Tag: United States of America

Worse yet, the top 0.1 percent has cornered about 20 percent of it, up from 7 percent in the mid-1970s. In fact, applicants from families in the top 1 percent are now 77 times more likely than in the bottom 20 percent to land in an elite college, and 38 of those schools admit more kids from families in that top percentage than from the bottom 60 percent. Individuals, companies, and organizations can, for instance, give money to political action committees (PACs) and Super PACs. PACs face no monetary limits on their independent efforts to shape elections, though they can’t accept corporate or union money or take more than $5,000 from individuals. They raised $1.6 billion and spent nearly $809 million. Nearly 78 percent of the money they received came from 100 donors. They, in turn, belonged to the wealthiest 1 percent, who provided 95 percent of what those Super PACs took in. It devoted $15 million to lobbying in 2018—and that’s not counting its campaign contributions, using various channels. Compared to other democracies, the United States appears to be in a league of its own when it comes to money’s prominence in politics. (Super PACs spent another $350 million to help Romney and $100 million to back Obama.)

CM: Do you have examples of things that people get really worked up over that they can’t actually control? Who are these people? CM: Don’t we have those things right now? Matt: I think a lot of it has to do with scale and how different things work better for small or big places. I really like the way they do things there. CM: So you’re sort of arguing that the only time our form of democracy worked was back in the 1700s when the country was actually that small. Matt: I don’t know that I’d go that far. CM: How would you describe yourself politically? People tell me, “Oh, you should vote anyway, it’s your duty.” I don’t agree with that. CM: How would you respond to someone saying, “Listen, Matt, you’re a white guy, your demographic was never disenfranchised in the United States, so you don’t have the same emotional attachment to voting that we do.” Matt: It’s true and I can’t blame them for wanting to exercise that as much as possible given, say, a person of color’s history.

The first time Rosalía was publicly called out for appropriating and capitalizing on cultures that are not of her Spanish origins came in 2018 with the success of her multiple Latin Grammy Award-winning album “El Mal Querer." Because music, even music created fully with the intention to entertain, is inherently political. It would be hard to argue when listening to the lyrics of “Con Altura," the title meaning with height in Spanish, that there is a political dimension to the song, but the politics of performance are at play. Why is Rosalía, and not a female artist who specializes in reggaeton, granted a feature on a J. Balvins song that was more or less projected to become an international hit? According to writer Angela Membrado, it is hard to find the line between appropriation and inspiration in Rosalía's work. In the case of “Con Altura”, the popularity of the song cross-culturally might introduce listeners unfamiliar with reggaeton to underrepresented reggaeton artists and give them an international spotlight. If that doesn’t happen, “Con Altura” will be another case where an artist capitalized off of an art form by a marginalized group — even though this is more often than not completely unintentional. Though Rosalía has a deep passion and respect for flamenco as an art form, flamenco and other flamenco artists have not received much further attention or acclaim on an international stage since the success of this album. Though reggaeton has wider international acceptance than flamenco, it is uncertain if the success of “Con Altura” will leverage underrepresented reggaeton artists. As George Orwell said, “The very notion that art should have nothing to do with politics is itself a political position.” Politics are an intrinsic part of music and music-making, but it is up to the listener to decide just how much politics matter in their listening habits.

As Harvard professor Steven Pinker, a liberal and an atheist, put it, the Left has rendered the universities a “laughingstock.” The most godless, religion-free, and Bible-free institution in the West — the university — has become the both the stupidest and most morally corrupt institution in the West. That is what first awakened me to the indispensability of God, religion, and the Bible. Our universities, because of the Left, are intellectually and morally sick. The godless Left and universities teach that there’s no male and female in the human species, that these terms are mere “social constructs.” A few weeks ago, two trans females came in first and second place in a Connecticut high-school track race for girls. As I show in my commentary on Genesis, what the first book of the Bible depicts is not only God’s creation of the world but, equally important, God’s shaping primordial chaos (Genesis 1:2) into order. male and female he created them” (Genesis 1:27). “He created them male and female and blessed them” (Genesis 5:2). No ethnic or racial distinction matters in Genesis, only the male-female distinction. Belief in God and the Bible were instrumental to the creation of America — the last, best hope of mankind. The Left knows it, too.

Why do Americans love boycotts? If you want to stick it to conservatives, don’t buy Hobby Lobby craft supplies, Yuengling beer, or Chick-fil-A sandwiches. If you’re eager to own the libs, then avoid Nike shoes, Gillette razors, and Keurig coffee machines. These actions may not make much of a difference to corporate bottom lines, but they are a reminder that arguments over symbols—salad combs, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s Navy Yard apartment—are increasingly filling our rotted-out political core. That’s why it’s kind of amazing that, even in these blisteringly partisan times, a holiday like July 4 still spans cultural divides. (Last year’s “A Capitol Fourth” concert at the Capitol featured the Beach Boys, country star Luke Combs, and gospel singer CeCe Winans.) That could be because more than eight in ten Americans still think the US is better than most other nations and enjoy celebrating the birthday of the country they love. Or, more likely, it could be because Donald Trump hadn’t quite figured out how to insert himself into the holiday. It’s too early to know whether Trump’s July 4 party will be something truly new and different or if it will prove to be political vaporware, like Space Force, the DC military parade, and the Wall before it. Here’s the thing to remember: The Mall fireworks cap off one of the best days around here.

A powerful and poorly understood anti-stall system in the new planes may have played a role in the crashes, leading lawmakers and the public to question how the system was approved in the first place. Republicans will argue that regulations are bad for business and growth, while Democrats will essentially cede that point, arguing that rules are nonetheless necessary for health and safety. The notion of sharing the work of inspecting and clearing planes with the company isn’t absurd. There’s a rule for that. Then there are the 4,600 Max 8 planes yet to be delivered, all of which will stay on the ground until the company has fixed the issue and they are cleared to fly again. This might have been avoided with a better regulatory process, one that didn’t put quite so much faith in the company to regulate itself. But the notion that regulation can be good for business runs counter to the political debate about rules in Washington. Boeing is far from the only example of good regulations being good for business—or regulatory lapses being bad. (The FAA took a long timeto put rules in place for drones, and as a result, companies that make them started testing in countries that already had clear rules.) The renewed attention on airplane safety, and to what extent Boeing should be able to regulate itself, is a good thing.

When President Donald Trump at 12:50 on a Thursday afternoon tweeted it was “time for the United States to fully recognize Israel’s Sovereignty over the Golan Heights,” the average world citizen said a collective “huh?” Israel captured two-thirds of the strategic plateau from Syria in 1967 during the Six-Day War—and no one has seriously contested its control in more than 50 years. Syria’s minister of defense, the father of current President Bashar al-Assad, gave his troops an order no Israeli has likely forgotten: “Strike the enemy’s settlements, turn them into dust, pave the Arab roads with the skulls of the Jews.” Unlike then-foes Egypt and Jordan, Syria has never made peace with Israel. The barrier is made more necessary now eight years into a war inside Syria that Assad also has refused to end through a negotiated peace process. Groves of mangoes and avocados compete with orchards of apples and pears. Hothouses vie for hillsides with vineyards making some of Israel’s best wines. Securing Trump’s endorsement of stepped-up control over the Golan could secure votes. Netanyahu lobbied first National Security Adviser John Bolton, then Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo on his Middle East trip in March. During a March 18 phone briefing with Pompeo and about a half-dozen reporters I attended, Pompeo was vague in response to questions about the Golan Heights. Israel more firmly in control of Syria’s southern border takes attention away from Turkey’s problematic control at Syria’s northern border. That same frailty, he said, has fed the current war in Syria.

WASHINGTON — Even as the White House claims vindication from the summary of special counsel Robert Mueller’s findings in the Russia probe, the American public does not see a clear verdict about whether President Donald Trump has been cleared of wrongdoing. But a third of Americans — 31 percent — say they’re not sure if Trump has been cleared. In February, Trump’s approval rating stood at 46 percent, but this month’s shift is within the poll’s margin of error. Warning signs for Trump for 2020 — and some Democratic presidential candidates, too While the poll did not find a significant shift in the president’s approval rating, it showed some continued weak spots as he prepares to run for re-election. A combined 58 percent of voters are either uncomfortable (37 percent) or have reservations about (21 percent) Bernie Sanders’ 2020 bid. For Joe Biden, who has yet to formally announce a presidential bid, a combined 47 percent are either enthusiastic (17 percent) or comfortable (30 percent) with him as a candidate, compared with 48 percent who say they’re either uncomfortable or have reservations. A combined 73 percent of Democrats say they’re either enthusiastic (33 percent) or comfortable (40 percent) with Biden as a candidate, while just 25 percent either have reservations (19 percent) or are uncomfortable (6 percent). For Warren, 23 percent of Democratic primary have reservations, and 10 percent are very uncomfortable. But a significant chunk of Democratic voters — about one in five — don’t know enough about those candidates to express an opinion. Among all Americans, 23 percent have a positive opinion of her, while 34 percent have a negative one.

The growing acceptance of women in politics and in the workforce is highlighted by the General Social Survey, a widely respected trend survey that has been measuring views of gender and society since the 1970s. The share of Americans who say women are as suited for politics as men is up 6 percentage points since 2016, when Hillary Clinton became the first woman to win a major party’s presidential nomination, and 14 points since 2008, when she lost a grueling primary battle to Barack Obama. In 1974, just 49 percent said so. Democrats are somewhat more likely than Republicans to say so, 89 percent to 80 percent, though the share in both parties has grown in recent years. The survey found 9 percent of women saying they have been discriminated against at work because of their gender. The share of Democrats who support preferential hiring for women is up to 46 percent, from 35 percent in 2016. Within the GOP, a gender gap persists on attitudes toward women in the workforce. Republican men are more likely than Republican women to say it is better for women to stay at home while men work, 37 percent to 22 percent. Similarly, while 18 percent of Republican women think preschool children suffer if their mother works, 39 percent of Republican men say this. About a third of Republicans (35 percent) say the same.

It was not hard for Beto O’Rourke to seem like a champion of green issues during his eye-catching Senate campaign in America’s 2018 midterm elections – after all, he was up against Ted Cruz, a climate change denier. Now, as the former US congressman vies to be the Democratic candidate to run against Donald Trump in the 2020 race for the White House, he faces much closer scrutiny on the subject. Environmental advocates and experts wait to see if – as O’Rourke pivots from an election in a conservative-led oil state to a national primary race heavily influenced by left-leaning Democratic candidates – he will have more latitude and desire to put progressive green policies at the heart of his strategy. “He’s going to have to take a pretty strong stand.” The seeds of a decisive and urgent approach were visible in his first campaign visits to Iowa in March, when O’Rourke praised the radical climate change-led proposals in the Green New Deal, citing his home state’s struggles with extreme weather such as droughts and hurricanes. “Already, five declared presidential candidates have officially signed the No Fossil Fuel Money pledge, meaning more than a third of declared Democratic candidates have done so,” said David Turnbull, strategic communications director of Oil Change US, a group that urges politicians to commit to clean energy. “We look forward to the sixth candidate signing the full No Fossil Fuel Money pledge, and we’re hopeful that Beto might be that candidate.” O’Rourke’s campaign did not respond to questions about whether he plans to sign the pledge or how his qualified support for natural gas is compatible with the Green New Deal. “We have seen the result, which is an emergency of booming fossil fuel production here in the United States at precisely the time we need to be urgently moving away from those dirty fuels,” Turnbull said. “Similarly problematic, Beto has pointed to fracked natural gas as a potential part of the solution to the climate crisis when the reality is that there is simply no room for new fossil fuel development of any sort, including fracked gas. Like with his support for the removal of the crude export ban, we hope that when Beto lays out his full climate policies it will reflect the fact that we can’t afford any new fossil fuels of any sort, including gas.” Given Texas’s critical importance to the environmental and economic future of the country, a Texas presidential candidate can deliver a powerful green narrative, said Luke Metzger, executive director of Environment Texas, an advocacy group. “I think Texas has a real interesting story to tell in terms of our both being number one in the country for global warming pollution but also being number one for renewable energy,” he said.