win force reaction movement revitalization american experiment choice going lot conservatives evangelical christian otherwise govern future say religious right might win necessarily predict outcome say 1996 presidential election 1997 virginia gubernatorial election 1998 congressional elections one overlook possibility current moralcultural ills country might lead kind national implosion perhaps next decade given demographic realities current sad state politics law might yet happen say religious right might win rather express intuition current correlation forces debate ought live together one get feeling irving kristol something argued wall street journal february 1 1993 cultural conservatism wave future united states secularization project dominates network airwaves academy largely failed americans arguably religious today fifty years ago growth found precincts mainlineoldline churches acquiescing morally theologically secularization contrary precisely churches making serious doctrinal moral demands congregants flourishing positive side coupled undeniably disastrous effects sexual revolution welfare state absolutization individual autonomy negative side suggests revival traditional moral values common ethical horizon public life late twentieth early twentyfirst century impossibility circumstances appropriate indeed obligatory evangelical fundamentalist components religious right practice public arts grammatical ecumenicity learn translate religiously grounded moral claims public language imagery capable challenging hegemony mary ann glendon styled rightstalk culturalconservative coalition revitalize american civil society american politics coalition includes christians protestant roman catholic orthodox commitment jews broken ranks reflexive secularism cultural liberalism come inform much american jewrys approach public square secular people perhaps considerable number muslims grammatical ecumenicity within coalition essential maintaining tensile strength cultural political battles coalition engaged ecumenicity anything even essential exercising authority governance reconstitution america nation e pluribus unum involves deepening rather theologically democratically inappropriate narrowing unum talking talk truth charity force wit others enter great conversation oughts common life religious right make signal contribution reclothing naked public square america serving lord stands judgment works hands especially politics orthodox christians politics ought penultimate talking talk terms suggested helps keep politics place mean contribution reconstruction civil society america end twentieth century george weigel distinguished senior fellow ethics public policy center washington dc holds eppcs william e simon chair catholic studies | 3,407 |
<p>Are you a friend or foe? That seems to be uppermost in President Donald Trump’s approach to foreign policy in the first six months of office.</p>
<p>The probe at home into Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. election continues to be a thorn in his side, bedeviling Trump’s apparent desire to have warm relations with Russia’s Vladimir Putin, and the initial “bromance” with China’s Xi Jinping also buckled under geopolitical and economic disagreements. But there are others who have been lavished with the president’s favor.</p>
<p>Who is in the friend camp is clear from the president’s foreign travels, actions and statements. To varying degrees, his support has emboldened favored countries to carry out contentious regional or domestic policies.</p>
<p>Some traditional U.S foes, though, could find themselves in a more precarious position than they did under President Barack Obama, who generally avoided direct confrontation and even pursued diplomatic openings with Iran and Cuba.</p>
<p>Below, AP journalists assess the friend-or-foe dynamic as seen from key nations:</p>
<p>SAUDI ARABIA</p>
<p>In Trump Saudi Arabia trusts.</p>
<p>The ultraconservative Sunni kingdom played host to Trump’s first overseas trip when it brought him and officials from other Muslim nations for an anti-terrorism conference in May.</p>
<p>Their embrace comes as no surprise as Trump long criticized the Iran nuclear deal, part of the reason for cold relations between the kingdom and President Barack Obama.</p>
<p>Trump also has been willing to overlook human rights concerns in his embrace of Mideast leaders, including Saudi King Salman and Egyptian President Abdel-Fattah el-Sissi.</p>
<p>Trump sent U.S. special operations forces into Yemen to back the Saudi-led campaign in a January raid that killed some 30 people, including women, children and a Navy SEAL.</p>
<p>Trump also has written tweets against Qatar and openly criticized the U.S. ally, host of a major American military base, amid a Saudi-led effort to isolate the country. That’s even as members of his administration try to mediate an end to the rift.</p>
<p>King Salman’s 31-year-old son, the recently appointed Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, was one of the first foreign officials to rush to America to see Trump. He has met several times with Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner.</p>
<p>Now next in line to the throne, the crown prince likely hopes to trade on those ties in further cementing his interests in weaning the oil-rich kingdom from its crude-dependent economy as global energy prices remain low.</p>
<p>-Jon Gambrell in Dubai, United Arab Emirates</p>
<p>ISRAEL</p>
<p>To Trump, Israel definitely falls into the most-trusted-friend category.</p>
<p>From early in his campaign, Trump cast himself as an unconditional supporter of Israel who would have a far warmer relationship with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu than Obama did.</p>
<p>After repeated clashes with Obama, Israel’s nationalist right had high expectations for Trump. His ambassador to Israel is David Friedman, a bankruptcy lawyer who has raised millions of dollars for the Beit El settlement. That community north of Jerusalem is in the heart of the occupied territory Palestinians want for an independent state.</p>
<p>A foundation run by the family of Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner — the president’s czar for Middle East peace efforts — also supported Beit El. Tax records show Trump himself donated money to a Jewish seminary in the settlement through his foundation.</p>
<p>Trump indicated his affinity by including Israel in his first overseas trip as president, where he was fawned over by his hosts. He speaks warmly about Netanyahu and has reportedly sided with him in spats with the Palestinians. He also encouraged Israelis by taking a tough stand on Iran.</p>
<p>At the same time, Trump has not made good on his campaign promise to move the American Embassy to Jerusalem and has spoken of pushing for the “ultimate deal,” raising fears in Israel that it could be pressured into making unwanted concessions.</p>
<p>Meanwhile, the Palestinians have made efforts to get in Trump’s good graces, with Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas traveling to Washington to meet him and praise his leadership. But a new wave of violence over a disputed Jerusalem shrine, sacred to Muslims and Jews, is Trump’s first experience of the decades-long conflict’s realities. How his administration navigates it will be telling.</p>
<p>-Aron Heller in Jerusalem</p>
<p>POLAND</p>
<p>Trump lavished praise on Poland during a visit this month, hailing its struggles for freedom against past oppression and depicting the country — which strongly opposes taking any Muslim refugees — as a defender of Western civilization. He made no mention of rule of law or human rights, even though the country’s populist ruling party has spent the past 20 months consolidating power in ways that have weakened checks and balances.</p>
<p>Within days of the visit, the Law and Justice party moved to pass legislation aimed at giving the government vast new powers over the courts. One bill called for the immediate dismissal of all Supreme Court judges, giving the justice minister power to replace them. Among other things, the change would have given the ruling party direct control over confirming election results, one of the Supreme Court’s functions.</p>
<p>This week the country’s president responded to days of mass nationwide protests by vetoing two of three bills on the judiciary, including the one on the Supreme Court. However, he left in place a third bill that gives the justice minister the power to name the heads of all the country’s lower courts, which critics also see as unconstitutional.</p>
<p>“Trump’s silence about the Polish government’s problems with democracy and the rule of law encouraged Warsaw to pursue further measures, effectively ending judicial independence and separation of powers soon after the presidential visit,” said Marcin Zaborowski, a political analyst affiliated with Visegrad Insight, a journal about politics in Central Europe.</p>
<p>-Vanessa Gera in Warsaw, Poland</p>
<p>IRAN</p>
<p>Trump hasn’t yet torn up the Iran nuclear deal, which took the U.S. and other world powers years to negotiate and ended with Tehran accepting curbs on its contested nuclear program in exchange for sanctions relief.</p>
<p>Whether that remains the case is an open question.</p>
<p>Days into the Trump presidency, then-national security adviser Michael Flynn warned Iran that it was being put “on notice” following a ballistic missile test.</p>
<p>That hasn’t stopped Iran from continuing to develop its weapons programs. In the past six months, it has unveiled new arms, staged military drills and launched a sea-deployed ballistic missile with a reported 300-kilometer (185-mile) range.</p>
<p>Last month, an Iranian patrol boat shined a laser at a U.S. Marine Corps helicopter flying over the Strait of Hormuz — an incident deemed dangerous by the U.S. military.</p>
<p>Trump considered declaring Iran in breach of the nuclear deal this month but ultimately confirmed it was in compliance. He’ll have to revisit the issue in three months.</p>
<p>The administration has slapped Iran with new sanctions, however, including 18 this month targeting Iranian individuals and groups for aiding its non-nuclear weapons programs.</p>
<p>And it recently came out with a new warning, saying Tehran faces “new and serious consequences” unless it frees all U.S. citizens held there. They include Princeton graduate student Xiyue Wang, whose arrest nearly a year ago only came to light this month when he was sentenced to 10 years behind bars.</p>
<p>– Adam Schreck in Dubai, United Arab Emirates</p>
<p>THE KOREAS</p>
<p>There’s not a lot of room for doubt on this one. North Korea is not only an enemy of the United States — a “sworn enemy” as the North Koreans put it — but the two are technically still at war, since the 1950-53 Korean War ended in what was supposed to be a temporary armistice.</p>
<p>Pyongyang made no secret of its anger at Washington’s policy under Obama of keeping up sanctions and other pressure and refusing contacts. But in Trump’s first six months, it seems to take even more umbrage at him — though his policy so far has been enunciated mostly just in chastising tweets.</p>
<p>The North is testing Trump in dramatic ways — most recently with its July 4 test of its first intercontinental ballistic missile.</p>
<p>Kim Jong Un’s bold rush toward nuclear weapons and missiles capable of reaching the U.S. is in part intended to drive a wedge between Washington and Seoul — and Trump isn’t helping to counter that very well. Instead, he has stepped on Seoul’s toes by accusing it of not carrying enough of its own defense burden, and by hurriedly installing a controversial anti-missile system in South Korea before conservatives there lost the presidency in elections this spring. The system is partially deployed, but a full rollout has been delayed under liberal President Moon Jae-in for a environmental review.</p>
<p>For South Korea, one of Washington’s most loyal allies, knowing where the U.S. president stands is absolutely key to its national security policy.</p>
<p>But right now, Kim Jong Un might well be the easier of the two men for Seoul to predict.</p>
<p>-Eric Talmadge, Pyongyang</p>
<p>VENEZUELA</p>
<p>Things haven’t been good between the U.S. and Venezuela since then-President Hugo Chavez called then-President George W. Bush “the devil” in a 2006 speech at the U.N.</p>
<p>Obama avoided confrontation with Venezuela, instead encouraging dialogue between the government and opposition. Trump is threatening to launch “strong and swift economic actions” if Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro moves ahead with the rewriting of the constitution, which Maduro’s opponents fear would pave the way for a single-party, authoritarian state.</p>
<p>Those actions could include devastating sanctions on Venezuela’s oil exports, or simply lengthening a list of top officials who can’t do business with the United States. Maduro and his top aides insist they will go ahead with the election Sunday of a special assembly charged with the constitutional rewrite, a move that will reveal how tough Trump is willing to get.</p>
<p>The Trump administration has already imposed sanctions against Maduro’s vice president and eight Supreme Court justices, with no measurable impact on the Venezuelan government’s behavior. On Wednesday it targeted another 13 current or former top officials in Maduro’s government.</p>
<p>The United States remains the primary source of hard currency keeping the Venezuelan government afloat, since Venezuela sends about half its total exports to the U.S. Restricting Venezuelan oil imports would undermine Maduro’s government but would also increase hardship in the country and give Maduro an easier scapegoat for an already spiraling economic collapse.</p>
<p>Trump’s continued use of sanctions against individuals may be a sign that Washington will stop short of a full-on economic confrontation, though Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin suggested more penalties could come if Maduro’s government fails to change course.</p>
<p>-Michael Weissenstein in Caracas, Venezuela</p> | false | 1 | friend foe seems uppermost president donald trumps approach foreign policy first six months office probe home russian interference 2016 us election continues thorn side bedeviling trumps apparent desire warm relations russias vladimir putin initial bromance chinas xi jinping also buckled geopolitical economic disagreements others lavished presidents favor friend camp clear presidents foreign travels actions statements varying degrees support emboldened favored countries carry contentious regional domestic policies traditional us foes though could find precarious position president barack obama generally avoided direct confrontation even pursued diplomatic openings iran cuba ap journalists assess friendorfoe dynamic seen key nations saudi arabia trump saudi arabia trusts ultraconservative sunni kingdom played host trumps first overseas trip brought officials muslim nations antiterrorism conference may embrace comes surprise trump long criticized iran nuclear deal part reason cold relations kingdom president barack obama trump also willing overlook human rights concerns embrace mideast leaders including saudi king salman egyptian president abdelfattah elsissi trump sent us special operations forces yemen back saudiled campaign january raid killed 30 people including women children navy seal trump also written tweets qatar openly criticized us ally host major american military base amid saudiled effort isolate country thats even members administration try mediate end rift king salmans 31yearold son recently appointed crown prince mohammed bin salman one first foreign officials rush america see trump met several times trumps soninlaw jared kushner next line throne crown prince likely hopes trade ties cementing interests weaning oilrich kingdom crudedependent economy global energy prices remain low jon gambrell dubai united arab emirates israel trump israel definitely falls mosttrustedfriend category early campaign trump cast unconditional supporter israel would far warmer relationship prime minister benjamin netanyahu obama repeated clashes obama israels nationalist right high expectations trump ambassador israel david friedman bankruptcy lawyer raised millions dollars beit el settlement community north jerusalem heart occupied territory palestinians want independent state foundation run family trumps soninlaw jared kushner presidents czar middle east peace efforts also supported beit el tax records show trump donated money jewish seminary settlement foundation trump indicated affinity including israel first overseas trip president fawned hosts speaks warmly netanyahu reportedly sided spats palestinians also encouraged israelis taking tough stand iran time trump made good campaign promise move american embassy jerusalem spoken pushing ultimate deal raising fears israel could pressured making unwanted concessions meanwhile palestinians made efforts get trumps good graces palestinian president mahmoud abbas traveling washington meet praise leadership new wave violence disputed jerusalem shrine sacred muslims jews trumps first experience decadeslong conflicts realities administration navigates telling aron heller jerusalem poland trump lavished praise poland visit month hailing struggles freedom past oppression depicting country strongly opposes taking muslim refugees defender western civilization made mention rule law human rights even though countrys populist ruling party spent past 20 months consolidating power ways weakened checks balances within days visit law justice party moved pass legislation aimed giving government vast new powers courts one bill called immediate dismissal supreme court judges giving justice minister power replace among things change would given ruling party direct control confirming election results one supreme courts functions week countrys president responded days mass nationwide protests vetoing two three bills judiciary including one supreme court however left place third bill gives justice minister power name heads countrys lower courts critics also see unconstitutional trumps silence polish governments problems democracy rule law encouraged warsaw pursue measures effectively ending judicial independence separation powers soon presidential visit said marcin zaborowski political analyst affiliated visegrad insight journal politics central europe vanessa gera warsaw poland iran trump hasnt yet torn iran nuclear deal took us world powers years negotiate ended tehran accepting curbs contested nuclear program exchange sanctions relief whether remains case open question days trump presidency thennational security adviser michael flynn warned iran put notice following ballistic missile test hasnt stopped iran continuing develop weapons programs past six months unveiled new arms staged military drills launched seadeployed ballistic missile reported 300kilometer 185mile range last month iranian patrol boat shined laser us marine corps helicopter flying strait hormuz incident deemed dangerous us military trump considered declaring iran breach nuclear deal month ultimately confirmed compliance hell revisit issue three months administration slapped iran new sanctions however including 18 month targeting iranian individuals groups aiding nonnuclear weapons programs recently came new warning saying tehran faces new serious consequences unless frees us citizens held include princeton graduate student xiyue wang whose arrest nearly year ago came light month sentenced 10 years behind bars adam schreck dubai united arab emirates koreas theres lot room doubt one north korea enemy united states sworn enemy north koreans put two technically still war since 195053 korean war ended supposed temporary armistice pyongyang made secret anger washingtons policy obama keeping sanctions pressure refusing contacts trumps first six months seems take even umbrage though policy far enunciated mostly chastising tweets north testing trump dramatic ways recently july 4 test first intercontinental ballistic missile kim jong uns bold rush toward nuclear weapons missiles capable reaching us part intended drive wedge washington seoul trump isnt helping counter well instead stepped seouls toes accusing carrying enough defense burden hurriedly installing controversial antimissile system south korea conservatives lost presidency elections spring system partially deployed full rollout delayed liberal president moon jaein environmental review south korea one washingtons loyal allies knowing us president stands absolutely key national security policy right kim jong un might well easier two men seoul predict eric talmadge pyongyang venezuela things havent good us venezuela since thenpresident hugo chavez called thenpresident george w bush devil 2006 speech un obama avoided confrontation venezuela instead encouraging dialogue government opposition trump threatening launch strong swift economic actions venezuelan president nicolas maduro moves ahead rewriting constitution maduros opponents fear would pave way singleparty authoritarian state actions could include devastating sanctions venezuelas oil exports simply lengthening list top officials cant business united states maduro top aides insist go ahead election sunday special assembly charged constitutional rewrite move reveal tough trump willing get trump administration already imposed sanctions maduros vice president eight supreme court justices measurable impact venezuelan governments behavior wednesday targeted another 13 current former top officials maduros government united states remains primary source hard currency keeping venezuelan government afloat since venezuela sends half total exports us restricting venezuelan oil imports would undermine maduros government would also increase hardship country give maduro easier scapegoat already spiraling economic collapse trumps continued use sanctions individuals may sign washington stop short fullon economic confrontation though treasury secretary steven mnuchin suggested penalties could come maduros government fails change course michael weissenstein caracas venezuela | 1,078 |
<p>This is not the first dubious appointment of Rwandan generals to major UN peacekeeping operations.</p>
<p>The United Nations has hired a Rwandan general to head a peacekeeping force in Darfur, despite his previous role as army chief of staff at the height of a deadly, Rwandan-backed insurgency in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC).</p>
<p>On Monday the United Nations and the African Union jointly <a href="http://www.un.org/press/en/2015/sga1618.doc.htm" type="external">announced</a> that Rwandan Lieutenant General Frank Mushyo Kamanzi had been appointed force commander of UNAMID, a hybrid mission that provides security and humanitarian assistance in war torn Sudan.</p>
<p>The decision was taken despite General Kamanzi having served as one of the most <a href="http://mod.gov.rw/about-the-rdf/leaders/chief-of-staff-army/#.VnLqt3tVB_w" type="external">senior</a> military figures in Rwanda when the country supplied troops and weapons to a brutal militia in eastern Congo.</p>
<p>General Kamanzi was named army chief of staff in July 2012, just as <a href="http://www.securitycouncilreport.org/atf/cf/%7B65BFCF9B-6D27-4E9C-8CD3-CF6E4FF96FF9%7D/s_2012_843.pdf" type="external">Rwanda</a> stepped up efforts to recruit soldiers, including children, and provide arms, ammunition and fighters for the M23, which was eventually routed by a UN intervention brigade.</p>
<p>Kamanzi was responsible for ‘command, control and management’ of Rwandan army services when M23 militia members were accused of the worst atrocities. At the time, M23 members <a href="https://www.hrw.org/news/2012/09/11/dr-congo-m23-rebels-committing-war-crimes" type="external">slaughtered</a> and raped Congolese civilians, and pillaged a string of communities in the DRC, according to Human Rights Watch and UN staff.</p>
<p>One of the militia’s warlords, <a href="https://www.hrw.org/news/2015/09/01/icc-trial-bosco-ntaganda-congo-crimes" type="external">Bosco Ntaganda</a>, is now facing war crimes charges at the International Criminal Court.</p>
<p>In November 2012, the UN’s Group of Experts concluded that “Rwandan officials exercised overall command and strategic planning for M23.” Their report said Rwanda clearly violated the arms embargo and sanctions regime.</p>
<p>Despite these findings and General Kamanzi’s senior position during that period, the UN Department of Peacekeeping Operations (DPKO) said Friday he was properly screened and the UN did not have any specific information on him breaking international or humanitarian law.</p>
<p>“In line with the 2012 policy on Human Rights screening of UN personnel for senior appointments, the UN screened Lt Gen Mushyo Frank Kamanzi, the recommended candidate for the post of Force Commander for UNAMID, against available information from throughout the UN system” a UN peacekeeping official said.</p>
<p>“In the absence of specific information on Lt Gen Kamanzi’s involvement in violations of international human rights or humanitarian law, DPKO recommended the candidate for appointment. As per standard practice, if anyone has further information, we ask them to share it with the UN,” the official added.</p>
<p>DPKO relies in part on the UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) to conduct its screening for candidates.</p>
<p>Requests for a comment from the OHCHR this week went unanswered.</p>
<p>This is not the first dubious appointment of Rwandan generals to major UN peacekeeping operations.</p>
<p>From 2009 until 2013, Rwandan General Patrick Nyamvumba served as UNAMID force commander, despite <a href="" type="internal">evidence</a> gathered at a UN tribunal that he headed a death squad targeting Hutu civilians during the genocide.</p>
<p>“Nyamvumba should have been charged with war crimes,” a former investigator with the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) told this journalist.</p>
<p>“Many people gave testimony against him. We had enough evidence to indict him 25 times over.”</p>
<p>“We were told to stop our investigations,” he said. “The United Nations and the ICTR were all about politics,” he lamented.</p>
<p>Nyamvumba ran the notorious Training Wing during the genocide and reported directly to Paul Kagame, head of the Rwandan Patriotic Front (RPA) and now president.</p>
<p>The ICTR investigator called Kagame’s army ‘highly disciplined.’</p>
<p>“Nothing was done by the RPA or by any soldier that was not approved by ‘number 1,’” he said, referring to the president.</p>
<p>“Kagame is ready to kill any Hutu. But anyone else who gets in his way or bothers him will disappear,” said the former investigator, who worked on major ICTR cases prosecuting Hutu génocidaires and for the Special Investigations Unit that probed RPA crimes.</p>
<p>Another Rwandan general hired to head a UN force in Mali, has also been linked to war crimes committed against civilians.</p>
<p>Former colleagues said Major General Jean Bosco Kazura, who served as force commander of the UN stabilization mission MINUSMA until December 2014, was deputy commander of Nyamvumba’s death squad that operated in the prefectures of Byumba and Kibungo during the genocide in areas cleared of former Rwandan Hutu army forces.</p>
<p>Under their supervision, thousands of Hutu men, women and children were rounded up and murdered, some dumped in mass graves and others brought to Akagera National Park where they were burned and incinerated, according to testimony from former Tutsi officers.</p>
<p>The officers said that after the genocide, Generals Nyamvumba and Kazura also oversaw the transport of Hutu male recruits from all areas of Rwanda to killing grounds near the Gabiro training barracks and in other areas of Akagera Park, which were off limits to NGOs and UN personnel.</p>
<p>In 2008, UN peacekeeping came under fire for renewing the contract of Lieutenant General Emmanuel Karenzi Karake as deputy commander of UNAMID, months after he’d been indicted by Spain in a case of universal jurisdiction. The Spanish court charged Karake with war crimes and genocide committed in Rwanda and the DRC when he headed Kagame’s Directorate of Military Intelligence from 1994 until 1997.</p> | false | 1 | first dubious appointment rwandan generals major un peacekeeping operations united nations hired rwandan general head peacekeeping force darfur despite previous role army chief staff height deadly rwandanbacked insurgency democratic republic congo drc monday united nations african union jointly announced rwandan lieutenant general frank mushyo kamanzi appointed force commander unamid hybrid mission provides security humanitarian assistance war torn sudan decision taken despite general kamanzi served one senior military figures rwanda country supplied troops weapons brutal militia eastern congo general kamanzi named army chief staff july 2012 rwanda stepped efforts recruit soldiers including children provide arms ammunition fighters m23 eventually routed un intervention brigade kamanzi responsible command control management rwandan army services m23 militia members accused worst atrocities time m23 members slaughtered raped congolese civilians pillaged string communities drc according human rights watch un staff one militias warlords bosco ntaganda facing war crimes charges international criminal court november 2012 uns group experts concluded rwandan officials exercised overall command strategic planning m23 report said rwanda clearly violated arms embargo sanctions regime despite findings general kamanzis senior position period un department peacekeeping operations dpko said friday properly screened un specific information breaking international humanitarian law line 2012 policy human rights screening un personnel senior appointments un screened lt gen mushyo frank kamanzi recommended candidate post force commander unamid available information throughout un system un peacekeeping official said absence specific information lt gen kamanzis involvement violations international human rights humanitarian law dpko recommended candidate appointment per standard practice anyone information ask share un official added dpko relies part un office high commissioner human rights ohchr conduct screening candidates requests comment ohchr week went unanswered first dubious appointment rwandan generals major un peacekeeping operations 2009 2013 rwandan general patrick nyamvumba served unamid force commander despite evidence gathered un tribunal headed death squad targeting hutu civilians genocide nyamvumba charged war crimes former investigator international criminal tribunal rwanda ictr told journalist many people gave testimony enough evidence indict 25 times told stop investigations said united nations ictr politics lamented nyamvumba ran notorious training wing genocide reported directly paul kagame head rwandan patriotic front rpa president ictr investigator called kagames army highly disciplined nothing done rpa soldier approved number 1 said referring president kagame ready kill hutu anyone else gets way bothers disappear said former investigator worked major ictr cases prosecuting hutu génocidaires special investigations unit probed rpa crimes another rwandan general hired head un force mali also linked war crimes committed civilians former colleagues said major general jean bosco kazura served force commander un stabilization mission minusma december 2014 deputy commander nyamvumbas death squad operated prefectures byumba kibungo genocide areas cleared former rwandan hutu army forces supervision thousands hutu men women children rounded murdered dumped mass graves others brought akagera national park burned incinerated according testimony former tutsi officers officers said genocide generals nyamvumba kazura also oversaw transport hutu male recruits areas rwanda killing grounds near gabiro training barracks areas akagera park limits ngos un personnel 2008 un peacekeeping came fire renewing contract lieutenant general emmanuel karenzi karake deputy commander unamid months hed indicted spain case universal jurisdiction spanish court charged karake war crimes genocide committed rwanda drc headed kagames directorate military intelligence 1994 1997 | 527 |
<p>Many U.S. Hispanics are venturing out only to buy essential goods and are cutting back on discretionary spending, worried about possible harassment by immigration or law enforcement officials since the election of U.S. President Donald Trump, according to community groups, research firms and retailers.</p>
<p>This change in consumer behavior by the country’s second-fastest-growing ethnic group has recently been cited as a cause for worry by already-struggling consumer companies, from big-box retailers to auto parts makers.</p>
<p>O’Reilly Automotive Chief Executive Gregory Henslee told analysts earlier this month that many of the company’s stores with weak second-quarter sales were in Hispanic-dominant areas of the United States. “It’s not just something that we’ve seen. It’s something that most retailers have seen,” Henslee said.</p>
<p>In late July, Target Corp Chief Executive Brian Cornell at a conference referenced a report by retail consultants NPD Group that cited a decline in discretionary spending by Hispanics.</p>
<p>“They are staying home. They are going out less often, particularly around border towns in the United States,” Cornell said at a conference in Aspen, Colo.</p>
<p>Trump’s surprise election win last November came partly on campaign promises to deport undocumented foreigners en masse and build a wall on the U.S.-Mexico border. These pledges – along with Trump’s claim that Mexico was sending rapists and drug dealers into the United States – sparked outrage within the American Hispanic community.</p>
<p>“For our own president to call us criminals, thieves and rapists – it’s terrible … we live in fear of doing those simple things like going for groceries,” said a 19-year-old Chicago college student, Juan F., who did not want his full name used out of concern for family members who are undocumented.</p>
<p>Juan, a U.S. citizen, said he has been shopping for his household since Trump’s presidency began because family members are afraid to leave the house.</p>
<p>“People are squirreling money away and don’t want to leave their houses to go to stores,” said Eric Rodriguez of Latino advocacy group UnidosUS, which has been critical of Trump’s proposals on immigration.</p>
<p>“They’re afraid local law enforcement or immigration officials are going to harass or embarrass them,” he said in an interview.</p>
<p>Not all consumer categories, however, are experiencing a significant decline in Hispanic spending. The purchase of essentials such as food and basic household goods is still on the rise, but at a much slower rate than in recent years, according to research firm Nielsen.</p>
<p>None of the reports specified any changes to first-half online spending by Hispanics, which make up about 18 percent of the U.S. population, according to research firm Nielsen Holdings Plc.</p>
<p>TRUMP EFFECT</p>
<p>The lower spending by Hispanics has been hurting certain retailers since the start of the year, according to reports by brokerage firm Jefferies and analytics firm NPD Group.</p>
<p>Cornell, citing a more detailed version of the NPD report than one that has been publicly released, said late last month that shopping visits among Latinos were down about 11 percent in November and December. The “concerning” trend had been noticed particularly around U.S. border towns, Cornell said.</p>
<p>“Their buying power is undeniable, as is their influence on everything from fashion and food to music and entertainment,” Cornell said.</p>
<p>Big-box retailers have for years invested heavily in courting the Hispanic community’s substantial spending power, which reached $1.4 trillion in 2016, according to data by the University of Georgia’s Terry College of Business.</p>
<p>Luis Fitch, founder of Minneapolis-based Hispanic marketing company UNO Branding, whose clients have included Target and Best Buy Co Inc, said several small clients across different cities had posted declining sales since Trump took office, and that this had to be affecting big-box retailers, too.</p>
<p>“It’s very common to have a Mexican married to an American, but if that Mexican is undocumented, he’s really afraid of going out and looking for work,” Fitch said. “And if only one person is working, obviously their budget is cut in half and that’s a problem if they were going to buy a house or car this year.”</p>
<p>DEMOGRAPHIC FACTORS</p>
<p>On average, Hispanics are younger than non-Hispanics, have more children, and spend more on each child, according to Jeff Humphreys, director of economic forecasting at the Terry College of Business. Humphreys also said Hispanics tend to spend more on apparel, making their buying choices crucial to many retailers.</p>
<p>As the slowdown has mainly hit discretionary spending, retailers that deal in apparel and footwear — two sectors already feeling pressure – are hurting the most.</p>
<p>NPD said makers of athletic wear popular with Hispanics, including Nike Inc, Skechers USA Inc and Vans , would take a big hit.</p>
<p>“It’s certainly a good litmus test of how the holiday season is going to shake out,” NPD analyst Marshal Cohen said, pointing to a double-digit decline in back-to-school footwear sales, compared with a double-digit increase last year.</p>
<p>“That’s how powerful certain segments are, certainly the Hispanic market.”</p>
<p>Nielsen said sales of consumer essentials to Hispanics rose only 0.6 percent in the year ended July 1, compared with a 2.9 percent increase the prior year, and a 6.2 percent in the year before that.</p>
<p>Some restaurants and food companies have remarked on signs that the worst is over for them.</p>
<p>“The Trump effect just on Hispanic foot traffic into the convenience store seems to have also dropped off a little bit,” Rodney Sacks, chief executive of Monster Beverage Corp, told analysts on an earnings call earlier this month.&#160;</p> | false | 1 | many us hispanics venturing buy essential goods cutting back discretionary spending worried possible harassment immigration law enforcement officials since election us president donald trump according community groups research firms retailers change consumer behavior countrys secondfastestgrowing ethnic group recently cited cause worry alreadystruggling consumer companies bigbox retailers auto parts makers oreilly automotive chief executive gregory henslee told analysts earlier month many companys stores weak secondquarter sales hispanicdominant areas united states something weve seen something retailers seen henslee said late july target corp chief executive brian cornell conference referenced report retail consultants npd group cited decline discretionary spending hispanics staying home going less often particularly around border towns united states cornell said conference aspen colo trumps surprise election win last november came partly campaign promises deport undocumented foreigners en masse build wall usmexico border pledges along trumps claim mexico sending rapists drug dealers united states sparked outrage within american hispanic community president call us criminals thieves rapists terrible live fear simple things like going groceries said 19yearold chicago college student juan f want full name used concern family members undocumented juan us citizen said shopping household since trumps presidency began family members afraid leave house people squirreling money away dont want leave houses go stores said eric rodriguez latino advocacy group unidosus critical trumps proposals immigration theyre afraid local law enforcement immigration officials going harass embarrass said interview consumer categories however experiencing significant decline hispanic spending purchase essentials food basic household goods still rise much slower rate recent years according research firm nielsen none reports specified changes firsthalf online spending hispanics make 18 percent us population according research firm nielsen holdings plc trump effect lower spending hispanics hurting certain retailers since start year according reports brokerage firm jefferies analytics firm npd group cornell citing detailed version npd report one publicly released said late last month shopping visits among latinos 11 percent november december concerning trend noticed particularly around us border towns cornell said buying power undeniable influence everything fashion food music entertainment cornell said bigbox retailers years invested heavily courting hispanic communitys substantial spending power reached 14 trillion 2016 according data university georgias terry college business luis fitch founder minneapolisbased hispanic marketing company uno branding whose clients included target best buy co inc said several small clients across different cities posted declining sales since trump took office affecting bigbox retailers common mexican married american mexican undocumented hes really afraid going looking work fitch said one person working obviously budget cut half thats problem going buy house car year demographic factors average hispanics younger nonhispanics children spend child according jeff humphreys director economic forecasting terry college business humphreys also said hispanics tend spend apparel making buying choices crucial many retailers slowdown mainly hit discretionary spending retailers deal apparel footwear two sectors already feeling pressure hurting npd said makers athletic wear popular hispanics including nike inc skechers usa inc vans would take big hit certainly good litmus test holiday season going shake npd analyst marshal cohen said pointing doubledigit decline backtoschool footwear sales compared doubledigit increase last year thats powerful certain segments certainly hispanic market nielsen said sales consumer essentials hispanics rose 06 percent year ended july 1 compared 29 percent increase prior year 62 percent year restaurants food companies remarked signs worst trump effect hispanic foot traffic convenience store seems also dropped little bit rodney sacks chief executive monster beverage corp told analysts earnings call earlier month160 | 564 |
<p>By Michelle Price</p>
<p>HONG KONG (Reuters) – Hong Kong and Singapore are seeking to snare a bigger share of the $540 trillion global derivatives business, taking advantage of tough new UK and European banking rules and uncertainty created by Britain’s plans to leave the European Union.</p>
<p>Over the past five months, regulators from the two Asian financial centers have been separately holding talks with the Asia Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association (ASIFMA), which represents global lenders in Asia, five people with direct knowledge of the matter told Reuters.</p>
<p>At the center of the discussions is what kind of regulatory changes would be needed in Hong Kong and Singapore to get more banks to book their derivatives business in one of the two places.</p>
<p>If the Hong Kong Monetary Authority (HKMA) and the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) are successful, they could lure billions of dollars of banking business and eventually create what could amount to thousands of jobs in Asia.</p>
<p>These derivatives would include products such as interest rate swaps or foreign exchange derivatives, which allow companies and investors to hedge their exposure to interest rate rises and currency swings.</p>
<p>Asia has traditionally accounted for less than 10 percent of the global over-the-counter derivatives market, according to Bank for International Settlements data.</p>
<p>Global banks have typically held the majority of Asia-related trades on their European balance sheets, with London being a major booking center for such deals. This has allowed them to gain economies of scale by aggregating their capital and infrastructure in one or two locations, while London also has a deep talent pool of employees with expertise in managing and processing the trading book.</p>
<p>During the past three years, though, many banks have begun to review their Asia trade booking arrangements because of new U.K. and European rules that have made Britain less attractive as a global hub for Asian risk.</p>
<p>Brexit has made the situation more urgent by prompting many banks to move some of their operations, including trading books, out of London. This has sparked broader internal discussions over whether more of the London book holding Asia trades should also be moved to Asian financial centers, the sources said.</p>
<p>Banks looking to book more trades in Asia include HSBC (L:), Standard Chartered (L:), UBS (S:) and Credit Suisse (S:), one of the sources said.</p>
<p>In a statement, HSBC said it would support clients as they pursued opportunities in Asia: “Hong Kong is one of the world’s leading financial centers and continues to be at the heart of HSBC’s growth plans.”</p>
<p>UBS, Standard Chartered and Credit Suisse declined to comment.</p>
<p>COSTLY DEALS</p>
<p>Booking derivatives trades in Hong Kong and Singapore is currently expensive for global banks because they are not yet allowed by the HKMA and the MAS to use their own internal risk-management models, which typically allow banks to hold less capital against such trades than standard models used by regulators.</p>
<p>Now, though, regulators are considering approving these internal capital calculation models.</p>
<p>For Hong Kong and Singapore, grabbing a much larger chunk of the global derivatives market would promote their status as global financial centers by helping them diversify away from asset management and offering them other benefits, according to one of the sources.</p>
<p>These would include boosting demand for consultancy and IT services, and potentially boosting fees for local clearing houses that sit in between trades to guarantee payment.</p>
<p>But it would also increase the overall level of financial risk, potentially leaving the authorities on the hook in the event a bank gets into trouble.</p>
<p>“The HKMA has been in discussion with ASIFMA and its member institutions to explain the HKMA’s supervisory policies and processes with regard to the establishment of a derivatives hub in Hong Kong,” a spokeswoman for the HKMA said in a statement.</p>
<p>Adding: “The HKMA welcomes banks to establish a derivatives hub in Hong Kong on the understanding that the risks associated with the activity will be properly managed.”</p>
<p>The MAS said in a statement that banks were looking to book more financial activity in Singapore due to the rapid growth of Asian markets and client preferences, among other reasons.</p>
<p>“In order to meet MAS’ validation standards for the use of more advanced approaches in capital computation, [financial institutions] must demonstrate that they have robust risk management systems and processes to measure and validate the accuracy and consistency of all relevant risk components,” the statement added.</p>
<p>A spokeswoman for ASIFMA declined to comment.</p>
<p>The MAS and HKMA are not working together on their separate initiatives.</p>
<p>The HKMA is increasing staff with the technical expertise necessary to handle the model approval process, and may also hire external professional advisors if necessary. It is also planning to issue some guidance to banks on the matter, according to two of the sources.</p>
<p>The regulator is also reviewing section 87 of the Hong Kong Banking Ordinance, which currently limits banks’ ability to hold large amounts of equity derivatives exposure in the city.</p>
<p>Banks will have to demonstrate that they will not only book the trades in Hong Kong, but also have risk management and back office staff on the ground in the city too, the people added.</p> | false | 1 | michelle price hong kong reuters hong kong singapore seeking snare bigger share 540 trillion global derivatives business taking advantage tough new uk european banking rules uncertainty created britains plans leave european union past five months regulators two asian financial centers separately holding talks asia securities industry financial markets association asifma represents global lenders asia five people direct knowledge matter told reuters center discussions kind regulatory changes would needed hong kong singapore get banks book derivatives business one two places hong kong monetary authority hkma monetary authority singapore mas successful could lure billions dollars banking business eventually create could amount thousands jobs asia derivatives would include products interest rate swaps foreign exchange derivatives allow companies investors hedge exposure interest rate rises currency swings asia traditionally accounted less 10 percent global overthecounter derivatives market according bank international settlements data global banks typically held majority asiarelated trades european balance sheets london major booking center deals allowed gain economies scale aggregating capital infrastructure one two locations london also deep talent pool employees expertise managing processing trading book past three years though many banks begun review asia trade booking arrangements new uk european rules made britain less attractive global hub asian risk brexit made situation urgent prompting many banks move operations including trading books london sparked broader internal discussions whether london book holding asia trades also moved asian financial centers sources said banks looking book trades asia include hsbc l standard chartered l ubs credit suisse one sources said statement hsbc said would support clients pursued opportunities asia hong kong one worlds leading financial centers continues heart hsbcs growth plans ubs standard chartered credit suisse declined comment costly deals booking derivatives trades hong kong singapore currently expensive global banks yet allowed hkma mas use internal riskmanagement models typically allow banks hold less capital trades standard models used regulators though regulators considering approving internal capital calculation models hong kong singapore grabbing much larger chunk global derivatives market would promote status global financial centers helping diversify away asset management offering benefits according one sources would include boosting demand consultancy services potentially boosting fees local clearing houses sit trades guarantee payment would also increase overall level financial risk potentially leaving authorities hook event bank gets trouble hkma discussion asifma member institutions explain hkmas supervisory policies processes regard establishment derivatives hub hong kong spokeswoman hkma said statement adding hkma welcomes banks establish derivatives hub hong kong understanding risks associated activity properly managed mas said statement banks looking book financial activity singapore due rapid growth asian markets client preferences among reasons order meet mas validation standards use advanced approaches capital computation financial institutions must demonstrate robust risk management systems processes measure validate accuracy consistency relevant risk components statement added spokeswoman asifma declined comment mas hkma working together separate initiatives hkma increasing staff technical expertise necessary handle model approval process may also hire external professional advisors necessary also planning issue guidance banks matter according two sources regulator also reviewing section 87 hong kong banking ordinance currently limits banks ability hold large amounts equity derivatives exposure city banks demonstrate book trades hong kong also risk management back office staff ground city people added | 521 |
<p />
<p />
<p>MELBOURNE, June 17 — On June 19, Daw Aung San Suu Kyi will turn 64 years old. Instead of being amongst loved ones and the millions of people in Burma who revere her for standing up for human and civil rights, she is in isolation.&#160;There is a genuine possibility that in just a few days, Daw Suu Kyi may be sentenced to five years imprisonment in Insein Prison.&#160;Or the cruel agony of further trial delays may be extended.</p>
<p>The groundswell demanding her release matches that given to Nelson Mandela, but thanks to the paranoid leader of the Burmese military junta, Senior General Than Shwe, Daw Suu Kyi may never get to see the light of day again.&#160;Daw Suu Kyi’s trial has been delayed once more.</p>
<p>The junta leaders are using every trick in the book to discredit her. They run the courts, appoint the judges, write the laws, and, when all else fails, they resort to ridiculous propaganda.&#160;The Burmese Embassy in Hong Kong has declared that John William Yettaw, the American accused of breaking into Daw Suu Kyi’s compound, is Daw Suu Kyi’s “boyfriend” and intended on staying over at her residence.</p>
<p>Senior General Than Shwe’s dream will be complete when the military junta fixes the 2010 polls to guarantee victory. For the despotic regime, this will erase the bitter memories of 1990, when Suu Kyi’s National League for Democracy won 392 out of 452 seats. Only then will the issue of redemption be addressed. For us, it will be another failure to help the innocent people of Burma.</p>
<p>Australia has failed to demonstrate any leadership. Prime Minister Kevin Rudd has been far too quiet.&#160;For years, previous governments on both sides of the political spectrum have been asking for a more inclusive role in Southeast Asia. Prime Minister Rudd now has the chance to showcase his regional leadership capabilities by succeeding where ASEAN and individual nations have failed.</p>
<p>But rather than showing genuine leadership and criticising General Than Shwe for his regime’s treatment of Aung San Suu Kyi along with the thousands of political prisoners in jail and millions of civilians living in fear of their lives, Prime Minister Rudd has so far failed to strongly criticize the junta.</p>
<p>In the form of survivor testimony about the tactics used by the regime, there is no shortage of evidence that a genocide is taking place. We cannot afford to keep silent.</p>
<p>Any nation that publicly calls for free and fair elections in Burma in 2010 is blindly endorsing an illegitimate plan that should never be condoned in the first place. These proposed elections are born out of a fraudulent constitutional referendum held in May 2008, immediately after Cyclone Nargis devastated Burma.</p>
<p>The referendum promising democratic elections gained 92 per cent approval without a single question being raised as to their validity, and enshrined a requirement of 25 percent of all parliamentary seats to be reserved for the military. Under Burma’s constitution, a 75 percent majority is required to make any changes to the country’s laws.</p>
<p>What originally commenced as a roar of disapproval over the denial of natural justice to Daw Suu Kyi and indeed the entire civilian population of Burma has now ground to a halt.&#160;Now the dissenting voices amount to a regional whisper and are in danger of following the ineffective road taken by Ibrahim Gambari, the Special Envoy for Burma representing the United Nations.</p>
<p>The latest diplomatic failure is from Singapore’s Senior Minister, Goh Chok Tong.&#160;Having spent four days inside Burma, Tong indicated that the junta would best serve the national interests by using a “cautious but practical approach”.&#160;He even appeared to defend Senior General Than Shwe’s handling of the process by declaring that Shwe could not be blamed for the lack of process because he inherited a military dictatorship that was installed back in 1962.&#160;Goh Chok Tong’s words present the overtures that the military junta likes to hear.</p>
<p>No doubt the military regime leaders have been keeping a close eye on developments in Iran. Silently they will already be vowing that no such scenes will be tolerated on the streets of Rangoon, Mandalay and every other city and town in Burma.&#160;Their youth network, the Union and Solidarity Development Association (or USDA, of which Senior General Than Shwe is the main patron) has already been active in keeping Aung San Suu Kyi’s supporters away from her trial, and will be undoubtedly be mobilised for the 2010 election. The junta’s network has rightly been compared to the Hitler Youth movement.</p>
<p>The growing demand for change in Iran, while showing similarities to Burma’s ill-fated 1988 and 2007 protests, is unlikely to produce the same catastrophic results in which more than 3,000 people were slaughtered by the junta. Recent accusations of electoral fraud and protests in Tehran by supporters of opposition leader Mir Hossein Mousavi have seen mass crowds take to the streets but the foreign media have had a chance to get into Iran to report on the dissent and in some cases, speak to the people. This is something Burma’s junta-controlled media would never let happen.</p>
<p>Only Daw Suu Kyi can unite a people terrified by decades of war and trauma.&#160;For Daw Aung San Suu Kyi’s birthday present, let us keep the candles of hope burning brightly and tell Prime Minister Kevin Rudd, opposition leader Malcolm Turnbull, and all parliamentary representatives in Australia in a clear unified voice that she must be released immediately and unconditionally.</p>
<p>Because Daw Aung San Suu Kyi is Burma’s only true hope for a civilian democracy to bloom.</p> | false | 1 | melbourne june 17 june 19 daw aung san suu kyi turn 64 years old instead amongst loved ones millions people burma revere standing human civil rights isolation160there genuine possibility days daw suu kyi may sentenced five years imprisonment insein prison160or cruel agony trial delays may extended groundswell demanding release matches given nelson mandela thanks paranoid leader burmese military junta senior general shwe daw suu kyi may never get see light day again160daw suu kyis trial delayed junta leaders using every trick book discredit run courts appoint judges write laws else fails resort ridiculous propaganda160the burmese embassy hong kong declared john william yettaw american accused breaking daw suu kyis compound daw suu kyis boyfriend intended staying residence senior general shwes dream complete military junta fixes 2010 polls guarantee victory despotic regime erase bitter memories 1990 suu kyis national league democracy 392 452 seats issue redemption addressed us another failure help innocent people burma australia failed demonstrate leadership prime minister kevin rudd far quiet160for years previous governments sides political spectrum asking inclusive role southeast asia prime minister rudd chance showcase regional leadership capabilities succeeding asean individual nations failed rather showing genuine leadership criticising general shwe regimes treatment aung san suu kyi along thousands political prisoners jail millions civilians living fear lives prime minister rudd far failed strongly criticize junta form survivor testimony tactics used regime shortage evidence genocide taking place afford keep silent nation publicly calls free fair elections burma 2010 blindly endorsing illegitimate plan never condoned first place proposed elections born fraudulent constitutional referendum held may 2008 immediately cyclone nargis devastated burma referendum promising democratic elections gained 92 per cent approval without single question raised validity enshrined requirement 25 percent parliamentary seats reserved military burmas constitution 75 percent majority required make changes countrys laws originally commenced roar disapproval denial natural justice daw suu kyi indeed entire civilian population burma ground halt160now dissenting voices amount regional whisper danger following ineffective road taken ibrahim gambari special envoy burma representing united nations latest diplomatic failure singapores senior minister goh chok tong160having spent four days inside burma tong indicated junta would best serve national interests using cautious practical approach160he even appeared defend senior general shwes handling process declaring shwe could blamed lack process inherited military dictatorship installed back 1962160goh chok tongs words present overtures military junta likes hear doubt military regime leaders keeping close eye developments iran silently already vowing scenes tolerated streets rangoon mandalay every city town burma160their youth network union solidarity development association usda senior general shwe main patron already active keeping aung san suu kyis supporters away trial undoubtedly mobilised 2010 election juntas network rightly compared hitler youth movement growing demand change iran showing similarities burmas illfated 1988 2007 protests unlikely produce catastrophic results 3000 people slaughtered junta recent accusations electoral fraud protests tehran supporters opposition leader mir hossein mousavi seen mass crowds take streets foreign media chance get iran report dissent cases speak people something burmas juntacontrolled media would never let happen daw suu kyi unite people terrified decades war trauma160for daw aung san suu kyis birthday present let us keep candles hope burning brightly tell prime minister kevin rudd opposition leader malcolm turnbull parliamentary representatives australia clear unified voice must released immediately unconditionally daw aung san suu kyi burmas true hope civilian democracy bloom | 544 |
<p />
<p>Writers often romanticize their subjects. At times they even manipulate their readers. A book — or any piece of writing for that matter — is meant to provide a sense of completion. Sociological explanations are offered to offset the confusion caused by apparent inconsistency in human behavior. At times a reader is asked to take a stance, or choose sides.</p>
<p>This is especially true in writings which deal with compelling human experiences. In <a href="https://rcm.amazon.com/e/cm?lt1=_blank&amp;bc1=000000&amp;IS2=1&amp;bg1=FFFFFF&amp;fc1=000000&amp;lc1=0000FF&amp;t=forepolijour-20&amp;o=1&amp;p=8&amp;l=as1&amp;m=amazon&amp;f=ifr&amp;md=10FE9736YVPPT7A0FBG2&amp;asins=1597974390" type="external">Behind the Wall: Life, Love and Struggle in Palestine</a> (Potomac Books, 2010), Rich Wiles undoubtedly directs his readers, although implicitly, towards taking a stance. But he is unabashed about his moral priorities and makes no attempt to disguise his objectives.</p>
<p>As I began reading Wiles’ book, various aspects struck me as utterly refreshing in contrast to the way Palestine is generally written about. We tend to complicate what was meant to be straightforward and become too selective as we construct our narrative. And we tend to consider the possible political implications of our writings, and thus compose the conclusions with only this political awareness in mind.</p>
<p>Much of this is understandable. The situation in Palestine is appalling, and also worsening. If our writing is not meant to influence positive change, then why bother? But a hyped awareness of the consequences and over-politicization of narratives and texts can prove limiting and intellectually confining. Worse, at times it provides a particular contextualization of the conflict — with all of its internal offshoots and external outcomes — that does much injustice to other important contexts. It neglects facts and paints an unrealistic picture of a subject already confused in the minds of many readers.</p>
<p>Thus when the conflict is deciphered by a writer, all players take positions. Israel is pitted against ‘the Arabs’. Palestinians are often sliced off into two competing parties, while Israel is largely shown as maintaining a sense of political and institutional integrity. Palestinians are radicals or moderates, Islamists or secularists. The ‘conflict’ is right in the center, and within it are the sub-topics: the peace process, the occupation, the settlements and numerous others. Without such lucid configuration there is no structure. Publishers get frustrated. The writer is urged to revisit and restructure his work.</p>
<p>But real life is not a well-organized academic argument. It can be, and often is chaotic, strange and puzzling, but it is real. Only by understanding reality the way it is – not the way we feel that it ought to be for any reason – can we meaningfully position ourselves to appreciate the subject at hand.</p>
<p>Can we understand the conflict in Palestine and Israel without subscribing to the same language, confronting the same political and historical milestones? Can Palestinians be understood outside the confines of political and ideological affiliations?</p>
<p>That is what Rich Wiles attempted to do in Behind the Wall, and in my opinion, very much succeeded.</p>
<p>Wiles relocated the conflict historically, geographically and sociologically to the side most affected by it: the Palestinians. The book is located in the West Bank, mostly Aida refugee camp, where Wiles spent years dedicating his time and efforts as an artist and a writer to help children share their stories and talents with the rest of the world. The writing is a non-elitist, part and parcel, which is a prerequisite to a factual understanding of the struggle in Palestine. Equally important, Wiles provides a depiction of the Palestinian not as the victim, despite the protracted process of victimization that Palestinians have endured for generations. Wiles’ subjects might have been imprisoned or deeply scarred by war, but they are confident and complex human beings.</p>
<p>A chapter entitled “A Child and a Balcony” starts with this line: “‘On Friday, December 8, 2006, I was shot.’ Miras is unemotional as he tells his story.” Miras should be emotional, but he is not, and Wiles doesn’t attempt to rectify the seemingly inconsistent behavior. It turns out that Miras, a child (now a promising young photographer, thanks to Wiles’ help) almost died when a bullet carved its way through his body and penetrated his abdominal from one end and emerged from the other. He was playing with his siblings and cousins at a balcony in the refugee camp, when an Israeli sniper hit him from the watchtower. The story is short, but rich in emotionally powerful detail: the father’s panic and near hallucination, the mother’s confusion, the sense of solidarity that unifies the refugees and strengthens their resolve even when their situation seems so helpless.</p>
<p>Wiles is not an anthropologist or a detached ethnographer, and he doesn’t pose as one. He is part of the story, at times an important character. In “Memories”, he accompanies a young Palestinian boy on the journey of his life, from the confines of the small refugee camp to Jerusalem. The boy is visiting his very ill grandfather at a hospital in the Arab side of the city. (No other member of the family was granted an Israeli permission to make the short journey, thus the need for Wiles’ intervention). Wiles provides an extremely honest and vivid account, bringing to life the bravery of the boy and the sense of freedom he experiences as he crosses the checkpoints into Jerusalem.</p>
<p>At the same time, Wiles does not attempt to assemble the perfect, heroic and infallible character of the Palestinian. He includes the story of a son of a drug user who was mysteriously killed (perhaps by a Palestinian group that suspected him as a collaborator with Israel). The son became involved in the resistance to redeem the family’s honor. His impulsive resistance (an attempt to burn a hole in the Israeli wall that surrounded his refugee camp) earned him time in an Israeli prison. Yasser Jedar (known as Yasser ‘Wall’ owing to his obsession with trying to bring down the Israeli wall) was certainly not a poster child revolutionary. But he is refreshingly real, which is what should matter the most to an inquisitive reader.</p>
<p>Wiles’ work is an important contribution to what I insist on referring to as a ‘People’s History of Palestine’. In order for this genre to endure and flourish, it must remain honest, and duty-bound to the truth – to reality as it is, not how we wish it to be.</p> | false | 1 | writers often romanticize subjects times even manipulate readers book piece writing matter meant provide sense completion sociological explanations offered offset confusion caused apparent inconsistency human behavior times reader asked take stance choose sides especially true writings deal compelling human experiences behind wall life love struggle palestine potomac books 2010 rich wiles undoubtedly directs readers although implicitly towards taking stance unabashed moral priorities makes attempt disguise objectives began reading wiles book various aspects struck utterly refreshing contrast way palestine generally written tend complicate meant straightforward become selective construct narrative tend consider possible political implications writings thus compose conclusions political awareness mind much understandable situation palestine appalling also worsening writing meant influence positive change bother hyped awareness consequences overpoliticization narratives texts prove limiting intellectually confining worse times provides particular contextualization conflict internal offshoots external outcomes much injustice important contexts neglects facts paints unrealistic picture subject already confused minds many readers thus conflict deciphered writer players take positions israel pitted arabs palestinians often sliced two competing parties israel largely shown maintaining sense political institutional integrity palestinians radicals moderates islamists secularists conflict right center within subtopics peace process occupation settlements numerous others without lucid configuration structure publishers get frustrated writer urged revisit restructure work real life wellorganized academic argument often chaotic strange puzzling real understanding reality way way feel ought reason meaningfully position appreciate subject hand understand conflict palestine israel without subscribing language confronting political historical milestones palestinians understood outside confines political ideological affiliations rich wiles attempted behind wall opinion much succeeded wiles relocated conflict historically geographically sociologically side affected palestinians book located west bank mostly aida refugee camp wiles spent years dedicating time efforts artist writer help children share stories talents rest world writing nonelitist part parcel prerequisite factual understanding struggle palestine equally important wiles provides depiction palestinian victim despite protracted process victimization palestinians endured generations wiles subjects might imprisoned deeply scarred war confident complex human beings chapter entitled child balcony starts line friday december 8 2006 shot miras unemotional tells story miras emotional wiles doesnt attempt rectify seemingly inconsistent behavior turns miras child promising young photographer thanks wiles help almost died bullet carved way body penetrated abdominal one end emerged playing siblings cousins balcony refugee camp israeli sniper hit watchtower story short rich emotionally powerful detail fathers panic near hallucination mothers confusion sense solidarity unifies refugees strengthens resolve even situation seems helpless wiles anthropologist detached ethnographer doesnt pose one part story times important character memories accompanies young palestinian boy journey life confines small refugee camp jerusalem boy visiting ill grandfather hospital arab side city member family granted israeli permission make short journey thus need wiles intervention wiles provides extremely honest vivid account bringing life bravery boy sense freedom experiences crosses checkpoints jerusalem time wiles attempt assemble perfect heroic infallible character palestinian includes story son drug user mysteriously killed perhaps palestinian group suspected collaborator israel son became involved resistance redeem familys honor impulsive resistance attempt burn hole israeli wall surrounded refugee camp earned time israeli prison yasser jedar known yasser wall owing obsession trying bring israeli wall certainly poster child revolutionary refreshingly real matter inquisitive reader wiles work important contribution insist referring peoples history palestine order genre endure flourish must remain honest dutybound truth reality wish | 533 |
<p>SPARTANBURG, S. C. — Recent dramatic moves from the front office to the roster certainly helped get the attention of the <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Carolina_Panthers/" type="external">Carolina Panthers</a> even before the full squad reported Tuesday (July 25) for training camp at Wofford College.</p>
<p>Coming off a pathetic 6-10 record in 2016, owner <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Jerry_Richardson/" type="external">Jerry Richardson</a> obviously decided not to maintain status quo. He surprised almost everyone last week, including head coach <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Ron_Rivera/" type="external">Ron Rivera</a>, by firing general manager Dave Gettleman, who was replaced by his predecessor, and now interim GM, <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Marty_Hurney/" type="external">Marty Hurney</a>.</p>
<p>Rivera denied any input on the matter.</p>
<p>Hurney, Carolina’s general manager from 2001-2012, knows Richardson’s impatience well. Hurney drafted two consecutive Rookies of the Year, quarterback <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Cam_Newton/" type="external">Cam Newton</a> and linebacker <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Luke-Kuechly/" type="external">Luke Kuechly</a>. But after a 1-5 start in 2012, Richardson fired Hurney.</p>
<p>Why pull the plug on Gettlemen so close to camp opening? Some point to the unsettled status of popular linebacker <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Thomas_Davis/" type="external">Thomas Davis</a> and productive tight end <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Greg_Olsen/" type="external">Greg Olsen</a> as well as releasing iconic Panthers, including wide receiver <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Steve_Smith/" type="external">Steve Smith</a> and running back <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/DeAngelo_Williams/" type="external">DeAngelo Williams</a>.</p>
<p>Knowing Richardson’s impatient nature first hand, Hurney made changes quickly. First, he released offensive tackle Michael Oher, who had 110 NFL starts but failed his physical(concussions). That saved $1.69 million toward the salary cap, but it was quickly spent when guard Trai Turner’s contract was extended to the tune of $45 million over four years.</p>
<p>“The offensive line is a key to the team’s success and Trai is a very integral part of that,” said Hurney.</p>
<p>He then fired Mark Koncz, who had been promoted in May by Gettleman from pro personnel director to director of player personnel.</p>
<p>Hurney inherits a team that hopes Newtown rebounds from offseason shoulder surgery, an unsettled secondary and that offensive line on which he already made significant moves.</p>
<p>Newton will report in the best shape of his career, based on social media pictures that show ripped abs and muscle tone. Hurney also gets Gettleman’s final No. 1 draft pick, versatile running back Christian McCaffrey from Stanford.</p>
<p>The good news as camp opened was the presence of tight end Greg Olsen, who was the subject of speculation that he might hold out. Olsen wants a new contract, but has two years remaining on his current deal.</p>
<p>Upon arriving in Spartanburg, Olsen said, “We thought, obviously, long and hard about everything over the last couple months – our position, the team’s position, how things played out and things changed last week with the move to let go of Dave. At the end of the day, with everything going on, and now with the transition to Marty and slight chaos that went around for another week, I just didn’t feel like it was right for me to add fuel to that fire and make things that much more complicated, add more controversy or distraction to our team.</p>
<p>“I didn’t think it was right to the players, I didn’t think it was right to the guys that count on me to be a leader on this team and coaches, people in this organization – Mr. Richardson on down – who count on me to set a certain example both by my presence here but also my play. I just didn’t think my selfishness would do any good.”</p>
<p>Top Summer battle:</p>
<p>Despite all those big names and big bodies already in the news, one of the key battles for the Panthers this summer will be at kicker.</p>
<p>Graham Gano is the incumbent, but the Panthers felt serious enough about this position they selected Harrison Butker in the draft. Gano had his shakiest season as a Panther, capped by missing three field-goal attempts in the final game in a loss to Tampa Bay. With the seventh-round pick, Butker became the first kicker ever drafted by the Panthers. Butker was 15 of 17 on field goals as a senior.</p>
<p>THE FACTS:</p>
<p>TRAINING CAMP: Wofford College; Spartanburg, S.C.</p>
<p>HEAD COACH: Ron Rivera</p>
<p>7th season as Panthers/NFL head coach</p>
<p>56-45-1 overall; 3-3 postseason</p>
<p>THE BREAKDOWN</p>
<p>2016 finish: 4th NFC South (6-10)</p>
<p>STATISTICS</p>
<p>TOTAL OFFENSE: 343.7 (19th)</p>
<p>RUSHING: 113.4 (10th)</p>
<p>PASSING: 230.3 (T21st)</p>
<p>TOTAL DEFENSE: 359.8 (21st)</p>
<p>RUSHING: 91.6 (6th)</p>
<p>PASSING: 268.2 (29th)</p>
<p>2017 PRESEASON SCHEDULE</p>
<p>All times Eastern</p>
<p>Aug. 9, HOUSTON (Wed), 7:30</p>
<p>Aug. 19, at Tennessee (Sat), 3:00</p>
<p>Aug. 24, at Jacksonville (Thu), 7:30</p>
<p>Aug. 31, PITTSBURGH (Thu), 7:30</p>
<p>UNIT-BY-UNIT ANALYSIS</p>
<p>QUARTERBACKS: Starter – Cam Newton. Backups – <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Derek_Anderson/" type="external">Derek Anderson</a>, Joe Webb.</p>
<p>Newton was the NFL’s Most Valuable Player in 2015, so he’s on the elite level. He made steady progress in each season in the league until last year, when injuries were partly to blame. He’s coming off shoulder surgery so his workload in training camp is something that must be considered. Anderson gives the Panthers the veteran backup who’s good to have, but they probably don’t want to rely on him across the course of an entire season.</p>
<p>RUNNING BACKS: Starters – <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Jonathan_Stewart/" type="external">Jonathan Stewart</a>, Christian McCaffrey. Backups – Fozzy Whittaker, FB Alex Armah, FB Darrel Young, Jalen Simmons.</p>
<p>Stewart will be pushed by McCaffrey, if not for direct playing time than for prominence in the game plan. McCaffrey’s versatility will be put to use, and that could leave Stewart to handle much of the grunt work with carries. McCaffrey has the ability to bring flair to the position and that’s something that’s much anticipated. Whittaker has been solid at times in a limited role and he’s likely to stick with the team.</p>
<p>TIGHT ENDS: Starter – Greg Olsen. Backups – Ed Dickson, Chris Manhertz, Scott Simonson, Eric Wallace.</p>
<p>Olsen is one of the league’s top producers at the position and he doesn’t seem to be letting up. Perhaps because Olsen has been so entrenched at the position since arriving in a trade from the <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Chicago_Bears/" type="external">Chicago Bears</a>, the Panthers haven’t had much of a chance to groom others at the position and it’s not a spot that has been attractive to free agents. Dickson will be looking to hang on to his backup role, with the need for more consistency.</p>
<p>WIDE RECEIVERS: Starters – Kelvin Benjamin, Devin Funchess. Backups – Chris Samuel, Austin Duke, Brenton Bersin, Damiere Byrd, Kaelin Clay, Mose Frazier, Keyarris Garrett, <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Russell-Shepard/" type="external">Russell Shepard</a>.</p>
<p>Benjamin’s physical presence at 6-foot-5 and 245 pounds makes him difficult to cover, though his sometimes-ballooning weight tends to be a topic of discussion. Funchess has made considerable strides and has been lauded for his leadership among the receivers. Samuel is a rookie out of Ohio State who figures to factor in prominently in the team’s plans, particularly with his speed.</p>
<p>OFFENSIVE LINEMEN: Starters – LT Matt Kahil, LG Andrew Norwell, C Ryan Kahil, RG Trai Turner, RT Daryl Williams. Backups – RT Taylor Moton, T Dan France, T Tyrus Thompson, T Blaine Clausell, C Gino Gradkowski, C Tyler Larsen, C/G Greg Van Roten.</p>
<p>Matt Kahil arrived from the <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Minnesota-Vikings/" type="external">Minnesota Vikings</a> to join his brother along the Carolina offensive line. Ryan Kahil has been an all-pro player, but he missed time last year with an injury. There could be quite a bit of sorting out along the line in August, though Norwell and Turner have proved to be dependable. Moton might be versatile enough to fill spots at guard and tackle until he potentially moves into a starting role. In fact, there’s some thoughts that Moton might be the key to the whole breakdown along the front.</p>
<p>DEFENSIVE LINEMEN: Starters — DE <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Charles_Johnson/" type="external">Charles Johnson</a>, NT Star Lotulelei, DT Kawann Short, DE Wes Horton. Backups – NT <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Vernon-Butler/" type="external">Vernon Butler</a>, DT Kyle Love DE <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Mario-Addison/" type="external">Mario Addison</a>, DT Eric Crume, DT Toby Johnson, DT Gabriel Mass, DE Charles Johnson, DE <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Julius_Peppers/" type="external">Julius Peppers</a>, DE Bryan Cox, DT Toby Johnson.</p>
<p>This group has the chance to be extremely stout and there aren’t any perceived weaknesses. Lotulelei and Short have gained more stock with their play and Horton has continued to be a force. The experience level is high as well, particularly with Johnson and Peppers, who began his career with the organization, available to fill vital roles. Addison has a high motor and could be in line for a breakout season after a nice contract bump. Upgrading the pass rush remains a priority, particularly with questions in the secondary.</p>
<p>LINEBACKERS: Starters – MLB Luke Kuechly, WLB Thomas Davis, SLB <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Shaq-Thompson/" type="external">Shaq Thompson</a>. Backups – David Mayo, Jeremy Cash, Jared Norris, Ben Jacobs, Ben Boulware, Zeek Bigger</p>
<p>Kuechly sat out a large chunk of last season with a concussion, missing time with that ailment for the second year in a row. He has the ability to be one of the best defensive players in the NFL, a status he has held previously. With Davis, the Panthers have one of the most revered players in the league and he continues to be a playmaker. There’s no shortage of expectations for Thompson as well and his athleticism is something the team would like to see more of. Mayo made a case for the key backup role when he picked up some unexpected playing time for injured teammates last year.</p>
<p>DEFENSIVE BACKS: Starters — LCB <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/James-Bradberry/" type="external">James Bradberry</a>, RCB Daryl Worley, FS <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Kurt-Coleman/" type="external">Kurt Coleman</a>, SS <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Mike_Adams/" type="external">Mike Adams</a>. Backups – CB Captain <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Munnerlyn/" type="external">Munnerlyn</a>, CB Corn Elder, CB Zack Sanchez, CB Teddy Williams, S Dean Marlowe, S Colin Jones, S Dezmen Southward, S Travell Dixon, S Brian Blechen.</p>
<p>Bradberry and Worley paid their dues during what was sometimes a rough 2016 rookie season. But they’re more seasoned now and building their confidence during the offseason was one of the objectives. With the likelihood that Coleman moves back to free safety, that should increase his comfort level. But this means the Panthers are counting on Adams, at age 36, to provide additional stability in the secondary. Munnerlyn, a former Panther returning after playing for Minnesota, figures to be on the field plenty, particularly in special packages. Elder could stick on the roster in part because he has value as a return specialist. Jones’ work on special teams adds to his value as well.</p>
<p>SPECIAL TEAMS: K Graham Gano, K Harrison Butker, P Andy Lee, P Michael Palardy, LS J.J. Jansen, KOR Corn Elder, Chris Samuel. PR Corn Elder.</p>
<p>Gano has experience on his side, but Butker was valued enough to use a draft selection. Among punters, Palardy provided efficient after Lee went out with an injury last season. Jansen is the stabilizing force in the kicking game because he largely goes unnoticed. The returning specialist roles could be turned over to rookies, so that will be worth keeping an eye on. Elder provided some big-time plays on returns in college for Miami.</p> | false | 1 | spartanburg c recent dramatic moves front office roster certainly helped get attention carolina panthers even full squad reported tuesday july 25 training camp wofford college coming pathetic 610 record 2016 owner jerry richardson obviously decided maintain status quo surprised almost everyone last week including head coach ron rivera firing general manager dave gettleman replaced predecessor interim gm marty hurney rivera denied input matter hurney carolinas general manager 20012012 knows richardsons impatience well hurney drafted two consecutive rookies year quarterback cam newton linebacker luke kuechly 15 start 2012 richardson fired hurney pull plug gettlemen close camp opening point unsettled status popular linebacker thomas davis productive tight end greg olsen well releasing iconic panthers including wide receiver steve smith running back deangelo williams knowing richardsons impatient nature first hand hurney made changes quickly first released offensive tackle michael oher 110 nfl starts failed physicalconcussions saved 169 million toward salary cap quickly spent guard trai turners contract extended tune 45 million four years offensive line key teams success trai integral part said hurney fired mark koncz promoted may gettleman pro personnel director director player personnel hurney inherits team hopes newtown rebounds offseason shoulder surgery unsettled secondary offensive line already made significant moves newton report best shape career based social media pictures show ripped abs muscle tone hurney also gets gettlemans final 1 draft pick versatile running back christian mccaffrey stanford good news camp opened presence tight end greg olsen subject speculation might hold olsen wants new contract two years remaining current deal upon arriving spartanburg olsen said thought obviously long hard everything last couple months position teams position things played things changed last week move let go dave end day everything going transition marty slight chaos went around another week didnt feel like right add fuel fire make things much complicated add controversy distraction team didnt think right players didnt think right guys count leader team coaches people organization mr richardson count set certain example presence also play didnt think selfishness would good top summer battle despite big names big bodies already news one key battles panthers summer kicker graham gano incumbent panthers felt serious enough position selected harrison butker draft gano shakiest season panther capped missing three fieldgoal attempts final game loss tampa bay seventhround pick butker became first kicker ever drafted panthers butker 15 17 field goals senior facts training camp wofford college spartanburg sc head coach ron rivera 7th season panthersnfl head coach 56451 overall 33 postseason breakdown 2016 finish 4th nfc south 610 statistics total offense 3437 19th rushing 1134 10th passing 2303 t21st total defense 3598 21st rushing 916 6th passing 2682 29th 2017 preseason schedule times eastern aug 9 houston wed 730 aug 19 tennessee sat 300 aug 24 jacksonville thu 730 aug 31 pittsburgh thu 730 unitbyunit analysis quarterbacks starter cam newton backups derek anderson joe webb newton nfls valuable player 2015 hes elite level made steady progress season league last year injuries partly blame hes coming shoulder surgery workload training camp something must considered anderson gives panthers veteran backup whos good probably dont want rely across course entire season running backs starters jonathan stewart christian mccaffrey backups fozzy whittaker fb alex armah fb darrel young jalen simmons stewart pushed mccaffrey direct playing time prominence game plan mccaffreys versatility put use could leave stewart handle much grunt work carries mccaffrey ability bring flair position thats something thats much anticipated whittaker solid times limited role hes likely stick team tight ends starter greg olsen backups ed dickson chris manhertz scott simonson eric wallace olsen one leagues top producers position doesnt seem letting perhaps olsen entrenched position since arriving trade chicago bears panthers havent much chance groom others position spot attractive free agents dickson looking hang backup role need consistency wide receivers starters kelvin benjamin devin funchess backups chris samuel austin duke brenton bersin damiere byrd kaelin clay mose frazier keyarris garrett russell shepard benjamins physical presence 6foot5 245 pounds makes difficult cover though sometimesballooning weight tends topic discussion funchess made considerable strides lauded leadership among receivers samuel rookie ohio state figures factor prominently teams plans particularly speed offensive linemen starters lt matt kahil lg andrew norwell c ryan kahil rg trai turner rt daryl williams backups rt taylor moton dan france tyrus thompson blaine clausell c gino gradkowski c tyler larsen cg greg van roten matt kahil arrived minnesota vikings join brother along carolina offensive line ryan kahil allpro player missed time last year injury could quite bit sorting along line august though norwell turner proved dependable moton might versatile enough fill spots guard tackle potentially moves starting role fact theres thoughts moton might key whole breakdown along front defensive linemen starters de charles johnson nt star lotulelei dt kawann short de wes horton backups nt vernon butler dt kyle love de mario addison dt eric crume dt toby johnson dt gabriel mass de charles johnson de julius peppers de bryan cox dt toby johnson group chance extremely stout arent perceived weaknesses lotulelei short gained stock play horton continued force experience level high well particularly johnson peppers began career organization available fill vital roles addison high motor could line breakout season nice contract bump upgrading pass rush remains priority particularly questions secondary linebackers starters mlb luke kuechly wlb thomas davis slb shaq thompson backups david mayo jeremy cash jared norris ben jacobs ben boulware zeek bigger kuechly sat large chunk last season concussion missing time ailment second year row ability one best defensive players nfl status held previously davis panthers one revered players league continues playmaker theres shortage expectations thompson well athleticism something team would like see mayo made case key backup role picked unexpected playing time injured teammates last year defensive backs starters lcb james bradberry rcb daryl worley fs kurt coleman ss mike adams backups cb captain munnerlyn cb corn elder cb zack sanchez cb teddy williams dean marlowe colin jones dezmen southward travell dixon brian blechen bradberry worley paid dues sometimes rough 2016 rookie season theyre seasoned building confidence offseason one objectives likelihood coleman moves back free safety increase comfort level means panthers counting adams age 36 provide additional stability secondary munnerlyn former panther returning playing minnesota figures field plenty particularly special packages elder could stick roster part value return specialist jones work special teams adds value well special teams k graham gano k harrison butker p andy lee p michael palardy ls jj jansen kor corn elder chris samuel pr corn elder gano experience side butker valued enough use draft selection among punters palardy provided efficient lee went injury last season jansen stabilizing force kicking game largely goes unnoticed returning specialist roles could turned rookies worth keeping eye elder provided bigtime plays returns college miami | 1,112 |
<p>SAN SEBASTIAN — You would be hard pressed to find a more respectful regard towards action-sports films than the San Sebastian’s <a href="http://variety.com/t/savage-cinema/" type="external">Savage Cinema</a> program. Each year, the industry’s biggest game changers make their way to the shores of the Bay of Biscay and screen for cinephiles and industry professionals alike. This year, surf-history will be on display when surf filmmaking legend Ira Opper ’s ethnographic documentary, “ <a href="http://variety.com/t/secrets-of-desert-point/" type="external">Secrets of Desert Point</a>” receives itsEuropean premiere on Wednesday.</p>
<p>The film is a composition of interviews, highlight reels and a classic “dirtbag” story that would almost certainly never happen today. Most of the footage was recorded by William and Bill Heick from the mid ’70s through the start of the ’80s. The film documents a bygone era in surfing when the sport was a counter culture movement and relegated largely to the fringes of polite society.</p>
<p>William Heick was a classic photographer who trained at the California School of Fine Arts under legendary teachers like Ansel Adams and Minor White. The skills he acquired there, along with access to ahead-of-its-time technology, are major reasons why “Secrets of Desert Point” was able to be made after so many years.</p>
<p>Bill Heick came to the field of filmmaking less traditionally. Raised with the means and support of a successful family, Bill found his calling in the water, or rather on the water. He and his group of companions, called the Golden Beards, spent their summers trolling the beaches of the west-coast and south Pacific looking for the best swell they could find. And find it they did.</p>
<p>Starting in Bali, Bill and his crew were constantly on the move to find uncharted swell where they could surf in solitude, away from the crowded waters of popular beaches. After chartering a boat and heading to a remote, often hostile, beach, the Golden Beards struck oil. For nearly a decade, the group had the run of a beach that is now famous among thrill-seeking surfers, Desert Point.</p>
<p>After showing the current state of affairs at Desert Point, and a few great waves shared by Bill and his son Andrew Heick, the movie picks up a social cause, as each surfer interviewed, old and young, American and Indonesian, commits themselves to protecting the environment that harbored them all. With increased popularity came increased pollution, and the beach now hardly looks like it did when Bill and his friends were living in grass huts, drinking boiled sea water, and practicing unlicensed medicine.</p>
<p>Director Opper has been making surfing films almost since Desert Point was still a secret. The film was produced by his own company, Opper Films, and he has recently developed a VOD platform for surfing films, TheSurfNetwork.com, where the film will stream. Opper talked with Variety about making the film, the state of surfing and his plans for the future.</p>
<p>How did you try to differentiate this film from other action-sports movies?</p>
<p>There are three components to “Secrets of Desert Point” that make this film a unique and compelling documentary. First is the protagonist Bill Heick, a rough-around-the-edges surfing adventurer and filmmaker; next is the ethnographic aspect of camping on a remote Indonesian desert island to surf a perfect wave; and third is the forty years of cinematographic documentation of Heick’s adventures on Desert Point.</p>
<p>“Secrets of Desert Point” is one of the most significant “dirtbag” adventures in the history of the sport. Simply, a group of friends discover a wave and strive to surf it to perfection, and all along keep it their secret.</p>
<p>How did your relationship with Bill come about?</p>
<p>Bill and I met on a snowboard expedition first descent of Victoria Peak in Canada. We wanted to snowboard a mountain in North America no one had boarded. During the down time he told me stories about his filmmaking father and Desert Point.</p>
<p>And when did you decide to make “Secrets” together?</p>
<p>Twenty years later, after his father passed away, Bill showed up at my Solana Beach, California studio with film in-hand to ask me to help him create a legacy video for his family. After I screened the footage and photographs I realized that there was more here than a family photo album. Heick’s footage was one-of-a-kind and could be the most important documentation of a pure surf experience since The Endless Summer.</p>
<p>For the next year Bill, Steve Barilotti (writer), Julian Clark (editor), Dustin Hood (technical director) and myself worked on crafting the documentary.</p>
<p>What kind of work did you have to do to get the film cinema-ready?</p>
<p>Most of the film and photographs were in excellent shape considering the age. Bill’s father was an accomplished photographer and therefore he used start-of-the art equipment in capturing the images and he implemented professional storage techniques. Traditionally, I would first craft a compelling story then go out to locate the images and interview the participants. I never had all the goods handed to me.</p>
<p>What is the climate like around the sport today? Can you compare it to the time of the events in “Secrets”?</p>
<p>In today’s world to experience a similar adventure like “Deserts” a surfer only needs a credit card, a surf resort, and the swell forecast. On Bill’s surf adventure they only had a compass and a sea chart, this is why “Secrets of Desert Point” is the last great “dirtbag” surfing adventure of the 20th century.</p>
<p>What are you working on now? What’s next for you and the film?</p>
<p>My primary focus has shifted from production to developing a new distribution platform for professionally-produced surf movies, <a href="http://www.thesurfnetwork.com/" type="external">www.TheSurfNetwork.com</a>, the Netflix of surfing. “Secrets” is currently touring the global film festivals, with the European premiere at the San Sebastián Film Festival.</p> | false | 1 | san sebastian would hard pressed find respectful regard towards actionsports films san sebastians savage cinema program year industrys biggest game changers make way shores bay biscay screen cinephiles industry professionals alike year surfhistory display surf filmmaking legend ira opper ethnographic documentary secrets desert point receives itseuropean premiere wednesday film composition interviews highlight reels classic dirtbag story would almost certainly never happen today footage recorded william bill heick mid 70s start 80s film documents bygone era surfing sport counter culture movement relegated largely fringes polite society william heick classic photographer trained california school fine arts legendary teachers like ansel adams minor white skills acquired along access aheadofitstime technology major reasons secrets desert point able made many years bill heick came field filmmaking less traditionally raised means support successful family bill found calling water rather water group companions called golden beards spent summers trolling beaches westcoast south pacific looking best swell could find find starting bali bill crew constantly move find uncharted swell could surf solitude away crowded waters popular beaches chartering boat heading remote often hostile beach golden beards struck oil nearly decade group run beach famous among thrillseeking surfers desert point showing current state affairs desert point great waves shared bill son andrew heick movie picks social cause surfer interviewed old young american indonesian commits protecting environment harbored increased popularity came increased pollution beach hardly looks like bill friends living grass huts drinking boiled sea water practicing unlicensed medicine director opper making surfing films almost since desert point still secret film produced company opper films recently developed vod platform surfing films thesurfnetworkcom film stream opper talked variety making film state surfing plans future try differentiate film actionsports movies three components secrets desert point make film unique compelling documentary first protagonist bill heick rougharoundtheedges surfing adventurer filmmaker next ethnographic aspect camping remote indonesian desert island surf perfect wave third forty years cinematographic documentation heicks adventures desert point secrets desert point one significant dirtbag adventures history sport simply group friends discover wave strive surf perfection along keep secret relationship bill come bill met snowboard expedition first descent victoria peak canada wanted snowboard mountain north america one boarded time told stories filmmaking father desert point decide make secrets together twenty years later father passed away bill showed solana beach california studio film inhand ask help create legacy video family screened footage photographs realized family photo album heicks footage oneofakind could important documentation pure surf experience since endless summer next year bill steve barilotti writer julian clark editor dustin hood technical director worked crafting documentary kind work get film cinemaready film photographs excellent shape considering age bills father accomplished photographer therefore used startofthe art equipment capturing images implemented professional storage techniques traditionally would first craft compelling story go locate images interview participants never goods handed climate like around sport today compare time events secrets todays world experience similar adventure like deserts surfer needs credit card surf resort swell forecast bills surf adventure compass sea chart secrets desert point last great dirtbag surfing adventure 20th century working whats next film primary focus shifted production developing new distribution platform professionallyproduced surf movies wwwthesurfnetworkcom netflix surfing secrets currently touring global film festivals european premiere san sebastián film festival | 531 |
<p>MAR DEL PLATA, Argentina — Lucia and Julia’s Meik’s Buenos Aires-based <a href="http://variety.com/t/meikincine/" type="external">Meikincine</a>, a boutique sales company, has acquired world sales rights to “Al Desierto” (To the Desert), one of the only three Argentine movies in International Competition at this year’s Mar del Plata Festival, which opened Nov. 17.</p>
<p>Cinetren will release “To the Desert” on Nov. 30 in Argentina.</p>
<p>“To the Desert” is also just the third live-action feature from Ulises Rosell, one of the founding fathers of the New Argentine Cinema who, along with Daniel Burman, Israel Adrián Caetano and Lucrecia Martel, was one of the directors of 1996’s “Historias Breves,” a omnibus feature calling card for a new generation of Argentine directorial talent.</p>
<p>Though Rosell won a brace of awards for 2006’s “Sofabed,” his career has been lower-profile to date than these illustrious contemporaries, “To the Desert” marking by far his largest canvas for a theme which has marked some of his finest films, a sympathy for the marginalized, whether the singular snake-hunter, scrap merchant and bank robber hero of “Bonanza” or the Wichi community of North-West Argentina whom anthropologist John Palmer attempts to defend in 2012’s “The Ethnographer,” another docu-feature.</p>
<p>Penned by Rosell and Sergio Bizzi, an Argentine screenwriter-novelist adapted by Argentina’s Lucía Puenzo (“XXY”), Ecuador’s Sebastián Cordero (“Rage”) and Brazil’s Marco Dutra (“Era el cielo”), “To the Desert” is produced by Wanka Cine and Ajimolido Films, two companies behind debutant Emiliano Torre’s “The Winter,” a 2016 San Sebastián Special Jury Prize winner.</p>
<p>World premiering at San Sebastian’s Horizontes Latinos this September, “To the Desert” stars Valentina Bassi (“Common Ground”) and Jorge Sesan (“Ardor”). Enrolling genre, “To the Desert” constantly confounds expectations, kicking off with Julia, a casino waitress (Bassi) in Patagonia’s Comodoro Rivadavia, living on the breadline who accepts a job interview, proposed by casino client Gwynfor for a position at an oil company.</p>
<p>Driven into the depths of the desert, however, she soon realizes she is being kidnapped. But what could have been a stock abduction suspense drama becomes a survival thriller when Julia’s panics, causing Gwynfor to crash his truck, leaving both in a majestically barren Patagonia desert, an ocean of steep buffs and dry water courses swept by sandstorms. Free to run away, but with nowhere to run to nor knowledge of where she is and depending on Gwynfor for elemental protection, Julia begins to develop a kind of love for her captor. &#160; &#160; &#160; &#160; &#160; &#160; &#160; &#160; &#160; &#160; &#160; &#160; &#160; &#160; &#160; &#160; &#160; &#160; &#160; &#160; &#160; &#160; &#160; &#160; &#160; &#160; &#160; &#160; &#160; &#160; &#160; &#160; &#160; &#160; &#160; &#160; &#160; &#160; &#160; &#160; &#160; &#160; &#160; &#160; &#160; &#160; &#160; &#160; &#160; &#160; &#160; &#160; &#160; &#160; &#160; &#160; &#160; &#160; &#160; &#160; &#160; &#160; &#160; &#160; &#160; &#160; &#160; &#160; &#160; &#160; &#160; &#160; &#160; &#160; &#160; &#160; &#160; &#160; &#160; &#160; &#160; &#160; &#160; “I was interested in working at a relationship between two people isolated from the world as a mere narrative challenge, Rosell said, adding that he supposed that “without the gaze of the daily context and with the pressure for survival, possibilities would open up which would allow the characters to evolve from initial trauma of the abduction to less trodden grounds.”</p>
<p>“To the Desert” also delivers a telling comment on the state of Argentina’s laboring classes in a modern world. It begins with Julia attempting to forge a future for herself, renting a beachside apartment. But her job at a gargantuan, impersonal casino hardly gives her enough to pay the rent at a rickety down-market bedsit. The ranches Gwynfor and she stumbles upon in their trek have hardly changed for centuries: They still draw water from a well. But for both, they seem in some ways preferable to their dehumanized prior existence.</p>
<p>Just how far characters can remain on the margins is another matter. Shot in widescreen, “To the Desert” constantly shows individuals dwarfed by environment, as in the magnificent opening scene where Julia crosses a vast beach on her way to check out a beach-side apartment in Comodoro Rivadavia, her diminutive figure bending into a driving wind.</p>
<p><a href="http://variety.com/2017/film/festivals/berlinale-2017-meikincine-entertainment-lissette-orozco-adrianas-pact-berlin-film-festival-1201988814/" type="external">Meikincine</a>’s has also acquired world sales rights on “Maracaibo,” from Argentina’s Miguel Angel Rocca, which it will screen at next week’s <a href="http://variety.com/t/ventana-sur/" type="external">Ventana Sur</a>, along with “Adriana’s Pact.”</p>
<p>A family drama/revenge thriller taking place against the background of a lack of a rampant security in Latin America, “Maracaibo” hinges on the murder of the 24-old-Facundo, which leaves an irreparable sense of emptiness in the lives of his parents. Wracked by guilt and unresolved issues with his son, his father is overwhelmed y a deep desire for revenge, seeking out his son’s killer.</p>
<p>Produced by Pensa &amp; Rocca, and picked up for distribution by Argentina’s Distribution Company, “Maracaibo” world premiered at the Shanghai Festival, and has just won the Key to Freedom prize, awarded by the inmates of Huelva’s state penitentiary during Spain’s Huelva Fest.</p>
<p>Lead-produced by Chile’s Storyboard Media and world premiering this year at the Berlinale’s Panorama Documentary Section, “Adriana’s Pact” – about the arrest of the director’s aunt, whom Orozco used to idolize, for human rights crimes under Augusto Pinochet – recently won the top Trfeu Bandeira Paulista Award for best film at Brazil’s 41st Sao Paulo Festival.</p> | false | 1 | mar del plata argentina lucia julias meiks buenos airesbased meikincine boutique sales company acquired world sales rights al desierto desert one three argentine movies international competition years mar del plata festival opened nov 17 cinetren release desert nov 30 argentina desert also third liveaction feature ulises rosell one founding fathers new argentine cinema along daniel burman israel adrián caetano lucrecia martel one directors 1996s historias breves omnibus feature calling card new generation argentine directorial talent though rosell brace awards 2006s sofabed career lowerprofile date illustrious contemporaries desert marking far largest canvas theme marked finest films sympathy marginalized whether singular snakehunter scrap merchant bank robber hero bonanza wichi community northwest argentina anthropologist john palmer attempts defend 2012s ethnographer another docufeature penned rosell sergio bizzi argentine screenwriternovelist adapted argentinas lucía puenzo xxy ecuadors sebastián cordero rage brazils marco dutra era el cielo desert produced wanka cine ajimolido films two companies behind debutant emiliano torres winter 2016 san sebastián special jury prize winner world premiering san sebastians horizontes latinos september desert stars valentina bassi common ground jorge sesan ardor enrolling genre desert constantly confounds expectations kicking julia casino waitress bassi patagonias comodoro rivadavia living breadline accepts job interview proposed casino client gwynfor position oil company driven depths desert however soon realizes kidnapped could stock abduction suspense drama becomes survival thriller julias panics causing gwynfor crash truck leaving majestically barren patagonia desert ocean steep buffs dry water courses swept sandstorms free run away nowhere run knowledge depending gwynfor elemental protection julia begins develop kind love captor 160 160 160 160 160 160 160 160 160 160 160 160 160 160 160 160 160 160 160 160 160 160 160 160 160 160 160 160 160 160 160 160 160 160 160 160 160 160 160 160 160 160 160 160 160 160 160 160 160 160 160 160 160 160 160 160 160 160 160 160 160 160 160 160 160 160 160 160 160 160 160 160 160 160 160 160 160 160 160 160 160 160 160 interested working relationship two people isolated world mere narrative challenge rosell said adding supposed without gaze daily context pressure survival possibilities would open would allow characters evolve initial trauma abduction less trodden grounds desert also delivers telling comment state argentinas laboring classes modern world begins julia attempting forge future renting beachside apartment job gargantuan impersonal casino hardly gives enough pay rent rickety downmarket bedsit ranches gwynfor stumbles upon trek hardly changed centuries still draw water well seem ways preferable dehumanized prior existence far characters remain margins another matter shot widescreen desert constantly shows individuals dwarfed environment magnificent opening scene julia crosses vast beach way check beachside apartment comodoro rivadavia diminutive figure bending driving wind meikincines also acquired world sales rights maracaibo argentinas miguel angel rocca screen next weeks ventana sur along adrianas pact family dramarevenge thriller taking place background lack rampant security latin america maracaibo hinges murder 24oldfacundo leaves irreparable sense emptiness lives parents wracked guilt unresolved issues son father overwhelmed deep desire revenge seeking sons killer produced pensa amp rocca picked distribution argentinas distribution company maracaibo world premiered shanghai festival key freedom prize awarded inmates huelvas state penitentiary spains huelva fest leadproduced chiles storyboard media world premiering year berlinales panorama documentary section adrianas pact arrest directors aunt orozco used idolize human rights crimes augusto pinochet recently top trfeu bandeira paulista award best film brazils 41st sao paulo festival | 564 |
<p>Democrats are enraged at President Obama for his decision to extend George W. Bush’s tax cuts for all Americans, including top income earners. What explains their anger?</p>
<p>It cannot be because of concern for the deficit. After all, Democrats are responsible for an unprecedented two-year spending binge (the United States spent $1.3 trillion more over the last two-year period-2009-2010-than in the two-year period preceding it). In addition, increasing tax rates for the middle class, something Democrats oppose, would do far more to reduce the deficits than increasing tax rates for the top 2 percent of income earners. Nor do most Democrats believe the deal Obama struck with Republicans would hurt job growth. The White House is highlighting independent forecasts predicting the package could create as many as 2.2 million jobs next year.</p>
<p>What, then, explains the ferocious opposition many Democrats have for the tax deal Obama struck with Republicans? Senator Mary Landrieu spoke for many of them when she said, “I’m going to argue forcefully for the nonsensicalness and the almost, you know, moral corruptness of that particular policy. This is beyond politics. This is about justice and doing what’s right.”</p>
<p>For a lot of Democrats, this is not simply a matter of wise vs. unwise economic policy; it is about basic justice. Those who favor allowing high-income earners to keep more of their money are not simply wrong; they are guilty of an immoral act. One cannot help but conclude that even if lower tax rates for the wealthy led to strong economic growth, more jobs, and a higher standard of living for everyone, it wouldn’t matter. Punishing “the rich” would remain a top priority.</p>
<p>I am reminded of something Jimmy Connors, one of the greatest tennis players of his generation, said when asked to explain his fierce competitiveness. “I hate to lose more than I love to win,” Connors said. Of some liberals it can be said: They hate the rich more than they love economic growth or tax cuts for the middle class. It is more emotionally satisfying to punish the wealthy than it is to assist the nonwealthy.</p>
<p>Part of this is driven by a deeply ingrained animus toward the rich. If you examine how Democrats characterize the affluent in America, it’s almost always negative. The top income earners are portrayed as greedy, selfish, and generally contemptible. Mention the wealthy and liberals don’t think of creative, entrepreneurial, and hard-working people; they think of Gordon Gekko. Even President Obama, in arguing for passage of legislation his administration negotiated, couldn’t hide his disdain for “millionaires and billionaires.” David Axelrod, Obama’s senior adviser, referred to reductions in the estate tax as “odious.”</p>
<p>What animates this liberal cast of mind, apart from their contempt for the well-to-do, is the belief that the rich need to pay more taxes in order to reduce inequality. Inequality, according to this outlook, is intrinsically bad-and tax cuts for the wealthy, even if they make economic sense, accelerate inequality. This is an offense, and the role of the state is to narrow inequality through redistribution of income. Equality of outcome is, for liberals, more important than equality of opportunity. The duty of the federal government is to ensure greater “fairness” in the system.</p>
<p>There are many reasons why this attitude is, in the most fundamental sense, wrong. Here it’s worth recounting what a professor does every semester with his students. This professor told me and Arthur Brooks, with whom I cowrote&#160;Wealth and Justice: The Morality of Democratic Capitalism, that he will redistribute points on the first exam in order to achieve an equal outcome of results. He then tells his students to imagine that he has taken points off their exam in order to achieve that result. To a person, these students are adamant that such a thing is simply unfair; they have earned their grade, they insist. To take points off their exam in order to give them to someone who scored lower is unfair. That is, of course, precisely the point. The students understand, in very personal terms, that justice is a matter of receiving one’s due.</p>
<p>Pope John Paul II called “personal economic enterprise” a fundamental human right and, in his encyclical&#160;Sollicitudo Rei Socialis&#160;(“On Social Concern”), wrote:</p>
<p>Experience shows us that the denial of this right, or its limitation in the name of an alleged “equality” of everyone in society, diminishes, or in practice absolutely destroys the spirit of initiative, that is to say the creative subjectivity of the citizen. As a consequence, there arises, not so much a true equality as a “leveling down.” In the place of creative initiative there appears passivity, dependence and submission to the bureaucratic apparatus which  .  .  .  puts everyone in a position of almost absolute dependence.</p>
<p>This is not to say that a tax system that levies a proportionately higher tax rate on those with higher income is itself evil or even unwise. Simple justice does not require a society to tax the rich at higher rates than -others, but compassion for the neediest might. Adam Smith, in&#160;The Wealth of Nations, wrote, “It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion.”</p>
<p>But a progressive tax system is a world apart from the modern liberal belief that inequality is itself a sin that government should take great strides to ameliorate. It cedes a frightening amount of power to the federal government to fine-tune outcomes and take upon itself the task of leveling out differences.</p>
<p>Indeed, inequality is the inevitable outcome of human differences. A healthy society, while caring for the poor and the weak, also needs to celebrate and reward human excellence. Tom Brady deserves to make more than his New England Patriot backup Brian Hoyer. And to demonize the wealthy is not only unwarranted but undermines civic comity. In an effort to promote an economic theory, liberals are appealing to class resentment, which is itself deeply contrary to the American ideal as interpreted authoritatively by Lincoln, who praised ambition and enterprise and upward mobility. “I don’t believe in a law to prevent a man from getting rich; it would do more harm than good,” Lincoln said. “So while we do not propose any war upon capital, we do wish to allow the humblest man an equal chance to get rich with everybody else.”</p>
<p>Mary Landrieu is right in one respect: There is a moral calculus to the current economic debate. The problem for her is that she, and contemporary liberalism, are on the wrong side of it.</p>
<p>Peter Wehner is a senior fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center and a managing director of the economic website e21.</p> | false | 1 | democrats enraged president obama decision extend george w bushs tax cuts americans including top income earners explains anger concern deficit democrats responsible unprecedented twoyear spending binge united states spent 13 trillion last twoyear period20092010than twoyear period preceding addition increasing tax rates middle class something democrats oppose would far reduce deficits increasing tax rates top 2 percent income earners democrats believe deal obama struck republicans would hurt job growth white house highlighting independent forecasts predicting package could create many 22 million jobs next year explains ferocious opposition many democrats tax deal obama struck republicans senator mary landrieu spoke many said im going argue forcefully nonsensicalness almost know moral corruptness particular policy beyond politics justice whats right lot democrats simply matter wise vs unwise economic policy basic justice favor allowing highincome earners keep money simply wrong guilty immoral act one help conclude even lower tax rates wealthy led strong economic growth jobs higher standard living everyone wouldnt matter punishing rich would remain top priority reminded something jimmy connors one greatest tennis players generation said asked explain fierce competitiveness hate lose love win connors said liberals said hate rich love economic growth tax cuts middle class emotionally satisfying punish wealthy assist nonwealthy part driven deeply ingrained animus toward rich examine democrats characterize affluent america almost always negative top income earners portrayed greedy selfish generally contemptible mention wealthy liberals dont think creative entrepreneurial hardworking people think gordon gekko even president obama arguing passage legislation administration negotiated couldnt hide disdain millionaires billionaires david axelrod obamas senior adviser referred reductions estate tax odious animates liberal cast mind apart contempt welltodo belief rich need pay taxes order reduce inequality inequality according outlook intrinsically badand tax cuts wealthy even make economic sense accelerate inequality offense role state narrow inequality redistribution income equality outcome liberals important equality opportunity duty federal government ensure greater fairness system many reasons attitude fundamental sense wrong worth recounting professor every semester students professor told arthur brooks cowrote160wealth justice morality democratic capitalism redistribute points first exam order achieve equal outcome results tells students imagine taken points exam order achieve result person students adamant thing simply unfair earned grade insist take points exam order give someone scored lower unfair course precisely point students understand personal terms justice matter receiving ones due pope john paul ii called personal economic enterprise fundamental human right encyclical160sollicitudo rei socialis160on social concern wrote experience shows us denial right limitation name alleged equality everyone society diminishes practice absolutely destroys spirit initiative say creative subjectivity citizen consequence arises much true equality leveling place creative initiative appears passivity dependence submission bureaucratic apparatus puts everyone position almost absolute dependence say tax system levies proportionately higher tax rate higher income evil even unwise simple justice require society tax rich higher rates others compassion neediest might adam smith in160the wealth nations wrote unreasonable rich contribute public expense proportion revenue something proportion progressive tax system world apart modern liberal belief inequality sin government take great strides ameliorate cedes frightening amount power federal government finetune outcomes take upon task leveling differences indeed inequality inevitable outcome human differences healthy society caring poor weak also needs celebrate reward human excellence tom brady deserves make new england patriot backup brian hoyer demonize wealthy unwarranted undermines civic comity effort promote economic theory liberals appealing class resentment deeply contrary american ideal interpreted authoritatively lincoln praised ambition enterprise upward mobility dont believe law prevent man getting rich would harm good lincoln said propose war upon capital wish allow humblest man equal chance get rich everybody else mary landrieu right one respect moral calculus current economic debate problem contemporary liberalism wrong side peter wehner senior fellow ethics public policy center managing director economic website e21 | 609 |
<p>Testimony of Edward Whelan</p>
<p>Submitted March 1, 2013</p>
<p>United States Commission on Civil Rights</p>
<p>Hearing on “Peaceful Co-Existence? Reconciling Non-Discrimination Principles with Civil Liberties”</p>
<p>March 22, 2013</p>
<p>Thank you for inviting me to testify before this Commission on the important topic of the conflict between non-discrimination principles and civil liberties.</p>
<p>I offer my views in my capacity as president of the Ethics and Public Policy Center and as director of EPPC’s program on The Constitution, the Courts, and the Culture. I am testifying on my own behalf, and my statements are not to be imputed to EPPC as an institution.</p>
<p>I</p>
<p>The title of this hearing asks whether non-discrimination principles and civil liberties can peacefully co-exist. I respectfully submit that, by its very nature, the imposition of a non-discrimination principle on nongovernmental actors intrudes, at least to some degree, on civil liberties. At the simplest level, the embodiment in law of the principle that, in performing lawful Action A–say, providing a service or hiring an employee–a person should not discriminate on the basis of Category X means that the person no longer has the full liberty to perform Action A as she pleases.</p>
<p>As I trust is obvious, this elementary observation says nothing about whether the imposition of a particular non-discrimination restriction on how a person performs a particular type of action is justified. Nor does it speak to whether the resulting intrusion on liberty is trivial or significant. It merely points out the inevitable conflict.</p>
<p>As a guide to thinking through whether and when non-discrimination principles ought to apply, I offer these considerations:</p>
<p>1. Traditional liberalism distinguishes between the rules that the government must follow and the rules that apply to the conduct of ordinary citizens. It is one thing to impose a regimen of “fair” conduct on the government and on governmental actors, which do not have any countervailing civil liberties at stake. It is a very different matter to impose the same regimen on ordinary citizens, whose civil liberties include religious liberty, free speech, freedom of association, and a general autonomy to act, within broad bounds, as they see fit, without interference from the government.</p>
<p>The flourishing of civil society depends on recognizing and respecting this distinction between the norms applicable to the government and the norms applicable to the citizenry. By contrast, the failure to recognize and respect this distinction leads to what one critic has fairly labeled “totalitarian liberalism”–a liberalism that seeks to occupy the totality of human affairs and that “tends to imply that institutions such as the family, the Church, and other agencies exist only with the permission of the state, and, to exist lawfully, must abide by the dictates or norms of the state.” Philip Tartaglia, “At the Door of the Temple: Religious Freedom and the New Orthodoxy,” Public Discourse (June 27, 2012).</p>
<p>2. “That’s discrimination!” seems to have become for many Americans an observation that stifles more careful thinking about what line-drawing is legitimate and about the proper limits on the application of non-discrimination norms. But, as law professor Richard W. Garnett points out, “discrimination” is “just another word for decision-making, for choosing and acting in accord with or with reference to particular criteria.” Richard W. Garnett, “Confusion About Discrimination,” Public Discourse (Apr. 5, 2012). Thus, we speak approvingly of someone with “discriminating tastes”–someone, that is, who values the true, the good, and the beautiful over the false, the bad, and the ugly.</p>
<p>A threshold question (a necessary but not sufficient condition) in deciding whether to adopt a norm of nondiscrimination is whether and when a particular form of discrimination is wrongful or invidious.</p>
<p>3. The paradigmatic case of a wrongful basis of discrimination is race. We abhor discrimination on the basis of race because we recognize that a person’s race does not detract from (or add to) his stature as a being made in the image and likeness of God or (in more secular terms) his equal dignity as a human being. We especially abhor racial discrimination against African-Americans because we recognize, and grieve over, our nation’s ugly legacy of slavery and of state-enforced racial segregation.</p>
<p>It is worth emphasizing, however, that our legal system’s condemnation of discrimination on the basis of race is far from absolute. In particular, under the rubric of “affirmative action,” our legal system currently allows and encourages racial discrimination, both by the government and by private actors, against non-Hispanic whites and against Asian Americans in educational admissions and against non-Hispanic whites in employment. To a much lesser extent, there are some job assignments–e.g., an FBI agent infiltrating a group of racist terrorists–for which race may well be regarded as a permissible criterion.</p>
<p>My point at this hearing is neither to defend nor dispute these departures from the norm of non-discrimination on the basis of race, but merely to highlight that our legal system’s ban on racial discrimination has some significant exceptions.</p>
<p>4. Other bases of discrimination commonly prohibited under federal law are qualitatively different from race.</p>
<p>Take sex, for example. For various reasons, we regard sex-segregated restrooms, sex-segregated athletic competitions, and single-sex schools very differently from race-segregated restrooms, race-segregated athletic competitions, and single-race schools. Most of us don’t disapprove of a woman who wants to be part of a women-only book club or of a boy who wants to join the Boy Scouts.</p>
<p>If the increasingly common disparagement of traditional religious believers is any indication, it would also seem that, for many Americans, discrimination on the basis of religion does not carry the same moral stigma as discrimination on the basis of race. The fact that a person is free to choose and change her religious beliefs in a way that she is not free to change her race may well account for some of the difference. But a growing hostility against traditional religion would also seem an important factor.</p>
<p>5. Insofar as the social attitudes that sustained invidious discrimination have evolved, prohibitions on discrimination may be a very costly way of achieving very little. Employers, for example, will generally harm themselves when they engage in irrational discrimination. Thus, as one leading scholar puts it, “Competitive markets with free entry offer better and more certain protection against invidious discrimination than any anti-discrimination law.” Richard Epstein, Forbidden Grounds: The Case Against Employment Discrimination Laws 9 (Harvard University Press 1992). Similarly, thanks in part to advances in technology, customers for goods and services enjoy an increasingly broad range of available providers and incur much lower search costs in choosing among providers.</p>
<p>Further, as many scholars have argued, prohibitions on discrimination may well have unintended consequences that undermine their objectives. For example:</p>
<p>By making it harder to fire certain workers, employment discrimination law tends to make these workers less attractive prospects at the hiring stage. An employer would prefer to hire someone who can be easily fired (should that prove necessary) than an otherwise identical applicant whose firing would be subject to legal scrutiny. Thus, protection against discriminatory firing acts as a kind of tax on hiring those to whom it is extended.</p>
<p>Ian Ayres &amp; Peter Siegelman, “The Q-Word as Red Herring: Why Disparate Impact Liability Does Not Induce Hiring Quotas,” 74 Tex. L. Rev. 1487, 1487-1488 (1996).</p>
<p>II</p>
<p>I do not contend that it is a simple or uncontroversial matter to translate the general considerations that I have outlined into a set of non-discrimination norms, and I will not attempt to do so here. Instead, I would like to explore more concretely the clash between non-discrimination principles and civil liberties. Let’s look at a real-life case:</p>
<p>Elaine Huguenin and her husband Jonathan own Elane Photography, a business providing photography services, in Albuquerque, New Mexico. Elane Photography has a policy against photographing events that communicate messages inconsistent with the Huguenins’ Christian beliefs. In 2006, Ms. Huguenin received an e-mail from a potential customer, Vanessa Willock, inquiring about photography for Ms. Willock’s upcoming same-sex commitment ceremony. Ms. Huguenin informed Ms. Willock that Elane Photography would not provide the service.</p>
<p>Ms. Willock then filed a discrimination claim with the New Mexico Human Rights Commission. That agency found that Elane Photography had violated state law by discriminating on the basis of sexual orientation, and it ordered Elane Photography to pay Ms. Willock more than $6,600 in attorney fees and costs. More than six years later, Elane Photography’s appeal of that order is now pending before the New Mexico supreme court.</p>
<p>Let’s consider at the same time a hypothetical variant:</p>
<p>Assume now that the owner of the photography business is a gay man, John Doe, who will photograph same-sex commitment ceremonies but who refuses to photograph male-female weddings. Mr. Doe therefore informs a potential customer, Jane Poe, that he won’t photograph her wedding. Ms. Poe files a discrimination claim with the New Mexico Human Rights Commission, which finds that Mr. Doe violated state law by discriminating on the basis of sexual orientation and which orders him to pay Ms. Poe more than $6,600 in attorney fees and costs.</p>
<p>Do these results make any sense? Consider:</p>
<p>1. As First Amendment expert Eugene Volokh has explained, event photography “involves a substantial degree of artistic judgment and expression on the photographer’s part,” and the photographer’s creative expression is protected by the First Amendment. Further, “the right to be free from compelled speech includes the right not to create First-Amendment-protected expression … that you disagree with.” Eugene Volokh, “Wedding Photographer May Be Required (on Pain of Legal Liability) to Photograph Same-Sex Commitment Ceremonies,” Volokh Conspiracy (June 4, 2012). In other words, both Elane Photography (and the Huguenins) and the hypothetical John Doe have a strong free-speech claim under the First Amendment to discriminate, on the basis of sexual orientation or on other bases, against potential customers for whom they would prefer not to exercise their expressive capacities.</p>
<p>2. Elane Photography’s policy against photographing same-sex commitment ceremonies reflects the religious beliefs of its owners, the Huguenins. Whether or not the Huguenins have an enforceable religious-liberty right (under the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment, under New Mexico’s Religious Freedom Restoration Act, or under some other provision of law), there can be no question that imposing on them an obligation to photograph same-sex ceremonies intrudes on their religious beliefs.</p>
<p>The same, of course, might well be true for Mr. Doe–if, that is, his own practice is driven by his religious beliefs.</p>
<p>3. No sensible person seeking artistic photographic services for an event would want a photographer who is hostile to the event. The potential customers, Ms. Willock and Ms. Poe, would likely have been worse off if the photographers had concealed their objections and grudgingly provided their services. Because there are alternative providers of photography services, the customers were instead able to find willing and able substitutes.</p>
<p>4. To be sure, in addition to the trivial inconvenience of an e-mail exchange, Ms. Willock and Ms. Poe each incurred what might be called the dignitary injury of being told that the photographer had a policy against photographing her event. But in our pluralistic society, it should be no surprise that nearly everyone will be disapproved of by some of the people some of the time. As a general rule, it is difficult to see how the desire to avoid encountering disapproval would justify imposition of a regime in which customers dragoon unwilling providers rather than a regime in which customers obtain the services they want from willing providers. It is also difficult to see why it is better to reward thin-skinned plaintiffs for running to court (or, even worse, to a “human rights commission”) than to encourage the healthy growth of thicker skin.</p>
<p>III</p>
<p>In his famous Memorial and Remonstrance of 1785, James Madison celebrated that the “American Theatre” had discovered the “true remedy” for the “disease” of “Religious discord” that had so afflicted the “old world” of Europe: “equal and compleat” religious liberty. In a warning that resonates across the centuries, Madison declaimed: “If with the salutary effects of this system [of “equal and compleat” liberty] under our own eyes, we begin to contract the bounds of Religious freedom, we know no name that will too severely reproach our folly.”</p>
<p>The clash between non-discrimination principles and religious liberty in particular has been exacerbated by the Obama administration’s hostility to a robust conception of religious liberty and by its determination to subordinate religious liberty to its ideology of sexual absolutism. The so-called HHS contraception mandate provides a prime example.</p>
<p>In implementing President Obama’s signature health-care legislation, the Department of Health and Human Services announced in January 2012 that it will require many employer-provided health-insurance plans to include in the preventive services that they cover all FDA-approved forms of contraception, including those contraceptives that sometimes operate as abortifacients, and sterilization services. For those employers who have religious objections to providing some or all of the mandated coverage, this HHS contraception mandate clearly violates their rights under the 1993 federal Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) and the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment. Even worse, it displays an illiberal contempt for the religious views of those whom it seeks to coerce.</p>
<p>The case against the HHS mandate under RFRA is quite simple. Under RFRA, the federal government “may substantially burden a person’s exercise of religion only if it demonstrates that applica­tion of the burden to the person (1) is in furtherance of a compelling governmental interest; and (2) is the least restrictive means of furthering that compelling governmental interest.” Let’s consider the italicized elements in logical order.[1]</p>
<p>It is clear that an employer is engaged in an exercise of religion when she, for religious reasons, refuses to provide health insurance that covers contraceptives or abortifacients. RFRA itself defines exercise of religion broadly to mean “any exercise of religion, whether or not compelled by, or central to, a system of religious belief.” Further, RFRA was adopted against a backdrop of prominent Supreme Court cases in which the exercise of religion consisted of abstentions like not working on the Sabbath (Sherbert v. Verner (1963)), not sending one’s children to high school (Wisconsin v. Yoder (1972)), and not taking part in the production of armaments (Thomas v. Review Board (1981)).</p>
<p>It is equally clear that the HHS mandate substantially burdens objecting employers’ exercise of religion. An employer who violates the HHS mandate incurs an annual penalty of roughly $2000 per employee–vastly more than the five-dollar fine that substantially burdened the religious rights of the fathers in Yoder who refused to send their children to high school. Under the Supreme Court case law that RFRA incorporates, that penalty for noncompliance with the HHS mandate puts the same kind of burden on religious rights as a direct fine for holding religious beliefs against contraceptives or abortifacients.[2]</p>
<p>The question whether the government can demonstrate that application of the burden to the objecting employer is in furtherance of a compelling governmental interest involves a more complicated analysis, but the answer in the end is clearly no. For starters, by HHS’s own account, there is already widespread access to contraceptives, via pre-existing employer-based insurance plans, community health centers, and public clinics (as well as the countless pharmacies and doctors who dispense contraceptives). No one can seriously maintain that there is a general problem of lack of access to contraceptives. Just as the Supreme Court has recently declared that “the government does not have a compelling interest in each marginal percentage point by which its goals are advanced,”[3] it surely does not have a compelling interest in each marginal employer by which its goal of increased provision of contraceptives is advanced.</p>
<p>Indeed, the Obama administration effectively concedes this point by exempting so many employers from the HHS mandate for purely secular reasons. For example, employers offering so-called “grandfathered” plans, estimated to cover nearly 100 million Americans in 2013, are not subject to the HHS mandate. Nor are the many businesses which employ fewer than 50 full-time employees and which decline to provide them group health insurance. It is absurd for anyone to contend that the Obama administration has a compelling interest in imposing the mandate on objecting religious employers when it obviously perceives no such interest in imposing it on all these other employers.</p>
<p>The HHS mandate also clearly flunks the least restrictive means test. (In order to satisfy RFRA, it would have to meet both the compelling governmental interest test and the least restrictive means test.) The question under this test is whether imposing the HHS mandate on an employer who has religious objections to providing insurance coverage for contraceptives or abortifacients furthers the government’s interest in increasing access to contraceptives via the means that is least restrictive of the religious liberty of the objecting employer.</p>
<p>The question virtually answers itself. There are lots of alternative means by which the government could increase access to contraceptives without conscripting objecting employers: for example, direct government provision of contraceptives, government payment to third-party providers, mandates on contraceptive providers, and tax credits or deductions or other financial support for contraceptive users. Instead of pursuing any of these alternatives, the Obama administration has adopted the single means that is most restrictive of the religious liberty of objecting employers.</p>
<p>The HHS mandate also violates the Free Exercise Clause. The HHS mandate is not neutral and generally applicable, and therefore does not qualify for the low bar of Employment Division v. Smith, because (as I discuss above) employers are exempt from it for purely secular reasons.[4] The HHS mandate is therefore subject under the Free Exercise Clause to the same standard that RFRA imposes, and it fails for the same reasons.</p>
<p>Even more troubling than the Obama administration’s violations of RFRA and the Free Exercise Clause is the fact that its conduct was willful and deliberate. Before it finalized the HHS mandate, the administration received thousands and thousands of comments explaining the impact that the mandate would have on employers who had religious objections to providing insurance coverage for contraceptives or abortifacients. Without conducting any review of the legality of the mandate under RFRA and the First Amendment, the administration bulldozed ahead. At the very least, it did so despite the mandate’s impact on objectors. But there is ample reason to believe that the Obama administration found it desirable to trample the consciences of many Americans, as the HHS mandate is part of a broader pattern of the Obama administration’s hostility to religious liberty and of its determination to subordinate religious liberty to its ideology of sexual absolutism. For example:</p>
<p>The administration’s hostility to religious liberty is part of its broader “progressive” vision. In that vision, the moral propositions associated with traditional religious beliefs are dismissed as irrational and bigoted, and religious institutions and believers are deemed to have value, and to be tolerated, only insofar as they serve the interests of the state and conform themselves to its norms. In the progressive dystopia, in the name of diversity everyone must be the same.</p>
<p>By dragooning employers to be the vehicle for increasing access to contraceptives and abortifacients, the Obama administration is putting many Americans to a grave test of conscience–and it is doing so gratuitously, for an end that could be easily accomplished through other means. The American tradition of broad religious liberty has operated to minimize the instances in which Americans have understood their religious identities and duties to be in conflict with their identities and duties as citizens. But in defiance of Madison’s warning, President Obama has chosen to “contract the bounds of Religious freedom” of those who object to providing coverage for contraceptives or abortifacients.</p>
<p>As Madison would recognize, the HHS mandate is a folly that deserves the severe reproach of all Americans.</p>
<p>IV</p>
<p>The spread of same-sex marriage also threatens to sharply exacerbate the conflict between nondiscrimination policies and religious liberty.[5]</p>
<p>A scholarly consensus has emerged that the redefinition of marriage to include same-sex couples will generate widespread clashes between existing laws that bar discrimination on the basis of sex/gender, marital status, or sexual orientation (most of which were never designed to reach claims by parties to same-sex marriages) and religious liberty. See, e.g., Same-Sex Marriage and Religious Liberty: Emerging Conflicts (Douglas Laycock, Anthony R. Picarello Jr. &amp; Robin Fretwell Wilson eds. 2008).</p>
<p>An episode just two weeks ago illustrates the potential severity of that clash: Responding to complaints that a civil-unions bill failed to provide any meaningful protection for religious objectors, Colorado state senator Pat Steadman displayed his contempt for religious liberty by declaring:</p>
<p>“So, what to say to those who say religion requires them to discriminate. I’ll tell you what I’d say. Get thee to a nunnery and live there then. Go live a monastic life away from modern society, away from people you can’t see as equal to yourself, away from the stream of commerce where you may have to serve them.”</p>
<p>Vincent Carroll, “Civil unions or a nunnery? Please,” Denver Post, Feb. 13, 2013.</p>
<p>A</p>
<p>Unless robust protections for religious liberty are adopted and maintained, religious people and institutions will face a wave of private civil litigation under anti-discrimination laws. Consider, for example, the litigation that can reasonably be threatened under public-accommodation laws, housing-discrimination laws, and employment-discrimination laws.</p>
<p>Public-accommodation laws. Religious institutions often provide a broad array of programs and facilities to their members and to the general public, such as hospitals, schools, adoption services, and marital counseling. Religious institutions have historically enjoyed wide latitude in choosing what religiously motivated services and facilities they will provide, and to whom they will provide them. This wide latitude has both protected liberty of conscience and maximized the number of organizations that can provide for the needs of society. But giving legal recognition to same-sex marriage without robust conscience exemptions will restrict that freedom in at least two ways.</p>
<p>First, most states include gender, marital status, or sexual orientation as protected categories under public accommodation laws. <a href="" type="internal">[6]</a> Second, religious institutions and their related ministries are facing increased risk of being declared places of public accommodation, and thus being subject to legal regimes designed to regulate secular businesses. For example, some laws require church halls be treated as public accommodations if they are rented to non-members.</p>
<p>This risk is greatest for those religious organizations that serve people with different beliefs. Unfortunately, the more a religious organization seeks to minister to the general public (as opposed to just co-religionists), the greater the risk that the service will be regarded as a public accommodation giving rise to liability.</p>
<p>Some of the many religiously motivated services that could be subjected to public accommodation laws are health-care services, marriage counseling, family counseling, job training programs, child care, gyms and day camps, life coaching, schooling, adoption services, and the use of wedding ceremony facilities.</p>
<p>Religious business owners face the same risks, as my discussion of Elane Photography illustrates.</p>
<p>Housing-discrimination laws. Religious colleges and universities frequently provide student housing and often give special treatment to married couples. Legally married same-sex couples could reasonably be expected to seek these benefits, but many religious educational institutions would conscientiously object to providing similar support for same-sex unions. Housing discrimination lawsuits would result.</p>
<p>Under federal law, gender discrimination in housing is prohibited. See 42 U.S.C. §3604. There are some limited exemptions for religious institutions, see 42 U.S.C. §3607, but they would not automatically cover all conflicts triggered by legal recognition of same-sex marriage–and determining their scope would require costly litigation. Similarly, state and local housing laws ban discrimination on the basis of gender, marital status, and sexual orientation–and the religious exemptions are also limited.</p>
<p>In several states, courts have required landlords to facilitate the unmarried cohabitation of their tenants, over strong religious objections. If unmarried couples cannot be discriminated against in housing due to marital status protections, legally married same-sex couples would likely have even stronger protection.</p>
<p>Employment-discrimination laws. Religious organizations that object to same-sex marriage may also face private lawsuits when one of their employees enters into a civilly-recognized same-sex marriage. For many religious institutions, an employee’s entering a same-sex marriage would constitute a public repudiation of the institution’s core religious beliefs in a way that less public relationships do not. Some employers will respond by changing the terms of employment for those employees. These employees may then sue under laws prohibiting gender, sexual orientation, or marital status discrimination in employment. If the employee is a “minister,” or the relevant statute includes an exemption, then the defendant religious employer could raise an affirmative defense. But where the employee does not qualify as a minister and no legislative exemption is in place, the employer will be exposed to liability for any alleged adverse employment action.</p>
<p>Moreover, if same-sex marriage is adopted without protections, religious employers who provide insurance for spouses of employees may be automatically required to provide insurance for all legal spouses–both opposite-sex and same-sex–to comply with anti-discrimination laws. Thus, after the District of Columbia passed a same-sex marriage law without strong conscience protections, the Catholic Archdiocese of Washington saw no choice but to stop offering spousal benefits to any of its new employees.</p>
<p>B</p>
<p>Adoption of same-sex marriage will also subject religious people and institutions to a variety of penalties imposed by the federal, state, and local governments:</p>
<p>Exclusion from government facilities and fora. Religious institutions that object to same-sex marriage will face challenges to their ability to access a diverse array of government facilities and fora. This is borne out in the reaction to the Boy Scouts’ requirement that members believe in God and not advocate for, or engage in, homosexual conduct. Because of this requirement, the Boy Scouts have had to fight to gain equal access to public after-school facilities.[7] They have lost leases to city campgrounds and parks,[8] a lease to a government building that served as their headquarters for 79 years,[9] and the right to participate in a state-facilitated charitable payroll deduction program.[10] All of this has happened despite the Supreme Court’s decision in Boy Scouts v. Dale (2000) recognizing that the Boy Scouts have a constitutional right, under the First Amendment, to maintain their policies. If same-sex marriage is adopted without robust protections for conscientious objectors, religious organizations that object to same-sex marriage could expect to face similar penalties, notwithstanding any constitutional rights that they may have.</p>
<p>Loss of licenses or accreditation. A related concern exists with respect to licensing and accreditation decisions. In Massachusetts, for example, Boston Catholic Charities, a large and longstanding religious social-service organization, faced the loss of its state license to operate as an adoption agency because it refused on religious grounds to place foster children with same-sex couples. Rather than violate its religious beliefs, Catholic Charities shut down its adoption services. This sort of licensing conflict would only increase after judicial recognition of same-sex marriage, since many governments would require all civil marriages to be treated identically.</p>
<p>Similarly, religious colleges and universities have been threatened with the loss of accreditation because they object to sexual conduct outside of opposite-sex marriage. In 2001, for example, the American Psychological Association, the accrediting body for professional psychology programs, threatened to revoke the accreditation of religious colleges that prefer co-religionists, in large part because of concerns about codes of conduct that prohibit sex outside of marriage and homosexual behavior. Where same-sex marriage is adopted without strong religious protections, religious colleges and universities that oppose same-sex marriage will likely face similar threats. And the same issue will also affect licensed professionals.</p>
<p>Disqualification from government grants and contracts. Religious universities, charities, hospitals, and social service organizations often serve secular government purposes through contracts and grants. For instance, religious colleges participate in state-funded financial aid programs, religious counseling services provide marital counseling and substance abuse treatment, and religious homeless shelters care for those in need.</p>
<p>Many contracts and grants require recipients to be organized “for the public good” and forbid recipients to act “contrary to public policy.” If same-sex marriage is recognized without specific accommodations for religious organizations, those organizations that refuse to approve, subsidize, or perform same-sex marriages could be found to violate such standards, thus disqualifying them from participation in government contracts and grants. For example, religious universities that oppose same-sex marriage could be denied access to government programs (such as scholarships, grants, or tax-exempt bonds) by governmental agencies that adopt an aggressive view of applicable anti-discrimination standards.</p>
<p>Religious organizations opposed to same-sex marriage also face the loss of government social service contracts. After the District of Columbia adopted same-sex marriage, Catholic Charities stopped providing foster care services for the city because it had to choose between continuing its program and violating its religious beliefs regarding the recognition of same-sex marriages. And in Illinois, a state court held that Catholic Charities was required to place children for adoption with couples in civil unions or forgo its annual contracts with the state. If same-sex marriage is given legal recognition without accommodation for religious objectors, many religious organizations will be forced either to extend benefits to same-sex spouses or to stop providing social services in partnership with government.</p>
<p>Loss of state or local tax exemptions. Most religious institutions have charitable tax-exempt status under federal, state and local laws. But without conscience protections, that status could be stripped away, based solely on a religious institution’s conscientious objection to same-sex marriage.Whether the First Amendment could provide an effective defense to this kind of penalty is an open question.</p>
<p>Loss of educational and employment opportunities. Individual religious believers would also face an array of penalties. In Vermont, individual town clerks may be fired if they seek to avoid issuing civil union licenses to same-sex couples for religious reasons, and at least twelve justices of the peace in Massachusetts lost their jobs because they could not facilitate same-sex marriages. The situation is particularly acute for state-employed professionals like social workers who face a difficult choice between their conscience and their livelihood.</p>
<p>Students in counseling programs at public universities face similarly stark choices. When Julea Ward, a Master’s in Counseling student in her final semester at Eastern Michigan University, told her professors that she had no problem counseling individual gay and lesbian clients but could not in good conscience assist them with their same-sex relationships, she was expelled for violating the school’s anti-discrimination policy. See Ward v. Polite, 667 F.3d 727 (6th Cir. 2012) (reversing grant of summary judgment against Ward on her First Amendment claims).</p>
<p>V</p>
<p>The sweeping application of non-discrimination principles poses an increasingly severe threat to civil liberties, especially to our first liberty of religious freedom. There is an urgent need to rethink when and how non-discrimination norms ought to apply and to provide robust protections for civil liberties.</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>[1] For a fuller version of the case I outline here, together with citations to supporting authorities, see my Notre Dame Law Review essay “The HHS Contraception Mandate vs. the Religious Freedom Restoration Act,” 87 Notre Dame L. Rev. 2179 (2012).</p>
<p>[2] There should be no dispute that making an exercise of religion illegal and subjecting it to massive fines imposes a substantial burden on that exercise of religion. But in muddled and convoluted reasoning, the minority of courts that, in addressing RFRA challenges to the HHS mandate on the merits, have rejected those challenges have purported to do so on the ground that the mandate does not impose a substantial burden. In reality, what those courts have done, in violation of governing Supreme Court precedent, is to impose their own views of the range of permissible religious beliefs about what constitutes improper complicity in immoral conduct and to disqualify the challenger’s exercise of religion from any protection under RFRA for being beyond that range.</p>
<p>[3] Brown v. Entertainment Merchants Ass’n, 564 U.S. 1, 16 n. 9 (2011). The Court’s statement might be better understood to mean that the government cannot be presumed to have a compelling interest in each marginal percentage point by which its goals are advanced. The difference is immaterial here.</p>
<p>[4] See, e.g., Ward v. Polite, 667 F.3d 727, 738 (6th Cir. 2012) (a rule is not neutral and generally applicable for purposes of Employment Division v. Smith if it is “riddled with exemptions” or “permit[s] secular exemptions but not religious ones”).</p>
<p>[5] With the permission of The Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, this part of my testimony draws heavily (including in extensive verbatim passages) from the amicus brief that it submitted in the pending marriage cases in the Supreme Court. See Brief Amicus Curiae of The Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, submitted in Hollingsworth v. Perry, No. 12-144, and United States v. Windsor, No. 12-307.</p>
<p>[6] See Appendix to Becket Fund Amicus, at 1a-101a (listing state laws).</p>
<p>[7] Boy Scouts of America v. Till, 136 F. Supp. 2d 1295 (S.D. Fla. 2001) (challenge to Boy Scouts’ use of school facilities).</p>
<p>[8] Evans v. City of Berkeley, 129 P.3d 394 (Cal. 2006) (equal access to boat berths denied to Scouts).</p>
<p>[9] Cradle of Liberty Council, Inc. v. City of Philadelphia, 851 F. Supp. 2d 936, 939 (E.D. Pa. 2012).</p>
<p>[10] Boy Scouts of Am. v. Wyman, 335 F.3d 80 (2d Cir. 2003) (Boy Scouts could be excluded from state’s workplace charitable contributions campaign).</p> | false | 1 | testimony edward whelan submitted march 1 2013 united states commission civil rights hearing peaceful coexistence reconciling nondiscrimination principles civil liberties march 22 2013 thank inviting testify commission important topic conflict nondiscrimination principles civil liberties offer views capacity president ethics public policy center director eppcs program constitution courts culture testifying behalf statements imputed eppc institution title hearing asks whether nondiscrimination principles civil liberties peacefully coexist respectfully submit nature imposition nondiscrimination principle nongovernmental actors intrudes least degree civil liberties simplest level embodiment law principle performing lawful action asay providing service hiring employeea person discriminate basis category x means person longer full liberty perform action pleases trust obvious elementary observation says nothing whether imposition particular nondiscrimination restriction person performs particular type action justified speak whether resulting intrusion liberty trivial significant merely points inevitable conflict guide thinking whether nondiscrimination principles ought apply offer considerations 1 traditional liberalism distinguishes rules government must follow rules apply conduct ordinary citizens one thing impose regimen fair conduct government governmental actors countervailing civil liberties stake different matter impose regimen ordinary citizens whose civil liberties include religious liberty free speech freedom association general autonomy act within broad bounds see fit without interference government flourishing civil society depends recognizing respecting distinction norms applicable government norms applicable citizenry contrast failure recognize respect distinction leads one critic fairly labeled totalitarian liberalisma liberalism seeks occupy totality human affairs tends imply institutions family church agencies exist permission state exist lawfully must abide dictates norms state philip tartaglia door temple religious freedom new orthodoxy public discourse june 27 2012 2 thats discrimination seems become many americans observation stifles careful thinking linedrawing legitimate proper limits application nondiscrimination norms law professor richard w garnett points discrimination another word decisionmaking choosing acting accord reference particular criteria richard w garnett confusion discrimination public discourse apr 5 2012 thus speak approvingly someone discriminating tastessomeone values true good beautiful false bad ugly threshold question necessary sufficient condition deciding whether adopt norm nondiscrimination whether particular form discrimination wrongful invidious 3 paradigmatic case wrongful basis discrimination race abhor discrimination basis race recognize persons race detract add stature made image likeness god secular terms equal dignity human especially abhor racial discrimination africanamericans recognize grieve nations ugly legacy slavery stateenforced racial segregation worth emphasizing however legal systems condemnation discrimination basis race far absolute particular rubric affirmative action legal system currently allows encourages racial discrimination government private actors nonhispanic whites asian americans educational admissions nonhispanic whites employment much lesser extent job assignmentseg fbi agent infiltrating group racist terroristsfor race may well regarded permissible criterion point hearing neither defend dispute departures norm nondiscrimination basis race merely highlight legal systems ban racial discrimination significant exceptions 4 bases discrimination commonly prohibited federal law qualitatively different race take sex example various reasons regard sexsegregated restrooms sexsegregated athletic competitions singlesex schools differently racesegregated restrooms racesegregated athletic competitions singlerace schools us dont disapprove woman wants part womenonly book club boy wants join boy scouts increasingly common disparagement traditional religious believers indication would also seem many americans discrimination basis religion carry moral stigma discrimination basis race fact person free choose change religious beliefs way free change race may well account difference growing hostility traditional religion would also seem important factor 5 insofar social attitudes sustained invidious discrimination evolved prohibitions discrimination may costly way achieving little employers example generally harm engage irrational discrimination thus one leading scholar puts competitive markets free entry offer better certain protection invidious discrimination antidiscrimination law richard epstein forbidden grounds case employment discrimination laws 9 harvard university press 1992 similarly thanks part advances technology customers goods services enjoy increasingly broad range available providers incur much lower search costs choosing among providers many scholars argued prohibitions discrimination may well unintended consequences undermine objectives example making harder fire certain workers employment discrimination law tends make workers less attractive prospects hiring stage employer would prefer hire someone easily fired prove necessary otherwise identical applicant whose firing would subject legal scrutiny thus protection discriminatory firing acts kind tax hiring extended ian ayres amp peter siegelman qword red herring disparate impact liability induce hiring quotas 74 tex l rev 1487 14871488 1996 ii contend simple uncontroversial matter translate general considerations outlined set nondiscrimination norms attempt instead would like explore concretely clash nondiscrimination principles civil liberties lets look reallife case elaine huguenin husband jonathan elane photography business providing photography services albuquerque new mexico elane photography policy photographing events communicate messages inconsistent huguenins christian beliefs 2006 ms huguenin received email potential customer vanessa willock inquiring photography ms willocks upcoming samesex commitment ceremony ms huguenin informed ms willock elane photography would provide service ms willock filed discrimination claim new mexico human rights commission agency found elane photography violated state law discriminating basis sexual orientation ordered elane photography pay ms willock 6600 attorney fees costs six years later elane photographys appeal order pending new mexico supreme court lets consider time hypothetical variant assume owner photography business gay man john doe photograph samesex commitment ceremonies refuses photograph malefemale weddings mr doe therefore informs potential customer jane poe wont photograph wedding ms poe files discrimination claim new mexico human rights commission finds mr doe violated state law discriminating basis sexual orientation orders pay ms poe 6600 attorney fees costs results make sense consider 1 first amendment expert eugene volokh explained event photography involves substantial degree artistic judgment expression photographers part photographers creative expression protected first amendment right free compelled speech includes right create firstamendmentprotected expression disagree eugene volokh wedding photographer may required pain legal liability photograph samesex commitment ceremonies volokh conspiracy june 4 2012 words elane photography huguenins hypothetical john doe strong freespeech claim first amendment discriminate basis sexual orientation bases potential customers would prefer exercise expressive capacities 2 elane photographys policy photographing samesex commitment ceremonies reflects religious beliefs owners huguenins whether huguenins enforceable religiousliberty right free exercise clause first amendment new mexicos religious freedom restoration act provision law question imposing obligation photograph samesex ceremonies intrudes religious beliefs course might well true mr doeif practice driven religious beliefs 3 sensible person seeking artistic photographic services event would want photographer hostile event potential customers ms willock ms poe would likely worse photographers concealed objections grudgingly provided services alternative providers photography services customers instead able find willing able substitutes 4 sure addition trivial inconvenience email exchange ms willock ms poe incurred might called dignitary injury told photographer policy photographing event pluralistic society surprise nearly everyone disapproved people time general rule difficult see desire avoid encountering disapproval would justify imposition regime customers dragoon unwilling providers rather regime customers obtain services want willing providers also difficult see better reward thinskinned plaintiffs running court even worse human rights commission encourage healthy growth thicker skin iii famous memorial remonstrance 1785 james madison celebrated american theatre discovered true remedy disease religious discord afflicted old world europe equal compleat religious liberty warning resonates across centuries madison declaimed salutary effects system equal compleat liberty eyes begin contract bounds religious freedom know name severely reproach folly clash nondiscrimination principles religious liberty particular exacerbated obama administrations hostility robust conception religious liberty determination subordinate religious liberty ideology sexual absolutism socalled hhs contraception mandate provides prime example implementing president obamas signature healthcare legislation department health human services announced january 2012 require many employerprovided healthinsurance plans include preventive services cover fdaapproved forms contraception including contraceptives sometimes operate abortifacients sterilization services employers religious objections providing mandated coverage hhs contraception mandate clearly violates rights 1993 federal religious freedom restoration act rfra free exercise clause first amendment even worse displays illiberal contempt religious views seeks coerce case hhs mandate rfra quite simple rfra federal government may substantially burden persons exercise religion demonstrates application burden person 1 furtherance compelling governmental interest 2 least restrictive means furthering compelling governmental interest lets consider italicized elements logical order1 clear employer engaged exercise religion religious reasons refuses provide health insurance covers contraceptives abortifacients rfra defines exercise religion broadly mean exercise religion whether compelled central system religious belief rfra adopted backdrop prominent supreme court cases exercise religion consisted abstentions like working sabbath sherbert v verner 1963 sending ones children high school wisconsin v yoder 1972 taking part production armaments thomas v review board 1981 equally clear hhs mandate substantially burdens objecting employers exercise religion employer violates hhs mandate incurs annual penalty roughly 2000 per employeevastly fivedollar fine substantially burdened religious rights fathers yoder refused send children high school supreme court case law rfra incorporates penalty noncompliance hhs mandate puts kind burden religious rights direct fine holding religious beliefs contraceptives abortifacients2 question whether government demonstrate application burden objecting employer furtherance compelling governmental interest involves complicated analysis answer end clearly starters hhss account already widespread access contraceptives via preexisting employerbased insurance plans community health centers public clinics well countless pharmacies doctors dispense contraceptives one seriously maintain general problem lack access contraceptives supreme court recently declared government compelling interest marginal percentage point goals advanced3 surely compelling interest marginal employer goal increased provision contraceptives advanced indeed obama administration effectively concedes point exempting many employers hhs mandate purely secular reasons example employers offering socalled grandfathered plans estimated cover nearly 100 million americans 2013 subject hhs mandate many businesses employ fewer 50 fulltime employees decline provide group health insurance absurd anyone contend obama administration compelling interest imposing mandate objecting religious employers obviously perceives interest imposing employers hhs mandate also clearly flunks least restrictive means test order satisfy rfra would meet compelling governmental interest test least restrictive means test question test whether imposing hhs mandate employer religious objections providing insurance coverage contraceptives abortifacients furthers governments interest increasing access contraceptives via means least restrictive religious liberty objecting employer question virtually answers lots alternative means government could increase access contraceptives without conscripting objecting employers example direct government provision contraceptives government payment thirdparty providers mandates contraceptive providers tax credits deductions financial support contraceptive users instead pursuing alternatives obama administration adopted single means restrictive religious liberty objecting employers hhs mandate also violates free exercise clause hhs mandate neutral generally applicable therefore qualify low bar employment division v smith discuss employers exempt purely secular reasons4 hhs mandate therefore subject free exercise clause standard rfra imposes fails reasons even troubling obama administrations violations rfra free exercise clause fact conduct willful deliberate finalized hhs mandate administration received thousands thousands comments explaining impact mandate would employers religious objections providing insurance coverage contraceptives abortifacients without conducting review legality mandate rfra first amendment administration bulldozed ahead least despite mandates impact objectors ample reason believe obama administration found desirable trample consciences many americans hhs mandate part broader pattern obama administrations hostility religious liberty determination subordinate religious liberty ideology sexual absolutism example administrations hostility religious liberty part broader progressive vision vision moral propositions associated traditional religious beliefs dismissed irrational bigoted religious institutions believers deemed value tolerated insofar serve interests state conform norms progressive dystopia name diversity everyone must dragooning employers vehicle increasing access contraceptives abortifacients obama administration putting many americans grave test conscienceand gratuitously end could easily accomplished means american tradition broad religious liberty operated minimize instances americans understood religious identities duties conflict identities duties citizens defiance madisons warning president obama chosen contract bounds religious freedom object providing coverage contraceptives abortifacients madison would recognize hhs mandate folly deserves severe reproach americans iv spread samesex marriage also threatens sharply exacerbate conflict nondiscrimination policies religious liberty5 scholarly consensus emerged redefinition marriage include samesex couples generate widespread clashes existing laws bar discrimination basis sexgender marital status sexual orientation never designed reach claims parties samesex marriages religious liberty see eg samesex marriage religious liberty emerging conflicts douglas laycock anthony r picarello jr amp robin fretwell wilson eds 2008 episode two weeks ago illustrates potential severity clash responding complaints civilunions bill failed provide meaningful protection religious objectors colorado state senator pat steadman displayed contempt religious liberty declaring say say religion requires discriminate ill tell id say get thee nunnery live go live monastic life away modern society away people cant see equal away stream commerce may serve vincent carroll civil unions nunnery please denver post feb 13 2013 unless robust protections religious liberty adopted maintained religious people institutions face wave private civil litigation antidiscrimination laws consider example litigation reasonably threatened publicaccommodation laws housingdiscrimination laws employmentdiscrimination laws publicaccommodation laws religious institutions often provide broad array programs facilities members general public hospitals schools adoption services marital counseling religious institutions historically enjoyed wide latitude choosing religiously motivated services facilities provide provide wide latitude protected liberty conscience maximized number organizations provide needs society giving legal recognition samesex marriage without robust conscience exemptions restrict freedom least two ways first states include gender marital status sexual orientation protected categories public accommodation laws 6 second religious institutions related ministries facing increased risk declared places public accommodation thus subject legal regimes designed regulate secular businesses example laws require church halls treated public accommodations rented nonmembers risk greatest religious organizations serve people different beliefs unfortunately religious organization seeks minister general public opposed coreligionists greater risk service regarded public accommodation giving rise liability many religiously motivated services could subjected public accommodation laws healthcare services marriage counseling family counseling job training programs child care gyms day camps life coaching schooling adoption services use wedding ceremony facilities religious business owners face risks discussion elane photography illustrates housingdiscrimination laws religious colleges universities frequently provide student housing often give special treatment married couples legally married samesex couples could reasonably expected seek benefits many religious educational institutions would conscientiously object providing similar support samesex unions housing discrimination lawsuits would result federal law gender discrimination housing prohibited see 42 usc 3604 limited exemptions religious institutions see 42 usc 3607 would automatically cover conflicts triggered legal recognition samesex marriageand determining scope would require costly litigation similarly state local housing laws ban discrimination basis gender marital status sexual orientationand religious exemptions also limited several states courts required landlords facilitate unmarried cohabitation tenants strong religious objections unmarried couples discriminated housing due marital status protections legally married samesex couples would likely even stronger protection employmentdiscrimination laws religious organizations object samesex marriage may also face private lawsuits one employees enters civillyrecognized samesex marriage many religious institutions employees entering samesex marriage would constitute public repudiation institutions core religious beliefs way less public relationships employers respond changing terms employment employees employees may sue laws prohibiting gender sexual orientation marital status discrimination employment employee minister relevant statute includes exemption defendant religious employer could raise affirmative defense employee qualify minister legislative exemption place employer exposed liability alleged adverse employment action moreover samesex marriage adopted without protections religious employers provide insurance spouses employees may automatically required provide insurance legal spousesboth oppositesex samesexto comply antidiscrimination laws thus district columbia passed samesex marriage law without strong conscience protections catholic archdiocese washington saw choice stop offering spousal benefits new employees b adoption samesex marriage also subject religious people institutions variety penalties imposed federal state local governments exclusion government facilities fora religious institutions object samesex marriage face challenges ability access diverse array government facilities fora borne reaction boy scouts requirement members believe god advocate engage homosexual conduct requirement boy scouts fight gain equal access public afterschool facilities7 lost leases city campgrounds parks8 lease government building served headquarters 79 years9 right participate statefacilitated charitable payroll deduction program10 happened despite supreme courts decision boy scouts v dale 2000 recognizing boy scouts constitutional right first amendment maintain policies samesex marriage adopted without robust protections conscientious objectors religious organizations object samesex marriage could expect face similar penalties notwithstanding constitutional rights may loss licenses accreditation related concern exists respect licensing accreditation decisions massachusetts example boston catholic charities large longstanding religious socialservice organization faced loss state license operate adoption agency refused religious grounds place foster children samesex couples rather violate religious beliefs catholic charities shut adoption services sort licensing conflict would increase judicial recognition samesex marriage since many governments would require civil marriages treated identically similarly religious colleges universities threatened loss accreditation object sexual conduct outside oppositesex marriage 2001 example american psychological association accrediting body professional psychology programs threatened revoke accreditation religious colleges prefer coreligionists large part concerns codes conduct prohibit sex outside marriage homosexual behavior samesex marriage adopted without strong religious protections religious colleges universities oppose samesex marriage likely face similar threats issue also affect licensed professionals disqualification government grants contracts religious universities charities hospitals social service organizations often serve secular government purposes contracts grants instance religious colleges participate statefunded financial aid programs religious counseling services provide marital counseling substance abuse treatment religious homeless shelters care need many contracts grants require recipients organized public good forbid recipients act contrary public policy samesex marriage recognized without specific accommodations religious organizations organizations refuse approve subsidize perform samesex marriages could found violate standards thus disqualifying participation government contracts grants example religious universities oppose samesex marriage could denied access government programs scholarships grants taxexempt bonds governmental agencies adopt aggressive view applicable antidiscrimination standards religious organizations opposed samesex marriage also face loss government social service contracts district columbia adopted samesex marriage catholic charities stopped providing foster care services city choose continuing program violating religious beliefs regarding recognition samesex marriages illinois state court held catholic charities required place children adoption couples civil unions forgo annual contracts state samesex marriage given legal recognition without accommodation religious objectors many religious organizations forced either extend benefits samesex spouses stop providing social services partnership government loss state local tax exemptions religious institutions charitable taxexempt status federal state local laws without conscience protections status could stripped away based solely religious institutions conscientious objection samesex marriagewhether first amendment could provide effective defense kind penalty open question loss educational employment opportunities individual religious believers would also face array penalties vermont individual town clerks may fired seek avoid issuing civil union licenses samesex couples religious reasons least twelve justices peace massachusetts lost jobs could facilitate samesex marriages situation particularly acute stateemployed professionals like social workers face difficult choice conscience livelihood students counseling programs public universities face similarly stark choices julea ward masters counseling student final semester eastern michigan university told professors problem counseling individual gay lesbian clients could good conscience assist samesex relationships expelled violating schools antidiscrimination policy see ward v polite 667 f3d 727 6th cir 2012 reversing grant summary judgment ward first amendment claims v sweeping application nondiscrimination principles poses increasingly severe threat civil liberties especially first liberty religious freedom urgent need rethink nondiscrimination norms ought apply provide robust protections civil liberties 160 1 fuller version case outline together citations supporting authorities see notre dame law review essay hhs contraception mandate vs religious freedom restoration act 87 notre dame l rev 2179 2012 2 dispute making exercise religion illegal subjecting massive fines imposes substantial burden exercise religion muddled convoluted reasoning minority courts addressing rfra challenges hhs mandate merits rejected challenges purported ground mandate impose substantial burden reality courts done violation governing supreme court precedent impose views range permissible religious beliefs constitutes improper complicity immoral conduct disqualify challengers exercise religion protection rfra beyond range 3 brown v entertainment merchants assn 564 us 1 16 n 9 2011 courts statement might better understood mean government presumed compelling interest marginal percentage point goals advanced difference immaterial 4 see eg ward v polite 667 f3d 727 738 6th cir 2012 rule neutral generally applicable purposes employment division v smith riddled exemptions permits secular exemptions religious ones 5 permission becket fund religious liberty part testimony draws heavily including extensive verbatim passages amicus brief submitted pending marriage cases supreme court see brief amicus curiae becket fund religious liberty submitted hollingsworth v perry 12144 united states v windsor 12307 6 see appendix becket fund amicus 1a101a listing state laws 7 boy scouts america v till 136 f supp 2d 1295 sd fla 2001 challenge boy scouts use school facilities 8 evans v city berkeley 129 p3d 394 cal 2006 equal access boat berths denied scouts 9 cradle liberty council inc v city philadelphia 851 f supp 2d 936 939 ed pa 2012 10 boy scouts v wyman 335 f3d 80 2d cir 2003 boy scouts could excluded states workplace charitable contributions campaign | 3,279 |
<p>WASHINGTON — The Justice Department abruptly appointed former FBI Director Robert Mueller Wednesday night as a special counsel to lead a federal investigation into allegations that Donald Trump’s campaign collaborated with Russia to sway the 2016 election that put him in the White House. Mueller will have sweeping powers and the authority to prosecute any crimes he uncovers.</p>
<p>The surprise announcement to hand the probe over to Mueller, a lawman with deep bipartisan respect, was a striking shift for Trump’s Justice Department, which had resisted increasingly loud calls from Democrats for an outside prosecutor. It immediately escalated the legal stakes — and the potential political damage — for a president who has tried to dismiss the matter as partisan witch hunt and a “hoax.”</p>
<p>The announcement, the latest in the shock-a-day Washington saga, was made by deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein. The White House counsel’s office was alerted only after the order appointing Mueller was signed, said a senior White House official, who was not authorized to speak publicly by name and commented only on condition of anonymity.</p>
<p>In a written statement, Trump insisted anew there were no nefarious ties between his campaign and Russia.</p>
<p>“A thorough investigation will confirm what we already know — there was no collusion between my campaign and any foreign entity,” he declared. “I look forward to this matter concluding quickly.”</p>
<p>Mueller’s broad mandate gives him not only oversight of the Russia probe, but also “any matters that arose or may arise directly from the investigation.” That would surely include Trump’s firing last week of FBI Director James Comey.</p>
<p>Mueller, a former federal prosecutor at the Justice Department, was confirmed as FBI director days before the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks that would ultimately shape his tenure. The FBI’s counterterror mission was elevated in those years, as the U.S. intelligence agencies adjusted to better position America to prevent another attack of such magnitude. He was so valued that President Barack Obama asked him to stay on two years longer than his 10-year term.</p>
<p>Comey succeeded him, appointed by Obama.</p>
<p>Mueller was appointed Wednesday by Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, who had faced criticism as the author of a memo that preceded Comey’s firing. Rosenstein said the appointment was “necessary in order for the American people to have full confidence in the outcome.”</p>
<p>Republicans have largely stood behind Trump in the first months of his presidency as FBI and congressional investigations into Russia’s election meddling intensified. But GOP lawmakers have grown increasingly anxious since Trump fired Comey, who had been leading the bureau’s probe — and after Comey associates said he had notes from a meeting in which Trump asked him to shut down the investigation into the Russia ties of former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn.</p>
<p>First reactions from Congress were mainly positive.</p>
<p>House Speaker Paul Ryan said the appointment was consistent with his goal of ensuring that “thorough and independent investigations are allowed to follow the facts wherever they may lead.”</p>
<p>Republican Jason Chaffetz of Utah, chairman of the House Oversight Committee, said Mueller was a “great selection. Impeccable credentials. Should be widely accepted.”</p>
<p>And not a moment too soon, Democrats said.</p>
<p>“I believe Mueller will be independent, he will be thorough and he will be fair and he’s not going to be easily swayed,” said Elijah Cummings of Maryland, top Democrat on the oversight panel. Cummings has vigorously urged such an appointment, suggesting it could lead to accusations of obstruction of justice.</p>
<p>In the 1990s, Democrats complained that independent counsel Kenneth Starr, who investigated President Bill Clinton, overstepped his authority.</p>
<p>The latest political storm, coupled with the still-potent fallout from Trump’s recent disclosure of classified information to Russian diplomats at the White House, has overshadowed all else in the capital and beyond. Stocks fell sharply on Wall Street Wednesday as investors worried the latest turmoil in Washington could hinder Trump’s pro-business agenda</p>
<p>Trump has repeatedly slammed the FBI and congressional investigations as a “hoax” and blamed disgruntled officials at intelligence agencies for leaking information related to the probes. During a commencement address Wednesday at the Coast Guard Academy, he complained bitterly about criticism he’s faced.</p>
<p>“No politician in history, and I say this with great surety, has been treated worse or more unfairly,” he said. “You can’t let the critics and the naysayers get in the way of your dreams. … I guess that’s why we won. Adversity makes you stronger. Don’t give in, don’t back down. … And the more righteous your fight, the more opposition that you will face.”</p>
<p>No less a commentator than Russia’s Vladimir Putin called the dramatic charges swirling around Trump evidence of “political schizophrenia spreading in the U.S.” He offered to furnish a “record” of the Trump-diplomats meeting in the Oval Office if the White House desired it.</p>
<p>There was no word on what that record might entail, a question many were likely to raise in light of Trump’s recent warning to Comey that he had “better hope” there were no tapes of a discussion they’d had.</p>
<p>The White House has disputed Comey’s account of his February conversation with Trump concerning Flynn but has not offered specifics. Several congressional Republicans said Wednesday that if Trump did suggest that Comey “let this go” regarding Flynn’s Russian contacts, it was probably just a joke, light banter.</p>
<p>Both of the explosive revelations — that the president pressed his FBI director to drop a federal investigation before later firing him, and that he disclosed classified information to senior Russian officials — came from anonymous sources, and the White House was quick to denounce the leaks and deny any impropriety. Trump aides said he never tried to squelch the Flynn investigation nor made inappropriate disclosures to the Russians.</p>
<p>On Capitol Hill, Comey was clearly the man in demand, with three committees working to seat him at their witness tables soon, two in the Senate and one in the House.</p>
<p>The Senate intelligence committee also asked acting FBI Director Andrew McCabe to turn over any notes Comey might have made regarding discussions he had with White House or Justice Department officials about Russia’s efforts to influence the election.</p>
<p>McCabe had other matters on his mind, too. He was one of four potential candidates to lead the FBI that Trump was interviewing. The others were former Connecticut Sen. Joe Lieberman, former Oklahoma Gov. Frank Keating and Richard McFeely, a former top FBI official.</p>
<p>Trump is preparing to leave town Friday on his first foreign trip, and aides have been hopeful the journey will be a chance for the administration to get back on track after weeks of chaos and distractions.</p>
<p>Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., speculated Trump was probably happy to get out of town — “and a lot of us are glad he’s leaving for a few days.”</p>
<p>His advice to the president: “Stay disciplined, stay focused and deliver on the world stage.”</p>
<p>Separately, McClatchy News Service reported Wednesday that before Trump took office, Flynn had blocked an Obama administration military plan, opposed by Turkey, against the Islamic State group. Unknown to the Obama administration, Flynn had been paid more than $500,000 to advocate for Turkey’s interests.</p>
<p>McClatchy says Flynn declined to OK a request from Obama officials to approve a military operation involving the IS stronghold of Raqqa, effectively delaying the operation. The Trump team had been asked since the operation was likely to be carried out after Trump took office. Turkey has long opposed U.S. forces working with Kurdish forces.</p>
<p>The plan was eventually approved by the Trump administration, but not until after Flynn had been fired.</p>
<p>Related</p>
<p><a href="" type="internal">Trump abruptly fires FBI Director James Comey</a></p>
<p><a href="" type="internal">Comey: FBI investigating ties between Russia, Trump associates</a></p>
<p><a href="" type="internal">White House denies report that Trump asked Comey to end Flynn investigation</a></p>
<p /> | false | 1 | washington justice department abruptly appointed former fbi director robert mueller wednesday night special counsel lead federal investigation allegations donald trumps campaign collaborated russia sway 2016 election put white house mueller sweeping powers authority prosecute crimes uncovers surprise announcement hand probe mueller lawman deep bipartisan respect striking shift trumps justice department resisted increasingly loud calls democrats outside prosecutor immediately escalated legal stakes potential political damage president tried dismiss matter partisan witch hunt hoax announcement latest shockaday washington saga made deputy attorney general rod rosenstein white house counsels office alerted order appointing mueller signed said senior white house official authorized speak publicly name commented condition anonymity written statement trump insisted anew nefarious ties campaign russia thorough investigation confirm already know collusion campaign foreign entity declared look forward matter concluding quickly muellers broad mandate gives oversight russia probe also matters arose may arise directly investigation would surely include trumps firing last week fbi director james comey mueller former federal prosecutor justice department confirmed fbi director days sept 11 2001 attacks would ultimately shape tenure fbis counterterror mission elevated years us intelligence agencies adjusted better position america prevent another attack magnitude valued president barack obama asked stay two years longer 10year term comey succeeded appointed obama mueller appointed wednesday deputy attorney general rod rosenstein faced criticism author memo preceded comeys firing rosenstein said appointment necessary order american people full confidence outcome republicans largely stood behind trump first months presidency fbi congressional investigations russias election meddling intensified gop lawmakers grown increasingly anxious since trump fired comey leading bureaus probe comey associates said notes meeting trump asked shut investigation russia ties former national security adviser michael flynn first reactions congress mainly positive house speaker paul ryan said appointment consistent goal ensuring thorough independent investigations allowed follow facts wherever may lead republican jason chaffetz utah chairman house oversight committee said mueller great selection impeccable credentials widely accepted moment soon democrats said believe mueller independent thorough fair hes going easily swayed said elijah cummings maryland top democrat oversight panel cummings vigorously urged appointment suggesting could lead accusations obstruction justice 1990s democrats complained independent counsel kenneth starr investigated president bill clinton overstepped authority latest political storm coupled stillpotent fallout trumps recent disclosure classified information russian diplomats white house overshadowed else capital beyond stocks fell sharply wall street wednesday investors worried latest turmoil washington could hinder trumps probusiness agenda trump repeatedly slammed fbi congressional investigations hoax blamed disgruntled officials intelligence agencies leaking information related probes commencement address wednesday coast guard academy complained bitterly criticism hes faced politician history say great surety treated worse unfairly said cant let critics naysayers get way dreams guess thats adversity makes stronger dont give dont back righteous fight opposition face less commentator russias vladimir putin called dramatic charges swirling around trump evidence political schizophrenia spreading us offered furnish record trumpdiplomats meeting oval office white house desired word record might entail question many likely raise light trumps recent warning comey better hope tapes discussion theyd white house disputed comeys account february conversation trump concerning flynn offered specifics several congressional republicans said wednesday trump suggest comey let go regarding flynns russian contacts probably joke light banter explosive revelations president pressed fbi director drop federal investigation later firing disclosed classified information senior russian officials came anonymous sources white house quick denounce leaks deny impropriety trump aides said never tried squelch flynn investigation made inappropriate disclosures russians capitol hill comey clearly man demand three committees working seat witness tables soon two senate one house senate intelligence committee also asked acting fbi director andrew mccabe turn notes comey might made regarding discussions white house justice department officials russias efforts influence election mccabe matters mind one four potential candidates lead fbi trump interviewing others former connecticut sen joe lieberman former oklahoma gov frank keating richard mcfeely former top fbi official trump preparing leave town friday first foreign trip aides hopeful journey chance administration get back track weeks chaos distractions sen lindsey graham rsc speculated trump probably happy get town lot us glad hes leaving days advice president stay disciplined stay focused deliver world stage separately mcclatchy news service reported wednesday trump took office flynn blocked obama administration military plan opposed turkey islamic state group unknown obama administration flynn paid 500000 advocate turkeys interests mcclatchy says flynn declined ok request obama officials approve military operation involving stronghold raqqa effectively delaying operation trump team asked since operation likely carried trump took office turkey long opposed us forces working kurdish forces plan eventually approved trump administration flynn fired related trump abruptly fires fbi director james comey comey fbi investigating ties russia trump associates white house denies report trump asked comey end flynn investigation | 769 |
<p>By Jason Szep and Matt Spetalnick</p>
<p>WASHINGTON (Reuters) – A group of about a dozen U.S. State Department officials have taken the unusual step of formally accusing Secretary of State Rex Tillerson of violating a federal law designed to stop foreign militaries from enlisting child soldiers, according to internal government documents reviewed by Reuters.</p>
<p>A confidential State Department “dissent” memo not previously reported said Tillerson breached the Child Soldiers Prevention Act when he decided in June to exclude Iraq, Myanmar, and Afghanistan from a U.S. list of offenders in the use of child soldiers. This was despite the department publicly acknowledging that children were being conscripted in those countries.[http://tmsnrt.rs/2jJ7pav]</p>
<p>Keeping the countries off the annual list makes it easier to provide them with U.S. military assistance. Iraq and Afghanistan are close allies in the fight against Islamist militants, while Myanmar is an emerging ally to offset China’s influence in Southeast Asia.</p>
<p>Documents reviewed by Reuters also show Tillerson’s decision was at odds with a unanimous recommendation by the heads of the State Department’s regional bureaus overseeing embassies in the Middle East and Asia, the U.S. envoy on Afghanistan and Pakistan, the department’s human rights office and its own in-house lawyers. [http://tmsnrt.rs/2Ah6tB4]</p>
<p>“Beyond contravening U.S. law, this decision risks marring the credibility of a broad range of State Department reports and analyses and has weakened one of the U.S. government’s primary diplomatic tools to deter governmental armed forces and government-supported armed groups from recruiting and using children in combat and support roles around the world,” said the July 28 memo.</p>
<p>Reuters reported in June that Tillerson had disregarded internal recommendations on Iraq, Myanmar and Afghanistan. The new documents reveal the scale of the opposition in the State Department, including the rare use of what is known as the “dissent channel,” which allows officials to object to policies without fear of reprisals.</p>
<p>The views expressed by the U.S. officials illustrate ongoing tensions between career diplomats and the former chief of Exxon Mobil Corp (NYSE:) appointed by President Donald Trump to pursue an “America First” approach to diplomacy.</p>
<p>INTERPRETING THE LAW</p>
<p>The child soldiers law passed in 2008 states that the U.S. government must be satisfied that no children under the age of 18 “are recruited, conscripted or otherwise compelled to serve as child soldiers” for a country to be removed from the list. It currently includes the Democratic Republic of Congo, Nigeria, Somalia, South Sudan, Mali, Sudan, Syria and Yemen.</p>
<p>“The Secretary thoroughly reviewed all of the information presented to him and made a determination about whether the facts presented justified a listing pursuant to the law,” a State Department spokesperson said when asked about the officials’ allegation that he had violated the law.</p>
<p>In a written response to the dissent memo on Sept. 1, Tillerson adviser Brian Hook acknowledged that the three countries did use child soldiers. He said, however, it was necessary to distinguish between governments “making little or no effort to correct their child soldier violations … and those which are making sincere – if as yet incomplete – efforts.”</p>
<p>Hook made clear that America’s top diplomat used what he sees as his discretion to interpret the law.</p>
<p>‘A POWERFUL MESSAGE’</p>
<p>Foreign militaries on the list are prohibited from receiving aid, training and weapons from Washington unless the White House issues a waiver based on U.S. “national interest.” In 2016, under the Obama administration, both Iraq and Myanmar, as well as others such as Nigeria and Somalia, received waivers.</p>
<p>At times, the human rights community chided President Barack Obama for being too willing to issue waivers and exemptions, especially for governments that had security ties with Washington, instead of sanctioning more of those countries.</p>
<p>“Human Rights Watch frequently criticized President Barack Obama for giving too many countries waivers, but the law has made a real difference,” Jo Becker, advocacy director for the children’s rights division of Human Rights Watch, wrote in June in a critique of Tillerson’s decision.</p>
<p>The dissenting U.S. officials stressed that Tillerson’s decision to exclude Iraq, Afghanistan and Myanmar went a step further than the Obama administration’s waiver policy by contravening the law and effectively easing pressure on the countries to eradicate the use of child soldiers.</p>
<p>The officials acknowledged in the documents reviewed by Reuters that those three countries had made progress. But in their reading of the law, they said that was not enough to be kept off a list that has been used to shame governments into completely eradicating the use of child soldiers.</p>
<p>‘UNCONSCIONABLE ACTIONS’</p>
<p>Ben Cardin, ranking Democrat on the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee, wrote to Tillerson on Friday saying there were “serious concerns that the State Department may not be complying” with the law and that the secretary’s decision “sent a powerful message to these countries that they were receiving a pass on their unconscionable actions.”</p>
<p>The memo was among a series of previously unreported documents sent this month to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and the State Department’s independent inspector general’s office that relate to allegations that Tillerson violated the child soldiers law.</p>
<p>Legal scholars say that because of the executive branch’s latitude in foreign policy there is little legal recourse to counter Tillerson’s decision.</p>
<p>Herman Schwartz, a constitutional law professor at American University in Washington, said U.S. courts would be unlikely to accept any challenge to Tillerson’s interpretation of the child soldiers law as allowing him to remove a country from the list on his own discretion.</p>
<p>The signatories to the document were largely senior policy experts with years of involvement in the issues, said an official familiar with the matter. Reuters saw a copy of the document that did not include the names of those who signed it.</p>
<p>Tillerson’s decision to remove Iraq and Myanmar, formerly known as Burma, from the list and reject a recommendation by U.S. officials to add Afghanistan was announced in the release of the government’s annual human trafficking report on June 27.</p>
<p>Six days earlier, a previously unreported memo emailed to Tillerson from a range of senior diplomats said the three countries violated the law based on evidence gathered by U.S. officials in 2016 and recommended that he approve them for the new list.</p>
<p>It noted that in Iraq, the United Nations and non-governmental organizations “reported that some Sunni tribal forces … recruited and used persons younger than the age of 18, including instances of children taking a direct part in hostilities.”</p>
<p>Ali Kareem, who heads Iraq’s High Committee for Human Rights, denied the country’s military or state-backed militias use child soldiers. “We can say today with full confidence that we have a clean slate on child recruitment issues,” he said.</p>
<p>The memo also said “two confirmed cases of child recruitment” by the Myanmar military “were documented during the reporting period.” Human rights advocates have estimated that dozens of children are still conscripted there.</p>
<p>Myanmar government spokesman Zaw Htay challenged accusers to provide details of where and how child soldiers are being used. He noted that in the latest State Department report on human trafficking, “they already recognized (Myanmar) for reducing of child soldiers” – though the report also made clear some children were still conscripted.</p>
<p>The memo said further there was “credible evidence” that a government-supported militia in Afghanistan “recruited and used a child,” meeting the minimum threshold of a single confirmed case that the State Department had previously used as the legal basis for putting a country on the list.</p>
<p>The Afghan defense and interior ministries both denied there were any child soldiers in Afghan national security forces, an assertion that contradicts the State Department’s reports and human rights activists.</p> | false | 1 | jason szep matt spetalnick washington reuters group dozen us state department officials taken unusual step formally accusing secretary state rex tillerson violating federal law designed stop foreign militaries enlisting child soldiers according internal government documents reviewed reuters confidential state department dissent memo previously reported said tillerson breached child soldiers prevention act decided june exclude iraq myanmar afghanistan us list offenders use child soldiers despite department publicly acknowledging children conscripted countrieshttptmsnrtrs2jj7pav keeping countries annual list makes easier provide us military assistance iraq afghanistan close allies fight islamist militants myanmar emerging ally offset chinas influence southeast asia documents reviewed reuters also show tillersons decision odds unanimous recommendation heads state departments regional bureaus overseeing embassies middle east asia us envoy afghanistan pakistan departments human rights office inhouse lawyers httptmsnrtrs2ah6tb4 beyond contravening us law decision risks marring credibility broad range state department reports analyses weakened one us governments primary diplomatic tools deter governmental armed forces governmentsupported armed groups recruiting using children combat support roles around world said july 28 memo reuters reported june tillerson disregarded internal recommendations iraq myanmar afghanistan new documents reveal scale opposition state department including rare use known dissent channel allows officials object policies without fear reprisals views expressed us officials illustrate ongoing tensions career diplomats former chief exxon mobil corp nyse appointed president donald trump pursue america first approach diplomacy interpreting law child soldiers law passed 2008 states us government must satisfied children age 18 recruited conscripted otherwise compelled serve child soldiers country removed list currently includes democratic republic congo nigeria somalia south sudan mali sudan syria yemen secretary thoroughly reviewed information presented made determination whether facts presented justified listing pursuant law state department spokesperson said asked officials allegation violated law written response dissent memo sept 1 tillerson adviser brian hook acknowledged three countries use child soldiers said however necessary distinguish governments making little effort correct child soldier violations making sincere yet incomplete efforts hook made clear americas top diplomat used sees discretion interpret law powerful message foreign militaries list prohibited receiving aid training weapons washington unless white house issues waiver based us national interest 2016 obama administration iraq myanmar well others nigeria somalia received waivers times human rights community chided president barack obama willing issue waivers exemptions especially governments security ties washington instead sanctioning countries human rights watch frequently criticized president barack obama giving many countries waivers law made real difference jo becker advocacy director childrens rights division human rights watch wrote june critique tillersons decision dissenting us officials stressed tillersons decision exclude iraq afghanistan myanmar went step obama administrations waiver policy contravening law effectively easing pressure countries eradicate use child soldiers officials acknowledged documents reviewed reuters three countries made progress reading law said enough kept list used shame governments completely eradicating use child soldiers unconscionable actions ben cardin ranking democrat us senate foreign relations committee wrote tillerson friday saying serious concerns state department may complying law secretarys decision sent powerful message countries receiving pass unconscionable actions memo among series previously unreported documents sent month senate foreign relations committee state departments independent inspector generals office relate allegations tillerson violated child soldiers law legal scholars say executive branchs latitude foreign policy little legal recourse counter tillersons decision herman schwartz constitutional law professor american university washington said us courts would unlikely accept challenge tillersons interpretation child soldiers law allowing remove country list discretion signatories document largely senior policy experts years involvement issues said official familiar matter reuters saw copy document include names signed tillersons decision remove iraq myanmar formerly known burma list reject recommendation us officials add afghanistan announced release governments annual human trafficking report june 27 six days earlier previously unreported memo emailed tillerson range senior diplomats said three countries violated law based evidence gathered us officials 2016 recommended approve new list noted iraq united nations nongovernmental organizations reported sunni tribal forces recruited used persons younger age 18 including instances children taking direct part hostilities ali kareem heads iraqs high committee human rights denied countrys military statebacked militias use child soldiers say today full confidence clean slate child recruitment issues said memo also said two confirmed cases child recruitment myanmar military documented reporting period human rights advocates estimated dozens children still conscripted myanmar government spokesman zaw htay challenged accusers provide details child soldiers used noted latest state department report human trafficking already recognized myanmar reducing child soldiers though report also made clear children still conscripted memo said credible evidence governmentsupported militia afghanistan recruited used child meeting minimum threshold single confirmed case state department previously used legal basis putting country list afghan defense interior ministries denied child soldiers afghan national security forces assertion contradicts state departments reports human rights activists | 769 |
<p>At this stage in a presidential campaign, Republicans, generally a rather disciplined lot, have usually united and begun to train their fire on Democrats. Circular firing squads are for them, not us.</p>
<p>Not this year.</p>
<p>The candidacy of Donald J. Trump is not only fracturing the Republican Party, it is breaking up friendships as well.</p>
<p>A prominent Republican, describing a Trump-related disagreement with another influential Republican with whom he has been close for decades, sent me a note that stated things in a matter-of-fact way: “We had a friendship-ending email exchange.”</p>
<p>Others have confided that differences over the Trump candidacy have caused such a loss of respect that they feared their friendships would not survive, and that even if they did, they would never be the same.</p>
<p>While I haven’t lost any friendships during this Trumpian moment, at least not yet, I certainly haven’t been immune to the heightened tension. Several friends whose political views have often coincided with mine in the past have voiced their anger to me over my public opposition to Mr. Trump’s candidacy.</p>
<p>One close longtime friend told me that my criticism of Mr. Trump stemmed from my desire for attention and notoriety and a longing for the favor of liberals. He was questioning not my reasoning but my motivations. His concern wasn’t about policy; it was about the state of my soul.</p>
<p>Last week, a friend I am in frequent contact with and who is sympathetic to Mr. Trump informed me that my attitude was “unhinged” and utterly close-minded. A woman I attended church with for several years expressed her unhappiness with my anti-Trump “screeds.”</p>
<p>These people aren’t stupid or malicious; they are upset because I see things in a profoundly different way from them and because I have referred to a candidate they like as the avatar of unreason.</p>
<p>Strained relationships resulting from political differences are pretty common. What makes this moment so unusual is that the ruptures are occurring among people who have for years been political allies, whose friendships were forged through common battles, often standing shoulder to shoulder.</p>
<p>This dynamic is playing out in public, too. Glenn Beck and Sarah Palin, while not lifelong friends, were once close. Mr. Beck described her in 2010 as one of the few people who could “possibly lead us out of where we are”; Ms. Palin referred to him as an “inspiring patriot.” Yet in part because Mr. Beck supports Ted Cruz while Ms. Palin supports Mr. Trump, they now trade insults. Mr. Beck accused Ms. Palin of abandoning her principles, while she has mocked Mr. Beck for having distributed care packages to illegal immigrant children.</p>
<p>Similar stories are happening all over. National Review’s Jonah Goldberg, whose opposition to Mr. Trump has also put him at odds with people he has long liked and respected, admitted, “I hate the idea that political disagreements will poison friendships.”</p>
<p>The reason for the envenoming is Mr. Trump, who inspires deep loyalty among his followers and revulsion among his critics. For some, he is a breath of fresh air: perhaps a bit rough around the edges, but a strong person, plain-spoken and able to make America great again. Others,&#160; <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/14/opinion/campaign-stops/why-i-will-never-vote-for-donald-trump.html" type="external">like me</a>, consider him emotionally unstable, unprincipled, cruel and careless, the kind of demagogic figure the ancient Greeks and the American&#160; <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/20/opinion/campaign-stops/the-man-the-founders-feared.html" type="external">founders feared</a>.</p>
<p>Given the fundamental and intense disagreement over the advent of Mr. Trump, then, we should not be surprised that even longtime friendships are feeling the strain. In his short book “The Four Loves,” C. S. Lewis writes that while lovers stand face to face, friends stand side by side, absorbed in common interests, seeing some common truths. When these common truths become competing truths, a distancing is inevitable — perhaps especially when political differences arise among people who have devoted their lives to politics, who view it as a means to advance justice and human flourishing and therefore consider it a core part of who they are.</p>
<p>And therein lies the problem: When political differences shatter friendships, when we attribute disagreements to deep character flaws, it usually means politics has become too central to our lives.</p>
<p>I will be the first to admit that for those of us who inhabit the world of politics, political differences aren’t trivial. I am guilty of having sometimes lost sight of the fact that friendships aren’t meant to reinforce every one of my views. But the best friendships are those in which one person elevates the sensibilities of the other, including from time to time helping us see things from a different angle. They are, as Aristotle put it, friendships of virtue rather than of utility or pleasure.</p>
<p>Years ago I wrote my friend and mentor, Steve Hayner, worried that our differences over a political issue we both had strong feelings about might hurt our relationship. Our relationship mattered more to me than politics, I told him, and I didn’t want a breach to occur.</p>
<p>“I want to assure you that I don’t think that our disagreements on most anything could affect our relationship,” he wrote to me. “My love for you has nothing to do with your views.”</p>
<p>My relationship with Steve, who died last year, was among&#160; <a href="https://www.commentarymagazine.com/culture-civilization/religion/christianity/friend-steve-hayner/" type="external">the deepest in my life</a>. I had known him since college — I was a student and he was an associate pastor — and he had accompanied me through times of joy and hardship. This insulated our relationship against mere political differences. But the main point applies even to friendships that may have taken root in the soil of politics: We need to work to stay in relationships with people despite deep differences of opinion, not just across the aisle but on either side of it.</p>
<p>This isn’t always easy. One example: I was friends with a journalist with whom I had some similar instincts, if not complete political agreement. Our relationship was characterized by respect, affection and interests beyond politics. Yet after I joined the Bush White House in 2001, it hit a very rough patch. I sensed that he believed I had gone over to the Dark Side, loyally supporting indefensible policies; I felt that he was unfair and unreasonable in his critiques of our administration. Neither of us was inclined to give ground; each of us was happy to point out the flaws we suddenly saw so clearly in each other.</p>
<p>Thankfully, since then we have reconciled, although it took almost the entire length of the Obama administration. I felt last summer was time to explore the possibility of re-connecting. It turned out it was.</p>
<p>Time and distance helped repair the breach. Passions cool, the gaps between you don’t seem quite as wide. The qualities that once attracted you to others come back into focus. Conversations turn to topics deeper and more personal than politics. But the restoration of fractured friendships doesn’t happen by accident; it is a matter of choice.</p>
<p>Mr. Trump’s candidacy is putting more stress on more friendships than any other political development in my experience. Precisely because of the antipathy I have for Mr. Trump, I need to try doubly hard to resist the temptation to assume the worst of his supporters even as my worries about him mount. Absent compelling evidence to the contrary, I need to grant to them the same good faith I hope others would grant to me.</p>
<p>In his first inaugural address, with the Civil War looming, Abraham Lincoln told his fellow citizens that we are not enemies but friends. “Though passion may have strained, it must not break our bonds of affection,” he said. During his second inaugural, at the war’s end, he asked us to “bind up the nation’s wounds,” with “malice toward none, with charity for all.” This was an almost superhuman ideal, but it needed to be stated.</p>
<p>None of us is Lincoln, and our divisions today obviously pale in comparison to those he and the country faced. Yet we can still learn from him. Having lived through the previous decade of tumult and political division, he knew the importance an attitude of conciliation can play in the life of a nation. We should strive for a bit of the grace and largeness of spirit he showed.</p>
<p>Peter Wehner, a senior fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center, served in the last three Republican administrations and is a contributing opinion writer.</p> | false | 1 | stage presidential campaign republicans generally rather disciplined lot usually united begun train fire democrats circular firing squads us year candidacy donald j trump fracturing republican party breaking friendships well prominent republican describing trumprelated disagreement another influential republican close decades sent note stated things matteroffact way friendshipending email exchange others confided differences trump candidacy caused loss respect feared friendships would survive even would never havent lost friendships trumpian moment least yet certainly havent immune heightened tension several friends whose political views often coincided mine past voiced anger public opposition mr trumps candidacy one close longtime friend told criticism mr trump stemmed desire attention notoriety longing favor liberals questioning reasoning motivations concern wasnt policy state soul last week friend frequent contact sympathetic mr trump informed attitude unhinged utterly closeminded woman attended church several years expressed unhappiness antitrump screeds people arent stupid malicious upset see things profoundly different way referred candidate like avatar unreason strained relationships resulting political differences pretty common makes moment unusual ruptures occurring among people years political allies whose friendships forged common battles often standing shoulder shoulder dynamic playing public glenn beck sarah palin lifelong friends close mr beck described 2010 one people could possibly lead us ms palin referred inspiring patriot yet part mr beck supports ted cruz ms palin supports mr trump trade insults mr beck accused ms palin abandoning principles mocked mr beck distributed care packages illegal immigrant children similar stories happening national reviews jonah goldberg whose opposition mr trump also put odds people long liked respected admitted hate idea political disagreements poison friendships reason envenoming mr trump inspires deep loyalty among followers revulsion among critics breath fresh air perhaps bit rough around edges strong person plainspoken able make america great others160 like consider emotionally unstable unprincipled cruel careless kind demagogic figure ancient greeks american160 founders feared given fundamental intense disagreement advent mr trump surprised even longtime friendships feeling strain short book four loves c lewis writes lovers stand face face friends stand side side absorbed common interests seeing common truths common truths become competing truths distancing inevitable perhaps especially political differences arise among people devoted lives politics view means advance justice human flourishing therefore consider core part therein lies problem political differences shatter friendships attribute disagreements deep character flaws usually means politics become central lives first admit us inhabit world politics political differences arent trivial guilty sometimes lost sight fact friendships arent meant reinforce every one views best friendships one person elevates sensibilities including time time helping us see things different angle aristotle put friendships virtue rather utility pleasure years ago wrote friend mentor steve hayner worried differences political issue strong feelings might hurt relationship relationship mattered politics told didnt want breach occur want assure dont think disagreements anything could affect relationship wrote love nothing views relationship steve died last year among160 deepest life known since college student associate pastor accompanied times joy hardship insulated relationship mere political differences main point applies even friendships may taken root soil politics need work stay relationships people despite deep differences opinion across aisle either side isnt always easy one example friends journalist similar instincts complete political agreement relationship characterized respect affection interests beyond politics yet joined bush white house 2001 hit rough patch sensed believed gone dark side loyally supporting indefensible policies felt unfair unreasonable critiques administration neither us inclined give ground us happy point flaws suddenly saw clearly thankfully since reconciled although took almost entire length obama administration felt last summer time explore possibility reconnecting turned time distance helped repair breach passions cool gaps dont seem quite wide qualities attracted others come back focus conversations turn topics deeper personal politics restoration fractured friendships doesnt happen accident matter choice mr trumps candidacy putting stress friendships political development experience precisely antipathy mr trump need try doubly hard resist temptation assume worst supporters even worries mount absent compelling evidence contrary need grant good faith hope others would grant first inaugural address civil war looming abraham lincoln told fellow citizens enemies friends though passion may strained must break bonds affection said second inaugural wars end asked us bind nations wounds malice toward none charity almost superhuman ideal needed stated none us lincoln divisions today obviously pale comparison country faced yet still learn lived previous decade tumult political division knew importance attitude conciliation play life nation strive bit grace largeness spirit showed peter wehner senior fellow ethics public policy center served last three republican administrations contributing opinion writer | 735 |
<p>It is a gratuitous and reckless act for Washington to send the message to Russia and China that they must choose vassalage or war.</p>
<p>It is not only American generals who are irresponsible and declare on the basis of no evidence whatsoever that “Russia is an existential threat to the United States” and also to the Baltic states, Poland, Georgia, Ukraine, and all of Europe. British generals also participate in the warmongering. UK retired general and former NATO commander Sir Richard Shirreff, Deputy Supreme Allied Commander in Europe until 2014, has <a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3596977/The-outbreak-nuclear-war-year-West-Putin-entirely-plausible-says-former-NATO-chief-promoting-novel-2017-war-Russia.html" type="external">just declared that nuclear war with Russia is “entirely possible” within the year</a>.</p>
<p>My loyal readers know that I, myself, have been warning for some time about the likelihood of nuclear war. However, there is a vast difference between me and the Western generals. I see the war as the consequence of the neoconservative drive for US world hegemony. The neoconservative drive for world hegemony is acknowledged by the neoconservatives themselves in their public position papers, and it has a 15 year record of being implemented in America’s many and ongoing wars in the Middle East and Africa. Although the Presstitute media does its best to keep our focus away from the known facts, the facts remain known.</p>
<p>The position of the Western generals is that “Russian aggression” is driving an innocent America/NATO to nuclear war.</p>
<p>Here is General Shirreff’s list of “Russian aggressions”: “He [Putin] has invaded Georgia, he has invaded the Crimea, he has invaded Ukraine. He has used force and got away with it. In a period of tension, an attack on the Baltic states… is entirely plausible.” Shirreff is talking about make-believe happenings that even if real would be taking place inside what were until recently Russia’s long-standing national boundaries.</p>
<p>General Shirreff strikes me as either uninformed or a dissembler. It is the United States and Israel who use force and get away with it. The Russian invasion of the former Russian province, Georgia, was a response to the American puppet government’s invasion of South Ossetia in which the American and Israeli trained and equipped Georgia troops killed Russian peace-keeping troops and a large number of South Ossetian civilians while the Russian government was at the Beijing Olympics.</p>
<p>It only took a small fraction of the Russian Army a few hours to roll up the American and Israeli trained Georgian Army. Putin had the former Russian province in his hand. He could have hung the American puppet president and reincorporated Georgia back into Russia, where if probably belongs, having spent all of modern history in that location.</p>
<p>But Putin did not see Georgia as a prize, and having made his point, let the Americans have their puppet state back. The president at the time, a scummy scoundrel, was thrown out of the country by Georgians and now serves the American puppet state of Ukraine, like so many others who are not Ukrainian. Apparently, Washington can’t find enough Ukrainians who will sell out their country for Washington and has to bring in foreigners to help Washington rule Ukraine.</p>
<p>There has been, alas, no Russian invasion of Ukraine. Putin would not even accept the pleas of the Russian majority populations in the breakaway provinces of Donetsk and Luhansk to be reincorporated back into Russia where they belong. If Putin actually wanted Ukraine, he doesn’t need to send in an army. He can take back the eastern and southern parts just by accepting the pleas of the people to again be a part of Russia.</p>
<p>The only plea that Putin accepted was that of the Crimeans, who with an extremely high turnout never experienced in “western democracies” voted 97.6 percent to rejoin Russia, where Crimea resided for longer than the US has existed, until Khrushchev, a Ukrainian, transferred Crimea from the Russian Soviet Republic to the Ukrainian Soviet Republic when both were provinces of the Soviet Union.</p>
<p>Little doubt that Putin accepted Crimea’s plea because Russia’s only warm water port and entrance into the Mediterranean Sea is Russia’s naval base in Crimea, and little doubt that Putin refused Donetsk and Luhansk in order to deflect Washington’s propagandistic charges, such of those of former general Shirreff. Putin reasoned, mistakenly in my view, that his refusal to accept Donetsk and Luhansk would reassure Washington’s NATO puppet states and lessen Washington’s influence over Europe. For the corrupt Europeans, facts are of no consequence. Washington’s money prevails.</p>
<p>Putin doesn’t understand the power of Washington’s money. In the entire West only money counts. There is no such thing as Washington’s word, government integrity, truth, or even empirical facts. There are only well- propagated lies. The entire West is a lie. The West exists for one reason only: corporate profits.</p>
<p>The retired general Shirreff claims, without any evidence, which is typical, that Putin “used force and got away with it.”</p>
<p>What force is the general talking about? Can he identify the force? The independent international observers of the Crimean voting report that it was completely fair, that there was no intimidation, no troops or any Russian intimidation present.</p>
<p>The former NATO general Shirreff believes that a Russian attack “on the Baltic states is entirely possible.” For what reason? The Baltic states, former provinces of the Soviet Union, comprise no threat whatsoever to Russia. The Russians have no reason whatsoever to attack the Baltic states. It was Russia that gave the Baltic states their independence. Just as it was Russia that gave Ukraine and Georgia their independence.</p>
<p>Imperial Washington is leveraging the reasonableness of the Russian government to put Russia in a propagandistic light. The Russian government has permitted itself to be put on the defensive and has given the attack to Washington.</p>
<p>Russia has not attacked anyone except the terrorist group ISIS. Allegedly, Washington is opposed to terrorism, but Washington has been using ISIS in an effort to overthrow the Syrian government with terrorism. Russia has put a halt to that. The question before us is whether the Russian government so desires to be accepted by the West that Putin sells out Syria to Washington/Israeli dismemberment in order to show that Russia is a good partner for the West.</p>
<p>If Russia doesn’t get over its affection for the West, Russia will lose its independence.</p>
<p>My understanding is that Russia has been resurrected as a Christian, morally principally country, perhaps the only one on earth. The question that the Russian people and their Russian government need, desperately, to ask themselves is: Do we want to be associated with the War Criminal West that disobeys not only its own laws, but also international laws?</p>
<p>The vast majority of the evil in the world resides in the West. It is the west with its lies and greed that has devastated millions of people in 7 countries during the new 21st century. This is the most threatening beginning of a new millennium in modern times.</p>
<p>Unsatisfied with its looting of the Third World, South America, Greece, Portugal, Latvia, Argentina, and now Brazil and Ukraine, the Western Capitalists have their sights set on Russia, China, India, and South Africa.</p>
<p>What a prize it would be to get Russia with all that vast expanse of Siberia that can be environmentally brutalized and destroyed for capitalist profits.</p>
<p>The Russian government’s offering of free land in Siberia had better be limited to Russian citizens.&#160;Otherwise, the land is likely to be bought up by the West, which will use its ownership of Russia to destroy the country.</p>
<p>The Russians and the Chinese are blinded by the fact that they lived for decades under oppressive and failed regimes. They look to the West as success. Their misreading of the West endangers their independence.</p>
<p>Neither Russia nor China seek conflict. It is a gratuitous and reckless act for Washington to send the message to Russia and China that they must choose vassalage or war.</p> | false | 1 | gratuitous reckless act washington send message russia china must choose vassalage war american generals irresponsible declare basis evidence whatsoever russia existential threat united states also baltic states poland georgia ukraine europe british generals also participate warmongering uk retired general former nato commander sir richard shirreff deputy supreme allied commander europe 2014 declared nuclear war russia entirely possible within year loyal readers know warning time likelihood nuclear war however vast difference western generals see war consequence neoconservative drive us world hegemony neoconservative drive world hegemony acknowledged neoconservatives public position papers 15 year record implemented americas many ongoing wars middle east africa although presstitute media best keep focus away known facts facts remain known position western generals russian aggression driving innocent americanato nuclear war general shirreffs list russian aggressions putin invaded georgia invaded crimea invaded ukraine used force got away period tension attack baltic states entirely plausible shirreff talking makebelieve happenings even real would taking place inside recently russias longstanding national boundaries general shirreff strikes either uninformed dissembler united states israel use force get away russian invasion former russian province georgia response american puppet governments invasion south ossetia american israeli trained equipped georgia troops killed russian peacekeeping troops large number south ossetian civilians russian government beijing olympics took small fraction russian army hours roll american israeli trained georgian army putin former russian province hand could hung american puppet president reincorporated georgia back russia probably belongs spent modern history location putin see georgia prize made point let americans puppet state back president time scummy scoundrel thrown country georgians serves american puppet state ukraine like many others ukrainian apparently washington cant find enough ukrainians sell country washington bring foreigners help washington rule ukraine alas russian invasion ukraine putin would even accept pleas russian majority populations breakaway provinces donetsk luhansk reincorporated back russia belong putin actually wanted ukraine doesnt need send army take back eastern southern parts accepting pleas people part russia plea putin accepted crimeans extremely high turnout never experienced western democracies voted 976 percent rejoin russia crimea resided longer us existed khrushchev ukrainian transferred crimea russian soviet republic ukrainian soviet republic provinces soviet union little doubt putin accepted crimeas plea russias warm water port entrance mediterranean sea russias naval base crimea little doubt putin refused donetsk luhansk order deflect washingtons propagandistic charges former general shirreff putin reasoned mistakenly view refusal accept donetsk luhansk would reassure washingtons nato puppet states lessen washingtons influence europe corrupt europeans facts consequence washingtons money prevails putin doesnt understand power washingtons money entire west money counts thing washingtons word government integrity truth even empirical facts well propagated lies entire west lie west exists one reason corporate profits retired general shirreff claims without evidence typical putin used force got away force general talking identify force independent international observers crimean voting report completely fair intimidation troops russian intimidation present former nato general shirreff believes russian attack baltic states entirely possible reason baltic states former provinces soviet union comprise threat whatsoever russia russians reason whatsoever attack baltic states russia gave baltic states independence russia gave ukraine georgia independence imperial washington leveraging reasonableness russian government put russia propagandistic light russian government permitted put defensive given attack washington russia attacked anyone except terrorist group isis allegedly washington opposed terrorism washington using isis effort overthrow syrian government terrorism russia put halt question us whether russian government desires accepted west putin sells syria washingtonisraeli dismemberment order show russia good partner west russia doesnt get affection west russia lose independence understanding russia resurrected christian morally principally country perhaps one earth question russian people russian government need desperately ask want associated war criminal west disobeys laws also international laws vast majority evil world resides west west lies greed devastated millions people 7 countries new 21st century threatening beginning new millennium modern times unsatisfied looting third world south america greece portugal latvia argentina brazil ukraine western capitalists sights set russia china india south africa prize would get russia vast expanse siberia environmentally brutalized destroyed capitalist profits russian governments offering free land siberia better limited russian citizens160otherwise land likely bought west use ownership russia destroy country russians chinese blinded fact lived decades oppressive failed regimes look west success misreading west endangers independence neither russia china seek conflict gratuitous reckless act washington send message russia china must choose vassalage war | 709 |
<p>CARSON CITY — The decades-long battle over federal ownership of nearly 110,000 square miles of Nevada is about to be re-engaged at the Nevada Legislature.</p>
<p>With about 85 percent of those acres under control of a variety of federal agencies — primarily the U.S. Bureau of Land Management — some Nevada political leaders want a transfer of as many as 7 million acres to state control in a first phase that could eventually see large tracts of land become state lands.</p>
<p>Economic development is the primary driver for the introduction of Senate Joint Resolution 7, but some proponents see it as the first step in a state takeover of much of the federal public land in Nevada.</p>
<p>U.S. Rep. Mark Amodei, R-Nev., had a land transfer bill introduced in Congress in the last term, and though it died, the issue could come up again in this session. Republican Gov. Brian Sandoval has supported a transfer of some federal lands, as has U.S. Sen. Dean Heller, R-Nev.</p>
<p>State Sen. Pete Goicoechea, R-Eureka, a rancher with more than passing knowledge of the public lands issue, is a co-sponsor of the resolution, which has not been scheduled for a hearing.</p>
<p>Chances for such a transfer might have improved under the Trump administration, he said.</p>
<p>TOO EXPENSIVE?</p>
<p>Opponents are concerned the lands would be sold off by the state, decreasing access for everything from off-road vehicle use and hunting and fishing to hiking. They also argue that Nevada could not afford to manage millions of acres of federal land, citing the multimillion-dollar cost of fighting wildfires.</p>
<p>“We fought it last time, and we’ll fight it this time if it goes forward,” said Annette Magnus-Marquart, executive director of Battle Born Progress. “How would the state pay to manage the lands? We can’t educate our kids properly. We can’t afford to pay to fight a fire.”</p>
<p>A nearly identical resolution seeking such a transfer was approved by the Republican-controlled Legislature in 2015 and sent to Congress. A hearing on that resolution even prompted a visit by Bunkerville rancher Cliven Bundy to the Nevada Legislature.</p>
<p>The new measure likely has a dim future, given that Democrats control the Legislature.</p>
<p>&lt;img src="https://www.reviewjournal.com/sites/default/files/FED-LANDS-LEG-MAR04-17.jpg" style="margin: 1em 0; width:100%; max-width: 640px" alt="Federal and State land in Nevada (Gabriel Utasi/Las Vegas Review-Journal)" /&gt;</p>
<p>SCHOOLS ON BLM LAND</p>
<p>Goicoechea said a good case for transfer to state control can be made for four categories of lands. Those lands could total 5 million acres or more, according to an analysis by the Nevada Land Management Task Force, which in 2014 issued a report arguing that the state would benefit from such a transfer.</p>
<p>The four categories are:</p>
<p>Checkerboard lands. Estimated at about 4.2 million acres, these public lands alternate in sections with private lands along the Union Pacific railroad corridor. The private sections were granted to the railroad to pay for construction of the transcontinental railroad more than a century ago.</p>
<p>Goicoechea said the lands are unmanageable in their current configuration.</p>
<p>Lands already inventoried by the BLM and other federal agencies for disposal, estimated at about 1 million acres.</p>
<p>“They are trying to sell them,” Goicoechea said. “Give them to the state, and let the state generate some profit.”</p>
<p>Recreation and public-purpose lands, estimated at 200,000 acres. While small in number, these lands are being used for a variety of purposes around the state, from rodeo grounds to public schools to flood control. The entities using these lands pay rent to the BLM.</p>
<p>“We’ve got 58 schools in Clark County built on RPP lands,” Goicoechea said. “And we need to tell the federal government, no, we’re not going to pay you any more. We need title.</p>
<p>“Transfer those back to us,” he said. “They don’t want to do it, because they are getting lease revenues.”</p>
<p>BLM “split-estate” lands, estimated at about 300,000 acres. These are lands where the surface rights are privately owned and the subsurface mineral rights are federally owned.</p>
<p>“We’re enforcing the regulations,” Goicoechea said of the lands. “That’s why I have always been a supporter of Phase 1.”</p>
<p>SYSTEM IN PLACE</p>
<p>A process exists for limited federal transfers through acts of Congress, including one sponsored by Amodei that sent 10,400 acres of public lands to the city of Yerington and Lyon County for economic, recreational and cultural development. It has allowed a copper mining project there to proceed.</p>
<p>Magnus-Marquart said Nevada also has the Southern Nevada Public Land Management Act, which allows the BLM to sell public land around Las Vegas to accommodate growth.</p>
<p>This system for land transfers works and should be allowed to continue, she said.</p>
<p>Magnus-Marquart said broad public support remains for leaving the public lands as they are.</p>
<p>“People want the lands kept open for public access, not sold off to the highest bidder,” she said.</p>
<p>Contact Sean Whaley at [email protected] or 775-461-3820. Follow <a href="http://www.twitter.com/seanw801" type="external">@seanw801</a> on Twitter.</p>
<p>RELATED</p>
<p><a href="" type="internal">Nevada senators submit bill to ask Congress to give state millions of acres of land</a></p>
<p><a href="" type="internal">Past transfers of federal land to Nevada led to corruption, history suggests</a></p>
<p><a href="" type="internal">Conservatives in Nevada, Utah howl over Obama’s national monument declarations</a></p>
<p><a href="" type="internal">Proposed state control of federal public lands divides Nevada interests</a></p>
<p /> | false | 1 | carson city decadeslong battle federal ownership nearly 110000 square miles nevada reengaged nevada legislature 85 percent acres control variety federal agencies primarily us bureau land management nevada political leaders want transfer many 7 million acres state control first phase could eventually see large tracts land become state lands economic development primary driver introduction senate joint resolution 7 proponents see first step state takeover much federal public land nevada us rep mark amodei rnev land transfer bill introduced congress last term though died issue could come session republican gov brian sandoval supported transfer federal lands us sen dean heller rnev state sen pete goicoechea reureka rancher passing knowledge public lands issue cosponsor resolution scheduled hearing chances transfer might improved trump administration said expensive opponents concerned lands would sold state decreasing access everything offroad vehicle use hunting fishing hiking also argue nevada could afford manage millions acres federal land citing multimilliondollar cost fighting wildfires fought last time well fight time goes forward said annette magnusmarquart executive director battle born progress would state pay manage lands cant educate kids properly cant afford pay fight fire nearly identical resolution seeking transfer approved republicancontrolled legislature 2015 sent congress hearing resolution even prompted visit bunkerville rancher cliven bundy nevada legislature new measure likely dim future given democrats control legislature ltimg srchttpswwwreviewjournalcomsitesdefaultfilesfedlandslegmar0417jpg stylemargin 1em 0 width100 maxwidth 640px altfederal state land nevada gabriel utasilas vegas reviewjournal gt schools blm land goicoechea said good case transfer state control made four categories lands lands could total 5 million acres according analysis nevada land management task force 2014 issued report arguing state would benefit transfer four categories checkerboard lands estimated 42 million acres public lands alternate sections private lands along union pacific railroad corridor private sections granted railroad pay construction transcontinental railroad century ago goicoechea said lands unmanageable current configuration lands already inventoried blm federal agencies disposal estimated 1 million acres trying sell goicoechea said give state let state generate profit recreation publicpurpose lands estimated 200000 acres small number lands used variety purposes around state rodeo grounds public schools flood control entities using lands pay rent blm weve got 58 schools clark county built rpp lands goicoechea said need tell federal government going pay need title transfer back us said dont want getting lease revenues blm splitestate lands estimated 300000 acres lands surface rights privately owned subsurface mineral rights federally owned enforcing regulations goicoechea said lands thats always supporter phase 1 system place process exists limited federal transfers acts congress including one sponsored amodei sent 10400 acres public lands city yerington lyon county economic recreational cultural development allowed copper mining project proceed magnusmarquart said nevada also southern nevada public land management act allows blm sell public land around las vegas accommodate growth system land transfers works allowed continue said magnusmarquart said broad public support remains leaving public lands people want lands kept open public access sold highest bidder said contact sean whaley swhaleyreviewjournalcom 7754613820 follow seanw801 twitter related nevada senators submit bill ask congress give state millions acres land past transfers federal land nevada led corruption history suggests conservatives nevada utah howl obamas national monument declarations proposed state control federal public lands divides nevada interests | 525 |
<p>Clark County Commission chairman Steve Sisolak is staying tight-lipped on whether he’ll run for governor of Nevada in 2018.</p>
<p>However, one thing is certain: If Sisolak runs, he’ll have an unprecedented head start on campaign fundraising.</p>
<p>With two years until Nevada’s next gubernatorial election, Sisolak expects to have $2.8 million to $3.2 million in cash after he finishes paying campaign expenses related to his recent re-election to a third four-year term on the county commission.</p>
<p>State law allows Sisolak to roll those funds over to his next campaign if he so chooses.</p>
<p>“That’s an incredible war chest,” said Rory Reid, Nevada’s Democratic gubernatorial candidate in 2010 and son of Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev. “When I was running I was trying to get $1 million by the beginning of (2009) to appear formidable. Without question, Steve is formidable.”</p>
<p>When Republican Gov. Brian Sandoval successfully ran for re-election in 2014, campaign finance records show his coffers held about $950,000 two years out.</p>
<p>In comparison, Sisolak raised close to $1.8 million in 2015 and $1.2 million in 2016. As of early November, he had only spent about 14 percent of that money, campaign finance reports show.</p>
<p>And after his second election campaign for the commission seat ended in 2012, Sisolak apparently had about $1 million left in his war chest, according to finance reports.</p>
<p>“He has excelled at fundraising. He’s very skilled at it, and he doesn’t mind doing it,” said longtime Democratic political strategist Dan Hart.</p>
<p>But even with all that cash-on-hand, Sisolak will only confirm that he’s considering running. Nevadans haven’t elected a Democrat as governor since Bob Miller in 1994.</p>
<p>“Before we make a decision we’ll do some polling statewide to determine what the issues are, what my chances would be of success,” Sisolak said last week. “I won’t do anything without talking to my family first, and my advisers and my supporters.”</p>
<p>If Sisolak decides not to run for another office, state law allows him to return his excess funds to his contributors, donate the money, or contribute it to other candidates.</p>
<p>‘AN EFFECTIVE POLITICIAN’</p>
<p>Sisolak, 62, has been a familiar face in Nevada politics for nearly two decades.</p>
<p>Born in Wisconsin in 1953, Sisolak received a bachelor’s degree in business from the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee in 1974. He moved to the town of Spring Valley in Clark County during his early 20s and graduated from UNLV with a master’s degree in business administration in 1978.</p>
<p>From 1998 through 2008 he was a member of the state Board of Regents, the elected body that governs Nevada’s higher education institutions. In 2008 he resigned from that board after being elected to the commission’s District A seat.</p>
<p>Today he holds the same seat on the governing body of Nevada’s most populous county, where he’s known for being a fiscal conservative and for his outspoken demeanor. His fellow commissioners have elected him the board’s chair twice since 2013.</p>
<p>Sisolak made headlines in 2014 when he toyed with the idea of running in that year’s gubernatorial election. But after spending about $70,000 on polling and research he decided against it, saying the timing was not right.</p>
<p>The 2018 election could hold better opportunities for Sisolak, Hart said.</p>
<p>Sandoval will be terming out of office, and Hart said Sisolak is better positioned to run “than virtually anybody on the Democratic side.”</p>
<p>“He’s got a great reputation as an effective politician but also as an effective leader and an inside player,” Hart said. “He knows how to lead. He knows how to deal with political players. He knows how to navigate the corridors of power virtually better than anyone I’ve seen on our side of the aisle.”</p>
<p>FIRST STATEWIDE RACE</p>
<p>Sisolak’s burgeoning war chest and penchant for the public spotlight means he would be a far different candidate from the Democrat’s 2014 nominee for Nevada governor.</p>
<p>That year, Bob Goodman raised less than $10,000 during his failed run against Sandoval, who won with 70 percent of the vote. While Goodman was the state’s economic development director in the ’70s, he was relatively unknown in 2014.</p>
<p>“It’s hard to draw a comparison because Goodman was a default candidate. No Democrat really had the stomach to take on Sandoval,” said Michael Green, a historian and professor at UNLV. “Sisolak comes into a completely different situation.”</p>
<p>Of course, Sisolak will probably need to raise millions more to run a competitive campaign for governor.</p>
<p>When Sandoval first successfully ran for the office in 2010, he collected nearly all of his $5 million in the 14 months before the election. Between his first election to governor and second in 2014, the former federal judge raised close to $5.1 million, campaign finance reports show.</p>
<p>Sisolak faces another considerable hurdle.</p>
<p>“I’ve never run in a statewide race before so it’s a little different for me. My campaign was set up for county,” he said. “It’s something we have to talk about and talk through how well I would do in those (rural) areas.”</p>
<p>Eric Herzik, chair of the political science department at the University of Nevada, Reno, said that while Sisolak is one of Southern Nevada’s best known politicians, he will have to prove himself to residents of the state’s northern counties if he wants their votes.</p>
<p>“There is a lingering north-south suspicion gap,” Herzik said.</p>
<p>“The wariness the north has is: ‘OK, are you a complete advocate for the south at the expense of the north?’” he continued. “The northerners see the south as taking a disproportionate share of resources.”</p>
<p>REPUBLICAN ROADBLOCKS</p>
<p>For better or worse, Sisolak also will be known as an outspoken champion for the deal to build a $1.9 billion stadium in Las Vegas using $750 million in public financing. He served on the Southern Nevada Tourism Infrastructure Committee, which sent Sandoval recommendations to increase the county’s hotel room tax to fund the stadium project and expansion of the Las Vegas Convention Center.</p>
<p>The stadium funding plan has been a divisive issue for a large number of county residents.</p>
<p>Nevada’s largest union, Culinary Local 226, implied in a video earlier this year it planned to oust politicians who favored the stadium deal. Subsequently a coalition of six unions, including Laborers Local 872, formed to support the project.</p>
<p>“It cuts both ways,” Herzik said of Sisolak’s support of the stadium. “When organized labor shows up in a Nevada election they are crucial. But they’ve also sat out elections and that really hurts Democrats, and we saw that in 2014.”</p>
<p>And while he wouldn’t run against an incumbent, Sisolak could find himself pitted against Sen. Dean Heller, R-Nev., Lt. Governor Mark Hutchison or Nevada Attorney General Adam Paul Laxalt, another prominent Republican.</p>
<p>“If it was a Heller-Sisolak race, I say Heller starts as the favorite. He has everything that Sisolak has and more of it,” Herzik said. “Dean Heller would not have to reintroduce himself to any part of the state.”</p>
<p>Regardless, Herzik and Hart agreed, Sisolak’s prep work has made him the Democratic Party’s frontrunner if it wants to take back the governor’s office in 2018.</p>
<p>“He has all the building blocks, he has all the ingredients, now the question is whether he really wants to do it,” Hart said.</p>
<p>Contact Michael Scott Davidson at [email protected] or 702-477-3861. Follow <a href="http://www.twitter.com/davidsonlvrj" type="external">@davidsonlvrj</a> on Twitter.</p> | false | 1 | clark county commission chairman steve sisolak staying tightlipped whether hell run governor nevada 2018 however one thing certain sisolak runs hell unprecedented head start campaign fundraising two years nevadas next gubernatorial election sisolak expects 28 million 32 million cash finishes paying campaign expenses related recent reelection third fouryear term county commission state law allows sisolak roll funds next campaign chooses thats incredible war chest said rory reid nevadas democratic gubernatorial candidate 2010 son sen harry reid dnev running trying get 1 million beginning 2009 appear formidable without question steve formidable republican gov brian sandoval successfully ran reelection 2014 campaign finance records show coffers held 950000 two years comparison sisolak raised close 18 million 2015 12 million 2016 early november spent 14 percent money campaign finance reports show second election campaign commission seat ended 2012 sisolak apparently 1 million left war chest according finance reports excelled fundraising hes skilled doesnt mind said longtime democratic political strategist dan hart even cashonhand sisolak confirm hes considering running nevadans havent elected democrat governor since bob miller 1994 make decision well polling statewide determine issues chances would success sisolak said last week wont anything without talking family first advisers supporters sisolak decides run another office state law allows return excess funds contributors donate money contribute candidates effective politician sisolak 62 familiar face nevada politics nearly two decades born wisconsin 1953 sisolak received bachelors degree business university wisconsinmilwaukee 1974 moved town spring valley clark county early 20s graduated unlv masters degree business administration 1978 1998 2008 member state board regents elected body governs nevadas higher education institutions 2008 resigned board elected commissions district seat today holds seat governing body nevadas populous county hes known fiscal conservative outspoken demeanor fellow commissioners elected boards chair twice since 2013 sisolak made headlines 2014 toyed idea running years gubernatorial election spending 70000 polling research decided saying timing right 2018 election could hold better opportunities sisolak hart said sandoval terming office hart said sisolak better positioned run virtually anybody democratic side hes got great reputation effective politician also effective leader inside player hart said knows lead knows deal political players knows navigate corridors power virtually better anyone ive seen side aisle first statewide race sisolaks burgeoning war chest penchant public spotlight means would far different candidate democrats 2014 nominee nevada governor year bob goodman raised less 10000 failed run sandoval 70 percent vote goodman states economic development director 70s relatively unknown 2014 hard draw comparison goodman default candidate democrat really stomach take sandoval said michael green historian professor unlv sisolak comes completely different situation course sisolak probably need raise millions run competitive campaign governor sandoval first successfully ran office 2010 collected nearly 5 million 14 months election first election governor second 2014 former federal judge raised close 51 million campaign finance reports show sisolak faces another considerable hurdle ive never run statewide race little different campaign set county said something talk talk well would rural areas eric herzik chair political science department university nevada reno said sisolak one southern nevadas best known politicians prove residents states northern counties wants votes lingering northsouth suspicion gap herzik said wariness north ok complete advocate south expense north continued northerners see south taking disproportionate share resources republican roadblocks better worse sisolak also known outspoken champion deal build 19 billion stadium las vegas using 750 million public financing served southern nevada tourism infrastructure committee sent sandoval recommendations increase countys hotel room tax fund stadium project expansion las vegas convention center stadium funding plan divisive issue large number county residents nevadas largest union culinary local 226 implied video earlier year planned oust politicians favored stadium deal subsequently coalition six unions including laborers local 872 formed support project cuts ways herzik said sisolaks support stadium organized labor shows nevada election crucial theyve also sat elections really hurts democrats saw 2014 wouldnt run incumbent sisolak could find pitted sen dean heller rnev lt governor mark hutchison nevada attorney general adam paul laxalt another prominent republican hellersisolak race say heller starts favorite everything sisolak herzik said dean heller would reintroduce part state regardless herzik hart agreed sisolaks prep work made democratic partys frontrunner wants take back governors office 2018 building blocks ingredients question whether really wants hart said contact michael scott davidson sdavidsonreviewjournalcom 7024773861 follow davidsonlvrj twitter | 707 |
<p>Amidst all the speculation about John Roberts’s views on abortion, I am certain that Roberts will not be a “pro-life” justice. Indeed, there is absolutely nothing in his record that would remotely support the misplaced hopes of some and fears of others on that point. To the limited extent that political labels can properly apply to judging, what all Americans should hope is that Roberts will prove to be a genuine moderate on abortion. Let me explain.</p>
<p>There are, broadly speaking, three competing positions on what the Constitution says about abortion.</p>
<p>1. The pro-abortion position. The first position is that the Constitution prohibits, to one degree or another, laws that protect the life of an unborn human being against her mother’s desire to have her killed. In Roe v. Wade, the Supreme Court adopted an extreme version of this “pro-abortion” position. The Court invoked the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment — which provides that no state shall “deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law” — to overturn the abortion laws of all 50 states. The Court ruled that the Due Process Clause prohibits protection of the lives of unborn human beings at any time through the second trimester. And even from viability until birth, the Court, under the predominant reading of Roe‘s companion case, Doe v. Bolton, requires that abortion be available whenever the abortionist determines that it would serve the mother’s well-being.</p>
<p>As a number of honest liberals have long recognized, as a matter of constitutional law, this pro-abortion position is indefensible. Nonetheless, with minor modifications, a five-justice majority ratified Roe in the 1992 ruling in Planned Parenthood v. Casey. In so doing, these justices declared, “At 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 vacuous New Age declaration — which has now been embraced by six of the current justices — really means, of course, is that those justices claim to have the unconstrained power to define for all Americans which particular interests those justices think should be beyond the bounds of American citizens to address through legislation.</p>
<p>Fittingly, this radical claim in Casey was accompanied by the majority’s bizarre “Nietzchean vision” (Scalia’s apt label) of the Court’s obligation to adhere to even wrong precedent, lest Americans’ “belief in themselves” be undermined. (Not surprisingly, the justices in the Casey majority blithely cast aside this supposed regard for precedent in Lawrence v. Texas when they encountered a precedent they didn’t like.)</p>
<p>2. The pro-life position. A second position is that the Constitution prohibits, to one degree or another, laws that permit abortion. Under this “pro-life” position, unborn human beings would be recognized as “persons” for purposes of the Due Process Clause. The argument for this position would begin with the historical fact that, prior to Roe, the American tradition long provided broad legal protection for the lives of unborn human beings from the time that those lives were understood, in light of the biological knowledge of the age, to commence. It would build on the modern advances in embryology and genetics, which establish that the life of each individual member of the species Homo sapiens begins at conception. Consistent with the American tradition, this pro-life position might allow limited exceptions for abortion — for example, where continuation of the pregnancy threatened the life of the mother.</p>
<p>This argument is far more credible than the position taken by the Court in Roe and Casey. Indeed, advocates of the “living Constitution” ought to embrace it, as it combines respect for America’s traditions with an updated scientific understanding. Nonetheless, I believe this position to be incompatible with a proper originalist understanding of the Due Process Clause.</p>
<p>3. The substantively neutral position. The third position is that the Constitution generally does not speak to the question of abortion. Under this substantively neutral position, American citizens would have the constitutional power to determine through their state representatives what the abortion policy in their own states would be. This neutral position — which three members of the current Court, Rehnquist, Scalia, and Thomas, embrace — also happens to be the proper reading of the Constitution (as I explain more fully <a href="" type="internal">here</a>).</p>
<p>Insofar as sensible political labels might be applied to these three positions, it would seem plain that the first (pro-abortion) position would be labeled liberal (with the Roe version of that position being radical), the second (pro-life) would be labeled conservative, and the third (neutral) would be labeled moderate.</p>
<p>Of course, sense does not prevail in the frenzied abortion culture in which we live. Thus, the media routinely label the radical pro-abortion position as “moderate” and the substantively neutral position as “extremist right-wing.” And, of course, the media consistently understate the radical nature of the Roe regime (often pretending, for example, that Roe merely protects abortion in the first three months of pregnancy), confuse the public into thinking that reversing Roe would render abortion illegal, and then cite the public’s resulting support for the imagined Roe as supposed evidence of Roe‘s moderation.</p>
<p>As a deputy solicitor general in President George H. W. Bush’s administration, Roberts co-authored briefs that reflected the administration’s sound view that the substantively neutral position was the correct constitutional position. There is, unfortunately, no particular reason to infer that the position taken in those briefs reflects Roberts’s own constitutional reading. In those cases, as in all the other briefs that Roberts wrote in government and in private practice, he was acting as an advocate for his client.</p>
<p>Increasing numbers of observers across the political spectrum are coming to recognize that it is well past time for the Supreme Court to restore abortion policy to the people and to the political processes in the states. As Scalia observed in his Casey dissent, the Supreme Court’s unconstitutional power grab on the abortion issue in Roe “fanned into life an issue that has inflamed our national politics ever since.” “[B]y foreclosing all democratic outlet for the deep passions this issue arouses, by banishing the issue from the political forum that gives all participants, even the losers, the satisfaction of a fair hearing and an honest fight, by continuing the imposition of a rigid national rule instead of allowing for regional differences,” the Court has profoundly disrupted the proper functioning of the American political system.</p>
<p>John Roberts is, by all accounts, a man of deep intellect and high character who understands the proper role of the judiciary in our constitutional republic. There is therefore good reason to hope that he will be a genuine moderate who will not read his own policy views on abortion (whatever they are) into the Constitution but who will respect the constitutional authority of the people to govern their own states and communities on this and other issues of social policy.</p>
<p>— Edward Whelan is president of the Ethics and Public Policy Center and is a regular contributor to NRO’s <a href="http://bench.nationalreview.com/" type="external">“Bench Memos” blog</a> on judicial nominations.</p> | false | 1 | amidst speculation john robertss views abortion certain roberts prolife justice indeed absolutely nothing record would remotely support misplaced hopes fears others point limited extent political labels properly apply judging americans hope roberts prove genuine moderate abortion let explain broadly speaking three competing positions constitution says abortion 1 proabortion position first position constitution prohibits one degree another laws protect life unborn human mothers desire killed roe v wade supreme court adopted extreme version proabortion position court invoked due process clause fourteenth amendment provides state shall deprive person life liberty property without due process law overturn abortion laws 50 states court ruled due process clause prohibits protection lives unborn human beings time second trimester even viability birth court predominant reading roes companion case doe v bolton requires abortion available whenever abortionist determines would serve mothers wellbeing number honest liberals long recognized matter constitutional law proabortion position indefensible nonetheless minor modifications fivejustice majority ratified roe 1992 ruling planned parenthood v casey justices declared heart liberty right define ones concept existence meaning universe mystery human life vacuous new age declaration embraced six current justices really means course justices claim unconstrained power define americans particular interests justices think beyond bounds american citizens address legislation fittingly radical claim casey accompanied majoritys bizarre nietzchean vision scalias apt label courts obligation adhere even wrong precedent lest americans belief undermined surprisingly justices casey majority blithely cast aside supposed regard precedent lawrence v texas encountered precedent didnt like 2 prolife position second position constitution prohibits one degree another laws permit abortion prolife position unborn human beings would recognized persons purposes due process clause argument position would begin historical fact prior roe american tradition long provided broad legal protection lives unborn human beings time lives understood light biological knowledge age commence would build modern advances embryology genetics establish life individual member species homo sapiens begins conception consistent american tradition prolife position might allow limited exceptions abortion example continuation pregnancy threatened life mother argument far credible position taken court roe casey indeed advocates living constitution ought embrace combines respect americas traditions updated scientific understanding nonetheless believe position incompatible proper originalist understanding due process clause 3 substantively neutral position third position constitution generally speak question abortion substantively neutral position american citizens would constitutional power determine state representatives abortion policy states would neutral position three members current court rehnquist scalia thomas embrace also happens proper reading constitution explain fully insofar sensible political labels might applied three positions would seem plain first proabortion position would labeled liberal roe version position radical second prolife would labeled conservative third neutral would labeled moderate course sense prevail frenzied abortion culture live thus media routinely label radical proabortion position moderate substantively neutral position extremist rightwing course media consistently understate radical nature roe regime often pretending example roe merely protects abortion first three months pregnancy confuse public thinking reversing roe would render abortion illegal cite publics resulting support imagined roe supposed evidence roes moderation deputy solicitor general president george h w bushs administration roberts coauthored briefs reflected administrations sound view substantively neutral position correct constitutional position unfortunately particular reason infer position taken briefs reflects robertss constitutional reading cases briefs roberts wrote government private practice acting advocate client increasing numbers observers across political spectrum coming recognize well past time supreme court restore abortion policy people political processes states scalia observed casey dissent supreme courts unconstitutional power grab abortion issue roe fanned life issue inflamed national politics ever since foreclosing democratic outlet deep passions issue arouses banishing issue political forum gives participants even losers satisfaction fair hearing honest fight continuing imposition rigid national rule instead allowing regional differences court profoundly disrupted proper functioning american political system john roberts accounts man deep intellect high character understands proper role judiciary constitutional republic therefore good reason hope genuine moderate read policy views abortion whatever constitution respect constitutional authority people govern states communities issues social policy edward whelan president ethics public policy center regular contributor nros bench memos blog judicial nominations | 655 |
<p>The other day my colleague <a href="" type="internal">George Weigel</a>, author of <a href="" type="internal">Witness to Hope</a>, the best-selling biography of Pope John Paul II, came into my office to read an excerpt from an advance notice in The Kirkus Review of his new book, The Cube and the Cathedral: Europe, America and Politics Without God, due out in April.</p>
<p>After a generally favorable preamble (“Weigel’s pithy polemic boldly assesses contemporary Europe”), the anonymous reviewer adds the following: “But Weigel sprinkles his own conservative Catholicism so readily throughout the text that readers who might have been persuaded by the contours of his argument may well dismiss him as a right-wing nut.”</p>
<p>Well, some readers anyway. The reviewer is probably not alone in holding this opinion of a distinguished author whose political views differ from his own, but it is hardly an impartial one. Why, then, is the reviewer allowed to hide his face in the cloak of anonymity?</p>
<p>The Kirkus Review is one of two trade magazines for publishers and booksellers that employ anonymous reviewers. The other, much larger, one is Publishers Weekly. Both have licensing agreements with Amazon.com and Barnes &amp; Noble, so that not only booksellers but also many ordinary book buyers will be guided by the opinions of, well, who exactly? A librarian in Dubuque? A schoolteacher in Detroit? A graduate student at Duquesne? Whoever else it may be, it is unlikely to be a world authority on the subject, as writers are paid about $50 per review.</p>
<p>As it happens, PW has just brought into its circle a new editor in chief, Sara Nelson, who claims to have plans for revitalizing the magazine. She might want to revisit this scandalous and long-lamented policy of anonymity, although it’s not hard to see why she might, in a Bartleby vein, prefer not to.</p>
<p>There are nearly 500 books a day published in America, or enough in a year to fill an average-size college library. No one could possibly read reviews of them all, let alone the books themselves. Even the team of Stakhanovite readers at Publishers Weekly can cover only about 10,000 books a year.</p>
<p>Faced with this annual tsunami of literature, we all must grasp at any bit of solid support that comes to hand. We have no choice but to seek advice. That’s one reason why Publishers Weekly and Kirkus cling to their policy of anonymity: It suggests a magisterial, objective, authoritative source, unsullied by personal biases.</p>
<p>Yet the opinions actually on offer in these magazines are every bit as quirky, perverse and prone to bias as they are in publications where the writers must take responsibility for what they say. And as the experience of Mr. Weigel and other “right-wing nuts” reminds us, the magazines’ politics tend to be predictably liberal.</p>
<p>Thus Sen. Robert Byrd’s dyspeptic election-year attack on President Bush was described as “a searing criticism, informed by Byrd’s knowledge of history, leavened with his vast experience and written with his legendary rhetorical flourish,” while P.J. O’Rourke’s latest was described in the same issue of PW as “irreverent, in-your-face and often offensive” and containing “slightly skewed reporting.”</p>
<p>Eric Alterman and others “exhaustively diagnose corporate-owned media,” and Lewis Lapham (“a modern-day Tom Paine”) writes “a compelling book” about “the complicity of the media in its support of the steady erosion of individual civil liberties in the name of national security.” But L. Brent Bozell’s attack on the liberal media, “Weapons of Mass Distortion,” offers a thesis that “nearly requires that he present a partial picture.”</p>
<p>Does that sound familiar? It makes me think of Dan Rather labeling as “partisans” those who called attention to his fraudulent report on President Bush’s National Guard service during the recent election campaign. As if he’s not a partisan himself.</p>
<p>What the mantle of journalistic “objectivity” was to Dan Rather that of anonymity is to the reviewers of PW and Kirkus. Both, too, are relics of what we may call the unitary culture — or, to put it another way, a time when politics was of little or no relevance, in nearly everyone’s eyes save those of the most committed Marxists, to reporting the news or assessing the worth of a book.</p>
<p>The same culture also once produced something called “the general reader” for whom gate-keepers like the Book of the Month Club or the Literary Guild used to cater. This week declining numbers of subscribers led to the announcement by the Book of the Month Club that it was discontinuing the panel of judges it appointed in 2001 as successors to the likes of Clifton Fadiman, whose guidance the general reader relied on for so many years during the club’s heyday.</p>
<p>In other words, the era of the unitary culture is over. And the pretense of some among the literary elites that they can behave as if it were not over by simply ignoring conservatives — or treating their views as if they were faults of writing, thinking or researching — should be treated like the now-established bias of CBS News.</p>
<p>It could be argued that the death knell of the unitary culture was sounded in 1974 when John Gross, then the editor of the Times Literary Supplement of London, ended the policy of anonymity that had been in place for the first 72 years of the paper’s existence.</p>
<p>“The case against anonymity is a relatively simple one,” wrote Mr. Gross at the time. “There are many occasions on which a reader is entitled to ask on what authority a judgment or opinion is being advanced. There are even occasions when the whole import of a review depends on knowing the identity of the reviewer. Above all, critics should be prepared to be held directly responsible for what they write….I feel that the principle of accountability comes first.”</p>
<p>This view was not universally applauded. When the subject had been mooted on an earlier occasion, no less a figure than T.S. Eliot had risen to the defense of anonymity. In writing anonymously for the TLS, he himself had learned, he said, “to moderate my dislikes and crochets, to write in a temperate and impartial way; I learnt that some things are permissible when they appear over one’s name, which become tasteless eccentricity or unseemly violence when unsigned.”</p>
<p>That’s just what the anonymous reviewers of today, brought up in the “culture wars” of the past 30 years, seem no longer to feel the need of learning. That’s why Sara Nelson at PW should take a leaf out of John Gross’s book and put a name next to the opinion.</p>
<p>—Mr. Bowman is a resident scholar at the Ethics and Public Policy Center in Washington.</p> | false | 1 | day colleague george weigel author witness hope bestselling biography pope john paul ii came office read excerpt advance notice kirkus review new book cube cathedral europe america politics without god due april generally favorable preamble weigels pithy polemic boldly assesses contemporary europe anonymous reviewer adds following weigel sprinkles conservative catholicism readily throughout text readers might persuaded contours argument may well dismiss rightwing nut well readers anyway reviewer probably alone holding opinion distinguished author whose political views differ hardly impartial one reviewer allowed hide face cloak anonymity kirkus review one two trade magazines publishers booksellers employ anonymous reviewers much larger one publishers weekly licensing agreements amazoncom barnes amp noble booksellers also many ordinary book buyers guided opinions well exactly librarian dubuque schoolteacher detroit graduate student duquesne whoever else may unlikely world authority subject writers paid 50 per review happens pw brought circle new editor chief sara nelson claims plans revitalizing magazine might want revisit scandalous longlamented policy anonymity although hard see might bartleby vein prefer nearly 500 books day published america enough year fill averagesize college library one could possibly read reviews let alone books even team stakhanovite readers publishers weekly cover 10000 books year faced annual tsunami literature must grasp bit solid support comes hand choice seek advice thats one reason publishers weekly kirkus cling policy anonymity suggests magisterial objective authoritative source unsullied personal biases yet opinions actually offer magazines every bit quirky perverse prone bias publications writers must take responsibility say experience mr weigel rightwing nuts reminds us magazines politics tend predictably liberal thus sen robert byrds dyspeptic electionyear attack president bush described searing criticism informed byrds knowledge history leavened vast experience written legendary rhetorical flourish pj orourkes latest described issue pw irreverent inyourface often offensive containing slightly skewed reporting eric alterman others exhaustively diagnose corporateowned media lewis lapham modernday tom paine writes compelling book complicity media support steady erosion individual civil liberties name national security l brent bozells attack liberal media weapons mass distortion offers thesis nearly requires present partial picture sound familiar makes think dan rather labeling partisans called attention fraudulent report president bushs national guard service recent election campaign hes partisan mantle journalistic objectivity dan rather anonymity reviewers pw kirkus relics may call unitary culture put another way time politics little relevance nearly everyones eyes save committed marxists reporting news assessing worth book culture also produced something called general reader gatekeepers like book month club literary guild used cater week declining numbers subscribers led announcement book month club discontinuing panel judges appointed 2001 successors likes clifton fadiman whose guidance general reader relied many years clubs heyday words era unitary culture pretense among literary elites behave simply ignoring conservatives treating views faults writing thinking researching treated like nowestablished bias cbs news could argued death knell unitary culture sounded 1974 john gross editor times literary supplement london ended policy anonymity place first 72 years papers existence case anonymity relatively simple one wrote mr gross time many occasions reader entitled ask authority judgment opinion advanced even occasions whole import review depends knowing identity reviewer critics prepared held directly responsible writei feel principle accountability comes first view universally applauded subject mooted earlier occasion less figure ts eliot risen defense anonymity writing anonymously tls learned said moderate dislikes crochets write temperate impartial way learnt things permissible appear ones name become tasteless eccentricity unseemly violence unsigned thats anonymous reviewers today brought culture wars past 30 years seem longer feel need learning thats sara nelson pw take leaf john grosss book put name next opinion mr bowman resident scholar ethics public policy center washington | 591 |
<p>By Antoni Slodkowski, Shoon Naing and Thu Thu Aung</p>
<p>YANGON/BANGKOK (Reuters) – In many ways Wa Lone and Kyaw Soe Oo, two Reuters journalists arrested in Myanmar, symbolize their country’s emergence after decades of isolation – both from modest, provincial backgrounds, they worked hard to pursue careers that would have been impossible in the junta era into which they were born.</p>
<p>Following are profiles of the two journalists, who were arrested on Dec. 12 and have been held since then without contact with their families or a lawyer, accused of breaching the country’s Official Secrets Act:</p>
<p>WA LONE</p>
<p>Wa Lone, 31, grew up in Kin Pyit, a village of some 100 households in the Shwe Bo district north of Mandalay, on Myanmar’s dry central plain between the mighty Irrawaddy and Chindwin rivers.</p>
<p>One of five children, his parents were rice farmers and there was little money. His mother died from cancer when he was young.</p>
<p>But he was a good student, according to friends and family, and took a keen interest in news from an early age. One of his brothers, Thura Aung, remembers Wa Lone, aged around 10, watching bulletins on a shared TV in their village.</p>
<p>“Sometimes he would play at being an anchor,” said Thura Aung, 26. “He always said he wanted to be a reporter in the future.”</p>
<p>After finishing school at 16 he enrolled as a student at a government technical university, but left after a couple of semesters because his family could not afford the tuition.</p>
<p>Around 2004 he went to Mawlamyine, Myanmar’s fourth biggest city, living in a Buddhist monastery where his uncle was a monk. In exchange for a place to stay, he would get up at 5 a.m. to clean and prepare food for the monks before going to work at a photo services business. Wa Lone showed a talent for design and photography, and soon set up a small photo services shop of his own, which he ran with Thura Aung.</p>
<p>In December 2010, having saved a little money, the brothers moved back to Yangon, where Wa Lone could pursue his boyhood dream. Living in North Okklapa township, near the city’s airport, they re-established their photo services business, while Wa Lone also enrolled in a media training school and later began taking English classes.</p>
<p>Mindy Walker, an American teacher who met him in 2012, recalls a “skinny kid from the village who had little interaction with foreigners”.</p>
<p>He was so nervous he fled her English class the first time he was called on to answer a question.</p>
<p>“We still joke about that moment and he tells every new student in our class that story so that they feel more confident,” said Walker in an email. “His heart is huge and he is always encouraging others to succeed.”</p>
<p>CHARITABLE FOUNDATION</p>
<p>Within five or six months Wa Lone had landed his first job in journalism on the weekly People’s Age in Yangon, where his editor was Pe Myint – now Myanmar’s Minister of Information.</p>
<p>In 2014, he joined the English-language daily, Myanmar Times, covering the historic 2015 general election that swept Nobel peace prize laureate Aung San Suu Kyi to power.</p>
<p>“As soon as I met Wa Lone, I knew we had to hire him,” said the paper’s former editor, Thomas Kean. “He was thoughtful, articulate and clearly cared deeply about journalism.”</p>
<p>As well as providing a platform for him to excel as a journalist, the two years he spent at the Myanmar Times was a significant period in Wa Lone’s life – it was there that he met his wife Pan Ei Mon who works in the paper’s sales and marketing department. The couple married in April last year.</p>
<p>Despite the long hours chasing stories and studying, Wa Lone has still found time to write a children’s book, The Gardener, a story in Burmese and English with an environmental message that draws on his own rural roots.</p>
<p>He co-founded the Third Story Project, a charitable foundation that produces and distributes stories that aim to promote tolerance between Myanmar’s different ethnic groups, and is involved in projects working with orphans.</p>
<p>Many of his weekends off have been spent visiting poor rural villages – much like the one where he grew up.</p>
<p>“He brings story books from Third Story and gives them to children,” said Pan Ei Mon. “He reads to them and does painting competitions and sings with the children.”</p>
<p>Wa Lone joined Reuters in July 2016 and quickly made his mark with in-depth stories on sensitive subjects including land grabs by the powerful military and the murder of prominent politician Ko Ni, as well as uncovering evidence of killings by soldiers in the northeast.</p>
<p>His reporting on the crisis that erupted in northwestern Rakhine state in October 2016 won him a joint honorable mention from the Society of Publishers in Asia in its annual awards.</p>
<p>He returned to Rakhine this year, after attacks by Rohingya Muslim militants on security forces in August triggered a crackdown by the army.</p>
<p>Covering such subjects is not easy in a country where the transition from decades of junta rule is proving painful.</p>
<p>“His bravery over the past year, and particularly since Aug. 25, has been incredible. It’s hard to describe the tide of ill-feeling towards journalists who question the military-government narrative on Rakhine,” said Kean, his former editor.</p>
<p>“As soon as one of my colleagues said, ‘Have you heard about Wa Lone?’, I knew he’d been arrested. His reporting has undoubtedly made him a target. It’s heartbreaking, infuriating and completely unsurprising.”</p>
<p>KYAW SOE OO</p>
<p>Family and friends of Kyaw Soe Oo say he has always had a love of writing, and composed poetry before becoming a journalist.</p>
<p>Min Min, the founder of the Root Investigative Agency, where Kyaw Soe Oo worked after starting his reporting career with the online Rakhine Development News, described the 27-year-old as “a joyful person” who had many friends.</p>
<p>“When I first met him in 2013, he was a poet not a journalist and not interested in journalism yet,” said Min Min.</p>
<p>An ethnic Rakhine Buddhist, Kyaw Soe Oe grew up in the state capital Sittwe, and was one of five siblings.</p>
<p>“He is a good elder brother,” said his sister, Nyo Nyo Aye, adding that her brother always stood out from the crowd.</p>
<p>“He was always with books. He went to the book store or second-hand booksellers. He spent all his money buying books. .”</p>
<p>Childhood friend Zaw Myo Thu said he avoided becoming caught up in the communal tensions between Rakhine Buddhists and Rohingya Muslims that have seethed in the city since the upheavals in 2012.</p>
<p>“He wrote poems. He loved to read,” he said. “He never fought with anyone.”</p>
<p>But it was that conflict which drew him into journalism, covering Rakhine issues. He had been with Reuters since September, reporting on the army’s crackdown in the aftermath of militant attacks on security forces on Aug. 25.</p>
<p>“As a journalist, he will cover news, but I think he will do it fairly because he does not discriminate between races,” said his sister Nyo Nyo Aye. “He just realizes all are human.”</p>
<p>For Reuters, Kyaw Soe Oo worked on an investigative story about Myanmar’s plan to harvest the crops of Rohingya farmers who fled to Bangladesh, and reported on how some Buddhists were enforcing local-level segregation in central Rakhine.</p>
<p>“He didn’t tell me about the work and I never asked,” said his wife, Chit Thu Win, with whom he has a three-year-old daughter. “I believed in him that he is doing the right thing and he’s just following his passion. He wanted to be a writer.”</p> | false | 1 | antoni slodkowski shoon naing thu thu aung yangonbangkok reuters many ways wa lone kyaw soe oo two reuters journalists arrested myanmar symbolize countrys emergence decades isolation modest provincial backgrounds worked hard pursue careers would impossible junta era born following profiles two journalists arrested dec 12 held since without contact families lawyer accused breaching countrys official secrets act wa lone wa lone 31 grew kin pyit village 100 households shwe bo district north mandalay myanmars dry central plain mighty irrawaddy chindwin rivers one five children parents rice farmers little money mother died cancer young good student according friends family took keen interest news early age one brothers thura aung remembers wa lone aged around 10 watching bulletins shared tv village sometimes would play anchor said thura aung 26 always said wanted reporter future finishing school 16 enrolled student government technical university left couple semesters family could afford tuition around 2004 went mawlamyine myanmars fourth biggest city living buddhist monastery uncle monk exchange place stay would get 5 clean prepare food monks going work photo services business wa lone showed talent design photography soon set small photo services shop ran thura aung december 2010 saved little money brothers moved back yangon wa lone could pursue boyhood dream living north okklapa township near citys airport reestablished photo services business wa lone also enrolled media training school later began taking english classes mindy walker american teacher met 2012 recalls skinny kid village little interaction foreigners nervous fled english class first time called answer question still joke moment tells every new student class story feel confident said walker email heart huge always encouraging others succeed charitable foundation within five six months wa lone landed first job journalism weekly peoples age yangon editor pe myint myanmars minister information 2014 joined englishlanguage daily myanmar times covering historic 2015 general election swept nobel peace prize laureate aung san suu kyi power soon met wa lone knew hire said papers former editor thomas kean thoughtful articulate clearly cared deeply journalism well providing platform excel journalist two years spent myanmar times significant period wa lones life met wife pan ei mon works papers sales marketing department couple married april last year despite long hours chasing stories studying wa lone still found time write childrens book gardener story burmese english environmental message draws rural roots cofounded third story project charitable foundation produces distributes stories aim promote tolerance myanmars different ethnic groups involved projects working orphans many weekends spent visiting poor rural villages much like one grew brings story books third story gives children said pan ei mon reads painting competitions sings children wa lone joined reuters july 2016 quickly made mark indepth stories sensitive subjects including land grabs powerful military murder prominent politician ko ni well uncovering evidence killings soldiers northeast reporting crisis erupted northwestern rakhine state october 2016 joint honorable mention society publishers asia annual awards returned rakhine year attacks rohingya muslim militants security forces august triggered crackdown army covering subjects easy country transition decades junta rule proving painful bravery past year particularly since aug 25 incredible hard describe tide illfeeling towards journalists question militarygovernment narrative rakhine said kean former editor soon one colleagues said heard wa lone knew hed arrested reporting undoubtedly made target heartbreaking infuriating completely unsurprising kyaw soe oo family friends kyaw soe oo say always love writing composed poetry becoming journalist min min founder root investigative agency kyaw soe oo worked starting reporting career online rakhine development news described 27yearold joyful person many friends first met 2013 poet journalist interested journalism yet said min min ethnic rakhine buddhist kyaw soe oe grew state capital sittwe one five siblings good elder brother said sister nyo nyo aye adding brother always stood crowd always books went book store secondhand booksellers spent money buying books childhood friend zaw myo thu said avoided becoming caught communal tensions rakhine buddhists rohingya muslims seethed city since upheavals 2012 wrote poems loved read said never fought anyone conflict drew journalism covering rakhine issues reuters since september reporting armys crackdown aftermath militant attacks security forces aug 25 journalist cover news think fairly discriminate races said sister nyo nyo aye realizes human reuters kyaw soe oo worked investigative story myanmars plan harvest crops rohingya farmers fled bangladesh reported buddhists enforcing locallevel segregation central rakhine didnt tell work never asked said wife chit thu win threeyearold daughter believed right thing hes following passion wanted writer | 729 |
<p>With all the disagreements within modern Judaism, embryonic-stem-cell research is an area of remarkable moral and theological consensus. Judaism is pro-medicine; there are no clear grounds in Jewish law for treating human embryos as inviolable; therefore the moral duty to advance potentially life-saving research trumps any moral concerns about the exploitation and destruction of human embryos in the laboratory. On this question, Reform Jews who never feel bound by Jewish law and Orthodox Jews who always live in strict accordance with Jewish law entirely agree: Full speed ahead.</p>
<p>It is in this context that the <a href="http://www.ou.org/" type="external">Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations</a>, one of the most important Jewish organizations in America, has circulated a letter in support of the Castle-DeGette bill (H.R. 810), legislation that would provide federal funding for research using embryos created initially for reproductive purposes but left-over in fertility clinics. The letter is worth quoting at some length:</p>
<p>The Jewish tradition places great value upon human life and its preservation. The Torah commands us to treat and cure the ill and to defeat disease wherever possible; to do this is to be the Creator’s partner in safeguarding the created. The traditional Jewish perspective thus emphasizes that the potential to save and heal human lives is an integral part of valuing human life. Moreover, the traditional Jewish perspective does not accord an embryo outside of the womb the full status of humanhood and its attendant protections. Thus, stem cell research may be consistent with and serve these moral and noble goals; however, such research must not be pursued indiscriminately.</p>
<p>H.R. 810 strikes this careful balance. By insisting that publicly funded stem cell research be conducted on cells derived from embryos donated to IVF clinics and were in excess of the clinical need of the individuals seeking IVF treatment, and by requiring the prior consultation with and consent of the donors, the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act serves to value and venerate the sanctity of life and our responsibilities to our fellow man and woman.</p>
<p>In the end, the argument that such embryos are available for our use because they are leftover (“donated to IVF clinics”), because they are unwanted (“in excess of clinical need”), and because they are likely to die anyway is morally unconvincing. Human dignity does not depend on being wanted by others; and being doomed to death does not make human beings into things&#160;— otherwise, the terminally ill would be in danger of being turned into ready sources of organs. In the end, the moral question hinges on the moral standing of human embryos themselves&#160;— on what human embryos are and what we owe them. And it seems irresponsible for Judaism to seek the fruits of modern science without confronting the facts modern biology&#160;— which demonstrates, beyond reasonable doubt, that the embryo is a complete human organism from the moment of conception, with purposeful division and development from the very beginning, and with primordial limbs, organs, and beating heart tissue by age 40 days. To call such embryos “mere water” denies the biological and human reality that lies before us.</p>
<p>It also seems irresponsible to ignore the many references in Jewish literature and Jewish law that celebrate the dignity and mystery of developing life, and that describe the violation of God’s majestic creation entailed in deliberately destroying it. Even the wisest rabbi many centuries ago could not deal adequately and precisely with the moral complexity of our current biotechnology. Instead, the Jewish sages of the past can offer us moral guideposts&#160;— things to revere and things to avoid&#160;— that we must wisely apply in light of current knowledge and current circumstances. This means not only considering the act in itself&#160;— embryo destruction&#160;— but the environment in which the act will be committed, and by whom. And I think it is fair to say that most stem-cell biologists&#160;— those in the laboratories destroying embryos&#160;— don’t revere God and Torah the way most Orthodox Jews do. This, too, the wise Jewish citizen must remember.</p>
<p>While acting positively to save life is a great Jewish good, so is preserving a society that welcomes the weak and never kills the innocent. Even if embryos are not our ontological or moral equals&#160;— though the argument for such a position is hard to make on rational grounds&#160;— there are good Jewish reasons not to promote the destruction of nascent human life, precisely because it will corrode the sensibilities that make us good people&#160;— and good Jews. It is simply wrong to appeal to Jewish law on abortion, which privileges the life of the mother over the life of the unborn child, as a moral justification. Jewish law does so, after all, only in cases where the unborn child is a “pursuer” who threatens the mother’s life and health directly. With embryo research, by contrast, there is no direct conflict between an embryo and a patient, and we are not in the position of using particular embryos to save particular patients. Rather, we are proposing a speculative research project that requires the massive, ongoing destruction of human embryos. And this should make all Jews and all decent citizens shudder&#160;— not only for what it is, but for where it might lead. Where is the Jewish “fence around the law” when you need it?</p>
<p>But what is most remarkable about the Orthodox Union’s letter is the seemingly disingenuous character of the way it endorses H.R. 810&#160;— by saying that the legislation strikes a “careful balance” by promoting only research on leftover IVF embryos. Anyone who has followed the Orthodox Union knows, after all, that this organization has been one of the most vigorous proponents for research cloning&#160;— that is, for creating human embryos solely for research that requires their destruction. There are no “leftover” cloned embryos. There are no cloned embryos that are “in excess of clinical need.” There is no “careful balance” being struck in the South Korean-style research that the Orthodox Union proudly supports. And if one rereads these past endorsements of research cloning&#160;— easily discovered on the Orthodox Union’s website&#160;— they are prefaced with the exact same moral language as the endorsement of H.R. 810&#160;— with a discussion about the Torah tradition’s “great value upon human life” and the fact that “our tradition states that an embryo in vitro does not enjoy the full status of humanhood.”</p>
<p>Perhaps the “careful balance” is simply political and not ethical, and perhaps we can expect a letter any day now saying that the Orthodox Union is absolutely opposed to federal funding for “research cloning” and absolutely opposed to federal funding for creating human embryos solely for research. But this seems rather unlikely. More likely is that the Castle-DeGette bill is just one step towards seeking&#160;— or demanding&#160;— federal funding for research cloning, too, since “defeating disease” may require creating the kind of tailor-made stem cells that cannot be created using only the “spares.” This is why everyone is so excited about so-called “therapeutic cloning” in the first place, and why many scientists say using the “spares” is “not enough.”</p>
<p>On most issues, Orthodox Judaism is a beacon of moral wisdom. And personally, I wish I lived up to the standards of everyday holiness embodied by many Orthodox Jews. But on the stem-cell question, the conscience of Judaism has been misguided. And when it comes to the Castle-DeGette bill, Jews seem to have forgotten even the minimal liberal wisdom of tolerance&#160;— the wisdom of not trampling on the moral opinions of their fellow citizens, like pro-life Christians, who believe embryo destruction is not only evil but the gravest evil. As Jews, don’t we owe our fellow citizens the minimal decency of not asking them to pay for the activity that most offends them? (The Bush policy that the Orthodox Union seeks to overturn, one must remember, does not fund embryo research or ban embryo research; its practical effect is ultimately neutral.) As Jews, don’t we know what it is like to have our own deepest principles and practices trampled upon by the state? And as Jews, are we really so sure that medical progress justifies or requires the full-scale dehumanization of early human life? Have we forgotten not only the words but also the spirit of Ecclesiastes: “As thou knowest not what is the way of the wind, Nor how the bones do grow in the womb of her that is with child; Even so thou knowest not the work of God Who doeth all things”?</p>
<p>— Eric Cohen is editor of <a href="http://www.thenewatlantis.com/" type="external">The New Atlantis</a> and a resident scholar at the <a href="" type="internal">Ethics and Public Policy Center</a>.</p> | false | 1 | disagreements within modern judaism embryonicstemcell research area remarkable moral theological consensus judaism promedicine clear grounds jewish law treating human embryos inviolable therefore moral duty advance potentially lifesaving research trumps moral concerns exploitation destruction human embryos laboratory question reform jews never feel bound jewish law orthodox jews always live strict accordance jewish law entirely agree full speed ahead context union orthodox jewish congregations one important jewish organizations america circulated letter support castledegette bill hr 810 legislation would provide federal funding research using embryos created initially reproductive purposes leftover fertility clinics letter worth quoting length jewish tradition places great value upon human life preservation torah commands us treat cure ill defeat disease wherever possible creators partner safeguarding created traditional jewish perspective thus emphasizes potential save heal human lives integral part valuing human life moreover traditional jewish perspective accord embryo outside womb full status humanhood attendant protections thus stem cell research may consistent serve moral noble goals however research must pursued indiscriminately hr 810 strikes careful balance insisting publicly funded stem cell research conducted cells derived embryos donated ivf clinics excess clinical need individuals seeking ivf treatment requiring prior consultation consent donors stem cell research enhancement act serves value venerate sanctity life responsibilities fellow man woman end argument embryos available use leftover donated ivf clinics unwanted excess clinical need likely die anyway morally unconvincing human dignity depend wanted others doomed death make human beings things160 otherwise terminally ill would danger turned ready sources organs end moral question hinges moral standing human embryos themselves160 human embryos owe seems irresponsible judaism seek fruits modern science without confronting facts modern biology160 demonstrates beyond reasonable doubt embryo complete human organism moment conception purposeful division development beginning primordial limbs organs beating heart tissue age 40 days call embryos mere water denies biological human reality lies us also seems irresponsible ignore many references jewish literature jewish law celebrate dignity mystery developing life describe violation gods majestic creation entailed deliberately destroying even wisest rabbi many centuries ago could deal adequately precisely moral complexity current biotechnology instead jewish sages past offer us moral guideposts160 things revere things avoid160 must wisely apply light current knowledge current circumstances means considering act itself160 embryo destruction160 environment act committed think fair say stemcell biologists160 laboratories destroying embryos160 dont revere god torah way orthodox jews wise jewish citizen must remember acting positively save life great jewish good preserving society welcomes weak never kills innocent even embryos ontological moral equals160 though argument position hard make rational grounds160 good jewish reasons promote destruction nascent human life precisely corrode sensibilities make us good people160 good jews simply wrong appeal jewish law abortion privileges life mother life unborn child moral justification jewish law cases unborn child pursuer threatens mothers life health directly embryo research contrast direct conflict embryo patient position using particular embryos save particular patients rather proposing speculative research project requires massive ongoing destruction human embryos make jews decent citizens shudder160 might lead jewish fence around law need remarkable orthodox unions letter seemingly disingenuous character way endorses hr 810160 saying legislation strikes careful balance promoting research leftover ivf embryos anyone followed orthodox union knows organization one vigorous proponents research cloning160 creating human embryos solely research requires destruction leftover cloned embryos cloned embryos excess clinical need careful balance struck south koreanstyle research orthodox union proudly supports one rereads past endorsements research cloning160 easily discovered orthodox unions website160 prefaced exact moral language endorsement hr 810160 discussion torah traditions great value upon human life fact tradition states embryo vitro enjoy full status humanhood perhaps careful balance simply political ethical perhaps expect letter day saying orthodox union absolutely opposed federal funding research cloning absolutely opposed federal funding creating human embryos solely research seems rather unlikely likely castledegette bill one step towards seeking160 demanding160 federal funding research cloning since defeating disease may require creating kind tailormade stem cells created using spares everyone excited socalled therapeutic cloning first place many scientists say using spares enough issues orthodox judaism beacon moral wisdom personally wish lived standards everyday holiness embodied many orthodox jews stemcell question conscience judaism misguided comes castledegette bill jews seem forgotten even minimal liberal wisdom tolerance160 wisdom trampling moral opinions fellow citizens like prolife christians believe embryo destruction evil gravest evil jews dont owe fellow citizens minimal decency asking pay activity offends bush policy orthodox union seeks overturn one must remember fund embryo research ban embryo research practical effect ultimately neutral jews dont know like deepest principles practices trampled upon state jews really sure medical progress justifies requires fullscale dehumanization early human life forgotten words also spirit ecclesiastes thou knowest way wind bones grow womb child even thou knowest work god doeth things eric cohen editor new atlantis resident scholar ethics public policy center | 780 |
<p>By Alana Wise and Jonathan Allen</p>
<p>NEW YORK (Reuters) – Many U.S. flight attendants lack the training in how to deal with complaints of on-board sexual harassment, an industry union and Democratic lawmakers say, raising questions about whether airlines are prepared to protect passengers from predatory men.</p>
<p>The issue was thrust into the spotlight this week when Alaska Airlines (N:) promised to investigate a complaint by Randi Zuckerberg, a Silicon Valley executive and sister of Facebook Inc (O:) CEO Mark Zuckerberg, that a male passenger seated near her made lewd sexual remarks to her.</p>
<p>Reuters could not independently verify Zuckerberg’s allegation. Alaska Airlines did not respond to repeated requests for comment on Friday.</p>
<p>Zuckerberg’s complaint comes at a moment of reckoning in the United States over sexual harassment, with nearly daily headlines about rich and powerful men in entertainment, politics and media being felled by complaints of impropriety or worse.</p>
<p>The Association of Flight Attendants (AFA), which represents employees of Alaska Airlines and several other carriers, said some airlines have guidelines specific to dealing with accusations of passenger-on-passenger sexual misconduct. But those policies are rarely highlighted and staff are often unaware of any specific guidance, it said.</p>
<p>Last year, at the request of the U.S. Congress, the group surveyed its members on their awareness of guidelines for dealing with accusations of sexual harassment and assault and found that more than half of the nearly 2,000 respondents had no knowledge of any specific policies.</p>
<p>“This is different than if someone punches you in the face,” AFA spokeswoman Taylor Garland said. “There can be shame associated with it. It’s just a very unique crime.”</p>
<p>Democratic lawmakers in the Republican-controlled U.S. Senate have complained for more than a year about a lack of guidance given to airlines and their flight crews on how to deal with sexual harassment.</p>
<p>Senators Bob Casey and Patty Murray, among others, wrote to the U.S. Department of Justice and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) in October last year urging them to do more to track incidents and to strengthen federal rules and guidelines. They also introduced a bill this year mandating better tracking and clearer rules, but it has not become law.</p>
<p>“It’s clear this Congress needs to act sooner rather than later to truly address this issue and make sure survivors get the support and help they deserve,” Murray said in a statement on Friday.</p>
<p>GRAY AREA</p>
<p>A committee on in-flight sexual assault formed earlier this year by the U.S. Justice Department met as recently as June, the FAA said, but declined to give details of any proposed guidelines.</p>
<p>While airlines did not provide a number of complaints, the problem of onboard sexual misconduct is not new, even if its frequency is not well tracked.</p>
<p>There have been a handful of successful prosecutions in recent years against people caught sexually harassing other passengers, but they typically involve physical contact.</p>
<p>In 2015, a Catholic priest who groped a sleeping woman on a U.S. Airways flight was sentenced to six months in federal prison after being convicted of abusive sexual contact.</p>
<p>In 2016, a woman told the New York Times that President Donald Trump had groped her during a flight to New York around 1980, when she was 38. Trump denied the woman’s claims, telling the newspaper “none of this ever took place.”</p>
<p>The policy for any potential criminal behavior onboard a flight, including acts of alleged sexual misconduct, is to reach out to law enforcement officers, who will meet the plane at the gate upon landing to investigate the incident.</p>
<p>Airlines have different policies and training in place to deal with passenger disruptions.</p>
<p>United Airlines (N:) said it encourages customers to report incidents of harassment to crew. American Airlines (O:) said its staff are trained to deal with all matters of passenger disruptions the same way, including separating involved passengers, and depending on severity, possibly diverting the flight to a different airport to summon law enforcement.</p>
<p>The FBI said there was an increase in reports of sexual assault on aircraft in 2016, when it opened at least 58 investigations, compared with 40 in 2015, the New York Times reported. The bureau did not respond to requests for more recent data.</p>
<p>Verbal sexual harassment as described in Zuckerberg’s complaint falls into a legal gray area, said John Banzhaf, a public-interest law professor at George Washington University.</p>
<p>Even so, public opinion, not legal statutes, may shape how airlines respond to the alleged incident.</p>
<p>In April, United faced international backlash after a video surfaced of a 69-year old passenger being forcibly removed from a parked plane to make room for additional flight crew. Afterwards, some airlines changed their policy on overbooking.</p>
<p>But policing speech, even if it is highly offensive, may be more tricky, Banzhaf said.</p>
<p>“The law basically starts off with the premise that simply saying nasty things, propositioning women and so on by itself is not even a civil tort, much less is it a criminal action,” he said in a telephone interview.</p>
<p>But Thomas Demetrio, who represented the passenger removed from the United flight, questions whether, in the Zuckerberg incident, Alaska Air staff erred in providing more alcoholic drinks to the man she said was harassing her, according to her account.</p>
<p>“They owe Ms. Zuckerberg the highest duty of care and that includes protecting her from an unruly seat mate,” Demetrio said in a telephone interview. “It’s no different than any restaurant or bar. They’re supposed to know when to cut a guy off.”</p> | false | 1 | alana wise jonathan allen new york reuters many us flight attendants lack training deal complaints onboard sexual harassment industry union democratic lawmakers say raising questions whether airlines prepared protect passengers predatory men issue thrust spotlight week alaska airlines n promised investigate complaint randi zuckerberg silicon valley executive sister facebook inc ceo mark zuckerberg male passenger seated near made lewd sexual remarks reuters could independently verify zuckerbergs allegation alaska airlines respond repeated requests comment friday zuckerbergs complaint comes moment reckoning united states sexual harassment nearly daily headlines rich powerful men entertainment politics media felled complaints impropriety worse association flight attendants afa represents employees alaska airlines several carriers said airlines guidelines specific dealing accusations passengeronpassenger sexual misconduct policies rarely highlighted staff often unaware specific guidance said last year request us congress group surveyed members awareness guidelines dealing accusations sexual harassment assault found half nearly 2000 respondents knowledge specific policies different someone punches face afa spokeswoman taylor garland said shame associated unique crime democratic lawmakers republicancontrolled us senate complained year lack guidance given airlines flight crews deal sexual harassment senators bob casey patty murray among others wrote us department justice federal aviation administration faa october last year urging track incidents strengthen federal rules guidelines also introduced bill year mandating better tracking clearer rules become law clear congress needs act sooner rather later truly address issue make sure survivors get support help deserve murray said statement friday gray area committee inflight sexual assault formed earlier year us justice department met recently june faa said declined give details proposed guidelines airlines provide number complaints problem onboard sexual misconduct new even frequency well tracked handful successful prosecutions recent years people caught sexually harassing passengers typically involve physical contact 2015 catholic priest groped sleeping woman us airways flight sentenced six months federal prison convicted abusive sexual contact 2016 woman told new york times president donald trump groped flight new york around 1980 38 trump denied womans claims telling newspaper none ever took place policy potential criminal behavior onboard flight including acts alleged sexual misconduct reach law enforcement officers meet plane gate upon landing investigate incident airlines different policies training place deal passenger disruptions united airlines n said encourages customers report incidents harassment crew american airlines said staff trained deal matters passenger disruptions way including separating involved passengers depending severity possibly diverting flight different airport summon law enforcement fbi said increase reports sexual assault aircraft 2016 opened least 58 investigations compared 40 2015 new york times reported bureau respond requests recent data verbal sexual harassment described zuckerbergs complaint falls legal gray area said john banzhaf publicinterest law professor george washington university even public opinion legal statutes may shape airlines respond alleged incident april united faced international backlash video surfaced 69year old passenger forcibly removed parked plane make room additional flight crew afterwards airlines changed policy overbooking policing speech even highly offensive may tricky banzhaf said law basically starts premise simply saying nasty things propositioning women even civil tort much less criminal action said telephone interview thomas demetrio represented passenger removed united flight questions whether zuckerberg incident alaska air staff erred providing alcoholic drinks man said harassing according account owe ms zuckerberg highest duty care includes protecting unruly seat mate demetrio said telephone interview different restaurant bar theyre supposed know cut guy | 543 |
<p>“Veep” has won the Emmy for casting in a comedy series, marking the first award handed out on the second night of the 69th annual <a href="http://variety.com/t/creative-arts-emmy-awards/" type="external">Creative Arts Emmy Awards</a> at the Microsoft Theater in downtown Los Angeles.</p>
<p>Highlights from Saturday and Sunday’s award presentations in 92 categories will air Sept. 16 as a special on FXX.</p>
<p>Here is a complete list of tonight’s nominees. Winners will be updated live.</p>
<p>Casting for a Comedy SeriesDorian Frankel &amp; Sibby Kirchgessner (“Veep”)</p>
<p>Original Main Title Theme MusicMichael Stein, Kyle Dixon (“Stranger Things”)</p>
<p>Single-Camera Picture Editing for a Comedy Series&#160;Jennifer Lilly (“Master of None”)</p>
<p>Multi-Camera Picture Editing for a Comedy SeriesPeter Chakos (“The Big Bang Theory”)</p>
<p>Stunt Coordination For a Drama Series, Limited Series or MovieJames Lew (“Marvel’s Luke Cage”)</p>
<p>Period/ Fantasy Costumes for a Series, Limited Series or MovieMichele Clapton, Alex Fordham, Emma O’Loughlin &amp; Kate O’Farrell (“The Crown”)</p>
<p>Production Design for a Narrative Period Program (One Hour or More)Martin Childs, Mark Raggett &amp; Celia Bobak (“The Crown”)</p>
<p>Music Composition for a Limited Series, Movie, or Special (Original Dramatic Score)Jeff Russo (“Fargo” — “Aporia”)</p>
<p>Production Design for a Narrative Contemporary or Fantasy Program (One Hour or More)Julie Berghoff, Evan Webber &amp; Sophie Neudorfer (“The Handmaid’s Tale”)Jonathan McKinstry, Jo Riddell &amp; Philip Murphy (“Penny Dreadful”)Zack Grobler, Steve Christensen &amp; Julie Ochipinti (“Westworld”)Nathan Crowley, Naaman Marshall &amp; Julie Ochipinti (“Westworld”)Ludovica Ferrario, Alexandro Maria Santucci &amp; Laura Casalini (“The Young Pope”)</p>
<p>Children’s Program“Girl Meets World” (Disney Channel)“Macy’s Thanksgiving Day Parade 90th Celebration” (NBC)“Once Upon a Sesame Street Christmas” (HBO)“School of Rock” (Nickelodeon)“Star Wars Rebels” (Disney XD)</p>
<p>Production Design for a Narrative Program (Half-Hour or Less)John Shaffner, Francoise Cherry-Cohen &amp; Ann Shea (“The Big Bang Theory”)Devorah Herbert, Ben Edelberg &amp; Christopher Carlson (“Grace and Frankie”)Tommaso Ortino, Susanna Codognato &amp; Letizia Santucci (“Mozart in the Jungle”)Richard Toyon, Jaclyn Hauser &amp; Jennifer Mueller (“Silicon Valley”)Cat Smith, Macie Vener &amp; Dea Johnson (“Transparent”)Jim Gloster, Andrew Leitch &amp; Kimberly Wannop (“Veep”)</p>
<p>Cinematography for a Multi-Camera SeriesJoseph Wilmond Calloway (“K.C. Undercover”)Donald A. Morgan (“The Ranch”)Gary Baum (” Superior Donuts”)Christian La Fountaine (“2 Broke Girls”)</p>
<p>Guest Actor in a Comedy SeriesRiz Ahmed (“Girls” — “All I Ever Wanted”)Matthew Rhys (“Girls” — “American Bitch”)Dave Chappelle (“Saturday Night Live” — “Host: Dave Chappelle”)Lin-Manuel Miranda (“Satuday Night Live” — “Host: Lin-Manuel Miranda”)Tom Hanks (“Saturday Night Live” — “Host: Tom Hanks”)Hugh Laurie (“Veep” — “Blurb”)</p>
<p>Sound Mixing for a Comedy or Drama Series (One Hour)Larry Benjamin, Kevin Valentine, Philip W. Palmer (“Better Call Saul” — “Witness”)Nathan Nance, Scott R. Lewis, Lorenzo Milan (“House of Cards” — “Chapter 53”)John W. Cook II, Bill Freesh, William Sarokin, Paul Drenning (“Mr. Robot” — “eps2.8_h1dden-pr0cess.axx”)Joe Barnett, Adam Jenkins, Chris Durfy, Bill Higley (“Stranger Things” — “Chapter Eight: The Upside Down”)Keith Rogers, Scott Weber, Roger Stevenson, Kyle O’Neal (“Westworld” — “The Bicameral Mind”)</p>
<p>Music Composition For A Series (Original Dramatic Score)Rupert Gregson-Williams (“The Crown” — “Hyde Park Corner”)Jeff Beal (“House of Cards” — “Chapter 63”)Jacob Shea, Jasha Klebe (“Planet Earth II” — “Islands”)James Newton Howard (“A Series of Unfortunate Events” — “A Bad Beginning”)Max Richter (“Taboo” — “Episode 1”)Martin Phipps, Ruth Barrett, Natalie Holt (“Victoria (Masterpiece)” — “Doll 123”)</p>
<p>Guest Actress in a Comedy SeriesWanda Sykes (“Black-ish” — “Lemons”)Carrie Fisher (“Catastrophe” — “Episode 6”)Becky Ann Baker (“Girls” — “Gummies”)Angela Bassett (“Master of None” — “Thanksgiving”)Kristen Wiig (“Saturday Night Live” — “Host: Kristen Wiig”)Melissa McCarthy (“Saturday Night Live” — “Host: Melissa McCarthy”)</p>
<p>Stunt Coordination for a Comedy Series or Variety ProgramErik Marshall Solky (“Angie Tribeca”)Norman Howell (“Brooklyn Nine-Nine”)Brian Smyj (“Saturday Night Live”)Eddie Perez (“Shameless”)Jill Brown (“Unbreakable Kimmy Schmidt”)</p>
<p>Creative Achievement in Interactive Media Within a Scripted Program&#160;Mike Benson, Bob Bowen, Brianna Lopez, Brian Burton &amp; Campfire (“The Man in the High Castle: Resistance Radio”)USA Network, Universal Cable Productions, Here Be Dragons, Esmail Corp. &amp; Anonymous Content (“The Mr. Robot Virtual Reality Experience”)James L. Brooks, Al Jean, Matt Groening, David Silverman &amp; Google Spotlight Stories (“The Simpsons – Planet of the Couches”)Netflix &amp; CBS Digital (“Stranger Things VR Experience”)HBO, Kilter Films &amp; Bad Robot (“Westworld”)</p>
<p>Commercial&#160;John X Hannes &amp; Smuggler (“Calling JohnMalkovich.com – Squarespace”)R/GA &amp; Tool of North America (“Love Cam – Ad Coucil: Love Has No Labels”)</p>
<p>R/GA &amp; MJZ (“We Are America – Ad Council: Love Has No Labels”)McGarry Bowen &amp; Hungry Man Productions (“Why I March – Women’s March on Washington”)72 and Sunny &amp; Hecho en 72 (“Year in Search 2016 – Google”)</p>
<p>Special Visual EffectsKevin Tod Haug, David Stump, Jeremy Ball, Bernice Charlotte Howes, Jessica Smith, Josh Carlton, Pierre Buffin, James Cooper, Aymeric Perceval (“American Gods” — “The Bone Orchard”)Erik Henry, Terron Pratt, Ashley J. Ward, Kevin Rafferty, Paul Dimmer, Yafei Wu, Martin Lipmann, Nicklas Andersson, David Wahlberg (“Black Sails” — “XXIX”)Lawson Deming, Cory Jamieson, Casi Blume, Nick Chamberlain, David Andrade, Bill Parker, Justin Fox, Danielle Malambri (“The Man in the High Castle” — “Fallout”)Dominic Remane, Michael Borrett, Bill Halliday, Paul Wishart, Ovidiu Cinazan, Jim Maxwell, Kiernan McKay, Isabelle Alles, Tom Morrison (“Vikings” — “On the Eve”)Jay Worth, Elizabeth Castro, Joe Wehmeyer, Eric Levin-Hatz, Bobo Skipper, Gustav Ahren, Paul Ghezzo, Mitchell S. Drain, Michael Lantieri (“Westworld” — “The Bicameral Mind”)</p>
<p>Special Visual Effects in a Supporting Role&#160;Ben Turner, Tom Debenham, Standish Millennas, Kim Phelan, Oliver Cubbage, Lionel Heath, Charlie Bennet, Stephen Smith, Carmine Agnone (“The Crown” — “Windsor”)Eric Durst, Lenka Líkařová, Viktor Muller, Marek Ruth, Tomáš Kalhous, Lukáš Herrmann, Pavel Kolář, Petr Hastík, Vit Komrzý (“Genius” — “Einstein: Chapter One”)Thomas Mahoney, Matthew Wheelon Hunt, Alex Gitler, Sina San, Michael Capton, Jon Anastasiades, Ryan Bauer, Mark Anthony Nazal, Randy Little (“Gotham” — “Heavydirtysoul”)Brendan Taylor, Stephen Lebed, Leo Bovell, Martin O’Brien, Winston Lee, Kelly Knauff, Zach Dembinski, Mike Suta, Cameron Kerr (“The Handmaid’s Tale” — “Birth Day”)Henry Badgett, Tracy McCreary, Angela Barson, Lucy Ainsworth-Taylor, Nic Birmingham, Simon Rowe, Alexander Kirichenko, Finlay Duncan, Colin Gorry (“Taboo” — “Episode 1”)</p>
<p>Hairstyling for a Limited Series or MovieMichelle Ceglia, Valerie Jackson &amp; Jose Zamora (“American Horror Story: Roanoke”)Michelle Ceglia, Nickole C. Jones, Lona Vigi, Frances Mathias &amp; Jocelyn Mulhern (“Big Little Lies”)Chris Glimsdale, Penny Thompson, Judy Durbacs &amp; Eva Blanchard (“Fargo”)Chris Clark, Ralph Michael Abalos, Wendy Southard &amp; Helena Cepeda (“Feud: Bette &amp; Joan”)Tash Lees, Fae Hammond, Adela Robova &amp; Alex Rouse (“Genius”)</p>
<p>Music SupervisionThomas Golubic (“Better Call Saul” — “Sunk Costs”)Susan Jacobs (“Big Little Lies” — “You Get What You Need”)Manish Raval, Jonathan Leahy, Tom Wolfe (“Girls” — “Goodbye Tour”)Zach Cowie, Kerri Drootin (“Master of None” — “Amarsi Un Po”)Nora Felder (“Stranger Things” — “Chapter Two: The Weirdo on Maple Street”)</p>
<p>Sound Editing for a SeriesBenjamin Cook, Stefan Henrix, Mike Szakmeister,&#160;Shaugnessy Hare, Tim Tuchrello, Brett Voss, Michael Baber, Jeffrey Wilhoit &amp; Dylan Tuomy-Wilhoit (“Black Sails”)George Haddad, Chad J. Hughes, Dale Chaloukian, David Barbee, Julie Altus, Ashley Revell, Joey Sabella &amp; Joanie Rowe (“Gotham”)Craig A. Dellinger, Ryne Gierke, Eric Raber, Shawn Kennelly, Jeff Charbonneau, Melissa Kennelly &amp; Vince Nicastro (“Homeland”)Bradley North, Craig Henighan, Jordan Wilby, Jonathan Golodner, Tiffany S. Griffth, Sam Munoz, Sam Munoz, David Klotz, Noel Vought &amp; Ginger Geary (“Stranger Things”)Thomas E. deGorter, Matthew Sawelson, Brian Armstrong, Fred Paragano, Mark Allen, Marc Glassman, Sebastian Visconti, Geordy Sincavage, Michael Head, Christopher Kaller, Rick Owens &amp; Tara Blume Norton (“Westworld”)</p>
<p>Sound Mixing For a Comedy Or Drama Series (Half-Hour) and AnimationJoshua Berger, Michael Barosky (“Master of None” — “Dinner Party”)Dean Okrand, Brian R. Harman, Stephen A. Tibbo (“Modern Family” — “Basketball”)Andy D’Addario, Gary Gegan, Marco Fiumara (“Mozart in the Jungle” — “Now I Will Sing”)Elmo Ponsdomenech, Todd Beckett, Ben Patrick (“Silicon Valley” — “Intellectual Property”)John W. Cook II, Bill Freesh, Bill MacPherson (“Veep” — “Omaha”)</p>
<p>Cinematography for a Limited Series or MovieYves&#160;Bélanger (“Big Little Lies”)Seamus McGarvey (“Black Mirror: Nosedive”)Dana Gonzales (“Fargo”)Fred Elmes (“The Night Of”0Luca Bigazzi (“The Young Pope”)</p>
<p>Sound Editing for a Limited Series, Movie or SpecialGary Megregian, Steve M. Stuhr, Jason Krane, Timothy A. Cleveland, Paul Diller, David Klotz &amp; Noel Vought (“American Horror Story: Roanoke”)Nick Forshager, Joe Bracciale, Martin Gwynn Jones, Brent Pickett, Claire Dobson, Robert Bertola, Alex Bullick, Tyler Whitham, Matt Decker &amp; John Elliot (“Fargo”)Daniel Pagan, Erich Gann, Arielle McGrail, Bill Bell, Nicholas Fitzgerald, TIm Chilton &amp; Jill Sanders (“Genuis”)Nicholas Renbeck, Marissa Littlefield, Steve Visscher, Ruth Hernandez, Sara Stern, Luciano Vignola, Odin Benitez, Ruy Garcia, Wyatt Sprague, Warren Shaw, Roland Vajs, Heather Gross, Dan Evans Farkas, Grant Conway &amp; Marko Costanzo (“The Night Of”)Douglas Sinclair, Jon Salmon-Joyce, Stuart McCowan, Paul McFadden, Howard Bargroff, Nathan Palmer, Jamie Talbutt, Rael Jones &amp; Sue Harding (“Sherlock: The Lying Detective (Masterpiece)”)</p>
<p>Prosthetic Makeup for a Series, Limited Series, Movie, or SpecialEryn Krueger Mekash, Michael Mekash, David Leroy Anderson, James Mackinnon, Jason Hamer, Melanie Eichner,&#160;Cristina Himiob, &#160;Maiko Chiba (“American Horror Story: Roanoke”)Nick Dudman, Sarita Allison, Barney Nikolic, Dennis Penkov (“Penny Dreadful” — “No Beast So Fierce”)Louie Zakarian, Jason Milani, Tom Denier Jr., Amy Tagliamonti, Craig Lindberg, Steve Kelly (“Saturday Night Live” — “Host: Alec Baldwin”)Greg Nicotero, Jake Garber, Garrett Immel, Kevin Wasner, Gino Crognale, Kerrin Jackson (“The Walking Dead” — “The Day Will Come When You Won’t Be”)Christien Tinsley, Hiroshi Yada, Georgia Allen, Gerald Quist, Myriam Arougheti (“Westworld” — “The Original”)</p>
<p>Sound Mixing For A Limited Series or MovieGavin Fernandes, Louis Gignac, Brendan Beebe (“Big Little Lies” — “You Get What You Need”)Martin Lee, Kirk Lynds, Michael Playfair, Michael Perftt (“Fargo” — “Who Rules the Land of Denial?”)Bob Bronow, Mark Hensley, Petr Forejt (“Genius” — “Einstein: Chapter One”)Nicholas Renbeck, Michael Barry, Felix Andrew, Larry Hoff (“The Night Of” — “The Beach”)Howard Bargroff, John Mooney, Peter Gleaves, Nick Wollage (“Sherlock: The Lying Detective (Masterpiece)”)</p>
<p>Short Form Comedy or Drama Series“Brown Girls” (Open TV)“Fear The Walking Dead: Passage” (AMC.com)“Hack Into Broad City” (ComedyCentral.com)“Los Pollos Hermanos Employee Training” (AMC)“Marvel’s Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D.: Slingshot” (ABCd/ABC.com)</p>
<p>Hairstyling for a Single-Camera SeriesIvana Primorac &amp; Amy Riley (“The Crown”)Luca Vanella, Alexis Continente, Sevlene Roddy, Joseph Whelan &amp; Orla Carrol (“Penny Dreadful”)Sarah Hindsgaul &amp; Evelyn Roach (“Stranger Things”)Dee Corcoran, Catherine Argue, Jenny Readman, Ida Erickson &amp; Zuelika Delaney (“Vikings”)Joey Zapata, Pavy Olivarez, Bruce Samia &amp; Donna Anderson (“Westworld”)</p>
<p>Main Title DesignPatrick Clair, Raoul Marks, Devin Maurer, Jeff Han (“American Gods”)Patrick Clair, Raoul Marks,&#160;Javier Leon Carrillo,&#160;Jeff Han (“The Crown”)Ryan Murphy,&#160;Alexis Martin Woodall, Kyle Cooper,&#160;Nadia Tzuo,&#160;Margherita Premuroso (“FEUD: Bette and Joan”)Michelle Dougherty,&#160;Peter Frankfurt,&#160;Arisu Kashiwagi,&#160;Eric Demeusy (“Stranger Things”)Patrick Clair, Raoul Marks, Yongsub Song, Felix Soletic, Jessica Hurst, Jose Limon (“Westworld”)</p>
<p>Contemporary Costumes for a Series, Limited Series or MovieAlix Friedberg, Risa Garcia &amp; Patricia McLaughlin (“Big Little Lies”)Paolo Nieddu, Jennifer Salim &amp; Mary Lane (“Empire”)Allyson B. Fanger, Heather Pain &amp; Lori DeLapp (“Grace and Frankie”)Hala Bahmet, Marina Ray &amp; Elinor Bardach (“This Is Us”)Marie Schley, Hannah Schneider &amp; Leslie Herman (“Transparent”)</p>
<p>Single-Camera Picture Editing for a Limited Series or MovieVeronique Barbe, David Berman, Justin LaChance, Maxine Lahie, Sylvain Lebel &amp; Jim Vega (“Big Little Lies”)Henk Van Eeghen (“Fargo”)Regis Kimble (“Fargo”)Curtis Thurber (“Fargo”)Jay Cassidy &amp; Nick Houy (“The Night Of”)</p>
<p>Makeup for a Limited Series or Movie (Non-Prosthetic)Kim Ayers, Mike Mekash, Eryn Krueger Mekash, Silvina Knight, Carleigh Herbert, Luis Garcia (“American Horror Story: Roanoke”)Steve Artmont, Nicole Artmont, Angela Levin, Molly R Stern, Claudia Humburg (“Big Little Lies”)Gail Kennedy, Joanne Preece, Amanda Rye, Danielle Hanson (“Fargo”)Eryn Krueger Mekash, Robin Beauschense, Tym Buacharern, Kim Ayers, Becky Cotton, David Williams (“FEUD: Bette and Joan”)Davina Lamont (“Genius”)</p>
<p>Casting for a Limited Series, Movie or Special&#160;David Rubin (“Big Little Lies”)Rachel Tenner, Jackie Lind &amp; Stephanie Goran (“Fargo”)Robert J. Ulrich &amp; Eric Dawson (“Feud: Bette and Joan”)Avy Kaufman &amp; Sabrina Hyman (“The Night Of”)Ellen Chenoweth (“The Wizard of Lies”)</p>
<p>Guest Actress in a Drama SeriesAlison Wright (“The Americans” — “The Soviet Division”)Alexis Bledel (“The Handmaid’s Tale” — “Late”)Cicely Tyson (“How to Get Away with Murder” — “Go Cry Somewhere Else”)Ann Dowd (“The Leftovers” — “The Most Powerful Man In The World (And His Identical Twin Brother)”)Laverne Cox (“Orange is the New Black” — “Doctor Psycho”)Shannon Purser (“Stranger Things” — “Chapter Three: Jolly, Holly”)</p>
<p>Casting for a Drama SeriesNina Gold &amp; Robert Sterne (“The Crown”)Russell Scott, Sharon Bialy &amp; Sherry Thomas (“The Handmaid’s Tale”)Carmen Cuba, Tara Feldstein Bennett &amp; Chase Paris (“Stranger Things”)Bernard Telsey &amp; Tiffany Little Canfield (“This Is Us”)John Papsidera (“Westworld”)</p>
<p>Single-Camera Picture Editing for a Drama SeriesSkip Macdonald (“Better Call Saul”)Kelley Dixon &amp; Skip Macdonald (“Better Call Saul”)Dean Zimmerman (“Stranger Things”)Kevin D. Ross (“Stranger Things”)Andrew Seklir (“Westworld”)</p>
<p>Original Interactive ProgramDisney/ ABC Television Group &amp; Kids Digital Media (“Amigo to the Rescue: Disney Junior Interactive Show”)Oculus Story Studio (“Dear Angelica”)Joseph Gordon-Levitt, Jared Geller, ACLU &amp; Hitrecord (“Hitrecord x ACLU: Are You There Democracy? It’s Me, The Internet”)Ben Grossmann, Adrian Sciutto, Amaresh Kollipara, David Swift &amp; Oculus (“Mission: ISS”)Felix &amp; Paul Studios (“The People’s House – Inside the White House With Barack and Michelle Obama”)</p>
<p>Cinematography for a Single-Camera Series (Half-Hour)Rodney Taylor (“Ballers”)Reed Morano (“Divorce”)Tobias Datum (“Mozart in the Jungle”)Tim Suhrstedt (“Silicon Valley”)Jim Frohna (“Transparent”)David Miller (“Veep”)</p>
<p>Cinematography for a Single-Camera Series (One Hour)Adriano Goldman (“The Crown”)Colin Watkinson (“The Handmaid’s Tale”)James Hawkinson (“The Man in the High Castle”)Tod Campbell (Mr. Robot”)John Toll (“Sense8”)Tim Ives (“Stranger Things”)Paul Cameron (“Westworld”)</p>
<p>Makeup for a Single-Camera Series (Non-Prosthetic)Enzo Mastrantonio, Clare Lambe, Caterina Sisto, Lorraine McCrann, Morna Ferguson (“Penny Dreadful” — “Perpetual Night”)Myke Michaels, Teresa Vest (“Stranger Things” — “Chapter Six: The Monster”)Zoe Hay, Heather Plott, Elizabeth Hoel-Chang, Judith Lynn Staats, John Damiani (“This Is Us” — “I Call Marriage”)Tom McInerney, Katie Derwin, Ciara Scanell, Lizzanne Procter (“Vikings” — “All His Angels”)Christien Tinsley, Myriam Arougheti, Gerald Quist, Lydia Milars, Ed French (“Westworld” — “The Original”)</p>
<p>Actor in a Short Form Comedy or Drama SeriesTy Burrell (“Boondoggle”)Alan Tudyk (“Comic Man”)Kim Estes (“Dicks”)Ben Schwartz (“The Earliest Show”)Jason Ritter (“Tales of Titans”)John Michael Higgins (“Tween Fest”)</p>
<p>Actress in a Short Form Comedy or Drama SeriesMindy Sterling (“Con Man”)Jane Lynch (“Dropping the Soap”)Lauren Lapkus (“The Earliest Show”)Kelsey Scott (“Fear the Walking Dead: Passage”)Mindy Sterling (“secs &amp; EXECS”)</p>
<p>Guest Actor in a Drama SeriesBen Mendelsohn (“Bloodline” — “Part 32”)BD Wong (“Mr. Robot” — “eps2.3_logic-b0mb.hc”)Hank Azaria (“Ray Donovan” — “Norman Saves the World”)Denis O’Hare (“This Is Us” — “Last Christmas”)Brian Tyree Henry (“This Is Us” — “Memphis”)Gerald McRaney (“This Is Us” — “The Big Day”)</p> | false | 1 | veep emmy casting comedy series marking first award handed second night 69th annual creative arts emmy awards microsoft theater downtown los angeles highlights saturday sundays award presentations 92 categories air sept 16 special fxx complete list tonights nominees winners updated live casting comedy seriesdorian frankel amp sibby kirchgessner veep original main title theme musicmichael stein kyle dixon stranger things singlecamera picture editing comedy series160jennifer lilly master none multicamera picture editing comedy seriespeter chakos big bang theory stunt coordination drama series limited series moviejames lew marvels luke cage period fantasy costumes series limited series moviemichele clapton alex fordham emma oloughlin amp kate ofarrell crown production design narrative period program one hour moremartin childs mark raggett amp celia bobak crown music composition limited series movie special original dramatic scorejeff russo fargo aporia production design narrative contemporary fantasy program one hour morejulie berghoff evan webber amp sophie neudorfer handmaids talejonathan mckinstry jo riddell amp philip murphy penny dreadfulzack grobler steve christensen amp julie ochipinti westworldnathan crowley naaman marshall amp julie ochipinti westworldludovica ferrario alexandro maria santucci amp laura casalini young pope childrens programgirl meets world disney channelmacys thanksgiving day parade 90th celebration nbconce upon sesame street christmas hboschool rock nickelodeonstar wars rebels disney xd production design narrative program halfhour lessjohn shaffner francoise cherrycohen amp ann shea big bang theorydevorah herbert ben edelberg amp christopher carlson grace frankietommaso ortino susanna codognato amp letizia santucci mozart junglerichard toyon jaclyn hauser amp jennifer mueller silicon valleycat smith macie vener amp dea johnson transparentjim gloster andrew leitch amp kimberly wannop veep cinematography multicamera seriesjoseph wilmond calloway kc undercoverdonald morgan ranchgary baum superior donutschristian la fountaine 2 broke girls guest actor comedy seriesriz ahmed girls ever wantedmatthew rhys girls american bitchdave chappelle saturday night live host dave chappellelinmanuel miranda satuday night live host linmanuel mirandatom hanks saturday night live host tom hankshugh laurie veep blurb sound mixing comedy drama series one hourlarry benjamin kevin valentine philip w palmer better call saul witnessnathan nance scott r lewis lorenzo milan house cards chapter 53john w cook ii bill freesh william sarokin paul drenning mr robot eps28_h1ddenpr0cessaxxjoe barnett adam jenkins chris durfy bill higley stranger things chapter eight upside downkeith rogers scott weber roger stevenson kyle oneal westworld bicameral mind music composition series original dramatic scorerupert gregsonwilliams crown hyde park cornerjeff beal house cards chapter 63jacob shea jasha klebe planet earth ii islandsjames newton howard series unfortunate events bad beginningmax richter taboo episode 1martin phipps ruth barrett natalie holt victoria masterpiece doll 123 guest actress comedy serieswanda sykes blackish lemonscarrie fisher catastrophe episode 6becky ann baker girls gummiesangela bassett master none thanksgivingkristen wiig saturday night live host kristen wiigmelissa mccarthy saturday night live host melissa mccarthy stunt coordination comedy series variety programerik marshall solky angie tribecanorman howell brooklyn nineninebrian smyj saturday night liveeddie perez shamelessjill brown unbreakable kimmy schmidt creative achievement interactive media within scripted program160mike benson bob bowen brianna lopez brian burton amp campfire man high castle resistance radiousa network universal cable productions dragons esmail corp amp anonymous content mr robot virtual reality experiencejames l brooks al jean matt groening david silverman amp google spotlight stories simpsons planet couchesnetflix amp cbs digital stranger things vr experiencehbo kilter films amp bad robot westworld commercial160john x hannes amp smuggler calling johnmalkovichcom squarespacerga amp tool north america love cam ad coucil love labels rga amp mjz america ad council love labelsmcgarry bowen amp hungry man productions march womens march washington72 sunny amp hecho en 72 year search 2016 google special visual effectskevin tod haug david stump jeremy ball bernice charlotte howes jessica smith josh carlton pierre buffin james cooper aymeric perceval american gods bone orcharderik henry terron pratt ashley j ward kevin rafferty paul dimmer yafei wu martin lipmann nicklas andersson david wahlberg black sails xxixlawson deming cory jamieson casi blume nick chamberlain david andrade bill parker justin fox danielle malambri man high castle falloutdominic remane michael borrett bill halliday paul wishart ovidiu cinazan jim maxwell kiernan mckay isabelle alles tom morrison vikings evejay worth elizabeth castro joe wehmeyer eric levinhatz bobo skipper gustav ahren paul ghezzo mitchell drain michael lantieri westworld bicameral mind special visual effects supporting role160ben turner tom debenham standish millennas kim phelan oliver cubbage lionel heath charlie bennet stephen smith carmine agnone crown windsoreric durst lenka líkařová viktor muller marek ruth tomáš kalhous lukáš herrmann pavel kolář petr hastík vit komrzý genius einstein chapter onethomas mahoney matthew wheelon hunt alex gitler sina san michael capton jon anastasiades ryan bauer mark anthony nazal randy little gotham heavydirtysoulbrendan taylor stephen lebed leo bovell martin obrien winston lee kelly knauff zach dembinski mike suta cameron kerr handmaids tale birth dayhenry badgett tracy mccreary angela barson lucy ainsworthtaylor nic birmingham simon rowe alexander kirichenko finlay duncan colin gorry taboo episode 1 hairstyling limited series moviemichelle ceglia valerie jackson amp jose zamora american horror story roanokemichelle ceglia nickole c jones lona vigi frances mathias amp jocelyn mulhern big little lieschris glimsdale penny thompson judy durbacs amp eva blanchard fargochris clark ralph michael abalos wendy southard amp helena cepeda feud bette amp joantash lees fae hammond adela robova amp alex rouse genius music supervisionthomas golubic better call saul sunk costssusan jacobs big little lies get needmanish raval jonathan leahy tom wolfe girls goodbye tourzach cowie kerri drootin master none amarsi un ponora felder stranger things chapter two weirdo maple street sound editing seriesbenjamin cook stefan henrix mike szakmeister160shaugnessy hare tim tuchrello brett voss michael baber jeffrey wilhoit amp dylan tuomywilhoit black sailsgeorge haddad chad j hughes dale chaloukian david barbee julie altus ashley revell joey sabella amp joanie rowe gothamcraig dellinger ryne gierke eric raber shawn kennelly jeff charbonneau melissa kennelly amp vince nicastro homelandbradley north craig henighan jordan wilby jonathan golodner tiffany griffth sam munoz sam munoz david klotz noel vought amp ginger geary stranger thingsthomas e degorter matthew sawelson brian armstrong fred paragano mark allen marc glassman sebastian visconti geordy sincavage michael head christopher kaller rick owens amp tara blume norton westworld sound mixing comedy drama series halfhour animationjoshua berger michael barosky master none dinner partydean okrand brian r harman stephen tibbo modern family basketballandy daddario gary gegan marco fiumara mozart jungle singelmo ponsdomenech todd beckett ben patrick silicon valley intellectual propertyjohn w cook ii bill freesh bill macpherson veep omaha cinematography limited series movieyves160bélanger big little liesseamus mcgarvey black mirror nosedivedana gonzales fargofred elmes night of0luca bigazzi young pope sound editing limited series movie specialgary megregian steve stuhr jason krane timothy cleveland paul diller david klotz amp noel vought american horror story roanokenick forshager joe bracciale martin gwynn jones brent pickett claire dobson robert bertola alex bullick tyler whitham matt decker amp john elliot fargodaniel pagan erich gann arielle mcgrail bill bell nicholas fitzgerald tim chilton amp jill sanders genuisnicholas renbeck marissa littlefield steve visscher ruth hernandez sara stern luciano vignola odin benitez ruy garcia wyatt sprague warren shaw roland vajs heather gross dan evans farkas grant conway amp marko costanzo night ofdouglas sinclair jon salmonjoyce stuart mccowan paul mcfadden howard bargroff nathan palmer jamie talbutt rael jones amp sue harding sherlock lying detective masterpiece prosthetic makeup series limited series movie specialeryn krueger mekash michael mekash david leroy anderson james mackinnon jason hamer melanie eichner160cristina himiob 160maiko chiba american horror story roanokenick dudman sarita allison barney nikolic dennis penkov penny dreadful beast fiercelouie zakarian jason milani tom denier jr amy tagliamonti craig lindberg steve kelly saturday night live host alec baldwingreg nicotero jake garber garrett immel kevin wasner gino crognale kerrin jackson walking dead day come wont bechristien tinsley hiroshi yada georgia allen gerald quist myriam arougheti westworld original sound mixing limited series moviegavin fernandes louis gignac brendan beebe big little lies get needmartin lee kirk lynds michael playfair michael perftt fargo rules land denialbob bronow mark hensley petr forejt genius einstein chapter onenicholas renbeck michael barry felix andrew larry hoff night beachhoward bargroff john mooney peter gleaves nick wollage sherlock lying detective masterpiece short form comedy drama seriesbrown girls open tvfear walking dead passage amccomhack broad city comedycentralcomlos pollos hermanos employee training amcmarvels agents shield slingshot abcdabccom hairstyling singlecamera seriesivana primorac amp amy riley crownluca vanella alexis continente sevlene roddy joseph whelan amp orla carrol penny dreadfulsarah hindsgaul amp evelyn roach stranger thingsdee corcoran catherine argue jenny readman ida erickson amp zuelika delaney vikingsjoey zapata pavy olivarez bruce samia amp donna anderson westworld main title designpatrick clair raoul marks devin maurer jeff han american godspatrick clair raoul marks160javier leon carrillo160jeff han crownryan murphy160alexis martin woodall kyle cooper160nadia tzuo160margherita premuroso feud bette joanmichelle dougherty160peter frankfurt160arisu kashiwagi160eric demeusy stranger thingspatrick clair raoul marks yongsub song felix soletic jessica hurst jose limon westworld contemporary costumes series limited series moviealix friedberg risa garcia amp patricia mclaughlin big little liespaolo nieddu jennifer salim amp mary lane empireallyson b fanger heather pain amp lori delapp grace frankiehala bahmet marina ray amp elinor bardach usmarie schley hannah schneider amp leslie herman transparent singlecamera picture editing limited series movieveronique barbe david berman justin lachance maxine lahie sylvain lebel amp jim vega big little lieshenk van eeghen fargoregis kimble fargocurtis thurber fargojay cassidy amp nick houy night makeup limited series movie nonprosthetickim ayers mike mekash eryn krueger mekash silvina knight carleigh herbert luis garcia american horror story roanokesteve artmont nicole artmont angela levin molly r stern claudia humburg big little liesgail kennedy joanne preece amanda rye danielle hanson fargoeryn krueger mekash robin beauschense tym buacharern kim ayers becky cotton david williams feud bette joandavina lamont genius casting limited series movie special160david rubin big little liesrachel tenner jackie lind amp stephanie goran fargorobert j ulrich amp eric dawson feud bette joanavy kaufman amp sabrina hyman night ofellen chenoweth wizard lies guest actress drama seriesalison wright americans soviet divisionalexis bledel handmaids tale latecicely tyson get away murder go cry somewhere elseann dowd leftovers powerful man world identical twin brotherlaverne cox orange new black doctor psychoshannon purser stranger things chapter three jolly holly casting drama seriesnina gold amp robert sterne crownrussell scott sharon bialy amp sherry thomas handmaids talecarmen cuba tara feldstein bennett amp chase paris stranger thingsbernard telsey amp tiffany little canfield usjohn papsidera westworld singlecamera picture editing drama seriesskip macdonald better call saulkelley dixon amp skip macdonald better call sauldean zimmerman stranger thingskevin ross stranger thingsandrew seklir westworld original interactive programdisney abc television group amp kids digital media amigo rescue disney junior interactive showoculus story studio dear angelicajoseph gordonlevitt jared geller aclu amp hitrecord hitrecord x aclu democracy internetben grossmann adrian sciutto amaresh kollipara david swift amp oculus mission issfelix amp paul studios peoples house inside white house barack michelle obama cinematography singlecamera series halfhourrodney taylor ballersreed morano divorcetobias datum mozart jungletim suhrstedt silicon valleyjim frohna transparentdavid miller veep cinematography singlecamera series one houradriano goldman crowncolin watkinson handmaids talejames hawkinson man high castletod campbell mr robotjohn toll sense8tim ives stranger thingspaul cameron westworld makeup singlecamera series nonprostheticenzo mastrantonio clare lambe caterina sisto lorraine mccrann morna ferguson penny dreadful perpetual nightmyke michaels teresa vest stranger things chapter six monsterzoe hay heather plott elizabeth hoelchang judith lynn staats john damiani us call marriagetom mcinerney katie derwin ciara scanell lizzanne procter vikings angelschristien tinsley myriam arougheti gerald quist lydia milars ed french westworld original actor short form comedy drama seriesty burrell boondogglealan tudyk comic mankim estes dicksben schwartz earliest showjason ritter tales titansjohn michael higgins tween fest actress short form comedy drama seriesmindy sterling con manjane lynch dropping soaplauren lapkus earliest showkelsey scott fear walking dead passagemindy sterling secs amp execs guest actor drama seriesben mendelsohn bloodline part 32bd wong mr robot eps23_logicb0mbhchank azaria ray donovan norman saves worlddenis ohare us last christmasbrian tyree henry us memphisgerald mcraney us big day | 1,927 |
<p>Aug. 4 (UPI) — New Jersey Sen. <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Cory_Booker/" type="external">Cory Booker</a> announced this week he’d introduced a bill to legalize marijuana nationwide — a measure that usually might not get much attention. However, he used Facebook Live — and immediately reached more than 120,000 people.</p>
<p>Booker’s live announcement is one example of how ever-evolving social pioneering continues to open doors to Washington, D.C., for average Americans.</p>
<p>“Senator Booker believes that Facebook Live is an effective tool to talk directly with his constituents about important policy initiatives,” said spokeswoman Kristin Lynch. “He <a href="https://www.facebook.com/corybooker/videos/10156979723652228/" type="external">uses Facebook Live</a> to facilitate the democratic process in the digital age and to address individuals’ questions and concerns in real time.”</p>
<p>Although Booker’s marked the first Facebook Live Senate bill introduction, it wasn’t the first time a member of Congress had used such a platform — which also includes Snapchat and Periscope — to communicate directly and instantly with constituents.</p>
<p>“People react more strongly to video than they do to words,” said Daniel Schuman, policy director at Demand Progress, a group that advocates government transparency. “Having it be live, people can react in real time.”</p>
<p>Booker joined Rep. <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/John_Lewis/" type="external">John Lewis</a>, D-Ga., in June when he live-streamed thoughts about Republican efforts to dismantle the Affordable Care Act — while the Senate debated a bill that would have repealed and replaced it with a GOP version that would’ve left 22 million Americans without health care.</p>
<p>With over 1 million views and 13,000 shares on the live stream, the two politicians spent hours explaining the Republican bill’s flaws, as well as their opinions on what’s needed to ensure Americans’ access to health care.</p>
<p>“Senator Booker is always looking for new and creative ways to connect with constituents,” Lynch said. “I wouldn’t say one form of social media is necessarily better than another. Different platforms offer different advantages.”</p>
<p>“It allows people outside of government to have an interest in what’s going on and be able to engage better with what’s happening,” Schuman added.</p>
<p>“It is a must that people be informed,” Lewis said during the beginning of the nearly four-hour live stream. “That people know what is happening here. What is about to happen to … more than 20 million of our citizens.”</p>
<p>As hundreds gathered for the impromptu rally, Senate Minority Leader <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Chuck_Schumer/" type="external">Chuck Schumer</a> and Democratic Sens. <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Dick_Durbin/" type="external">Dick Durbin</a> of Illinois, Chris Murphy of Connecticut, Brian Schatz of Hawaii, <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Kirsten_Gillibrand/" type="external">Kirsten Gillibrand</a>, of New York, <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Bob_Casey/" type="external">Bob Casey</a> of Pennsylvania and <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Jeff_Merkley/" type="external">Jeff Merkley</a> of Oregon joined Booker and Lewis on the stairs.</p>
<p>“Having your own stream with your own setup lets you have your own frame for your event, as well as a full record of what happened,” said Brian Selander, former communications director for Delaware Sen. <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Tom_Carper/" type="external">Tom Carper</a>, who now makes media and tech investments at venture firm SeventySix Capital.</p>
<p>The June live stream from the Capitol steps wasn’t the first use of live social videos around important Hill events. Utah Sen. Mike Lee <a href="https://www.facebook.com/mikeleeUT/videos/10154626306667431/" type="external">used Facebook Live</a> in October to ask then-candidate <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Donald_Trump/" type="external">Donald Trump</a> to leave the race after his comments about women.</p>
<p>“I certainly don’t think I would feel comfortable hiring that person to be the leader of the free world,” he said at the time.</p>
<p>In February, Sen. <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Elizabeth_Warren/" type="external">Elizabeth Warren</a>, D-Mass., <a href="https://www.facebook.com/senatorelizabethwarren/videos/724337794395383/" type="external">stepped outside</a> the Senate chamber during a debate on the nomination of now-Attorney General <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Jeff_Sessions/" type="external">Jeff Sessions</a>. Senate Majority Leader <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Mitch_McConnell/" type="external">Mitch McConnell</a> had blocked her from reading a letter from <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Coretta_Scott_King/" type="external">Coretta Scott King</a>, the widow of <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Martin_Luther/" type="external">Martin Luther</a> King, Jr., in opposing Sessions’ appointment to a federal judgeship in 1986 — a position he did not get.</p>
<p>Instead, Warren used a live stream to read King’s letter. It attracted more than 12 million views and 222,000 shares.</p>
<p>Rep. <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Sheila_Jackson_Lee/" type="external">Sheila Jackson Lee</a>, D-Texas, has <a href="https://www.facebook.com/CongresswomanSheilaJacksonLee/videos/10155323228115985/" type="external">turned to streaming platforms</a> “to connect more directly” with constituents — “essentially bringing them with her in her daily endeavors with the hopes of shedding light on the intricacies associated with the democratic process,” spokesman Remmington Belford said. “She also uses this to help sustain a connection with her millennial constituents.”</p>
<p>Jackson Lee <a href="https://www.facebook.com/CongresswomanSheilaJacksonLee/videos/10155262678190985/" type="external">later used</a> Facebook Live to criticize Trump for a tweet about television host Mika Brzezinski. It gained over 63,000 views.</p>
<p>The first notable congressional live stream came in 2016, when Democratic congressmen staged a 26-hour sit-in in the House over gun control. Normally, the event would’ve been broadcast by C-SPAN, but House Republicans adjourned the session and the cameras were turned off. That’s when Democrats turned to live streaming to <a href="https://www.facebook.com/BetoORourkeTX16/videos/1187449984654186/?pnref=story" type="external">get their message out</a>.</p>
<p>However, not all members of Congress are big live-streamers– yet.</p>
<p>Rep. <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Bennie_Thompson/" type="external">Bennie Thompson</a>, D-Miss., has his first planned for next week — to showcase a corporation’s gift that will help constituents in Mississippi in need.</p>
<p>“This will be our first time using Facebook Live, and we are excited about it,” said Guy King, Thompson’s press secretary. “It provides transparency, which is the most important thing for anyone in elected office.</p>
<p>“As we move forward in the future, our office will definitely be utilizing more of Facebook Live.”</p> | false | 1 | aug 4 upi new jersey sen cory booker announced week hed introduced bill legalize marijuana nationwide measure usually might get much attention however used facebook live immediately reached 120000 people bookers live announcement one example everevolving social pioneering continues open doors washington dc average americans senator booker believes facebook live effective tool talk directly constituents important policy initiatives said spokeswoman kristin lynch uses facebook live facilitate democratic process digital age address individuals questions concerns real time although bookers marked first facebook live senate bill introduction wasnt first time member congress used platform also includes snapchat periscope communicate directly instantly constituents people react strongly video words said daniel schuman policy director demand progress group advocates government transparency live people react real time booker joined rep john lewis dga june livestreamed thoughts republican efforts dismantle affordable care act senate debated bill would repealed replaced gop version wouldve left 22 million americans without health care 1 million views 13000 shares live stream two politicians spent hours explaining republican bills flaws well opinions whats needed ensure americans access health care senator booker always looking new creative ways connect constituents lynch said wouldnt say one form social media necessarily better another different platforms offer different advantages allows people outside government interest whats going able engage better whats happening schuman added must people informed lewis said beginning nearly fourhour live stream people know happening happen 20 million citizens hundreds gathered impromptu rally senate minority leader chuck schumer democratic sens dick durbin illinois chris murphy connecticut brian schatz hawaii kirsten gillibrand new york bob casey pennsylvania jeff merkley oregon joined booker lewis stairs stream setup lets frame event well full record happened said brian selander former communications director delaware sen tom carper makes media tech investments venture firm seventysix capital june live stream capitol steps wasnt first use live social videos around important hill events utah sen mike lee used facebook live october ask thencandidate donald trump leave race comments women certainly dont think would feel comfortable hiring person leader free world said time february sen elizabeth warren dmass stepped outside senate chamber debate nomination nowattorney general jeff sessions senate majority leader mitch mcconnell blocked reading letter coretta scott king widow martin luther king jr opposing sessions appointment federal judgeship 1986 position get instead warren used live stream read kings letter attracted 12 million views 222000 shares rep sheila jackson lee dtexas turned streaming platforms connect directly constituents essentially bringing daily endeavors hopes shedding light intricacies associated democratic process spokesman remmington belford said also uses help sustain connection millennial constituents jackson lee later used facebook live criticize trump tweet television host mika brzezinski gained 63000 views first notable congressional live stream came 2016 democratic congressmen staged 26hour sitin house gun control normally event wouldve broadcast cspan house republicans adjourned session cameras turned thats democrats turned live streaming get message however members congress big livestreamers yet rep bennie thompson dmiss first planned next week showcase corporations gift help constituents mississippi need first time using facebook live excited said guy king thompsons press secretary provides transparency important thing anyone elected office move forward future office definitely utilizing facebook live | 520 |
<p>Russian President Vladimir Putin again rejected U.S. calls for new sanctions against North Korea after its sixth and most powerful nuclear test, echoing China’s resistance to more punitive measures to pressure Pyongyang into abandoning its atomic and missile programs.</p>
<p>The Russian leader criticized sanctions as “useless and ineffective,” instead urging the international community to offer security guarantees to North Korea.</p>
<p>“They’ll eat grass, but they won’t abandon their program unless they feel secure,” he told reporters Tuesday at an&#160;emerging markets summit in Xiamen, China, which was hosted by his Chinese counterpart Xi Jinping.</p>
<p>U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, Nikki Haley, said Monday the Trump administration would seek the strongest possible sanctions against Kim Jong Un’s regime. Kim was “begging for war” after testing what he claimed was a hydrogen bomb, she said after a meeting of the UN Security Council.</p>
<p>Haley said the U.S. would circulate new draft sanctions and wants the Security Council to vote on them Sept. 11.</p>
<p>Japan is singing the same tune as the U.S., with Deputy Prime Minister Taro Aso on Tuesday calling for additional measures. “There’s no chance of talks progressing without increasing pressure,” he told reporters in Tokyo.</p>
<p>The standoff between North Korea and the U.S. has become the most dangerous foreign crisis facing President Donald Trump, as the isolated Communist state accelerates its program to develop weapons of mass destruction.</p>
<p>Putin condemned what he described as a policy of whipping up war hysteria, which he said could lead to a “global catastrophe and a huge number” of human casualties. “There’s no other path except for a peaceful, diplomatic resolution of the North Korean nuclear problem,” he said.</p>
<p>Even before North Korea detonated its most powerful nuclear bomb on Sunday, Japan was calling for moves to cut off its oil supply. Afterward, Trump threatened to halt all trade with any country that does business with Kim Jong Un’s regime. China, which supplies most of its food and fuel, called the warning “unacceptable.”</p>
<p>Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Geng Shuang batted off a question at a briefing in Beijing on whether his nation would consider limiting oil shipments to North Korea.</p>
<p>“The actions and reactions of the Security Council will depend on the conclusions reached through debate by its members,” Geng said, according to an official transcript. “China will promote denuclearization and the maintenance of stability on the peninsula, and promote solving problems on the peninsula through dialogue and consultation.”</p>
<p>Since the Korean War, Beijing has avoided prodding North Korea to the point it might collapse, fearing a destabilizing economic blow and the possibility of the U.S. military gaining influence on its border via a unified Korea. That calculation has held even while China’s interests have diverged from those of North Korea.</p>
<p>Even so, South Korean Foreign Minister Kang Kyung-hwa said Tuesday that her Chinese counterpart Wang Yi told her that Beijing is open to additional sanctions. Kang told parliament that her nation is working with the U.S. for the “strongest” measures against North Korea.</p>
<p>Trump agreed on Monday to support billions of dollars in new weapons sales to South Korea. In a phone conversation with South Korean President Moon Jae-In, Trump said he would support “in principle” the U.S. ally fitting its missiles with heavier warheads, boosting its deterrence against North Korea.</p>
<p>Hours later, the Seoul-based Asia Business Daily reported that North Korea was preparing to launch an intercontinental ballistic missile before Saturday. The country’s defense ministry declined to comment on the report saying the isolated state was observed moving an ICBM to a launch site.</p>
<p>South Korea has detected “continued activities” related to North Korea missile tests in the aftermath of its sixth and most powerful nuclear detonation, according to a government official who asked not to be named in line with government policy.</p>
<p>Chang Kyung-soo, acting chief of the Defense Ministry’s policy planning office, told lawmakers in Seoul on Monday that North Korea was readying a missile firing, but didn’t give a timeframe. The Yonhap News Agency cited South Korea’s spy agency as saying there is a chance Pyongyang could fire an ICBM into the Pacific Ocean. North Korea has previously threatened to launch missiles toward Guam.</p>
<p>South Korea’s Defense Ministry will review “various possible options” to find a “realistic” solution to North Korea’s threats, spokesman Moon Sang-gyun told reporters in Seoul on Tuesday. He was clarifying Defense Minister Song Young-moo’s comment yesterday that redeployment of U.S. tactical nuclear weapons could be an option.</p>
<p>The nation’s navy also began live-fire drills involving 20 vessels — exercises that will continue through Saturday.</p>
<p>Sunday’s test, North Korea’s first since Trump took office, was a “perfect success” and confirmed the precision and technology of the bomb, the regime said. Energy from the underground explosion was about six times stronger than the last test a year ago, South Korea’s weather agency said.</p> | false | 1 | russian president vladimir putin rejected us calls new sanctions north korea sixth powerful nuclear test echoing chinas resistance punitive measures pressure pyongyang abandoning atomic missile programs russian leader criticized sanctions useless ineffective instead urging international community offer security guarantees north korea theyll eat grass wont abandon program unless feel secure told reporters tuesday an160emerging markets summit xiamen china hosted chinese counterpart xi jinping us ambassador united nations nikki haley said monday trump administration would seek strongest possible sanctions kim jong uns regime kim begging war testing claimed hydrogen bomb said meeting un security council haley said us would circulate new draft sanctions wants security council vote sept 11 japan singing tune us deputy prime minister taro aso tuesday calling additional measures theres chance talks progressing without increasing pressure told reporters tokyo standoff north korea us become dangerous foreign crisis facing president donald trump isolated communist state accelerates program develop weapons mass destruction putin condemned described policy whipping war hysteria said could lead global catastrophe huge number human casualties theres path except peaceful diplomatic resolution north korean nuclear problem said even north korea detonated powerful nuclear bomb sunday japan calling moves cut oil supply afterward trump threatened halt trade country business kim jong uns regime china supplies food fuel called warning unacceptable chinese foreign ministry spokesman geng shuang batted question briefing beijing whether nation would consider limiting oil shipments north korea actions reactions security council depend conclusions reached debate members geng said according official transcript china promote denuclearization maintenance stability peninsula promote solving problems peninsula dialogue consultation since korean war beijing avoided prodding north korea point might collapse fearing destabilizing economic blow possibility us military gaining influence border via unified korea calculation held even chinas interests diverged north korea even south korean foreign minister kang kyunghwa said tuesday chinese counterpart wang yi told beijing open additional sanctions kang told parliament nation working us strongest measures north korea trump agreed monday support billions dollars new weapons sales south korea phone conversation south korean president moon jaein trump said would support principle us ally fitting missiles heavier warheads boosting deterrence north korea hours later seoulbased asia business daily reported north korea preparing launch intercontinental ballistic missile saturday countrys defense ministry declined comment report saying isolated state observed moving icbm launch site south korea detected continued activities related north korea missile tests aftermath sixth powerful nuclear detonation according government official asked named line government policy chang kyungsoo acting chief defense ministrys policy planning office told lawmakers seoul monday north korea readying missile firing didnt give timeframe yonhap news agency cited south koreas spy agency saying chance pyongyang could fire icbm pacific ocean north korea previously threatened launch missiles toward guam south koreas defense ministry review various possible options find realistic solution north koreas threats spokesman moon sanggyun told reporters seoul tuesday clarifying defense minister song youngmoos comment yesterday redeployment us tactical nuclear weapons could option nations navy also began livefire drills involving 20 vessels exercises continue saturday sundays test north koreas first since trump took office perfect success confirmed precision technology bomb regime said energy underground explosion six times stronger last test year ago south koreas weather agency said | 525 |
<p />
<p>So far, the diplomatic effort to end the violence in Gaza has failed miserably, most recently with Israel’s cabinet rejecting a ceasefire proposal from U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry. This attempt by Washington is representative of the overall failure of American policy toward the Israel-Palestine conflict, only on this occasion the consequences can be measured in the growing pile of dead bodies and the widespread devastation that includes numerous homes, public buildings and even artillery damage to several United Nations schools sheltering Palestinian civilians.</p>
<p>&lt;img class="alignleft size-medium wp-image-19651" src="https://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/richard-falk-300x162.jpg" alt="Richard Falk" width="300" height="162" /&gt; The U.S. approach fails because it exhibits extreme partisanship in a setting where trust, credibility and reciprocity are crucial if the proclaimed aim of ending the violence is the true objective of this exhibition of statecraft. Kerry is undoubtedly dedicated to achieving a cease-fire, just as he demonstrated for most of the past year a sincerity of commitment in pushing so hard for a negotiated peace agreement between Israel and the Palestinian Authority. Yet throughout the failed peace process the United States exhibited all along this discrediting extreme partisanship, never more blatantly than when it designated Martin Indyk, a former staff member of the America Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) and former ambassador to Israel, to serve as the U.S. special envoy throughout the peace talks.</p>
<p>The U.S. approach up to this point to achieving a ceasefire in Gaza has been undertaken in a manner that is either woefully ignorant of the real constraints or callously cynical about their relevance. This is especially clear from the initial attempt to bring about a cease-fire by consulting only one side, Israel — the party bearing the major responsibility for causing massive casualties and damage — and leaving Hamas out in the cold. Even if this is an unavoidable consequence of Hamas being treated as “a terrorist entity,” it still makes no sense in the midst of such carnage to handle diplomacy in such a reckless manner when lives were daily at stake. When Israel itself has wanted to deal with Hamas in the past, it had no trouble doing so — for instance, when it arranged the prisoner exchange that led to the release of the single captured Israeli soldier Gilad Schalit back in 2011.</p>
<p>The basic facts seem so calculated to end in diplomatic failure that it is difficult to explain how they could have happened: The U.S. relied on Egypt as the broker of a proposal it vetted, supposedly with the approved text delivered personally by Tony Blair to President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi in Cairo, secreted endorsed by the Netanyahu government, and then publicly announced on July 15 via the media as a ceasefire proposal accepted by Israel, without Hamas having been consulted, or even previously informed. It’s a diplomatic analogue to the theater of the absurd. Last July, then-General Sisi was the Egyptian mastermind of a coup that brutally cracked down on the Muslim Brotherhood and criminalized the entire organization. The Sisi government has made no secret of its unrelenting hostility to Hamas, which it views as an offshoot of the Muslim Brotherhood and alleged responsibility for insurgent violence in the Sinai. Egypt destroyed the extensive tunnel network connecting Gaza with the outside world created to circumvent the punitive Israeli blockade that has been maintained since 2007. Was there ever any reason for Hamas to accept such a humiliating ceasefire arrangement? As some respected Israeli commentators have suggested, most prominently Amira Hass, the “normalization” of the occupation is what the Israeli military operation Protective Edge is all about. What Hass suggests is that Israel is seeking a compliant Palestinian response to an occupation that has for all intents and purposes become permanent, and seems to believe that such periodic shows of force will finally break once and for all the will to resist, symbolized by Hamas and its rockets, and now its tunnels. In this respect, the recent move to establish a unity government reconciling the Palestinian Authority with Hamas was a setback for the normalization policy, especially suggesting that even&#160;the PA could no longer be taken for granted as an acceptably compliant ‘partner,’ not for peace, but for occupation.</p>
<p>Whatever ambiguity might surround the Kerry diplomacy, the fact that the cease-fire’s terms were communicated to Hamas via the media, made the proposal a “take it or leave it” clearly designed to show the world that Hamas would never be treated as a political actor with grievances of its own. Such a way of proceeding also ignored the reasonable conditions Hamas had posited as the basis of a cease-fire it could accept. These conditions included an unwavering insistence on ending the unlawful seven-year siege of Gaza, releasing prisoners arrested in the anti-Hamas campaign in the West Bank prior to launching the military operation on July 8, and stopping interference with the unity government that brought Hamas and the Palestinian Authority together on June 3. Kerry, by contrast, was urging both sides to restore the cease-fire text that had been accepted in November 2012 after the previous major Israeli military attack upon Gaza, but relevantly, had never been fully implemented producing continuous tensions.</p>
<p>Hamas’ chief leader, Khaled Meshaal, has been called “defiant” by Kerry because he would not go along with this tilted diplomacy. “Everyone wanted us to accept a ceasefire and then negotiate for our rights,” Meshaal said. This was tried by Hamas in 2012 and didn’t work. As soon as the violence ceased, Israel refused to follow through on the cease-fire agreement that had promised negotiations seeking an end of the blockade and an immediate expansion of Gazan fishing rights.</p>
<p>In the aftermath of Protective Edge is it not reasonable, even mandatory, for Hamas to demand a firm commitment to end the siege of Gaza, which has been flagrantly unlawful since it was first imposed in mid-2007? Israel as the occupying power has an obligation under the Geneva Conventions to protect the civilian population of an occupied people. Israel claims that its “disengagement” in 2005, involving the withdrawal of security forces and the dismantling of settlements, ended such obligations. Such a position is legally (and morally) unacceptable, a view almost universally shared in the international community, since the persistence of effective Israeli control of entry and exit, as well as air and sea, and violent incursions amounts to a shift in the form of occupation — not its end. Israel is certainly justified in complaining about the rockets, but the maintenance of an oppressive regime of collective punishment on the civilians of Gaza is an ongoing crime. And it should be appreciated that more often than not, Israel provokes the rockets by recourse to aggressive policies of one sort or another or that most primitive rockets are fired by breakaway militia groups that Hamas struggles to control. A full and unbiased account of the interaction of violence across the Gaza border would not find that Israel was innocent and only Hamas was at fault. The story is far more complicated, and not an occasion for judging which side is entitled to be seen as acting in self-defense.</p>
<p>In “ <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/24/opinion/mustafa-akyol-turkey-can-teach-israel-how-to-end-terror.html?_r=0" type="external">Turkey Can Teach Israel How to End Terror</a>,” an insightful July 23 article in The New York Times, the influential Turkish journalist Mustafa Akyol drew from the experience of his country in ending decades of violent struggle between the insurgent Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) and the Turkish state. Akyol “congratulated” Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan (while taking critical note of his “growing authoritarianism”) for ending the violence in Turkey two years ago by agreeing with the imprisoned PKK leader, Abdullah Ocalan, to initiate conflict-resolving negotiations in good faith and abandon the “terrorist” label. Some years ago I heard former British Prime Minister John Major say that he made progress toward peace in Northern Ireland only when he stopped treating the Irish Republican Army as a terrorist organization and began dealing with it as a political actor with genuine grievances. If a secure peace were ever to become Israel’s true objective, this is a lesson to be learned and imitated.</p>
<p>Just as with the peace process itself, the time has surely come for a credible&#160;ceasefire to take account of the views and interests of both sides, and bring this sustained surge of barbaric violence to an end. International law and balanced diplomacy are available to do this if the political will were to emerge on the Israeli side, which seems all but impossible without the combination of continuing Palestinian resistance and mounting pressure from outside by way of the BDS campaign and the tactics of a militant, nonviolent global solidarity movement.</p> | false | 1 | far diplomatic effort end violence gaza failed miserably recently israels cabinet rejecting ceasefire proposal us secretary state john kerry attempt washington representative overall failure american policy toward israelpalestine conflict occasion consequences measured growing pile dead bodies widespread devastation includes numerous homes public buildings even artillery damage several united nations schools sheltering palestinian civilians ltimg classalignleft sizemedium wpimage19651 srchttpswwwforeignpolicyjournalcomwpcontentuploads201402richardfalk300x162jpg altrichard falk width300 height162 gt us approach fails exhibits extreme partisanship setting trust credibility reciprocity crucial proclaimed aim ending violence true objective exhibition statecraft kerry undoubtedly dedicated achieving ceasefire demonstrated past year sincerity commitment pushing hard negotiated peace agreement israel palestinian authority yet throughout failed peace process united states exhibited along discrediting extreme partisanship never blatantly designated martin indyk former staff member america israel public affairs committee aipac former ambassador israel serve us special envoy throughout peace talks us approach point achieving ceasefire gaza undertaken manner either woefully ignorant real constraints callously cynical relevance especially clear initial attempt bring ceasefire consulting one side israel party bearing major responsibility causing massive casualties damage leaving hamas cold even unavoidable consequence hamas treated terrorist entity still makes sense midst carnage handle diplomacy reckless manner lives daily stake israel wanted deal hamas past trouble instance arranged prisoner exchange led release single captured israeli soldier gilad schalit back 2011 basic facts seem calculated end diplomatic failure difficult explain could happened us relied egypt broker proposal vetted supposedly approved text delivered personally tony blair president abdel fattah elsisi cairo secreted endorsed netanyahu government publicly announced july 15 via media ceasefire proposal accepted israel without hamas consulted even previously informed diplomatic analogue theater absurd last july thengeneral sisi egyptian mastermind coup brutally cracked muslim brotherhood criminalized entire organization sisi government made secret unrelenting hostility hamas views offshoot muslim brotherhood alleged responsibility insurgent violence sinai egypt destroyed extensive tunnel network connecting gaza outside world created circumvent punitive israeli blockade maintained since 2007 ever reason hamas accept humiliating ceasefire arrangement respected israeli commentators suggested prominently amira hass normalization occupation israeli military operation protective edge hass suggests israel seeking compliant palestinian response occupation intents purposes become permanent seems believe periodic shows force finally break resist symbolized hamas rockets tunnels respect recent move establish unity government reconciling palestinian authority hamas setback normalization policy especially suggesting even160the pa could longer taken granted acceptably compliant partner peace occupation whatever ambiguity might surround kerry diplomacy fact ceasefires terms communicated hamas via media made proposal take leave clearly designed show world hamas would never treated political actor grievances way proceeding also ignored reasonable conditions hamas posited basis ceasefire could accept conditions included unwavering insistence ending unlawful sevenyear siege gaza releasing prisoners arrested antihamas campaign west bank prior launching military operation july 8 stopping interference unity government brought hamas palestinian authority together june 3 kerry contrast urging sides restore ceasefire text accepted november 2012 previous major israeli military attack upon gaza relevantly never fully implemented producing continuous tensions hamas chief leader khaled meshaal called defiant kerry would go along tilted diplomacy everyone wanted us accept ceasefire negotiate rights meshaal said tried hamas 2012 didnt work soon violence ceased israel refused follow ceasefire agreement promised negotiations seeking end blockade immediate expansion gazan fishing rights aftermath protective edge reasonable even mandatory hamas demand firm commitment end siege gaza flagrantly unlawful since first imposed mid2007 israel occupying power obligation geneva conventions protect civilian population occupied people israel claims disengagement 2005 involving withdrawal security forces dismantling settlements ended obligations position legally morally unacceptable view almost universally shared international community since persistence effective israeli control entry exit well air sea violent incursions amounts shift form occupation end israel certainly justified complaining rockets maintenance oppressive regime collective punishment civilians gaza ongoing crime appreciated often israel provokes rockets recourse aggressive policies one sort another primitive rockets fired breakaway militia groups hamas struggles control full unbiased account interaction violence across gaza border would find israel innocent hamas fault story far complicated occasion judging side entitled seen acting selfdefense turkey teach israel end terror insightful july 23 article new york times influential turkish journalist mustafa akyol drew experience country ending decades violent struggle insurgent kurdistan workers party pkk turkish state akyol congratulated turkish prime minister recep tayyip erdogan taking critical note growing authoritarianism ending violence turkey two years ago agreeing imprisoned pkk leader abdullah ocalan initiate conflictresolving negotiations good faith abandon terrorist label years ago heard former british prime minister john major say made progress toward peace northern ireland stopped treating irish republican army terrorist organization began dealing political actor genuine grievances secure peace ever become israels true objective lesson learned imitated peace process time surely come credible160ceasefire take account views interests sides bring sustained surge barbaric violence end international law balanced diplomacy available political emerge israeli side seems impossible without combination continuing palestinian resistance mounting pressure outside way bds campaign tactics militant nonviolent global solidarity movement | 800 |
<p>“Songs for Screens” (formerly known as “ <a href="http://variety.com/2017/music/columns/synch-this-beth-ditto-ooh-la-la-1202431039/" type="external">Synch This</a>”) is a Variety column written by Andrew Hampp, a VP at New York-based music sponsorship and experiential agency MAC Presents and former branding correspondent for Billboard. Each week, the column will highlight noteworthy use of music in advertising and marketing campaigns, as well as new and catalog songs that we deem ripe for synch use.</p>
<p><a href="http://variety.com/t/natalie-hemby/" type="external">Natalie Hemby</a> has written for many of country music’s biggest stars – including hits for&#160; <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V0O0nzkESTI" type="external">Little Big Town</a>,&#160; <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3WeSItykFyY" type="external">Lady Antebellum</a>, and Miranda Lambert’s 2015 ACM Song of the Year award-winning “ <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ksWKOy665o" type="external">Automatic</a>.” But for her long-awaited solo-artist debut&#160;“Puxico,” which is already ranking high on&#160; <a href="http://www.rollingstone.com/country/lists/40-best-country-albums-americana-albums-of-2017-w513189" type="external">2017 year-end lists</a>, Hemby took a low-key approach.</p>
<p>The project began as the score to a&#160; <a href="http://www.puxicofilm.com/" type="external">documentary</a>&#160;Hemby created on the album’s titular town, a tribute to her grandparents’ hometown in Southeast Missouri. After showcasing the film in Nashville, Hemby hadn’t intended for&#160;“Puxico” to have a life of its own. In fact, it took requests from artists like breakout star Maren Morris to convince Hemby to even release it.</p>
<p>“I tried to pass it off as a soundtrack, but really it’s my story. It’s like the deepest part of who I am,” Hemby says. “I always thought I would do my first record guns a-blazin’, because I do love a Sheryl Crow-type rock ‘n roll rebelliousness. I’m 40 years old, and I just found myself looking back on the past and I really loved it and didn’t want it to change in some sort of way, it was just where I was at the time. I literally was like, ‘I think this is my first record.’”</p>
<p>The album tells the all-too-familiar story of a small town built on traditions and county fairs and square dancing adjusting to change amid economic crises. But as written through the perspective of her grandfather,&#160;“Puxico”&#160;is also imbued with rich, calloused details and metaphors about ambition (“Ferris Wheel”), the durability of love (“Worn”) and family bonds (“Cairo, IL”), all sung in a honeyed, hopeful tone that recalls peak Patty Griffin, the Grammy-winning era of Shelby Lynne or latter-period Dixie Chicks.</p>
<p>[embedded content]</p>
<p>Though&#160;“Puxico”&#160;has origins in synch, albeit to Hemby’s own project, many of the songs could easily be re-purposed in film and TV, while the melodies and instrumentation of upbeat standouts “Lovers On Display” and “Time Honored Tradition” have strong commercial appeal for campaigns built around community development or investing in a new home.</p>
<p>Hemby is particularly proud of <a href="https://www.youtube.com/embed/mYWV2TOHOHY" type="external">album-closer “Return,”</a> which sums up both the album and film’s theme of re-investing in family and the communities that raised you. “I’ve always heard that at the end of a film, or in a television show like&#160;“This Is Us.” I love regional things like Johnny Cash, the Midwest region and the songs and the people. I don’t know…I think it lends itself to a more organic movie is what I’m trying to say. Almost like a&#160;“Dead Man Walking”&#160;type of deal.”</p>
<p>Though Hemby seen first-hand the accolades (and royalties) that scoring a number-one hit on country radio or a synch on&#160;“Nashville”&#160;or a Reese Witherspoon vehicle can bring as a songwriter, finding acclaim and commercial success on her own merits as an artist has always been a secondary goal.</p>
<p>“I don’t know if I want to be that kind of artist who has to go and do massive radio touring and all that,” she says. “Artists like Ryan Adams and Feist and those types got it right. They go out and play theaters, they’re not trying to fight for radio…I think people are craving authenticity. And in different ways, authenticity is winning right now.”</p>
<p>SYNCH OF THE WEEKLike many holiday albums, <a href="http://variety.com/t/sia/" type="external">Sia</a>’s newly released&#160;“Everyday Is Christmas”&#160;was turned in to her management team at Crush Management in July, when the subjects of songs like “Snowflake” and “Candy Cane Lane” seemed far away.</p>
<p>But the album, which includes 10 all-new holiday originals co-written and produced by longtime collaborator Greg Kurstin (“Chandelier,” Adele’s “Hello”), is also a rare attempt to add a full album’s worth of songs to the contemporary Christmas canon in the vein of Mariah Carey and Wham! Add to that an artist notorious for keeping press to a bare minimum, save for the occasional “Ellen” performance or interview, and Crush had a unique marketing challenge on their hands.</p>
<p>“With Christmas records, you only have a few weeks in which it’s part of the culture, so however you can make the music part of the culture is the key,” says Jonathan Daniel, co-president and founder of Crush.</p>
<p>Enter JCPenney, whose ad agency mcgarrybowen was the first to respond to Crush’s Head of Synch Patricia Joseph’s July email to music supervisors under the subject, “Is it too early for Christmas?”</p>
<p>“I like to start early because you never know – some brands like to start searches in July, some start in November,” says Joseph.</p>
<p>Vlad Bar, a music producer at mcgarrybowen, had already been testing approaches to a campaign that could drive strong social-media buzz from “a brand new holiday song and not a tried and true standard” when he “serendipitously” received Joseph’s note. “While it’s always fortunate to be able to land on an artist as culturally relevant as <a href="http://variety.com/2017/music/news/zayn-malik-drops-new-single-dusk-till-dawn-featuring-sia-watch-1202549975/" type="external">Sia</a> for a campaign, it’s even more fortunate when that artist happens to have a song that seems as if it was tailor-made for the spot,” Bar says.</p>
<p>The Sia spots began airing in November and will continue through January, due to consumer feedback that Bar says has been “nothing short of wildly enthusiastic.”</p>
<p>Though the full-length version of “Ho Ho Ho” invites “all the misfits” to “bring a bottle of rum,” the JCPenney ads only utilize the title for their refrain. That’s as close as many major brands come to using the word “Christmas” in their ads these days, in favor of a more non-denominational approach to holiday advertising.</p>
<p>Some even avoid the holiday genre entirely, like when&#160; <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UYkzQQKzKoI" type="external">Mercedes-Benz opted for a moody cover</a>&#160;of Bob Dylan’s “To Make You Feel My Love” for a seasonal campaign last year. “It’s another example of brands reaching outside those typical Christmas songs and putting a new spin on it,” says Brian Monaco, president and chief marketing officer at Sia’s publisher Sony/ATV.</p>
<p>[embedded content]</p> | false | 1 | songs screens formerly known synch variety column written andrew hampp vp new yorkbased music sponsorship experiential agency mac presents former branding correspondent billboard week column highlight noteworthy use music advertising marketing campaigns well new catalog songs deem ripe synch use natalie hemby written many country musics biggest stars including hits for160 little big town160 lady antebellum miranda lamberts 2015 acm song year awardwinning automatic longawaited soloartist debut160puxico already ranking high on160 2017 yearend lists hemby took lowkey approach project began score a160 documentary160hemby created albums titular town tribute grandparents hometown southeast missouri showcasing film nashville hemby hadnt intended for160puxico life fact took requests artists like breakout star maren morris convince hemby even release tried pass soundtrack really story like deepest part hemby says always thought would first record guns ablazin love sheryl crowtype rock n roll rebelliousness im 40 years old found looking back past really loved didnt want change sort way time literally like think first record album tells alltoofamiliar story small town built traditions county fairs square dancing adjusting change amid economic crises written perspective grandfather160puxico160is also imbued rich calloused details metaphors ambition ferris wheel durability love worn family bonds cairo il sung honeyed hopeful tone recalls peak patty griffin grammywinning era shelby lynne latterperiod dixie chicks embedded content though160puxico160has origins synch albeit hembys project many songs could easily repurposed film tv melodies instrumentation upbeat standouts lovers display time honored tradition strong commercial appeal campaigns built around community development investing new home hemby particularly proud albumcloser return sums album films theme reinvesting family communities raised ive always heard end film television show like160this us love regional things like johnny cash midwest region songs people dont knowi think lends organic movie im trying say almost like a160dead man walking160type deal though hemby seen firsthand accolades royalties scoring numberone hit country radio synch on160nashville160or reese witherspoon vehicle bring songwriter finding acclaim commercial success merits artist always secondary goal dont know want kind artist go massive radio touring says artists like ryan adams feist types got right go play theaters theyre trying fight radioi think people craving authenticity different ways authenticity winning right synch weeklike many holiday albums sias newly released160everyday christmas160was turned management team crush management july subjects songs like snowflake candy cane lane seemed far away album includes 10 allnew holiday originals cowritten produced longtime collaborator greg kurstin chandelier adeles hello also rare attempt add full albums worth songs contemporary christmas canon vein mariah carey wham add artist notorious keeping press bare minimum save occasional ellen performance interview crush unique marketing challenge hands christmas records weeks part culture however make music part culture key says jonathan daniel copresident founder crush enter jcpenney whose ad agency mcgarrybowen first respond crushs head synch patricia josephs july email music supervisors subject early christmas like start early never know brands like start searches july start november says joseph vlad bar music producer mcgarrybowen already testing approaches campaign could drive strong socialmedia buzz brand new holiday song tried true standard serendipitously received josephs note always fortunate able land artist culturally relevant sia campaign even fortunate artist happens song seems tailormade spot bar says sia spots began airing november continue january due consumer feedback bar says nothing short wildly enthusiastic though fulllength version ho ho ho invites misfits bring bottle rum jcpenney ads utilize title refrain thats close many major brands come using word christmas ads days favor nondenominational approach holiday advertising even avoid holiday genre entirely like when160 mercedesbenz opted moody cover160of bob dylans make feel love seasonal campaign last year another example brands reaching outside typical christmas songs putting new spin says brian monaco president chief marketing officer sias publisher sonyatv embedded content | 610 |
<p>TEMPE, Ariz. — When the <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Arizona-Cardinals/" type="external">Arizona Cardinals</a> begin workouts upon their official start of training camp, the first questions to head coach <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Bruce-Arians/" type="external">Bruce Arians</a> aren’t going to be about the health of his team, position battles, the rise of <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/David_Johnson/" type="external">David Johnson</a> or what went wrong a year ago.</p>
<p>What everyone will want to know is whether the 2017 season might be the last for not only the 64-year-old Arians, but also the final year in the careers of quarterback <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Carson_Palmer/" type="external">Carson Palmer</a> and wide receiver <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Larry_Fitzgerald/" type="external">Larry Fitzgerald</a>, Palmer turns 38 in December while Fitzgerald turns 34 in August.</p>
<p>And if it is the final go-round for all three, does that mean the Cardinals’ window of opportunity to get back to the playoffs and make a possible Super Bowl appearance is about to slam shut after this season?</p>
<p>A new head coach likely means wholesale changes to just about everything. And since there is no young protege to learn and study under Palmer at quarterback, it could also mean there is no “quarterback whisperer” to teach him. It also means the best and most popular player in the history of the organization might not be around either to help soften the losses of the other two.</p>
<p>It’s the most pressing issue entering Cardinals’ camp and until or unless Arians, Palmer and Fitzgerald make their intentions fully known about their futures beyond this season, it can be assumed that 2017 could be the end of the road for all of them.</p>
<p>Arians revealed in his new book, entitled “The Quarterback Whisperer,” that he underwent surgery in February to remove cancerous cells in his kidney. He had been diagnosed, he wrote, with renal cell carcinoma in December.</p>
<p>“Now I feel great,” Arians said in his book. “My energy has returned. I’m told I’m cancer-free again. I’m ready for at least one more season of NFL football — maybe more.”</p>
<p>One more season? Maybe more? What about Palmer? What about Fitzgerald? Both players have said for the past couple years that they evaluate their futures at the end of every season. Fitzgerald, entering the final year of his contract, has indicated he will make some sort of announcement in training camp.</p>
<p>As for Palmer, who technically has another year left on his deal, it seems just as up in the air as Arians and Fitzgerald. To hear Arians tell it, however, Palmer could play as long as he wants.</p>
<p>“Physically, he’s probably body-wise like if he was 28 right now,” Arians told CBS Sports Network last week. “The sports science is unbelievable, you know with the stuff right now, nutrition, all of the training stuff, he could play easily ’til he’s 40-42 probably — if he wants to.”</p>
<p>TOP THREE TRAINING CAMP GOALS</p>
<p>–Keeping Carson Palmer fresh. With four quarterbacks in camp, this normally wouldn’t be an issue. But with an extra week of camp, five preseason games and Palmer turning 38 in December, it could be. For that reason, look for the Cardinals to try and rest Palmer as much as they can before the start of the regular season, relying on <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Drew_Stanton/" type="external">Drew Stanton</a>, <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Blaine_Gabbert/" type="external">Blaine Gabbert</a> and yes, undrafted rookie free agent Trevor Knight. Gabbert, specifically, figures to see more action than most No. 3 quarterbacks so coach Bruce Arians and staff get a better idea if he can ultimately be the man to replace Palmer in another year — or two.</p>
<p>–Finding the No. 2 starting cornerback. The leaders in the clubhouse to start opposite <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Patrick-Peterson/" type="external">Patrick Peterson</a> are, in order, <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Justin-Bethel/" type="external">Justin Bethel</a> and <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Brandon-Williams/" type="external">Brandon Williams</a>, but don’t discount general manager <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Steve-Keim/" type="external">Steve Keim</a> throwing a big-name veteran free agent into the mix like he normally does when there are pre-camp questions about a concerning starting position on this team. He’s basically done it every year since assuming full control of the front office and for the most part, it’s always seemed to work. In this situation, it may not be necessary unless Bethel or Williams prove after a few weeks that neither is trustworthy enough to handle the role, which is incredibly tough considering opposing teams rarely throw in Peterson’s direction and this spot usually gets all the serious action.</p>
<p>–Making sure the Badger and Money-backer are ready. Two incredibly important players on defense, safety Tyrann Mathieu and inside “money” linebacker Deone Bucannon, are returning from injuries and the Cardinals plan to be mindful of that in regard to how hard they push each player early on. Bucannon, in fact, might not even be ready for Week 1 after undergoing foot surgery to fix a problem he thought was past him. Mathieu, meanwhile, has dealt with numerous injuries virtually every year since turning pro in 2013 and hasn’t been able to finish a season without some sort of issue. What could be considered just as troubling is that the Cardinals may have to rely on two rookie draft picks if either player isn’t ready. The good news is, the team loves both first-year players in No. 1 pick Haasan Reddick, an inside linebacker, and second-round pick Budda Baker, a seemingly do-everything safety who has patterned his game after the Honey Badger.</p>
<p>PROJECTED CAMP DEPTH CHART</p>
<p>QUARTERBACKS: Starter — Carson Palmer. Backups — Drew Stanton, Blaine Gabbert, Trevor Knight.</p>
<p>RUNNING BACKS: Starter — David Johnson. Backups — Andre Ellington, Kerwynn Williams, Elijhaa Penny, T.J. Logan, James Summers.</p>
<p>TIGHT ENDS: Starter. — <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Jermaine_Gresham/" type="external">Jermaine Gresham</a>. Backups — Troy Niklas, Ifeanyi Momah, Hakeem Valles, Ricky Seals-Jones, <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Steven/" type="external">Steven</a> Wroblewski.</p>
<p>WIDE RECEIVERS: Starters — Larry Fitzgerald, <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/John_Brown/" type="external">John Brown</a>, <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/JJ-Nelson/" type="external">J.J. Nelson</a>. Backups — Aaron Dobson, Jaron Brown, Chad Williams, Brittan Golden, Jeremy Ross, Kris Hogan, <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Larry_Clark/" type="external">Larry Clark</a>, Marquis Bundy, Carlton Agudosi.</p>
<p>OFFENSIVE LINEMEN: Starters — LT D.J. Humphries, LG Mike Iupati, C A.Q. Shipley, RG Evan Boehm, RT Jared Veldheer. Backups — T Will Holden, G/C Cole Toner, C Tony Bergstrom, G Dorian Johnson, T John Wetzel, G Kaleb Johnson, T Ulrick John, T Givens Price, C/G Daniel Munyer, C Lucas Crowley, T Jonathan McLaughlin.</p>
<p>DEFENSIVE LINEMEN: Starters — LDE Robert Nkemdiche, NT Corey Peters, RDT Frostee Rucker. Backups — DE Ed Stinson, NT Xavier Williams, DT Josh Mauro, DT Rodney Gunter, NT Olsen Pierre, DE Tasini Pasoni.</p>
<p>LINEBACKERS: Starters — SOLB <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Chandler-Jones/" type="external">Chandler Jones</a>, SILB Karlos Dansby, RILB Haasan Reddick, WOLB Markus Golden. Backups — OLB Jarvis Jones, MLB Deone Bucannon, MLB Gabe Martin, OLB Kareem Martin, ILB/OLB Alani Fua, MLB Scooby Wright, MLB Tre’Von Johnson, OLB Capi Cap, MLB Zaviar Gooden, OLB Alex Bazzie.</p>
<p>DEFENSIVE BACKS: Starters — LCB Patrick Peterson, RCB Justin Bethel, FS Tyrann Mathieu, SS Antoine Bethea. Backups — CB Brandon Williams, CB Jumal Rolle, FS Budda Baker, SS Tyvon Branch, CB Rudy Ford, S/CB Harlan Miller, CB Elie Bouka, S Ironhead Gallon, CB Ronald Zamort, CB Sojourn Shelton, CB Daniel Gray, CB Gump Hayes, CB Ryan Lewis.</p>
<p>SPECIAL TEAMS: K <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Phil_Dawson/" type="external">Phil Dawson</a>, P Richie Leone, P Matt Wile, LS Aaron Brewer, KOR T.J. Logan, PR Patrick Peterson.</p> | false | 1 | tempe ariz arizona cardinals begin workouts upon official start training camp first questions head coach bruce arians arent going health team position battles rise david johnson went wrong year ago everyone want know whether 2017 season might last 64yearold arians also final year careers quarterback carson palmer wide receiver larry fitzgerald palmer turns 38 december fitzgerald turns 34 august final goround three mean cardinals window opportunity get back playoffs make possible super bowl appearance slam shut season new head coach likely means wholesale changes everything since young protege learn study palmer quarterback could also mean quarterback whisperer teach also means best popular player history organization might around either help soften losses two pressing issue entering cardinals camp unless arians palmer fitzgerald make intentions fully known futures beyond season assumed 2017 could end road arians revealed new book entitled quarterback whisperer underwent surgery february remove cancerous cells kidney diagnosed wrote renal cell carcinoma december feel great arians said book energy returned im told im cancerfree im ready least one season nfl football maybe one season maybe palmer fitzgerald players said past couple years evaluate futures end every season fitzgerald entering final year contract indicated make sort announcement training camp palmer technically another year left deal seems air arians fitzgerald hear arians tell however palmer could play long wants physically hes probably bodywise like 28 right arians told cbs sports network last week sports science unbelievable know stuff right nutrition training stuff could play easily til hes 4042 probably wants top three training camp goals keeping carson palmer fresh four quarterbacks camp normally wouldnt issue extra week camp five preseason games palmer turning 38 december could reason look cardinals try rest palmer much start regular season relying drew stanton blaine gabbert yes undrafted rookie free agent trevor knight gabbert specifically figures see action 3 quarterbacks coach bruce arians staff get better idea ultimately man replace palmer another year two finding 2 starting cornerback leaders clubhouse start opposite patrick peterson order justin bethel brandon williams dont discount general manager steve keim throwing bigname veteran free agent mix like normally precamp questions concerning starting position team hes basically done every year since assuming full control front office part always seemed work situation may necessary unless bethel williams prove weeks neither trustworthy enough handle role incredibly tough considering opposing teams rarely throw petersons direction spot usually gets serious action making sure badger moneybacker ready two incredibly important players defense safety tyrann mathieu inside money linebacker deone bucannon returning injuries cardinals plan mindful regard hard push player early bucannon fact might even ready week 1 undergoing foot surgery fix problem thought past mathieu meanwhile dealt numerous injuries virtually every year since turning pro 2013 hasnt able finish season without sort issue could considered troubling cardinals may rely two rookie draft picks either player isnt ready good news team loves firstyear players 1 pick haasan reddick inside linebacker secondround pick budda baker seemingly doeverything safety patterned game honey badger projected camp depth chart quarterbacks starter carson palmer backups drew stanton blaine gabbert trevor knight running backs starter david johnson backups andre ellington kerwynn williams elijhaa penny tj logan james summers tight ends starter jermaine gresham backups troy niklas ifeanyi momah hakeem valles ricky sealsjones steven wroblewski wide receivers starters larry fitzgerald john brown jj nelson backups aaron dobson jaron brown chad williams brittan golden jeremy ross kris hogan larry clark marquis bundy carlton agudosi offensive linemen starters lt dj humphries lg mike iupati c aq shipley rg evan boehm rt jared veldheer backups holden gc cole toner c tony bergstrom g dorian johnson john wetzel g kaleb johnson ulrick john givens price cg daniel munyer c lucas crowley jonathan mclaughlin defensive linemen starters lde robert nkemdiche nt corey peters rdt frostee rucker backups de ed stinson nt xavier williams dt josh mauro dt rodney gunter nt olsen pierre de tasini pasoni linebackers starters solb chandler jones silb karlos dansby rilb haasan reddick wolb markus golden backups olb jarvis jones mlb deone bucannon mlb gabe martin olb kareem martin ilbolb alani fua mlb scooby wright mlb trevon johnson olb capi cap mlb zaviar gooden olb alex bazzie defensive backs starters lcb patrick peterson rcb justin bethel fs tyrann mathieu ss antoine bethea backups cb brandon williams cb jumal rolle fs budda baker ss tyvon branch cb rudy ford scb harlan miller cb elie bouka ironhead gallon cb ronald zamort cb sojourn shelton cb daniel gray cb gump hayes cb ryan lewis special teams k phil dawson p richie leone p matt wile ls aaron brewer kor tj logan pr patrick peterson | 763 |
<p>Editor’s note: Pascal-Emmanuel Gobry, a conservative writer and fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center, is writing a series of columns on uncomfortable truths about health care in America. Some will make conservatives more uncomfortable, others will make progressives more uncomfortable, but most should make everyone uncomfortable.</p>
<p>Gather ’round, children, if you want to hear a scary story. Last time around, I pointed out that while everyone “knows” that there is a lot of waste in American health-care spending, we engage in widespread self-deception about the true magnitude of the problem. That half, approximately, of all U.S. health spending is wasted, is simultaneously scientifically uncontroversial, ignored by health-policy experts, and totally absent from public debate.</p>
<p>But that’s not the worst part. In fact, it could be good news in a way: The magnitude of the problem suggests that there’s a lot of room for improvement; more important, if we can only educate more people about the fact, then positive change might be on the horizon.</p>
<p>Fat chance.</p>
<p>Because it’s not just that we waste so much money, it’s that the most wasteful spending is also the most popular.</p>
<p>Some of this is already broadly understood, at least among those with an interest in health-care policy. America’s two major health-care entitlements are gobbling up ever-bigger amounts of cash for less and less value. The two major health-care entitlements I am referring to, of course, are Medicare and employer-sponsored health insurance, which is subsidized by the biggest loophole in the tax code. (You thought I was going to say Medicaid? True, Medicaid is terrible, but&#160; <a href="https://www.amazon.com/Medicaid-Fails-Poor-Encounter-Broadsides/dp/1594037523" type="external">for different reasons</a>.)</p>
<p>Yes, the latter is very much an entitlement. Some conservatives resist that sort of language in the interest of a philosophical defense of private-property rights, the idea being that to call a tax break government spending presupposes that our money belongs to the government. I applaud and share the philosophical attachment to private-property rights, but we shouldn’t let it obscure the fact that macroeconomically, tax expenditures have many of the same effects as government spending, since they represent spending directed by the government rather than private individuals.</p>
<p>While Medicare’s dysfunction is mostly only on the radar for right-leaning health-policy wonks, there is broad unanimity that the tax break for employer-sponsored health insurance, passed during World War II to get around wage controls and having since ballooned into a monster, is one of our major sources of waste. It is a huge giveaway to insurers and virtually ensures that third-party payments — the “original sin” of the American health-care system, that which prevents consumer dynamics from operating — remain the center of the system.</p>
<p>It is also the most popular part of the American health-care system. There’s a reason why Barack Obama, no dummy, made a refrain of “if you like your plan, you can keep your plan.” And there’s a reason why breaking that promise made Obamacare so unpopular, and there’s a reason why the GOP suddenly became the party of keeping your plan — that is, the party of entitlements.</p>
<p>One of the few good parts of Obamacare was the so-called “Cadillac Tax,” an attempt, albeit a ham-fisted one, to get this monster a little bit under control by taxing the most expensive plans. It’s also no coincidence that it’s the part whose implementation keeps getting delayed and the part that Republicans are united in wanting to repeal.</p>
<p>This, at least, is fairly well understood among health-policy experts, even as the political impossibility of doing something about it looms so large. But wait, there’s more! There’s something that’s just as bad, if not worse, and even more popular — and that isn’t even on most health-policy experts’ radar: doctors.</p>
<p>Doctors are the biggest villains in American health care. They are also, of course, its most popular actors.</p>
<p>As with public-school teachers, we should be able to recognize that a profession as a whole can be pathological even as many individual members are perfectly good actors, and even if many of them are heroes. And just like public-school teachers, the medical profession as a whole puts its own interests ahead of those of the citizens it claims to be dedicated to serve.</p>
<p>One of the most celebrated pieces of health-care journalism in recent years has been Atul Gawande’s&#160;New Yorker&#160; <a href="https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2007/12/10/the-checklist" type="external">exposé</a>&#160;on the Herculean efforts by a handful of scientists to get intensive-care physicians to implement basic hygiene measures so as to stop hospital-borne diseases, which kill about 100,000 people per year&#160; <a href="https://www.cdc.gov/washington/~cdcatWork/pdf/infections.pdf" type="external">according to the CDC</a>. The “checklist” was of no cost to the doctors, and its scientific rationale was unquestionable. Doctors still resisted it with all their might because they found it mildly inconvenient; perhaps they found it even less acceptable that anybody might tell them how to do their jobs. Somehow, “sociopathic” seems a mild descriptor.</p>
<p>It goes on, of course. The evidence that artificial intelligence is better at diagnosis than most general practitioners is&#160; <a href="https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/can-a-crowdsourced-ai-medical-diagnosis-app-outperform-your-doctor/" type="external">pretty robust</a>&#160;at this point, and the profession resists it tooth and nail. In a few years, we’ll be able to know how many unnecessary deaths this led to, but the number will have lots of zeroes. It’s hard to think of a measure or policy in the interests of patients that doctors haven’t ferociously resisted as a group.</p>
<p>Much like public-school teachers, the medical profession has used its positive image to create a legal structure that fills its pockets and prevents accountability. Medical-licensure rules make the health-care system a gravy train run for their benefit. Countless procedures that doctors have a legal monopoly on could just as well be performed by less skilled experts. This is hugely wasteful, but it only scratches the surface.</p>
<p>The legal regime’s reification of medicine prevents new and successful forms of medicine from appearing. Milton Friedman liked to point out that the Mayo Clinic, by all accounts one of the world’s top hospitals, whose success is credited to its group practice and tertiary-care model, would have been illegal under the medical-licensure rules that were passed later on. In other words, the biggest problem with medical licensure isn’t that we’re paying too much for the services we’re currently getting (although its effects include that too); it’s that it is preventing new and much better services from being born.</p>
<p>It’s hard to say if general practitioners, as a professional category, should even exist. We treat the breakdown of medical practitioners into “doctors” and “nurses” as a self-evident law of the Universe or the product of some sort of scientific imperative. In reality, it is a mandatory reification of the way the medical profession worked a century ago, and there is no reason to believe that it is the way health care should be run. In Africa, which suffers from a dire doctor shortage,&#160; <a href="https://www.the-american-interest.com/2014/10/06/what-americans-wont-learn-about-health-care/" type="external">there are examples</a>&#160;of professionally run clinics that deliver a first-world standard of care to hundreds of patients without a single doctor. It’s highly probable that in a deregulated system you would have a broad spectrum of medical professions going from less skilled to more highly skilled, perhaps even without the concept of “doctor” except in the same vague sense that an “engineer” can be both a low-skilled technician and a cutting-edge researcher and everything in between.</p>
<p>This is a good analogy: When computers were first invented, (largely male) skilled engineers worked on arcane computer code while (largely female) lower-paid and lower-skilled assistants turned the code into punch cards and the punch cards back into code. As the technology evolved, that division of labor became obsolete, and even as the word “engineer” remained, it covered a completely different reality. Imagine that at some point circa 1964, engineers had successfully lobbied so that only those with a Ph.D. could program computers (and that their association would control the accreditation of computer-science schools and how many people graduate each year). You can be sure that in that parallel universe, in 2017 a computer is something that looks like something from our 1980s and costs $20,000. We would have none of the economic and cultural transformations that the software revolution wrought — and even worse, we wouldn’t even know what we were missing.</p>
<p>But to circle back to this column’s original point, we have Stockholm’s Syndrome. Except for the more reckless libertarians, nobody dares to touch the doctors, because economic literacy is so low and because our emotional investment in the idea of their expertise and professional dedication is so high.</p>
<p>It’s not just that we’re wasting half the money. It’s that the most wasteful half is the most popular.</p>
<p>— Pascal-Emmanuel Gobry is a fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center.</p> | false | 1 | editors note pascalemmanuel gobry conservative writer fellow ethics public policy center writing series columns uncomfortable truths health care america make conservatives uncomfortable others make progressives uncomfortable make everyone uncomfortable gather round children want hear scary story last time around pointed everyone knows lot waste american healthcare spending engage widespread selfdeception true magnitude problem half approximately us health spending wasted simultaneously scientifically uncontroversial ignored healthpolicy experts totally absent public debate thats worst part fact could good news way magnitude problem suggests theres lot room improvement important educate people fact positive change might horizon fat chance waste much money wasteful spending also popular already broadly understood least among interest healthcare policy americas two major healthcare entitlements gobbling everbigger amounts cash less less value two major healthcare entitlements referring course medicare employersponsored health insurance subsidized biggest loophole tax code thought going say medicaid true medicaid terrible but160 different reasons yes latter much entitlement conservatives resist sort language interest philosophical defense privateproperty rights idea call tax break government spending presupposes money belongs government applaud share philosophical attachment privateproperty rights shouldnt let obscure fact macroeconomically tax expenditures many effects government spending since represent spending directed government rather private individuals medicares dysfunction mostly radar rightleaning healthpolicy wonks broad unanimity tax break employersponsored health insurance passed world war ii get around wage controls since ballooned monster one major sources waste huge giveaway insurers virtually ensures thirdparty payments original sin american healthcare system prevents consumer dynamics operating remain center system also popular part american healthcare system theres reason barack obama dummy made refrain like plan keep plan theres reason breaking promise made obamacare unpopular theres reason gop suddenly became party keeping plan party entitlements one good parts obamacare socalled cadillac tax attempt albeit hamfisted one get monster little bit control taxing expensive plans also coincidence part whose implementation keeps getting delayed part republicans united wanting repeal least fairly well understood among healthpolicy experts even political impossibility something looms large wait theres theres something thats bad worse even popular isnt even healthpolicy experts radar doctors doctors biggest villains american health care also course popular actors publicschool teachers able recognize profession whole pathological even many individual members perfectly good actors even many heroes like publicschool teachers medical profession whole puts interests ahead citizens claims dedicated serve one celebrated pieces healthcare journalism recent years atul gawandes160new yorker160 exposé160on herculean efforts handful scientists get intensivecare physicians implement basic hygiene measures stop hospitalborne diseases kill 100000 people per year160 according cdc checklist cost doctors scientific rationale unquestionable doctors still resisted might found mildly inconvenient perhaps found even less acceptable anybody might tell jobs somehow sociopathic seems mild descriptor goes course evidence artificial intelligence better diagnosis general practitioners is160 pretty robust160at point profession resists tooth nail years well able know many unnecessary deaths led number lots zeroes hard think measure policy interests patients doctors havent ferociously resisted group much like publicschool teachers medical profession used positive image create legal structure fills pockets prevents accountability medicallicensure rules make healthcare system gravy train run benefit countless procedures doctors legal monopoly could well performed less skilled experts hugely wasteful scratches surface legal regimes reification medicine prevents new successful forms medicine appearing milton friedman liked point mayo clinic accounts one worlds top hospitals whose success credited group practice tertiarycare model would illegal medicallicensure rules passed later words biggest problem medical licensure isnt paying much services currently getting although effects include preventing new much better services born hard say general practitioners professional category even exist treat breakdown medical practitioners doctors nurses selfevident law universe product sort scientific imperative reality mandatory reification way medical profession worked century ago reason believe way health care run africa suffers dire doctor shortage160 examples160of professionally run clinics deliver firstworld standard care hundreds patients without single doctor highly probable deregulated system would broad spectrum medical professions going less skilled highly skilled perhaps even without concept doctor except vague sense engineer lowskilled technician cuttingedge researcher everything good analogy computers first invented largely male skilled engineers worked arcane computer code largely female lowerpaid lowerskilled assistants turned code punch cards punch cards back code technology evolved division labor became obsolete even word engineer remained covered completely different reality imagine point circa 1964 engineers successfully lobbied phd could program computers association would control accreditation computerscience schools many people graduate year sure parallel universe 2017 computer something looks like something 1980s costs 20000 would none economic cultural transformations software revolution wrought even worse wouldnt even know missing circle back columns original point stockholms syndrome except reckless libertarians nobody dares touch doctors economic literacy low emotional investment idea expertise professional dedication high wasting half money wasteful half popular pascalemmanuel gobry fellow ethics public policy center | 774 |
<p>LOS ANGELES — Joc Pederson is in a hitting slump, but he won Tuesday’s game for the <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Los-Angeles-Dodgers/" type="external">Los Angeles Dodgers</a> in the batter’s box in a more unconventional way.</p>
<p>With the bases loaded in the eighth inning of a tie game against the <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Chicago-White-Sox/" type="external">Chicago White Sox</a>, Pederson got hit by a pitch in the leg courtesy of reliever Jake Petricka to knock in the go-ahead run.</p>
<p>That led the Dodgers to a 6-1 win over the Chicago White Sox.</p>
<p>Los Angeles used a five-run eighth inning to turn a tight game into a rout. After Pederson was plunked with the bases loaded, pinch hitter Austin Barnes delivered a two-run single, as did <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Corey-Seager/" type="external">Corey Seager</a>.</p>
<p>After the game, closer <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Kenley-Jansen/" type="external">Kenley Jansen</a> jokingly said to Pederson in the clubhouse: “Hey, Joc, that was really big. Way to finally come through.”</p>
<p>The Dodgers, a major-league-best 84-34, moved to 50 games above .500 for the first time since 1953. This was their 37th comeback victory.</p>
<p>“When you look at the win-loss, it’s remarkable,” Los Angeles manager <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Dave_Roberts/" type="external">Dave Roberts</a> said. “We’re going to celebrate tonight, like we do after we win, but we will refocus and it will be fun having Yu (Darvish) on the mound (Wednesday) making his home debut.</p>
<p>“Fifty games over .500 is kind of unchartered territory. We’re playing good baseball.”</p>
<p>The White Sox’s season is completely opposite, and the bullpen woes continued for Chicago (45-71).</p>
<p>“The hit-by-pitch obviously didn’t do us any favors,” Petricka said. “Dug a little hole myself, and they just found some holes … It’s just next batter. I felt like I kept good focus. It was one pitch yanked a little too much and caught his hip.”</p>
<p>Chicago’s <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Tim_Anderson/" type="external">Tim Anderson</a> continued his hot hitting, belting a home run to left field on the first pitch of the game. It was the fourth career leadoff home run for Anderson, who has four home runs and eight RBIs in his past seven games.</p>
<p>Dodgers starter Alex Wood gave up the solo shot, then was masterful. In the sixth, with a runner on third and two outs, Wood got pinch hitter Alen Hanson out on a called third strike. The lefty threw a big fist-pump after keeping the game tied at 1.</p>
<p>Wood allowed one run on six hits and no walks in seven innings while striking out six. His lone mistake was Anderson’s home run, the first of his 79 pitches. He did not get a decision, though, failing in a bid to improve to 15-1.</p>
<p>“He just jumped on it,” Wood said of Anderson’s home run. “First pitch of the game, heater. Maybe left it up a little bit. It was out over. He was definitely looking heater. It surprised me a little bit how he turned and burned on that to start the game. After that, we settled down and made some quality pitches.”</p>
<p><a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Brandon_Morrow/" type="external">Brandon Morrow</a> (5-0) got the win with one scoreless inning.</p>
<p>White Sox starter Miguel Gonzalez pitched well and made a quality start, allowing just one run on five hits in six innings. He struck out four and walked three in an emotional game as it was his first time pitching in Dodger Stadium.</p>
<p>Gonzalez was born in Mexico, but his family moved to San Fernando — a city outside Los Angeles — when he was 4. He graduated from San Fernando High and then attended Los Angeles Mission College. He went to plenty of Dodgers games sitting in the upper-deck seats.</p>
<p>“There were a lot of emotions,” Gonzalez said. “I had my family here. My friends. When I was stretching in the outfield right before I started warming up, everyone was there supporting. They were pretty pumped about it.</p>
<p>“It just got me going right off the get-go. There’s a lot of memories here growing up. It was fun.”</p>
<p>His parents and many other family members and friends were in attendance. His wife, Lucia, who just gave birth to their second child a few days ago, was back in Chicago.</p>
<p>Juan Minaya (1-1), who allowed one hit and one run in one-plus inning, took the loss.</p>
<p>In the sixth inning, the Dodgers’ <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Cody-Bellinger/" type="external">Cody Bellinger</a> used his speed to reach via an infield single. Yasmani Grandal singled and Yasiel Puig drew a walk to load the bases. A <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Logan-Forsythe/" type="external">Logan Forsythe</a> sacrifice fly scored Bellinger from third to tie the game at 1.</p>
<p>Puig was moved up to sixth in the batting order on Tuesday because of his consistency in at-bats, according to Roberts. He went 0-for-2 with two walks.</p>
<p>Forsythe and Pederson, who have been struggling as of late, were dropped to seventh and eighth in the order, respectively. Still, Pederson found a way to help the Dodgers clinch yet another comeback win.</p>
<p>NOTES: The Dodgers traded RHP Chris Hatcher to Oakland for international bonus pool money. The reliever was not going to get much work in the stacked Los Angeles bullpen, according to manager Dave Roberts …. Dodgers OF Rob Segedin (toe strain, wrist surgery) was activated from the 60-day disabled list … The White Sox reinstated RHP Dylan Covey (left oblique strain) from the disabled list. … White Sox C <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Geovany_Soto/" type="external">Geovany Soto</a> (right elbow surgery) is expected to miss the rest of the season …. 1B <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Adrian_Gonzalez/" type="external">Adrian Gonzalez</a> (back) will make the Dodgers’ next road trip, which starts Friday in Detroit. Gonzalez last played in a game on June 11. … White Sox INF Matt Davidson (right wrist bruise) had a rehab setback caused by irritation. There was no structural damage, but his return date is unknown.</p> | false | 1 | los angeles joc pederson hitting slump tuesdays game los angeles dodgers batters box unconventional way bases loaded eighth inning tie game chicago white sox pederson got hit pitch leg courtesy reliever jake petricka knock goahead run led dodgers 61 win chicago white sox los angeles used fiverun eighth inning turn tight game rout pederson plunked bases loaded pinch hitter austin barnes delivered tworun single corey seager game closer kenley jansen jokingly said pederson clubhouse hey joc really big way finally come dodgers majorleaguebest 8434 moved 50 games 500 first time since 1953 37th comeback victory look winloss remarkable los angeles manager dave roberts said going celebrate tonight like win refocus fun yu darvish mound wednesday making home debut fifty games 500 kind unchartered territory playing good baseball white soxs season completely opposite bullpen woes continued chicago 4571 hitbypitch obviously didnt us favors petricka said dug little hole found holes next batter felt like kept good focus one pitch yanked little much caught hip chicagos tim anderson continued hot hitting belting home run left field first pitch game fourth career leadoff home run anderson four home runs eight rbis past seven games dodgers starter alex wood gave solo shot masterful sixth runner third two outs wood got pinch hitter alen hanson called third strike lefty threw big fistpump keeping game tied 1 wood allowed one run six hits walks seven innings striking six lone mistake andersons home run first 79 pitches get decision though failing bid improve 151 jumped wood said andersons home run first pitch game heater maybe left little bit definitely looking heater surprised little bit turned burned start game settled made quality pitches brandon morrow 50 got win one scoreless inning white sox starter miguel gonzalez pitched well made quality start allowing one run five hits six innings struck four walked three emotional game first time pitching dodger stadium gonzalez born mexico family moved san fernando city outside los angeles 4 graduated san fernando high attended los angeles mission college went plenty dodgers games sitting upperdeck seats lot emotions gonzalez said family friends stretching outfield right started warming everyone supporting pretty pumped got going right getgo theres lot memories growing fun parents many family members friends attendance wife lucia gave birth second child days ago back chicago juan minaya 11 allowed one hit one run oneplus inning took loss sixth inning dodgers cody bellinger used speed reach via infield single yasmani grandal singled yasiel puig drew walk load bases logan forsythe sacrifice fly scored bellinger third tie game 1 puig moved sixth batting order tuesday consistency atbats according roberts went 0for2 two walks forsythe pederson struggling late dropped seventh eighth order respectively still pederson found way help dodgers clinch yet another comeback win notes dodgers traded rhp chris hatcher oakland international bonus pool money reliever going get much work stacked los angeles bullpen according manager dave roberts dodgers rob segedin toe strain wrist surgery activated 60day disabled list white sox reinstated rhp dylan covey left oblique strain disabled list white sox c geovany soto right elbow surgery expected miss rest season 1b adrian gonzalez back make dodgers next road trip starts friday detroit gonzalez last played game june 11 white sox inf matt davidson right wrist bruise rehab setback caused irritation structural damage return date unknown | 548 |
<p>This war in Yemen is not a religious one, but world powers are doing a really good job at turning it into one.</p>
<p>In utter and complete violation of international law, Saudi Arabia, the world’s most violent and repressive theocracy, declared war on its southern neighbor Yemen, on March 25, 2015, calling on a broad military coalition to lend its support. Behind Saudi Arabia stands Jordan, Morocco, Bahrain, Kuwait, Qatar, Egypt, Sudan, the UAE, the U.S., the EU, and Pakistan.</p>
<p>As unsuspecting Yemenis slept in their homes, Saudi Arabia and Co. unleashed a deluge of bombs onto the capital, Sana’a, caring little for the millions of civilians below, intent on crushing their designated enemy, the Houthis.</p>
<p>The new object of the kingdom’s disaffection, the Houthis are a Yemeni rebel group hailing from northern Sa’ada organized under the leadership of Abdel-Malek Al Houthi and have been actively depicted in western and pro-KSA media as the source of all evil, a Shia rebel faction in collusion with Iran, the new enemy to hate and, above all, the new target to destroy.</p>
<p>And while such a narrative could be easily construed as politically charged, the mere manifestation of Saudi Arabia’s paranoiac fear that&#160; Iran might one day ambition to dissolve its mighty Arabian empire, labelling the Houthis as Shia and inferring they represent Yemen’s entire Shia community has only served to fuel negative sectarian sentiment while stripping all Shia in Yemen from their inalienable national civil rights.</p>
<p>The equation has been as follows: Houthis are Shia and therefore all Shia in Yemen are Houthis. Since all Houthis are in alliance with Iran and therefore inherently bad, all Shia in Yemen should be treated with suspicion and eventually neutralized.</p>
<p>While this rhetoric serves the kingdom’s reactionary religious stance, appealing to its radical religious leadership, it has put Yemen and of course all Yemenis in the crossfire of a dangerous debate: freedom of religion. More importantly such a reduction of Yemen’s political, social, and religious makeup is as bias as it is profoundly erroneous.</p>
<p>In the words of famous Irish politician, David Trimble, “The dark shadow we seem to see in the distance is not really a mountain ahead, but the shadow of the mountain behind—a shadow from the past thrown forward into our future. It is a dark sludge of historical sectarianism. We can leave it behind us if we wish.”</p>
<p>So what happened in Yemen that the world has felt compelled to revert to religious labeling and shaming in order to advance its political agenda on the ground?</p>
<p>The first element here that needs to be understood is that Saudi Arabia, the main instigator of violence and promoter of hate, is itself defined within the parameters of religious radicalism— in essence, reactionary Sunni Wahhabis are prone to reject anything that does not fall in line with their understanding of the divine. This trait has been amply demonstrated by Riyadh in its brutal and often bloody repression campaign against Shia rights activists in the eastern province of Qatif.</p>
<p>The arrest and subsequent sentencing to death of Sheikh Nimr Al Nimr stands as testimony to Saudi Arabia’s intolerance towards whoever or whatever is perceived to represent a threat to its authority—religious, political or otherwise.</p>
<p>But back to Yemen….</p>
<p>A lesson in religion: What is Zaidism?</p>
<p>To better understand what is at play and truly grasp the tragedy that is unfolding in this once joyous nation of southern Arabia, one needs to go back to the social-religious makeup of Yemen.</p>
<p>Yemen is a Muslim nation. And though Islam acts as the axis upon which the constitution has been weaved, it is important to understand that unlike its northern neighbor Saudi Arabia, Yemen is at heart a tolerant and religiously inclusive country.</p>
<p>Now, Yemen’s Muslim population can be broken down into two main religious groups: the Sunnis to the south and the Zaidis to the north.</p>
<p>Zaidism, the oldest branch of Shia Islam, carries very little difference to Sunnism—at least not in the sense many might think. Just as Sunni Islam is not Saudi Arabia, Zaidism is not Shia Iran.</p>
<p>Now, about 40 percent of Yemen’s total population is Zaidi. Yemen’s Zaidi tradition dates back to eighth century AD, when the Ummah (Muslim community) was experiencing its first great schism.</p>
<p>Inspired by Imam Hussein’s grandson, Zayd, Zaidis are also known as Fivers and are different in their philosophy from the Twelvers—mainstream Shia Islam.</p>
<p>With a religious tradition stretching back across the centuries, Yemeni Zaidis are hardly an oddity or even a new religious phenomenon as some media have attempted to portray them to be. If the world suddenly woke up to Yemen’s Zaidi character, it is mainly because the religious suddenly appeared as a potent political catalyst, a weapon of opportunity.</p>
<p>Came along the Houthis…. As it happens, the Houthis, a tribal faction from northern Sa’ada organized politically under the denomination, Ansarallah, are Zaidi Muslims. And while they never hid this factor from their identity, their affiliation to Zaidi Islam has been of no consequence when it comes to their political demands.</p>
<p>Like any other political groups in Yemen, the Houthis have defined themselves through their demands, not their faith, as the Saudis and the world would do for them!</p>
<p>While all Houthi tribesmen—not to be confused with the group’s political arm, Ansarallah, since the faction now includes within its ranks Sunnis—are Zaidis, not all Zaidis are Houthis. The Houthis are merely a tribal group within Yemen; they do not speak or represent the whole of Yemen’s Zaidi community. And while the Houthis carry immense weight within Ansarallah, not all Ansarallah members are Houthis. Many of Ansarallah leaders—Ali Al Amad, for example—do not belong to the Houthi tribe.</p>
<p>It is this confusion that has fed the wave of abuses that has befallen Yemen Zaidis and to a greater extent Yemen’s broad Shia community.</p>
<p>As noted by Hawra Zakery, a rights activist with Shia Rights Watch, “Considering the increasing anti-Shia movements in Middle East, it is critical that politicians and media outlets differentiate between militant groups and majority of Shia populations in order to present this minority in a more realistic picture.”</p>
<p>She added, “The Houthis themselves say to aim to speak for the Yemeni people and represent the Yemeni people’s aspirations, beyond religious dogma and such differentiation is critical.”</p>
<p>The Shia boogeyman</p>
<p>Shia Islam stands now the boogeyman, the twisted religious ideology that everyone is so very scared of. Thing is, no one really knows why. And therein lies an interesting question indeed.</p>
<p>Why is it, for example, that the Houthis continue to be labelled as this “Shia rebel group” when other groups do not enjoy the same flurry of adjectives?&#160; Not even Al Qaida. Why not describe Al Qaida as this Sunni radical/Wahhabi terror group? Or would that be upsetting for Saudi Arabia? Would that automatically entails painting off all Wahhabis and Sunnis for that matter, under the terror brush?</p>
<p>Actually yes it would! And of course that would be unfair, prejudice and above all self-defeating.</p>
<p>Playing religion to fuel negative sentiments and somewhat rationalize violence will only lead to more senseless violence and bloodshed.</p>
<p>And while the world remains at war with Yemen, Shia Rights Watch has rung the alarm, calling on world powers to honor their commitments to international law and human rights and change the pervasive narrative which is tearing Yemen apart from the inside out.</p>
<p>“Freedom of religion is an alienable right. Yemen’s Shia community should not be turned into a political target so that to fit foreign powers’ agenda. People should not have to feel threatened in their religious identity and be turned into easy targets of hate, shun by society as they are members of a minority,” said SRW in a statement.</p>
<p>SRW actually argues that groups such as Al Qaida and ISIS have benefited from the rise of anti-Shia sentiments, both in Yemen and the broader region, as reducing the debate to a framework of Sunni versus Shia fits directly into its politico-religious narrative. The rights groups have not been alone in this assessment.</p>
<p>Marwa Osman, a political analyst and commentator with RT stressed earlier this April that Saudi Arabia’s anti-Shia campaign will carry heavy repercussions throughout the Middle East.</p>
<p>“The violence in Yemen began this month on March fourth when a car bomb exploded outside a stadium in Beitha,” &#160;wrote SRW in its <a href="http://shiarightswatch.org/en/monthly-report/906-march2015.html" type="external">March report</a>, “which resulted in the death of 10 Shias and the wounding of 50 more. This was only the beginning of the casualties as 167 Shias were murdered, and 400 were injured. 143 of the deaths and 350 of the injuries took place on March 20th when the Islamic State terrorists performed four mosque bombings. This is the first month this year that Yemen has had reported anti-Shia incidents, but the invasion by neighboring Gulf States may bring more casualties. The Arab coalition forces have already begun racking up the civilian casualties, which include a refugee camp, and the invasion cannot end well.”</p>
<p>More troubling yet, Yemeni Zaidis have been turned away from hospitals in the capital, refused care by doctors on account of their Zaidism over the past few months—yet another manifestation of this new rising hatred politicians and media have fueled and fed.</p>
<p>Hossam Al Hamdi, an administrator at one of Sana’a hospitals said he personally witnessed two incidents when Zaidi patients were told to leave the premises and seek treatment elsewhere. “There’s been a great deal of tensions within the communities as a lot of people have transferred their political antipathy of the Houthis onto all Yemeni Zaidis … This is really a worrying development as Yemen has never experienced such problems before.”</p>
<p>While Yemen suffered many woes over the years, decades and centuries, sectarianism was never part of the equation. Are we to believe that Yemen Zaidi community, which community has been around since the eighth century suddenly became a potent threat to national security? Or is it that politicians would much rather exploit religion to rationalize very worldly ambitions: money and power.</p>
<p>This war in Yemen is not a religious one, but world powers are doing a really good job at turning it into one.</p>
<p>Let us all remember why Saudi Arabia sent the heavy cavalry in Yemen: oil and control over the world oil route.</p> | false | 1 | war yemen religious one world powers really good job turning one utter complete violation international law saudi arabia worlds violent repressive theocracy declared war southern neighbor yemen march 25 2015 calling broad military coalition lend support behind saudi arabia stands jordan morocco bahrain kuwait qatar egypt sudan uae us eu pakistan unsuspecting yemenis slept homes saudi arabia co unleashed deluge bombs onto capital sanaa caring little millions civilians intent crushing designated enemy houthis new object kingdoms disaffection houthis yemeni rebel group hailing northern saada organized leadership abdelmalek al houthi actively depicted western proksa media source evil shia rebel faction collusion iran new enemy hate new target destroy narrative could easily construed politically charged mere manifestation saudi arabias paranoiac fear that160 iran might one day ambition dissolve mighty arabian empire labelling houthis shia inferring represent yemens entire shia community served fuel negative sectarian sentiment stripping shia yemen inalienable national civil rights equation follows houthis shia therefore shia yemen houthis since houthis alliance iran therefore inherently bad shia yemen treated suspicion eventually neutralized rhetoric serves kingdoms reactionary religious stance appealing radical religious leadership put yemen course yemenis crossfire dangerous debate freedom religion importantly reduction yemens political social religious makeup bias profoundly erroneous words famous irish politician david trimble dark shadow seem see distance really mountain ahead shadow mountain behinda shadow past thrown forward future dark sludge historical sectarianism leave behind us wish happened yemen world felt compelled revert religious labeling shaming order advance political agenda ground first element needs understood saudi arabia main instigator violence promoter hate defined within parameters religious radicalism essence reactionary sunni wahhabis prone reject anything fall line understanding divine trait amply demonstrated riyadh brutal often bloody repression campaign shia rights activists eastern province qatif arrest subsequent sentencing death sheikh nimr al nimr stands testimony saudi arabias intolerance towards whoever whatever perceived represent threat authorityreligious political otherwise back yemen lesson religion zaidism better understand play truly grasp tragedy unfolding joyous nation southern arabia one needs go back socialreligious makeup yemen yemen muslim nation though islam acts axis upon constitution weaved important understand unlike northern neighbor saudi arabia yemen heart tolerant religiously inclusive country yemens muslim population broken two main religious groups sunnis south zaidis north zaidism oldest branch shia islam carries little difference sunnismat least sense many might think sunni islam saudi arabia zaidism shia iran 40 percent yemens total population zaidi yemens zaidi tradition dates back eighth century ad ummah muslim community experiencing first great schism inspired imam husseins grandson zayd zaidis also known fivers different philosophy twelversmainstream shia islam religious tradition stretching back across centuries yemeni zaidis hardly oddity even new religious phenomenon media attempted portray world suddenly woke yemens zaidi character mainly religious suddenly appeared potent political catalyst weapon opportunity came along houthis happens houthis tribal faction northern saada organized politically denomination ansarallah zaidi muslims never hid factor identity affiliation zaidi islam consequence comes political demands like political groups yemen houthis defined demands faith saudis world would houthi tribesmennot confused groups political arm ansarallah since faction includes within ranks sunnisare zaidis zaidis houthis houthis merely tribal group within yemen speak represent whole yemens zaidi community houthis carry immense weight within ansarallah ansarallah members houthis many ansarallah leadersali al amad exampledo belong houthi tribe confusion fed wave abuses befallen yemen zaidis greater extent yemens broad shia community noted hawra zakery rights activist shia rights watch considering increasing antishia movements middle east critical politicians media outlets differentiate militant groups majority shia populations order present minority realistic picture added houthis say aim speak yemeni people represent yemeni peoples aspirations beyond religious dogma differentiation critical shia boogeyman shia islam stands boogeyman twisted religious ideology everyone scared thing one really knows therein lies interesting question indeed example houthis continue labelled shia rebel group groups enjoy flurry adjectives160 even al qaida describe al qaida sunni radicalwahhabi terror group would upsetting saudi arabia would automatically entails painting wahhabis sunnis matter terror brush actually yes would course would unfair prejudice selfdefeating playing religion fuel negative sentiments somewhat rationalize violence lead senseless violence bloodshed world remains war yemen shia rights watch rung alarm calling world powers honor commitments international law human rights change pervasive narrative tearing yemen apart inside freedom religion alienable right yemens shia community turned political target fit foreign powers agenda people feel threatened religious identity turned easy targets hate shun society members minority said srw statement srw actually argues groups al qaida isis benefited rise antishia sentiments yemen broader region reducing debate framework sunni versus shia fits directly politicoreligious narrative rights groups alone assessment marwa osman political analyst commentator rt stressed earlier april saudi arabias antishia campaign carry heavy repercussions throughout middle east violence yemen began month march fourth car bomb exploded outside stadium beitha 160wrote srw march report resulted death 10 shias wounding 50 beginning casualties 167 shias murdered 400 injured 143 deaths 350 injuries took place march 20th islamic state terrorists performed four mosque bombings first month year yemen reported antishia incidents invasion neighboring gulf states may bring casualties arab coalition forces already begun racking civilian casualties include refugee camp invasion end well troubling yet yemeni zaidis turned away hospitals capital refused care doctors account zaidism past monthsyet another manifestation new rising hatred politicians media fueled fed hossam al hamdi administrator one sanaa hospitals said personally witnessed two incidents zaidi patients told leave premises seek treatment elsewhere theres great deal tensions within communities lot people transferred political antipathy houthis onto yemeni zaidis really worrying development yemen never experienced problems yemen suffered many woes years decades centuries sectarianism never part equation believe yemen zaidi community community around since eighth century suddenly became potent threat national security politicians would much rather exploit religion rationalize worldly ambitions money power war yemen religious one world powers really good job turning one let us remember saudi arabia sent heavy cavalry yemen oil control world oil route | 971 |
<p>It's not a secret that manufacturing is changing. Over the years, the industry has been battered and forced to modernize, but after decades of off-shoring, it's flourishing again.</p>
<p>Manufacturing makes up about 12.5 percent of the country's GDP, contributing $2.18 trillion to the U.S. economy, according to data from the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA). What's more, the <a href="http://www.nam.org/Newsroom/Top-20-Facts-About-Manufacturing/" type="external">National Association of Manufacturers</a> calculates that for every dollar spent in manufacturing, the economy gains $1.81. Workers are also getting paid better – manufacturing employees make $26 an hour on average, per BEA research.</p>
<p>Some roles, particularly jobs that can be done by machines or by overseas workers for cheaper, are slowly disappearing. However, manufacturing is not going away in the U.S. Far from it. In the early aughts, the sector shed about 6 million jobs, according to the Manufacturing Institute, but since 2010, manufacturing has added about 1 million back.</p>
<p>The catch is the jobs gained require advanced training or specific degrees, which has created a serious skills gap. By 2025, the Manufacturing Institute expects there to be 3.5 million new jobs added to manufacturing. But it also expects 2 million of those to go unfilled.</p>
<p>"The jobs we lost were the low-skilled, low-paying jobs. We're now replacing them with higher-skilled, higher-paid jobs," AJ Jorgenson, AVP at the Manufacturing Institute, told Circa. "But… the skills that they have are still applicable. It's just they need to be up-skilled."</p>
<p>Entering the era of modern manufacturing</p>
<p>A lot of renewal within manufacturing has been because of companies like Ford and GMC investing in education, more specifically in transferring and updating workers' skills. Detroit-based Shinola, for example, has provided tools and training to bring its workers up to speed with modern manufacturing.</p>
<p>"We’ve brought in a Swiss group to teach our teams how to build movements and watches," Jacques Panis, president of Shinola, told Circa. "Teach your teams how to do these things, and then ensure that the training can be replicated into more people as these operations scale out."</p>
<p>Another unique aspect of Shinola's set up is that in the building where they're based, there is a school downstairs. The American brand has sponsored classes – from marketing to design – as a way to encourage kids from a younger age to enter into this line of work.</p>
<p>Jorgenson says that in addition to getting children excited about different types of manufacturing earlier on, players in the space also need to help people see it from an updated perspective.</p>
<p>"We need manufacturers to open their doors, so that middle schools and high schools can go and see what manufacturing is actually like. We need to dispel the misperceptions of what manufacturing is, and show it as high tech and innovative," Jorgenson said. Engineers, developers, scientists, machinists, designers and welders – those are all manufacturers, Jorgenson explained.</p>
<p>Beyond opening their doors, manufacturers also need to help longtime workers update their skill sets. Because, <a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2017/01/america-is-still-making-things/512282/" type="external">as The Atlantic has reported</a>, America's economic advantage is "the kind of high-cost, high-skilled manufacturing that capitalizes on the country’s technology and educated labor pool."</p>
<p>Damon Love, who works as an incoming leather specialist at Shinola, is one such worker. Since he was 15, Love has worked in manufacturing, most recently at a carmaker before getting laid off during the 2008 Recession.</p>
<p>"I didn't expect I'd be this far in such a short time," Love told Circa. "I've been here three years. I enjoy my job... This is the first time I’m ever dealing with leather."</p>
<p>As Panis puts it, "People here in Detroit have sewn leather seats. So we have been able to bring people over to this operation who are now sewing leather straps." Shinola sent Love to a leather authentication class in Ohio to get his certificate, and while he may not be one of the workers with a previous background as a leather craftsman, he has been able to transfer his skills.</p>
<p>"All leather, before it gets distributed or when we receive it, I check it, I grade it, and I make sure it's okay for us to use on the floor. If not, I'll send it back to the tanners," he explained while showing Circa the many different leather pieces he surveys and for what products they're used.</p>
<p>American-made goods</p>
<p>Shinola opened its assembly and manufacturing plant doors in 2011, quickly becoming a symbol of what manufacturing can be. Politicians from Bill Clinton to Barack Obama have touted it as an American success story – Obama even <a href="http://www.gq-magazine.co.uk/article/president-obama-buys-david-cameron-a-custom-shinola-watch" type="external">gifted then-UK Prime Minister David Cameron a Shinola custom timepiece</a> during a visit in 2016.</p>
<p>The American brand specializes in high-end watches and leather goods like handbags and wallets. It has added bikes and record players to its roster of products recently, too.</p>
<p>But despite its success and investment in retraining, Shinola has been criticized for exaggerating its "Made in America" claims. As an article in <a href="https://www.inc.com/magazine/201604/stacy-perman/shinola-watch-history-manufacturing-heritage-brand.html" type="external">Inc.</a> put it: "In Shinola, [Tom] Kartsotis has managed to engineer a brand that feels authentic despite being largely contrived. How he's done that is a study in new-age marketing."</p>
<p>What critics argue is that Shinola may be producing some products in Detroit, but a large amount of its parts are shipped in from overseas. Panis doesn't deny that, but says the company was launched to create jobs and revive industry – and it's done that.</p>
<p>"We are a brand that is making things here in the U.S. We have a global supply chain that comes in from different parts of Asia, different parts of Europe, into our facilities here in Detroit," Panis said. "The premise was creating great manufacturing jobs here in the United States. We've since done that, but it hasn't just been manufacturing jobs."</p>
<p>Shinola's leaders have said as the company grows, it will only help to reshore jobs and supply chains.</p>
<p>The conversation around American made products has swelled in recent years, as survey after survey shows American shoppers want products made in the U.S. The problem with that is when it comes down to it, <a href="" type="internal">what consumers really want is a good deal</a>. A recent Associated Press-GFK survey that revealed another problem for the Made in America movement is that Americans might say they prefer to buy domestic products, but a scant 30 percent are actually willing to pay more for them.</p>
<p>For reference, the average Shinola watch retails at $750; handbags start at $395.</p>
<p>The "Made in America" conundrum isn't unique to Shinola. It implicates manufacturers, large and small batch. To be purely American-made is an expensive gamble, given current U.S. consumer shopping habits outlined in the AP-GFK survey.</p>
<p>That said, in Detroit, where companies are investing in people, there's long-term payoff.</p>
<p>"This is a company that I could see myself retiring from," Love said. "I want to actually be one, what do they call it, the big wigs? I actually want to be one."</p>
<p>See more related Circa stories: <a href="" type="internal">Detroit Bikes is transforming America’s car capital into a bike town</a> <a href="" type="internal">Here's how startups are helping mega-brand Coca-Cola take on the future</a> <a href="" type="internal">These businesses have pledged job creation in the US, but how much credit can Trump take?</a></p> | false | 1 | secret manufacturing changing years industry battered forced modernize decades offshoring flourishing manufacturing makes 125 percent countrys gdp contributing 218 trillion us economy according data us bureau economic analysis bea whats national association manufacturers calculates every dollar spent manufacturing economy gains 181 workers also getting paid better manufacturing employees make 26 hour average per bea research roles particularly jobs done machines overseas workers cheaper slowly disappearing however manufacturing going away us far early aughts sector shed 6 million jobs according manufacturing institute since 2010 manufacturing added 1 million back catch jobs gained require advanced training specific degrees created serious skills gap 2025 manufacturing institute expects 35 million new jobs added manufacturing also expects 2 million go unfilled jobs lost lowskilled lowpaying jobs replacing higherskilled higherpaid jobs aj jorgenson avp manufacturing institute told circa skills still applicable need upskilled entering era modern manufacturing lot renewal within manufacturing companies like ford gmc investing education specifically transferring updating workers skills detroitbased shinola example provided tools training bring workers speed modern manufacturing weve brought swiss group teach teams build movements watches jacques panis president shinola told circa teach teams things ensure training replicated people operations scale another unique aspect shinolas set building theyre based school downstairs american brand sponsored classes marketing design way encourage kids younger age enter line work jorgenson says addition getting children excited different types manufacturing earlier players space also need help people see updated perspective need manufacturers open doors middle schools high schools go see manufacturing actually like need dispel misperceptions manufacturing show high tech innovative jorgenson said engineers developers scientists machinists designers welders manufacturers jorgenson explained beyond opening doors manufacturers also need help longtime workers update skill sets atlantic reported americas economic advantage kind highcost highskilled manufacturing capitalizes countrys technology educated labor pool damon love works incoming leather specialist shinola one worker since 15 love worked manufacturing recently carmaker getting laid 2008 recession didnt expect id far short time love told circa ive three years enjoy job first time im ever dealing leather panis puts people detroit sewn leather seats able bring people operation sewing leather straps shinola sent love leather authentication class ohio get certificate may one workers previous background leather craftsman able transfer skills leather gets distributed receive check grade make sure okay us use floor ill send back tanners explained showing circa many different leather pieces surveys products theyre used americanmade goods shinola opened assembly manufacturing plant doors 2011 quickly becoming symbol manufacturing politicians bill clinton barack obama touted american success story obama even gifted thenuk prime minister david cameron shinola custom timepiece visit 2016 american brand specializes highend watches leather goods like handbags wallets added bikes record players roster products recently despite success investment retraining shinola criticized exaggerating made america claims article inc put shinola tom kartsotis managed engineer brand feels authentic despite largely contrived hes done study newage marketing critics argue shinola may producing products detroit large amount parts shipped overseas panis doesnt deny says company launched create jobs revive industry done brand making things us global supply chain comes different parts asia different parts europe facilities detroit panis said premise creating great manufacturing jobs united states weve since done hasnt manufacturing jobs shinolas leaders said company grows help reshore jobs supply chains conversation around american made products swelled recent years survey survey shows american shoppers want products made us problem comes consumers really want good deal recent associated pressgfk survey revealed another problem made america movement americans might say prefer buy domestic products scant 30 percent actually willing pay reference average shinola watch retails 750 handbags start 395 made america conundrum isnt unique shinola implicates manufacturers large small batch purely americanmade expensive gamble given current us consumer shopping habits outlined apgfk survey said detroit companies investing people theres longterm payoff company could see retiring love said want actually one call big wigs actually want one see related circa stories detroit bikes transforming americas car capital bike town heres startups helping megabrand cocacola take future businesses pledged job creation us much credit trump take | 669 |
<p>With only hours left before Election Day, here’s the painful, self-evident truth facing lifelong Republicans like me: The 2016 presidential campaign has revealed dark and disturbing things about not only Donald J. Trump but also the party that nominated him.</p>
<p>Self-renewal starts — but doesn’t end — with self-examination.</p>
<p>The forces that propelled Mr. Trump’s rise need to be confronted and defeated. It won’t be easy, given that tens of millions of Americans will vote for him and believe deeply in him. But if these forces are not defeated, what happened this year will be replicated in one form or another, and the Republican Party will continue to inflict great harm on our republic.</p>
<p>If Mr. Trump loses the presidential race, as I believe is likely but hardly a sure thing, it will not be enough for Republicans to excuse or ignore his candidacy. It could never have happened unless things had gone terribly awry in the Republican Party. Its political and moral recovery requires Republicans to reverse three destructive trends that have emerged over the last decade.</p>
<p>Anti-intellectualism. As Margaret Thatcher once said, first you win the argument, then you win the vote. One of the appealing things to me about the Republican Party in the early 1980s, as a young conservative, was that it had become a party of ideas, of governing experiment. But somewhere along the way large numbers of Republicans began to devalue serious ideas. For example, as early as 2013, Gov. Chris Christie of New Jersey, one of Mr. Trump’s most emphatic supporters,&#160; <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/new-jerseys-chris-christie-looks-to-send-a-message-to-gop-with-his-reelection-campaign/2013/11/03/863f5708-433f-11e3-a624-41d661b0bb78_story.html" type="external">said</a>&#160;of his fellow Republicans, “I think we’ve had too many people who’ve become less interested in winning an election and more interested in winning an argument.”</p>
<p>Pointing to the precise moment this devaluation occurred is difficult; it was a gradual process. But the embodiment of what I’m talking about is someone like Sarah Palin, who started out as a relatively conventional, if unaccomplished, Republican governor and was thrust into the spotlight as John McCain’s vice-presidential nominee in 2008. Since then she has become the proud personification of thoughtlessness. I don’t agree with President Obama on very much, but he was right when&#160; <a href="http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2016/10/barack-obama-on-5-days-that-shaped-his-presidency.html" type="external">he said</a>&#160;there was a straight line that could be drawn from Ms. Palin to Mr. Trump. A party that produces Ms. Palin as its vice-presidential nominee and Mr. Trump as its nominee is at war with reason.</p>
<p>Political recklessness. Over the years a large number of Republicans began to dismiss the craft of governing. They embraced a style of politics characterized by unceasing combativeness, intemperance and a deep hostility toward compromise and temperamental moderation. One example: the 2013 shutdown of the government, a ridiculous and politically damaging move led by Senator Ted Cruz of Texas.</p>
<p>Particularly since the election of Barack Obama, we have witnessed on the Republican side the rise of fear, anger and apocalyptic rhetoric. It didn’t have to be this way, but we’ve also seen the growing appeal of conspiracy theories, with the most poisonous and revealing being that Mr. Obama was not born in the United States.</p>
<p>In 2011, I wrote a column in The Wall Street Journal&#160; <a href="http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052748703551304576260773968228358" type="external">criticizing Mr. Trump’s embrace of birtherism</a>, warning that “when prominent figures in a party play footsie with peddlers of paranoia, the party suffers an erosion of credibility.” I also pointed out that “people are generally uneasy about political institutions that give a home to cranks.” But I never for a moment imagined that Mr. Trump, as the chief apostle of this crazed, racist conspiracy theory, would become the nominee of the Republican Party five years later. Yet he did, and he did it in large part not despite but because he has championed&#160; <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2016/09/16/here-are-10-more-conspiracy-theories-embraced-by-donald-trump/" type="external">one conspiracy theory after another</a>. When conspiracy theories gain wide currency within a political party, it means it is losing — or has lost — contact with reality.</p>
<p>Appealing to nativism and xenophobia. Within the Republican Party there are legitimate concerns about illegal immigration. While I favored comprehensive immigration reform in the past, I never believed that most of the opposition to it was based on nativism. (Even now, most Republicans&#160; <a href="http://www.people-press.org/2015/06/04/broad-public-support-for-legal-status-for-undocumented-immigrants/" type="external">favor a pathway</a>&#160;to legal status and&#160; <a href="http://thehill.com/homenews/news/274575-poll-majority-of-republicans-support-path-to-citizenship" type="external">citizenship</a>&#160;for illegal immigrants.) But what can’t be denied is that the Republican nominee began his campaign by appealing to nativism and xenophobia, and as the primaries unfolded it was the issue he returned to time and time again. Mr. Trump’s success has emboldened ugly forces within the Republican Party that had been confined to its fringes. Demonizing people of other races, cultures and faiths succeeded; demeaning women and war heroes succeeded. The fact that we’re now so familiar with his offenses shouldn’t inure us to how damning they are.</p>
<p>That a demagogue like Mr. Trump would emerge when there is a lot frustration in the lives of Americans who feel that their suffering is ignored isn’t without precedent. Which is why the greater sin of the Republican Party wasn’t that Mr. Trump won the nomination by carrying a plurality of votes in a large field. It was that people who surely knew better rallied to Mr. Trump once he became the nominee. Some advised him, others defended him and excused him, and still others tried to ignore him. Certain people acted worse than others. But in the end, they were all caught up in Mr. Trump’s ethical confusion and moral corruption. They didn’t pull him up; he pulled them down.</p>
<p>It is not as if the trends cited above were unknown to responsible Republicans and conservatives before the advent of Mr. Trump. They were, and some party loyalists challenged them at the time. Those efforts clearly failed, and Republicans have to come to terms with the fact that the rot was far more advanced than we understood.</p>
<p>Those of us who have long defended the Republican Party could do worse than honestly assess what role we might have played in all this, what we missed and why, and what more we could have done to stop it. When you are part of a political movement that chose Donald Trump as your nominee, some serious self-reflection is in order.</p>
<p>For now, though, the Republican Party faces a crisis. If Mr. Trump loses, the party faces a daunting reconstruction challenge. Policies that promote economic growth, social mobility and greater opportunity are important. But in some respects the party’s stance on the tax code, wage subsidies, higher education, tax credits or entitlement programs are a secondary priority.</p>
<p>Republicans need to wrestle with more fundamental questions first: Will their party choose as its leaders people who respect democratic institutions and traditions, or not; who conceive of America as a welcoming society or as one that is racially and religiously closed; who are committed to helping or exploiting the weak and vulnerable; who admire or oppose tyrants; who respect truth or view it in purely utilitarian ways; who abhor ignorance or embrace it? Will Republicans gravitate toward leaders who have authoritarian tendencies, who incite violence in their followers, and whose personalities are vindictive, cruel and disordered?</p>
<p>In a post-Trump world, Republicans need to ask themselves if their party will be characterized by its aspirations or its resentments. Can it make its own inner peace with living in an increasingly diverse and nonwhite America? Does it conceive of its role as tamping down or inflaming ugly passions? Does it believe in a just social order or not?</p>
<p>These questions are not about whether the economic concerns of Mr. Trump’s core constituency should be taken seriously and addressed by Republican policy makers. They clearly should, and in fact many of the people who urged the party to focus on this long before Mr. Trump entered the race are his most scathing critics. These questions go to how the Republican Party conceives of itself, its role and purpose in our political system and our common life. No single person can answer them. This self-definition rests with Republicans in every state and social stratum.</p>
<p>The next few months will tell us a lot about whether Mr. Trump and Trumpism were an anomaly or are now the new norm of the party that Lincoln helped create. Even liberal critics of the Republican Party who believe Mr. Trump was an inevitable result of the party’s political machinations have to concede he is in a different category than the nominees who preceded him. President Obama and Hillary Clinton have both said as much.</p>
<p>If Mr. Trump should win on Nov. 8, the Republican Party will be fundamentally redefined, to put it mildly. Many of us could not continue to be a part of a political institution defined by Donald Trump, by Breitbart.com and Ann Coulter, one that most resembles the right-wing nationalist parties we see in Europe. Our allegiance isn’t to a party; it is to a set of ideas and ideals, to the good of the whole, to what the prophet Jeremiah called “the welfare of the city.” No party is simply the embodiment of ideas, of course. All parties are coalitions. But a party that is recast into the image of Mr. Trump is something many of us would want nothing to do with.</p>
<p>Of course, if Mr. Trump wins, it won’t simply be the Republican Party that faces its moment of reckoning. Our republic will, too. That worries me a great deal more, because I love my country far more than I love my party.</p>
<p>Peter Wehner, a senior fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center, served in the last three Republican administrations and is a contributing opinion writer.</p> | false | 1 | hours left election day heres painful selfevident truth facing lifelong republicans like 2016 presidential campaign revealed dark disturbing things donald j trump also party nominated selfrenewal starts doesnt end selfexamination forces propelled mr trumps rise need confronted defeated wont easy given tens millions americans vote believe deeply forces defeated happened year replicated one form another republican party continue inflict great harm republic mr trump loses presidential race believe likely hardly sure thing enough republicans excuse ignore candidacy could never happened unless things gone terribly awry republican party political moral recovery requires republicans reverse three destructive trends emerged last decade antiintellectualism margaret thatcher said first win argument win vote one appealing things republican party early 1980s young conservative become party ideas governing experiment somewhere along way large numbers republicans began devalue serious ideas example early 2013 gov chris christie new jersey one mr trumps emphatic supporters160 said160of fellow republicans think weve many people whove become less interested winning election interested winning argument pointing precise moment devaluation occurred difficult gradual process embodiment im talking someone like sarah palin started relatively conventional unaccomplished republican governor thrust spotlight john mccains vicepresidential nominee 2008 since become proud personification thoughtlessness dont agree president obama much right when160 said160there straight line could drawn ms palin mr trump party produces ms palin vicepresidential nominee mr trump nominee war reason political recklessness years large number republicans began dismiss craft governing embraced style politics characterized unceasing combativeness intemperance deep hostility toward compromise temperamental moderation one example 2013 shutdown government ridiculous politically damaging move led senator ted cruz texas particularly since election barack obama witnessed republican side rise fear anger apocalyptic rhetoric didnt way weve also seen growing appeal conspiracy theories poisonous revealing mr obama born united states 2011 wrote column wall street journal160 criticizing mr trumps embrace birtherism warning prominent figures party play footsie peddlers paranoia party suffers erosion credibility also pointed people generally uneasy political institutions give home cranks never moment imagined mr trump chief apostle crazed racist conspiracy theory would become nominee republican party five years later yet large part despite championed160 one conspiracy theory another conspiracy theories gain wide currency within political party means losing lost contact reality appealing nativism xenophobia within republican party legitimate concerns illegal immigration favored comprehensive immigration reform past never believed opposition based nativism even republicans160 favor pathway160to legal status and160 citizenship160for illegal immigrants cant denied republican nominee began campaign appealing nativism xenophobia primaries unfolded issue returned time time mr trumps success emboldened ugly forces within republican party confined fringes demonizing people races cultures faiths succeeded demeaning women war heroes succeeded fact familiar offenses shouldnt inure us damning demagogue like mr trump would emerge lot frustration lives americans feel suffering ignored isnt without precedent greater sin republican party wasnt mr trump nomination carrying plurality votes large field people surely knew better rallied mr trump became nominee advised others defended excused still others tried ignore certain people acted worse others end caught mr trumps ethical confusion moral corruption didnt pull pulled trends cited unknown responsible republicans conservatives advent mr trump party loyalists challenged time efforts clearly failed republicans come terms fact rot far advanced understood us long defended republican party could worse honestly assess role might played missed could done stop part political movement chose donald trump nominee serious selfreflection order though republican party faces crisis mr trump loses party faces daunting reconstruction challenge policies promote economic growth social mobility greater opportunity important respects partys stance tax code wage subsidies higher education tax credits entitlement programs secondary priority republicans need wrestle fundamental questions first party choose leaders people respect democratic institutions traditions conceive america welcoming society one racially religiously closed committed helping exploiting weak vulnerable admire oppose tyrants respect truth view purely utilitarian ways abhor ignorance embrace republicans gravitate toward leaders authoritarian tendencies incite violence followers whose personalities vindictive cruel disordered posttrump world republicans need ask party characterized aspirations resentments make inner peace living increasingly diverse nonwhite america conceive role tamping inflaming ugly passions believe social order questions whether economic concerns mr trumps core constituency taken seriously addressed republican policy makers clearly fact many people urged party focus long mr trump entered race scathing critics questions go republican party conceives role purpose political system common life single person answer selfdefinition rests republicans every state social stratum next months tell us lot whether mr trump trumpism anomaly new norm party lincoln helped create even liberal critics republican party believe mr trump inevitable result partys political machinations concede different category nominees preceded president obama hillary clinton said much mr trump win nov 8 republican party fundamentally redefined put mildly many us could continue part political institution defined donald trump breitbartcom ann coulter one resembles rightwing nationalist parties see europe allegiance isnt party set ideas ideals good whole prophet jeremiah called welfare city party simply embodiment ideas course parties coalitions party recast image mr trump something many us would want nothing course mr trump wins wont simply republican party faces moment reckoning republic worries great deal love country far love party peter wehner senior fellow ethics public policy center served last three republican administrations contributing opinion writer | 850 |
<p>On Friday night, November 30, EPPC Distinguished Senior Fellow George Weigel delivered one of the keynote addresses at a conference, “The Dialogue of Cultures,”&#160;sponsored by the University of Notre Dame’s Center for Ethics and Culture. The full text of Weigel’s lecture follows.</p>
<p>* * *</p>
<p>On the night of September 12, 2006, my wife and I were having dinner with two of the late Pope John Paul II’s oldest friends in their Cracovian apartment when my mobile phone began ringing . It was an extremely agitated Italian reporter — which is, I suppose, a formulation replete with adverbial and adjectival redundancy. Nevertheless,&#160; for a native of Italy, my caller was remarkably indicative rather than subjunctive: “Ze Pope has just given zees crazee conferenza in Germania about ze Muslims. What do you say about it?” I replied that I couldn’t answer as I hadn’t read the Pope’s lecture. “Si, si, I know,” my caller responded, “but what do you say about it?” I then replied that, unlike some of my caller’s countrymen — indeed, unlike some of my own — I wasn’t in the habit of commenting on papal texts until I had read, marked, and inwardly digested them; so would he please e-mail me a copy of the text so that I could read it on the plane home the next day, at which point he could call me back for a comment. This he did; and I must tell you that, if you have never conducted a trans-Atlantic telephone interview from the Wendy’s at Newark Liberty International Airport, you are missing one of life’s more bracing experiences.</p>
<p>I recount this little bit of journalistic melodrama in order to lay down two preliminary markers. Primo: It struck me on the plane, and it still strikes me today, that Benedict XVI’s Regensburg Lecture was the most important papal statement on publicmatters of global consequence since John Paul II’s address to the United Nations General Assembly in October 1995. In the latter, John Paul defended the universality of human rights on the basis of a universal human nature, from which could be read a universal moral law. Absent a universal human nature and a universal moral law that could be known by the disciplined exercise of reason, John Paul argued, there could be no universal conversation about universal goods, no universal consideration of the&#160; the human future — and no “dialogue of cultures,” the theme of this conference. For, absent a universal moral law functioning as a kind of inter-cultural grammar for ordering a genuine dialogue, there would only be noise —&#160; cacophony. John Paul II’s 1995 U.N. address identified one set of pressing moral issues for the immediate post-Cold War period; Benedict XVI’s Regensburg Lecture clearly identified a cluster of related and equally pressing issues underlying the new world disorder of the early 21st century.</p>
<p>Secondo: The initial media reaction to Regensburg — “The Pope has made a gaffe!” — got set in quick-drying cement and has remained in that condition ever since, at least as a default position in the world press. As recently as two weeks ago, when the agenda for Pope Benedict’s April 2008 visit to the United States was released, more than a few media outlets mentioned the Regensburg mis-step, as they continued to construe it. In the immediate aftermath of Regensburg, colleagues and I published several op-ed columns and articles in a number of newspapers and newsmagazines arguing that Benedict XVI knew exactly what he was saying, and that if his critics would do him the courtesy of reading the text in its entirely, they might come to a similar conclusion. We also argued that there wasn’t a centimeter’s worth of difference between Benedict XVI’s theological reading of Islam and John Paul II’s — a gap between the two popes being another antiphon in the chorus of deprecation by which “God’s Rottweiler” was being transformed into God’s Dunce. All that this managed to accomplish, in my case, was to increase the volume of e-mail I was receiving with slightly disconcerting subject lines like “Greetings from Peshawar; we are unhappy with you.”</p>
<p>Reading Regensburg right, my subject this evening, requires clearing away some of this rubble, in order to assess the claim that Regensburg was, in fact, a critically important papal statement correctly identifying one of the mega-dynamics of early 21st century history, and in order to see how the Regensburg Lecture could help set the foundation for a genuine, truth-centered dialogue of cultures.</p>
<p>A papal gaffe? Let’s begin with the alleged “gaffe.” I have been a longtime, if friendly, critic of Vatican communications, and I freely concede that there was much left to be desired in the way the Holy See’s communications apparatus handled Regensburg. The press was not properly briefed on what to expect from the Pope’s lecture — and on why he was saying what he was saying. The post-lecture controversy seems not to have been anticipated; and so neither was an adequate response. If memory serves, it took more than a week for the Vatican to post the complete text of the Regensburg Lecture, including its scholarly apparatus, on its Web site. The net effect of this fumbling around was to reinforce the impression that a gaffe had indeed been made, that the Pope had indeed “misspoken” (I wonder what the Italian translation of that famous White House neologism would be?), and that amends had to be made so that inter-religious comity could be restored — hence the hastily arranged meeting between the Pope and the diplomatic representatives of several Islamic states at Castel Gandolfo in late September 2006. How anything the Pope said at Regensburg gave reasonable cause for the violent reactions — lethally violent reactions, in some instances — that followed his lecture, once the jihadists had gotten the Regensburg bit into their teeth, was left unexplored by the media. Jihadists do not, of course, march to the Holy See’s drummer; but one has to ask whether a more adroit management of the immediate post-lecture controversy by the Holy See might not have dampened passions to the point where they could not be so successfully (and, it would seem, readily) ignited.</p>
<p>That being said, and meant, it still beggars belief to give credence to the claim that Joseph Ratzinger, a man with a half-century’s experience of public controversy, did not know what he was saying at Regensburg. It further beggars belief to give credence to the suggestion that Benedict XVI was being deliberately provocative, even insulting. I have had the honor of knowing the present pope for nineteen years, and in the first decade of our conversation I formed some distinct impressions of the man, impressions that shed some light on the Regensburg Lecture. Permit me to share three of those impressions with you this evening.</p>
<p>In the first instance, Benedict XVI is a Christian gentleman whose exquisite manners reflect both his innate shyness and his deep-seated respect for others. As I have come to know him, he is incapable of the gratuitous insult. Nor has he been much given to polemics since the famous Ratzinger Report caused a storm of controversy and set the basic terms of conversation for the Extraordinary Synod of 1985. He is also a man acutely responsible of his responsibilities as pope, which include the papal sollicitudo omnium ecclesiarum, the papal “solicitude for all the churches,” which includes the persecuted churches — and which certainly includes the hard-pressed&#160; churches in Islamic states. The “Rottweiler” caricature, vicious and inaccurate but still lurking in the subconscious of some journalists, was a hermeneutic filter distorting the message of Regensburg, it seems to me.</p>
<p>In the second place, I have been struck by Joseph Ratzinger’s encyclopedic knowledge of theology, which ranges far beyond Catholic thought to encompass Protestant and Orthodox thinking, Jewish scholarship, and Islamic commentators. It is, of course, true that Ratzinger is not as well-versed in some of these disciplines as he is in others. But he is certainly not ignorant of the main currents of thought in other world religious traditions, as some of the post-Regensburg commentary suggested.</p>
<p>Then, in the third place, there is the precision of his mind. I have been blessed by the acquaintance of many brilliant men and women. Joseph Ratzinger is one of the very, very few brilliant people I have ever known who, when asked a question, pauses, reflects — and then answers in complete paragraphs. And in his third or fourth language. This is a man who says precisely what he means and means exactly what he says. And if that was true of his performance during interviews and conversations in his office at the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, how much more would it be true of his performance in a rather formal academic context such as the Regensburg Lecture?</p>
<p>Thus I find the notion of Regensburg-as-papal-“gaffe” prima facie implausible.</p>
<p>Three crucial points What, then, did this precise man say in his Regensburg Lecture? Benedict’s&#160; first point was that all the great questions of life, including social and political questions, are ultimately theological. How we think (or don’t think) about God has much to do with how we think about what is good and what is wicked, how we judge what is noble and what is base, and how we think about the appropriate methods for advancing the truth in a world in which there are profound disagreements about the truth of things.</p>
<p>If, for example, men and women imagine God to be pure will, an absolute dominance to whom the only appropriate response is submission, then there will be little “room” within our theology for a God of reason, a God of “Logos” — and still less “room” for a God of love. A God of radical willfulness can command anything, even the irrational. To be sure, Christian thinkers like Scotus and Ockham have tended to imagine God this way: pure will, pure dominance. But their views are in considerable theological tension with the mainstream of the Christian tradition, in which the God of Abraham, Moses, and Jesus is a God of reason and love, a God who comes searching for man in history and invites human beings into a dialogue of salvation. This is the God for whom are hearts are restless, until they rest in his embrace.</p>
<p>This God cannot command the unreasonable, for to do so would be to contradict God’s own nature. This theological datum yields an important anthropological by-product that has shaped Christian moral reflection on the right-ordering of society for centuries. For in the human capacity for reason, we see the imprint of the divine reason, the “Logos,” the Word through whom the world was made. Thus God’s self-revelation– first to the People of Israel, later and definitively in his Son — does not “cancel” human reason: God’s revelation appeals to human reason, to the divine spark within us. That is why mainstream Christianity has always taught that human beings can build decent societies by attending to reason. That is why natural law ways of thinking about the good have helped shape Christian reflection on society, on war and peace, and on politics for centuries.</p>
<p>Thus Benedict XVI’s first point: our idea of God inevitably influences our ideas of theology and politics. Benedict’s second point followed closely on his first: irrational violence aimed at innocent men, women, and children is, as he put it at Regensburg, “incompatible with the nature of God and the nature of the [human] soul.” Joseph Ratzinger was certainly not laying down a blanket indictment here; he would, I am confident, agree that it is very much worth engaging in the most serious of scholarly conversations in order to clarify and explore the several theologies of God at work in the complex worlds-within-worlds of Islam. But while that exploration is underway, it is equally imperative to recognize, as Benedict did at Regensburg, that certain currents of thought in contemporary Islam insist (to take the most dramatic and odious example) that the suicide bombing of innocents is an act pleasing to God, an act of martyrdom meriting eternal bliss. Muting the latter point cannot be the admission ticket for engaging the deeper dialogue about the divine nature. Moreover, it is the responsibility of all who worship the one, true God to declare, unambiguously, that the murder of innocents in the name of advancing the divine cause in the world is an abomination based on gravely mistaken understandings: misunderstandings about God, about’s God’s will and God’s purposes, and about the nature of moral obligation.</p>
<p>To be sure, responsibility for challenging these distorted views of God and the distorted understanding of moral duty that flows from them rests, first, with Islamic&#160; leaders. But too few Islamic leaders have been willing to undertake a cleansing Islam’s conscience — as John Paul II taught the Catholic Church to cleanse its historical conscience in preparation for the Great Jubilee of 2000. We know that, in the past, Christians used violence to advance Christian purposes. The Catholic Church has publicly repented of such distortions of the Gospel, and has developed a deep theological critique of the misunderstandings that led to such episodes. Can the Church, therefore, be of some help to those brave Islamic reformers who, at the risk of&#160; their own lives, are trying to develop a parallel Islamic critique of their co-religionists’ misunderstandings?</p>
<p>By quoting from a robust exchange between a medieval Byzantine emperor and a learned Islamic scholar, Benedict XVI was not making a cheap rhetorical point; he was trying to illustrate the possibility of a tough-minded but rational dialogue between Christians and Muslims. That dialogue can only take place, however, on the basis of a shared commitment to reason and a mutual rejection of irrational violence in the name of God.</p>
<p>Pope Benedict’s third point — which has been almost entirely ignored in the fourteen-plus months since the Regensburg Lecture — was directed to the West. If the high culture of the West continues to fritter its time away in the intellectual sandbox of&#160; post-modern irrationalism — in which there is “your truth” and “my truth” but nothing properly describable as “the truth”– the West will be unable to defend itself. Why? Because the West won’t be able to give reasons why its commitments to civility, tolerance, human rights, and the rule of law are worth defending. A western world stripped of convictions about the truths that make western civilization possible cannot make a useful contribution to a genuine dialogue of civilizations and cultures, for any such dialogue must be based on a shared understanding that human beings can, however imperfectly, come to know the truth of things.</p>
<p>Can Islam be self-critical? Can its leaders condemn and marginalize its extremists, or are Muslims condemned to be held hostage to the passions of those who consider the murder of innocents to be pleasing to God? Can the West recover its commitment to reason and thus help support Islamic reformers? These, I suggest are the large questions that Benedict XVI put on the world’s agenda at Regensburg. No one else could have done so: no president, prime minister, king, queen, or secretary-general could put these questions into play, at this level of sophistication, and for a world audience. But Benedict XVI did more than raise unavoidable questions at Regensburg; he also gave the political world a grammar for addressing these questions — the genuinely transcultural grammar of rationality-and-irrationality. The theological communities of the great world religious traditions can conduct a robust interreligio us dialogue within their own specialist grammars and vocabularies. Something other than those specialist grammars and vocabularies is required in public life. The grammar of “rationality/irrationality” can be that “something,” I suggest.</p>
<p>My friends at the National Catholic Reporter editorially criticized the Regensburg Lecture as having trafficked “too much in theological abstraction,” as they put it. It seems to me that the Holy Father did precisely the opposite: At Regensburg, Pope Benedict XVI did the world an immense service by giving believers and non-believers alike a language with which to deal with the threat of jihadist ideology: the language of rationality and irrationality. Far from being an exercise in “theological abstraction,” the Regensburg lecture was a courageous attempt to create a new public grammar capable of disciplining and directing the world’s discussion of what is arguably the world’s gravest problem (Mr. Gore’s homeless and overheated polar bears notwithstanding).</p>
<p>And in doing these things, Benedict XVI was in sync with the view of Islam, its religious accomplishments, and its challenges held by his predecessor, John Paul II.</p>
<p>Remembering John Paul II It was, of course, somewhat amusing to hear some of the same voices that used to lament the “hardline” and “conservative” Polish Pope now, in the wake of the Regensburg Lecture,&#160; lifting John Paul up as a paragon of enlightened, benign liberality: amusing, if slightly disconcerting. More disconcerting, however, were the attempts to drive a wedge between Benedict and his papal predecessor by those who could care less about the internal Catholic culture-war, but who saw their chance to make a seemingly decisive point, and took it. Thus the Arabic satellite TV network, Al-Jazeera, in the aftermath of Regensburg, ran a series of cartoons featuring a John Paul-figure releasing peaceful doves in St. Peter’s Square; the doves are then shot down by Benedict from the roof of the Bernini colonnades surrounding St. Peter’s. The last images in the series have John Paul weeping, head in hands, while Benedict, holding a smoking shotgun, smirks. All of which is silly and vulgar, of course. But it isn’t that far from the views expressed by some Catholics, lamenting what they allege to be the drastic difference between Wojtyla’s and Ratzinger’s views of Islam.</p>
<p>The 1994 international bestseller, Crossing the Threshold of Hope was John Paul II’s most personal statement, a summary of his convictions about faith, prayer, the papal mission, other world religions, and the human future. As such, it has a special claim on our attention as an expression of Karol Wojtyla’s views, which were honed by an acute intelligence and a long experience of the world. One section of Threshold is devoted to Islam. In it, John Paul expressed his respect for “the religiosity of Muslims” and his admiration for their “fidelity to prayer.” As the late Pope put it, “The image of believers in Allah who, without caring about time or place, fall to their knees and immerse themselves in prayer remains a model for all those who invoke the true God, in particular for those Christians who, having deserted their magnificent cathedrals, pray only a little or not at all.”</p>
<p>But do these expressions of respect suggest, as National Public Radio’s Sylvia Poggioli did after Regensburg, that John Paul II (in marked contrast to Benedict XVI) had put Islam “on the same plane” as Catholicism? Hardly. Here, again, is the authentic voice of John Paul II, from Crossing the Threshold of Hope:</p>
<p>“Whoever knows the Old and New Testaments, and then reads the Koran, clearly sees the process by which it completely reduces Divine Revelation. It is impossible not to note the movement away from what God said about himself, first in the Old Testament through the Prophets, and then finally in the New Testament through His Son. In Islam, all the richness of God’s self-revelation, which constitutes the heritage of the Old and New Testaments, has definitely been set aside.</p>
<p>“Some of the most beautiful names in the human language are given to the God of the Koran, but He is ultimately a God outside of the world, a God who is only Majesty, never Emmanuel, God with us. Islam is not a religion of redemption. There is no room for the Cross and the Resurrection. Jesus is mentioned, but only as a prophet who prepares for the last prophet, Muhammad. There is also mention of Mary, His Virgin Mother, but the tragedy of redemption is completely absent. For this reason not only the theology but also the anthropology of Islam is very distant from Christianity.”</p>
<p>Thus the personal testimony of John Paul II, which is in some respects more blunt and challenging than anything Benedict XVI said at Regensburg. But we can leave the comparisons and contrasts and for another day. The point here is that&#160; there isn’t a centimeter of difference between John Paul II’s substantive evaluation of Islam and Benedict XVI’s. John Paul II was a master of the public gesture; but to read from his public gestures of respect for Islamic piety an agreement with Islam’s understanding of God, man, and moral obligation is to make a grave mistake. John Paul II would have completely agreed with Benedict XVI’s critique, at Regensburg, of any theology that reduces God to pure will, a remote dictator who can command the irrational (like the murder of innocents) if he chooses. And, like Benedict XVI, John Paul II knew that such misconceptions can have lethal public consequences, because all the great questions of the human condition, including political questions, are ultimately theological.</p>
<p>Benedict XVI bears the burden of the papacy at a historical moment in which religiously-warranted irrationality is a lethal threat to the future of civilization. He and his predecessor have the same view of the theological conditions for the possibility of that irrationality. What Benedict XVI has added to the mix is a broader analysis of the problem of faith-and-reason as engaging the West (a theme, to be sure, also found in John Paul II) and a prescription for the direction the dialogue over faith-and-reason should take. It is to that proposal that I now wish to turn, for reading Regensburg right requires us to read the lecture in continuity with other statements by Pope Benedict which have gotten, sadly, little attention.</p>
<p>A Benedictine strategy for 21st century interreligious dialogue The most important and potentially consequential of these post-Regensburg statements was the Pope’s Christmas 2006 address to the Roman Curia.</p>
<p>As many of you know, these annual addresses, framed by a formal exchange of greetings between the pope and his senior collaborators, are often used by popes to review the year just past and to provide some clues as to themes to be developed in the year ahead. Late 2006 had been an especially busy period, between Regensburg and the papal pilgrimage to the Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople. Benedict XVI, reflecting on both experiences and the controversies that had attended them, had the following to say: “In a dialogue to be intensified with Islam, we must bear in mind the fact that the Muslim world today is finding itself faced with an urgent task. This task is very similar&#160; to the one that was imposed upon Christians since the Enlightenment, and to which the Second Vatican Council, as the fruit of long and difficult research, found real solutions for the Catholic Church… “It is a question of the attitude that the community of the faithful must adopt in the face of the convictions and demands that were strengthened in the Enlightenment. “On the one hand, one must counter a dictatorship of positivist reason that excludes God from the life of the community and from public organizations… “On the other hand, one must welcome the true conquests of the Enlightenment, human rights, and especially the freedom of faith and its practice, and recognize these also as being essential elements for the authenticity of religion. “As in the Christian community, where there has been a long search to find the correct position of faith in relation to such beliefs — a search that will certainly&#160; never be concluded once and for all — so also the Islamic world with its own tradition faces the immense task of finding the appropriate solutions to these problems. “The content of the dialogue between Christians and Muslims will be at this time especially one of meeting each other in this commitment to find the right solutions. We Christians feel ourselves in solidarity with all those who, precisely on the basis of their religious convictions as Muslims, work to oppose violence and for the synergy between faith and reason, between religion and freedom…” .</p>
<p>Translated from Vatican English into standard English, I take it that Benedict was suggesting the following:&#160; First, history itself has put before the Islamic world the “urgent task” of finding a way to come to grips with the intellectual and institutional achievements of the Enlightenment: the Muslim world can no longer live as if the Enlightenment, in both its achievements and its flaws, had not happened. The intra-Islamic civil war over these questions has now spilled out of the House of Islam and now affects the entire world That blunt fact of 21st century public life underscores the urgency of the task facing Islam’s religious leaders and legal scholars.</p>
<p>Second, this necessary Islamic encounter with Enlightenment thought and the institutions of governance that grew out of Enlightenment thought requires separating the Enlightenment wheat from the Enlightenment chaff. The skepticism and relativism that characterize one stream of Enlightenment thought need not (and indeed should not) be accepted. Yet one can (and must) make a distinction between the ideas that the Enlightenment got right — for example, religious freedom, understood as an inalienable human right to be acknowledged and protected by any just&#160; government — even as one rejects the ideas of which the Enlightenment made a hash (for example, the idea of God).</p>
<p>Third, this process of coming to grips with the complex heritage and continuing momentum of the Enlightenment is an ongoing one. As the experience of the Catholic Church has demonstrated in recent decades, however, an ancient religious tradition can appropriate certain aspects of Enlightenment thought, and can come to appreciate the institutions of freedom that emerged from the Enlightenment, without compromising in a fundamental way its own core theological commitments — indeed, the experience of the Catholic Church on the question of religious freedom and the institutional separation of Church and state shows that a serious, critical engagement with Enlightenment ideas and institutions can lead a religious community to a revivification of classic theological concepts that may have lain dormant for a long period of time, and thus to a genuine development of religious understanding. The Catholic Church came to the understandings embodied in Dignitatis Humanae, the Second Vatican Council’s&#160; Declaration on Religious Freedom, not by a Jacobin kicking-over of the theological traces, but by a process of retrieval-and-development that brought ancient, if long-forgotten, elements of the faith and of Christian philosopher into conversation with modern public life. Might this process of retrieval-an-development hold some lessons for our Muslim interlocutors?</p>
<p>Fourth, it is precisely on this ground — the ground where faith meets reason in a search for the truth about hos just societies should be structured — that inter-religious dialogue should be constructed. All of which is to say that, in Benedict XVI’s view, the inter-religious dialogue of the future should focus on helping those Muslims willing to do so to explore the possibility of an Islamic case for religious tolerance, social pluralism, and civil society — even as Islam’s interlocutors (among Christians, Jews, and others, including non-believers) open themselves to the possibility that the Islamic critique of certain aspects of modern culture is not without merit.</p>
<p>That seems to me to be about right. While I would not preclude the possibility of a genuine theological dialogue between “Islam and the rest” on such questions as the nature of God, the mode of God’s engagement with his world, Islamic supersessionism and the resulting Islamic conception of both Judaism and Christianity, and the correct understanding of sacred texts and their exegesis, the most urgent, immediate&#160; questions for a dialogue of cultures between Islam and the West — and specifically between Islam and Catholicism — engage issues of practical reason: for the most urgent and immediate questions before us are questions of the proper organization of 21st century societies, and indeed of the 21st century global commons. The deeper theological dialogue with Islam is a dialogue whose progress, if such is possible, will be measured in centuries. The dialogue proposed by Benedict XVI is, necessarily, one with an immediate urgency about it. If you’ll pardon the image, it’s a dialogue with a much shorter fuse.</p>
<p>All the more reason, then, to regret that the Pope’s proposal seems to have been ignored — or, at the very least side-stepped — by the October 2007 statement signed by 138 world Islamic leaders, “A Common Word Between Us and You.”</p>
<p>Knowledgeable analysts of Islamic affairs have raised questions about the composition of the “138,” a group that includes a considerable number of government functionaries as well as figures with connections to Wahhabism, whose teachings and financial influence inflame so much Islamist agitation around the world. Be that as it may — and it’s not an insignificant thing — I would suggest that the better approach would be to ask the people who put “A Common Word” together, with all respect, why the Pope’s invitation of last December was not addressed in that statement.</p>
<p>As the Pope reminded the Curia, and as we have just noted, Catholicism spent the better part of two centuries trying to find solutions to the questions of faith, freedom, and governance posed by the Enlightenment, a process that bore fruit at the Second Vatican Council. Isn’t this theological method of retrieval-and-renewal a useful model for a Christian-Islamic dialogue aimed at the points stressed by Benedict XVI’s address to the Curia?</p>
<p>To repeat: the questions the Holy Father identified in December 2006 do seem to be the most urgent ones. For unless Islam can find within its own spiritual resources a way to legitimate religious freedom and the distinction between religious and political authority, the relationship between the world’s two billion Christians and its billion Muslims is going to remain fraught with tension. “A Common Word” spoke at length about the two Great Commandments; it said nothing about their applicability to issues of faith, freedom, and the governance of society: issues posed, for example, by the death threats visited upon Muslims who convert to Christianity and by the refusal to allow Christian public worship in Saudi Arabia. “A Common Word” also strikes a rather defensive tone, as if it were 21st century Christians who, in considerable numbers, were justifying the murder of innocents in advancing the cause of God. But that is manifestly not the case.</p>
<p>Do these 138 Muslim leaders agree or disagree that religious freedom and the distinction between religious and political authority are the issues at the heart of today’s tensions between Islam and the West — indeed, Isl am and the rest? Would it not be more useful to concentrate on these urgent issues of practical reason (which bear on the organization of 21st century societies) than to frame the dialogue in terms of a generic exploration of the two Great Commandments (which risks leading to an exchange of banalities)? Why not get down to cases?</p>
<p>It is of the utmost importance for the human future that a genuine interreligious dialogue unfold between Islam and Christianity (and Judaism, which is largely ignored in “A Common Word”). Genuine dialogue requires a precise focus, and a commitment by the dialogue partners to condemn by name those members of their communities who murder in the name of God. It is unfortunate that “A Common Word” took us no closer to cementing either of these building blocks of genuine dialogue into place. We can only hope that the series of meeting involving the Pope, Vatican officials, and some of the signatories of “A Common Word” proposed earlier this week in a letter to the “138” by Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, Secretary of State of the Holy See, will make some advance along this front.</p>
<p>I must confess to having experienced a similar disappointment when reading “Loving God and Neighbor Together,” a Christian response to “A Common Word Between Us and You” organized out of the Yale Divinity School and run as a full-page ad in the November 17 issue of the New York Times. Once again, the question of Islam’s difficult encounter with the political, social, and economic achievements of the Englightenment — which is manifestly at the heart of the intra-Islamic civil war that, as I noted above,&#160; has now spilled out to engage the entire world — is simply ignored. Questions about ideas embedded deep in the theological structure of Islam — ideas that shape Islam’s theological anthropologies and thus Islamic views of the just society — are similarly ignored. The faith/reason nexus explored at Regensburg is left unremarked. (Nor is anything said about the provenance of “A Common Word Between Us and You,” which, as indicated above, is another cause for concern; it is simply assumed-as-read, by the authors of “Loving God and Neighbor Together,” that “A Common Word” represents a pan-Islamic religious, theological, and moral consensus that is happily abstracted from today’s political contentions.) Most egregiously, there is not the slightest hint that the commandment of love-of-neighbor proclaimed in the Yale statement as a thick common ground between Islam and Christianity is routinely, and often brutally, violated by the lack of religious freedom under which Christians suffer in too many Islamic societies.</p>
<p>A dialogue about the human future, the structuring of international public life, and the encounter of Christian and Islamic cultures that does not begin, even tacitly, from the fact that one of the dialogue partners has (if with difficulty) assimilated the genuine achievements of the Enlightenment in the sphere of governance while the other has not: well, that is not a dialogue likely to be fruitful. Indeed, it is a dialogue likely to engage precisely the wrong Islamic interlocutors, while giving further credibility to those who do not merit it.</p>
<p>Reading Regensburg right, therefore, requires that we not only take the text and its author seriously; it requires us to grasp the public implications of Benedict’s analysis of the complex crisis of faith-and-reason in the early 21st century. That crisis, as the Pope acutely observed, is being played out within the West, within the Islamic world, and between the West and Islam. If there is a nodal point at which these three dimensions of the crisis of faith-and-reason intersect, it is on the question of religious freedom, and on the qustion of what is required, theologically, to create the kind of societies that can warrant, sustain, and defend the religious freedom of all. Any dialogue of cultures that fails to address the question of religious freedom will dissolve ultimately — and perhaps rapidly — into a dialogue of the deaf.</p>
<p>Winston Churchill, who did not shrink from war when war became necessary, famously said that “Jaw, jaw is better than war, war.” That is certainly true. But it is just as true that a false kind of dialogue in which the engagement of differences within the bond of civility is displaced by political correctness, historical self-deprecation, and a failure to identity the roots of competing perceptions of human goods yields a kind of “jaw, jaw” that is, in fact, “blah, blah” — a false dialogue that brings us no closer to the peace that is the fruit of order, an order that is itself an expression of moral reason.</p>
<p>Pope Benedict XVI’s Regensburg Lecture remains to be seriously engaged, by Christians and Muslims alike. It is past time to get on with that urgent task.</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>
<p /> | false | 1 | friday night november 30 eppc distinguished senior fellow george weigel delivered one keynote addresses conference dialogue cultures160sponsored university notre dames center ethics culture full text weigels lecture follows night september 12 2006 wife dinner two late pope john paul iis oldest friends cracovian apartment mobile phone began ringing extremely agitated italian reporter suppose formulation replete adverbial adjectival redundancy nevertheless160 native italy caller remarkably indicative rather subjunctive ze pope given zees crazee conferenza germania ze muslims say replied couldnt answer hadnt read popes lecture si si know caller responded say replied unlike callers countrymen indeed unlike wasnt habit commenting papal texts read marked inwardly digested would please email copy text could read plane home next day point could call back comment must tell never conducted transatlantic telephone interview wendys newark liberty international airport missing one lifes bracing experiences recount little bit journalistic melodrama order lay two preliminary markers primo struck plane still strikes today benedict xvis regensburg lecture important papal statement publicmatters global consequence since john paul iis address united nations general assembly october 1995 latter john paul defended universality human rights basis universal human nature could read universal moral law absent universal human nature universal moral law could known disciplined exercise reason john paul argued could universal conversation universal goods universal consideration the160 human future dialogue cultures theme conference absent universal moral law functioning kind intercultural grammar ordering genuine dialogue would noise 160 cacophony john paul iis 1995 un address identified one set pressing moral issues immediate postcold war period benedict xvis regensburg lecture clearly identified cluster related equally pressing issues underlying new world disorder early 21st century secondo initial media reaction regensburg pope made gaffe got set quickdrying cement remained condition ever since least default position world press recently two weeks ago agenda pope benedicts april 2008 visit united states released media outlets mentioned regensburg misstep continued construe immediate aftermath regensburg colleagues published several oped columns articles number newspapers newsmagazines arguing benedict xvi knew exactly saying critics would courtesy reading text entirely might come similar conclusion also argued wasnt centimeters worth difference benedict xvis theological reading islam john paul iis gap two popes another antiphon chorus deprecation gods rottweiler transformed gods dunce managed accomplish case increase volume email receiving slightly disconcerting subject lines like greetings peshawar unhappy reading regensburg right subject evening requires clearing away rubble order assess claim regensburg fact critically important papal statement correctly identifying one megadynamics early 21st century history order see regensburg lecture could help set foundation genuine truthcentered dialogue cultures papal gaffe lets begin alleged gaffe longtime friendly critic vatican communications freely concede much left desired way holy sees communications apparatus handled regensburg press properly briefed expect popes lecture saying saying postlecture controversy seems anticipated neither adequate response memory serves took week vatican post complete text regensburg lecture including scholarly apparatus web site net effect fumbling around reinforce impression gaffe indeed made pope indeed misspoken wonder italian translation famous white house neologism would amends made interreligious comity could restored hence hastily arranged meeting pope diplomatic representatives several islamic states castel gandolfo late september 2006 anything pope said regensburg gave reasonable cause violent reactions lethally violent reactions instances followed lecture jihadists gotten regensburg bit teeth left unexplored media jihadists course march holy sees drummer one ask whether adroit management immediate postlecture controversy holy see might dampened passions point could successfully would seem readily ignited said meant still beggars belief give credence claim joseph ratzinger man halfcenturys experience public controversy know saying regensburg beggars belief give credence suggestion benedict xvi deliberately provocative even insulting honor knowing present pope nineteen years first decade conversation formed distinct impressions man impressions shed light regensburg lecture permit share three impressions evening first instance benedict xvi christian gentleman whose exquisite manners reflect innate shyness deepseated respect others come know incapable gratuitous insult much given polemics since famous ratzinger report caused storm controversy set basic terms conversation extraordinary synod 1985 also man acutely responsible responsibilities pope include papal sollicitudo omnium ecclesiarum papal solicitude churches includes persecuted churches certainly includes hardpressed160 churches islamic states rottweiler caricature vicious inaccurate still lurking subconscious journalists hermeneutic filter distorting message regensburg seems second place struck joseph ratzingers encyclopedic knowledge theology ranges far beyond catholic thought encompass protestant orthodox thinking jewish scholarship islamic commentators course true ratzinger wellversed disciplines others certainly ignorant main currents thought world religious traditions postregensburg commentary suggested third place precision mind blessed acquaintance many brilliant men women joseph ratzinger one brilliant people ever known asked question pauses reflects answers complete paragraphs third fourth language man says precisely means means exactly says true performance interviews conversations office congregation doctrine faith much would true performance rather formal academic context regensburg lecture thus find notion regensburgaspapalgaffe prima facie implausible three crucial points precise man say regensburg lecture benedicts160 first point great questions life including social political questions ultimately theological think dont think god much think good wicked judge noble base think appropriate methods advancing truth world profound disagreements truth things example men women imagine god pure absolute dominance appropriate response submission little room within theology god reason god logos still less room god love god radical willfulness command anything even irrational sure christian thinkers like scotus ockham tended imagine god way pure pure dominance views considerable theological tension mainstream christian tradition god abraham moses jesus god reason love god comes searching man history invites human beings dialogue salvation god hearts restless rest embrace god command unreasonable would contradict gods nature theological datum yields important anthropological byproduct shaped christian moral reflection rightordering society centuries human capacity reason see imprint divine reason logos word world made thus gods selfrevelation first people israel later definitively son cancel human reason gods revelation appeals human reason divine spark within us mainstream christianity always taught human beings build decent societies attending reason natural law ways thinking good helped shape christian reflection society war peace politics centuries thus benedict xvis first point idea god inevitably influences ideas theology politics benedicts second point followed closely first irrational violence aimed innocent men women children put regensburg incompatible nature god nature human soul joseph ratzinger certainly laying blanket indictment would confident agree much worth engaging serious scholarly conversations order clarify explore several theologies god work complex worldswithinworlds islam exploration underway equally imperative recognize benedict regensburg certain currents thought contemporary islam insist take dramatic odious example suicide bombing innocents act pleasing god act martyrdom meriting eternal bliss muting latter point admission ticket engaging deeper dialogue divine nature moreover responsibility worship one true god declare unambiguously murder innocents name advancing divine cause world abomination based gravely mistaken understandings misunderstandings god abouts gods gods purposes nature moral obligation sure responsibility challenging distorted views god distorted understanding moral duty flows rests first islamic160 leaders islamic leaders willing undertake cleansing islams conscience john paul ii taught catholic church cleanse historical conscience preparation great jubilee 2000 know past christians used violence advance christian purposes catholic church publicly repented distortions gospel developed deep theological critique misunderstandings led episodes church therefore help brave islamic reformers risk of160 lives trying develop parallel islamic critique coreligionists misunderstandings quoting robust exchange medieval byzantine emperor learned islamic scholar benedict xvi making cheap rhetorical point trying illustrate possibility toughminded rational dialogue christians muslims dialogue take place however basis shared commitment reason mutual rejection irrational violence name god pope benedicts third point almost entirely ignored fourteenplus months since regensburg lecture directed west high culture west continues fritter time away intellectual sandbox of160 postmodern irrationalism truth truth nothing properly describable truth west unable defend west wont able give reasons commitments civility tolerance human rights rule law worth defending western world stripped convictions truths make western civilization possible make useful contribution genuine dialogue civilizations cultures dialogue must based shared understanding human beings however imperfectly come know truth things islam selfcritical leaders condemn marginalize extremists muslims condemned held hostage passions consider murder innocents pleasing god west recover commitment reason thus help support islamic reformers suggest large questions benedict xvi put worlds agenda regensburg one else could done president prime minister king queen secretarygeneral could put questions play level sophistication world audience benedict xvi raise unavoidable questions regensburg also gave political world grammar addressing questions genuinely transcultural grammar rationalityandirrationality theological communities great world religious traditions conduct robust interreligio us dialogue within specialist grammars vocabularies something specialist grammars vocabularies required public life grammar rationalityirrationality something suggest friends national catholic reporter editorially criticized regensburg lecture trafficked much theological abstraction put seems holy father precisely opposite regensburg pope benedict xvi world immense service giving believers nonbelievers alike language deal threat jihadist ideology language rationality irrationality far exercise theological abstraction regensburg lecture courageous attempt create new public grammar capable disciplining directing worlds discussion arguably worlds gravest problem mr gores homeless overheated polar bears notwithstanding things benedict xvi sync view islam religious accomplishments challenges held predecessor john paul ii remembering john paul ii course somewhat amusing hear voices used lament hardline conservative polish pope wake regensburg lecture160 lifting john paul paragon enlightened benign liberality amusing slightly disconcerting disconcerting however attempts drive wedge benedict papal predecessor could care less internal catholic culturewar saw chance make seemingly decisive point took thus arabic satellite tv network aljazeera aftermath regensburg ran series cartoons featuring john paulfigure releasing peaceful doves st peters square doves shot benedict roof bernini colonnades surrounding st peters last images series john paul weeping head hands benedict holding smoking shotgun smirks silly vulgar course isnt far views expressed catholics lamenting allege drastic difference wojtylas ratzingers views islam 1994 international bestseller crossing threshold hope john paul iis personal statement summary convictions faith prayer papal mission world religions human future special claim attention expression karol wojtylas views honed acute intelligence long experience world one section threshold devoted islam john paul expressed respect religiosity muslims admiration fidelity prayer late pope put image believers allah without caring time place fall knees immerse prayer remains model invoke true god particular christians deserted magnificent cathedrals pray little expressions respect suggest national public radios sylvia poggioli regensburg john paul ii marked contrast benedict xvi put islam plane catholicism hardly authentic voice john paul ii crossing threshold hope whoever knows old new testaments reads koran clearly sees process completely reduces divine revelation impossible note movement away god said first old testament prophets finally new testament son islam richness gods selfrevelation constitutes heritage old new testaments definitely set aside beautiful names human language given god koran ultimately god outside world god majesty never emmanuel god us islam religion redemption room cross resurrection jesus mentioned prophet prepares last prophet muhammad also mention mary virgin mother tragedy redemption completely absent reason theology also anthropology islam distant christianity thus personal testimony john paul ii respects blunt challenging anything benedict xvi said regensburg leave comparisons contrasts another day point that160 isnt centimeter difference john paul iis substantive evaluation islam benedict xvis john paul ii master public gesture read public gestures respect islamic piety agreement islams understanding god man moral obligation make grave mistake john paul ii would completely agreed benedict xvis critique regensburg theology reduces god pure remote dictator command irrational like murder innocents chooses like benedict xvi john paul ii knew misconceptions lethal public consequences great questions human condition including political questions ultimately theological benedict xvi bears burden papacy historical moment religiouslywarranted irrationality lethal threat future civilization predecessor view theological conditions possibility irrationality benedict xvi added mix broader analysis problem faithandreason engaging west theme sure also found john paul ii prescription direction dialogue faithandreason take proposal wish turn reading regensburg right requires us read lecture continuity statements pope benedict gotten sadly little attention benedictine strategy 21st century interreligious dialogue important potentially consequential postregensburg statements popes christmas 2006 address roman curia many know annual addresses framed formal exchange greetings pope senior collaborators often used popes review year past provide clues themes developed year ahead late 2006 especially busy period regensburg papal pilgrimage ecumenical patriarchate constantinople benedict xvi reflecting experiences controversies attended following say dialogue intensified islam must bear mind fact muslim world today finding faced urgent task task similar160 one imposed upon christians since enlightenment second vatican council fruit long difficult research found real solutions catholic church question attitude community faithful must adopt face convictions demands strengthened enlightenment one hand one must counter dictatorship positivist reason excludes god life community public organizations hand one must welcome true conquests enlightenment human rights especially freedom faith practice recognize also essential elements authenticity religion christian community long search find correct position faith relation beliefs search certainly160 never concluded also islamic world tradition faces immense task finding appropriate solutions problems content dialogue christians muslims time especially one meeting commitment find right solutions christians feel solidarity precisely basis religious convictions muslims work oppose violence synergy faith reason religion freedom translated vatican english standard english take benedict suggesting following160 first history put islamic world urgent task finding way come grips intellectual institutional achievements enlightenment muslim world longer live enlightenment achievements flaws happened intraislamic civil war questions spilled house islam affects entire world blunt fact 21st century public life underscores urgency task facing islams religious leaders legal scholars second necessary islamic encounter enlightenment thought institutions governance grew enlightenment thought requires separating enlightenment wheat enlightenment chaff skepticism relativism characterize one stream enlightenment thought need indeed accepted yet one must make distinction ideas enlightenment got right example religious freedom understood inalienable human right acknowledged protected just160 government even one rejects ideas enlightenment made hash example idea god third process coming grips complex heritage continuing momentum enlightenment ongoing one experience catholic church demonstrated recent decades however ancient religious tradition appropriate certain aspects enlightenment thought come appreciate institutions freedom emerged enlightenment without compromising fundamental way core theological commitments indeed experience catholic church question religious freedom institutional separation church state shows serious critical engagement enlightenment ideas institutions lead religious community revivification classic theological concepts may lain dormant long period time thus genuine development religious understanding catholic church came understandings embodied dignitatis humanae second vatican councils160 declaration religious freedom jacobin kickingover theological traces process retrievalanddevelopment brought ancient longforgotten elements faith christian philosopher conversation modern public life might process retrievalandevelopment hold lessons muslim interlocutors fourth precisely ground ground faith meets reason search truth hos societies structured interreligious dialogue constructed say benedict xvis view interreligious dialogue future focus helping muslims willing explore possibility islamic case religious tolerance social pluralism civil society even islams interlocutors among christians jews others including nonbelievers open possibility islamic critique certain aspects modern culture without merit seems right would preclude possibility genuine theological dialogue islam rest questions nature god mode gods engagement world islamic supersessionism resulting islamic conception judaism christianity correct understanding sacred texts exegesis urgent immediate160 questions dialogue cultures islam west specifically islam catholicism engage issues practical reason urgent immediate questions us questions proper organization 21st century societies indeed 21st century global commons deeper theological dialogue islam dialogue whose progress possible measured centuries dialogue proposed benedict xvi necessarily one immediate urgency youll pardon image dialogue much shorter fuse reason regret popes proposal seems ignored least sidestepped october 2007 statement signed 138 world islamic leaders common word us knowledgeable analysts islamic affairs raised questions composition 138 group includes considerable number government functionaries well figures connections wahhabism whose teachings financial influence inflame much islamist agitation around world may insignificant thing would suggest better approach would ask people put common word together respect popes invitation last december addressed statement pope reminded curia noted catholicism spent better part two centuries trying find solutions questions faith freedom governance posed enlightenment process bore fruit second vatican council isnt theological method retrievalandrenewal useful model christianislamic dialogue aimed points stressed benedict xvis address curia repeat questions holy father identified december 2006 seem urgent ones unless islam find within spiritual resources way legitimate religious freedom distinction religious political authority relationship worlds two billion christians billion muslims going remain fraught tension common word spoke length two great commandments said nothing applicability issues faith freedom governance society issues posed example death threats visited upon muslims convert christianity refusal allow christian public worship saudi arabia common word also strikes rather defensive tone 21st century christians considerable numbers justifying murder innocents advancing cause god manifestly case 138 muslim leaders agree disagree religious freedom distinction religious political authority issues heart todays tensions islam west indeed isl rest would useful concentrate urgent issues practical reason bear organization 21st century societies frame dialogue terms generic exploration two great commandments risks leading exchange banalities get cases utmost importance human future genuine interreligious dialogue unfold islam christianity judaism largely ignored common word genuine dialogue requires precise focus commitment dialogue partners condemn name members communities murder name god unfortunate common word took us closer cementing either building blocks genuine dialogue place hope series meeting involving pope vatican officials signatories common word proposed earlier week letter 138 cardinal tarcisio bertone secretary state holy see make advance along front must confess experienced similar disappointment reading loving god neighbor together christian response common word us organized yale divinity school run fullpage ad november 17 issue new york times question islams difficult encounter political social economic achievements englightenment manifestly heart intraislamic civil war noted above160 spilled engage entire world simply ignored questions ideas embedded deep theological structure islam ideas shape islams theological anthropologies thus islamic views society similarly ignored faithreason nexus explored regensburg left unremarked anything said provenance common word us indicated another cause concern simply assumedasread authors loving god neighbor together common word represents panislamic religious theological moral consensus happily abstracted todays political contentions egregiously slightest hint commandment loveofneighbor proclaimed yale statement thick common ground islam christianity routinely often brutally violated lack religious freedom christians suffer many islamic societies dialogue human future structuring international public life encounter christian islamic cultures begin even tacitly fact one dialogue partners difficulty assimilated genuine achievements enlightenment sphere governance well dialogue likely fruitful indeed dialogue likely engage precisely wrong islamic interlocutors giving credibility merit reading regensburg right therefore requires take text author seriously requires us grasp public implications benedicts analysis complex crisis faithandreason early 21st century crisis pope acutely observed played within west within islamic world west islam nodal point three dimensions crisis faithandreason intersect question religious freedom qustion required theologically create kind societies warrant sustain defend religious freedom dialogue cultures fails address question religious freedom dissolve ultimately perhaps rapidly dialogue deaf winston churchill shrink war war became necessary famously said jaw jaw better war war certainly true true false kind dialogue engagement differences within bond civility displaced political correctness historical selfdeprecation failure identity roots competing perceptions human goods yields kind jaw jaw fact blah blah false dialogue brings us closer peace fruit order order expression moral reason pope benedict xvis regensburg lecture remains seriously engaged christians muslims alike past time get urgent task george weigel distinguished senior fellow ethics public policy center washington dc holds eppcs william e simon chair catholic studies | 3,102 |
<p>EDEN PRAIRIE, Minn. — The <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Minnesota-Vikings/" type="external">Minnesota Vikings</a> probably lost <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Sam_Bradford/" type="external">Sam Bradford</a> for another week or so, but they’re also on the verge of possibly getting <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Teddy-Bridgewater/" type="external">Teddy Bridgewater</a>, who is on reserve/physically unable to perform (PUP), back at practice as early as next week.</p>
<p>Those are the two main storylines on a 3-2 Vikings team that hopes to stay in the hunt with <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Case_Keenum/" type="external">Case Keenum</a> long enough to get the left knees of Bradford or Bridgewater back up and running.</p>
<p>Sensitive to the criticism they received for starting a clearly hobbled Bradford in Chicago on Monday night, the Vikings made head athletic trainer Eric Sugarman available for a rare press conference on Tuesday.</p>
<p>Sugarman said Bradford is dealing with “wear and tear” in the knee that underwent ACL reconstruction in 2013 and 2014. He said Bradford is day-to-day and will be reevaluated again on Wednesday.</p>
<p>Sugarman refuted the notion that the Vikings rushed Bradford back too soon. Bradford had missed three straight games and was limited in practice all last week. He was uncharacteristically inaccurate (5 for 11), unable to move and was sacked four times, including once for a safety, before the Vikings pulled him right before halftime of their 20-17 win.</p>
<p>“I do think it’s very important for me to mention that yesterday and always we were all on the same page with, ‘Should Sam play?’ or ‘Should Sam not play?'” Sugarman said. “The question is, how do we come up with that evaluation? Basically, it’s on a player’s exam and on a player’s function. And it’s a collaborative decision always. The player has a vote. The medical staff has a vote. The head coach, the coaching staff, the GM and together collaboratively we decide if a player is able to function and do his job or not.</p>
<p>“And I think it’s very important — I’ve known most of you now for over a decade — we would never put a player on the field that we thought could not protect himself. So I think that’s really important for me to mention. Sam at some point obviously aggravated his knee (on Monday).”</p>
<p>Meanwhile, Bridgewater is eligible to begin practicing next Monday. Sugarman said he’ll be evaluated by his surgeon next week to see if he’s ready to return. Bridgewater has been sidelined for 13 months since dislocating his left knee and tearing ligaments a week before the 2016 season. When he begins practicing, the Vikings will have three weeks to decide whether to add him to the active roster or keep him on PUP all year.</p>
<p>Head coach <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Mike_Zimmer/" type="external">Mike Zimmer</a> said he believes Bridgewater will play this season, but deferred comment to Sugarman.</p>
<p>“Teddy is working hard every day,” Sugarman said. “You guys see him all the time on the side working extremely hard, doing a great job. That’s the only thing I’m going to say about Teddy.”</p>
<p>Meanwhile, the Vikings feel better about their ability to tread water with Keenum as their backup. He entered Sunday’s game with the Vikings leading 3-2 near the end of the first half. He was careful with the ball while completing 17 of 21 passes with a touchdown in a turnover-free effort that saw the Vikings outscore the Bears 17-15 in the second half.</p>
<p>“Well, I think he’s won two games, so he showed he’s had some good stuff on tape,” Zimmer said of Keenum, who is 1-2 as a starter this year, but definitely gave the team a jolt in relief on Monday night. “I think the team believes when he comes in there he’s going to go in there and play well and that’s the most important thing.”</p>
<p>The Vikings trail the Packers (4-1) by a game heading into Sunday’s showdown at U.S. Bank Stadium. Keenum is the likely starter.</p>
<p>NOTES, QUOTES</p>
<p>—</p>
<p>Vikings tight end <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Kyle-Rudolph/" type="external">Kyle Rudolph</a> and many of his offensive teammates sparked a Twitter war with a touchdown celebration Monday night.</p>
<p>After Rudolph’s touchdown, he and teammates took advantage of the NFL’s relaxed celebration rules. The name of the children’s game they pretended to play depends on whether you’re from Minnesota or other parts of the country.</p>
<p>Teammates sat in a circle while Rudolph went around touching their helmets until one of them popped up and started chasing him.</p>
<p>Most of the country, it seems, would call this a game of “Duck, Duck, Goose!” But them’s fightin’ words in Minnesota, where kids are taught that the game is called, “Duck, Duck, Grey Duck!”</p>
<p>That’s their story. And they aren’t backing down.</p>
<p>—</p>
<p>Sometimes, defensive end Everson Griffen is faster at the snap of the ball than the eye of an average NFL official can comprehend.</p>
<p>“I watch the ball and I’m really quick when I see it move,” he said after Monday’s 20-17 win over the Bears. “When I see it move, I’m gone.”</p>
<p>Griffen did that perfectly when the Vikings needed it most late in the first half. The offense had mustered only 29 yards in 28 minutes and trailed 2-0 when Griffen got a great jump, blew past left tackle Charles Leno Jr. and got a strip-sack that gave the Vikings the ball at the Chicago 13. That led to a field goal and a 3-2 lead.</p>
<p>“Everson has such great reaction time at the snap of the ball,” said left end Brian Robison. “A lot of times, the officials think he’s offsides when he’s not. That’s how quick and fast he is.”</p>
<p>STRATEGY AND PERSONNEL</p>
<p>PLAYER NOTES</p>
<p>—</p>
<p>RB <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Stevan_Ridley/" type="external">Stevan Ridley</a>, who was signed early last week after <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Dalvin-Cook/" type="external">Dalvin Cook</a> went on injured reserve, was released on Monday. The Vikings will continue looking for running back depth this week.</p>
<p>—</p>
<p>WR <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Michael-Floyd/" type="external">Michael Floyd</a>, who was suspended for the first four games for violating the NFL’s substance abuse policy, was activated on Monday. He had a holding penalty to negate a first-down catch by <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Adam-Thielen/" type="external">Adam Thielen</a>. But he atoned for it a couple plays later with a nice 19-yard sideline grab for a first down.</p>
<p>—</p>
<p>RB <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Jerick-McKinnon/" type="external">Jerick McKinnon</a> had 197 all-purpose yards in one of the best games of his career. He had 95 yards rushing and a touchdown on 16 carries, 51 yards on six receptions and 51 yards on two kickoff returns. With Dalvin Cook out and <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Latavius-Murray/" type="external">Latavius Murray</a> underachieving, McKinnon will have a key role the rest of the season, barring injury, of course.</p>
<p>—</p>
<p>WR <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Stefon-Diggs/" type="external">Stefon Diggs</a>, who went into Week 5 as the NFL’s leader in receiving yards (391), was held to four yards on just one catch. He was targeted four times. Diggs suffered a groin injury at some point during the game. The Vikings will update his status on Wednesday.</p>
<p>—</p>
<p>DE Everson Griffen notched his sixth sack of the season. And it came at a time when the offense had mustered only 29 yards in 28 minutes. Griffen stipped the ball from <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Mitchell-Trubisky/" type="external">Mitchell Trubisky</a>, giving the Vikings the ball at the Chicago 13. That led to a field goal and a 3-2 halftime lead.</p>
<p>—</p>
<p>S Jayron Kearse didn’t play because of a groin injury suffered in practice last week. He was missed on special teams, where his replacement, cornerback Tramaine Brock, made several errors, including a holding penalty on a punt return.</p>
<p>—</p>
<p>LG Nick Easton suffered a calf injury in Sunday’s game. It doesn’t appear to be serious. Head coach Mike Zimmer said the team will have an update when the injury report comes out Wednesday.</p>
<p>REPORT CARD VS. BEARS</p>
<p>—PASSING OFFENSE: C – Sam Bradford was awful because he was still injured and never should have started the game after missing three games because of a left knee injury. He was pulled in the closing minutes of the first half after completing just 5 of 11 passes for 36 yards. He looked totally defenseless on four sacks, one of which was a safety that came after he held the ball way too long. Case Keenum entered the game and was a boost. He completed 17 of 21 passes for 140 yards and a touchdown without a turnover. But most of Keenum’s passes were short and conservative.</p>
<p>—RUSHING OFFENSE: C-plus – The final tally looks good at 159 yards on 31 carries (5.1), but 69 of those came on two plays. One of them was a 58-yard touchdown by Jerick McKinnon. The other was a 22-yard scramble by Keenum. With Dalvin Cook out for the season, Latavius Murray got the start. And he continued to be unimpressive with 31 yards on 12 carries (2.6).</p>
<p>—PASS DEFENSE A – End Everson Griffen had a strip-sack that gave the Vikings the ball inside the Chicago 15-yard line late in the first half. That led to a field goal and a 3-2 lead. Safety Harrison Smith intercepted a pass in Bears territory in the closing minutes of the game. That handed the Vikings the game-winning field goal with 12 seconds left. Bears rookie QB Mitchell Trubisky completed only 12 of 25 passes for 128 yards in his starting debut.</p>
<p>—RUSH DEFENSE B – Unlike last year at Soldier Field, the Vikings contained the Bears’ running game. <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Jordan-Howard/" type="external">Jordan Howard</a>, who had 153 yards against the Vikings at Soldier Field last year, was held to 76 on 19 carries (4.0). Not great, but considering he had 72 yards in his first two carries a year ago, this was a good game. Shifty little rookie Tarik Cohen was held to only 13 yards on six carries (2.2)</p>
<p>—SPECIAL TEAMS D – Give Kai Forbath some credit for having the calm nerves to nail a 26-yarder to win the game with 12 seconds left. As the Vikings found out with <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Blair-Walsh/" type="external">Blair Walsh</a> in the playoffs two years ago, chip shots like this aren’t always gimmes under pressure. But the special teams made a massive gaffe when it allowed Bears punter Pat O’Donnell to perfectly execute a fake punt that turned into a 38-yard touchdown pass and closed Chicago’s deficit to 10-9. Punter Ryan Quigley also struggled with a 38.8-yard net on six punts.</p>
<p>—COACHING C – Give the Vikings credit for winning at Chicago for only the second time in the last 10 trips. But head coach Mike Zimmer shouldn’t have put Sam Bradford on the field. Bradford couldn’t move, couldn’t buy time, and couldn’t defend himself against Chicago’s pass rushers. It was obvious early on that Bradford’s left knee needed more time to heal. But it wasn’t until the closing minutes of the first half that Zimmer pulled Bradford. The Bears outsmarted and outschemed the Vikings on the 38-yard fake punt for a touchdown. They also were a step behind Chicago on a nifty double-reverse play that enabled Trubisky to take a pitch from the tight end and score a two-point conversion to tie the game at 17 early in the fourth quarter.</p> | false | 1 | eden prairie minn minnesota vikings probably lost sam bradford another week theyre also verge possibly getting teddy bridgewater reservephysically unable perform pup back practice early next week two main storylines 32 vikings team hopes stay hunt case keenum long enough get left knees bradford bridgewater back running sensitive criticism received starting clearly hobbled bradford chicago monday night vikings made head athletic trainer eric sugarman available rare press conference tuesday sugarman said bradford dealing wear tear knee underwent acl reconstruction 2013 2014 said bradford daytoday reevaluated wednesday sugarman refuted notion vikings rushed bradford back soon bradford missed three straight games limited practice last week uncharacteristically inaccurate 5 11 unable move sacked four times including safety vikings pulled right halftime 2017 win think important mention yesterday always page sam play sam play sugarman said question come evaluation basically players exam players function collaborative decision always player vote medical staff vote head coach coaching staff gm together collaboratively decide player able function job think important ive known decade would never put player field thought could protect think thats really important mention sam point obviously aggravated knee monday meanwhile bridgewater eligible begin practicing next monday sugarman said hell evaluated surgeon next week see hes ready return bridgewater sidelined 13 months since dislocating left knee tearing ligaments week 2016 season begins practicing vikings three weeks decide whether add active roster keep pup year head coach mike zimmer said believes bridgewater play season deferred comment sugarman teddy working hard every day sugarman said guys see time side working extremely hard great job thats thing im going say teddy meanwhile vikings feel better ability tread water keenum backup entered sundays game vikings leading 32 near end first half careful ball completing 17 21 passes touchdown turnoverfree effort saw vikings outscore bears 1715 second half well think hes two games showed hes good stuff tape zimmer said keenum 12 starter year definitely gave team jolt relief monday night think team believes comes hes going go play well thats important thing vikings trail packers 41 game heading sundays showdown us bank stadium keenum likely starter notes quotes vikings tight end kyle rudolph many offensive teammates sparked twitter war touchdown celebration monday night rudolphs touchdown teammates took advantage nfls relaxed celebration rules name childrens game pretended play depends whether youre minnesota parts country teammates sat circle rudolph went around touching helmets one popped started chasing country seems would call game duck duck goose thems fightin words minnesota kids taught game called duck duck grey duck thats story arent backing sometimes defensive end everson griffen faster snap ball eye average nfl official comprehend watch ball im really quick see move said mondays 2017 win bears see move im gone griffen perfectly vikings needed late first half offense mustered 29 yards 28 minutes trailed 20 griffen got great jump blew past left tackle charles leno jr got stripsack gave vikings ball chicago 13 led field goal 32 lead everson great reaction time snap ball said left end brian robison lot times officials think hes offsides hes thats quick fast strategy personnel player notes rb stevan ridley signed early last week dalvin cook went injured reserve released monday vikings continue looking running back depth week wr michael floyd suspended first four games violating nfls substance abuse policy activated monday holding penalty negate firstdown catch adam thielen atoned couple plays later nice 19yard sideline grab first rb jerick mckinnon 197 allpurpose yards one best games career 95 yards rushing touchdown 16 carries 51 yards six receptions 51 yards two kickoff returns dalvin cook latavius murray underachieving mckinnon key role rest season barring injury course wr stefon diggs went week 5 nfls leader receiving yards 391 held four yards one catch targeted four times diggs suffered groin injury point game vikings update status wednesday de everson griffen notched sixth sack season came time offense mustered 29 yards 28 minutes griffen stipped ball mitchell trubisky giving vikings ball chicago 13 led field goal 32 halftime lead jayron kearse didnt play groin injury suffered practice last week missed special teams replacement cornerback tramaine brock made several errors including holding penalty punt return lg nick easton suffered calf injury sundays game doesnt appear serious head coach mike zimmer said team update injury report comes wednesday report card vs bears passing offense c sam bradford awful still injured never started game missing three games left knee injury pulled closing minutes first half completing 5 11 passes 36 yards looked totally defenseless four sacks one safety came held ball way long case keenum entered game boost completed 17 21 passes 140 yards touchdown without turnover keenums passes short conservative rushing offense cplus final tally looks good 159 yards 31 carries 51 69 came two plays one 58yard touchdown jerick mckinnon 22yard scramble keenum dalvin cook season latavius murray got start continued unimpressive 31 yards 12 carries 26 pass defense end everson griffen stripsack gave vikings ball inside chicago 15yard line late first half led field goal 32 lead safety harrison smith intercepted pass bears territory closing minutes game handed vikings gamewinning field goal 12 seconds left bears rookie qb mitchell trubisky completed 12 25 passes 128 yards starting debut rush defense b unlike last year soldier field vikings contained bears running game jordan howard 153 yards vikings soldier field last year held 76 19 carries 40 great considering 72 yards first two carries year ago good game shifty little rookie tarik cohen held 13 yards six carries 22 special teams give kai forbath credit calm nerves nail 26yarder win game 12 seconds left vikings found blair walsh playoffs two years ago chip shots like arent always gimmes pressure special teams made massive gaffe allowed bears punter pat odonnell perfectly execute fake punt turned 38yard touchdown pass closed chicagos deficit 109 punter ryan quigley also struggled 388yard net six punts coaching c give vikings credit winning chicago second time last 10 trips head coach mike zimmer shouldnt put sam bradford field bradford couldnt move couldnt buy time couldnt defend chicagos pass rushers obvious early bradfords left knee needed time heal wasnt closing minutes first half zimmer pulled bradford bears outsmarted outschemed vikings 38yard fake punt touchdown also step behind chicago nifty doublereverse play enabled trubisky take pitch tight end score twopoint conversion tie game 17 early fourth quarter | 1,047 |
<p>One of the most consequential provisions of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) is also one of its most obscure.</p>
<p>The “productivity adjustment factor,” inserted by the ACA into the Medicare program, is a massive spending cut, one of the largest in the program’s history. It was included to make room in the federal budget for the ACA’s expensive new health insurance subsidies. &#160;If Congress follows past practice, the ACA’s higher spending will be with us long after savings from the productivity adjustment factor have been reduced or eliminated altogether.</p>
<p>The productivity adjustment factor is one of four ACA “indexing” provisions we examined <a href="http://mercatus.org/sites/default/files/Capretta-Indexing-ACA.pdf" type="external">in a new research paper published by the Mercatus Center at George Mason University</a>. Indexing refers to adjustments that are made to keep tax and program benefit parameters consistent with policy preferences over time. &#160;The most familiar indexing provision in federal law is the Social Security cost-of-living adjustment, or COLA, which prevents purchasing-power erosion of Social Security checks due to inflation.</p>
<p>In Medicare, the federal government makes a COLA-like adjustment to the payments made to hospitals and other facilities. The cost of running a hospital is measured by examining a “market basket” of goods and services typically purchased by inpatient facilities. The prices of items in the basket are tracked, creating an index used to maintain the inflation-adjusted value of Medicare’s payments for seniors’ hospital stays.</p>
<p>Since 1983, when Congress established this prospective payment system for hospitals, Capitol Hill has frequently made ad hoc adjustments to the increase that otherwise would have applied to hospital payments. &#160;For instance, in 1990, as part of a large budget-cutting effort, Congress reduced the market basket increase for fiscal year 1991 by 2.0 percentage points for hospitals located in urban areas and 0.7 percentage points for facilities located in rural communities.</p>
<p>The new ACA productivity adjustment factor is different from previous adjustments because it isn’t ad hoc (the formula for making the cut is written into the law) and it isn’t temporary (it will occur automatically every year). Under this provision, the annual updates to hospital and other facility payments will be reduced by a measure of economy-wide productivity increases — thus it’s a productivity adjustment factor. The government actuaries who produce Medicare cost projections estimate that this factor will reduce the market basket index by, on average, 1.1 percentage points annually, dropping the average increase from 3.5 percent to 2.4 percent.</p>
<p>The budgetary savings from this cut in payments are substantial — at least on paper. The Congressional Budget Office has estimated it would reduce Medicare spending by $196 billion over 10 years — making it the largest single spending reduction included in the ACA.</p>
<p>But it is over the long run that the purported cost reductions are truly staggering because the annual cut compounds each year. Medicare’s actuaries have compared these cuts to a scenario in which hospital and other facility payment updates more closely track historical rates. That comparison shows the productivity adjustment factor reduces Medicare spending by about $4.0 trillion over seventy-five years, measured in present value terms.</p>
<p>The actuaries are skeptical that the full cuts from the productivity adjustment factor can be sustained. They estimate that by 2040, half of all hospitals, 70 percent of skilled nursing facilities, and 90 percent of home health agencies would be losing money each year because of the deep cuts in their Medicare reimbursement rates. &#160;This would leave Medicare beneficiaries facing substantial barriers to accessing needed care. As the actuaries put it, “in practice, providers could not sustain continuing negative margins and, absent legislative changes, may have to withdraw from providing services to Medicare beneficiaries” or take actions to shift the cost of Medicare patients to other payers.</p>
<p>It’s ironic that Congress enacted the productivity adjustment factor in 2010 because, even then, it was clear that a similar effort to cut Medicare payments to physicians was not working. The so-called “sustainable growth rate,” or SGR, was enacted in 1997 and imposed a cap on total physician fees that was indexed to GDP growth. As health expenses outpaced economic growth, the gap between the amount of spending allowed by the cap and what was necessary to take care of patients grew wider every year. With formula-driven cuts exceeding 20 percent, the SGR became impractical to enforce. It was abandoned altogether earlier this year.</p>
<p>Formulaic cuts are attractive to legislators because they create the illusion of improved solvency in Medicare. The productivity adjustment factor is a blunt instrument that simply lowers what Medicare will pay for services, by trillions of dollars. But if the solution were that easy, it would have been done long ago. The truth is that Medicare is only valuable to the program’s beneficiaries if hospitals and physicians are willing to take Medicare patients. &#160;There’s nothing to stop providers of medical care from catering to patients covered by private insurance and avoiding those on Medicare and Medicaid when the government payments fall too low.</p>
<p>The ACA’s defenders say the law will reduce future federal budget deficits. But that will only be true if Congress sticks with the productivity adjustment factor even when beneficiaries complain of restricted access to care. Based on prior history, that’s an unlikely scenario, to say the least.</p>
<p>Mr. Capretta is a <a href="" type="internal">senior fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center</a>, a Visiting Fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, and an affiliated scholar at the Mercatus Center at George Mason University. Dr. Antos is <a href="https://www.aei.org/scholar/joseph-antos/" type="external">the Wilson H. Taylor Scholar in Health Care and Retirement Policy at the American Enterprise Institute</a>. They are the authors of <a href="http://mercatus.org/publication/indexing-affordable-care-act-impact-federal-budget" type="external">“Indexing in the Affordable Care Act: The Impact on the Federal Budget,”</a> published this month by the Mercatus Center.</p> | false | 1 | one consequential provisions affordable care act aca also one obscure productivity adjustment factor inserted aca medicare program massive spending cut one largest programs history included make room federal budget acas expensive new health insurance subsidies 160if congress follows past practice acas higher spending us long savings productivity adjustment factor reduced eliminated altogether productivity adjustment factor one four aca indexing provisions examined new research paper published mercatus center george mason university indexing refers adjustments made keep tax program benefit parameters consistent policy preferences time 160the familiar indexing provision federal law social security costofliving adjustment cola prevents purchasingpower erosion social security checks due inflation medicare federal government makes colalike adjustment payments made hospitals facilities cost running hospital measured examining market basket goods services typically purchased inpatient facilities prices items basket tracked creating index used maintain inflationadjusted value medicares payments seniors hospital stays since 1983 congress established prospective payment system hospitals capitol hill frequently made ad hoc adjustments increase otherwise would applied hospital payments 160for instance 1990 part large budgetcutting effort congress reduced market basket increase fiscal year 1991 20 percentage points hospitals located urban areas 07 percentage points facilities located rural communities new aca productivity adjustment factor different previous adjustments isnt ad hoc formula making cut written law isnt temporary occur automatically every year provision annual updates hospital facility payments reduced measure economywide productivity increases thus productivity adjustment factor government actuaries produce medicare cost projections estimate factor reduce market basket index average 11 percentage points annually dropping average increase 35 percent 24 percent budgetary savings cut payments substantial least paper congressional budget office estimated would reduce medicare spending 196 billion 10 years making largest single spending reduction included aca long run purported cost reductions truly staggering annual cut compounds year medicares actuaries compared cuts scenario hospital facility payment updates closely track historical rates comparison shows productivity adjustment factor reduces medicare spending 40 trillion seventyfive years measured present value terms actuaries skeptical full cuts productivity adjustment factor sustained estimate 2040 half hospitals 70 percent skilled nursing facilities 90 percent home health agencies would losing money year deep cuts medicare reimbursement rates 160this would leave medicare beneficiaries facing substantial barriers accessing needed care actuaries put practice providers could sustain continuing negative margins absent legislative changes may withdraw providing services medicare beneficiaries take actions shift cost medicare patients payers ironic congress enacted productivity adjustment factor 2010 even clear similar effort cut medicare payments physicians working socalled sustainable growth rate sgr enacted 1997 imposed cap total physician fees indexed gdp growth health expenses outpaced economic growth gap amount spending allowed cap necessary take care patients grew wider every year formuladriven cuts exceeding 20 percent sgr became impractical enforce abandoned altogether earlier year formulaic cuts attractive legislators create illusion improved solvency medicare productivity adjustment factor blunt instrument simply lowers medicare pay services trillions dollars solution easy would done long ago truth medicare valuable programs beneficiaries hospitals physicians willing take medicare patients 160theres nothing stop providers medical care catering patients covered private insurance avoiding medicare medicaid government payments fall low acas defenders say law reduce future federal budget deficits true congress sticks productivity adjustment factor even beneficiaries complain restricted access care based prior history thats unlikely scenario say least mr capretta senior fellow ethics public policy center visiting fellow american enterprise institute affiliated scholar mercatus center george mason university dr antos wilson h taylor scholar health care retirement policy american enterprise institute authors indexing affordable care act impact federal budget published month mercatus center | 576 |
<p />
<p>Parliamentary elections in post-Soviet Georgia on October 1, 2012 dramatically changed the political landscape of the country. Yet, because of numerous constraints ingrained into the country’s geopolitical positioning and political culture, Georgia is set to remain remarkably constant in its foreign policy orientation, Western alignment.</p>
<p>A loose coalition led by Bidzina Ivanishvili, the billionaire-cum-politician, issued a resounding defeat over Saakashvili’s party in the parliamentary elections in post-Soviet Georgia on October 1. Even more astounding is that the incumbent President of Georgia, Mikheil Saakashvili, promptly conceded defeat.</p>
<p>The question on everyone’s tongue is whether and, if so, how the new coalition will revise the radical reforms and pro-Western policies of the last eight years. Many expect Ivanishvili’s coalition to warm up to Russia. Just as in the Ukraine, where Moscow has managed to water-down the Orange Revolution, and to restore pro-Moscow candidates to power in 2006, some fear that Georgia is on the brink of the same democratic counter-revolution that would push the country back into Moscow’s bosom, and away from the West.</p>
<p>To understand why there’s little to fear, it’s helpful to go back before Marx to Hegel. In his Phenomenology of Spirit, Hegel tells a story of how the Master, by virtue of his dependence on the Slave for recognition as the Master, ultimately becomes the Slave. &#160;This dialectic is a story that the leadership of Russia and Georgia, along with all those who care about the fate of this part of the world, should re-read more closely. Although clearly the regional heavyweight, most observers have failed to notice that Russia depends on small Georgia—in this dialectic sense—to recognize Russia as the regional hegemon. In the 1990s, when Georgia was essentially a failed state, Russia was never fully able to control it. It is much less likely for Georgia to come under Russia’s thumb now, when the country has introduced robust institutions and political order. Saakashvili’s quick electoral concession only underscores this new reality.</p>
<p>Who should fear whom?</p>
<p>The peaceful transition of political power in Georgia on October 1 has been hailed as a remarkable achievement. This extraordinary domestic event has equally important international and regional ramifications. First is the example this sets for neighboring Armenia and Azerbaijan, which are considerably behind Georgia in terms of their democratic evolution. Then there is Russia to the north, where Vladimir Putin appears to have embarked on a lifelong presidential term. Over time, Russia has become so invested into Georgian affairs that it cannot simply ignore developments in the neighboring country. Despite the Russian government’s dismissive approach to Georgian reforms, the Russian public still receives large amounts of information about Georgia, and watches its democratization with curiosity and some degree of envy.</p>
<p>To maintain its position as the Master in the relationship with Georgia, the Russian government needs to cast Ivanishvili’s victory as the Kremlin’s victory—the installation of a new, quasi-pro-Russian regime in Georgia. The elections in Georgia have shown that, in fact, the Kremlin may have more to fear from Georgia’s example, which could spread south and north, than Georgia may have to fear from the spread of Russia’s example, which is increasingly seen as a reactionary and outdated model of political and social order in Georgia.</p>
<p>Since the Georgian billionaire Bidzina Ivanishvili made his fortune in Russia in the 1990s, many have opined that Ivanishvili will be inclined to establish cozier relations with Russia that would undermine Georgia’s sovereignty. This sort of forecasting is chock full of dubious assumptions and fails to account for important constraints that the new Georgian leader will face. First, the winning coalition is made up by several parties that were united by little apart from their aversion for Mikheil Saakashvili’s regime. Second, even though Saakashvili’s second presidential term ends in January 2013, he is free to stay in office until the end of next year, due to the recent constitutional changes. While the Georgian president stays in power for another year, if he so chooses, the loose coalition might begin to crumble, or at least to start fraying at the edges.</p>
<p>Second, we should not assume Ivanishvili’s dependence on Russia to be greater than Eduard Shevardnadze’s dependence on Russia. An old school Soviet Communist party functionary, Shevardnadze nonetheless managed to steer Georgia clear of getting completely consumed by its political heavyweight neighbor, Russia, from 1995 to 2003. Even when the former Soviet Foreign Minister was in charge of Georgia, Shevardnadze’s relations with Russia were never rosy. In fact, Moscow unilaterally imposed a visa regime on Georgia in 2000 in an apparent attempt to strangle the country into greater submission. Instead, the enforced separation of Georgia from Russia “practically created the Georgian state,” in the words of one Georgian journalist, by cutting the umbilical cord that connected it to the imperial center.</p>
<p>Moscow’s wish-list for the new regime in Georgia is ambitious: “[N]o NATO whatsoever, no foreign bases, forget entirely supporting any separatist movements in the [Russian] North Caucasus; overall—abstain from helping the West to increase its influence in the region, including [implementation of] large economic projects” according to Nezavisimaya Gazeta, an influential Russian paper. Russia’s demands have remained remarkably unchanged for the past two decades, and yet none of the Georgian governments has ever fully complied with them.</p>
<p>Existential tension lines</p>
<p>The core of the problem is that Georgia’s existence as an independent (and, even worse, democratic) state on Russia’s rim is viewed as inherently dangerous in Russia. The more affluent and viable Georgia’s democracy, the more it will provide an enviable and infectious example to the volatile and multiethnic North Caucasus. It is understandable that such contagion is harmful to Russia’s regional ambitions. Yet if this unstable region, which is currently leaning toward Islamic radicalism, will instead follow the path implied by Georgia’s example, the region is likely to be considerably more peaceful, prosperous and safe, much to everybody’s interests. Moscow certainly has a few bargaining chips up in its sleeve to stymie Georgia’s influence and some incentives to influence Georgia’s new government. One is the vast Russian market for Georgian goods, especially Georgian wine, which is recognizable and prized in Russia and from which Georgia could profit.</p>
<p>But the most intensive political bargaining still awaits the two sides on the future of Abkhazia and South Ossetia, two breakaway territories that Georgia considers “occupied” and Russia has recognized as “independent”. Scarcely had the election results become known when the Georgian Dream coalition announced that it was changing the approach to Abkhazia and South Ossetia to all-encompassing and catchy slogan—“Anything except recognition of independence.” While the details of the new Georgian policy toward the breakaway territories are still being hammered out, Ivanishvili’s aide and former Georgian government official, Georgy Volsky, stated that “anything” included a few important concessions. Tbilisi is set to engage in direct talks with the de-facto governments of Abkhazia and South Ossetia. Previously, these governments were denounced as mere puppets of Moscow that Tbilisi could not afford to legitimize by the virtue of negotiating with them. The new Georgian leaders are also prepared to sign a non-aggression pact with the separatist leaders, something that Tbilisi had previously ruled out. All non-profits would be allowed to operate freely in Abkhazia and South Ossetia from their headquarters in the territory of Georgia proper. The governments-in-exile from the breakaway territories, which have long been treated as legitimate in Tbilisi, will be removed from bilateral negotiations.</p>
<p>Moscow has not yet signaled its willingness to bargain over the status of Abkhazia and South Ossetia. In fact, on October 9, Russian Foreign Ministry Sergei Lavrov ruled out negotiations over the future of the Georgian breakaway territories since “the fate of these republics has been decided by their people.” However, Russia might well return to the negotiations if it feels the incoming Georgian government is drifting toward Russia and needs some stimuli. The view that Russia was the sole guarantor of Georgia’s territorial integrity and Georgia could incorporate Abkhazia and South Ossetia only when it was part of Russia itself has been very widespread among Russian observers. Russia may potentially push the two territories back into Georgia even against their will, thus in effect revoking its recognition, but apart from damage to its reputation, there is the very real risk that Georgia’s government will change again in near future and then Russia may lose out. So the only workable solution for Moscow would be a return to the pre-August 2008 situation—when the status of Abkhazia and South Ossetia was suspended and the two territories were best described as areas of “no war, no peace”. This situation would serve Russia’s interests, but not Georgia’s, because it would make this small country dependent on Russia’s whims again with no clear prospects of ever actually regaining control over the breakaway territories, but with some prospects of going to war with Russia in the future. In any case, the breakaway territories’ puzzle will keep Georgia and Russia engaged in rivalry. At this moment, the equation is very straightforward—either Georgia stays independent and has no access to Abkhazia and South Ossetia, or Georgia repossesses these two territories, but loses its own independence.</p>
<p>People Power</p>
<p>The return of multiparty competition to the Georgian parliament, which has been dominated by one party for a long time, is a positive sign—not only for Georgia and its people, but also for foreign audiences. In the highly asymmetric relationship of Georgia and Russia, the restoration of power to the people to elect the government they want is a mighty tool. This does not mean that Georgia will not need Western support and, conceivably expertise, anymore. Rather, respect for participatory democracy and abiding by the rule of law will strengthen the country beyond any harm that the incoming future authorities of Georgia might inflict on the country’s future.</p>
<p>Despite the perturbations in Georgia’s leadership over the past twenty years, which includes two civil wars, a coup d’etat, and a revolution, Georgia’s trajectory has been remarkably stable. &#160;The country’s new leadership and elections are important because they underline the consolidation of democratic rule in Georgia, and less because they represent a dramatic reorientation of the country’s public opinion, domestic development strategy or Western-oriented foreign policy.</p> | false | 1 | parliamentary elections postsoviet georgia october 1 2012 dramatically changed political landscape country yet numerous constraints ingrained countrys geopolitical positioning political culture georgia set remain remarkably constant foreign policy orientation western alignment loose coalition led bidzina ivanishvili billionairecumpolitician issued resounding defeat saakashvilis party parliamentary elections postsoviet georgia october 1 even astounding incumbent president georgia mikheil saakashvili promptly conceded defeat question everyones tongue whether new coalition revise radical reforms prowestern policies last eight years many expect ivanishvilis coalition warm russia ukraine moscow managed waterdown orange revolution restore promoscow candidates power 2006 fear georgia brink democratic counterrevolution would push country back moscows bosom away west understand theres little fear helpful go back marx hegel phenomenology spirit hegel tells story master virtue dependence slave recognition master ultimately becomes slave 160this dialectic story leadership russia georgia along care fate part world reread closely although clearly regional heavyweight observers failed notice russia depends small georgiain dialectic senseto recognize russia regional hegemon 1990s georgia essentially failed state russia never fully able control much less likely georgia come russias thumb country introduced robust institutions political order saakashvilis quick electoral concession underscores new reality fear peaceful transition political power georgia october 1 hailed remarkable achievement extraordinary domestic event equally important international regional ramifications first example sets neighboring armenia azerbaijan considerably behind georgia terms democratic evolution russia north vladimir putin appears embarked lifelong presidential term time russia become invested georgian affairs simply ignore developments neighboring country despite russian governments dismissive approach georgian reforms russian public still receives large amounts information georgia watches democratization curiosity degree envy maintain position master relationship georgia russian government needs cast ivanishvilis victory kremlins victorythe installation new quasiprorussian regime georgia elections georgia shown fact kremlin may fear georgias example could spread south north georgia may fear spread russias example increasingly seen reactionary outdated model political social order georgia since georgian billionaire bidzina ivanishvili made fortune russia 1990s many opined ivanishvili inclined establish cozier relations russia would undermine georgias sovereignty sort forecasting chock full dubious assumptions fails account important constraints new georgian leader face first winning coalition made several parties united little apart aversion mikheil saakashvilis regime second even though saakashvilis second presidential term ends january 2013 free stay office end next year due recent constitutional changes georgian president stays power another year chooses loose coalition might begin crumble least start fraying edges second assume ivanishvilis dependence russia greater eduard shevardnadzes dependence russia old school soviet communist party functionary shevardnadze nonetheless managed steer georgia clear getting completely consumed political heavyweight neighbor russia 1995 2003 even former soviet foreign minister charge georgia shevardnadzes relations russia never rosy fact moscow unilaterally imposed visa regime georgia 2000 apparent attempt strangle country greater submission instead enforced separation georgia russia practically created georgian state words one georgian journalist cutting umbilical cord connected imperial center moscows wishlist new regime georgia ambitious nato whatsoever foreign bases forget entirely supporting separatist movements russian north caucasus overallabstain helping west increase influence region including implementation large economic projects according nezavisimaya gazeta influential russian paper russias demands remained remarkably unchanged past two decades yet none georgian governments ever fully complied existential tension lines core problem georgias existence independent even worse democratic state russias rim viewed inherently dangerous russia affluent viable georgias democracy provide enviable infectious example volatile multiethnic north caucasus understandable contagion harmful russias regional ambitions yet unstable region currently leaning toward islamic radicalism instead follow path implied georgias example region likely considerably peaceful prosperous safe much everybodys interests moscow certainly bargaining chips sleeve stymie georgias influence incentives influence georgias new government one vast russian market georgian goods especially georgian wine recognizable prized russia georgia could profit intensive political bargaining still awaits two sides future abkhazia south ossetia two breakaway territories georgia considers occupied russia recognized independent scarcely election results become known georgian dream coalition announced changing approach abkhazia south ossetia allencompassing catchy slogananything except recognition independence details new georgian policy toward breakaway territories still hammered ivanishvilis aide former georgian government official georgy volsky stated anything included important concessions tbilisi set engage direct talks defacto governments abkhazia south ossetia previously governments denounced mere puppets moscow tbilisi could afford legitimize virtue negotiating new georgian leaders also prepared sign nonaggression pact separatist leaders something tbilisi previously ruled nonprofits would allowed operate freely abkhazia south ossetia headquarters territory georgia proper governmentsinexile breakaway territories long treated legitimate tbilisi removed bilateral negotiations moscow yet signaled willingness bargain status abkhazia south ossetia fact october 9 russian foreign ministry sergei lavrov ruled negotiations future georgian breakaway territories since fate republics decided people however russia might well return negotiations feels incoming georgian government drifting toward russia needs stimuli view russia sole guarantor georgias territorial integrity georgia could incorporate abkhazia south ossetia part russia widespread among russian observers russia may potentially push two territories back georgia even thus effect revoking recognition apart damage reputation real risk georgias government change near future russia may lose workable solution moscow would return preaugust 2008 situationwhen status abkhazia south ossetia suspended two territories best described areas war peace situation would serve russias interests georgias would make small country dependent russias whims clear prospects ever actually regaining control breakaway territories prospects going war russia future case breakaway territories puzzle keep georgia russia engaged rivalry moment equation straightforwardeither georgia stays independent access abkhazia south ossetia georgia repossesses two territories loses independence people power return multiparty competition georgian parliament dominated one party long time positive signnot georgia people also foreign audiences highly asymmetric relationship georgia russia restoration power people elect government want mighty tool mean georgia need western support conceivably expertise anymore rather respect participatory democracy abiding rule law strengthen country beyond harm incoming future authorities georgia might inflict countrys future despite perturbations georgias leadership past twenty years includes two civil wars coup detat revolution georgias trajectory remarkably stable 160the countrys new leadership elections important underline consolidation democratic rule georgia less represent dramatic reorientation countrys public opinion domestic development strategy westernoriented foreign policy | 979 |
<p>The debate about whether the United States ought to accept at least 10,000 Syrian refugees, as President Obama has proposed, is typical of many issues in public life in which there are legitimate arguments on both sides. As a result, they need to be carefully weighed and balanced. (Most of the time we speak as though all the arguments are on one side and none on the other, but that is often a distortion of reality.)</p>
<p>On the one hand are those who argue that in the light of the rise of the Islamic State and the massacre in Paris, it’s irresponsible to accept Syrian refugees since we know jihadists are determined to infiltrate refugee flows to enter the West and may have already have done so in Europe. In addition, there are significant challenges in screening Syrian refugees. Our human sources in Syria are minimal.</p>
<p>According to FBI Director James Comey, “We can query our databases until the cows come home, but nothing will show up because we have no record of that person…You can only query what you have collected.” National Counterterrorism Center Director Nicholas Rasmussen admitted, “the intelligence picture we’ve had of this (Syrian) conflict zone isn’t what we’d like it to be… you can only review (data) against what you have.” In addition, officials overseas have told staff of the House Homeland Security Committee they have seen signs that Islamist radicals are actively working to recruit from the arriving pools of refugees and asylum seekers.</p>
<p>On the flip side, the civil war in Syria has created one of the worst refugee crises since World War II. The violence has cost the lives of roughly a quarter of a million Syrians, displaced over half the population, and produced widespread atrocities and crimes against humanity. The United States has a proud history of refugee resettlement, and to admit no Syrians in the face of this humanitarian catastrophe, which we have done nothing to prevent, is wrong.</p>
<p>As for the specific counterarguments to those who oppose accepting Syrian refugees, the response is several-fold. First, no population entering the United States is more carefully examined than refugees; second, the process is a lengthy one (it usually takes 18-24 months before a refugee is approved for admission to the U.S.); third, the threat posed by refugees is minuscule (homegrown terrorism is a much more significant problem); fourth, the overwhelming number of Syrian refugees referred to the United States by the U.N. — 67 percent – have been women or children under age 12; and fifth, there are far easier and faster ways for foreigners to legally enter America than through a refugee program, such as the visa waiver program.</p>
<p>The Cato Institute’s Alex Nowrasteh puts things this way:</p>
<p>In 2015, the United States has accepted only 1,682 Syrian refugees, or 0.042 percent of the 4,045,650 registered Syrian refugees. Only one out of every 2,405 Syrian refugees in a camp was resettled in the United States in 2015.</p>
<p>Few ISIS soldiers or other terrorists are going to spend at least three years in a refugee camp for a 0.042 percent chance of entering the United States when almost any other option to do so is easier, cheaper, and quicker. [If the United States still takes in 10,000 Syrian refugees in 2016, and the number of refugees rises to 4.5 million, a mere 0.22 percent of them–one out of every 450–will be resettled in the United States.]</p>
<p>Mr. Nowrasteh adds, “Of the 859,629 refugees admitted from 2001 onwards, only three have been convicted of planning terrorist attacks on targets outside of the United States, and none was successfully carried out…. The terrorist threat from Syrian refugees in the United States is hyperbolically over-exaggerated, and we have very little to fear from them because the refugee vetting system is so thorough.”</p>
<p>What about public opinion? In a Bloomberg Politics national poll, 53 percent of those surveyed say the nation should not continue a program to resettle up to 10,000 Syrian refugees. Just 28 percent would keep the program with the screening process as it now exists.</p>
<p>If it were up to me, I would accept Syrian refugees. That’s where the arguments, fully considered, lead me. But given legitimate concerns about the vetting process, how badly President Obama has handled this issue (flippantly dismissing those concerns, mocking those who see things differently than he does, refusing to negotiate) and how wary the public is about accepting Syrian refugees, the plan put forward by Speaker of the House Paul Ryan is prudent and sensible.</p>
<p>In contrast to the petulant and self-righteous President Obama and the xenophobic and demagogic Donald Trump — who says he would send home all the Syrian refugees now in the United States, allow no more to enter, declared he “absolutely” wants a database of Muslims in America, and perpetuated the lie that “thousands and thousands” of Arab-Americans in Jersey City were cheering as the World Trade Centers crumbled on 9/11– Ryan has been a voice of calm reason. He’s called for a pause rather than a complete end to the Syrian refugee program, refused to distinguish between Christian and Muslim refugees, and still made the moral case for accepting refugees if security can be assured or, if necessary, improvements in the program are made. As a result, 47 Democrats helped Republicans pass the legislation with enough support to override a threatened presidential veto. Even Democrats concede the president mishandled this whole affair with his serrated rhetoric.</p>
<p>Of course, even if we were to accept 10,000 refugees, it would be a fraction of the total number (more than 4 million). And while Bashar al-Assad is responsible for the brutal civil war in Syria, it’s also true that President Obama, until the last few weeks, has been almost proudly indifferent in his response to it, signaling time and again that he felt like the United States had no role to play in the conflict. For Mr. Obama to now portray himself as a Voice of Conscience, to engage in moral preening, is farcical but perfectly predictable. It’s exactly what we have come to expect from America’s 44th president.</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 | debate whether united states ought accept least 10000 syrian refugees president obama proposed typical many issues public life legitimate arguments sides result need carefully weighed balanced time speak though arguments one side none often distortion reality one hand argue light rise islamic state massacre paris irresponsible accept syrian refugees since know jihadists determined infiltrate refugee flows enter west may already done europe addition significant challenges screening syrian refugees human sources syria minimal according fbi director james comey query databases cows come home nothing show record personyou query collected national counterterrorism center director nicholas rasmussen admitted intelligence picture weve syrian conflict zone isnt wed like review data addition officials overseas told staff house homeland security committee seen signs islamist radicals actively working recruit arriving pools refugees asylum seekers flip side civil war syria created one worst refugee crises since world war ii violence cost lives roughly quarter million syrians displaced half population produced widespread atrocities crimes humanity united states proud history refugee resettlement admit syrians face humanitarian catastrophe done nothing prevent wrong specific counterarguments oppose accepting syrian refugees response severalfold first population entering united states carefully examined refugees second process lengthy one usually takes 1824 months refugee approved admission us third threat posed refugees minuscule homegrown terrorism much significant problem fourth overwhelming number syrian refugees referred united states un 67 percent women children age 12 fifth far easier faster ways foreigners legally enter america refugee program visa waiver program cato institutes alex nowrasteh puts things way 2015 united states accepted 1682 syrian refugees 0042 percent 4045650 registered syrian refugees one every 2405 syrian refugees camp resettled united states 2015 isis soldiers terrorists going spend least three years refugee camp 0042 percent chance entering united states almost option easier cheaper quicker united states still takes 10000 syrian refugees 2016 number refugees rises 45 million mere 022 percent themone every 450will resettled united states mr nowrasteh adds 859629 refugees admitted 2001 onwards three convicted planning terrorist attacks targets outside united states none successfully carried terrorist threat syrian refugees united states hyperbolically overexaggerated little fear refugee vetting system thorough public opinion bloomberg politics national poll 53 percent surveyed say nation continue program resettle 10000 syrian refugees 28 percent would keep program screening process exists would accept syrian refugees thats arguments fully considered lead given legitimate concerns vetting process badly president obama handled issue flippantly dismissing concerns mocking see things differently refusing negotiate wary public accepting syrian refugees plan put forward speaker house paul ryan prudent sensible contrast petulant selfrighteous president obama xenophobic demagogic donald trump says would send home syrian refugees united states allow enter declared absolutely wants database muslims america perpetuated lie thousands thousands arabamericans jersey city cheering world trade centers crumbled 911 ryan voice calm reason hes called pause rather complete end syrian refugee program refused distinguish christian muslim refugees still made moral case accepting refugees security assured necessary improvements program made result 47 democrats helped republicans pass legislation enough support override threatened presidential veto even democrats concede president mishandled whole affair serrated rhetoric course even accept 10000 refugees would fraction total number 4 million bashar alassad responsible brutal civil war syria also true president obama last weeks almost proudly indifferent response signaling time felt like united states role play conflict mr obama portray voice conscience engage moral preening farcical perfectly predictable exactly come expect americas 44th president peter wehner senior fellow ethics public policy center contributing opinion writer new york times | 570 |
<p>OAKLAND RAIDERS (6-6) AT KANSAS CITY CHIEFS (6-6)</p>
<p>GAME SNAPSHOT</p>
<p>KICKOFF: Sunday, 1 p.m. ET, Arrowhead Stadium. TV: CBS, <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Kevin-Harlan/" type="external">Kevin Harlan</a>, <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Rich-Gannon/" type="external">Rich Gannon</a>.</p>
<p>SERIES HISTORY: 115th regular-season meeting. Chiefs lead series, 60-52-2. The Raiders won the first meeting this year, 31-30, on a 2-yard pass from <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Derek-Carr/" type="external">Derek Carr</a> to <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Michael_Crabtree/" type="external">Michael Crabtree</a> on an untimed down following a Chiefs penalty. It snapped a run of five straight wins by Kansas City. The Chiefs still own a four-game winning streak at home against the Raiders, with a 7-2 record overall against Oakland under coach <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Andy_Reid/" type="external">Andy Reid</a>.</p>
<p>KEYS TO THE GAME: The Raiders have gotten to the point where they hope to accomplish the goal they had at the outset: Let their offensive and defensive fronts dominate.</p>
<p>On offense, that means a lot of <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Marshawn_Lynch/" type="external">Marshawn Lynch</a> and some play-action from Derek Carr.</p>
<p>On defense, that means letting <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Khalil-Mack/" type="external">Khalil Mack</a> and Bruce Irvin loose as outside rushers and counting on Denico Autry to provide an inside presence and help keep the Chiefs from moving forward consistently. It’s not complicated, but it’s the way coach <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Jack_Del_Rio/" type="external">Jack Del Rio</a> prefers it.</p>
<p>Kansas City ranks 30th against the run but hasn’t allowed a 100-yard rusher since Week 6 against Pittsburgh’s <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/LeVeon-Bell/" type="external">Le’Veon Bell</a>, so the Raiders might find it tougher going than the overall numbers indicate.</p>
<p>The Chiefs’ defense typically plays Carr tough, too; but, given the fireworks from both teams in Week 7, betting on another shootout looks safe.</p>
<p>Chiefs quarterback <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Alex_Smith/" type="external">Alex Smith</a> needs to pick up where he left off last week, when he threw for 366 yards and four TDs, hopefully with increased contributions from struggling running back Kareem Hunt.</p>
<p>Stopping the Raiders on third down could be all the help the offense needs to emerge on the winning side of another thriller.</p>
<p>MATCHUPS TO WATCH:</p>
<p>–Raiders RT <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Marshall-Newhouse/" type="external">Marshall Newhouse</a> vs. Chiefs OLB <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Justin-Houston/" type="external">Justin Houston</a>. Newhouse has done an adequate job when healthy on the right side of the Raiders’ multi-million-dollar offensive line. It so happens that his spot — the lowest-paid one — could be within the sights of Houston, who leads the Chiefs with 9.5 sacks and remains their best pass rusher. Newhouse can expect help from blocking tight end <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Lee_Smith/" type="external">Lee Smith</a> and fullback Jamize Olawale.</p>
<p>–Chiefs WR <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Tyreek-Hill/" type="external">Tyreek Hill</a> vs. Raiders CB <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Sean_Smith/" type="external">Sean Smith</a>. Oh, how the Raiders and defensive coordinator John Pagano will attempt to avoid this matchup. Almost as much as Andy Reid and the Chiefs will hope to manipulate it and exploit it. Hill is one of the NFL’s big-play freaks, a scare tactic on every down who can wreck a game if let loose even twice per game, provided Alex Smith can locate him. Sean Smith has been solid recently, but his top-down coverage in terms of letting receivers get by has been suspect since he joined the Raiders.</p>
<p>FRIDAY INJURY REPORTS</p>
<p>OAKLAND RAIDERS</p>
<p>–Out: G Jon Feliciano (concussion)</p>
<p>–Doubtful: LB Cory James (knee), DE Jihad Ward (foot)</p>
<p>–Questionable: CB <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/David-Amerson/" type="external">David Amerson</a> (foot), DE Denico Autry (hand), WR <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Amari-Cooper/" type="external">Amari Cooper</a> (ankle), RB Jamize Olawale (ankle), WR Cordarrelle Patterson (hip)</p>
<p>FRIDAY INJURY REPORTS</p>
<p>–Out: C Mitch Morse (foot), S Eric Murray (ankle)</p>
<p>–Questionable: LB <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Tamba-Hali/" type="external">Tamba Hali</a> (knee)</p>
<p>PLAYER SPOTLIGHT: Chiefs WR Demarcus Robinson. The second-year wideout delivered a breakout game against Oakland in Week 7, hauling in five catches for 69 yards. Robinson first stepped into the starting lineup following a season-ending injury to Chris Conley in Week 5. Since his big game vs. the Raiders, however, Robinson has posted just eight catches for 71 yards in five games. The Chiefs need a stronger presence from Robinson to ease the burden on wide receiver Tyreek Hill and Travis Kelce, who combined for 10 receptions for 279 yards and four touchdowns against the <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/New-York-Jets/" type="external">New York Jets</a> last week.</p>
<p>FAST FACTS: In the last meeting, Oakland QB Derek Carr threw for 417 yards and three TDs. … RB Marshawn Lynch rushed for 101 yards in Week 13 — his first 100-yard game of the season. In three career games at KC, he has 323 scrimmage yards and one rushing TD. … WR Michael Crabtree has scored in three of the past five games vs. Kansas City. … WR Amari Cooper had a career-high 210 receiving yards and two TDs in the last meeting. He has at least 10 catches and 100 yards in two of the past three vs. KC. … DE Khalil Mack leads Oakland with 7.5 sacks, including a sack in three straight. He has 3.5 sacks in his past four vs. the division. … LB Bruce Irvin has three sacks and two forced fumbles in past his past two games. … Kansas City QB Alex Smith ranks second in the NFL with a 107.2 rating. He threw for 366 yards and four TDs (one for 79 yards) and also recorded a career-high 70-yard run in Week 13. He is the only player in the Super Bowl era with a 70-yard pass and 70-yard run in the same game. … RB Kareem Hunt had 117 scrimmage yards in the last game vs. Oakland. He ranks third in the NFL with 1,297 scrimmage yards, but he hasn’t hit 100 in any of the last five games. … WR Tyreek Hill tallied a career-high 185 receiving yards and scored twice in Week 13. His six 30-yard TD catches are the most in the NFL. He returned a punt 78 yards for a TD and caught a TD pass in the last home meeting. … TE Travis Kelce leads all NFL tight ends in receptions (66) and yards (871). He is one of four NFL players with 60 catches and 850 yards in each of the past four seasons. … LB Justin Houston has 10 sacks in his past six home games vs. the division.</p>
<p>PREDICTION: These teams are going in opposite directions — the Chiefs with six losses in seven games and the Raiders with four wins in their past six. Lynch will outrun Hunt for the season sweep.</p>
<p>OUR PICK: Raiders, 24-20.</p>
<p>— <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Chris-Cluff/" type="external">Chris Cluff</a></p> | false | 1 | oakland raiders 66 kansas city chiefs 66 game snapshot kickoff sunday 1 pm et arrowhead stadium tv cbs kevin harlan rich gannon series history 115th regularseason meeting chiefs lead series 60522 raiders first meeting year 3130 2yard pass derek carr michael crabtree untimed following chiefs penalty snapped run five straight wins kansas city chiefs still fourgame winning streak home raiders 72 record overall oakland coach andy reid keys game raiders gotten point hope accomplish goal outset let offensive defensive fronts dominate offense means lot marshawn lynch playaction derek carr defense means letting khalil mack bruce irvin loose outside rushers counting denico autry provide inside presence help keep chiefs moving forward consistently complicated way coach jack del rio prefers kansas city ranks 30th run hasnt allowed 100yard rusher since week 6 pittsburghs leveon bell raiders might find tougher going overall numbers indicate chiefs defense typically plays carr tough given fireworks teams week 7 betting another shootout looks safe chiefs quarterback alex smith needs pick left last week threw 366 yards four tds hopefully increased contributions struggling running back kareem hunt stopping raiders third could help offense needs emerge winning side another thriller matchups watch raiders rt marshall newhouse vs chiefs olb justin houston newhouse done adequate job healthy right side raiders multimilliondollar offensive line happens spot lowestpaid one could within sights houston leads chiefs 95 sacks remains best pass rusher newhouse expect help blocking tight end lee smith fullback jamize olawale chiefs wr tyreek hill vs raiders cb sean smith oh raiders defensive coordinator john pagano attempt avoid matchup almost much andy reid chiefs hope manipulate exploit hill one nfls bigplay freaks scare tactic every wreck game let loose even twice per game provided alex smith locate sean smith solid recently topdown coverage terms letting receivers get suspect since joined raiders friday injury reports oakland raiders g jon feliciano concussion doubtful lb cory james knee de jihad ward foot questionable cb david amerson foot de denico autry hand wr amari cooper ankle rb jamize olawale ankle wr cordarrelle patterson hip friday injury reports c mitch morse foot eric murray ankle questionable lb tamba hali knee player spotlight chiefs wr demarcus robinson secondyear wideout delivered breakout game oakland week 7 hauling five catches 69 yards robinson first stepped starting lineup following seasonending injury chris conley week 5 since big game vs raiders however robinson posted eight catches 71 yards five games chiefs need stronger presence robinson ease burden wide receiver tyreek hill travis kelce combined 10 receptions 279 yards four touchdowns new york jets last week fast facts last meeting oakland qb derek carr threw 417 yards three tds rb marshawn lynch rushed 101 yards week 13 first 100yard game season three career games kc 323 scrimmage yards one rushing td wr michael crabtree scored three past five games vs kansas city wr amari cooper careerhigh 210 receiving yards two tds last meeting least 10 catches 100 yards two past three vs kc de khalil mack leads oakland 75 sacks including sack three straight 35 sacks past four vs division lb bruce irvin three sacks two forced fumbles past past two games kansas city qb alex smith ranks second nfl 1072 rating threw 366 yards four tds one 79 yards also recorded careerhigh 70yard run week 13 player super bowl era 70yard pass 70yard run game rb kareem hunt 117 scrimmage yards last game vs oakland ranks third nfl 1297 scrimmage yards hasnt hit 100 last five games wr tyreek hill tallied careerhigh 185 receiving yards scored twice week 13 six 30yard td catches nfl returned punt 78 yards td caught td pass last home meeting te travis kelce leads nfl tight ends receptions 66 yards 871 one four nfl players 60 catches 850 yards past four seasons lb justin houston 10 sacks past six home games vs division prediction teams going opposite directions chiefs six losses seven games raiders four wins past six lynch outrun hunt season sweep pick raiders 2420 chris cluff | 662 |
<p>“Lebanon” director <a href="http://variety.com/t/samuel-maoz/" type="external">Samuel Maoz</a> went in a risky direction by making a film as different and daring as “ <a href="http://variety.com/t/foxtrot/" type="external">Foxtrot</a>,” and his boldness pays off in ways that make one reach for superlatives. Not content to merely confront the unspeakable grief of parents who lose a child, Maoz uses the film’s tripartite structure to encompass a devastating litany of Israeli attributes that run the gamut from machismo to racism to a past subverted by the Holocaust and then back again to grief. Just as no novel can tackle a mother’s fear of learning her soldier son is dead without being compared to David Grossman’s stunning “To the End of the Land,” so no film will be able to deal with a similar subject without being weighed against “Foxtrot.” Brilliantly constructed with a visual audacity that serves the subject rather than the other way around, this is award-winning filmmaking on a fearless level.</p>
<p>Each of the three parts is stylistically and tonally distinct, practically guaranteeing that many will find fault with one section or another. The first throws you into a hothouse intensity that’s wrenching to watch; the second has a hyperrealistic, at times comical surrealism recalling the sharply composed tableaux of Israeli photographer Adi Nes; while the third initially feels less distinctive, almost as if Maoz doesn’t quite know how to end things. By the final frames, however, that last impression should be laid to rest, because the director knows exactly how to end things, with a quiet and devastating sense of cruel futility.</p>
<p>Within the first minute, the fatal knock on the door arrives: soldiers have come to tell the Feldmans their son Jonathan has been killed in the line of duty. After Dafna (Sarah Adler) faints, the fixed camera pans left to show Michael (Lior Ashkenazi, never better) standing in paralyzed muteness. With practiced efficiency, the three soldiers inject Dafna with a tranquilizer and then calmly explain to Michael that funeral arrangements are made, a help line is available, and don’t forget to keep hydrated. Everything is arranged as he stares uncomprehendingly: the knockout tranquilizer they gave Dafna separates the couple exactly when they need each other most, creating an extra vacuum that further renders him helpless. Michael’s older brother Avigdor (Yehuda Almagor) arrives and takes over without being asked, the misogynist religious officer (Itamar Rothschild) tells him what will happen at the funeral, and Michael seeks refuge in the bathroom where he deliberately scalds himself with hot water.</p>
<p>Much of this section is shot in oppressive close-ups whose claustrophobic nature has a sensate correspondence with the stifling atmosphere of “Lebanon.” When Giora Bejach’s camera does move, it tends to be in stiffly fluid ways, in keeping with the perception that all of this is taking place on stage; it remains unclear whether the cityscape glimpsed outside the windows is real or a phony backdrop. Heightening the sense of disorientation are tempered glass doors that distort what’s on the other side, and overhead shots that draw attention to floor tiles made of optical-illusion cubes (production designer Arad Sawat deserves major recognition after this film).</p>
<p>Part two changes the focus to Jonathan (Yonatan Shiray), on guard duty with three other soldiers in a godforsaken spot near the northern border, where barely anything interrupts the dullness apart from the occasional camel passing. Then suddenly Maoz intensifies the surrealism with an extraordinary scene of a dancing soldier (Itay Exlroad) on the desert road, set off against paintbox colors of sky and sand alongside an old painted advertisement for ice cream. At night, Jonathan tunes in to the kitsch intonations of Renzo Cesana’s “Walk the Lonesome Night,” accompanied by a Wurlitzer, his boredom punctuated only by rare Arab travelers forced into humiliating, silent scrutiny by the tired privates clearly too young to be in the position of making life or death decisions. Then tragedy strikes.</p>
<p>The third and final section is about coping — or not — with grief. How it tears people apart, fades into the background for brief moments, then rises up again as those gripped by mourning drown in its suffocating embrace. At first it almost feels as if Maoz is ending with a commonplace coda, but the more simplified visuals force the viewer to hone in on the reality of what’s happened. Gone is the overwhelming immediacy and stage-like atmosphere of the first third of the movie, and the heady surrealism of the second; the last chapter offers no aesthetic escape, no distraction from the truth. It is terrifying in its stark finality.</p>
<p>One of the reasons “Foxtrot” is so wrenching is because it’s not satisfied with a simple story of loss: the film contextualizes the deaths and clarifies their futility. Michael’s Auschwitz-survivor mother (Karin Ugowski) represents an unfathomable past from which no lessons have been learned. Instead, there’s a twisted justification for oppression that inevitably leads to tragedy and trauma. Michael can neither escape the legacy of his direct Holocaust connection nor the soul-destroying mindset of an Israeli military apparatus designed to instill an us-vs.-them anti-humanism. Jonathan and his fellow soldiers are still young enough to retain their freshness, but before hardness or death settles on them as well, they can frolic in the pink-sunset landscape, accompanied by Mahler’s 5th.</p>
<p>Reviewed at Venice Film Festival (competing), Sept. 1, 2017. (Also in Telluride Film Festival; Toronto Film Festival — Special Presentations). Running time: 112 MIN.</p>
<p>(Germany-France-Israel-Switzerland) A Spiro Films, Pola Pandora Filmproduktions, ASAP Films, KNM, Bord Cadre Films, Arte France Cinema production, in association with Arte France, ZDF/arte. (International sales: The Match Factory, Cologne.) Producers: Michael Weber, Viola Fügen, Eitan Mansuri, Cedomir Kolar, Marc Baschet, Michel Merkt. Co-producers: Jonathan Doweck, Jamal Zeinal Zade.</p>
<p>Director, writer: Samuel Maoz. Camera (color): Giora Bejach. Editors: Arik Lahav Leibovich, Guy Nemesh. Music: Ophir Leibovitch, Amit Poznansky.</p>
<p>Lior Ashkenazi, Sarah Adler, Yonatan Shiray, Gefen Barkai, Dekel Adin, Shaul Amir, Itay Exlroad, Danny Isserles, Itamar Rotschild, Roi Miller, Arie Tcherner, Yehuda Almagor, Shira Haas, Karin Ugowski. (Hebrew, German dialogue)</p> | false | 1 | lebanon director samuel maoz went risky direction making film different daring foxtrot boldness pays ways make one reach superlatives content merely confront unspeakable grief parents lose child maoz uses films tripartite structure encompass devastating litany israeli attributes run gamut machismo racism past subverted holocaust back grief novel tackle mothers fear learning soldier son dead without compared david grossmans stunning end land film able deal similar subject without weighed foxtrot brilliantly constructed visual audacity serves subject rather way around awardwinning filmmaking fearless level three parts stylistically tonally distinct practically guaranteeing many find fault one section another first throws hothouse intensity thats wrenching watch second hyperrealistic times comical surrealism recalling sharply composed tableaux israeli photographer adi nes third initially feels less distinctive almost maoz doesnt quite know end things final frames however last impression laid rest director knows exactly end things quiet devastating sense cruel futility within first minute fatal knock door arrives soldiers come tell feldmans son jonathan killed line duty dafna sarah adler faints fixed camera pans left show michael lior ashkenazi never better standing paralyzed muteness practiced efficiency three soldiers inject dafna tranquilizer calmly explain michael funeral arrangements made help line available dont forget keep hydrated everything arranged stares uncomprehendingly knockout tranquilizer gave dafna separates couple exactly need creating extra vacuum renders helpless michaels older brother avigdor yehuda almagor arrives takes without asked misogynist religious officer itamar rothschild tells happen funeral michael seeks refuge bathroom deliberately scalds hot water much section shot oppressive closeups whose claustrophobic nature sensate correspondence stifling atmosphere lebanon giora bejachs camera move tends stiffly fluid ways keeping perception taking place stage remains unclear whether cityscape glimpsed outside windows real phony backdrop heightening sense disorientation tempered glass doors distort whats side overhead shots draw attention floor tiles made opticalillusion cubes production designer arad sawat deserves major recognition film part two changes focus jonathan yonatan shiray guard duty three soldiers godforsaken spot near northern border barely anything interrupts dullness apart occasional camel passing suddenly maoz intensifies surrealism extraordinary scene dancing soldier itay exlroad desert road set paintbox colors sky sand alongside old painted advertisement ice cream night jonathan tunes kitsch intonations renzo cesanas walk lonesome night accompanied wurlitzer boredom punctuated rare arab travelers forced humiliating silent scrutiny tired privates clearly young position making life death decisions tragedy strikes third final section coping grief tears people apart fades background brief moments rises gripped mourning drown suffocating embrace first almost feels maoz ending commonplace coda simplified visuals force viewer hone reality whats happened gone overwhelming immediacy stagelike atmosphere first third movie heady surrealism second last chapter offers aesthetic escape distraction truth terrifying stark finality one reasons foxtrot wrenching satisfied simple story loss film contextualizes deaths clarifies futility michaels auschwitzsurvivor mother karin ugowski represents unfathomable past lessons learned instead theres twisted justification oppression inevitably leads tragedy trauma michael neither escape legacy direct holocaust connection souldestroying mindset israeli military apparatus designed instill usvsthem antihumanism jonathan fellow soldiers still young enough retain freshness hardness death settles well frolic pinksunset landscape accompanied mahlers 5th reviewed venice film festival competing sept 1 2017 also telluride film festival toronto film festival special presentations running time 112 min germanyfranceisraelswitzerland spiro films pola pandora filmproduktions asap films knm bord cadre films arte france cinema production association arte france zdfarte international sales match factory cologne producers michael weber viola fügen eitan mansuri cedomir kolar marc baschet michel merkt coproducers jonathan doweck jamal zeinal zade director writer samuel maoz camera color giora bejach editors arik lahav leibovich guy nemesh music ophir leibovitch amit poznansky lior ashkenazi sarah adler yonatan shiray gefen barkai dekel adin shaul amir itay exlroad danny isserles itamar rotschild roi miller arie tcherner yehuda almagor shira haas karin ugowski hebrew german dialogue | 616 |
<p>US rhetorical opposition to illegal Israeli settlements rings hollow while it lays favors on settler organizations that fund them.</p>
<p>There was an international outcry when <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P-Bl9zAM5A4" type="external">video</a> footage was released on March 24 of an Israeli occupation soldier in Hebron shooting a Palestinian lying on the ground, execution style, after the Palestinian had been wounded during an attempted knife attack. The release of the video led to the soldier’s arrest, and an initial condemnation of his actions.</p>
<p>Days later, however, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu defended the soldier, <a href="https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/israeli-prime-minister-benjamin-netanyahu-now-defending-soldier-who-allegedly-shot-unarmed-a6955201.html" type="external">saying</a>: “Any challenge to the morality of the [Israel Defense Forces] is outrageous and unacceptable.”</p>
<p>Additional video footage also soon emerged of the soldier shaking hands with right wing extremist Baruch Marzel immediately after the shooting. As <a href="http://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/.premium-1.711163?date=1459102641348" type="external">Haaretz</a> newspaper reports, “Boston-born Marzel, a&#160;disciple of&#160;Rabbi&#160;Meir&#160;Kahane, was&#160;the latter’s&#160;successor as leader of the Kach movement,” a militant Zionist party banned for terrorism in both Israel and the US.</p>
<p>A known anti-Palestinian agitator, Marzel was repeatedly <a href="http://www.jta.org/1996/12/05/archive/marzel-freed-from-house-arrest-2" type="external">placed</a> under house arrest during the 1990s to “prevent extremist violence,” and is widely suspected of being <a href="http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4172948,00.html" type="external">involved</a> in attacks against Palestinians. In 2011, he <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/worldtoday/content/2011/s3355141.htm" type="external">led</a> a manhunt in the Hebron settlement for a released Palestinian prisoner, displaying posters saying: “Rise up and kill him”.</p>
<p>Marzel has often blamed Netanyahu for failing to fully support the settler movement. After an arson attack in 2010 against a mosque in the occupied West Bank, <a href="http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/Flash.aspx/195147" type="external">he stated</a>: “While the Israeli government abandons the roads in Judea and Samaria to terrorists, do not be surprised if there are Jews who rise up and take their fate into their own hands. The responsibility [for the attack] is on the shoulders of Netanyahu and [then deputy Prime Minister Ehud] Barak.”</p>
<p>What is often unreported is that Marzel, along with several other right wing extremist Israeli settlers, continues to receive both political and financial support from the US.</p>
<p>Although the US government has long stated its objection to Israeli settlements, it has been anything but robust in the policing of individuals and charities funneling tax-exempt money to extremist settlers, including followers of Rabbi Kahane, founder of Kach.</p>
<p><a href="https://www.nytimes.com/1990/11/06/obituaries/meir-kahane-58-israeli-militant-and-founder-of-the-jewish-defense-league.html?pagewanted=all" type="external">Kahane</a>, born and later assassinated in New York, openly called for the ethnic cleansing of Arabs from historical Palestine—including publicly chanting “kill the Arabs” during street protests—and was arrested numerous times for incitement and acts of violence. In 1968 he founded the Jewish Defense League, which carried out terrorist attacks across the United States throughout the 1970s and 1980s. In 1971, a US court <a href="http://archive.adl.org/extremism/jdl_chron.html" type="external">sentenced</a> Kahane to a year in jail for conspiring to make bombs. After his release, he moved to Israel and formed Kach.</p>
<p>Although Kahane successfully won a seat in the Knesset in 1984, he was politically isolated and Kach was ultimately <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/1988/10/06/world/israel-bans-kahane-party-from-election.html" type="external">banned</a> in Israel in 1988 for being “Nazi-like”, racist and undemocratic. One of Kahane’s followers was Baruch Goldstein, who in 1994 killed 29 Palestinian civilians and wounded more than one hundred at the Ibrahimi Mosque in Hebron. After the attack, Israel declared Kach a terrorist organization, as well as Kahane Chai (which translates as “Kahane lives”), an offshoot <a href="http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/foreign-policy/199475-kahanes-legacy" type="external">founded</a> by Kahane’s son. Nevertheless, Marzel is known to have subsequently <a href="http://www.timesofisrael.com/the-extremist-who-could-bring-kahanism-back-to-the-knesset/" type="external">organized</a> big parties to celebrate the actions of Goldstein.</p>
<p>Kach and its successor, Kahane Chai, were first listed in the US as distinct terrorist organizations in 1995, when President Bill Clinton issued Executive Order 12947, entitled “Prohibiting Transactions with Terrorists Who Threaten to Disrupt the Middle East Peace Process.” However, an organization called Kahane Net (EIN#11-3583299), based in Brooklyn, New York, was granted charitable status in 2013, according to the charity website <a href="http://www.guidestar.org/organizations/11-3583299/kahane-net.aspx" type="external">Guidestar</a>. It is worth mentioning that Kahane.net was amongst the aliases specifically <a href="http://www.philadelphiaweekly.com/news-and-opinion/domain_of_terror-38371614.html" type="external">listed</a> by the US government as terrorist in 2003. So far, it has not filed any tax documents.</p>
<p>This apparent lapse mirrors developments in Israel and the occupied Palestinian territories, where extremist views that were previously condemned are now becoming mainstream. As settler attacks against Palestinians continue to rise, graffiti, posters and other paraphernalia reading “Kahane was right” are increasingly <a href="http://www.timesofisrael.com/terror-shakes-suburban-normalcy-of-gush-etzion" type="external">visible</a>.</p>
<p>Shortly after the attack in Duma, where settlers firebombed a Palestinian house, killing three, Haaretz newspaper <a href="http://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/.premium-1.669291" type="external">reported</a> that Israeli intelligence fears that the Jewish extremists of today have more ambitious aims than those of the past, “like destabilizing the country and overthrowing the government to establish a new regime to be based on halakha, Jewish law. They plan to use violence in a systematic, continuous manner.”</p>
<p>Many of these extremists have direct and indirect links with American officials. As the Washington Report for Middle East Affairs <a href="http://www.wrmea.org/2011-july/the-new-kahane-social-network.html" type="external">revealed</a> in 2011, a Facebook account in the name of Meir Kahane was friends with New York City Assemblyman Dov Hikind, himself a former member of the Jewish Defense League.</p>
<p>Former House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA), who during his tenure helped to organize Congressional trips to Israel, was listed in December 2010 as Facebook friends with both Kahane Chai leader David Ha’Ivri and another former Kach spokesperson – Baruch Marzel.</p>
<p>Representative Louie Gohmert (R-TX) has also been <a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2011/08/the-texas-congressman-and-the-israeli-fascist/242848/" type="external">pictured</a> with Ha’Ivri, US Ambassador to the Czech Republic Norm Eisen has <a href="http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/features/american-view-s-on-the-israeli-palestinian-conflict-1.373974" type="external">visited</a> him in the settlements, and members of Congress from both parties have <a href="http://washingtonjewishweek.com/4057/talks-counterproductive/news/world-news/" type="external">given</a> him an audience in Washington.</p>
<p>According to an <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/06/world/middleeast/06settle.html?pagewanted=all&amp;_r=0" type="external">investigation</a> by The New York Times, Ha’Ivri “has had several run-ins with the authorities in Israel over the last two decades, including an arrest for celebrating the assassination of Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin in a television interview and a six-month jail term in connection with the desecration of a mosque.” Since founding the Shomron Liaison Office, he has been acting as an international <a href="http://www.haivri.com/about/" type="external">spokesperson</a> for the settlers.</p>
<p>Ha’Ivri also runs a tax-exempt charity registered in Illinois called the Shuva Israel the Return to Israel Fund (EIN#13-4036730). Founded in 1999, <a href="http://www.shuvaisrael.org.il/#!about_us/csgz" type="external">Shuva Israel</a> “was created to support the influx of Jewish immigrants from around the world” to live in the illegal West Bank settlements. Its charitable status means that US taxpayers are subsidizing the activities of a convicted criminal with a known affiliation to a designated terrorist organization.</p>
<p>Another convicted criminal, Era Rapaport, has led <a href="http://www.shemesh.co.il/pipermail/list/2008-April/148996.html" type="external">tours</a> of the settlements for the New York-based charity One Israel Fund (EIN#11-3195338). Rapaport is also a follower of Kahane and previously was a member of the terrorist movement known as the Jewish Underground. He was convicted of planting a car bomb in 1982 that blew off the legs of the Arab mayor of Nablus. After he was released from <a href="http://articles.latimes.com/1997-01-19/books/bk-19969_1_tel-mond-prison" type="external">prison</a>, he became mayor of the Shilo settlement.</p>
<p>One Israel Fund’s program director Marc Provisor <a href="http://www.oneisraelfund.org/news/?id=136" type="external">insists</a> that, “There is no green line.” The fund’s Security Projects program provides “preventive security” equipment to extremist settlers who have been known to <a href="http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/.premium-1.645881" type="external">clash</a> with Israeli forces.</p>
<p>Rapaport also works with Americans for a Safe Israel (EIN#51-0181418), another New York charity that <a href="http://www.jerusalemchai.org/contents/read.cfm?categoryID=115&amp;cID=1217" type="external">supports</a> the settlement project. The group includes memorials to Kahane in its organized <a href="http://www.afsi.org/articles.aspx?id=146" type="external">trips</a> to the settlements, known as Chizuk Mission To Israel.</p>
<p>One of the better-known funders of the above groups is California bingo tycoon Irving Moskowitz, whose family foundations granted over $1 million to One Israel Fund, $72,000 to Shuva Israel and $51,000 to Americans for a Safe Israel between 2009 and 2013. An analysis of IRS forms for <a href="http://www.spinwatch.org/" type="external">Public Interest Investigations/Spinwatch</a> has found that they also gave more than $11.6 million to registered US charities involved in the settlements during this time.</p>
<p>The New York Times <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/10/world/middleeast/west-bank-compound-irving-moskowitz.html" type="external">reported</a> in June 2015 that Moskowitz had recently acquired some Palestinian farmland between the cities of Bethlehem and Hebron, leading some Israeli activists and advocacy groups to suspect that he is launching “a secret initiative to establish a new settlement in the occupied West Bank that would further complicate the peace process”. The property had been a church-run hospital in the 1950s.</p>
<p>These concerns were on point. In January, Israeli Defense Minister Moshe Ya’alon officially <a href="http://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/.premium-1.696369" type="external">approved</a> the establishment of a new settlement inside the church compound. The US once again reiterated its concern – laying the blame on Israel.</p>
<p>But it is empty rhetoric when US taxpayers actually subsidized Moskowitz acquiring this land through his family’s tax-exempt charities—the same charities that have <a href="https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/summary.php?id=D000034750&amp;cycle=A" type="external">given</a> more than $1.6 million to political campaigns in Washington since 2006.</p> | false | 1 | us rhetorical opposition illegal israeli settlements rings hollow lays favors settler organizations fund international outcry video footage released march 24 israeli occupation soldier hebron shooting palestinian lying ground execution style palestinian wounded attempted knife attack release video led soldiers arrest initial condemnation actions days later however israeli prime minister benjamin netanyahu defended soldier saying challenge morality israel defense forces outrageous unacceptable additional video footage also soon emerged soldier shaking hands right wing extremist baruch marzel immediately shooting haaretz newspaper reports bostonborn marzel a160disciple of160rabbi160meir160kahane was160the latters160successor leader kach movement militant zionist party banned terrorism israel us known antipalestinian agitator marzel repeatedly placed house arrest 1990s prevent extremist violence widely suspected involved attacks palestinians 2011 led manhunt hebron settlement released palestinian prisoner displaying posters saying rise kill marzel often blamed netanyahu failing fully support settler movement arson attack 2010 mosque occupied west bank stated israeli government abandons roads judea samaria terrorists surprised jews rise take fate hands responsibility attack shoulders netanyahu deputy prime minister ehud barak often unreported marzel along several right wing extremist israeli settlers continues receive political financial support us although us government long stated objection israeli settlements anything robust policing individuals charities funneling taxexempt money extremist settlers including followers rabbi kahane founder kach kahane born later assassinated new york openly called ethnic cleansing arabs historical palestineincluding publicly chanting kill arabs street protestsand arrested numerous times incitement acts violence 1968 founded jewish defense league carried terrorist attacks across united states throughout 1970s 1980s 1971 us court sentenced kahane year jail conspiring make bombs release moved israel formed kach although kahane successfully seat knesset 1984 politically isolated kach ultimately banned israel 1988 nazilike racist undemocratic one kahanes followers baruch goldstein 1994 killed 29 palestinian civilians wounded one hundred ibrahimi mosque hebron attack israel declared kach terrorist organization well kahane chai translates kahane lives offshoot founded kahanes son nevertheless marzel known subsequently organized big parties celebrate actions goldstein kach successor kahane chai first listed us distinct terrorist organizations 1995 president bill clinton issued executive order 12947 entitled prohibiting transactions terrorists threaten disrupt middle east peace process however organization called kahane net ein113583299 based brooklyn new york granted charitable status 2013 according charity website guidestar worth mentioning kahanenet amongst aliases specifically listed us government terrorist 2003 far filed tax documents apparent lapse mirrors developments israel occupied palestinian territories extremist views previously condemned becoming mainstream settler attacks palestinians continue rise graffiti posters paraphernalia reading kahane right increasingly visible shortly attack duma settlers firebombed palestinian house killing three haaretz newspaper reported israeli intelligence fears jewish extremists today ambitious aims past like destabilizing country overthrowing government establish new regime based halakha jewish law plan use violence systematic continuous manner many extremists direct indirect links american officials washington report middle east affairs revealed 2011 facebook account name meir kahane friends new york city assemblyman dov hikind former member jewish defense league former house majority leader eric cantor rva tenure helped organize congressional trips israel listed december 2010 facebook friends kahane chai leader david haivri another former kach spokesperson baruch marzel representative louie gohmert rtx also pictured haivri us ambassador czech republic norm eisen visited settlements members congress parties given audience washington according investigation new york times haivri several runins authorities israel last two decades including arrest celebrating assassination prime minister yitzhak rabin television interview sixmonth jail term connection desecration mosque since founding shomron liaison office acting international spokesperson settlers haivri also runs taxexempt charity registered illinois called shuva israel return israel fund ein134036730 founded 1999 shuva israel created support influx jewish immigrants around world live illegal west bank settlements charitable status means us taxpayers subsidizing activities convicted criminal known affiliation designated terrorist organization another convicted criminal era rapaport led tours settlements new yorkbased charity one israel fund ein113195338 rapaport also follower kahane previously member terrorist movement known jewish underground convicted planting car bomb 1982 blew legs arab mayor nablus released prison became mayor shilo settlement one israel funds program director marc provisor insists green line funds security projects program provides preventive security equipment extremist settlers known clash israeli forces rapaport also works americans safe israel ein510181418 another new york charity supports settlement project group includes memorials kahane organized trips settlements known chizuk mission israel one betterknown funders groups california bingo tycoon irving moskowitz whose family foundations granted 1 million one israel fund 72000 shuva israel 51000 americans safe israel 2009 2013 analysis irs forms public interest investigationsspinwatch found also gave 116 million registered us charities involved settlements time new york times reported june 2015 moskowitz recently acquired palestinian farmland cities bethlehem hebron leading israeli activists advocacy groups suspect launching secret initiative establish new settlement occupied west bank would complicate peace process property churchrun hospital 1950s concerns point january israeli defense minister moshe yaalon officially approved establishment new settlement inside church compound us reiterated concern laying blame israel empty rhetoric us taxpayers actually subsidized moskowitz acquiring land familys taxexempt charitiesthe charities given 16 million political campaigns washington since 2006 | 822 |
<p>WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump is angry at all the news coverage about the people who stand to be hurt because of the Republican plan to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act.</p>
<p>“The press is making it look so wonderful,” Trump complained last week at an event at the White House arranged to counter the usual media narrative: a listening session with “victims” of the ACA, or Obamacare.</p>
<p>Open a newspaper and you can read all about it. The Congressional Budget Office predicted that in just one year, 14 million fewer people likely will be insured if the GOP’s American Health Care Act becomes law. There is little mention of the Congressional Budget Office’s past faulty predictions. In 2010, it said 21 million Americans would buy policies through Affordable Care Act exchanges by 2016. The actual number was 11.5 million.</p>
<p>There also is scant mention of the Americans who stand to lose coverage as health care providers drop out of the individual market or who pay their premiums but don’t see doctors because their plans’ high deductibles are prohibitive. There is little mention of the 6.5 million Americans who preferred to pay a penalty last year rather than purchase their own policies.</p>
<p>Democrats warn of the GOP bill’s “age tax.” The GOP plan would change a formula that prohibits insurers from charging their oldest consumers, age 50-64, more than three times what they charge adults under age 29. The new ratio, which would be offset by higher tax credits for older Americans, would be 5-to-1. That could mean younger adults will be more likely to buy their own plans, but that’s not the emphasis of many stories.</p>
<p>Later in the week, Trump held a rally in Nashville for a reason. Tennessee’s insurance commissioner has warned that ACA exchanges are “very near collapse,” as providers have bailed out of the state. Two of the 10 Obamacare “victims” invited to the White House hail from Tenneesse.</p>
<p>Trump’s “victims” resemble many Americans who resent Obamacare. They work hard and are successful, so they often don’t qualify for federal subsidies. They are paying higher premiums for policies with higher deductibles and limited access to once-beloved doctors. Many voted for Obama, in part because they believed his promise that if they liked their doctor, they could keep their doctor.</p>
<p>Wrong. The fact-checking organization PolitiFact rated “If you like your health care plan, you can keep it” as its 2013 Lie of the Year.</p>
<p>The White House event put a face on people who are miserable because of the Obama health care plan. Kim Sertich of Arizona had her own business for 25 years, and she always bought an individual policy — until this year. Her monthly premium jumped from $365 a month to $809 a month with a $6,800 deductible.</p>
<p>“It just didn’t seem like a good use of my money,” she said.</p>
<p>Colorado cattle rancher Carrie Couey said her family cannot afford equipment because her rates are three times higher than they were when Obamacare began.</p>
<p>Gina Sell, a Wisconsin nurse and mother, said she had to stop working part time and switch to a full-time schedule to pay the $1,200 premium for a high-deductible health care plan. Obamacare has cost her time with her children that she never will get back. She said she sent a daughter with a fever to school for three days because she had to go to her full-time job to pay for health care.</p>
<p>Dr. Manny Sethi operates a nonprofit, Healthy Tennessee, that conducts preventive health fairs across the state. He has seen adults who don’t buy health care as well as people who have coverage, including Medicaid, but don’t see doctors. The system is too big and too bureaucratic, he believes.</p>
<p>Sethi compared the drafting of the Affordable Care Act to a surgery that starts with one error. The first error becomes magnified as the operation continues and doctors try to compensate for that first mistake. What do his peers think about his meeting with Trump? In Tennessee, Sethi said, “most physicians agree that the exchanges are imploding.”</p>
<p>Cincinnati manufacturer Greg Knox’s issue wasn’t with the exchanges but with how the ACA’s mandates drove up the cost of the group insurance he provided. He used to provide health care not only for employees but also their families. It was a point of pride. But he had to pull back as premiums continued to climb.</p>
<p>Knox believes that more competition will drive down costs. Not that he is expecting a huge change. He thinks the plan Trump is pushing is “still too ‘Obamacare Light.’” But to Knox, “Obamacare Light” would be an improvement over the Affordable Care Act, which for his business is simply unaffordable.</p>
<p>Contact Debra J. Saunders at [email protected] or at 202-662-7391. Follow <a href="http://www.twitter.com/DebraJSaunders" type="external">@DebraJSaunders</a> on Twitter.</p>
<p>THE OTHER VICTIMS</p>
<p>Elias Seife of Florida, who has had to change his and his wife’s health insurance every year for the past few years because his premiums have increased 30-40 percent annually, and the deductibles have risen even more sharply.</p>
<p>Brittany Ivey of Georgia, a working mother whose family plan cost 65 percent of her monthly gross income, even accounting for a federal subsidy.</p>
<p>Joel Brown of Tennessee, a farmer whose costs for catastrophic coverage has spiked from $119 per month to more than $500 per month.</p>
<p>Robin Armstrong of Texas, a medical doctor who said Obamacare’s rising premiums and deductibles have hurt his patients.</p>
<p>Stan Summers of Utah, a local county commissioner whose family has seen its insurance costs skyrocket.</p>
<p>Louis Brown of Virginia, a 35-year-old attorney opposed to including taxpayer funding of abortion in Obamacare.</p>
<p>SOURCE: The White House</p>
<p /> | false | 1 | washington president donald trump angry news coverage people stand hurt republican plan repeal replace affordable care act press making look wonderful trump complained last week event white house arranged counter usual media narrative listening session victims aca obamacare open newspaper read congressional budget office predicted one year 14 million fewer people likely insured gops american health care act becomes law little mention congressional budget offices past faulty predictions 2010 said 21 million americans would buy policies affordable care act exchanges 2016 actual number 115 million also scant mention americans stand lose coverage health care providers drop individual market pay premiums dont see doctors plans high deductibles prohibitive little mention 65 million americans preferred pay penalty last year rather purchase policies democrats warn gop bills age tax gop plan would change formula prohibits insurers charging oldest consumers age 5064 three times charge adults age 29 new ratio would offset higher tax credits older americans would 5to1 could mean younger adults likely buy plans thats emphasis many stories later week trump held rally nashville reason tennessees insurance commissioner warned aca exchanges near collapse providers bailed state two 10 obamacare victims invited white house hail tenneesse trumps victims resemble many americans resent obamacare work hard successful often dont qualify federal subsidies paying higher premiums policies higher deductibles limited access oncebeloved doctors many voted obama part believed promise liked doctor could keep doctor wrong factchecking organization politifact rated like health care plan keep 2013 lie year white house event put face people miserable obama health care plan kim sertich arizona business 25 years always bought individual policy year monthly premium jumped 365 month 809 month 6800 deductible didnt seem like good use money said colorado cattle rancher carrie couey said family afford equipment rates three times higher obamacare began gina sell wisconsin nurse mother said stop working part time switch fulltime schedule pay 1200 premium highdeductible health care plan obamacare cost time children never get back said sent daughter fever school three days go fulltime job pay health care dr manny sethi operates nonprofit healthy tennessee conducts preventive health fairs across state seen adults dont buy health care well people coverage including medicaid dont see doctors system big bureaucratic believes sethi compared drafting affordable care act surgery starts one error first error becomes magnified operation continues doctors try compensate first mistake peers think meeting trump tennessee sethi said physicians agree exchanges imploding cincinnati manufacturer greg knoxs issue wasnt exchanges acas mandates drove cost group insurance provided used provide health care employees also families point pride pull back premiums continued climb knox believes competition drive costs expecting huge change thinks plan trump pushing still obamacare light knox obamacare light would improvement affordable care act business simply unaffordable contact debra j saunders dsaundersreviewjournalcom 2026627391 follow debrajsaunders twitter victims elias seife florida change wifes health insurance every year past years premiums increased 3040 percent annually deductibles risen even sharply brittany ivey georgia working mother whose family plan cost 65 percent monthly gross income even accounting federal subsidy joel brown tennessee farmer whose costs catastrophic coverage spiked 119 per month 500 per month robin armstrong texas medical doctor said obamacares rising premiums deductibles hurt patients stan summers utah local county commissioner whose family seen insurance costs skyrocket louis brown virginia 35yearold attorney opposed including taxpayer funding abortion obamacare source white house | 553 |
<p />
<p>Ethan Bronner <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/20/world/middleeast/20gaza.html" type="external">reports</a> in the New York Times that <a href="http://www.ochaopt.org/documents/ocha_opt_special_focus_2010_08_19_english.pdf" type="external">a report</a> on the situation in the Gaza Strip from the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (UNOCHA)</p>
<p>says that anti-Israeli militants operate from the border areas in question, planting explosive devices, firing at Israeli military vehicles and shooting rockets and mortar rounds at civilians. But it argues that Israel has an obligation under international law to protect civilians and civilian structures.</p>
<p>Bronner devotes the first part of his article to noting the impact on a Palestinian family, whose “trees and wells were bulldozed”, noting “destroyed houses” surrounding the family’s “desolate fields”. He notes that, according to the report, 12 percent of the population “have lost livelihoods or have otherwise been severely affected by Israeli security policies along the border, both land and sea, in recent years”, and that “the restricted land comprises 17 percent of Gaza’s total land mass and 35 percent of its agricultural land”, but this is about the extent of his discussion with regard to the content of the report. Most of the rest of the article is dedicated to offering the Israeli point of view and response to the release of the report:</p>
<p>Lt. Col. Avital Leibovich, a spokeswoman for the Israeli military, said that Hamas, the Islamist group that has ruled in Gaza for the past few years, knowingly endangers the civilians living near the border by sending militants there. “What is foremost in our minds is protection of our civilians who live within range of the border,” she said by telephone when asked about the new study. “If your choice is to operate terror, you have to bear the consequences.”</p>
<p>The Times article thus affords equal weight to the Israeli assertion that its activities in and policies towards the Gaza Strip are necessary measures of self-defense against Palestinian aggression and terrorism.</p>
<p>Where the U.N. report discusses the role of Palestinian militants, however, it offers a noticeably different characterization from the one presented by Bronner (emphasis added):</p>
<p>The [Israeli unilaterally declared] restricted areas [in Gaza] are regularly used by Palestinian armed factions for carrying out various military activities against Israeli targets, including against Israeli military vehicles patrolling the fence or carrying out leveling operations [i.e. destruction of Palestinian property] inside Gaza; the planting of explosives on the routes used by the army during incursions; and the firing of mortars and rockets towards Israel and the border.</p>
<p>In other words, indiscriminate rocket attacks excepted, militant operations in the “restricted areas” are primarily defensive and directed at military targets. On the Israeli side, all casualties have been soldiers, while on the Palestinian side, of the 170 or so casualties, 34 percent of those killed and 82 percent of those injured have been civilians (22 civilian deaths and 146 civilian injuries).</p>
<p>These casualties have resulted from Israeli attacks across the Green Line (the 1949 armistice line), with soldiers firing indiscriminately at Gazans who are frequently guilty of nothing more than attempting to reach their own land.</p>
<p>“The civilian population affected by access restrictions imposed by the Israeli military suffers from a systematic lack of respect for their basic rights, as enshrined in international humanitarian and human rights law”, the report notes. It also observes that “It is absolutely prohibited to target civilians,” under international law, “regardless of the circumstances”, and that “Israel, as the occupying power,” as well as Hamas, “are obliged to respect the human rights of people living in the Gaza Strip, as defined in the various human rights treaties and in accordance with customary international law.”</p>
<p>Apart from casualties of Israeli violence against Palestinians, “The Israeli military-enforced regime of access restrictions has had a negative effect on the livelihoods of the affected population. Increased rates of poverty and food insecurity, as well as the adoption of negative coping mechanisms…, are some of the ways in which the deterioration to livelihood is reflected.” Israel has destroyed 305 water wells, 197 chicken farms, 377 sheep farms, 3 mosques, 3 schools, and 6 factories. It has “totally destroyed” 996 homes and “partially destroyed” 371 others. Israel prevents farmers from reaching agricultural land, and destroys orchards and greenhouses. The immediate cost of this destruction of property to the already impoverished Palestinians of Gaza is estimated at $275 million. An additional cost from the loss of “potential agricultural output and corresponding income” is estimated at over $50 million annually.</p>
<p>Israel implements a similar policy at sea, restricting fishermen’s access to their own waters and firing upon those who stray too far away from shore in search of a catch.</p>
<p>As already noted, Bronner writes that the U.N. report “argues that Israel has an obligation under international law to protect civilians and civilian structures” (emphasis added), thus relegating an uncontroversial point of fact under international law to merely a point of view, which Bronner then seeks to “balance” by offering the Israeli argument, as though Israeli claims and facts of international law should somehow be treated as having equal merit.</p>
<p>According to Bronner’s formula, it is not a fact that Israel is prohibited under international law from engaging in attacks on and collective punishment of civilians, but merely an argument – as though this were somehow debatable.</p>
<p>And therein lies the fallacy of this kind of “objective” journalism.</p> | false | 1 | ethan bronner reports new york times report situation gaza strip united nations office coordination humanitarian affairs unocha says antiisraeli militants operate border areas question planting explosive devices firing israeli military vehicles shooting rockets mortar rounds civilians argues israel obligation international law protect civilians civilian structures bronner devotes first part article noting impact palestinian family whose trees wells bulldozed noting destroyed houses surrounding familys desolate fields notes according report 12 percent population lost livelihoods otherwise severely affected israeli security policies along border land sea recent years restricted land comprises 17 percent gazas total land mass 35 percent agricultural land extent discussion regard content report rest article dedicated offering israeli point view response release report lt col avital leibovich spokeswoman israeli military said hamas islamist group ruled gaza past years knowingly endangers civilians living near border sending militants foremost minds protection civilians live within range border said telephone asked new study choice operate terror bear consequences times article thus affords equal weight israeli assertion activities policies towards gaza strip necessary measures selfdefense palestinian aggression terrorism un report discusses role palestinian militants however offers noticeably different characterization one presented bronner emphasis added israeli unilaterally declared restricted areas gaza regularly used palestinian armed factions carrying various military activities israeli targets including israeli military vehicles patrolling fence carrying leveling operations ie destruction palestinian property inside gaza planting explosives routes used army incursions firing mortars rockets towards israel border words indiscriminate rocket attacks excepted militant operations restricted areas primarily defensive directed military targets israeli side casualties soldiers palestinian side 170 casualties 34 percent killed 82 percent injured civilians 22 civilian deaths 146 civilian injuries casualties resulted israeli attacks across green line 1949 armistice line soldiers firing indiscriminately gazans frequently guilty nothing attempting reach land civilian population affected access restrictions imposed israeli military suffers systematic lack respect basic rights enshrined international humanitarian human rights law report notes also observes absolutely prohibited target civilians international law regardless circumstances israel occupying power well hamas obliged respect human rights people living gaza strip defined various human rights treaties accordance customary international law apart casualties israeli violence palestinians israeli militaryenforced regime access restrictions negative effect livelihoods affected population increased rates poverty food insecurity well adoption negative coping mechanisms ways deterioration livelihood reflected israel destroyed 305 water wells 197 chicken farms 377 sheep farms 3 mosques 3 schools 6 factories totally destroyed 996 homes partially destroyed 371 others israel prevents farmers reaching agricultural land destroys orchards greenhouses immediate cost destruction property already impoverished palestinians gaza estimated 275 million additional cost loss potential agricultural output corresponding income estimated 50 million annually israel implements similar policy sea restricting fishermens access waters firing upon stray far away shore search catch already noted bronner writes un report argues israel obligation international law protect civilians civilian structures emphasis added thus relegating uncontroversial point fact international law merely point view bronner seeks balance offering israeli argument though israeli claims facts international law somehow treated equal merit according bronners formula fact israel prohibited international law engaging attacks collective punishment civilians merely argument though somehow debatable therein lies fallacy kind objective journalism | 512 |
<p>On February 29, Senate Budget Committee Chairman Kent Conrad convened a hearing on “Putting Health Care Spending on a Sustainable Path.” EPPC Fellow James C. Capretta participated on a panel with David Cutler, Professor of Economics at Harvard University, and Len Nichols, Director of the Center for Health Policy Research and Ethics at George Mason University.</p>
<p>Mr. Capretta’s testimony is available below and <a href="http://budget.senate.gov/democratic/index.cfm/files/serve?File_id=4b5692a0-8934-4461-aeff-21d03e3f084d" type="external">here</a>. The prepared testimony of Dr. Cutler is available <a href="http://budget.senate.gov/democratic/index.cfm/files/serve?File_id=b5fdb71b-5638-4f92-9b2e-d368eca8efec" type="external">here</a>. Dr. Nichols’ prepared testimony is available <a href="http://budget.senate.gov/democratic/index.cfm/files/serve?File_id=35be25b1-4b02-49db-b891-58baf31c374e" type="external">here</a>. The full hearing can be watched <a href="http://budget.senate.gov/democratic/index.cfm/committeehearings?ContentRecord_id=9c2f7127-214b-40af-8767-20736e62e7d6&amp;ContentType_id=14f995b9-dfa5-407a-9d35-56cc7152a7ed&amp;Group_id=d68d31c2-2e75-49fb-a03a-be915cb4550b" type="external">here</a>.</p>
<p>_______________________________</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Sessions, and members of the committee, thank you for the opportunity to participate in this very important hearing on “Putting Health Care Spending on a Sustainable Path.”</p>
<p>It is a particular pleasure for me to appear before you today as a witness because I worked for this committee for a decade as one of the staff members when Senator Domenici served as Chairman and Ranking Member.</p>
<p>I will make three basic points in my testimony today:</p>
<p>1. Rapidly rising entitlement spending is the cause of our nation’s fiscal problems, and escalating health costs is the primary reason for the entitlement spending surge.</p>
<p>2. The health care law that passed in 2010 has made the fiscal problem much worse because it used Medicare cuts and taxes to increase non-Medicare entitlement spending and pay future Medicare benefits. Further, the Medicare cuts are very unlikely to be sustained over the long term anyway.</p>
<p>3. Putting health spending on a sustainable path requires significant Medicare reform, but the federal government can’t “engineer” this reform through regulations, demonstrations, and micromanagement. The answer is a functioning and dynamic marketplace.</p>
<p>The Reason for Pronounced Fiscal Pressure</p>
<p>It is sometimes argued that the reason we have budget problems today is because of discrete tax or spending decisions made over the last decade or so. But this line of argument relies on what might be called the fallacy of the uncontrolled baseline. It gives a pass to the massive run-up in spending due to the growth in entitlements, and especially health care entitlements, and tries to assign all of the blame for our fiscal woes to tax policies that have held tax collection at about the historical post-war norm for the United States.</p>
<p>But, as shown in Chart 1, a longer-term perspective clearly indicates that entitlements are the problem, and most especially the health care entitlements. Over the past forty years, federal tax collection has averaged about 18 percent of GDP annually. Meanwhile, back in 1972, the federal government spent 4.4 percent of GDP on the big three entitlement programs, Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. So there was plenty of revenue left over after covering the costs of these entitlements for other governmental priorities.</p>
<p>Today, spending on just those three programs is expected to reach 10.2 percent of GDP, according to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO). So, in other words, today the government is spending an additional 6 percentage points of GDP on just these three programs compared to 1972. To put that in perspective, spending on defense and other security-related functions of the government totals only 5.6 percent of GDP in 2012.</p>
<p>This trend toward devoting more and more resources to entitlements is only going to accelerate as the baby boom retires. Over the next twenty-five years, CBO expects spending on these programs, plus the new entitlements created in the health care law, to push total spending on these programs over 16 percent of GDP, with reasonable assumptions about the growth in provider payments and other factors. If that were to occur, there would be virtually no room left in the budget for anything else, assuming the historical level of tax collection.</p>
<p>The Health Law Makes the Budget Outlook Much Worse, Not Better</p>
<p>During the debate over the health care law, it was often argued that the added federal cost of the coverage provisions would be more than offset by other tax hikes and spending cuts. Indeed, it was suggested that the new law would actually reduce the long-term budget deficit.</p>
<p>But this perspective rests critically on how one accounts for the Medicare taxes and cuts that were enacted in the law, and specifically the taxes and cuts that were assigned to the Medicare Hospital Insurance (HI) trust fund.</p>
<p>The Medicare HI trust fund, like Social Security, has generally been funded with dedicated taxes. Consequently, when the trust fund is projected to run short of funds, the only remedy is to increase revenue with tax hikes or slow spending from the trust fund with cuts.</p>
<p>Prior to enactment of the health care law, the HI trust fund was in exactly this situation (and continues to be to this day). Thus, some changes were needed to ensure the trust fund could continue paying full benefits beyond the moment when the trust fund was projected to be depleted of reserves.</p>
<p>If those changes – new taxes dedicated to Medicare HI and Medicare HI spending cuts – had been enacted as standalone provisions, there’s no question that the long-term budget outlook would have improved by the exact amount of the combined Medicare tax hike and spending cut.</p>
<p>But that’s not what happened. Because, unlike Social Security, changes to Medicare HI not only shore up the trust fund, they also count under what is called the “paygo” scorecard for budget scorekeeping purposes. Consequently, in 2010, when the health law cut Medicare spending by about $450 billion, and raised substantial new revenue for the program too, those funds were spent twice: once to pay for Medicare benefits that were in jeopardy due to the depleted trust fund, and again to pay for the large entitlement spending increase contained in the health care law. As CBO Director Douglas Elmendorf put it, “The key point is that the savings to the HI trust fund under the PPACA would be received by the government only once, so they cannot be set aside to pay for future Medicare spending and, at the same time, pay for current spending on other parts of the legislation or on other programs.”[1]</p>
<p>Some argue that while this may be true, it has been the longstanding practice of Congress to count Medicare HI changes in this manner. That is of course correct. But no previous legislation has come close to the 2010 health law in terms of the fiscal consequences of this double-count. In a forthcoming paper from the Mercatus Center, the public trustee for the Medicare program, Charles Blahous, estimates that due in large part to this double-count, the health care law will add at least $340 billion cumulatively to federal deficits over the period 2012 to 2021.[2]</p>
<p>Over the long run, the added cost to the federal budget is even more staggering. In the 2009 Medicare Trustees’ Report, the Medicare Trustees estimated the Medicare HI trust fund had an unfunded liability of $13.4 trillion over the seventy-five year projection period (in net present-value terms).[3] In the 2011 report, that unfunded liability was estimated at $3.0 trillion.[4] Thus, the double-counting of Medicare HI spending cuts and taxes has paid for both about $10 trillion in Medicare benefits over the next seventy-five years, and an equivalent amount of other entitlement spending in the health law.</p>
<p>Of course, this analysis of the double-count assumes that the Medicare cuts will be sustained at all over the coming years, which is very much in doubt because the cuts in the Medicare program contained in the health law are mainly blunt, across-the-board payment rate reductions that hit every provider of service the same regardless of the quality of care. According to the Office of the Actuary at the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, the deepest of these cuts – the annual “productivity factor” adjustment – will push the total revenue for about 15 percent of all institutions, including hospitals, that are providing services to Medicare patients below their total costs by the end of the decade, and thus force many them out of the Medicare program. By 2030, the percentage of “underwater” providers would reach 25 percent.[5] The actuaries have made it very clear that having such a large number of facilities with negative total margins would seriously jeopardize access to care for seniors, which is why they do not believe these Medicare cuts are viable over the long run.</p>
<p>For the past two years, the actuaries have issued an alternative analysis of Medicare’s future spending path to give the public a more realistic assessment of the program’s future. As indicated in Chart 2, this alternative scenario shows Medicare spending rising from 4 to 10 percent of GDP over the coming decades instead of leveling off at about 6 percent of GDP in the official Trustees’ projections. It’s clear from this alternative scenario that the health law has not solved our health cost or entitlement problem.</p>
<p>Putting Health Spending on a Sustainable Path</p>
<p>The key question health reformers must answer is this: what process is most likely to succeed in bringing about continual and rapid improvement in the productivity and quality of patient care? Because the only way to slow the pace of rising costs without compromising the quality of American medicine is by making the health sector ever more productive. More health bang for the buck, if you will.</p>
<p>Providing an answer to this question requires properly diagnosing the problem. Why are health care costs rising so rapidly, including for the federal government? The prevailing view has been that the federal government’s health programs experience rapidly rising costs because they are victims of the runaway cost train that is pulling the entire system down the tracks at too fast a rate. According to this way of thinking, the only way to slow the government’s costs is to slow the whole train.</p>
<p>But this thinking misses a crucial point. Yes, one aspect of cost escalation is an exogenous factor. Rising wealth and medical discovery are fueling the demand for more and better treatments. That should not be resisted in any event. But there is widespread agreement that costs are also high and rising because of waste and inefficiency-and here the problem is not some force outside of government’s control but existing governmental policy.</p>
<p>At present, the vast majority of Americans get their health insurance through one of three sources: Medicare, for the elderly and disabled; Medicaid, for low-income households; and employers for the working-age population and their families. In each of these instances, the federal Treasury is underwriting rapid cost escalation because, as premiums rise, so does the federal subsidy.</p>
<p>Medicare’s role is especially important in this regard. It is often said that American health care is characterized by extreme fragmentation and lack of coordination, much duplication and waste, an overemphasis on procedure-based medicine, and a lack of accountability for the all-too-frequent cases of low-quality care. That’s all true. But why is it this way? The main reason is how Medicare is run today, and most especially the traditional fee-for-service (FFS) program.</p>
<p>Medicare is the largest purchaser of health services in most markets today. Four out of five enrollees are in the traditional FFS. With FFS, Medicare pays a pre-set rate to any licensed provider for any service rendered on behalf of a program enrollee, with essentially no questions asked. Nearly all Medicare beneficiaries also have supplemental insurance, from their former employers or purchased in the Medigap market. With this additional coverage, they generally pay no charges at the point of service because the combined insurance pays 100 percent of the cost. This kind of first-dollar coverage provides a powerful incentive for additional use of services. Whole segments of the U.S. medical industry have been built around the incentives embedded in these arrangements. Moreover, all of the various providers of services have their own Medicare fee schedule, and can bill the program separately from all the others when they render services to Medicare patients.</p>
<p>Congress and the program’s administrators have, without interruption, tried to hold down Medicare’s costs by paying less for each service provided, and that’s true also of the Medicare cuts in the health law. Those providing services to Medicare patients have responded by providing more services, and more intensive treatment, over time for the same conditions that patients present to them.</p>
<p>Some believe these problems can be fixed through federal efforts to “engineer” more cost-effective health care delivery. That’s the theory behind Accountable Care Organizations, other Medicare pilot projects, the comparative effectiveness research funding, and the new $10 billion Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation.</p>
<p>But Medicare’s administrators have been trying for many years to change the dynamic in the traditional fee-for-service program and have failed. Recently, CBO issued a detailed report documenting the failure of scores of demonstration efforts to deliver better care at lower cost.[6]</p>
<p>The basic problem is that the only way to build a high-quality, low-cost network of care is to exclude those from the network who are low-value and high-cost. And that’s something Medicare has never been able to do because that involves picking winners and losers. It’s far easier, and more tempting, to simply impose across-the-board payment reductions for all providers of services, without picking among physicians and hospitals. And so such arbitrary cost-cutting has become the default mechanism for hitting budget targets of various kinds over the years.</p>
<p>Premium Support and Defined Contribution Health Care</p>
<p>The alternative to centralized cost-control efforts is a functioning marketplace with cost-conscious consumers. In 2003, Congress built such a marketplace, for the new prescription-drug benefit in Medicare. Two features of the program’s design were important to its success. First, there was no incumbent government-run option to distort the marketplace with price controls and cost shifting. All private plans were on a level playing field. They competed with each other based on their ability to get discounts from manufacturers for an array of prescription offerings that are in demand among beneficiaries and their physicians.</p>
<p>Second, the government’s contribution to the cost of drug coverage is fixed and is the same regardless of the specific plan a beneficiary selects. The contribution is calculated based on the enrollment-weighted average of bids by participating plans in a market area. Beneficiaries selecting more expensive plans than the average bid must pay the additional premium out of their own pockets. Those selecting less expensive plans pay a lower premium. With the incentives aligned properly, participating plans know in advance that the only way to win market share is by offering an attractive product at a competitive price because it is the beneficiaries to whom they must ultimately appeal.</p>
<p>This competitive structure, with a defined contribution fixed independently of the plan chosen by the beneficiary, has worked to keep cost growth much below other parts of Medicare and below expectations. At the time of enactment, there were many pronouncements that using competition, private plans, and a defined government contribution would never work because insurers would not participate, beneficiaries would be incapable of making choices, and private insurers would not be able to negotiate deeper discounts than the government could impose by fiat. All of those assumptions were proven wrong.</p>
<p>What actually happened is that robust competition took place, scores of insurers entered the program with aggressive cost cutting and low premiums, and costs were driven down. Yesterday, at a hearing before the House Budget Committee, the chief actuary for Medicare, Richard Foster, testified that in every year of the drug benefit’s operation, seniors have migrated from high-cost, low-efficiency plans to low-cost, high-efficiency plans.</p>
<p>The result has been a strong record of success. In 2012, the average beneficiary premium is just $30 per month for seniors – up just $4 per month since 2006.[7] Overall, federal spending has come in roughly 40 percent below expectations.</p>
<p>Similar changes – what might be called a defined contribution approach to reform – must be implemented in the non-drug portion of Medicare, as well as in Medicaid (excluding the disabled and elderly) and employer-provided health care.</p>
<p>In Medicare, that would mean using a competitive bidding system – including bids from the traditional FFS program – to determine the government’s contribution in a region. Beneficiaries could choose to enroll in any qualified plan, including FFS. In some regions, FFS might be less expensive than the competing private plans. But in some places, it almost certainly would not be, and beneficiary premiums would reflect the cost difference. This kind of reform could be implemented on a prospective basis so that those already on the program or nearly so would remain in the program as currently structured.</p>
<p>Moving toward a defined-contribution approach to reform would allow for much greater federal budgetary control, which is of course a primary objective and tremendously important for the nation’s economy and long-term prosperity. But this isn’t just a fiscal reform. It’s a crucial step toward better health care too because it would put consumers and patients in the driver’s seat, not the government. With consumers making choices about the kind of coverage they receive as well as the type of “delivery system” through which they get care, the health system would orient itself to delivering the kind of care patients want and expect.</p>
<p>Critics might claim that this improved fiscal outlook from defined contribution health care would come at the expense of the beneficiaries, who would bear the entire risk of costs continuing to rise faster than the government’s newly fixed contribution. But that would only be the case if building a functioning marketplace had no discernible impact on the productivity of the health sector. It is far more likely that converting millions of passive insurance enrollees into cost-conscious consumers will have a transformative effect on health care delivery, and for the better. There would be tremendous competitive pressure on those delivering services to do more with less, and find better ways of giving patients what they truly need. Any health sector player that did not step up and improve its productivity would risk losing substantial market share.</p>
<p>At yesterday’s House Budget Committee hearing, Mr. Foster was asked very directly by Chairman Paul Ryan if competitive bidding as part of a premium support model could help alleviate cost pressures in the rest of Medicare. His very direct answer was, yes, it could, and he based this response on the evidence he sees in the drug benefit, the other parts of Medicare, and modeling work his office has done over many years.</p>
<p>This committee should be commended for concerning itself with how to put health spending on a sustainable path. That is a crucial issue for the country. I believe the answer lies in moving away from a failed model of micromanaged payment systems and toward a decentralized system in which consumers themselves make the resource allocation decisions. That approach has the potential to keep costs under control even as it makes the system more responsive to patients’ needs.</p>
<p>James C. Capretta is a fellow at the <a href="" type="internal">Ethics and Public Policy Center</a>&#160;and project director of e21’s <a href="http://www.obamacarewatch.org/" type="external">ObamaCare Watch</a>. He was an associate director at the Office of Management and Budget from 2001 to 2004.</p>
<p>_______________________________</p>
<p>1 “Effects of the Patient Protection And Affordable Care Act On the Federal Budget And The Balance In The Hospital Insurance Trust Fund,” Director’s Blog, Congressional Budget Office, December 23, 2009 ( <a href="http://www.cbo.gov/publication/25017" type="external">http://www.cbo.gov/publication/25017</a>).</p>
<p>2 “The Fiscal Consequences of the Affordable Care Act,” Charles Blahous, Mercatus Center (forthcoming).</p>
<p>3 “2009 Annual Report of the Boards of Trustees of the Federal Hospital Insurance and Federal Supplementary Medical Insurance Trust Funds,” May 2009. p. 69.</p>
<p>4 “2011 Annual Report of the Boards of Trustees of the Federal Hospital Insurance and Federal Supplementary Medical Insurance Trust Funds,” May 2011, p. 87.</p>
<p>5 “Projected Medicare Expenditures under an Illustrative Scenario with Alternative Payment Updates to Medicare Providers,” John D. Shatto and M. Kent Clemens, Office of the Actuary, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, May 13, 2011, p. 8 ( <a href="http://www.cms.gov/ActuarialStudies/Downloads/2011TRAlternativeScenario.pdf" type="external">http://</a> <a href="http://www.cms.gov/ActuarialStudies/Downloads/2011TRAlternativeScenario.pdf" type="external">www.cms.gov/ActuarialStudies/Downloads/2011TRAlternativeScenario.pdf</a>).</p>
<p>6 “Lessons from Medicare’s Demonstration Programs on Disease Management, Care Coordination, and Value-Based Payment,” Congressional Budget Office, Issue Brief, January 2012.</p>
<p>7 “Medicare Prescription Drug Premiums Will Not Increase, More Seniors Receiving Free Preventive Care, Discounts in the Donut Hole,” Department of Health and Human Services, Press Release, August 4, 2011 ( <a href="http://www.hhs.gov/news/press/2011pres/08/20110804a.html" type="external">http://www.hhs.gov/news/press/2011pres/08/20110804a.html</a>).</p> | false | 1 | february 29 senate budget committee chairman kent conrad convened hearing putting health care spending sustainable path eppc fellow james c capretta participated panel david cutler professor economics harvard university len nichols director center health policy research ethics george mason university mr caprettas testimony available prepared testimony dr cutler available dr nichols prepared testimony available full hearing watched _______________________________ 160 mr chairman ranking member sessions members committee thank opportunity participate important hearing putting health care spending sustainable path particular pleasure appear today witness worked committee decade one staff members senator domenici served chairman ranking member make three basic points testimony today 1 rapidly rising entitlement spending cause nations fiscal problems escalating health costs primary reason entitlement spending surge 2 health care law passed 2010 made fiscal problem much worse used medicare cuts taxes increase nonmedicare entitlement spending pay future medicare benefits medicare cuts unlikely sustained long term anyway 3 putting health spending sustainable path requires significant medicare reform federal government cant engineer reform regulations demonstrations micromanagement answer functioning dynamic marketplace reason pronounced fiscal pressure sometimes argued reason budget problems today discrete tax spending decisions made last decade line argument relies might called fallacy uncontrolled baseline gives pass massive runup spending due growth entitlements especially health care entitlements tries assign blame fiscal woes tax policies held tax collection historical postwar norm united states shown chart 1 longerterm perspective clearly indicates entitlements problem especially health care entitlements past forty years federal tax collection averaged 18 percent gdp annually meanwhile back 1972 federal government spent 44 percent gdp big three entitlement programs social security medicare medicaid plenty revenue left covering costs entitlements governmental priorities today spending three programs expected reach 102 percent gdp according congressional budget office cbo words today government spending additional 6 percentage points gdp three programs compared 1972 put perspective spending defense securityrelated functions government totals 56 percent gdp 2012 trend toward devoting resources entitlements going accelerate baby boom retires next twentyfive years cbo expects spending programs plus new entitlements created health care law push total spending programs 16 percent gdp reasonable assumptions growth provider payments factors occur would virtually room left budget anything else assuming historical level tax collection health law makes budget outlook much worse better debate health care law often argued added federal cost coverage provisions would offset tax hikes spending cuts indeed suggested new law would actually reduce longterm budget deficit perspective rests critically one accounts medicare taxes cuts enacted law specifically taxes cuts assigned medicare hospital insurance hi trust fund medicare hi trust fund like social security generally funded dedicated taxes consequently trust fund projected run short funds remedy increase revenue tax hikes slow spending trust fund cuts prior enactment health care law hi trust fund exactly situation continues day thus changes needed ensure trust fund could continue paying full benefits beyond moment trust fund projected depleted reserves changes new taxes dedicated medicare hi medicare hi spending cuts enacted standalone provisions theres question longterm budget outlook would improved exact amount combined medicare tax hike spending cut thats happened unlike social security changes medicare hi shore trust fund also count called paygo scorecard budget scorekeeping purposes consequently 2010 health law cut medicare spending 450 billion raised substantial new revenue program funds spent twice pay medicare benefits jeopardy due depleted trust fund pay large entitlement spending increase contained health care law cbo director douglas elmendorf put key point savings hi trust fund ppaca would received government set aside pay future medicare spending time pay current spending parts legislation programs1 argue may true longstanding practice congress count medicare hi changes manner course correct previous legislation come close 2010 health law terms fiscal consequences doublecount forthcoming paper mercatus center public trustee medicare program charles blahous estimates due large part doublecount health care law add least 340 billion cumulatively federal deficits period 2012 20212 long run added cost federal budget even staggering 2009 medicare trustees report medicare trustees estimated medicare hi trust fund unfunded liability 134 trillion seventyfive year projection period net presentvalue terms3 2011 report unfunded liability estimated 30 trillion4 thus doublecounting medicare hi spending cuts taxes paid 10 trillion medicare benefits next seventyfive years equivalent amount entitlement spending health law course analysis doublecount assumes medicare cuts sustained coming years much doubt cuts medicare program contained health law mainly blunt acrosstheboard payment rate reductions hit every provider service regardless quality care according office actuary centers medicare medicaid services deepest cuts annual productivity factor adjustment push total revenue 15 percent institutions including hospitals providing services medicare patients total costs end decade thus force many medicare program 2030 percentage underwater providers would reach 25 percent5 actuaries made clear large number facilities negative total margins would seriously jeopardize access care seniors believe medicare cuts viable long run past two years actuaries issued alternative analysis medicares future spending path give public realistic assessment programs future indicated chart 2 alternative scenario shows medicare spending rising 4 10 percent gdp coming decades instead leveling 6 percent gdp official trustees projections clear alternative scenario health law solved health cost entitlement problem putting health spending sustainable path key question health reformers must answer process likely succeed bringing continual rapid improvement productivity quality patient care way slow pace rising costs without compromising quality american medicine making health sector ever productive health bang buck providing answer question requires properly diagnosing problem health care costs rising rapidly including federal government prevailing view federal governments health programs experience rapidly rising costs victims runaway cost train pulling entire system tracks fast rate according way thinking way slow governments costs slow whole train thinking misses crucial point yes one aspect cost escalation exogenous factor rising wealth medical discovery fueling demand better treatments resisted event widespread agreement costs also high rising waste inefficiencyand problem force outside governments control existing governmental policy present vast majority americans get health insurance one three sources medicare elderly disabled medicaid lowincome households employers workingage population families instances federal treasury underwriting rapid cost escalation premiums rise federal subsidy medicares role especially important regard often said american health care characterized extreme fragmentation lack coordination much duplication waste overemphasis procedurebased medicine lack accountability alltoofrequent cases lowquality care thats true way main reason medicare run today especially traditional feeforservice ffs program medicare largest purchaser health services markets today four five enrollees traditional ffs ffs medicare pays preset rate licensed provider service rendered behalf program enrollee essentially questions asked nearly medicare beneficiaries also supplemental insurance former employers purchased medigap market additional coverage generally pay charges point service combined insurance pays 100 percent cost kind firstdollar coverage provides powerful incentive additional use services whole segments us medical industry built around incentives embedded arrangements moreover various providers services medicare fee schedule bill program separately others render services medicare patients congress programs administrators without interruption tried hold medicares costs paying less service provided thats true also medicare cuts health law providing services medicare patients responded providing services intensive treatment time conditions patients present believe problems fixed federal efforts engineer costeffective health care delivery thats theory behind accountable care organizations medicare pilot projects comparative effectiveness research funding new 10 billion center medicare medicaid innovation medicares administrators trying many years change dynamic traditional feeforservice program failed recently cbo issued detailed report documenting failure scores demonstration efforts deliver better care lower cost6 basic problem way build highquality lowcost network care exclude network lowvalue highcost thats something medicare never able involves picking winners losers far easier tempting simply impose acrosstheboard payment reductions providers services without picking among physicians hospitals arbitrary costcutting become default mechanism hitting budget targets various kinds years premium support defined contribution health care alternative centralized costcontrol efforts functioning marketplace costconscious consumers 2003 congress built marketplace new prescriptiondrug benefit medicare two features programs design important success first incumbent governmentrun option distort marketplace price controls cost shifting private plans level playing field competed based ability get discounts manufacturers array prescription offerings demand among beneficiaries physicians second governments contribution cost drug coverage fixed regardless specific plan beneficiary selects contribution calculated based enrollmentweighted average bids participating plans market area beneficiaries selecting expensive plans average bid must pay additional premium pockets selecting less expensive plans pay lower premium incentives aligned properly participating plans know advance way win market share offering attractive product competitive price beneficiaries must ultimately appeal competitive structure defined contribution fixed independently plan chosen beneficiary worked keep cost growth much parts medicare expectations time enactment many pronouncements using competition private plans defined government contribution would never work insurers would participate beneficiaries would incapable making choices private insurers would able negotiate deeper discounts government could impose fiat assumptions proven wrong actually happened robust competition took place scores insurers entered program aggressive cost cutting low premiums costs driven yesterday hearing house budget committee chief actuary medicare richard foster testified every year drug benefits operation seniors migrated highcost lowefficiency plans lowcost highefficiency plans result strong record success 2012 average beneficiary premium 30 per month seniors 4 per month since 20067 overall federal spending come roughly 40 percent expectations similar changes might called defined contribution approach reform must implemented nondrug portion medicare well medicaid excluding disabled elderly employerprovided health care medicare would mean using competitive bidding system including bids traditional ffs program determine governments contribution region beneficiaries could choose enroll qualified plan including ffs regions ffs might less expensive competing private plans places almost certainly would beneficiary premiums would reflect cost difference kind reform could implemented prospective basis already program nearly would remain program currently structured moving toward definedcontribution approach reform would allow much greater federal budgetary control course primary objective tremendously important nations economy longterm prosperity isnt fiscal reform crucial step toward better health care would put consumers patients drivers seat government consumers making choices kind coverage receive well type delivery system get care health system would orient delivering kind care patients want expect critics might claim improved fiscal outlook defined contribution health care would come expense beneficiaries would bear entire risk costs continuing rise faster governments newly fixed contribution would case building functioning marketplace discernible impact productivity health sector far likely converting millions passive insurance enrollees costconscious consumers transformative effect health care delivery better would tremendous competitive pressure delivering services less find better ways giving patients truly need health sector player step improve productivity would risk losing substantial market share yesterdays house budget committee hearing mr foster asked directly chairman paul ryan competitive bidding part premium support model could help alleviate cost pressures rest medicare direct answer yes could based response evidence sees drug benefit parts medicare modeling work office done many years committee commended concerning put health spending sustainable path crucial issue country believe answer lies moving away failed model micromanaged payment systems toward decentralized system consumers make resource allocation decisions approach potential keep costs control even makes system responsive patients needs james c capretta fellow ethics public policy center160and project director e21s obamacare watch associate director office management budget 2001 2004 _______________________________ 1 effects patient protection affordable care act federal budget balance hospital insurance trust fund directors blog congressional budget office december 23 2009 httpwwwcbogovpublication25017 2 fiscal consequences affordable care act charles blahous mercatus center forthcoming 3 2009 annual report boards trustees federal hospital insurance federal supplementary medical insurance trust funds may 2009 p 69 4 2011 annual report boards trustees federal hospital insurance federal supplementary medical insurance trust funds may 2011 p 87 5 projected medicare expenditures illustrative scenario alternative payment updates medicare providers john shatto kent clemens office actuary centers medicare medicaid services may 13 2011 p 8 http wwwcmsgovactuarialstudiesdownloads2011tralternativescenariopdf 6 lessons medicares demonstration programs disease management care coordination valuebased payment congressional budget office issue brief january 2012 7 medicare prescription drug premiums increase seniors receiving free preventive care discounts donut hole department health human services press release august 4 2011 httpwwwhhsgovnewspress2011pres0820110804ahtml | 1,942 |
<p>Once, many years ago, a friend told me of an experience he had had walking down the street after a violent thunderstorm. He noticed, almost simultaneously, that a power-line had come down and lay with one end in a large puddle and that a hippie, coming down the street in the opposite direction, had not noticed it and was about to step in the puddle. He had had no time to shout a warning before the hippie was hurled into the air by the force of the electric charge and landed in a heap on the sidewalk. My friend and other by-standers rushed up to the poor fellow and cried, “Are you hurt? Are you all right?” The dazed hippie, perhaps not entirely a stranger to similar mind-altering experiences, looked up at the circle of concerned faces gathered around him and said: “I’m all right, man. I’m just groovin’ on the shock.”</p>
<p>That was the attitude I thought the media ought to have adopted on the morning after the Trump election victory last month — failing, of course, the attitude of genuine humility of which they are apparently incapable. Their dismay at so ghastly a prospect as Donald Trump in the White House was understandable, but it certainly wasn’t as if that was all downside for them. There could surely be no doubt that Mr Trump would continue to be for them the excellent copy he has been for the last eighteen months, and if the apocalyptic warnings of his unfitness for the presidency and the prospective dangers attending his tenure of that office which have become their stock-in-trade are not borne out by events, who will care? The disjunction between rhetoric and reality is what made both the Trump candidacy and their reaction to it possible in the first place.</p>
<p>As someone who has been reviewing movies for a quarter of a century during which pretty much everything coming out of our domestic film industry has aspired to the condition of the animated cartoon — as Walter Pater said the other arts did to the condition of music — I have been in a better position than most to have seen this election coming. Why suppose that politics would be immune to the virus of the cartoon culture that, over the last thirty or forty years, has come to pervade pretty much every other aspect of our public life? From the first appearances in the 1990s of “Reality TV” shows, like rust spots on a piece of delicate machinery, we could have foretold the day, not long hence, when the smooth workings of our democracy were bound to seize up on us, as they did during the late campaign, and turn into a braying cacophony of rival football gangs, each trying to shout down the other.</p>
<p>Yet the media have been too enthusiastically joining in the shouting — how else to attract an audience in the era of reality-TV politics? — to have noticed what, as Donald Trump likes to say, “is going on.” Even after the Trump victory, they seemed to see it all as a bizarre aberration beginning and ending with Mr Trump. “No one predicted a night like this,” wrote Jim Rutenberg of <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/09/business/media/media-trump-clinton.html" type="external">The New York Times</a>&#160;next morning — he of the front-page, signed editorial advocating journalistic advocacy on behalf of Mrs Clinton. What he meant, of course, was that no one he might have expected to meet socially had predicted it, no one from among the progressive Hillary-admirers and Trump-haters who are the only people he knows. It doesn’t occur to him that his casual relegation of half the country to unpersons might have had something to do with the Trump victory.</p>
<p>“Annoy the media: Re-elect Bush” was the cry back in 1992, the only time I have ever put a bumper-sticker on my car. Well, at last there is a case to be made that people did&#160;vote to annoy the media, who badly overplayed their hand by going into hysterics every time they were called upon to consider the prospect of a Trump victory. I doubt that he would have won if it had not been the Republicans’ “turn” at the presidency, as these things have gone since 1992, or if Mrs Clinton had been a more attractive candidate, but he came near enough to losing as it was that it seems entirely possible a popular reaction against the media’s self-importance and self-righteousness could have made the difference. Not that the media themselves can be expected to grasp this possibility.</p>
<p>Elsewhere in that day’s Times, Mr Rutenberg got together with the paper’s chief television critic, James Poniewozik, to ask <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/09/arts/television/after-this-election-can-the-media-recover.html" type="external">“Can the Media Recover From This Election?”</a>&#160;Alas, it was but too obvious that they could. And we who would have preferred to humble the media, rather than merely annoy them, have to beware of engaging in their own brand of apocalypticism, which was no more persuasive as applied to themselves than it had been when applied to the Republic under President Trump. Nowhere, however, in a piece apparently written before the result was known, did there appear to be any appetite for self-examination or re-consideration of the practices which were to bring them to such a pretty pass. Messrs. Rutenberg and Poniewozik only doubled down on the former’s advocacy advocacy, which the latter was pleased to describe as a noble endeavor “to describe reality as we honestly find it, regardless of appearances.” Reality, forsooth! That they apparently consider their claim to be arbiters of reality as beyond dispute is the best evidence yet that the media haven’t recovered from this election, at least not in the moral sense — and that they won’t.</p>
<p>Look, too, at that day’s paper’s trumpeting flight of headlines:</p>
<p>“ <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/09/world/europe/global-reaction-us-presidential-election-donald-trump.html" type="external">Across the World, Shock and Uncertainty at Trump’s Victory</a>”</p>
<p>“ <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/09/world/donald-trumps-victory-promises-to-upend-the-international-order.html" type="external">Donald Trump’s Victory Promises to Upend the International Order</a>”</p>
<p>“ <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/13/world/europe/donald-trump-un-human-rights.html" type="external">Donald Trump Is ‘Dangerous’ for Global Stability, U.N. Rights Chief Says</a>”</p>
<p>Not to mention the obvious fact that “ <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/10/business/dealbook/stock-markets-election.html" type="external">Global Markets Are Shaky After Trump Victory</a>” — though this later had to be changed to: “Global Markets, Initially Shaken, Edge Higher After Trump Victory”. All these were echoed in the Washington Post’s even more absurdly overstated:</p>
<p>“ <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/us-allies-look-on-anxiously-as-trump-takes-commanding-position-in-presidential-race/2016/11/09/c246dd4c-a63e-11e6-9bd6-184ab22d218e_story.html" type="external">World gasps in collective disbelief following Trump’s election</a>.”</p>
<p>This had also been a common tactic during the campaign. Somewhere, we were told, a foreigner was either laughing at or horrified at you dim-witted yokels who were supporting Donald Trump. Weren’t they ashamed of themselves? Weren’t their more sophisticated fellow-countrymen even more ashamed of them? But what kind of people did they suppose would be susceptible to such shaming tactics? Who but those already disposed to feel ashamed of their country? Wouldn’t anybody else be driven by them to vote for Mr Trump even if they were not already doing so? And, by the way, those gasps of disbelief from selected foreign dignitaries were interspersed in the article which followed with much more temperate and even some favorable reactions.</p>
<p>The comedy in the media’s tut-tutting about a world they essentially created by selling the public on the notion that elections are really titanic struggles between good and evil has been the one redeeming feature of the last year for those of us nostalgic for a press content with the role of wry observer of bipartisan follies and not committed instead to passionate advocacy of one side over the other. Donald Trump may not be the gigantic intellect he sees himself as being, but he is smart enough to have seen further than the media or the Democrats into the role he would be forced to play in this epic drama where Republicans are normally expected to play that of the gentlemanly loser. He relished playing it, too — and, with it, playing the media for suckers. The more they affected to throw up their hands in horror at his words and deeds, the more phony they and their fanatical anti-Trumpery appeared.</p>
<p>True, the media as we have known them for two generations are dying, and their faculties are fading fast, but how could they not have seen anything of themselves in the mirror when they looked at Donald Trump and the Trump campaign? Did there not stir in them some faint sense of recognition when they noted his Manichaean world-view, his use of hyperbole — particularly when it came to the catastrophic consequences of not listening to him — his obsession with appearances, his equally obsessive interest in scandal and hidden information, his inability to admit fault or mistakes, his insistence that the election was “rigged” and that those who disagreed with him about anything must be either “failed” or “crooked” or “lying”? How, above all, did they miss in his self-importance and absence of self-reflection the reflection of their own?</p>
<p>During the campaign, I often felt as Mike Pence presumably did when, during the vice presidential debate, Tim Kaine unleashed a string of insults against Donald Trump, beginning with the assertion that the Trump campaign was “insult-driven.” Wonderingly, Mr Pence replied: “ <a href="http://wtop.com/elections/2016/10/pence-calm-and-steady-but-dodges-in-defending-trump/" type="external">Ours is an insult-driven campaign?”</a>&#160;And yet both Mr Kaine and his many supporters and cheer-leaders in the media appeared to take it for granted that he could not be held to the same standard to which he was trying to hold Mr Trump. Similarly, Mr Kaine’s <a href="http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2016/10/16/kaine_trump_making_wild_scorched-earth_claims_about_rigged_election_are_scare_tactics.html" type="external">claims</a>&#160;that the Trump warning of a rigged election was “scorched earth” campaigning and mere “scare tactics” were hardly out of his mouth before he himself <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2016/11/05/politics/tim-kaine-fbi-hillary-clinton-email/" type="external">was accusing</a>&#160;“some in the FBI” of “actively working to try to help the Trump campaign.”</p>
<p>But why should the media have noticed any such contradiction when they themselves were simultaneously criticizing Mr Trump for undermining democracy with his claims of election fraud and repeating (and repeating) their own and the Democrats’ long-standing claims of GOP vote-rigging by “voter suppression” — which is their preferred term for the Voter ID laws mostly passed by Republican legislators and invalidated by Democratic judges? If, as they said, there was “no evidence” of voter fraud through failure to require a photo ID in order to vote, why were they so determined to make sure that there could be none?</p>
<p>This was one area in which the overheated rhetoric of the campaign might have been expected to have real-world consequences reaching beyond the election, but for the most part people on both sides appeared to treat the apocalypticism of the campaign as being for campaign purposes only, which is what you’d expect given the cartoon climate. Thus <a href="http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/hillary-clinton-sticks-hopeful-message-final-campaign-day-article-1.2862864" type="external">The New York Daily News</a> reported on Hillary Clinton’s last day of campaigning that,</p>
<p>Cleared of another FBI probe and clinging to a narrow lead in polls, Hillary Clinton hit the campaign trail for the final time Monday with a message of hope — and civility. “I think we do need more love and kindness,” Clinton told a rally crowd in Pittsburgh — her first of four events in an intense last day of campaigning. “We have got to rise above all this hate-filled rhetoric.” “Anger is not a plan,” she added, reiterating a promise to represent all Americans if elected — a message she repeated in her final campaign ad. “I want to be a president for all Americans, not just some,” she said.</p>
<p>So much for the “basket of deplorables” she had seen in the millions of Trump supporters a few weeks earlier. But, then, maybe she wasn’t thinking of her own anger and hate-filled rhetoric but somebody else’s. It’s possible. It was enough of a concession in her eyes to speak of such things in the abstract — and in the abstract to deplore them — once the campaign extravaganza was finally grinding to a halt.</p>
<p>I think that the extent to which our politics are now conducted entirely on the rhetorical level has been insufficiently appreciated up until now. <a href="http://www.jamesbowman.net/diaryDetail.asp?hpID=675" type="external">I have written before</a>&#160;about Barack Obama as our first rhetorical president, a man elected not on the strength of anything he had done or even of anything he had promised to do, apart from a vague expectation of “hope and change,” but for the words with which he told us how he felt about things, and how he made us feel about ourselves for believing in them, and in him. In this respect, he was a classier version of Trump before there was Trump, a Trump for starry-eyed elites who, like Michelle Obama, could only be proud of their country once it made him president. Like Mr Trump, too, he must have understood how low people’s expectations were of their federal government, and so that they wouldn’t anyway believe any but the vaguest of promises (“Hope+Change= “Make America Great Again”). What people wanted in a leader whom they considered more or less a figurehead was reduced to personal authenticity, and that is the one thing that both the President and his successor have had to offer — and that immunized both to some extent from the now ubiquitous charge of “lying.” It was also the one thing Hillary Clinton and the media, the big losers of this election, didn’t have.</p>
<p>Of course, so long as the media are able to keep the country focused on questions of good versus evil, the rhetorical presidency can be expected to continue, but, somewhat belatedly, there have appeared some unwelcome signs of a turn to substance. “She doesn’t do anything about anything other than talk,” said Donald Trump of his opponent. “With her, it’s all talk and no action.” This kind of thing began to resonate. Hillary’s hammering on the theme of forward, not back, and preserving the gains of the Obama administration was especially likely to look like mere spin when the way forward was as obscure to people as the putative gains of the Obama administration — or her own accomplishments as secretary of state which, by her own account, seemed to consist of visiting lots and lots of countries and logging lots and lots of air miles. Wasn’t this all, as Mr Trump said, just talk?</p>
<p>Ironically, his own more timid or reluctant supporters were likely to plead on his behalf that the offensive and politically incorrect language harped on by the media as the salient, if not the only, feature of his campaign was also just talk, if “locker-room” talk. And how much else besides, we may wonder? That, of course, remains to be seen. At all hazards, however, Mr Trump seems to have understood (as the media have yet to do) that American political contests now take place almost exclusively on the rhetorical level, and in that environment you have to shout to be heard. Bad manners on all sides, it seems, are de rigueur, even if they will only ever be noticed as such by the other side — which will confidently brand them, to the wonder of the world, as the sole true and unassailable reality we and our fellow partisans still have to cling to.</p>
<p>James Bowman is resident scholar at the Ethics and Public Policy Center.</p> | false | 1 | many years ago friend told experience walking street violent thunderstorm noticed almost simultaneously powerline come lay one end large puddle hippie coming street opposite direction noticed step puddle time shout warning hippie hurled air force electric charge landed heap sidewalk friend bystanders rushed poor fellow cried hurt right dazed hippie perhaps entirely stranger similar mindaltering experiences looked circle concerned faces gathered around said im right man im groovin shock attitude thought media ought adopted morning trump election victory last month failing course attitude genuine humility apparently incapable dismay ghastly prospect donald trump white house understandable certainly wasnt downside could surely doubt mr trump would continue excellent copy last eighteen months apocalyptic warnings unfitness presidency prospective dangers attending tenure office become stockintrade borne events care disjunction rhetoric reality made trump candidacy reaction possible first place someone reviewing movies quarter century pretty much everything coming domestic film industry aspired condition animated cartoon walter pater said arts condition music better position seen election coming suppose politics would immune virus cartoon culture last thirty forty years come pervade pretty much every aspect public life first appearances 1990s reality tv shows like rust spots piece delicate machinery could foretold day long hence smooth workings democracy bound seize us late campaign turn braying cacophony rival football gangs trying shout yet media enthusiastically joining shouting else attract audience era realitytv politics noticed donald trump likes say going even trump victory seemed see bizarre aberration beginning ending mr trump one predicted night like wrote jim rutenberg new york times160next morning frontpage signed editorial advocating journalistic advocacy behalf mrs clinton meant course one might expected meet socially predicted one among progressive hillaryadmirers trumphaters people knows doesnt occur casual relegation half country unpersons might something trump victory annoy media reelect bush cry back 1992 time ever put bumpersticker car well last case made people did160vote annoy media badly overplayed hand going hysterics every time called upon consider prospect trump victory doubt would republicans turn presidency things gone since 1992 mrs clinton attractive candidate came near enough losing seems entirely possible popular reaction medias selfimportance selfrighteousness could made difference media expected grasp possibility elsewhere days times mr rutenberg got together papers chief television critic james poniewozik ask media recover election160alas obvious could would preferred humble media rather merely annoy beware engaging brand apocalypticism persuasive applied applied republic president trump nowhere however piece apparently written result known appear appetite selfexamination reconsideration practices bring pretty pass messrs rutenberg poniewozik doubled formers advocacy advocacy latter pleased describe noble endeavor describe reality honestly find regardless appearances reality forsooth apparently consider claim arbiters reality beyond dispute best evidence yet media havent recovered election least moral sense wont look days papers trumpeting flight headlines across world shock uncertainty trumps victory donald trumps victory promises upend international order donald trump dangerous global stability un rights chief says mention obvious fact global markets shaky trump victory though later changed global markets initially shaken edge higher trump victory echoed washington posts even absurdly overstated world gasps collective disbelief following trumps election also common tactic campaign somewhere told foreigner either laughing horrified dimwitted yokels supporting donald trump werent ashamed werent sophisticated fellowcountrymen even ashamed kind people suppose would susceptible shaming tactics already disposed feel ashamed country wouldnt anybody else driven vote mr trump even already way gasps disbelief selected foreign dignitaries interspersed article followed much temperate even favorable reactions comedy medias tuttutting world essentially created selling public notion elections really titanic struggles good evil one redeeming feature last year us nostalgic press content role wry observer bipartisan follies committed instead passionate advocacy one side donald trump may gigantic intellect sees smart enough seen media democrats role would forced play epic drama republicans normally expected play gentlemanly loser relished playing playing media suckers affected throw hands horror words deeds phony fanatical antitrumpery appeared true media known two generations dying faculties fading fast could seen anything mirror looked donald trump trump campaign stir faint sense recognition noted manichaean worldview use hyperbole particularly came catastrophic consequences listening obsession appearances equally obsessive interest scandal hidden information inability admit fault mistakes insistence election rigged disagreed anything must either failed crooked lying miss selfimportance absence selfreflection reflection campaign often felt mike pence presumably vice presidential debate tim kaine unleashed string insults donald trump beginning assertion trump campaign insultdriven wonderingly mr pence replied insultdriven campaign160and yet mr kaine many supporters cheerleaders media appeared take granted could held standard trying hold mr trump similarly mr kaines claims160that trump warning rigged election scorched earth campaigning mere scare tactics hardly mouth accusing160some fbi actively working try help trump campaign media noticed contradiction simultaneously criticizing mr trump undermining democracy claims election fraud repeating repeating democrats longstanding claims gop voterigging voter suppression preferred term voter id laws mostly passed republican legislators invalidated democratic judges said evidence voter fraud failure require photo id order vote determined make sure could none one area overheated rhetoric campaign might expected realworld consequences reaching beyond election part people sides appeared treat apocalypticism campaign campaign purposes youd expect given cartoon climate thus new york daily news reported hillary clintons last day campaigning cleared another fbi probe clinging narrow lead polls hillary clinton hit campaign trail final time monday message hope civility think need love kindness clinton told rally crowd pittsburgh first four events intense last day campaigning got rise hatefilled rhetoric anger plan added reiterating promise represent americans elected message repeated final campaign ad want president americans said much basket deplorables seen millions trump supporters weeks earlier maybe wasnt thinking anger hatefilled rhetoric somebody elses possible enough concession eyes speak things abstract abstract deplore campaign extravaganza finally grinding halt think extent politics conducted entirely rhetorical level insufficiently appreciated written before160about barack obama first rhetorical president man elected strength anything done even anything promised apart vague expectation hope change words told us felt things made us feel believing respect classier version trump trump trump starryeyed elites like michelle obama could proud country made president like mr trump must understood low peoples expectations federal government wouldnt anyway believe vaguest promises hopechange make america great people wanted leader considered less figurehead reduced personal authenticity one thing president successor offer immunized extent ubiquitous charge lying also one thing hillary clinton media big losers election didnt course long media able keep country focused questions good versus evil rhetorical presidency expected continue somewhat belatedly appeared unwelcome signs turn substance doesnt anything anything talk said donald trump opponent talk action kind thing began resonate hillarys hammering theme forward back preserving gains obama administration especially likely look like mere spin way forward obscure people putative gains obama administration accomplishments secretary state account seemed consist visiting lots lots countries logging lots lots air miles wasnt mr trump said talk ironically timid reluctant supporters likely plead behalf offensive politically incorrect language harped media salient feature campaign also talk lockerroom talk much else besides may wonder course remains seen hazards however mr trump seems understood media yet american political contests take place almost exclusively rhetorical level environment shout heard bad manners sides seems de rigueur even ever noticed side confidently brand wonder world sole true unassailable reality fellow partisans still cling james bowman resident scholar ethics public policy center | 1,189 |
<p>MEXICO CITY — Despite being worried about an increased Russian military presence, the Baltic nations are still congratulating America’s new leader, Donald Trump.</p>
<p>Tensions grew during the U.S. presidential election campaign when Trump floated the idea that NATO members’ defense spending targets would be a prerequisite for the U.S. to defend a NATO ally. That is an abrupt break from longstanding American policy.</p>
<p>Lithuanian President Dalia Grybauskaite says “the people of the U.S. have made a decision, we will respect their choice… we trust the United States, as it is our strongest and closest ally.”</p>
<p>In neighboring Latvia, President Raimonds Vejonis’s office says he is looking forward “to close relations with the new U.S. administration,” and that the U.S. would remain a strategic partner and important NATO ally.</p>
<p>The new Estonian president, Kersti Kaljulaid, congratulated Trump, saying the United States “has been, and will also continue to be one of Estonia’s most important allies.”</p>
<p>———</p>
<p>1:40 p.m.</p>
<p>The leaders of the nationalist Alternative for Germany party, which campaigns against Chancellor Angela Merkel’s refugee policy, have welcomed Donald Trump’s presidential victory.</p>
<p>Party co-leader Frauke Petry says “it was high time that people disenfranchised by the political establishment get their voice back in the United States of America too.”</p>
<p>Petry said Trump’s victory offered the chance to “readjust the trans-Atlantic relationship and end the big conflicts in Ukraine and Syria jointly with Russia” and “replace America’s hegemonic claims in Europe with co-operation among equals.”</p>
<p>Fellow party leader Joerg Meuthen says “the establishment now has to recognize that you can’t rule past the population for long … Trump has rightly been rewarded for his bravery in standing up against the system and speaking uncomfortable truths.”</p>
<p>———</p>
<p>1:30 p.m.</p>
<p>International Olympic Committee President Thomas Bach is offering his congratulations to Donald Trump after his victory in the U.S. presidential election and wishes him “all the best” for his term in office.</p>
<p>Trump’s victory over Hillary Clinton comes as Los Angeles is bidding to host the 2024 Olympics. Trump’s statements during the campaign about Mexicans, Muslims and building a wall along the Mexican border may not help the California city’s Olympic case with some IOC members, who come from all over the world.</p>
<p>Los Angeles is competing against Paris and Budapest, Hungary. The IOC will select the host city in September 2017.</p>
<p>———</p>
<p>1:20 p.m.</p>
<p>Italy’s premier has offered his congratulations to Donald Trump, brushing aside political differences, following his repeated public endorsements of Hillary Clinton.</p>
<p>Premier Matteo Renzi says Wednesday “in the name of Italy, I congratulate the president of the United States and wish him well in his work, convinced that the Italian-American friendship remains strong and solid.”</p>
<p>Renzi faces his own political reckoning next month with a constitutional referendum that has mobilized opposition as well as party dissidents against him. A no vote is likely to force at least a government shuffling in Italy, if not new elections.</p>
<p>Renzi was in Washington last month for a state visit with President Barack Obama.</p>
<p>———</p>
<p>1:10 p.m.</p>
<p>Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan says he hopes Donald Trump’s election as president marks a new era in the United States that he hopes will lead to “beneficial” steps for fundamental rights, liberties and democracy in the world.</p>
<p>Addressing a business group in Istanbul on Wednesday, Erdogan also said he hopes the election result would also be auspicious for the region.</p>
<p>Erdogan said: “Personally and on behalf of the nation, I wish to consider this decision by the American people a positive sign and wish them a successful future.”</p>
<p>———</p>
<p>1:05 p.m.</p>
<p>A spokesman for the Polish president says Poland cares a lot whether U.S. President-elect Donald Trump will implement NATO decisions to deploy military deterrence forces in Poland and the Baltic states.</p>
<p>Marek Magierowski says on state Radio 1 Wednesday that it is a priority for Poland to see the implementation of NATO decision to base for battalions in the region, including a U.S. armored brigade to be stationed in Poland, and also the construction of a U.S. missile defense base.</p>
<p>The region is concerned for its security amid Russia’s rising military assertiveness.</p>
<p>Defense Minister Antoni Macierewicz says he expects ties to be even better under Trump as president.</p>
<p>———</p>
<p>12:50 p.m.</p>
<p>Environmentalists and climate scientists are alarmed over the election of a U.S. president who has called global warming a “hoax.”</p>
<p>Donald Trump’s win has raised questions about whether America, once again, would pull out of an international climate deal. Many said it’s now up to the rest of the world to lead efforts to rein in greenhouse gas emissions, while others held out hope that Trump would change his stance on climate change and honor U.S. commitments under last year’s landmark Paris Agreement.</p>
<p>Marshall Islands President Hilda Heine says Wednesday that as “the realities of leadership settle in, I expect he will realize that climate change is a threat to his people and to whole countries which share seas with the U.S.”</p>
<p>———</p>
<p>12:45 p.m.</p>
<p>Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull says his country will work “as closely as ever” with the United States under Donald Trump’s new administration.</p>
<p>He says “politicians and governments, congressmen, senators, prime ministers, presidents come and go according to the will of the people of Australia and the United States, but the bond between our two nations, our shared common interests, our shared national interests are so strong, are so committed that we will continue to work with our friends in the United States.”</p>
<p>———</p>
<p>12:40 p.m.</p>
<p>French President Francois Hollande says the election of Donald Trump “opens a period of uncertainty. It must be faced with lucidity and clarity.”</p>
<p>In brief remarks after the weekly Cabinet meeting, Hollande congratulated Trump “as is natural between two heads of state,” but showed little enthusiasm. Hollande had openly endorsed Hillary Clinton and said Wednesday he was thinking of her.</p>
<p>Hollande said “certain positions taken by Donald Trump during the American campaign must be confronted with the values and interests we share with the United States.”</p>
<p>He says “what is at stake is peace, the fight against terrorism, the situation in the Middle East. It is economic relations and the preservation of the planet.”</p>
<p>———</p>
<p>12:30 p.m.</p>
<p>The Taliban have called on Donald Trump to withdraw all U.S. forces from Afghanistan once he takes office as president.</p>
<p>In a statement sent to The Associated Press, Taliban spokesman Zabihullah Mujahid said Wednesday that a Trump administration “should allow Afghans to become a free nation and have relationships with other countries based on non-interference in each other’s affairs.”</p>
<p>The Afghan conflict is in its 16th year. The Taliban have spread their footprint across Afghanistan in the two years since most international combat troops withdrew.</p>
<p>President Barack Obama expanded U.S. troops’ mandate to enable them to work more closely on the battlefield with their Afghan counterparts, and to conduct counter-terrorism operations against Al-Qaeda, the Islamic State group and the Taliban.</p>
<p>———</p>
<p>12:25 p.m.</p>
<p>Chinese President Xi Jinping has conveyed his congratulations to U.S. President-elect Donald Trump, saying he looked forward to working with Trump on promoting ties in a “constructive” way that avoids conflict and confrontation.</p>
<p>During his campaign, Trump accused China of illegally subsidizing exports, manipulating its currency and stealing intellectual property.</p>
<p>State broadcaster CCTV reported Wednesday that Xi said the two biggest economies in the world shared common interests and shouldered a “special and important responsibility in upholding world peace.”</p>
<p>Xi says: “I highly value China-U.S. relations and am looking forward to working with you to expand cooperation in all fields, including in bilateral, regional and global aspects.” He says he expects they would “manage differences in a constructive way, in the spirit of non-conflict, non-confrontation, mutual respect, cooperation and win-win.”</p>
<p>———</p>
<p>12:15 p.m.</p>
<p>Kenyan President Uhuru Kenyatta has sent a message of congratulations to U.S. President-elect Donald Trump, saying “the American people have spoken, and they have spoken clearly.”</p>
<p>Kenyatta says Wednesday that “the ties that bind Kenya and the United States of America are close and strong. They are old, and based in the values that we hold dear: in democracy, in the rule of law, and in the equality of peoples.”</p>
<p>———</p>
<p>12:05 p.m.</p>
<p>The president of Slovenia — small Alpine nation that is the home country of future U.S. First Lady Melania Trump — says he hopes relations with the U.S. will further improve during Donald Trump’s presidency.</p>
<p>President Boris Pahor says Wednesday “we are allied as part of NATO and I will strive for the friendship and the alliance to deepen further.”</p>
<p>Pahor also says “American people have the right to decide on their leader.” Prime Minister Miro Cerar has also congratulated the Trumps in a Twitter message.</p>
<p>Melania Trump was born as Melanija Knavs in the industrial Slovenian town of Sevnica before working internationally as a model.</p>
<p>———</p>
<p>12:01 p.m.</p>
<p>The Vatican’s first reaction to the election of Donald Trump has focused on its wish for global peace.</p>
<p>Pope Francis pope did not mention the U.S. elections during his Wednesday audience, but secretary of state, Cardinal Pietro Parolin, offered Trump congratulations in a statement to Vatican Radio that “his government can be truly fruitful.”</p>
<p>He added the Vatican offered its prayers “that the Lord illuminates and sustains him in service of his country, naturally, but also in service of the well-being and peace of the world.”</p>
<p>Parolin concluded by noting that “there is need for everyone to work to change the global situation, which is in a situation of severe lacerations and great conflict.”</p>
<p>———</p>
<p>11:55 a.m.</p>
<p>Russian President Vladimir Putin says Moscow is ready to try to restore good relations with the United States in the wake of the election of Donald Trump.</p>
<p>Putin said Wednesday at a ceremony accepting the credentials of new ambassadors that “we aware that it is a difficult path, in view of the unfortunate degradation of relations between the Russian Federation and the United States.”</p>
<p>Putin says “it is not our fault that Russian-American relations are in such a state.”</p>
<p>Earlier, the Kremlin said Putin sent Trump a telegram of congratulation, expressing “his hope to work together for removing Russian-American relations from their crisis state.”</p>
<p>Putin also says ties between Moscow and Washington must be “based on principles of equality, mutual respect and a real accounting each other’s positions.”</p>
<p>————</p>
<p>11:45 a.m.</p>
<p>Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has congratulated Donald Trump, calling him a “true friend of the State of Israel.”</p>
<p>Netanyahu said Wednesday he believes the two leaders “will continue to strengthen the unique alliance between our two countries and bring it to ever greater heights.”</p>
<p>Earlier, a key ally in Netanyahu’s center-right coalition, Education Minister Naftali Bennett, said Tump’s victory means that “the era of a Palestinian state is over.” The Palestinians want a state in lands Israel captured in 1967.</p>
<p>Netanyahu has said he is willing to negotiate a border deal, but has retracted offers made by his predecessors while pressing ahead with Jewish settlement expansion on war-won land.</p>
<p>Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas said Wednesday that he hopes “peace will be achieved during his term.</p>
<p>———</p>
<p>11:40 a.m.</p>
<p>Without commenting directly on Donald Trump’s election, China’s government says Beijing hopes to work with the new U.S. administration to build sustainable ties and expressed confidence the two countries can handle trade disputes maturely.</p>
<p>Foreign Ministry spokesman Lu Kang told reporters in Beijing on Wednesday that China is “looking forward to making concerted efforts with the new U.S. government to ensure the sustainable, steady and sound development of bilateral relations” to benefit both countries’ people and the world.</p>
<p>Asked about U.S. voters’ anger about economic losses blamed on Chinese exports, Lu said only that the two countries had established ways to deal with trade disputes. He says “as mature, large countries, China and the U.S. are able to handle such issues.”</p>
<p>———</p>
<p>11:35 a.m.</p>
<p>Iran’s semi-official news agency Tasnim has quoted the country’s foreign minister as saying that the United States needs to implement its part of multilateral international commitments under last year’s historic nuclear deal.</p>
<p>The comments Wednesday by Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif came after businessman Donald Trump’s election as U.S. president.</p>
<p>During the campaign, Trump has criticized the deal and suggested he would try to renegotiate it. Zarif was quoted as saying that any U.S. president “should have a correct understanding of realities of the world and our region and face them realistically.”</p>
<p>Zarif says that America has accepted multilateral international commitments and has to “implement the nuclear deal.”</p>
<p>———</p>
<p>11:30 a.m.</p>
<p>The Iraqi government says relations with the United States have a “solid base” and this is not expected to change after Donald Trump’s election as president.</p>
<p>Government spokesman Saad al-Hadithi, told The Associated Press on Wednesday that Iraq is keen to develop its relations with the U.S. and “boost cooperation in the fight against terrorism.”</p>
<p>He noted the leading U.S. role in the current battle to push back Islamic State extremists in Iraq’s north. Last month, a U.S.-led military coalition launched an operation to retake Iraq’s second largest city, Mosul, from Islamic State extremists.</p>
<p>———</p>
<p>2:45 a.m.</p>
<p>Japan is sending a top official to Washington to try to meet with those who will be responsible for the next White House administration.</p>
<p>Katsuyuki Kawai, a political aide to Prime Minister Shinzo Abe in charge of diplomacy, told reporters after meeting with Abe that he had been instructed to visit Washington as early as next week.</p>
<p>Abe’s instruction came before Republican candidate Donald Trump was declared the winner of the race against Democrat Hillary Clinton. Chief Cabinet Secretary Yoshihide Suga said it was not because Japan was unprepared for Trump’s win.</p>
<p>He said: “We have been preparing so that we can respond to any situation because our stance is that our alliance with the U.S. remains to be the cornerstone of our diplomacy whoever becomes the next president.”</p>
<p>———</p>
<p>2:35 a.m.</p>
<p>The leader of Russia’s nationalist Liberal Democratic party, Vladimir Zhirinovsky, has welcomed the presumed victory of Donald Trump.</p>
<p>According to the Interfax news agency, Zhirinovsky said: “We of course regard with satisfaction that the better candidate of the two presented to the American voters was victorious.”</p>
<p>He also said that he hopes the Trump victory means that U.S. Ambassador John Tefft departs. He says, “We hope that this ambassador leaves Russia … he hates Russia.”</p>
<p>———</p>
<p>2:30 a.m.</p>
<p>Canada and the prospect of Americans moving there appears to have drawn so much online interest that it has knocked out the country’s immigration website.</p>
<p>Searches for “move to Canada” and “immigrate to Canada” spiked Tuesday night as election returns favored Republican nominee Donald Trump. “Canada” was a leading U.S. trend on Twitter, with more than 1 million tweets.</p>
<p>While much of the chatter was clearly tongue-in-cheek, the website for Citizenship and Immigration Canada was down at the same time. Agency officials could not be immediately reached for comment.</p>
<p>———</p>
<p>2:25 a.m.</p>
<p>German Defense Minister Ursula von der Leyen calls the strong vote for Donald Trump “a big shock,” and the U.S. elections “a vote against Washington, against the establishment.”</p>
<p>Von der Leyen said on German public Television Wednesday that while many questions remain open, “We Europeans obviously know that as partners in the NATO, Donald Trump will naturally ask what ‘are you achieving for the alliance,’ but we will also ask ‘what’s your stand toward the alliance.’”</p>
<p>The defense minister said that behind the scenes the German government would try to make contacts on the working level to find out who are the new contact persons.</p>
<p>———</p>
<p>2:10 a.m.</p>
<p>The first French presidential candidate to comment on the U.S. election was populist, anti-immigrant politician Marine Le Pen, congratulating Donald Trump even before the final results were known.</p>
<p>Le Pen, hoping to ride anti-establishment sentiment to victory in April-May French presidential elections, tweeted her support to the “American people, free!”</p>
<p>French Foreign Minister Jean-Marc Ayrault said France would continue to work with the new president whoever wins the final tally, though expressed concern about Trump’s lead and said it could hold a cautionary message for Europe.</p>
<p>“We don’t want a world where egoism triumphs,” Ayrault said on France-2 television Wednesday. France’s Socialist government had openly endorsed Clinton.</p>
<p>Ayrault said European politicians should pay attention to the message from Trump voters. “There is a part of our electorate that feels … abandoned,” including people who feel “left behind” by globalization, he said.</p>
<p>He said a Trump victory could bring “more incertitude” to French politics.</p>
<p>———</p>
<p>1:50 a.m.</p>
<p>Indonesians on social media are questioning why Americans have voted in big numbers for billionaire Donald Trump, who many in the world’s most populous Muslim country perceive as intolerant and reactionary.</p>
<p>Twitter, Facebook and chatrooms in instant messaging apps are buzzing with speculation about whether Trump would follow through on campaign rhetoric that included a ban on Muslims entering the U.S.</p>
<p>Some people say that under a Trump administration they fear they’ll be prevented from visiting relatives and friends who live in America or traveling there as tourists.</p>
<p>About 100,000 Indonesians live in the United States.</p>
<p>President Joko “Jokowi” Widodo says on national television that his government will work with whoever becomes president.</p>
<p>———</p>
<p>1:45 a.m.</p>
<p>News of Trump’s widening lead hit hard in Cuba, which has spent the last two years negotiating normalization with the United States after more than 50 years of Cold War hostility.</p>
<p>Normalization has set off a tourism boom in Cuba and visits by hundreds of executives from the U.S. and dozens of other nations newly interested in doing business on the island. Trump has promised to reverse Obama’s opening with Cuba unless President Raul Castro agrees to more political freedom on the island, a concession considered a virtual impossibility.</p>
<p>Speaking of Cuba’s leaders, Communist Party member and noted economist and political scientist Esteban Morales told the Telesur network that “they must be worried because I think this represents a new chapter.”</p>
<p>Carlos Alzugaray, a political scientist and retired Cuban diplomat, said a Trump victory could, however, please some hard-liners in the Cuban leadership who worried that Cuba was moving too close to the United States too quickly.</p>
<p>While many Cubans were unaware of the state of the race early Wednesday morning, those watching state-run Telesur or listening to radio updates said they feared that a Trump victory would mean losing the few improvements they had seen in their lives thanks to the post-detente tourism boom.</p>
<p>“The little we’ve advanced, if he reverses it, it hurts us,” taxi driver Oriel Iglesias Garcia said. “You know tourism will go down. If Donald Trump wins and turns everything back it’s really bad for us.”</p>
<p>———</p>
<p>1:10 a.m.</p>
<p>A couple of Chinese participants at a U.S. Embassy event in Beijing say they’d welcome a Trump presidency, while another says he thinks the Republican candidate projects a flawed image of the United States.</p>
<p>Blogger Wang Yiming says he hopes Trump will win because the Republican Party has been typically more willing to demonstrate American leadership globally, and he hoped a Republican president would do more to encourage freedom of speech in China.</p>
<p>Wang says: “I think America has stagnated and Trump represents justice, the rule of law and personal freedom.”</p>
<p>Lou Bin, a 43-year-old academic at a university in Beijing, says he didn’t support either candidate but Trump didn’t come across as much of a “gentleman.” He says: “As president you want someone who represents the country’s image.”</p>
<p>———</p>
<p>1 a.m.</p>
<p>Australian Foreign Minister Julie Bishop told reporters in Canberra, Australia’s capital, that her government is ready to work with whomever the American people, “in their wisdom,” choose to be their president.</p>
<p>She says a U.S. presidential election is always a momentous occasion, and in this instance, “it has been a particularly bruising, divisive and hard-fought campaign.”</p>
<p>She also says the new administration will face a number of challenges, including in Asia-Pacific, and Australia wants to work constructively with the new administration to ensure the continued presence and leadership of the United States in the region.</p>
<p>She calls the U.S. “our major security ally” and the largest foreign direct investor and the second-largest trading partner.</p>
<p>She says: “The United States is also the guarantor and defender of the rules-based international order that has underpinned so much of our economic and security issues. And interests.”</p>
<p>———</p>
<p>11:45 p.m.</p>
<p>Watching the results of the U.S. election at a New Zealand bar, 22-year-old student Sarah Pereira says she is looking forward to working as an intern in the U.S. Congress, but dreads the prospect of Donald Trump winning the presidency.</p>
<p>Pereira, a master’s student in strategic studies, says she will leave for Washington this weekend after winning a scholarship to work for Democratic Congressman Gregory Meeks.</p>
<p>She predicts the effects of a Trump on international relationships would be “catastrophic.”</p>
<p>Pereira commented while attending an event hosted by the U.S. Embassy in Wellington.</p>
<p>———</p>
<p>11:20 p.m.</p>
<p>Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe has told an aide that “the competition is closer than expected” in the U.S. election.</p>
<p>Aide Takeo Kawamura tells Japan’s Kyodo News service that Abe is following the vote count in his office.</p>
<p>The Japanese government has remained neutral in public statements, but analysts on both sides of the Pacific have talked about a possible change in U.S. policy toward Japan and the rest of Asia if Republican candidate Donald Trump should win.</p>
<p>Chief Cabinet Secretary Yoshihide Suga is reaffirming his government’s commitment to the U.S.-Japan security alliance. He tells reporters that whoever is the next president, the Japan-U.S. alliance will remain the cornerstone of Japan-U.S. diplomacy.</p>
<p>———</p>
<p>Chinese state media outlets are casting the U.S. election as the embodiment of America’s democracy in crisis in contrast to China’s perceived stability under authoritarian rule.</p>
<p>The state-run Xinhua News Agency says the campaign has highlighted that, in its words, “the majority of Americans are rebelling against the U.S.’s political class and financial elites.”</p>
<p>The official Communist Party newspaper People’s Daily says in a commentary that the presidential election reveals an “ill democracy.”</p>
<p>On Tuesday, the Chinese state broadcaster CCTV ran man-on-the-street interviews with unidentified American voters in which they expressed disgust with the system and dissatisfaction with both candidates.</p> | false | 1 | mexico city despite worried increased russian military presence baltic nations still congratulating americas new leader donald trump tensions grew us presidential election campaign trump floated idea nato members defense spending targets would prerequisite us defend nato ally abrupt break longstanding american policy lithuanian president dalia grybauskaite says people us made decision respect choice trust united states strongest closest ally neighboring latvia president raimonds vejoniss office says looking forward close relations new us administration us would remain strategic partner important nato ally new estonian president kersti kaljulaid congratulated trump saying united states also continue one estonias important allies 140 pm leaders nationalist alternative germany party campaigns chancellor angela merkels refugee policy welcomed donald trumps presidential victory party coleader frauke petry says high time people disenfranchised political establishment get voice back united states america petry said trumps victory offered chance readjust transatlantic relationship end big conflicts ukraine syria jointly russia replace americas hegemonic claims europe cooperation among equals fellow party leader joerg meuthen says establishment recognize cant rule past population long trump rightly rewarded bravery standing system speaking uncomfortable truths 130 pm international olympic committee president thomas bach offering congratulations donald trump victory us presidential election wishes best term office trumps victory hillary clinton comes los angeles bidding host 2024 olympics trumps statements campaign mexicans muslims building wall along mexican border may help california citys olympic case ioc members come world los angeles competing paris budapest hungary ioc select host city september 2017 120 pm italys premier offered congratulations donald trump brushing aside political differences following repeated public endorsements hillary clinton premier matteo renzi says wednesday name italy congratulate president united states wish well work convinced italianamerican friendship remains strong solid renzi faces political reckoning next month constitutional referendum mobilized opposition well party dissidents vote likely force least government shuffling italy new elections renzi washington last month state visit president barack obama 110 pm turkish president recep tayyip erdogan says hopes donald trumps election president marks new era united states hopes lead beneficial steps fundamental rights liberties democracy world addressing business group istanbul wednesday erdogan also said hopes election result would also auspicious region erdogan said personally behalf nation wish consider decision american people positive sign wish successful future 105 pm spokesman polish president says poland cares lot whether us presidentelect donald trump implement nato decisions deploy military deterrence forces poland baltic states marek magierowski says state radio 1 wednesday priority poland see implementation nato decision base battalions region including us armored brigade stationed poland also construction us missile defense base region concerned security amid russias rising military assertiveness defense minister antoni macierewicz says expects ties even better trump president 1250 pm environmentalists climate scientists alarmed election us president called global warming hoax donald trumps win raised questions whether america would pull international climate deal many said rest world lead efforts rein greenhouse gas emissions others held hope trump would change stance climate change honor us commitments last years landmark paris agreement marshall islands president hilda heine says wednesday realities leadership settle expect realize climate change threat people whole countries share seas us 1245 pm australian prime minister malcolm turnbull says country work closely ever united states donald trumps new administration says politicians governments congressmen senators prime ministers presidents come go according people australia united states bond two nations shared common interests shared national interests strong committed continue work friends united states 1240 pm french president francois hollande says election donald trump opens period uncertainty must faced lucidity clarity brief remarks weekly cabinet meeting hollande congratulated trump natural two heads state showed little enthusiasm hollande openly endorsed hillary clinton said wednesday thinking hollande said certain positions taken donald trump american campaign must confronted values interests share united states says stake peace fight terrorism situation middle east economic relations preservation planet 1230 pm taliban called donald trump withdraw us forces afghanistan takes office president statement sent associated press taliban spokesman zabihullah mujahid said wednesday trump administration allow afghans become free nation relationships countries based noninterference others affairs afghan conflict 16th year taliban spread footprint across afghanistan two years since international combat troops withdrew president barack obama expanded us troops mandate enable work closely battlefield afghan counterparts conduct counterterrorism operations alqaeda islamic state group taliban 1225 pm chinese president xi jinping conveyed congratulations us presidentelect donald trump saying looked forward working trump promoting ties constructive way avoids conflict confrontation campaign trump accused china illegally subsidizing exports manipulating currency stealing intellectual property state broadcaster cctv reported wednesday xi said two biggest economies world shared common interests shouldered special important responsibility upholding world peace xi says highly value chinaus relations looking forward working expand cooperation fields including bilateral regional global aspects says expects would manage differences constructive way spirit nonconflict nonconfrontation mutual respect cooperation winwin 1215 pm kenyan president uhuru kenyatta sent message congratulations us presidentelect donald trump saying american people spoken spoken clearly kenyatta says wednesday ties bind kenya united states america close strong old based values hold dear democracy rule law equality peoples 1205 pm president slovenia small alpine nation home country future us first lady melania trump says hopes relations us improve donald trumps presidency president boris pahor says wednesday allied part nato strive friendship alliance deepen pahor also says american people right decide leader prime minister miro cerar also congratulated trumps twitter message melania trump born melanija knavs industrial slovenian town sevnica working internationally model 1201 pm vaticans first reaction election donald trump focused wish global peace pope francis pope mention us elections wednesday audience secretary state cardinal pietro parolin offered trump congratulations statement vatican radio government truly fruitful added vatican offered prayers lord illuminates sustains service country naturally also service wellbeing peace world parolin concluded noting need everyone work change global situation situation severe lacerations great conflict 1155 russian president vladimir putin says moscow ready try restore good relations united states wake election donald trump putin said wednesday ceremony accepting credentials new ambassadors aware difficult path view unfortunate degradation relations russian federation united states putin says fault russianamerican relations state earlier kremlin said putin sent trump telegram congratulation expressing hope work together removing russianamerican relations crisis state putin also says ties moscow washington must based principles equality mutual respect real accounting others positions 1145 israeli prime minister benjamin netanyahu congratulated donald trump calling true friend state israel netanyahu said wednesday believes two leaders continue strengthen unique alliance two countries bring ever greater heights earlier key ally netanyahus centerright coalition education minister naftali bennett said tumps victory means era palestinian state palestinians want state lands israel captured 1967 netanyahu said willing negotiate border deal retracted offers made predecessors pressing ahead jewish settlement expansion warwon land palestinian president mahmoud abbas said wednesday hopes peace achieved term 1140 without commenting directly donald trumps election chinas government says beijing hopes work new us administration build sustainable ties expressed confidence two countries handle trade disputes maturely foreign ministry spokesman lu kang told reporters beijing wednesday china looking forward making concerted efforts new us government ensure sustainable steady sound development bilateral relations benefit countries people world asked us voters anger economic losses blamed chinese exports lu said two countries established ways deal trade disputes says mature large countries china us able handle issues 1135 irans semiofficial news agency tasnim quoted countrys foreign minister saying united states needs implement part multilateral international commitments last years historic nuclear deal comments wednesday foreign minister mohammad javad zarif came businessman donald trumps election us president campaign trump criticized deal suggested would try renegotiate zarif quoted saying us president correct understanding realities world region face realistically zarif says america accepted multilateral international commitments implement nuclear deal 1130 iraqi government says relations united states solid base expected change donald trumps election president government spokesman saad alhadithi told associated press wednesday iraq keen develop relations us boost cooperation fight terrorism noted leading us role current battle push back islamic state extremists iraqs north last month usled military coalition launched operation retake iraqs second largest city mosul islamic state extremists 245 japan sending top official washington try meet responsible next white house administration katsuyuki kawai political aide prime minister shinzo abe charge diplomacy told reporters meeting abe instructed visit washington early next week abes instruction came republican candidate donald trump declared winner race democrat hillary clinton chief cabinet secretary yoshihide suga said japan unprepared trumps win said preparing respond situation stance alliance us remains cornerstone diplomacy whoever becomes next president 235 leader russias nationalist liberal democratic party vladimir zhirinovsky welcomed presumed victory donald trump according interfax news agency zhirinovsky said course regard satisfaction better candidate two presented american voters victorious also said hopes trump victory means us ambassador john tefft departs says hope ambassador leaves russia hates russia 230 canada prospect americans moving appears drawn much online interest knocked countrys immigration website searches move canada immigrate canada spiked tuesday night election returns favored republican nominee donald trump canada leading us trend twitter 1 million tweets much chatter clearly tongueincheek website citizenship immigration canada time agency officials could immediately reached comment 225 german defense minister ursula von der leyen calls strong vote donald trump big shock us elections vote washington establishment von der leyen said german public television wednesday many questions remain open europeans obviously know partners nato donald trump naturally ask achieving alliance also ask whats stand toward alliance defense minister said behind scenes german government would try make contacts working level find new contact persons 210 first french presidential candidate comment us election populist antiimmigrant politician marine le pen congratulating donald trump even final results known le pen hoping ride antiestablishment sentiment victory aprilmay french presidential elections tweeted support american people free french foreign minister jeanmarc ayrault said france would continue work new president whoever wins final tally though expressed concern trumps lead said could hold cautionary message europe dont want world egoism triumphs ayrault said france2 television wednesday frances socialist government openly endorsed clinton ayrault said european politicians pay attention message trump voters part electorate feels abandoned including people feel left behind globalization said said trump victory could bring incertitude french politics 150 indonesians social media questioning americans voted big numbers billionaire donald trump many worlds populous muslim country perceive intolerant reactionary twitter facebook chatrooms instant messaging apps buzzing speculation whether trump would follow campaign rhetoric included ban muslims entering us people say trump administration fear theyll prevented visiting relatives friends live america traveling tourists 100000 indonesians live united states president joko jokowi widodo says national television government work whoever becomes president 145 news trumps widening lead hit hard cuba spent last two years negotiating normalization united states 50 years cold war hostility normalization set tourism boom cuba visits hundreds executives us dozens nations newly interested business island trump promised reverse obamas opening cuba unless president raul castro agrees political freedom island concession considered virtual impossibility speaking cubas leaders communist party member noted economist political scientist esteban morales told telesur network must worried think represents new chapter carlos alzugaray political scientist retired cuban diplomat said trump victory could however please hardliners cuban leadership worried cuba moving close united states quickly many cubans unaware state race early wednesday morning watching staterun telesur listening radio updates said feared trump victory would mean losing improvements seen lives thanks postdetente tourism boom little weve advanced reverses hurts us taxi driver oriel iglesias garcia said know tourism go donald trump wins turns everything back really bad us 110 couple chinese participants us embassy event beijing say theyd welcome trump presidency another says thinks republican candidate projects flawed image united states blogger wang yiming says hopes trump win republican party typically willing demonstrate american leadership globally hoped republican president would encourage freedom speech china wang says think america stagnated trump represents justice rule law personal freedom lou bin 43yearold academic university beijing says didnt support either candidate trump didnt come across much gentleman says president want someone represents countrys image 1 australian foreign minister julie bishop told reporters canberra australias capital government ready work whomever american people wisdom choose president says us presidential election always momentous occasion instance particularly bruising divisive hardfought campaign also says new administration face number challenges including asiapacific australia wants work constructively new administration ensure continued presence leadership united states region calls us major security ally largest foreign direct investor secondlargest trading partner says united states also guarantor defender rulesbased international order underpinned much economic security issues interests 1145 pm watching results us election new zealand bar 22yearold student sarah pereira says looking forward working intern us congress dreads prospect donald trump winning presidency pereira masters student strategic studies says leave washington weekend winning scholarship work democratic congressman gregory meeks predicts effects trump international relationships would catastrophic pereira commented attending event hosted us embassy wellington 1120 pm japanese prime minister shinzo abe told aide competition closer expected us election aide takeo kawamura tells japans kyodo news service abe following vote count office japanese government remained neutral public statements analysts sides pacific talked possible change us policy toward japan rest asia republican candidate donald trump win chief cabinet secretary yoshihide suga reaffirming governments commitment usjapan security alliance tells reporters whoever next president japanus alliance remain cornerstone japanus diplomacy chinese state media outlets casting us election embodiment americas democracy crisis contrast chinas perceived stability authoritarian rule staterun xinhua news agency says campaign highlighted words majority americans rebelling uss political class financial elites official communist party newspaper peoples daily says commentary presidential election reveals ill democracy tuesday chinese state broadcaster cctv ran manonthestreet interviews unidentified american voters expressed disgust system dissatisfaction candidates | 2,244 |
<p>President Donald Trump said on Wednesday that taxes on rich Americans might rise, as he pursues a tax code overhaul and reaches out to both Democrats and Republicans in a push to win support for a plan still far from complete.</p>
<p>Trump met with the two top congressional Democrats over dinner at the White House in a search for common ground that could make it easier to get a tax-cut package through Congress.</p>
<p>Both sides said the meeting, which covered an array of legislative issues, was productive.</p>
<p>Earlier, Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin said tax reductions would be paid for by faster economic growth.</p>
<p>The White House and the Republican-led Congress have yet to put forth a detailed tax plan, despite months of high-level talks that had until recent days excluded Democrats.</p>
<p>House of Representatives Speaker Paul Ryan said an outline of a plan would be unveiled during the work week beginning Sept. 25, with congressional tax-writing committees crafting detailed legislation in the subsequent weeks.</p>
<p>Mnuchin told Fox News Channel the Trump administration would use its own economic assumptions to gauge the impact of its tax cuts on the federal budget deficit and the $20 trillion national debt, a key issue in Washington’s intensifying tax debate.</p>
<p>“It will be revenue neutral under our growth assumptions,” Mnuchin said. “So, we can pay for these tax cuts with economic growth.”</p>
<p>The administration believes tax cuts will lead to much faster growth than do congressional analysts or most private forecasters, a likely fault line in the debate ahead.</p>
<p>As for taxing the rich, Trump said during a meeting with a bipartisan group of lawmakers – his second in as many days – that the wealthy “will not be gaining at all with this plan. … If they have to go higher, they’ll go higher, frankly.”</p>
<p>In a phone call with a small group of reporters, Marc Short, Trump’s legislative affairs director, said the president was not talking about higher tax rates, but that other changes in the tax code could affect the wealthy and how much they pay, the publication Roll Call reported.</p>
<p>TAXING THE RICH</p>
<p>Democrats have criticized Republican tax overhaul efforts as benefiting mainly the wealthiest Americans and corporations.</p>
<p>Tax experts said Trump could raise taxes on high-income people by lowering the cap on mortgages eligible for interest deductions to $500,000 from $1 million. Another step might be to close a loophole that lets Wall Street fund managers pay low taxes on much of their income, analysts said.</p>
<p>Trump might also propose eliminating the deduction for state and local taxes, then use the revenue raised to fund tax cuts for the middle class, leaving top earners with a higher effective tax bill. There has also been talk in the Senate about increasing tax rates on capital gains and dividends.</p>
<p>But even with those changes, analysts said it was not clear top earners would end up paying more overall, partly because Trump has also proposed cutting the top individual tax rate.</p>
<p>Steven Rosenthal, a senior fellow at the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center think tank in Washington, said Trump was unlikely to raise taxes on investment income.</p>
<p>Instead, he said, Trump could close a loophole that largely benefits super-rich financiers, although they may be able to find other ways to avoid taxes.</p>
<p>“That’s what I would expect him to do, take a symbolic but ineffective step,” Rosenthal said.</p>
<p>DINNER WITH ‘CHUCK AND NANCY’</p>
<p>Trump hosted Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer and House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi on Wednesday evening to discuss tax overhaul plans and other legislative items.</p>
<p>A White House official said the meeting was constructive and covered border security and the status of so-called Dreamers who came to the United States illegally as children, as well as infrastructure and trade, in addition to taxes.</p>
<p>“The administration looks forward to continuing these conversations with leadership on both sides of the aisle,” the official said.</p>
<p>In a joint statement, Schumer and Pelosi called the meeting “very productive” and said it focused mainly on the plight of the “Dreamers,” nearly 800,000 young immigrants who are able to live and work in the United States legally under the Obama-era DACA program that Trump recently rescinded.</p>
<p>“We agreed to enshrine the protections of DACA into law quickly, and to work out a package of border security, excluding the wall, that’s acceptable to both sides,” they said. One of Trump’s major campaign promises was building a wall the entire length of the U.S.-Mexican border.</p>
<p>In his meeting earlier on Wednesday with eight Democratic and five Republican House members, Trump had expressed hope he could bring a fresh bipartisanship to Washington.</p>
<p>Asked what his message was to skeptical conservatives who worry he is cozying up to Democrats, Trump said: “I’m a conservative, and I will tell you I’m not skeptical. And I think that if we can do things in a bipartisan manner, that’ll be great. Now it might not work out.”</p>
<p>Trump blindsided Republican leaders last week by striking a deal with Schumer and Pelosi on the U.S. debt limit and federal spending for three months.</p>
<p>Ryan said the outline being worked on now would reflect the consensus of the House Ways and Means Committee, the Senate Finance Committee and the Trump administration.</p>
<p>“I would love to have the Democrats supporting and working with us in a constructive way on tax reform, but we’re going to do it no matter what,” Ryan said.</p>
<p>There has been no comprehensive U.S. tax code overhaul since 1986, and starkly different visions embraced by the two parties for how to move forward promise to make the task difficult.</p>
<p>Asked about Trump’s comment on a possible tax increase for the wealthy, House Ways and Means Chairman Kevin Brady said: “My goal is to lower taxes on every American as much as possible and help them keep more of what they earn.”&#160;</p> | false | 1 | president donald trump said wednesday taxes rich americans might rise pursues tax code overhaul reaches democrats republicans push win support plan still far complete trump met two top congressional democrats dinner white house search common ground could make easier get taxcut package congress sides said meeting covered array legislative issues productive earlier treasury secretary steven mnuchin said tax reductions would paid faster economic growth white house republicanled congress yet put forth detailed tax plan despite months highlevel talks recent days excluded democrats house representatives speaker paul ryan said outline plan would unveiled work week beginning sept 25 congressional taxwriting committees crafting detailed legislation subsequent weeks mnuchin told fox news channel trump administration would use economic assumptions gauge impact tax cuts federal budget deficit 20 trillion national debt key issue washingtons intensifying tax debate revenue neutral growth assumptions mnuchin said pay tax cuts economic growth administration believes tax cuts lead much faster growth congressional analysts private forecasters likely fault line debate ahead taxing rich trump said meeting bipartisan group lawmakers second many days wealthy gaining plan go higher theyll go higher frankly phone call small group reporters marc short trumps legislative affairs director said president talking higher tax rates changes tax code could affect wealthy much pay publication roll call reported taxing rich democrats criticized republican tax overhaul efforts benefiting mainly wealthiest americans corporations tax experts said trump could raise taxes highincome people lowering cap mortgages eligible interest deductions 500000 1 million another step might close loophole lets wall street fund managers pay low taxes much income analysts said trump might also propose eliminating deduction state local taxes use revenue raised fund tax cuts middle class leaving top earners higher effective tax bill also talk senate increasing tax rates capital gains dividends even changes analysts said clear top earners would end paying overall partly trump also proposed cutting top individual tax rate steven rosenthal senior fellow nonpartisan tax policy center think tank washington said trump unlikely raise taxes investment income instead said trump could close loophole largely benefits superrich financiers although may able find ways avoid taxes thats would expect take symbolic ineffective step rosenthal said dinner chuck nancy trump hosted senate democratic leader chuck schumer house democratic leader nancy pelosi wednesday evening discuss tax overhaul plans legislative items white house official said meeting constructive covered border security status socalled dreamers came united states illegally children well infrastructure trade addition taxes administration looks forward continuing conversations leadership sides aisle official said joint statement schumer pelosi called meeting productive said focused mainly plight dreamers nearly 800000 young immigrants able live work united states legally obamaera daca program trump recently rescinded agreed enshrine protections daca law quickly work package border security excluding wall thats acceptable sides said one trumps major campaign promises building wall entire length usmexican border meeting earlier wednesday eight democratic five republican house members trump expressed hope could bring fresh bipartisanship washington asked message skeptical conservatives worry cozying democrats trump said im conservative tell im skeptical think things bipartisan manner thatll great might work trump blindsided republican leaders last week striking deal schumer pelosi us debt limit federal spending three months ryan said outline worked would reflect consensus house ways means committee senate finance committee trump administration would love democrats supporting working us constructive way tax reform going matter ryan said comprehensive us tax code overhaul since 1986 starkly different visions embraced two parties move forward promise make task difficult asked trumps comment possible tax increase wealthy house ways means chairman kevin brady said goal lower taxes every american much possible help keep earn160 | 594 |
<p>The observation is often made that political conservatives do not have anything much to say about the arts, either believing, with the libertarians, that in this matter people should be free to do as they please, or else fearing, like the traditionalists, that a policy for the arts will always be captured by the Left and turned into an assault on our inherited values. Of course, there is truth in both those responses; but they are not the whole truth, and in my view one reason for the precarious state of the arts in our public culture today is that conservatives — who often come out near the top in fair elections — have failed to develop a clear cultural policy and to understand why, philosophically, such a policy matters.</p>
<p>There is a kind of conservatism that sees all political questions as reducible to economics, with the free market as the ruling principle and the expansion of consumer choice as the only coherent political program. This way of looking at things can be taken a lot farther than at first sight appears. There is an economic justification, after all, for the traditional two-parent family, which produces well-adjusted children who are able to fend for themselves and make a positive contribution to the economy, and who are unlikely to be lifelong dependents on the welfare state. But is that all, or even the most important thing, to be said in favor of the traditional family? Surely its nature as an arena of peace, well-being, and love is far more important, and if it were ever proved that single-parent families and child labor were economically more productive, this would not be a conclusive argument, or any argument at all, against the old arrangement. The traditional family has an intrinsic as well as an instrumental value, and that is the real reason so many conservatives defend it. They defend it because they have a vision of human fulfillment that goes well beyond the economic, to embrace all those values — moral, spiritual, and personal — that shape human beings as higher than the animals and especially worthy of our protection.</p>
<p>Still, let’s stay with economics for a moment. If a hard-nosed free-marketer asks you what the economic benefit of a symphony orchestra is, how would you answer him? Orchestras depend on donations — but that is okay, he will say, since donations are part of the market economy. But private donations are seldom, if ever, enough. Even if it receives no direct subsidy from the government, the symphony hall will be granted charitable privileges and planning exemptions that violate what Hayek once called the “harsh discipline of the market.” Then, we must look at the long-term economic benefit, and here again matters are not so simple. A city with a symphony hall attracts upwardly mobile new residents. It sets a standard in entertainment and leisure that others might try to live up to; it contributes to a flourishing downtown life of a kind that will attract the middle classes; and so on. Its long-term economic benefit probably vastly outweighs the short-term economic cost, even if no one is in a position to measure it.</p>
<p>But again, all that is irrelevant to the true question, which concerns intrinsic and not instrumental values. The real reason people are conservatives has little or nothing to do with economics, even if they are aware that economic prosperity is a good thing, and necessary for the support of other things that they value. The real reason people are conservatives is that they are attached to the things that they love, and want to preserve them from abuse and decay. They are attached to their family, their friends, their religion, and their immediate environment. They have made a lifelong distinction between the things that nourish and the things that threaten their security and peace of mind.</p>
<p>In my writings I have made a point of emphasizing this. Conservatism, for me, is the philosophy and the politics of attachment. Its starting point is a loved way of life, and the institutions and settlements that have grown from it. Standing against conservatism has been another state of mind altogether, which sometimes masks itself as love, but always love for the ideal, the nonexistent, the “yet to be,” in the cause of which we are invited to pull down and destroy the things that are. Radical politics is merciless toward the actual, especially when the actual enshrines the old way of life, the old institutions, and the old hierarchies that have arisen from our attachments.</p>
<p>Conservatives hold on to things not only because they are attached to them, but also because they do not see the sense in radical change, until someone has told them what it will lead to. You criticize the traditional family? Then tell us about the alternative, and please give us the details: Tell us how children grow up in this new arrangement, how they find security, love, and satisfaction, how they acquire the sense of responsibility, how they live with others, how they reproduce and how they die.</p>
<p>One of the things to which we are attached is our culture: not the everyday culture only, of which the family is, or has been, an integral part, but the high culture, in which the intellectual and artistic treasures of our civilization are enshrined. When you are truly attached to something, it is no longer of merely instrumental value for you. It is not a means but an end, which does not mean that it has no consequences — of course it has — but rather that you are interested in the thing itself, for its own sake, finding fulfilment and joy in it.</p>
<p>To find things to which you can be attached in this way is to find a meaning in life, and the real cause of the destructiveness of radical causes is, I believe, a certain lack of meaning in the lives of those who promote them.</p>
<p>At this point someone will respond that it is scarcely democratic to devote resources to conserving something that is a minority taste, or to teaching things that promote minority interests. As soon as you defend intrinsic values you are exposed to the charge of elitism, and conservatives shy away from attracting this charge, since they know that all the things they most value are unequally distributed, and that it is therefore probably best to shut up about them and just hope that they will be reproduced nevertheless.</p>
<p>This, in my view, is a mistake. We should make the case for the things we love, even if we think that people will misunderstand them. That is why people defend the U.S. Constitution, even though so few really understand the subtle thinking embodied in that document. People defend the Constitution because they love it, and the sight of someone defending what he loves has a softening effect on those who might otherwise oppose him. Opposition retreats a little in the face of sincere conviction.</p>
<p>So here is what I would say about classical music and the institutions that sustain it. For many people music is simply a matter of enjoyment, irrelevant to the greater things in life, and a matter of personal taste with which we cannot argue. John likes hard rock, Mary likes bluegrass, Fred likes hip-hop, Judith likes modern jazz, and so on. Once you enter the realm of classical music, however, you realize that such simple views no longer apply. You are in the presence of a highly learned, highly structured art form, in which human thought, feeling, and posture are explored in elaborate tonal arguments. In learning to play the music of Bach or Beethoven, for example, you are acutely aware that you are being put to the test by the music that you are playing. There is a right and a wrong way to proceed, and the right way involves learning to express, to control, to respond in mature and persuasive ways. You are undergoing an education in emotion, and the skills you learn do not remain confined to your fingers: They penetrate the whole body and brain, to become part of your world.</p>
<p>Moreover, this kind of education is inseparable from the art of judgment. In learning classical music, you are learning to discriminate, to recognize the authentic examples, to distinguish real from fake emotion, and to glimpse both the depths of suffering and the heights of joy of which human beings are capable. Not everyone can excel in this form of education, just as not everyone can be a mathematician, a motor mechanic, or a basketball star.</p>
<p>But the existence of people who are real practitioners of classical music, who can perpetuate this precious repository of emotional knowledge, is just as important to the rest of us as it is to them. They set a standard of dedication and refinement. They create around themselves an aura of seriousness and peace, and the art that they learn is one on which we all depend when it comes to expressing our most solemn and committed emotions.</p>
<p>Also, it is probably a prejudice to think that it is only a minority who are capable of learning and appreciating classical music. Not only are the harmonic achievements of classical music fundamental to hymns, folk songs, musicals, and jazz, but the four-part choir, which we owe to Renaissance polyphony, remains a staple of musical-institution building all across American society. Recently I was asked to give the commencement speech at a charter school in Arizona. The leaving class of 50 students assembled in their gowns to sing their farewell to the school — children of different abilities and backgrounds, who nevertheless all joined in the song, which was a difficult four-part hymn of praise to friendship in the American revivalist tradition.</p>
<p>To my way of thinking, there cannot be a coherent conservatism, either in everyday life or in politics, that does not take high culture seriously. It really matters to the future of our societies that classical music should survive, not as a museum exhibit but as a live tradition of performance and enjoyment, radiating its grace and graciousness across our communities, and providing us all, whether as performers or as listeners, with a sense of the intrinsic value of being here, now, and among our fellows. From that primary experience of togetherness, of which music is not the only but surely the most exhilarating instance, countless other benefits flow, in the form of solidarity, mutual support and responsibility, and the growth of real communities.</p>
<p>Conservatives therefore ought to pay more attention than they do to the survival of musical skills, and to the place of music in the school and university curriculum. They ought to see that the symphony hall, the musical stage, and the instrumental ensemble are all institutions that they should promote, not as optional extras but as the very essence of what they value most, which is human life itself.</p>
<p>– Mr. Scruton, an English philosopher, is a distinguished senior fellow of the <a href="http://www.futuresymphony.org" type="external">Future Symphony Institute</a>&#160;and a senior fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center.</p> | false | 1 | observation often made political conservatives anything much say arts either believing libertarians matter people free please else fearing like traditionalists policy arts always captured left turned assault inherited values course truth responses whole truth view one reason precarious state arts public culture today conservatives often come near top fair elections failed develop clear cultural policy understand philosophically policy matters kind conservatism sees political questions reducible economics free market ruling principle expansion consumer choice coherent political program way looking things taken lot farther first sight appears economic justification traditional twoparent family produces welladjusted children able fend make positive contribution economy unlikely lifelong dependents welfare state even important thing said favor traditional family surely nature arena peace wellbeing love far important ever proved singleparent families child labor economically productive would conclusive argument argument old arrangement traditional family intrinsic well instrumental value real reason many conservatives defend defend vision human fulfillment goes well beyond economic embrace values moral spiritual personal shape human beings higher animals especially worthy protection still lets stay economics moment hardnosed freemarketer asks economic benefit symphony orchestra would answer orchestras depend donations okay say since donations part market economy private donations seldom ever enough even receives direct subsidy government symphony hall granted charitable privileges planning exemptions violate hayek called harsh discipline market must look longterm economic benefit matters simple city symphony hall attracts upwardly mobile new residents sets standard entertainment leisure others might try live contributes flourishing downtown life kind attract middle classes longterm economic benefit probably vastly outweighs shortterm economic cost even one position measure irrelevant true question concerns intrinsic instrumental values real reason people conservatives little nothing economics even aware economic prosperity good thing necessary support things value real reason people conservatives attached things love want preserve abuse decay attached family friends religion immediate environment made lifelong distinction things nourish things threaten security peace mind writings made point emphasizing conservatism philosophy politics attachment starting point loved way life institutions settlements grown standing conservatism another state mind altogether sometimes masks love always love ideal nonexistent yet cause invited pull destroy things radical politics merciless toward actual especially actual enshrines old way life old institutions old hierarchies arisen attachments conservatives hold things attached also see sense radical change someone told lead criticize traditional family tell us alternative please give us details tell us children grow new arrangement find security love satisfaction acquire sense responsibility live others reproduce die one things attached culture everyday culture family integral part high culture intellectual artistic treasures civilization enshrined truly attached something longer merely instrumental value means end mean consequences course rather interested thing sake finding fulfilment joy find things attached way find meaning life real cause destructiveness radical causes believe certain lack meaning lives promote point someone respond scarcely democratic devote resources conserving something minority taste teaching things promote minority interests soon defend intrinsic values exposed charge elitism conservatives shy away attracting charge since know things value unequally distributed therefore probably best shut hope reproduced nevertheless view mistake make case things love even think people misunderstand people defend us constitution even though really understand subtle thinking embodied document people defend constitution love sight someone defending loves softening effect might otherwise oppose opposition retreats little face sincere conviction would say classical music institutions sustain many people music simply matter enjoyment irrelevant greater things life matter personal taste argue john likes hard rock mary likes bluegrass fred likes hiphop judith likes modern jazz enter realm classical music however realize simple views longer apply presence highly learned highly structured art form human thought feeling posture explored elaborate tonal arguments learning play music bach beethoven example acutely aware put test music playing right wrong way proceed right way involves learning express control respond mature persuasive ways undergoing education emotion skills learn remain confined fingers penetrate whole body brain become part world moreover kind education inseparable art judgment learning classical music learning discriminate recognize authentic examples distinguish real fake emotion glimpse depths suffering heights joy human beings capable everyone excel form education everyone mathematician motor mechanic basketball star existence people real practitioners classical music perpetuate precious repository emotional knowledge important rest us set standard dedication refinement create around aura seriousness peace art learn one depend comes expressing solemn committed emotions also probably prejudice think minority capable learning appreciating classical music harmonic achievements classical music fundamental hymns folk songs musicals jazz fourpart choir owe renaissance polyphony remains staple musicalinstitution building across american society recently asked give commencement speech charter school arizona leaving class 50 students assembled gowns sing farewell school children different abilities backgrounds nevertheless joined song difficult fourpart hymn praise friendship american revivalist tradition way thinking coherent conservatism either everyday life politics take high culture seriously really matters future societies classical music survive museum exhibit live tradition performance enjoyment radiating grace graciousness across communities providing us whether performers listeners sense intrinsic value among fellows primary experience togetherness music surely exhilarating instance countless benefits flow form solidarity mutual support responsibility growth real communities conservatives therefore ought pay attention survival musical skills place music school university curriculum ought see symphony hall musical stage instrumental ensemble institutions promote optional extras essence value human life mr scruton english philosopher distinguished senior fellow future symphony institute160and senior fellow ethics public policy center | 868 |
<p>By Ahmed Rasheed, Dmitry Zhdannikov and Bozorgmehr Sharafedin</p>
<p>BAGHDAD/LONDON (Reuters) – After helping Iraq stifle a Kurdish push for independence, Iran is now positioning itself to take control of oil exports from the region’s giant Kirkuk field, with the first deliveries expected within days, officials and trading sources said.</p>
<p>In the weeks since September’s failed Kurdish independence referendum, Iraq has agreed for the first time to divert crude from Kirkuk province, which it retook from the Kurds, to Iran, where it will supply a refinery in the city of Kermanshah.</p>
<p>Iran is locked in a proxy war with its regional rival and U.S. ally, Saudi Arabia. As well as Iraq, it has been extending its influence in Syria, Yemen and Lebanon, raising increasing concerns in Washington and Riyadh.</p>
<p>Under the new arrangement, the first oil will be trucked across the border in the coming days. Initially Iran will receive 15,000 barrels per day worth nearly $1 million, rising gradually to 60,000 bpd, according to Iraqi officials and trading sources.</p>
<p>Baghdad and Tehran have also revived a project to build a pipeline to carry oil from Iraq’s Kirkuk fields to central Iran and onwards for export from the Gulf.</p>
<p>Hamid Hosseini, the Iranian secretary-general of the Iran-Iraq Chamber of Commerce, said Iran want to build a pipeline that can take as much as 650,000 bpd of Kurdish oil for its domestic refineries and for exports.</p>
<p>The pipeline would replace existing export routes for crude from northern Iraq via Turkey and the Mediterranean and would be a blow to Ankara’s hopes of becoming an energy hub for Europe.</p>
<p>It would also be evidence of a U.S. failure to prevent a rapprochement between its ally Iraq and one of its biggest political foes, Iran, which is rapidly regaining influence in the Middle East.</p>
<p>That is in part due to general Qassem Soleimani, commander of the Quds force, the international branch of the Revolutionary Guards, which is also taking a keen interest in Iran’s oil business in Iraq.</p>
<p>Soleimani visited Iraqi Kurdistan in September to warn the region against holding an independence vote. He was also involved in the Iraqi army’s recapture of Kirkuk.</p>
<p>“In Iraq, Iranian forces are working to sow discord as we recently saw in Kirkuk, where the presence of Quds force commander, Qassem Soleimani, exacerbated tensions among the Kurds and the government in Baghdad,” U.S. Senator John McCain said in Washington last week.</p>
<p>KURDISH DIVISION</p>
<p>“The Kurdish dream of being a big oil exporter is in tatters,” said a source close to the government in Erbil, who predicted that “Iran will be king of the game”.</p>
<p>The Kurds’ bid for independence angered Turkey and Iran, which both have large Kurdish populations and condemned the referendum as destabilizing the region. The United States also called on Kurdistan to scrap the vote.</p>
<p>But it was probably internal Kurdish divisions which doomed the referendum to failure, local political sources believe. Oil was at the heart of this dispute.</p>
<p>The Kirkuk fields were controlled by Iraq’s state oil firm SOMO before being taken over by Kurdish forces in 2014, when the Iraqi army retreated in the face of attacks by Islamic state.</p>
<p>The Patriotic Union of Kurdistan party (PUK), in Sulaimaniya, then accused the ruling Kurdistan Democratic Party (KDP) party of then President Massoud Barzani, based in the capital Erbil, of not sharing the oil wealth. The PUK wanted to export oil from Kirkuk to Iran.</p>
<p>“We tried to make Barzani accept joint management between Erbil and Sulaimaniya over the fields but he strongly opposed it,” said Sherzad Yaba, a political adviser close to the PUK.</p>
<p>“To put an end to the illegitimate control of the KDP over Kirkuk oil, senior members from the PUK contacted both Baghdad and Tehran and encouraged the Iranians to build a pipeline to export Kirkuk crude through Bandar Abbas port,” said Yaba.</p>
<p>The project lay dormant even though Iraqi oil minister Jabar al-Luaibi and his Iranian counterpart Bijal Zanganeh signed a memorandum on the project in February.</p>
<p>After the referendum, the KDP accused the PUK of striking a deal with Iran to withdraw from Kirkuk, which the PUK denies.</p>
<p>The recapture of Kirkuk was coordinated with Soleimani and left Iraqi government troops in control of half of all Kurdish oil output.</p>
<p>As Kurdish engineers fled the fields, output from Kirkuk was suspended and has remained shut for the past five weeks as Baghdad and Erbil argue over the revenue split.</p>
<p>With output of over 300,000 bpd suspended since mid-October, losses are approaching $1 billion, according to Kurdish industry sources.</p>
<p>To stop the losses, Iraq and the PUK resumed talks with Iran, according to Iraqi and Kurdish officials.</p>
<p>Officials from Iraq’s and Iran’s state oil firms, SOMO and NICO, met last month to iron out details of oil sales to the Kermanshah refinery, the acting chief of SOMO, Alaa al-Yasiri, said.</p>
<p>He also said active discussions were taking place about the pipeline project.</p>
<p>THE GUARDS RISING</p>
<p>Even though discussions between Baghdad and Tehran have been conducted between oil ministry officials and the Chamber of Commerce, the Revolutionary Guards are poised to step in.</p>
<p>“Any oil transaction between Iran and Iraq should be approved by the Revolutionary Guards, not the oil ministry.” said Reza Mostafavi Tabatabaei, president of London-based ENEXD, a firm involved in the energy equipment business in the Middle East.</p>
<p>Those dealings are overseen by the desk responsible for Iran’s investments in Iraq at the president’s office and are run by the Revolutionary Guards.</p>
<p>The pipeline project will be the Revolutionary Guards’ reward to the Kurds for helping with the recapture of Kirkuk, said Tabatabaei.</p> | false | 1 | ahmed rasheed dmitry zhdannikov bozorgmehr sharafedin baghdadlondon reuters helping iraq stifle kurdish push independence iran positioning take control oil exports regions giant kirkuk field first deliveries expected within days officials trading sources said weeks since septembers failed kurdish independence referendum iraq agreed first time divert crude kirkuk province retook kurds iran supply refinery city kermanshah iran locked proxy war regional rival us ally saudi arabia well iraq extending influence syria yemen lebanon raising increasing concerns washington riyadh new arrangement first oil trucked across border coming days initially iran receive 15000 barrels per day worth nearly 1 million rising gradually 60000 bpd according iraqi officials trading sources baghdad tehran also revived project build pipeline carry oil iraqs kirkuk fields central iran onwards export gulf hamid hosseini iranian secretarygeneral iraniraq chamber commerce said iran want build pipeline take much 650000 bpd kurdish oil domestic refineries exports pipeline would replace existing export routes crude northern iraq via turkey mediterranean would blow ankaras hopes becoming energy hub europe would also evidence us failure prevent rapprochement ally iraq one biggest political foes iran rapidly regaining influence middle east part due general qassem soleimani commander quds force international branch revolutionary guards also taking keen interest irans oil business iraq soleimani visited iraqi kurdistan september warn region holding independence vote also involved iraqi armys recapture kirkuk iraq iranian forces working sow discord recently saw kirkuk presence quds force commander qassem soleimani exacerbated tensions among kurds government baghdad us senator john mccain said washington last week kurdish division kurdish dream big oil exporter tatters said source close government erbil predicted iran king game kurds bid independence angered turkey iran large kurdish populations condemned referendum destabilizing region united states also called kurdistan scrap vote probably internal kurdish divisions doomed referendum failure local political sources believe oil heart dispute kirkuk fields controlled iraqs state oil firm somo taken kurdish forces 2014 iraqi army retreated face attacks islamic state patriotic union kurdistan party puk sulaimaniya accused ruling kurdistan democratic party kdp party president massoud barzani based capital erbil sharing oil wealth puk wanted export oil kirkuk iran tried make barzani accept joint management erbil sulaimaniya fields strongly opposed said sherzad yaba political adviser close puk put end illegitimate control kdp kirkuk oil senior members puk contacted baghdad tehran encouraged iranians build pipeline export kirkuk crude bandar abbas port said yaba project lay dormant even though iraqi oil minister jabar alluaibi iranian counterpart bijal zanganeh signed memorandum project february referendum kdp accused puk striking deal iran withdraw kirkuk puk denies recapture kirkuk coordinated soleimani left iraqi government troops control half kurdish oil output kurdish engineers fled fields output kirkuk suspended remained shut past five weeks baghdad erbil argue revenue split output 300000 bpd suspended since midoctober losses approaching 1 billion according kurdish industry sources stop losses iraq puk resumed talks iran according iraqi kurdish officials officials iraqs irans state oil firms somo nico met last month iron details oil sales kermanshah refinery acting chief somo alaa alyasiri said also said active discussions taking place pipeline project guards rising even though discussions baghdad tehran conducted oil ministry officials chamber commerce revolutionary guards poised step oil transaction iran iraq approved revolutionary guards oil ministry said reza mostafavi tabatabaei president londonbased enexd firm involved energy equipment business middle east dealings overseen desk responsible irans investments iraq presidents office run revolutionary guards pipeline project revolutionary guards reward kurds helping recapture kirkuk said tabatabaei | 567 |
<p />
<p>After every bloody episode of violence perpetrated by Israel, media spin doctors are often deployed with one grand mission: to absolve Israel of any responsibility in their acts of carnage.</p>
<p>&lt;img class="alignleft size-medium wp-image-17263" src="https://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/ramzy-baroud-300x200.jpg" alt="Ramzy Baroud" width="300" height="200" srcset="https://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/ramzy-baroud-300x200.jpg 300w, https://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/ramzy-baroud-600x400.jpg 600w, https://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/ramzy-baroud-73x50.jpg 73w, https://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/ramzy-baroud-500x333.jpg 500w, https://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/ramzy-baroud-280x186.jpg 280w, https://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/ramzy-baroud-60x40.jpg 60w, https://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/ramzy-baroud-118x78.jpg 118w, https://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/ramzy-baroud-479x319.jpg 479w, https://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/ramzy-baroud.jpg 625w" sizes="(max-width: 300px) 100vw, 300px" /&gt; Not only do these apologists demonize Palestinians, but anyone who dares to take a stand on their behalf. The main staple of this Israeli strategy has been blaming the victim. Such a tactic is nothing new in the way the so-called "Arab-Israeli conflict" has been presented in Western media, whose narrative has been <a href="http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/.premium-1.610116" type="external">much closer to that of Israeli official and media discourses</a> than that of Palestinians. This continued despite the decades-long military occupation, successive wars, and countless massacres.</p>
<p>Specifically, since the Israeli siege on Gaza, following the democratic elections that brought Hamas to power in January 2006, Israel needed all of its hasbara savvy, alongside that of its backers in western countries to explain why a population has been brutalized for making a democratic choice. The sheer amount of deception involved in the cleverly knitted story which purposely mixed between Hamas and al-Qaeda (as they once did between late Yasser Arafat and Hitler), among other ruses was a new low, even by Israel's own standards.</p>
<p><a href="https://www.theguardian.com/media/2014/aug/11/guardian-publisher-defends-anti-hamas-advert-decision" type="external">While the media demonized Hamas</a>, the resistance and all the other "bad" Palestinians who voted for the movement, it intentionally ignored the fascism that was taking over Israeli society.</p>
<p>For the bad - as in "radical," "extremist," anti-peace - Palestinian to exist, they have to be juxtaposed with the good Palestinian, represented in Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas and any faction, person or leader willing to, practically speaking, co-exist with the Israeli occupation. The PA went even further, by cooperating with Israel to ensure the demise of the Palestinian "radicals," as in those who insist on resisting the occupation.</p>
<p>Thanks to the PA, the price for the Israeli occupation has never been so cheap. Despite repeated attempts at re-activating the so-called peace process, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu always found a way to torpedo such efforts, even those promoted by his closest allies in Washington. "Peace" is a major risk for Netanyahu, whose government is <a href="http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/will-israel-go-fascist/" type="external">sustained by Jewish nationalists and extremists</a>, who feel no particular need to end their colonization of the West Bank. Abbas had done a great deal to ensure that Israel feels no pressure to negotiate. Every attempt at resistance, even by standing peacefully with placards and banners in Ramallah's al-Manara Square was crushed; often brutally.</p>
<p>Gaza, however, remained an exception. Israel's brutality there has reached unprecedented levels, especially after Israel's Cast Lead Operation, which killed and wounded thousands. Many predicted that the crimes in Gaza would turn the tide against Israel, but they didn't. Israeli influence over the media was still tight enough that somehow they managed to, at least, neutralize the impact of Cast Lead. The advent of the Arab Spring and the devaluing of human life, as happened in Syria, Libya and Egypt, somehow buried the Israeli crimes in Gaza; however temporarily.</p>
<p>But Israel's latest war on Gaza <a href="http://rt.com/op-edge/178932-genocide-israel-ethnic-cleansing/" type="external">mounted to a genocide</a>. Israel's argument that it was "defending itself" was no longer a sufficient excuse. No amount of hasbara was enough to explain the burying alive of entire families, the summary execution of civilians, the pulverizing of entire neighborhoods, the gunning down of fleeing children playing at the beach during a deceptive moment of "lull," the destruction of dozens of mosques and churches, the killing of civilians hiding in UN schools-turned temporary shelters.</p>
<p>It was particularly embarrassing for Israel, but also telling, that the Gaza resistance, which stood alone, <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/gaza/11028696/Israel-mulls-Gaza-tunnel-detection-system-as-truce-talks-continue.html" type="external">fighting tens of thousands of well-armed invaders from tunnels</a>, killed 64 Israelis. All but three were soldiers, mostly killed inside Gaza.</p>
<p>As the world was awakened to the level of devastation created by Israel in Gaza, many also became aware that such wrath is not independent from the <a href="http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/what-gaza-has-revealed/" type="external">fascism that has gripped Israeli society for years</a>. In Israel, there is no longer room for dissent, and those in the highest positions of power, are the ones who openly and freely preach genocide.</p>
<p>In <a href="http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/what-gaza-has-revealed/" type="external">his excellent article in the American Conservative</a> on August 6, Scott McConnell wrote, "All societies have their hate groups and extremists, but nowhere in the democratic world are they nearer to the center of power than Israel."&#160; He elaborated, "In the 1980s Meir Kahane had a small following in Israel, but his pro-ethnic cleansing party was made illegal. Now Kahanists are in the center of the country's ruling ideology."</p>
<p>This was discussed in <a href="http://www.jonathan-cook.net/blog/2014-07-21/calls-for-genocide-enter-israeli-mainstream/" type="external">context of statements made by Moshe Feiglin</a>, deputy speaker of the Knesset and a "top player in Israel's ruling Likud Party." Fieglin called for Palestinians from Gaza to be resettled in concentration camps, and all of Hamas and its supporters to be "annihilated." Who can now, with a good conscience, protest those who infuse the Nazi analogy to what is happening in Palestine?</p>
<p>Meanwhile, in this age of social media, where mainstream news networks no longer have complete command over the narrative, no self-respecting intellectual, journalist, official or any citizen with a conscience can <a href="http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2014/07/hamas-didnt-kidnap-the-israeli-teens-after-all.html" type="external">plead ignorance</a> and stand on the fence of neutrality.</p>
<p>Gaza has indeed changed everything. Israel's criminality and fascism should no longer be open for vibrant media debates, but it must be acknowledged as an uncontested fact. Our language, as in our perception, must also change to accommodate this uncontested reality.</p>
<p>To end the Israeli genocide and occupation, the wheel of continuous action must turn and keep on turning. Those who support Israel must be exposed, and those who facilitate the Israeli occupation and sustain its war machine are partakers in the war crimes committed daily in Gaza and the rest of Palestine. They must be boycotted. The Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement must grow and serve as the main platform for international solidarity.</p>
<p>Time for clever words and no action are long gone, and those who remain "soft" on Israel, for whatever reason, have no place in what is becoming a global movement with uncompromising demands: end the occupation, punish its sustainers, halt ethnic cleaning and genocide, end the siege, and <a href="https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/israelgaza-conflict-palestinians-consider-joining-icc-to-prosecute-israelis-for-war-crimes-9662806.html" type="external">bring Israeli and other culprits to the international criminal court</a> for their massive war crimes and crimes against humanity.</p> | false | 1 | every bloody episode violence perpetrated israel media spin doctors often deployed one grand mission absolve israel responsibility acts carnage ltimg classalignleft sizemedium wpimage17263 srchttpswwwforeignpolicyjournalcomwpcontentuploads201302ramzybaroud300x200jpg altramzy baroud width300 height200 srcsethttpswwwforeignpolicyjournalcomwpcontentuploads201302ramzybaroud300x200jpg 300w httpswwwforeignpolicyjournalcomwpcontentuploads201302ramzybaroud600x400jpg 600w httpswwwforeignpolicyjournalcomwpcontentuploads201302ramzybaroud73x50jpg 73w httpswwwforeignpolicyjournalcomwpcontentuploads201302ramzybaroud500x333jpg 500w httpswwwforeignpolicyjournalcomwpcontentuploads201302ramzybaroud280x186jpg 280w httpswwwforeignpolicyjournalcomwpcontentuploads201302ramzybaroud60x40jpg 60w httpswwwforeignpolicyjournalcomwpcontentuploads201302ramzybaroud118x78jpg 118w httpswwwforeignpolicyjournalcomwpcontentuploads201302ramzybaroud479x319jpg 479w httpswwwforeignpolicyjournalcomwpcontentuploads201302ramzybaroudjpg 625w sizesmaxwidth 300px 100vw 300px gt apologists demonize palestinians anyone dares take stand behalf main staple israeli strategy blaming victim tactic nothing new way socalled arabisraeli conflict presented western media whose narrative much closer israeli official media discourses palestinians continued despite decadeslong military occupation successive wars countless massacres specifically since israeli siege gaza following democratic elections brought hamas power january 2006 israel needed hasbara savvy alongside backers western countries explain population brutalized making democratic choice sheer amount deception involved cleverly knitted story purposely mixed hamas alqaeda late yasser arafat hitler among ruses new low even israels standards media demonized hamas resistance bad palestinians voted movement intentionally ignored fascism taking israeli society bad radical extremist antipeace palestinian exist juxtaposed good palestinian represented palestinian authority president mahmoud abbas faction person leader willing practically speaking coexist israeli occupation pa went even cooperating israel ensure demise palestinian radicals insist resisting occupation thanks pa price israeli occupation never cheap despite repeated attempts reactivating socalled peace process israeli prime minister benjamin netanyahu always found way torpedo efforts even promoted closest allies washington peace major risk netanyahu whose government sustained jewish nationalists extremists feel particular need end colonization west bank abbas done great deal ensure israel feels pressure negotiate every attempt resistance even standing peacefully placards banners ramallahs almanara square crushed often brutally gaza however remained exception israels brutality reached unprecedented levels especially israels cast lead operation killed wounded thousands many predicted crimes gaza would turn tide israel didnt israeli influence media still tight enough somehow managed least neutralize impact cast lead advent arab spring devaluing human life happened syria libya egypt somehow buried israeli crimes gaza however temporarily israels latest war gaza mounted genocide israels argument defending longer sufficient excuse amount hasbara enough explain burying alive entire families summary execution civilians pulverizing entire neighborhoods gunning fleeing children playing beach deceptive moment lull destruction dozens mosques churches killing civilians hiding un schoolsturned temporary shelters particularly embarrassing israel also telling gaza resistance stood alone fighting tens thousands wellarmed invaders tunnels killed 64 israelis three soldiers mostly killed inside gaza world awakened level devastation created israel gaza many also became aware wrath independent fascism gripped israeli society years israel longer room dissent highest positions power ones openly freely preach genocide excellent article american conservative august 6 scott mcconnell wrote societies hate groups extremists nowhere democratic world nearer center power israel160 elaborated 1980s meir kahane small following israel proethnic cleansing party made illegal kahanists center countrys ruling ideology discussed context statements made moshe feiglin deputy speaker knesset top player israels ruling likud party fieglin called palestinians gaza resettled concentration camps hamas supporters annihilated good conscience protest infuse nazi analogy happening palestine meanwhile age social media mainstream news networks longer complete command narrative selfrespecting intellectual journalist official citizen conscience plead ignorance stand fence neutrality gaza indeed changed everything israels criminality fascism longer open vibrant media debates must acknowledged uncontested fact language perception must also change accommodate uncontested reality end israeli genocide occupation wheel continuous action must turn keep turning support israel must exposed facilitate israeli occupation sustain war machine partakers war crimes committed daily gaza rest palestine must boycotted boycott divestment sanctions bds movement must grow serve main platform international solidarity time clever words action long gone remain soft israel whatever reason place becoming global movement uncompromising demands end occupation punish sustainers halt ethnic cleaning genocide end siege bring israeli culprits international criminal court massive war crimes crimes humanity | 613 |
<p>Everyone knows cigarettes can kill. Yet 36.5 million adults in the U.S. still smoke.</p>
<p>So after the labels and warnings, the restaurant bans and the grisly ad campaigns, the Food and Drug Administration is exploring a radical approach to helping people quit: regulating nicotine in cigarettes. If the FDA follows through — something far from certain — the shift could prompt some to quit or, at least, switch to relatively safer products like electronic cigarettes or vaping.</p>
<p>Peruz Nazli, who sat on a bench near New York’s Central Park with cigarette butts around her feet, said she was delighted when she heard about the agency’s plans.</p>
<p>“It’ll be easier to quit,” said the 59-year-old retail worker, who started when she was 14. “People look at us different.”</p>
<p>The FDA’s initiative may upend the $130 billion American tobacco industry. It’s also likely to set off a ferocious lobbying and legal war in Washington, and push the cigarette industry to develop products that rely less on burning carcinogenic tobacco and more on&#160;delivering doses of nicotine through cleaner vapor.&#160;Smoking-related illnesses cost $300 billion a year, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.</p>
<p>Interviews with New York smokers suggested that few had taken notice of the proposal announced last week, but many said they would be more likely to switch to new delivery devices than to smoke diluted cigarette after diluted cigarette. Some have already made the change.</p>
<p>Half Measure</p>
<p>Kevin Cleare,&#160;36, who picked up his first cigarette from a junior-high buddy when he was 13, turned to vaping three years ago on his doctor’s advice.</p>
<p>He quit smoking cigarettes for the first time three years ago but resumed for a few months amid a stressful breakup before turning to vaping. Now he’s “never going back,” and vaping looks like a long-term option.</p>
<p>“I’m so disgusted with cigarettes — the smell, the taste,” he said. “This is a fair, reasonable compromise.”</p>
<p>Over the past decades, U.S. regulators have banned smoking in many public places, sending smokers outside or into isolated corners. The rate of adult cigarette use has declined by a quarter since 1965 to only 15 percent, according to the CDC. Teens foresee life as a pariah and turn elsewhere, with daily smoking among high school seniors down to 5.5 percent in 2015.</p>
<p>Kids look at smokers and say, “You’re crazy. What are you doing?” said Cleare,&#160;who works with teenagers at the New York City health department.</p>
<p>Encouraging the remaining wannabes to suck on vape gizmos that resemble digital tape recorders is a planned inconvenience.</p>
<p>“This is just another way in making it less satisfying,”&#160;said Douglas Kamerow, a senior scholar at the Robert Graham Center for Primary Care Policy Studies in Washington.</p>
<p>Spurning Vaping</p>
<p>Those who stick with cigs are an increasingly gray crowd.</p>
<p>After emerging from a Mercedes-Benz onto a Brooklyn curb, Trevor Carter reached for a cigarette. The car belongs to his daughter. In the back seat is his grandson.</p>
<p>Carter, 68, has smoked for 50 years, a habit he says is harder to break than cocaine or booze, both of which he kicked. If the retired businessman doesn’t give up smoking by year-end, he said, his girlfriend will dump him.</p>
<p>“I’m ready, but I can’t break the habit,” said Carter. But he said he won’t try vaping or e-cigarettes, which mimic the traditional item. Instead, he’s “trying to quit the natural way.”</p>
<p>E-cigarettes are about 95 percent safer than smoked tobacco, according to the U.K. Centre for Tobacco and Alcohol Studies. Vaping atomizers and e-cigarettes heat liquid nicotine, which then becomes vapor. They don’t contain carbon monoxide and tar, chemicals in cigarettes that hurt smokers’ health. The FDA plan would encourage the use of the stand-ins by delaying further regulation until August 2022, giving tobacco companies a chance to build up a range of alternatives.</p>
<p>Transitional Era</p>
<p>After the FDA’s announcement last month, shares of the two largest cigarette sellers in the&#160;U.S., Altria Group Inc. And British American Tobacco Plc, suffered their biggest single-day drop since the recession,&#160;reflecting investors’ belief that companies aren’t prepared for the new era.</p>
<p>Vivien Azer, a research analyst with Cowen &amp; Co. who follows the industry, said that despite the sell-off, companies are trying to adapt with new products that take them beyond the simple equation of flame plus leaf.</p>
<p>“Everyone seems to be leaning in heavily into ‘heat not burn,”’ she said.</p>
<p>Medical Study</p>
<p>In one&#160;study published in 2015, cigarettes with lower levels of nicotine reduced not only nicotine exposure and dependence, but the number of cigarettes smoked. The research, conducted over six weeks and published in the New England Journal of Medicine, studied 780 people who regularly smoked with no interest in quitting.</p>
<p>For now, younger smokers are caught between eras.</p>
<p>John Mastbrook, 33, a bearded Brooklyn bike messenger, started smoking at 12 in his native Fairfax, Virginia. He vapes from time to time to wean himself from the cigarettes he rolls himself. “It’s just a good alternative,” he said.</p>
<p>Smoking refugees like Cleare who’ve switched to vaping recognize, though, that they may still spend their lives tethered to a habit they don’t want. He says he’s just “trading one vice for another.”</p>
<p>“I’m still obviously addicted to nicotine,” Cleare said, pausing to cough into his arm.</p> | false | 1 | everyone knows cigarettes kill yet 365 million adults us still smoke labels warnings restaurant bans grisly ad campaigns food drug administration exploring radical approach helping people quit regulating nicotine cigarettes fda follows something far certain shift could prompt quit least switch relatively safer products like electronic cigarettes vaping peruz nazli sat bench near new yorks central park cigarette butts around feet said delighted heard agencys plans itll easier quit said 59yearold retail worker started 14 people look us different fdas initiative may upend 130 billion american tobacco industry also likely set ferocious lobbying legal war washington push cigarette industry develop products rely less burning carcinogenic tobacco on160delivering doses nicotine cleaner vapor160smokingrelated illnesses cost 300 billion year according centers disease control prevention interviews new york smokers suggested taken notice proposal announced last week many said would likely switch new delivery devices smoke diluted cigarette diluted cigarette already made change half measure kevin cleare16036 picked first cigarette juniorhigh buddy 13 turned vaping three years ago doctors advice quit smoking cigarettes first time three years ago resumed months amid stressful breakup turning vaping hes never going back vaping looks like longterm option im disgusted cigarettes smell taste said fair reasonable compromise past decades us regulators banned smoking many public places sending smokers outside isolated corners rate adult cigarette use declined quarter since 1965 15 percent according cdc teens foresee life pariah turn elsewhere daily smoking among high school seniors 55 percent 2015 kids look smokers say youre crazy said cleare160who works teenagers new york city health department encouraging remaining wannabes suck vape gizmos resemble digital tape recorders planned inconvenience another way making less satisfying160said douglas kamerow senior scholar robert graham center primary care policy studies washington spurning vaping stick cigs increasingly gray crowd emerging mercedesbenz onto brooklyn curb trevor carter reached cigarette car belongs daughter back seat grandson carter 68 smoked 50 years habit says harder break cocaine booze kicked retired businessman doesnt give smoking yearend said girlfriend dump im ready cant break habit said carter said wont try vaping ecigarettes mimic traditional item instead hes trying quit natural way ecigarettes 95 percent safer smoked tobacco according uk centre tobacco alcohol studies vaping atomizers ecigarettes heat liquid nicotine becomes vapor dont contain carbon monoxide tar chemicals cigarettes hurt smokers health fda plan would encourage use standins delaying regulation august 2022 giving tobacco companies chance build range alternatives transitional era fdas announcement last month shares two largest cigarette sellers the160us altria group inc british american tobacco plc suffered biggest singleday drop since recession160reflecting investors belief companies arent prepared new era vivien azer research analyst cowen amp co follows industry said despite selloff companies trying adapt new products take beyond simple equation flame plus leaf everyone seems leaning heavily heat burn said medical study one160study published 2015 cigarettes lower levels nicotine reduced nicotine exposure dependence number cigarettes smoked research conducted six weeks published new england journal medicine studied 780 people regularly smoked interest quitting younger smokers caught eras john mastbrook 33 bearded brooklyn bike messenger started smoking 12 native fairfax virginia vapes time time wean cigarettes rolls good alternative said smoking refugees like cleare whove switched vaping recognize though may still spend lives tethered habit dont want says hes trading one vice another im still obviously addicted nicotine cleare said pausing cough arm | 548 |
<p>WASHINGTON — A sea of women in pink knit hats filled the nation’s capital Saturday to deliver a message to President Donald Trump that they will challenge any effort to roll back rights for women and other disaffected groups.</p>
<p>“You look great. I wish you could see yourselves,” activist Gloria Steinem told the thousands of women gathered on the National Mall. “It’s like an ocean.”</p>
<p>The Women’s March on Washington was one of many marches held across the country — including in Las Vegas and Reno — that were organized after Trump defeated Hillary Clinton during a harsh campaign that exposed a deep political divide in the nation.</p>
<p>As many as 200,000 people had been expected to take part in the Washington demonstration organized to highlight the need to protect the rights of women and others.</p>
<p />
<p>On Saturday morning, Washington city officials said march organizers had more than doubled their turnout estimate to 500,000 as crowds began swelling and subways into the city became clogged with participants.</p>
<p>Before the event, a contingent of about a dozen Nevada demonstrators met outside a subway entrance just a few blocks from the National Mall.</p>
<p>They were joined by U.S. Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto, D-Nev.</p>
<p>She said she was marching in honor of her mother and grandmothers “and to remind young women and girls the most important lesson they taught me: Never let your gender, age, race or background stand in the way from going after what you want.”</p>
<p>Cortez Masto said she was at the march with other Nevadans to deliver a message.</p>
<p>“We are not going to tolerate anybody coming in and trying to take anything away from us,” she told the Las Vegas Review-Journal. “We are going to use our voice and stand together united.”</p>
<p>About 200 people from Nevada were expected to find their way to Washington this weekend for the march.</p>
<p>Jean Dunbar, a Las Vegas medical field worker and organizer, said the exact number of participants from Nevada was unknown because many arranged their own means of transportation.</p>
<p>Some of the Nevada participants were recent transplants from Las Vegas, like Cynthia Thomas, an education advocate. For Thomas, the march was a chance to focus on abortion rights.</p>
<p>“It’s 2017 and we are still talking about a woman’s right to her own body,” Thomas said.</p>
<p>Nationally, organizers highlighted issues such as paid family leave, affordable access to abortion and birth control, a higher minimum wage and accountability of police in cases of brutality.</p>
<p>In addition to Steinem, other speakers included activist Angela Davis, Madonna and actress Scarlett Johansson, who spoke about basic women’s health care.</p>
<p>Folk-rock duo Indigo Girls and singer-songwriter Janelle Monae were among those who entertained the crowds.</p>
<p>Monae spoke out against police brutality and highlighted recent victims who have garnered national media attention, including Sandra Bland, a 28-year-old who was found hanged in her Texas jail cell following an encounter with police.</p>
<p>Much of the march, though, focused on the election of Trump, just 24 hours after he was sworn in to serve as the nation’s 45th president.</p>
<p>Trump began the day with the National Prayer Service, an interfaith worship service at Washington’s National Cathedral, and also paid a visit to CIA headquarters in Langley, Virginia.</p>
<p>The inaugural event was overshadowed by the hundreds of thousands of women accompanied by husbands, children, family and friends who took part in the peaceful march.</p>
<p>And many of the signs and posters touted by demonstrators contained a play on words on an audio recording of Trump’s crude comments about grabbing women by the genitals. Trump later apologized for the “locker room” talk.</p>
<p>Many women wore pink, cat-eared “pussy hats” that were knitted by other women for the march. A pattern was posted on social media to prompt mass production of the hats, which were prevalent at the march.</p>
<p>Many Nevada marchers wore the hats and carried a banner that read “Women’s March — on Washington — Nevada.”</p>
<p>Dunbar said the march was not just about Trump, but an effort to highlight social injustice and inequities faced by not only women, but also other groups.</p>
<p>“It’s a human rights and women’s rights demonstration,” Dunbar said.</p>
<p>Dunbar said the demonstration was peaceful, but the large number of participants made it difficult to move around and complete the march.</p>
<p>“There were way too many people,” she said.</p>
<p>A woman near the Nevada group collapsed and needed emergency medical treatment, she said. Despite the overwhelming crowds, people moved and opened a path for medical technicians to come and treat the woman.</p>
<p>“I’ve never seen anything like that,” Dunbar said.</p>
<p>The Nevada group was able to wend its way along the march route to the Washington Monument with few issues, Dunbar said.</p>
<p>“We just stayed together,” she added.</p>
<p>The contingent, however, decided to break up at the monument because of the challenges of moving as a group to the White House.</p>
<p>The march was still a positive experience, she said.</p>
<p>“We are all very motivated,” Dunbar said.</p>
<p>Later Saturday evening, demonstrators were still marching through Washington’s streets to mark their opposition to Trump.</p>
<p>Some chanted, “Welcome to your first day. We will never go away.” Others were chanting about democracy and women’s rights or holding protest signs.</p>
<p>There have been no known arrests related to Saturday’s gathering, according to the District of Columbia’s homeland security director, Christopher Geldart.</p>
<p>That’s in contrast to the events of Friday, when more than 200 people were arrested in Washington while protesting Trump’s inauguration. Those protests were led by self-described anarchists, and federal prosecutors say most of those arrested Friday will be charged with felony rioting.</p>
<p>Geldart said it is safe to say the crowd at the Women’s March exceeded the 500,000 that organizers told city officials to expect. That would make it one of the largest demonstrations in the city’s history.</p>
<p>The Associated Press contributed to this report. Contact Gary Martin at 202-662-7390 or [email protected]. Follow <a href="https://twitter.com/garymartindc" type="external">@garymartindc</a> on Twitter.</p> | false | 1 | washington sea women pink knit hats filled nations capital saturday deliver message president donald trump challenge effort roll back rights women disaffected groups look great wish could see activist gloria steinem told thousands women gathered national mall like ocean womens march washington one many marches held across country including las vegas reno organized trump defeated hillary clinton harsh campaign exposed deep political divide nation many 200000 people expected take part washington demonstration organized highlight need protect rights women others saturday morning washington city officials said march organizers doubled turnout estimate 500000 crowds began swelling subways city became clogged participants event contingent dozen nevada demonstrators met outside subway entrance blocks national mall joined us sen catherine cortez masto dnev said marching honor mother grandmothers remind young women girls important lesson taught never let gender age race background stand way going want cortez masto said march nevadans deliver message going tolerate anybody coming trying take anything away us told las vegas reviewjournal going use voice stand together united 200 people nevada expected find way washington weekend march jean dunbar las vegas medical field worker organizer said exact number participants nevada unknown many arranged means transportation nevada participants recent transplants las vegas like cynthia thomas education advocate thomas march chance focus abortion rights 2017 still talking womans right body thomas said nationally organizers highlighted issues paid family leave affordable access abortion birth control higher minimum wage accountability police cases brutality addition steinem speakers included activist angela davis madonna actress scarlett johansson spoke basic womens health care folkrock duo indigo girls singersongwriter janelle monae among entertained crowds monae spoke police brutality highlighted recent victims garnered national media attention including sandra bland 28yearold found hanged texas jail cell following encounter police much march though focused election trump 24 hours sworn serve nations 45th president trump began day national prayer service interfaith worship service washingtons national cathedral also paid visit cia headquarters langley virginia inaugural event overshadowed hundreds thousands women accompanied husbands children family friends took part peaceful march many signs posters touted demonstrators contained play words audio recording trumps crude comments grabbing women genitals trump later apologized locker room talk many women wore pink cateared pussy hats knitted women march pattern posted social media prompt mass production hats prevalent march many nevada marchers wore hats carried banner read womens march washington nevada dunbar said march trump effort highlight social injustice inequities faced women also groups human rights womens rights demonstration dunbar said dunbar said demonstration peaceful large number participants made difficult move around complete march way many people said woman near nevada group collapsed needed emergency medical treatment said despite overwhelming crowds people moved opened path medical technicians come treat woman ive never seen anything like dunbar said nevada group able wend way along march route washington monument issues dunbar said stayed together added contingent however decided break monument challenges moving group white house march still positive experience said motivated dunbar said later saturday evening demonstrators still marching washingtons streets mark opposition trump chanted welcome first day never go away others chanting democracy womens rights holding protest signs known arrests related saturdays gathering according district columbias homeland security director christopher geldart thats contrast events friday 200 people arrested washington protesting trumps inauguration protests led selfdescribed anarchists federal prosecutors say arrested friday charged felony rioting geldart said safe say crowd womens march exceeded 500000 organizers told city officials expect would make one largest demonstrations citys history associated press contributed report contact gary martin 2026627390 gmartinreviewjournalcom follow garymartindc twitter | 582 |
<p>You must first be decidedly clear on who you are; you must take pride in your values; in your identity; you must never cease to fight hate with love…</p>
<p>When I was a little boy, I used to dream of being reborn outside the hardship of the Refugee Camp in Gaza, in some other time and place where there were no soldiers, no military occupation, no concentration camps and no daily grind—where my father fought for our very survival, and my mother toiled to balance out the humiliation of life with her enduring love.</p>
<p>When I grew older and revisited my childhood fantasies, I came to quite a different conclusion: if I had to, I would do it all over again; I would not alter my past, however trying, in any way. I would embrace every moment, relive every tear, every loss, and cherish every triumph, however small.</p>
<p>When we are young, they often fail to tell us that we should not fear pain and dread hardship; that nothing can be as rewarding to the growth of one’s identity, sense of purpose in life, and the liberation of the human spirit than the struggle against injustice. True, one should never internalize servitude or wear victimhood as if a badge; for the mere act of resisting poverty, war, and injustice of any kind is the first and most essential criterion to prepare one for a more meaningful existence, and a better life.</p>
<p>I say this because I understand what many of you must be going through. My generation of refugee camp dwellers experienced this in the most violent manifestation you can ever imagine. These are difficult and challenging years for most of humanity, but all the more for you, young Muslims, in particular. Between the racism of American and European politicians and parties, the anti-Muslim sentiment sweeping much of the world, propagated by selfish individuals with sinister agendas, playing on people fears and ignorance, and the violence and counter-violence meted out by groups that refer to themselves as ‘Muslims’, you find yourself trapped, confined in a prison of stereotypes, media hate speech and violence; targeted, labeled and, undeservedly, feared.</p>
<p>Most of you were born into, or grew up in, that social and political confinement and remember no particular time in your past when life was relatively normal, when you were not the convenient scapegoat to much of what has gone wrong in the world. In fact, wittingly or otherwise, your characters were shaped by this prejudiced reality, where you subsist between bouts of anger at your mistreatment, and desperate attempts at defending yourself, fending for your family, and standing up for your community, for your culture and for your religion.</p>
<p>Most importantly, you continue to struggle, on a daily basis, to develop a sense of belonging, citizenship in societies where you often find yourself rejected and excluded. They demand your ‘assimilation’, yet push away whenever you draw nearer. It is seemingly an impossible task, I know.</p>
<p>And, it seems that, no matter what you do, you are yet to make a dent in the unfair misrepresentation of who you are and the noble values for which your religion stands. Their racism seems to be growing, and all the arrows of their hatred persistently point at Islam, despite your passionate attempts to convince them otherwise.</p>
<p>In fact, you hardly understand why Islam is, indeed, part of this discussion in the first place. Islam never invited the US to go to war in the Middle East, to tamper with your civilizations and to torment fellow Muslims in other parts of the globe.</p>
<p>Islam was never consulted when Guantanamo was erected to serve as a gulag outside the norms of human rights and international law.</p>
<p>Islam is hardly a topic of discussion as warring parties, with entirely self-interested political agendas, are fighting over the future of Syria or Iraq or Libya or Yemen or Afghanistan, and so on.</p>
<p>Islam was not the problem when Palestine was overrun by Zionist militias, with the help of the British and, later, the Americans, turning the Holy Land into a battlefield for most of the last century. The repercussions of that act has sealed the region’s fate from relative peace into a repugnant and perpetual war and conflict.</p>
<p>The same logic can be applied to everything else that went awry, and you have often wondered that yourself. Islam did not invent colonialism and imperialism, but inspired Asians, Africans and Arabs to fight this crushing evil. Islam did not usher in the age of mass slavery, although millions of American and European slaves were, themselves, Muslim.</p>
<p>You try to tell them all of this, and you insist that the likes of vicious groups like ISIS are not a product of Islam but a by-product of violence, greed and foreign interventions. But they do not listen, countering with selective verses from your Holy Book that were meant for specific historical contexts and circumstances. You even share such verses from the Quran with all of your social media followers: “…if any one killed a person, it would be as if he killed the whole of mankind; and if any one saved a life, it would be as if he saved the life of the whole of mankind…” (Chapter 5; Verse 32), hoping to elicit some understanding of the sanctity of human life according to your religion, but a fundamental change in attitude is yet to come.</p>
<p>So you despair; at least some of you do. Some of those who live in western countries cease to share with others the fact that they are Muslim, avoiding any discussion that may result in their being ostracized from increasingly intolerant societies. Some of those who live in Muslim majority countries, sadly, counter hate with hate of their own. Either way, they teeter between hate and self-hate, fear and self-pity, imposed apathy, rage and self-loathing. With time, a sense of belonging has been impossible to achieve and, like me when I was younger, perhaps you wonder what it would have been like if you lived in some other time, in some other place.</p>
<p>But, amid all of this, it is vital that we remember that the burdens of life can offer the best lessons in personal and collective growth.</p>
<p>You must understand that there is yet to exist a group of people that was spared the collective trials of history: that did not suffer persecution, racism, seemingly perpetual war, ethnic cleansing and all the evils that Muslims are contending with right now, from Syria to Palestine to Donald Trump’s America. This does not make it ‘okay’, but it is an important reminder that your hardship is not unique among nations. It just so happens that this could be the time for you to learn some of life’s most valuable lessons.</p>
<p>To surmount this hardship, you must first be decidedly clear on who you are; you must take pride in your values; in your identity; you must never cease to fight hate with love, to reach out, to educate, to belong. Because if you don’t, then racism wins, and you lose this unparalleled opportunity at individual and collective growth.</p>
<p>Sometimes I pity those who are born into privilege: although they have access to money and material opportunities, they can rarely appreciate the kind of experiences that only want and suffering can offer. Nothing even comes close to wisdom born out of pain.</p>
<p>And if you ever weaken, try to remember: God “does not burden a soul beyond that it can bear.” (Chapter 2; Verse 286).</p> | false | 1 | must first decidedly clear must take pride values identity must never cease fight hate love little boy used dream reborn outside hardship refugee camp gaza time place soldiers military occupation concentration camps daily grindwhere father fought survival mother toiled balance humiliation life enduring love grew older revisited childhood fantasies came quite different conclusion would would alter past however trying way would embrace every moment relive every tear every loss cherish every triumph however small young often fail tell us fear pain dread hardship nothing rewarding growth ones identity sense purpose life liberation human spirit struggle injustice true one never internalize servitude wear victimhood badge mere act resisting poverty war injustice kind first essential criterion prepare one meaningful existence better life say understand many must going generation refugee camp dwellers experienced violent manifestation ever imagine difficult challenging years humanity young muslims particular racism american european politicians parties antimuslim sentiment sweeping much world propagated selfish individuals sinister agendas playing people fears ignorance violence counterviolence meted groups refer muslims find trapped confined prison stereotypes media hate speech violence targeted labeled undeservedly feared born grew social political confinement remember particular time past life relatively normal convenient scapegoat much gone wrong world fact wittingly otherwise characters shaped prejudiced reality subsist bouts anger mistreatment desperate attempts defending fending family standing community culture religion importantly continue struggle daily basis develop sense belonging citizenship societies often find rejected excluded demand assimilation yet push away whenever draw nearer seemingly impossible task know seems matter yet make dent unfair misrepresentation noble values religion stands racism seems growing arrows hatred persistently point islam despite passionate attempts convince otherwise fact hardly understand islam indeed part discussion first place islam never invited us go war middle east tamper civilizations torment fellow muslims parts globe islam never consulted guantanamo erected serve gulag outside norms human rights international law islam hardly topic discussion warring parties entirely selfinterested political agendas fighting future syria iraq libya yemen afghanistan islam problem palestine overrun zionist militias help british later americans turning holy land battlefield last century repercussions act sealed regions fate relative peace repugnant perpetual war conflict logic applied everything else went awry often wondered islam invent colonialism imperialism inspired asians africans arabs fight crushing evil islam usher age mass slavery although millions american european slaves muslim try tell insist likes vicious groups like isis product islam byproduct violence greed foreign interventions listen countering selective verses holy book meant specific historical contexts circumstances even share verses quran social media followers one killed person would killed whole mankind one saved life would saved life whole mankind chapter 5 verse 32 hoping elicit understanding sanctity human life according religion fundamental change attitude yet come despair least live western countries cease share others fact muslim avoiding discussion may result ostracized increasingly intolerant societies live muslim majority countries sadly counter hate hate either way teeter hate selfhate fear selfpity imposed apathy rage selfloathing time sense belonging impossible achieve like younger perhaps wonder would like lived time place amid vital remember burdens life offer best lessons personal collective growth must understand yet exist group people spared collective trials history suffer persecution racism seemingly perpetual war ethnic cleansing evils muslims contending right syria palestine donald trumps america make okay important reminder hardship unique among nations happens could time learn lifes valuable lessons surmount hardship must first decidedly clear must take pride values identity must never cease fight hate love reach educate belong dont racism wins lose unparalleled opportunity individual collective growth sometimes pity born privilege although access money material opportunities rarely appreciate kind experiences want suffering offer nothing even comes close wisdom born pain ever weaken try remember god burden soul beyond bear chapter 2 verse 286 | 612 |
<p>Aug. 17 (UPI) — Lakes and ponds used by water utilities have long been viewed with a single purpose: holding water. Now a handful of pioneering water utilities are looking at their aquatic real estate with a new purpose in mind: solar energy generation.</p>
<p>Large-scale floating solar projects have been installed in Japan and China, as well as on ponds at California wineries. But solar energy has remained primarily a terrestrial endeavor because, in most cases, it is simpler and cheaper to mount photovoltaic (solar) panels on land.</p>
<p>That is beginning to change. The floats and other mounting components unique to water-based solar are slightly more expensive, but that difference will evaporate as more projects are built. And as solar has proliferated in some areas, it has become harder to find available land for new installations.</p>
<p>Now a few water agencies are embracing floating solar to maximize the utility of their storage ponds and reservoirs. Floating solar panels can provide energy that offsets operating costs and reduces greenhouse gas emissions. And there are other benefits: Floating solar panels throw shade on the water surface, which can reduce evaporation and algae growth.</p>
<p>Sonoma County Water Agency will install floating solar panel arrays later this year. The panels will float on its Oceanview treated wastewater pond in Windsor, where shade from the panels will reduce the cost of algae control, and the electricity produced will help power the treatment process.</p>
<p>The agency had already built solar arrays on rooftops and parking lots, said general manager Grant Davis. The next choice was ranch land, but that posed a conflict with livestock grazing operations.</p>
<p>“We were looking then for disturbed acreage that was going to be out of sight, out of mind,” Davis said. “And what better place than a wastewater treatment pond?”</p>
<p>The agency was also motivated by a 2008 policy adopted by its board of directors to become “carbon free” by 2015 – meaning it aimed to eliminate carbon dioxide emissions from its energy demand – a goal that it met.</p>
<p>So about three years ago the agency signed a contract with Pristine Sun, a San Francisco firm, to develop a floating solar panel system for several of its treatment ponds. Pristine had not built a floating solar system before. But after some research and testing, the first system was installed as a pilot project at the Oceanview treatment pond in summer 2016.</p>
<p>The trial was successful, and a permanent installation at the pond is expected to go live by the end of this year. It will produce 1 megawatt of electricity, enough to offset 4 percent of the agency’s electrical demand. The panels will be mounted on plastic floats borrowed from the dredge-mining industry.</p>
<p>The team plans five more floating solar projects on other treatment ponds. In total, they’ll produce enough electricity to power 3,500 homes.</p>
<p>“We’ll see about $33,000 in annual power savings at buildout,” Davis said.</p>
<p>The water agency pays nothing for these projects. Pristine Sun covers all costs for equipment, installation and permitting, and then makes its money selling the energy that’s generated.</p>
<p>Troy Helming, Pristine Sun’s founder and chief executive, said floating solar is still extremely rare in the U.S. But he said the potential is “enormous.”</p>
<p>In California alone, using a very conservative estimate of available inland water surface area, Helming estimates floating solar could produce 20 gigawatts of electricity. That’s more than 10 percent of the state’s total energy need.</p>
<p>“It seems like there is quite a bit of interest, which is exciting,” said Helming. “Now in California and Hawaii and Japan, and other parts of the world, there are challenges sometimes finding new locations where you do have fairly high concentrations of both rooftop and ground-mount solar. It makes a lot of sense to look at these underutilized assets owned by water agencies and municipalities for this potential application.”</p>
<p>One drawback to such installations is that the floating solar panels and their anchoring systems must not interfere with water system operations. That means preserving access to drains and other plumbing. In some cases, panels may need to be easily removable.</p>
<p>But these are simple “engineering challenges,” Helming said. In many cases, floating solar offers more advantages than drawbacks. One advantage is reducing algae that can rapidly clog filters, requiring more frequent cleaning or replacement. Depending on location and use of the water, algae may also pose a public health concern.</p>
<p>Evaporation control is another potential benefit. For many utilities, water is essentially money. They spend millions of dollars pumping and treating water, which then becomes a commodity that is sold to customers. So any water lost to evaporation is essentially lost revenue.</p>
<p>Water can also enhance solar generation. Ironically, too much heat reduces a solar panel’s energy output. Every panel is rated for certain temperature limits, above which energy output plummets. But a watery surface will always be cooler than the bare ground on which most solar arrays are built.</p>
<p>Dirt is another enemy of solar panels. Wind-blown dust inevitably collects on panels, preventing some of the sun’s energy from reaching photovoltaic cells. This can reduce energy output by 20 percent or more. Most ground-mounted solar arrays get cleaned only two or three times a year.</p>
<p>Helming’s company has rigged its floating panels with a simple sprinkler system to clean the panels using water drawn from the reservoir underneath. It cleans the panels every day.</p>
<p>“We’re curious to look at the data ourselves and see if we actually reap those ancillary benefits,” said Kelly Rodgers, energy program manager at the San Diego County Water Authority.</p>
<p>The San Diego agency signed a contract with Pristine Sun to install a 6-megawatt solar array floating on its Olivenhain Reservoir that will cover about 10 percent of the water surface.</p>
<p>Rodgers’ agency first sought bids for a floating solar project five years ago and got no “viable results,” she said. It tried again about 18 months ago and received several proposals.</p>
<p>The 24,000 acre-feet Olivenhain Reservoir functions purely as an emergency supply for the San Diego region, so water levels don’t fluctuate much. Also, recreation is not allowed there. Both factors simplify the installation, Rodgers said, which they hope to complete by the end of 2018.</p>
<p>“Certainly we wouldn’t cover the entire reservoir,” Rodgers said. “But we may add additional panels if this turns out to be a really good thing for us. We’re always trying to reap revenue and recover costs to stabilize our water bills.”</p>
<p>The Olivenhain project may include battery storage, Rodgers said. This would allow the water authority to maximize revenue by selling electricity during evening and late-afternoon hours, when solar output drops off but energy demand is peaking.</p>
<p>There are some big fish to catch in the floating solar business. One of the biggest of all is the California Aqueduct, owned by the state Department of Water Resources (DWR), which exports vast amounts of water from north to south. The aqueduct offers more than 400 miles of canal surface area that could be covered with solar panels in a region of the state – the San Joaquin Valley – that is relentlessly sunny.</p>
<p>DWR – a huge energy consumer – also faces a state mandate to slash its greenhouse gas emissions to 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050.</p>
<p>As recently as 2015, DWR investigated covering portions of the canal with solar panels. It concluded this wasn’t feasible because of the need for frequent visual inspections of the canal and the water surface itself. It also cited challenges in attaching panels to the canal banks.</p>
<p>But it appears DWR’s analysis may not have considered the prospect of floating solar panels, which pose a much less intensive installation process. They could also be easier to move temporarily to allow inspections.</p>
<p>A University of California, Davis study in 2015 found that covering the aqueduct with solar panels would more than pay for itself. It could also prevent over 9,000 acre-feet of water evaporation per day. On an annual basis, that’s equal to the entire capacity of Lake Oroville, the state’s second-largest reservoir.</p>
<p>The study found that mounting solar panels on just a single 80-mile stretch of canal serving the Bay Area would avoid water losses worth $1 million annually.</p>
<p>Helming said transforming the aqueduct into a solar-energy producer is entirely feasible today.</p>
<p>“There would be a whole bunch of companies that would jump at the chance to cover the aqueduct with solar at no cost to the state,” he said.</p>
<p>This article originally appeared on Water Deeply, and you can find the original <a href="https://www.newsdeeply.com/water/articles/2017/08/17/floating-solar-power-a-new-frontier-for-green-leaning-water-utilities" type="external">here</a>. For important news about the California drought, <a href="http://waterdeeply.us5.list-manage.com/subscribe?u=8b78e9a34ff7443ec1e8c62c6&amp;id=2947becb78" type="external">you can sign up to the Water Deeply email list.</a></p> | false | 1 | aug 17 upi lakes ponds used water utilities long viewed single purpose holding water handful pioneering water utilities looking aquatic real estate new purpose mind solar energy generation largescale floating solar projects installed japan china well ponds california wineries solar energy remained primarily terrestrial endeavor cases simpler cheaper mount photovoltaic solar panels land beginning change floats mounting components unique waterbased solar slightly expensive difference evaporate projects built solar proliferated areas become harder find available land new installations water agencies embracing floating solar maximize utility storage ponds reservoirs floating solar panels provide energy offsets operating costs reduces greenhouse gas emissions benefits floating solar panels throw shade water surface reduce evaporation algae growth sonoma county water agency install floating solar panel arrays later year panels float oceanview treated wastewater pond windsor shade panels reduce cost algae control electricity produced help power treatment process agency already built solar arrays rooftops parking lots said general manager grant davis next choice ranch land posed conflict livestock grazing operations looking disturbed acreage going sight mind davis said better place wastewater treatment pond agency also motivated 2008 policy adopted board directors become carbon free 2015 meaning aimed eliminate carbon dioxide emissions energy demand goal met three years ago agency signed contract pristine sun san francisco firm develop floating solar panel system several treatment ponds pristine built floating solar system research testing first system installed pilot project oceanview treatment pond summer 2016 trial successful permanent installation pond expected go live end year produce 1 megawatt electricity enough offset 4 percent agencys electrical demand panels mounted plastic floats borrowed dredgemining industry team plans five floating solar projects treatment ponds total theyll produce enough electricity power 3500 homes well see 33000 annual power savings buildout davis said water agency pays nothing projects pristine sun covers costs equipment installation permitting makes money selling energy thats generated troy helming pristine suns founder chief executive said floating solar still extremely rare us said potential enormous california alone using conservative estimate available inland water surface area helming estimates floating solar could produce 20 gigawatts electricity thats 10 percent states total energy need seems like quite bit interest exciting said helming california hawaii japan parts world challenges sometimes finding new locations fairly high concentrations rooftop groundmount solar makes lot sense look underutilized assets owned water agencies municipalities potential application one drawback installations floating solar panels anchoring systems must interfere water system operations means preserving access drains plumbing cases panels may need easily removable simple engineering challenges helming said many cases floating solar offers advantages drawbacks one advantage reducing algae rapidly clog filters requiring frequent cleaning replacement depending location use water algae may also pose public health concern evaporation control another potential benefit many utilities water essentially money spend millions dollars pumping treating water becomes commodity sold customers water lost evaporation essentially lost revenue water also enhance solar generation ironically much heat reduces solar panels energy output every panel rated certain temperature limits energy output plummets watery surface always cooler bare ground solar arrays built dirt another enemy solar panels windblown dust inevitably collects panels preventing suns energy reaching photovoltaic cells reduce energy output 20 percent groundmounted solar arrays get cleaned two three times year helmings company rigged floating panels simple sprinkler system clean panels using water drawn reservoir underneath cleans panels every day curious look data see actually reap ancillary benefits said kelly rodgers energy program manager san diego county water authority san diego agency signed contract pristine sun install 6megawatt solar array floating olivenhain reservoir cover 10 percent water surface rodgers agency first sought bids floating solar project five years ago got viable results said tried 18 months ago received several proposals 24000 acrefeet olivenhain reservoir functions purely emergency supply san diego region water levels dont fluctuate much also recreation allowed factors simplify installation rodgers said hope complete end 2018 certainly wouldnt cover entire reservoir rodgers said may add additional panels turns really good thing us always trying reap revenue recover costs stabilize water bills olivenhain project may include battery storage rodgers said would allow water authority maximize revenue selling electricity evening lateafternoon hours solar output drops energy demand peaking big fish catch floating solar business one biggest california aqueduct owned state department water resources dwr exports vast amounts water north south aqueduct offers 400 miles canal surface area could covered solar panels region state san joaquin valley relentlessly sunny dwr huge energy consumer also faces state mandate slash greenhouse gas emissions 80 percent 1990 levels 2050 recently 2015 dwr investigated covering portions canal solar panels concluded wasnt feasible need frequent visual inspections canal water surface also cited challenges attaching panels canal banks appears dwrs analysis may considered prospect floating solar panels pose much less intensive installation process could also easier move temporarily allow inspections university california davis study 2015 found covering aqueduct solar panels would pay could also prevent 9000 acrefeet water evaporation per day annual basis thats equal entire capacity lake oroville states secondlargest reservoir study found mounting solar panels single 80mile stretch canal serving bay area would avoid water losses worth 1 million annually helming said transforming aqueduct solarenergy producer entirely feasible today would whole bunch companies would jump chance cover aqueduct solar cost state said article originally appeared water deeply find original important news california drought sign water deeply email list | 881 |
<p>My original plan, several months ago, was to do homage before the 20th century ended to the French economist Jacques Rueff, by nominating him as the “rightest” political economist of the century. I had to rethink that plan after the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences awarded the Nobel Prize for Economics to Robert A. Mundell in October. It would have seemed strange to honor the dead before the living, so I devoted December’s LBMC Report to Mundell (“ <a href="" type="internal">Nobel Prize-Winner Robert A. Mundell: An Appreciation</a>,” 29 December 1999). I also realized that there was no need to shoehorn Rueff into the last days of the 20th century. Jacques Rueff wasn’t the most famous or the most influential economist of his time; John Maynard Keynes walks away with both those awards. But Rueff’s ideas about economic policy will easily make the transition to the 21st century, whereas Keynes’s will not.</p>
<p>I should explain that Rueff has had a profound influence on our financial markets forecasting firm, Lehrman Bell Mueller Cannon, Inc. Our senior partner, Lewis Lehrman, knew Rueff well, and the Lehrman Institute published Rueff’s complete works in his native France. Our use of the “World Dollar Base” is one of many LBMC analytical tools that were inspired by Rueff’s work. But my nomination of Rueff has a more objective basis. Rueff was both a theorist and a successful practitioner of economic policy, who gave the earliest accurate diagnosis of the two biggest economic policy problems of the 20th Century: unemployment and inflation. He used that diagnosis to engineer several successful reforms of national economic policy, and his analysis is just as valid today as when developed in the 1920s. Rueff also contributed to the philosophy of the “social market economy” and of the European Union. He succeeded in explaining the critical link between economics as a science and economic policy as a branch of moral or political philosophy, the importance of which is increasingly evident in economic policy debates.</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>Theorist of Theory</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>Born in 1896, the son of a physician, Jacques Rueff was trained in science and mathematics at the Ecole Polytechnique. His attention was turned from the study of medicine when he studied classical economics under Clement Colson, and was especially influenced by the mathematical general-equilibrium theory of Leon Walras.</p>
<p>We are now accustomed to thinking of economics as a mathematical science. But early in the 20th century this was the exception, not the rule. In fact, it was widely believed that economics could never be an exact science. Rueff accordingly devoted his first theoretical work, From the Physical to the Moral Sciences (1922), to methodology, showing that exactly the same scientific method can be applied to “moral” or “social” sciences like economics, as to the physical sciences.</p>
<p>The objection was typically raised that methods applied, say, to the theory of thermodynamics cannot be applied to the study of human beings endowed with free will. Rueff replied that just as there is no thermodynamics for a single molecule, there is no economics for an individual. The acts of individuals — individual particles in physics or free human beings in social sciences — are essentially “indeterminate”; yet in both cases, the pattern of behavior of a large number of individuals can be explained and predicted as a matter of statistical probability. The greater precision commonly observed in natural sciences is simply a function of sample size: while human beings in a national economy are typically counted in the millions (multiples of 10^6) or at most billions (multiples of 10^9), molecules are measured in moles (multiples of 6 x 10^23).</p>
<p>Also, Rueff said, in both cases theories or “models” are not so much the discovery as the logical “creation” of causes to fit empirical facts. A theory should be logically consistent, and thus true given its premises. But if an existing theory fails to explain the facts, a different theory must be created. In economics no less than physics, as Rueff later wrote, “A scientific theory is considered correct only if it makes forecasting possible.” Rueff taught the statistics of political economy at the newly established Statistical Institute of the University of Paris, and later joined a handful of like-minded economists like Ragnar Frisk in founding the International Econometric Society with its journal Econometrica.</p>
<p>Rueff was selected in 1923 as an “inspector of finance” — a competitive position unique to France, which gives a few relatively young men supervisory power over the many government agencies associated with the Ministry of Finance. While in this post, he embarked upon a series of path breaking studies combining economic theory with statistical evidence along the lines he had outlined. The subjects of these studies were not only hot topics at the time, but also highlighted what would become the main economic policy problems of the 20th century.</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>The ‘Transfer Problem’</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>His first study, “Exchange: a Natural Phenomenon” (1922), concerned fluctuations in exchange rates — a striking postwar event for populations used to the stability of the gold standard. Rueff described the principle of “purchasing power parity” and showed the conditions under which any divergences in purchasing power of different currencies must lead to restoration of equilibrium in the balance of payments. The study brought Rueff to the notice of French officials, since it had immediate implications for the question of German reparations, which preoccupied international relations throughout the 1920s and early 1930s. It also led Rueff later to debate John Maynard Keynes&#160;— who had not yet published the General Theory, or even the Treatise on Money&#160;— on what became known as the “transfer problem.”</p>
<p>Keynes argued that German reparations were in themselves destabilizing, on the grounds that a country has a certain “natural” balance of trade, which limits the amount of financial transfers it is able to make. Rueff argued (as did the Swedish economist Bertil Ohiin) that the amount of an international transfer is limited only by the ability of a country’s government to finance the necessary taxes or loans through its budget — in short, the price mechanism will cause the trade balance to adjust to accommodate the capital transfer, not the reverse. Rueff showed that, when France had been forced to pay sizeable reparations to Prussia after the Franco-Prussian war of 1870, the financial transfer induced the necessary large surplus in the French trade balance, enabling the reparations to be paid without difficulty.</p>
<p>Economists today recognize that Rueff and Ohlin were essentially correct, and Keynes incorrect on this issue. Yet English-speaking economists did not recognize the implications of this truth until the 1960s, when economists like Robert Mundell (1999 winner of the Nobel Prize) and Harry Johnson pioneered the “monetary approach to the balance of payments.”</p>
<p>In Towards a Theory of Inflation” (January 1925), Rueff examined the hyperinflations in France, Italy, Germany, Poland and Austria during World War I and the early Twenties. Rueff showed that in each case the main cause was the issue of money by the central bank to finance government budget deficits —and that if the “real” or inflation-adjusted amount of money is to remain relatively constant, prices will tend to rise exponentially. This preceded Phillip Cagan’s “classic” studies of hyperinflation by 30 years, but like many of Rueff’s works is little known because it was not published in English.</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>Rueff’s Law of Unemployment</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>In ‘Variations in Unemployment in England” (December 1925) Rueff was the first to show empirically that the reason for the unprecedented appearance of chronic high unemployment in England in the 1920s was a rise in the relative price of labor, as measured by the ratio of wage rates to the wholesale price index. He traced its cause to the institution after World War I of an open-ended “dole,” which was fixed in nominal terms (that is, so many shillings a week), in the face of postwar decline in the price level — a deflation that was required by Britain’s return to the pound’s prewar gold value. Rueff’s study first appeared in a French academic journal, and was described in the Financial Times in 1926, but caused a sensation when an updated version appeared in the London Times in 1931 as British unemployment rose again sharply. Later researchers, following Rueff’s lead, found a similar strong relationship between the relative price of labor and unemployment — which became known as “Rueff’s Law” — in the other industrial countries in Europe through the 1920s and 1930s. Keynes’s General Theory implicitly depends on Rueff’s Law, plus the assumption that wage rates are fixed in nominal but not real terms.</p>
<p>Interestingly, Rueff’s original study was published six months before Irving Fisher published what would later be called a “Phillips Curve” explanation of unemployment. Whereas Rueff explained joblessness as a function of the relative price of labor. Fisher explained unemployment as a function of the rate of price inflation. (A.W. Phillips was a British economist who rediscovered an apparent inflation/unemployment trade-off in the late 1950s.) The Phillips Curve relationship broke down when the Bretton Woods system exploded in 1971. But I have shown that Rueff’s Law, suitably updated, has held up empirically. (The necessary updating takes advantage of the greater detail of national income data now available, and takes into account taxes and transfer payments — which are no longer small enough to be ignored — when measuring the relative price of labor. For a recent illustration, see ‘Welfare Reform Lowered Unemployment,” LBMC Report, July 23, 1999.)</p>
<p>These striking studies brought Rueff to the attention of French policymakers. When foreign minister Raymond Poincare became French premier in 1926, he commissioned Rueff to determine the level at which the French franc should be stabilized. Like many conservative politicians, Poincare was intent upon a return to the prewar gold parity of the currency, as Britain had done, though this was against the advice of Charles Rist and Pierre Quesnay, the deputy governors of the Bank of France. But Poincare was ultimately persuaded, for fear of causing unemployment, to refix the gold value of the franc at only one-fifth the prewar parity. This was the level Rueff had chosen, the highest which would not require a deflation of prices, thereby causing unemployment. The Poincare reform was a rousing success: the currency was stabilized and the economy boomed, without inflation or unemployment, as capital flowed back to France. Moreover, many features of Poincare’s stabilization package were drawn from another Rueff paper, The Conditions of Sound Finance” (April 1925).</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>Macroeconomic Theory</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>In 1927, Rueff published his Theory of Monetary Phenomena, which sketched an alternate macroeconomic approach to the monetarism of Irving Fisher or what would later become Keynesian theory. Rueff examined Fisher’s “equation of exchange,” MV = PT, which says that the nominal volume of transactions (PT) is equal to the quantity of money times its “velocity of circulation” (MV). Rueff pointed out that, while formally true, the equation doesn’t say anything about causality: it merely means that the amount of payments made in an economy is equal to the amount of payments received. The United States had to re-learn this fact by bitter experience when the Federal Reserve treated it as a causal relation and used it to conduct monetary policy from 1979 to 1982.</p>
<p>In the same work, Rueff employed and explained the concepts of “total demand” and “total supply” a decade before Keynes’s General Theory; but his ideas never suffered the drawbacks of Keynesian theory. For better or worse, Keynes revolutionized the way economists think about the economy. One of the worse parts was that Keynes assumed a closed national economy, and implicitly assumed rigidity of wages and prices. And , in shifting the emphasis from the behavior of individuals to the behavior of aggregates&#160;— aggregate demand, aggregate supply, monetary aggregates, and the like — Keynes’s macroeconomic theory also lost any consistent microeconomic foundations.</p>
<p>Rueff’s theory was also comprehensive, but his economic aggregates were built up consistently from individual households and firms, and he was always explicit about the fact that economic relations among nations do not differ in kind from economic relations among national regions or among individual firms or households. In fact, the essence of his disagreement with Keynes, with whom he often debated, was precisely over the ability of markets to adjust when not hindered from doing so bylaw or regulation.</p>
<p>(An earlier LBMC Report, “The Rueffian Synthesis,” June/July 1991, considered Rueff’s economic ideas and their relation to Keynesian, monetarist and “supply-side” theory in more detail. The report is available on request.)</p>
<p>This output would be enough for most economists. But one reason Rueff’s theories are extraordinarily applicable in the real world is that he grappled for most of his life with the day-to-day problems of economic policy. (In fact, the increasing demands of these duties soon did away with the leisure necessary for empirical studies. He continued to develop his theories, but had to be content with expressing the hope that other researchers would prove them empirically.)</p>
<p>From 1927 to 1930, Rueff was assigned to the new League of Nations, where he worked as a “currency doctor” to devise economic programs, based on the principles he had worked out, for countries like Greece, Bulgaria and Portugal. Where they were applied, all were successful.</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>“Reserve Currency” Disaster</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>In 1929 Rueff was attached to the League’s Gold Committee, which studied the problems facing the international monetary system. In his report, “Abnormal Fluctuations in the Purchasing Power of Gold,” Rueff called attention for the first time to the threat posed by the “gold-exchange standard.” Rueff warned that, whereas the consequences of typical economic policy mistakes were confined to the country that made them, the nature of the “reserve-currency” system was to transmit inflation or deflation on a worldwide scale.</p>
<p>From 1930 to 1933, Rueff served as French financial attache in London, where he was in charge of the Bank of France’s sterling reserves, and was able to analyze and correctly warn about the deflationary collapse of the gold-exchange standard.</p>
<p>The “hardening” of European currencies in the course of the 1920s soon revealed the flaw in the international monetary system as it had evolved since the First World War. The gold values of the dollar and the pound sterling had been re-established at the prewar parities; but the general price levels in terms of those currencies had increased substantially because of wartime monetary expansion. Ultimately one of two things had to happen: either the gold parities would have to be changed to match the price level, or else prices in terms of those currencies would be subject to an eventual deflation back to the prewar level.</p>
<p>Instead of facing the choice squarely, policymakers at the 1922 Genoa conference recommended making up for the resulting “scarcity” of gold by supplementing the undervalued gold reserves with foreign exchange reserves&#160;— securities denominated in pounds or dollars, which were convertible into gold. The effect was greatly to increase the leverage of the world financial system.</p>
<p>The collapse against which Rueff had warned began when, after Nazi political gains caused a capital flight from Germany, an international panel of experts led by the United States effectively imposed exchange controls on capital invested in Germany. The immobilization of investments in Germany triggered the liquidation of assets elsewhere by creditors who needed to service their own debts. In the process, numerous banks failed, and almost all the world’s dollar and sterling exchange reserves were liquidated. The problem was intensified when industrial countries sought to protect themselves with trade and capital controls. The pound floated in 1931 and the dollar in 1933&#160;— but by that time, prices in dollar terms had deflated back to pre-World War I levels. The resulting social disruptions hastened the rise of totalitarian governments of the right and left.</p>
<p>From 1934 to 1939, Rueff supervised France’s international payments (since international payments were now generally blocked, they were subject to negotiation), and served as director of the Finance Ministry’s exchange stabilization fund, which controlled France’s official monetary reserves.</p>
<p>In 1939 he was named deputy governor of the Bank of France, and promptly charged with preparing for wartime exchange control. “But I’ve always been hostile to that institution, knowing the danger that it entails,” Rueff objected. That’s exactly why I’m asking you to direct the creation of an office of exchange controls,” Bank of France governor Pierre Fournier replied, “because I know they will rapidly become necessary, and I expect that you will apply the indispensable moderation.”</p>
<p>Rueff resigned the central bank post in 1941, after the German invasion (and after trying to keep France’s gold reserves out of German hands). He spent the war as an inspector of finance, and writing his greatest work, l’Ordre Social. As regions of France were liberated, he undertook to re-establish the functioning of a rudimentary system of payments. From France’s liberation in 1944, Rueff served as economic adviser to the Allied military mission for German and Austrian affairs until 1952.</p>
<p>Rueff co-operated with and promoted the ideas of like-minded German economists, such as Ludwig Erhard and Wilhelm Roepke, who developed Germany’s “social market economy,” the basis for the postwar Germam Wirtschaftswunder, or “economic miracle.”</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>“Neo-liberalism,” or the “Institutional Market”</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>Rueff, Erhard, Roepke and others sometimes called themselves “neo-liberals” or “social liberals” to distinguish their political philosophy from 19th-century classical liberalism. Unlike many American libertarians of today, they understood that economic freedom doesn’t happen spontaneously: it requires lots of hard work. Rueff also used the term “institutional market” to describe the approach. (He considered the United States the pre-eminent example of the “institutional market.”)</p>
<p>“If the institutional market distinguishes itself from the ‘Manchesterian’ market — not in its goals, but rather in its techniques&#160;— it’s because it rests on a totally different view of the evolution of human societies,” Rueff once explained. “For classical liberals liberty is, for man, the state of nature. ‘Man is born free, yet is everywhere in chains,’ Rousseau complained two centuries ago. If one wished to restore this lost liberty, it was not necessary to do anything, only to remove the shackles.</p>
<p>“For the neo-liberal, on the contrary, liberty is the fruit, painstakingly obtained and always threatened, of an evolution of institutions, founded on milennia of sad experience and on religious, moral, political and social interventions. Against Rousseau, he thinks that the great majority of men are born in chains, from which only the development of institutions can free them, and then only partially.</p>
<p>“Liberals [that is, libertarians] and neo-liberals share a common faith in the benefits of liberty. But the former expect a spontaneous generation, with which it is merely necessary not to interfere; whereas the latter want to help it be born, to grow and develop, by rendering it acceptable and avoiding those encroachments which constantly tend to annihilate it.”</p>
<p>This was not, for Rueff, merely an attitude. The main point of L’Ordre Social is to trace explicitly the juridical framework and economic theory of the price mechanism and the economic policy techniques upon which economic freedom and a liberal social order depend. Rueff had originally envisioned a second volume of monetary theory. But when finally published in 1945, it had broadened into a general outline of economic society, with a theory of economic policy and an analysis of different monetary, fiscal and regulatory policy regimes. The themes had become so sweeping, I think, because in the 1930s and 1940s European civilization had come to the brink, and the most immediate task was to rebuild it.</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>European Economic Union</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>Rueff was an early champion of European economic union. In April 1929, recognizing Europe’s 20,000 km of toll barriers as an obstacle to economic development, Rueff had recommended to France’s foreign minister, Aristide Briand, an “economic pact” among the nations of Europe to achieve “a common market in the whole of their territories, a market in which people, merchandise and capital would flow freely.” Briand, a Socialist politician and Nobel Peace Prize winner who had championed the League of Nations, expanded Rueff’s idea into a proposal, in December 1929, for a “United States of Europe.” But after the monetary collapse started, Europe was to go in a very different direction.</p>
<p>After the war, the European Common Market began more modestly and gradually, as the. European Coal and Steel Community, later the European Economic Community, and now the European Union. Rueff was appointed in 1952 a justice of the newly formed European Economic Community’s Court of Justice, and in that role he contributed to establishing its body of legal precedents until 1962. This was an unusual position for a non-jurist, but one at which he excelled. From 1962 to 1974, Rueff served on the European Community Economic and Social Affairs Council.</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>De Gaulle’s “Rueff Plan”</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>From the late 1940s, Rueff outlined plans to put the basket-case French republic, which was crippled by the combination of inflation and the continuation of wartime rationing and price controls, onto a sound financial footing. But he was given the chance to implement them only when Charles de Gaulle came to power in 1958. Despite the unanimous opposition of his cabinet, de Gaulle adopted the entire Rueff plan, which required sweeping measures to balance the budget and make the franc convertible after 17.5% devaluation&#160;— though not without qualms. “All your recommendations are excellent,” de Gaulle told Rueff. ‘But if I apply them all and nothing happens, have you considered how much real pain it will cause across this country?” Rueff replied, “I give you my word, mon General, that the plan, if completely adopted, will re-establish equilibrium in our balance of payments within a few weeks. Of this I am absolutely sure; I accept that your opinion of me will depend entirely on the result.” (It did: ten years later, de Gaulle awarded Rueff the medal of the Legion of Honor.) There was about the project something coherent and ardent, at once bold and ambitious, which strongly appealed to my judgement,” de Gaulle recounted in his memoirs.</p>
<p>The Rueff plan worked: while unemployment remained at one percent, the economy accelerated sharply without a pickup of inflation. (However, bureaucratic inertia squelched a subsequent Rueff plan in 1959, consisting of dozens of “supply-side” measures to “remove obstacles to economic development,” such as World War I-vintage rent controls.)</p>
<p>More than French politics and policy was at stake. Success of the plan was necessary to fulfill the terms of the Treaty of Rome which had established the EEC, requiring the external convertibility of European currencies.</p>
<p>After the success of the Rueff Plan, Rueff was increasingly drawn to outline the problems of the postwar Bretton Woods monetary system. The reserve-currency problem became increasingly urgent starting at the end of the 1950s. Exactly as had happened in the 1920s, once the European currencies were stabilized and exchange controls ended, what had been viewed as an insoluble international “dollar shortage” suddenly turned into a perennial “dollar glut” that steadily drained U.S. gold reserves. Rueff shared with Robert Triffm, a Belgian economist, the distinction of diagnosing the Bretton Woods system as the cause of creeping international inflation and accurately predicting its breakdown. But they disagreed about the solution. Rueff sought a return to an international gold standard, getting rid of reserve currencies, and advocated a “Marshall Plan for the United States” funded by doubling the gold price: a reform that would have prevented the world-wide inflation of the 1970s and 1980s. Triffin championed Keynes’ 1943 plan for a paper currency loosely linked to gold, issued by a world central bank. In the end, the question was decided by the United States, where Keynesian and monetarist economists, who agreed on little else, favored the move to floating exchange rates.</p>
<p>During the 1960s, Rueff published a number of works applying his theories to problems of French and European economic policy and to the Bretton Woods monetary system. Those translated into English include The Age of Inflation, The Monetary Sin of the West, and Balance of Payments. One of his last works was The Gods and the Kings, a meditation on the relation between sciences and society, which returned to the themes of his first work. His very last. The Creation of the World, even put these themes in the form of a drama. Rueff was made a member of the Academic Francaise, succeeding Jean Cocteau. He died in 1978.</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>And Now?</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>What would Rueff have to say if he were alive today? At the end of the 20th Century, all major industrial countries and most “emerging” economies seem largely to have licked the problem of chronic domestically-generated inflation. To do so, they have had to reject the Keynesian approach of inflationary finance of budget deficits and adopt a “Rueffian” policy. For example, in order to join the European Monetary Union, the countries of Europe have had to change the statutes governing their central banks to end inflationary finance of government deficits.</p>
<p>But the problem of chronic unemployment in Europe has not been solved. The cause is the influence of poorly designed transfer payment programs and other labor market rigidities that keep the cost of labor above the level consistent with full employment. Its solution requires reform of transfer payment programs that have elevated the cost of hiring — reforms like America’s welfare reform of the 1990s.</p>
<p>Nor have the problems caused by the use of international “reserve currencies” gone away. That was the essence of the “Asian crisis” of 1997-98. (See “A Layman’s Guide to the Asian Bubble Trouble,” LBMC Report, January 22, 1998; also “Asia’s Hot Money: Created with Dollar Reserves,” LBMC Report, May 27, 1999.) The international monetary system remains an accident always waiting to happen.</p>
<p>Finally, after the collapse of socialism, the politics of economic policy in most Western countries, including the United States, seems to offer no choice but a vapid libertarianism and a more vapid Third Way” mush. I think Rueff would be filling this void.</p>
<p>In a culture where people are famous for being famous, we are used to hearing celebrities pontificate about subjects outside their expertise. And so it is with economists and economic policy. To understand economic policy you have to grasp economic theory, but that’s not enough. Many a brilliant economist is sloppy — or even a raving loony — in his political philosophy. What Rueff grasped, as few other economists have done, is that in order to make good economic policy it is necessary to master both disciplines.</p>
<p>We badly need the penetrating philosophical and economic analysis, the optimistic belief in the persuasive power of reason, and the willingness to undertake large projects (and bring them to fruition), that Rueff provided. In that sense, Rueff’s career not only illuminated the economic struggles of the 20th century; his ideas remain, in my opinion, the most promising hope for the 21st.</p> | false | 1 | original plan several months ago homage 20th century ended french economist jacques rueff nominating rightest political economist century rethink plan royal swedish academy sciences awarded nobel prize economics robert mundell october would seemed strange honor dead living devoted decembers lbmc report mundell nobel prizewinner robert mundell appreciation 29 december 1999 also realized need shoehorn rueff last days 20th century jacques rueff wasnt famous influential economist time john maynard keynes walks away awards rueffs ideas economic policy easily make transition 21st century whereas keyness explain rueff profound influence financial markets forecasting firm lehrman bell mueller cannon inc senior partner lewis lehrman knew rueff well lehrman institute published rueffs complete works native france use world dollar base one many lbmc analytical tools inspired rueffs work nomination rueff objective basis rueff theorist successful practitioner economic policy gave earliest accurate diagnosis two biggest economic policy problems 20th century unemployment inflation used diagnosis engineer several successful reforms national economic policy analysis valid today developed 1920s rueff also contributed philosophy social market economy european union succeeded explaining critical link economics science economic policy branch moral political philosophy importance increasingly evident economic policy debates 160 theorist theory 160 born 1896 son physician jacques rueff trained science mathematics ecole polytechnique attention turned study medicine studied classical economics clement colson especially influenced mathematical generalequilibrium theory leon walras accustomed thinking economics mathematical science early 20th century exception rule fact widely believed economics could never exact science rueff accordingly devoted first theoretical work physical moral sciences 1922 methodology showing exactly scientific method applied moral social sciences like economics physical sciences objection typically raised methods applied say theory thermodynamics applied study human beings endowed free rueff replied thermodynamics single molecule economics individual acts individuals individual particles physics free human beings social sciences essentially indeterminate yet cases pattern behavior large number individuals explained predicted matter statistical probability greater precision commonly observed natural sciences simply function sample size human beings national economy typically counted millions multiples 106 billions multiples 109 molecules measured moles multiples 6 x 1023 also rueff said cases theories models much discovery logical creation causes fit empirical facts theory logically consistent thus true given premises existing theory fails explain facts different theory must created economics less physics rueff later wrote scientific theory considered correct makes forecasting possible rueff taught statistics political economy newly established statistical institute university paris later joined handful likeminded economists like ragnar frisk founding international econometric society journal econometrica rueff selected 1923 inspector finance competitive position unique france gives relatively young men supervisory power many government agencies associated ministry finance post embarked upon series path breaking studies combining economic theory statistical evidence along lines outlined subjects studies hot topics time also highlighted would become main economic policy problems 20th century 160 transfer problem 160 first study exchange natural phenomenon 1922 concerned fluctuations exchange rates striking postwar event populations used stability gold standard rueff described principle purchasing power parity showed conditions divergences purchasing power different currencies must lead restoration equilibrium balance payments study brought rueff notice french officials since immediate implications question german reparations preoccupied international relations throughout 1920s early 1930s also led rueff later debate john maynard keynes160 yet published general theory even treatise money160 became known transfer problem keynes argued german reparations destabilizing grounds country certain natural balance trade limits amount financial transfers able make rueff argued swedish economist bertil ohiin amount international transfer limited ability countrys government finance necessary taxes loans budget short price mechanism cause trade balance adjust accommodate capital transfer reverse rueff showed france forced pay sizeable reparations prussia francoprussian war 1870 financial transfer induced necessary large surplus french trade balance enabling reparations paid without difficulty economists today recognize rueff ohlin essentially correct keynes incorrect issue yet englishspeaking economists recognize implications truth 1960s economists like robert mundell 1999 winner nobel prize harry johnson pioneered monetary approach balance payments towards theory inflation january 1925 rueff examined hyperinflations france italy germany poland austria world war early twenties rueff showed case main cause issue money central bank finance government budget deficits real inflationadjusted amount money remain relatively constant prices tend rise exponentially preceded phillip cagans classic studies hyperinflation 30 years like many rueffs works little known published english 160 rueffs law unemployment 160 variations unemployment england december 1925 rueff first show empirically reason unprecedented appearance chronic high unemployment england 1920s rise relative price labor measured ratio wage rates wholesale price index traced cause institution world war openended dole fixed nominal terms many shillings week face postwar decline price level deflation required britains return pounds prewar gold value rueffs study first appeared french academic journal described financial times 1926 caused sensation updated version appeared london times 1931 british unemployment rose sharply later researchers following rueffs lead found similar strong relationship relative price labor unemployment became known rueffs law industrial countries europe 1920s 1930s keyness general theory implicitly depends rueffs law plus assumption wage rates fixed nominal real terms interestingly rueffs original study published six months irving fisher published would later called phillips curve explanation unemployment whereas rueff explained joblessness function relative price labor fisher explained unemployment function rate price inflation aw phillips british economist rediscovered apparent inflationunemployment tradeoff late 1950s phillips curve relationship broke bretton woods system exploded 1971 shown rueffs law suitably updated held empirically necessary updating takes advantage greater detail national income data available takes account taxes transfer payments longer small enough ignored measuring relative price labor recent illustration see welfare reform lowered unemployment lbmc report july 23 1999 striking studies brought rueff attention french policymakers foreign minister raymond poincare became french premier 1926 commissioned rueff determine level french franc stabilized like many conservative politicians poincare intent upon return prewar gold parity currency britain done though advice charles rist pierre quesnay deputy governors bank france poincare ultimately persuaded fear causing unemployment refix gold value franc onefifth prewar parity level rueff chosen highest would require deflation prices thereby causing unemployment poincare reform rousing success currency stabilized economy boomed without inflation unemployment capital flowed back france moreover many features poincares stabilization package drawn another rueff paper conditions sound finance april 1925 160 macroeconomic theory 160 1927 rueff published theory monetary phenomena sketched alternate macroeconomic approach monetarism irving fisher would later become keynesian theory rueff examined fishers equation exchange mv pt says nominal volume transactions pt equal quantity money times velocity circulation mv rueff pointed formally true equation doesnt say anything causality merely means amount payments made economy equal amount payments received united states relearn fact bitter experience federal reserve treated causal relation used conduct monetary policy 1979 1982 work rueff employed explained concepts total demand total supply decade keyness general theory ideas never suffered drawbacks keynesian theory better worse keynes revolutionized way economists think economy one worse parts keynes assumed closed national economy implicitly assumed rigidity wages prices shifting emphasis behavior individuals behavior aggregates160 aggregate demand aggregate supply monetary aggregates like keyness macroeconomic theory also lost consistent microeconomic foundations rueffs theory also comprehensive economic aggregates built consistently individual households firms always explicit fact economic relations among nations differ kind economic relations among national regions among individual firms households fact essence disagreement keynes often debated precisely ability markets adjust hindered bylaw regulation earlier lbmc report rueffian synthesis junejuly 1991 considered rueffs economic ideas relation keynesian monetarist supplyside theory detail report available request output would enough economists one reason rueffs theories extraordinarily applicable real world grappled life daytoday problems economic policy fact increasing demands duties soon away leisure necessary empirical studies continued develop theories content expressing hope researchers would prove empirically 1927 1930 rueff assigned new league nations worked currency doctor devise economic programs based principles worked countries like greece bulgaria portugal applied successful 160 reserve currency disaster 160 1929 rueff attached leagues gold committee studied problems facing international monetary system report abnormal fluctuations purchasing power gold rueff called attention first time threat posed goldexchange standard rueff warned whereas consequences typical economic policy mistakes confined country made nature reservecurrency system transmit inflation deflation worldwide scale 1930 1933 rueff served french financial attache london charge bank frances sterling reserves able analyze correctly warn deflationary collapse goldexchange standard hardening european currencies course 1920s soon revealed flaw international monetary system evolved since first world war gold values dollar pound sterling reestablished prewar parities general price levels terms currencies increased substantially wartime monetary expansion ultimately one two things happen either gold parities would changed match price level else prices terms currencies would subject eventual deflation back prewar level instead facing choice squarely policymakers 1922 genoa conference recommended making resulting scarcity gold supplementing undervalued gold reserves foreign exchange reserves160 securities denominated pounds dollars convertible gold effect greatly increase leverage world financial system collapse rueff warned began nazi political gains caused capital flight germany international panel experts led united states effectively imposed exchange controls capital invested germany immobilization investments germany triggered liquidation assets elsewhere creditors needed service debts process numerous banks failed almost worlds dollar sterling exchange reserves liquidated problem intensified industrial countries sought protect trade capital controls pound floated 1931 dollar 1933160 time prices dollar terms deflated back preworld war levels resulting social disruptions hastened rise totalitarian governments right left 1934 1939 rueff supervised frances international payments since international payments generally blocked subject negotiation served director finance ministrys exchange stabilization fund controlled frances official monetary reserves 1939 named deputy governor bank france promptly charged preparing wartime exchange control ive always hostile institution knowing danger entails rueff objected thats exactly im asking direct creation office exchange controls bank france governor pierre fournier replied know rapidly become necessary expect apply indispensable moderation rueff resigned central bank post 1941 german invasion trying keep frances gold reserves german hands spent war inspector finance writing greatest work lordre social regions france liberated undertook reestablish functioning rudimentary system payments frances liberation 1944 rueff served economic adviser allied military mission german austrian affairs 1952 rueff cooperated promoted ideas likeminded german economists ludwig erhard wilhelm roepke developed germanys social market economy basis postwar germam wirtschaftswunder economic miracle 160 neoliberalism institutional market 160 rueff erhard roepke others sometimes called neoliberals social liberals distinguish political philosophy 19thcentury classical liberalism unlike many american libertarians today understood economic freedom doesnt happen spontaneously requires lots hard work rueff also used term institutional market describe approach considered united states preeminent example institutional market institutional market distinguishes manchesterian market goals rather techniques160 rests totally different view evolution human societies rueff explained classical liberals liberty man state nature man born free yet everywhere chains rousseau complained two centuries ago one wished restore lost liberty necessary anything remove shackles neoliberal contrary liberty fruit painstakingly obtained always threatened evolution institutions founded milennia sad experience religious moral political social interventions rousseau thinks great majority men born chains development institutions free partially liberals libertarians neoliberals share common faith benefits liberty former expect spontaneous generation merely necessary interfere whereas latter want help born grow develop rendering acceptable avoiding encroachments constantly tend annihilate rueff merely attitude main point lordre social trace explicitly juridical framework economic theory price mechanism economic policy techniques upon economic freedom liberal social order depend rueff originally envisioned second volume monetary theory finally published 1945 broadened general outline economic society theory economic policy analysis different monetary fiscal regulatory policy regimes themes become sweeping think 1930s 1940s european civilization come brink immediate task rebuild 160 european economic union 160 rueff early champion european economic union april 1929 recognizing europes 20000 km toll barriers obstacle economic development rueff recommended frances foreign minister aristide briand economic pact among nations europe achieve common market whole territories market people merchandise capital would flow freely briand socialist politician nobel peace prize winner championed league nations expanded rueffs idea proposal december 1929 united states europe monetary collapse started europe go different direction war european common market began modestly gradually european coal steel community later european economic community european union rueff appointed 1952 justice newly formed european economic communitys court justice role contributed establishing body legal precedents 1962 unusual position nonjurist one excelled 1962 1974 rueff served european community economic social affairs council 160 de gaulles rueff plan 160 late 1940s rueff outlined plans put basketcase french republic crippled combination inflation continuation wartime rationing price controls onto sound financial footing given chance implement charles de gaulle came power 1958 despite unanimous opposition cabinet de gaulle adopted entire rueff plan required sweeping measures balance budget make franc convertible 175 devaluation160 though without qualms recommendations excellent de gaulle told rueff apply nothing happens considered much real pain cause across country rueff replied give word mon general plan completely adopted reestablish equilibrium balance payments within weeks absolutely sure accept opinion depend entirely result ten years later de gaulle awarded rueff medal legion honor project something coherent ardent bold ambitious strongly appealed judgement de gaulle recounted memoirs rueff plan worked unemployment remained one percent economy accelerated sharply without pickup inflation however bureaucratic inertia squelched subsequent rueff plan 1959 consisting dozens supplyside measures remove obstacles economic development world war ivintage rent controls french politics policy stake success plan necessary fulfill terms treaty rome established eec requiring external convertibility european currencies success rueff plan rueff increasingly drawn outline problems postwar bretton woods monetary system reservecurrency problem became increasingly urgent starting end 1950s exactly happened 1920s european currencies stabilized exchange controls ended viewed insoluble international dollar shortage suddenly turned perennial dollar glut steadily drained us gold reserves rueff shared robert triffm belgian economist distinction diagnosing bretton woods system cause creeping international inflation accurately predicting breakdown disagreed solution rueff sought return international gold standard getting rid reserve currencies advocated marshall plan united states funded doubling gold price reform would prevented worldwide inflation 1970s 1980s triffin championed keynes 1943 plan paper currency loosely linked gold issued world central bank end question decided united states keynesian monetarist economists agreed little else favored move floating exchange rates 1960s rueff published number works applying theories problems french european economic policy bretton woods monetary system translated english include age inflation monetary sin west balance payments one last works gods kings meditation relation sciences society returned themes first work last creation world even put themes form drama rueff made member academic francaise succeeding jean cocteau died 1978 160 160 would rueff say alive today end 20th century major industrial countries emerging economies seem largely licked problem chronic domesticallygenerated inflation reject keynesian approach inflationary finance budget deficits adopt rueffian policy example order join european monetary union countries europe change statutes governing central banks end inflationary finance government deficits problem chronic unemployment europe solved cause influence poorly designed transfer payment programs labor market rigidities keep cost labor level consistent full employment solution requires reform transfer payment programs elevated cost hiring reforms like americas welfare reform 1990s problems caused use international reserve currencies gone away essence asian crisis 199798 see laymans guide asian bubble trouble lbmc report january 22 1998 also asias hot money created dollar reserves lbmc report may 27 1999 international monetary system remains accident always waiting happen finally collapse socialism politics economic policy western countries including united states seems offer choice vapid libertarianism vapid third way mush think rueff would filling void culture people famous famous used hearing celebrities pontificate subjects outside expertise economists economic policy understand economic policy grasp economic theory thats enough many brilliant economist sloppy even raving loony political philosophy rueff grasped economists done order make good economic policy necessary master disciplines badly need penetrating philosophical economic analysis optimistic belief persuasive power reason willingness undertake large projects bring fruition rueff provided sense rueffs career illuminated economic struggles 20th century ideas remain opinion promising hope 21st | 2,562 |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.