Maks. visning af den sidste 6 indlæg - (Sidste indlæg først)
When President Donald Trump reopened a long-closed conversation about the name of the Washington NFL team, he and others implied that liberal thinking forced the venerable franchise to change its name from Redskins to Commanders in 2022.
It wasn’t “wokeness” that led to that moment. It was capitalism. Corporate sponsors made the decision, not politicians or fans.
On July 2, 2020, after the murder of George Floyd in late May and the resulting national conversation on race and racism, FedEx – the title sponsor of the team’s stadium at the time – called on the franchise to change its name.
<a href=https://tripskan.cc>трипскан</a>
Nike removed Redskins apparel from its website on the same day. The next day, the league and the organization announced that they were reviewing the team’s name. Soon, Amazon, Target and Walmart also removed Redskins merchandise from their stores and websites.
At a time of heightened corporate sensitivity to racism, the franchise suddenly saw the possibility of millions of dollars in revenue being lost due to the Redskins name. After years of controversy, the organization’s then-leadership finally saw the financial writing on the wall and gave up a fight they had promised to wage forever.
On July 13, the team announced it was retiring its name and logo and would go by the name Washington Football Team for the time being. Less than two years later, after a contest to rename the team, it became the Commanders.
None of this came about quickly, or without a fight. This was a conversation, and a decision, years in the making. Protests occasionally popped up around Washington Redskins games in the 1990s and early part of the 21st century, but there was no evidence of a groundswell to change the name.
tripskan.cc
tripscan
In 2013, the National Congress of American Indians, representing 1.2 million people in its member tribes, announced that it opposed the moniker.
The team consistently replied by saying it was honoring the achievements of Native Americans by keeping the name. As evidence, then-team president Bruce Allen said that three high schools with a majority Native American student body used the name. The team and its supporters mentioned a 2004 poll by the Annenberg Public Policy Center that found that a majority of Native Americans were not offended by the name.
Then again, the use of public polling methods to measure a small, diverse population also came into question and was criticized by experts.
More than a decade ago, Sports Illustrated’s Peter King led the way, as did a few other sports journalists, including myself, publicly stating that we would no longer use the name – a name that each of us had said thousands of times in our careers covering the NFL.
“Try explaining and defending the nickname to a child,” I wrote in 2013. “It’s impossible.”
Back then, NFL commissioner Roger Goodell was still defending the team’s name, but he said in radio interviews that he wanted to “listen” on the issue.
“We’ll always listen, and we’ll always be open,” he said on ESPN Radio August 1, 2013, when asked to compare his defense of the Washington team name with his comments on Philadelphia Eagle Riley Cooper’s racist slur at the time, which were anything but a defense: “Obviously wrong … insensitive and unacceptable,” Goodell said of Cooper’s language.
Goodell went farther a month later while speaking to a Washington radio station: “Ultimately it is Dan (Snyder’s) decision, but it is something I want all of us to go out and make sure we are listening to our fans, listening to people that have a different view, and making sure we continue to do what is right. We want to make sure the team represents the strong tradition and history that it has for so many years. … If we are offending one person we need to be listening and making sure we are doing the right things to address that.”
The Department of Justice quickly fired the newly named US attorney in New Jersey on Tuesday after federal judges in the state declined to extend Alina Habba’s interim appointment.
Attorney General Pam Bondi’s announcement came after the district court voted to elevate Desiree Leigh Grace, New Jersey’s first assistant US attorney, to replace the Trump ally.
<a href=https://tripskan.cc>tripscan войти</a>
“Nonetheless, politically minded judges refused to allow her to continue in her position, replacing Alina with the First Assistant. Accordingly, the First Assistant United States Attorney in New Jersey has just been removed. This Department of Justice does not tolerate rogue judges — especially when they threaten the President’s core Article II powers,” Bondi posted on X.
The rapid change-up prompted confusion as to who will lead the top federal prosecutor’s office in the state.
It’s unclear if Grace’s removal is enforceable or whether the district court judges will challenge the move. There’s also some confusion of when Habba’s appointment expires.
Grace’s appointment was set to be “effective July 22, 2025, or ‘upon the expiration of 120 days after appointment by the Attorney General’ of the Interim U.S. Attorney Alina Habba, whichever is later,” according to the order signed by Chief Judge Renee Marie Bumb.
tripskan.cc
трипскан
President Donald Trump appointed Habba to the position on March 24, but she was sworn in on March 28, with department officials arguing that her term doesn’t conclude until Friday. Interim US attorneys are only allowed to serve for 120 days if they are not confirmed by the US Senate or extended indefinitely by the district court in their jurisdiction.
Habba previously served as a spokesperson for the Trump campaign and as a personal attorney for Trump. She represented Trump during his civil fraud trial in 2023 and 2024. After Trump won reelection, Habba served as counselor to the president before Trump tapped her to serve as US attorney.
Trump formally nominated Habba to serve in the position for a four-year term on July 1. Habba’s nomination is still awaiting a vote from the Senate Judiciary Committee before she would advance to the full Senate for a floor confirmation vote.
The president and his legal team have been exploring options for reappointing nominees rejected by the courts, but it is unclear if Habba would accept a reappointment in this case, according to two sources familiar with the matter.
Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche put out a statement on X on Tuesday, saying: “The district court judges in NJ are trying to force out @USAttyHabba before her term expires at 11:59 p.m. Friday.”
“Their rush reveals what this was always about: a left-wing agenda, not the rule of law. When judges act like activists, they undermine confidence in our justice system. Alina is President Trump’s choice to lead—and no partisan bench can override that.”
He had previously urged the federal judges in New Jersey to appoint Habba indefinitely on an interim basis while she awaits Senate confirmation, saying she has the “full confidence” of leadership at the Justice Department.
Habba is President Trump’s second US attorney nominee to struggle to receive support from the district court or the Senate Judiciary Committee. In May, the Senate Judiciary Committee decided not to confirm Trump’s controversial pick to lead the DC US attorney’s office, Ed Martin.
It is rare to have multiple candidates fail to receive support from the district court or the Senate Judiciary Committee.
Job losses
But what about the impact of tariffs on job creation? Surprisingly, an increase in import taxes has been found to result in slightly more unemployment across countries.
kraken ссылка
An example provided by Irwin at Dartmouth College points to one plausible explanation — and it has to do with the steeper cost of imported goods.
“A number of studies have shown, on net, we lost jobs from the (2018) steel tariffs rather than gained jobs because there are more people employed in the downstream user industries than in the steel industry itself,” he said.
kra35c.cc
Кракен тор
A study by the Federal Reserve Board found that a rise in input costs resulting from US tariff hikes in 2018-19 led to job losses in American manufacturing. The damage from those higher expenses was compounded by retaliatory taxes on US exports, more than offsetting a small boost to manufacturing employment from US tariffs — at least so far, the 2024 paper said.
Retaliation by other countries is indeed another danger of pulling the tariff lever. Higher tariffs on American exports would typically raise their prices for foreign consumers, hitting demand for the goods in many cases.
When Trump announced new tariffs this year, America’s major trading partners were quick to strike back with their own levies, although the US then agreed a temporary truce with China and the European Union.
Costs of free trade
While economists generally agree that free trade has benefited the global economy in recent decades, they acknowledge that it comes with certain costs.
One is the loss of jobs in communities that are particularly exposed to new competition from foreign manufacturers.
That is similar to the impact of technological progress on workers. “Manufacturing jobs as a share of the labor force have come down everywhere. It isn’t a US-specific story,” said Gimber at JPMorgan Asset Management, pointing to automation.
He drew a parallel between helping workers affected by higher imports and what is known as a just transition — the idea that the drastic changes needed to move toward a greener economy should be fair to everyone and minimize harm to workers and communities.
In both cases, providing workers in impacted industries with new skills or retraining them could be key, Gimber said.
Another potential cost of free trade is dependency on far-flung manufacturers. That took on new relevance during the pandemic, which snarled global supply chains, contributing to shortages of products such as face masks and respirators in the US and elsewhere.
However, economists do not typically see tariffs as a good way to build up domestic manufacturing, Fatas at INSEAD said, noting that subsidies for specific industries are viewed as a better tool “because they work more directly.”
But perhaps the strongest argument in favor of free trade is its importance to maintaining peace between nations.
As Gimber’s colleague David Kelly noted in March, closer trade relations give countries more to lose in any conflict.
The latest Barbie slays in a chic blue polka-dot crop top, ruffled miniskirt, chunky heels and an insulin pump. She is the brand’s first doll with type 1 diabetes.
tripscan
Dollmaker Mattel worked with Breakthrough T1D, formerly known the Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation, to design the doll, which aims to represent the roughly 304,000 kids and teens living with type 1 diabetes in the United States.
tripscan.biz
трип скан
The doll launched Tuesday at the Breakthrough T1D Children’s Congress, a three-day event in Washington that brings in kids and teens living with the condition to meet with lawmakers. This year, they’re asking Congress to renew funding for the Special Diabetes Program, which was first allocated by Congress in 1997. The program’s current funding ends after September.
The advocacy efforts have taken on new urgency this year. With so many deep cuts to federally funded projects in recent months, Breakthrough T1D said it’s anxiously watching to see if this funding will be reupped.
Type 1 diabetes is an autoimmune disease, meaning the body mistakenly attacks its own organs and tissues. In this case, rough antibodies go after cells in the pancreas that make insulin, an essential hormone that helps the body turn food into energy. As a result, the body doesn’t make enough of its own insulin, so people have to take insulin by injection or though a pump to survive.
Type 1 diabetes is typically diagnosed in childhood but can be diagnosed in anyone at any age. It differs from type 2 diabetes, in which people are still able to make insulin but their cells stop responding to it.
In addition to the insulin pump that attaches to the new Barbie’s waist, the chestnut-haired beauty has a continuous glucose monitor on her arm – a button held on by a strip of heart-shaped Barbie-pink tape. Her cell phone displays an app that shows her glucose readings. She also has a light blue purse to hold her supplies and snacks to help her manage her blood sugar throughout the day. It matches her shoes, of course.
When President Donald Trump reopened a long-closed conversation about the name of the Washington NFL team, he and others implied that liberal thinking forced the venerable franchise to change its name from Redskins to Commanders in 2022.
It wasn’t “wokeness” that led to that moment. It was capitalism. Corporate sponsors made the decision, not politicians or fans.
On July 2, 2020, after the murder of George Floyd in late May and the resulting national conversation on race and racism, FedEx – the title sponsor of the team’s stadium at the time – called on the franchise to change its name.
<a href=https://tripskan.cc>tripskan</a>
Nike removed Redskins apparel from its website on the same day. The next day, the league and the organization announced that they were reviewing the team’s name. Soon, Amazon, Target and Walmart also removed Redskins merchandise from their stores and websites.
At a time of heightened corporate sensitivity to racism, the franchise suddenly saw the possibility of millions of dollars in revenue being lost due to the Redskins name. After years of controversy, the organization’s then-leadership finally saw the financial writing on the wall and gave up a fight they had promised to wage forever.
On July 13, the team announced it was retiring its name and logo and would go by the name Washington Football Team for the time being. Less than two years later, after a contest to rename the team, it became the Commanders.
None of this came about quickly, or without a fight. This was a conversation, and a decision, years in the making. Protests occasionally popped up around Washington Redskins games in the 1990s and early part of the 21st century, but there was no evidence of a groundswell to change the name.
tripskan.cc
трипскан вход
In 2013, the National Congress of American Indians, representing 1.2 million people in its member tribes, announced that it opposed the moniker.
The team consistently replied by saying it was honoring the achievements of Native Americans by keeping the name. As evidence, then-team president Bruce Allen said that three high schools with a majority Native American student body used the name. The team and its supporters mentioned a 2004 poll by the Annenberg Public Policy Center that found that a majority of Native Americans were not offended by the name.
Then again, the use of public polling methods to measure a small, diverse population also came into question and was criticized by experts.
More than a decade ago, Sports Illustrated’s Peter King led the way, as did a few other sports journalists, including myself, publicly stating that we would no longer use the name – a name that each of us had said thousands of times in our careers covering the NFL.
“Try explaining and defending the nickname to a child,” I wrote in 2013. “It’s impossible.”
Back then, NFL commissioner Roger Goodell was still defending the team’s name, but he said in radio interviews that he wanted to “listen” on the issue.
“We’ll always listen, and we’ll always be open,” he said on ESPN Radio August 1, 2013, when asked to compare his defense of the Washington team name with his comments on Philadelphia Eagle Riley Cooper’s racist slur at the time, which were anything but a defense: “Obviously wrong … insensitive and unacceptable,” Goodell said of Cooper’s language.
Goodell went farther a month later while speaking to a Washington radio station: “Ultimately it is Dan (Snyder’s) decision, but it is something I want all of us to go out and make sure we are listening to our fans, listening to people that have a different view, and making sure we continue to do what is right. We want to make sure the team represents the strong tradition and history that it has for so many years. … If we are offending one person we need to be listening and making sure we are doing the right things to address that.”
Two planes nearly collided on the runway in Mexico City on Monday, as an AeroMexico regional jet coming in for landing flew over and touched down in front of a Delta Air Lines Boeing 737 jet already beginning to take off.
<a href=https://trip-scan.cc>tripscan top</a>
Delta Flight 590 was starting to roll down the runway at Aeropuerto Internacional Benito Juarez with 144 customers and six crew members on board when the pilots saw another plane land directly in front of it, the airline said in a statement.
trip-scan.cc
tripscan top
Flight tracking website Flightradar 24 shows AeroMexico Connect flight 1631, an Embraer 190 regional jet, flew less than 200 feet over the moving Delta plane then landed in front of them on runway 5R.
The pilots stopped the takeoff and returned to the terminal. The plane eventually took off on its flight to Atlanta about three hours late.
Delta said it reported the incident to Mexican aviation authorities, as well as the Federal Aviation Administration and National Transportation Safety Board in the United States.
“Delta will fully cooperate with authorities as the circumstances around this flight are investigated,” the airline said in a statement. “We appreciate the flight crew’s actions to maintain situational awareness and act quickly – part of Delta’s extensive training.”
AeroMexico and the Mexican civil aviation authority did not immediately respond to CNN’s request for comment.
Mexico’s aviation safety rating was downgraded by the FAA in May 2021 for non-compliance with minimum international safety standards. The top level “category one” status was restored in September of 2023 after, “the FAA provided expertise and resources via technical assistance… to resolve the safety issues that led to the downgrade,” the agency said at the time.