• Теги
    • избранные теги
    • Компании1572
      • Показать ещё
      Люди639
      • Показать ещё
      Международные организации77
      • Показать ещё
      Страны / Регионы477
      • Показать ещё
      Формат7
      Разное645
      • Показать ещё
      Издания91
      • Показать ещё
      Показатели48
      • Показать ещё
21 февраля, 18:05

Burned In The Ovens, Bombed To Pieces, Drowned At Sea, Rammed By Vehicles Or Marched To Death

I walked into a concentration camp in Germany – and I walked out. A Jewish woman leaving a Nazi camp defies the odds and realities of millions of human beings. “If you are done with the alt-right you filthy kike, then fuck off to Israel or just get into the oven. Problem solved.” A man wrote me those words, which I read before coming face to face with the crematorium at a Nazi concentration camp in Germany, the very ovens where bodies of millions of Jews were incinerated. I found myself unexpectedly terrorized, shaken to my core — a horrific feeling that resurges upon hearing of or seeing the now near-daily occurrences of anti-Semitism and hate crimes. Never did I imagine visiting a concentration camp. Despite being born to a Jewish mother, I had zero desire and felt no family connection to the Holocaust. But there I found myself in Sachsenhausen: standing trapped within barbed wire and walls, fighting the most intense bone chill of my life, losing hope in humanity and in myself. On the heels of hearing a German parliamentarian negate that anti-Semitism is on the rise in Europe or worldwide, a cab driver affirm that Jews were responsible for 9/11, and a former neo-Nazi quote an Austrian military officer in saying his radical political beliefs would have been welcome had they won the war, I felt paralyzed – staring into the ovens in search of answers, of lessons, of direction. Still, I walked out through the gates of the concentration camp on my own two feet – because I could. Because I can. I retraced the fatal footsteps of 35,000 prisoners who were forced through that very same gate on a now infamous Death March. Even late in World War II, when it was clear that the Nazis were soon to fall to Allied powers, no one stopped to help the fragile souls in the streets of local towns. Houses were eerily close to the camp, adjacent to its walls, lining the perimeter, second story windows above the tops of the stone barriers. Residents cannot say they did not know what was happening, smell the burning corpses, note the ash falling from the sky, hear the screams of death, see the human beings forcibly marched by their doors. Along one border of Sachsenhausen lie former SS barracks. This very building where Nazi forces who tortured and murdered tens of thousands trained, restocked and strategized is now a training ground for modern day German state police. “They don’t see any connection between what was and what is now,” my tour guide responded, when I asked whether anyone recognized or vocalized the troublesome nature of that fact. I found her statement to be particularly terrifying. While the stories are far from identical, if we do not learn from history, it is doomed to repeat. I am ever reluctant to equate anything with the Holocaust and agree wholeheartedly with the statement by Jonathan Greenblatt, CEO of the Anti-Defamation League, in response to President Trump’s tweet asking if we were living in Nazi Germany. “No one should cavalierly draw analogies to Nazi Germany, especially the next leader of free world. It is not only a ridiculous comparison on the merits, but it also coarsens our discourse and diminishes the horror of the Holocaust. The President-elect should apologize for the remark.”  We now find ourselves alive at a dramatically different moment in time – though striking similarities to 1930s and 1940s Germany continue to plague me in the form of troubling questions. The Holocaust did not begin with death camps and gas chambers. We say “never again,” but are we doing enough to combat the perilous rise in anti-Semitism, extremism, racism, nativism, xenophobia, Islamophobia, white supremacy, isolationism, the list goes on? Our country denied entry to the St. Louis during World War II; the majority aboard the ship were returned to Europe, where 254 Jews died. A young girl named Anne Frank was refused a visa to the United States; she perished in Nazi concentration camps at the hands of the very perpetrators she was attempting to escape. Is issuing a rash Executive Order to close our borders, ban refugees, and suspend visas to those fleeing veritable religious, ethnic and political persecution and violence the answer? On Kristallnacht (the Night of Broken Glass) in November of 1938, many thousands of synagogues, as well as Jewish homes, schools and businesses were damaged and destroyed throughout Germany. Gravestones in countless Jewish cemeteries were overturned and desecrated. Just yesterday, eleven bomb threats evacuated Jewish centers in cities across the country, while over one hundred headstones were toppled or damaged at a St. Louis Jewish cemetery, violently uprooting peaceful, prayerful places of rest. How does a country, a people, a government, law enforcement respond to this latest act of violence in a string of anti-Semitic hate crimes, which make up the largest portion of religiously-motivated attacks in the U.S. today? “I was just following orders” was a claim made by many Nazis in attempt to defend the indefensible during the Nuremberg trials – and lies at the heart of an ongoing, widespread debate about what does or does not constitute a war crime. Are there not parallels between that and the President of the United States justifying his spreading of lies by saying, “I was given that information” by some other actor? Government-ordered military deportation forces once rounded up millions of children and adults, permanently ripping apart families. The current administration is/was considering mobilizing as many as 100,000 National Guard troops to round up unauthorized immigrants, per an 11-page draft memo obtained by the Associated Press. Should any such action ever be put into motion, what is the best way to protect and defend the mental and physical safety of the most vulnerable, the minorities, the targeted in our own cities and towns – such that young people aren’t hiding terrified in attics? The Nazis rose to power in 1933, as anti-Semitism surged. Anti-Jewish laws were enacted, death camps operationalized, professionals barred from service, work or practice, immigration restricted, synagogues destroyed, shops looted, students expelled from schools, masses forced into ghettos and deported, and six million murdered by 1945. Jews were far from the sole group persecuted: gay and lesbians, political opposition, Gypsies, physically or mentally disabled, communists, priests, the list goes on of other groups targeted because of race, action or belief. “Fire up the ovens,” countless people have told me – in emails and across Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, and YouTube. “You’re the oven-dodging kike who doesn’t belong in America but in Hell,” I heard, reinforcing the idea that I do not belong in the country in which I was born, in which I am a citizen, in which I have created a life. Where do they want me? Want us? Where do we turn? Where do we go from here? I have never been more acutely aware of the fact that I am Jewish than at this moment in history, with the newfound spike in anti-Semitism and hate crimes throughout the campaign season and since the election of the new president. When asked about the impact of his campaign rhetoric on spiking anti-Semitism in a recent press conference, Trump somehow responded by congratulating himself on his election victory margins – and stated that he knew Jewish people, including his son, daughter, and grandchildren without addressing the topic at all. When asked about how his administration plans to respond to the undeniable surge in anti-Semitism at a subsequent press conference, he responded by calling the Jewish reporter’s question unfair, saying he hated it and found it insulting, and instructed him to sit down without offering any answer whatsoever – aside from blaming the press. Trump called himself the “least anti-Semitic person that you’ve ever seen in your entire life,” though refuses to outright condemn by name, show up alongside, step up to protect the targeted, or order an investigation of the spike in hatred, hate-fueled violence and hate crimes against Jews or other peoples; the President and Administration are deafeningly and dangerously silent on anti-Semitism. An unprecedented 67 bomb threats have been phoned in to 56 Jewish centers across 27 states and one Canadian province since the start of the year has barely made headlines, yet invoked a paralyzing fear and terror in thousands of families, staff and community members of all faiths. A truck purposefully running over young Jews in Israel made the news cycle briefly. New Yorkers discovering and erasing swastikas from subway cars was a feel good story spotlighted for but a moment. A Chicago synagogue defaced with swastikas and a broken window is barely even searchable online. How many swastikas is too many? One. How many slurs? How many hate crimes? We ignore, deny, trivialize and understate horrors and attempt to normalize discrimination or hate speech until there is no possible alternative, until we find ourselves at the entrance of a death camp – metaphorically or in reality. We must remain vigilant and stay sensitized to both language and action, subtle and overt, specifics and generalizations, popular sentiment and government policies. As a Jew, I should not have walked out of that camp alive. I should have died within its walls, succumbed to the most debilitating bone chill of my life, toiled until my body collapsed, withered away without adequate nutrition. But I did not. And I will not. I said Kaddish for those who were murdered in death camps, for those who have been victims of crimes against humanity, for those who perish as the world watches, be it in Aleppo, in Chicago or in the Philippines. This is not solely about Jews, rather all of us, people of color, religious or ethnic minorities, the persecuted, the oppressed, the downtrodden, the needy, the victimized, the marginalized. Who will be the next ones rounded up from their homes? Sent to camps? Targeted by hatred? Decimated in a genocide? I want to be able to say that I would have been there to cross the bridge in Selma with Martin Luther King and John Lewis, that I would have been at the Salt March with Gandhi, that I would have been the one to harbor my Jewish neighbors when the Nazis came. So I stand, I speak, I march with my fellow females at the Women’s March, with my black and brown brothers and sisters in the streets of our cities, with my indigenous and native family at Standing Rock, with the immigrants and refugees who make our country what it is at the airports, with my LGBT community at Pride. I am for myself and my Jewish people, as I am for others. Because this is our continuous struggle for justice – for our humanity, our dignity, our future. -- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

21 февраля, 12:30

Who's Afraid of a Big BAT Tax?

The Border Adjustment Tax, a proposal favored by House Speaker Paul Ryan, has aroused serious opposition from Republican senators.

Выбор редакции
21 февраля, 09:17

На чем подъехать к 23 февраля: мотоциклы от $11 800 до $10 млн

Два колеса по цене четырех, а то и шести.

Выбор редакции
21 февраля, 05:36

2017 Dodge Challenger GT: What Dodge Needs; Maybe What Buyers Want

The Challenger GT probably wouldn’t exist if there were other, newer cars for Dodge to sell, or if its expected replacement had arrived on time. Instead, reality presented fewer options, so Dodge got creative when the sales data presented a “why not?”

Выбор редакции
20 февраля, 12:19

Dodge научил автомобиль отталкиваться от дороги

Американский автомобильный бренд Dodge, выпускаемый корпорацией «Крайслер», поделился с поклонниками марки очередным тизером, посвященным скорой премьере самой экстремальной модификации, ставшего культовым, купе Dodge Challenger

17 февраля, 19:55

Spanish princess cleared of tax dodging charges

A Spanish court yesterday acquitted King Felipe VI’s sister, Princess Cristina, of charges that she helped her husband evade taxes, in a case that shamed the royal family.

Выбор редакции
17 февраля, 19:14

The Weird Reason This Store Doesn't Have Mannequins

Do you ever find yourself startled by the often-haunting presence (and sometimes awkward positioning) of store mannequins? One second, you're intently thumbing through a rack, trying find your size, and the next moment, you're accidentally saying "Oh, excuse me" to a 6'1" plastic figure that's actually not a real human. And it's not like they represent the majority of customers, anyway. But we digress. Indie label Reformation feels the same way we do, so they're nixing the familiar merchandizing tool for their next store opening in San Francisco.Instead, they're replacing mannequins with some seriously high-tech touches that aim to make the consumer experience a whole lot easier. "We wanted to create a more seamless shopping experience that solves a lot of the problems with traditional clothing stores: most are super-messy, you can never find your size, you have to wait in line forever, the dressing room lighting is the worst, etc." Reformation founder Yael Aflalo told Refinery29. (Aflalo also recently admitted her disdain for mannequins: they "freak her out.") "I felt like a high-volume, high-end retail experience was basically nonexistent," Aflalo said. "With the new San Francisco store, the new technology elements will hopefully eliminate these inconveniences so people can have an amazing and memorable experience they'll want to come back for."The new store, which will open on February 21, will also feature touchscreen monitors, as well as "digital fitting room attendees" — which totally sounds like something we saw in The Jetsons or something. Instead of racks filled with the same item in multiple sizes, there will be a brand showroom-esque single item for each garment on offer. There are also all sorts of sustainable, environmentally conscious design touches too (unsurprising, considering the brand's always had an eco-friendly focus): There are rammed earth walls sourced from a local Bay Area company (they'll look something like this), low-VOC paints (a.k.a. volatile organic compounds, which can cause things like cancer and are harmful to the environment), and reusable totes and hangers made from recycled materials. That all sounds pretty snazzy, but what we're most looking forward to is that mannequin-free experience, because we all know the sweat-inducing embarrassment of the moment you knock one of those suckers over and literally everyone in the store jerks their head in your direction. Not to mention the battle that ensues when you try to re-style the plastic person, dodging pins and needles that were once holding everything in place and are now scattered all over the floor. Not in the Bay Area? Eventually, this futuristic-sounding Ref store template will be coming to other yet-unannounced cities nationally. By: Landon Peoples -- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

17 февраля, 17:15

Dow Didn't Need a Break

Dow Didn't Need a Break

17 февраля, 16:11

Российская "Нива" покорила автолюбителей!

Принято считать, что выпущенные российским заводом «АвтоВАЗ» машины популярны только в нашей стране, однако на самом деле, они хорошо известны и за пределами государства. Например, на этой неделе журналисты немецкого издания «Auto Motor und Sport» включили сразу три советских автомобиля в ТОП-10 лучших восточноевропейских внедорожников, которые могут составить конкуренцию современным автомобилям.Среди машин российского производства в этом списке оказались ВАЗ-2121 «Нива», Газ-24 «Волга» и УАЗ-469. Этих «монстров» советского автопрома до сих пор можно встретить на дорогах Европы и, в частности, Германии. Поэтому неудивительно, что они попали в топ немецких журналистов.«Нива» — это российский автомобиль повышенной проходимости с несущим кузовом и постоянным полным приводом, который начали выпускать еще в 1977 году. Изначально он создавался как комфортный автомобиль для российской «глубинки» и в итоге полностью оправдал ожидания.По мнению, немцев, главное преимущество ВАЗа «Нива», который сейчас выпускается под маркой Lada 4х4 в том, что он может проехать практически по любой сложной местности, даже там где не каждый немецкий автомобиль пройдет. При этом стоит эта машина в несколько раз дешевле европейских аналогов. Главными недостатками «Нивы» журналисты из Германии посчитали не слишком современную подвеску, а также тяжелый ход руля и коробки передач, которые требуют приложения определенной силы.Тем не менее, немцы сравнивают ВАЗ-2121 с автомобилями Land Rover Defender и Mercedes-Benz G-Klasse, а это о многом говорит. В целом, по словам авторов, «Нива», она же Лада 4х4, – это «не игрушка для богатых, а честный труженик и надежный инструмент», так что к ней однозначно стоит присмотреться.УАЗ-469, который тоже попал в топ-список немецких журналистов, — грузопассажирский автомобиль, который начали выпускать в СССР еще в 1972 году. Долгое время именно «УАЗики» использовались в качестве основного командирского транспорта в Советской Армии и у военных в странах Варшавского договора.Эта машина впечатлила немцев тем, что отлично ездит по пересеченной местности, предоставляя своему владельцу полную свободу передвижения. Кроме того, среди преимуществ этого внедорожника – весьма мощный и при этом неприхотливый в эксплуатации двигатель, а также большой клиренс. Как оказалось, «УАЗики» и в наши дни используются экстренными службами в Восточной Германии. Единственный же недостаток этих автомобилей – не слишком комфортный салон.ГАЗ-24 «Волга» — автомобиль среднего класса, который выходил с конвейеров Горьковского автомобильного завода с 1969 по 1985 годы. Эта машина сочетала в себе стильный и очень современный на момент создания дизайн, но вместе с тем отлично подходила для езды на не слишком хороших дорогах и работы в суровом климате. Для этого, в частности были предусмотрены усиленный несущий кузов, увеличенный дорожный просвет, живучая шкворневая подвеска и другие важные детали.Хотя «Волгу» сложно назвать внедорожником в классическом смысле, немцев она также впечатлила своей проходимостью и стойкостью. По мнению журналистов, этот автомобиль рассчитан на долгие годы службы даже при самых неблагоприятных условиях, таких как низкие температуры, от которых замерзает масло, или даже бензин не очень хорошего качества. Понравился немцам и салон «Волги» — они посчитали его просторным и весьма комфортным. Также похвалу заслужил и бесшумный мотор машины. В результате журналисты сравнили советскую «Волгу» с автомобилями Opel Admiral, Opel Rekord A и Dodge Dart.Советский и российский автопром всегда старался идти в ногу со временем и создавать автомобили, которые были бы востребованы как в России, так и в других странах. При этом главным преимуществом машин российских марок была и остается хорошая приспособленность к сложному климату и способность справиться с бездорожьем. Неудивительно, что в Германии и сейчас высоко оценивают советские авто, а некоторые автолюбители до сих пор активно их используют.Автор: Мария Осипова

15 февраля, 17:30

How Many Tax Deductions Are in Your Portfolio?

Everyone knows about tax deductions for charitable giving and health expenses. But did you know how many investment-related write-offs are in your portfolio?

Выбор редакции
14 февраля, 15:38

SO? Flynn sets record with only 24 days as national security adviser. The average tenure is about 2….

SO? Flynn sets record with only 24 days as national security adviser. The average tenure is about 2.6 years. I think Trump dodged a bullet with this one, even if he did originally fire it at himself. By most accounts, Flynn was a fine general, but was in over his head management-wise as Director of […]

14 февраля, 06:46

Bowe Bergdahl Can't Get A Fair Trial After Trump 'Traitor' Attacks, Lawyers Say

function onPlayerReadyVidible(e){'undefined'!=typeof HPTrack&&HPTrack.Vid.Vidible_track(e)}!function(e,i){if(e.vdb_Player){if('object'==typeof commercial_video){var a='',o='m.fwsitesection='+commercial_video.site_and_category;if(a+=o,commercial_video['package']){var c='&m.fwkeyvalues=sponsorship%3D'+commercial_video['package'];a+=c}e.setAttribute('vdb_params',a)}i(e.vdb_Player)}else{var t=arguments.callee;setTimeout(function(){t(e,i)},0)}}(document.getElementById('vidible_1'),onPlayerReadyVidible); Lawyers defending Bowe Bergdahl, the Army sergeant charged with desertion, argued in court Monday that the charges should be dismissed because Donald Trump’s repeated campaign attacks on him as a “traitor” make a fair trial impossible.  Military Judge Jeffery Nance conceded during a pretrial hearing at Fort Bragg, North Carolina, that Trump’s comments were “disturbing,” The Associated Press reported. He didn’t immediately rule on the motion to dismiss the charges. Bergdahl walked away from his base in Afghanistan in 2009 and was captured by the Taliban and held for five years. In a controversial barter, the Obama administration traded five Taliban prisoners to secure his freedom. Bergdahl’s complicated story, including torture during his captivity, were the focus of a “Serial” podcast last year. He has said he walked away from his post to call attention to problems at the base.  The motion to dismiss the charges, filed by Bergdahl’s defense team last month, lists dozens of times Trump spoke publicly about the Army sergeant. In a campaign appearance in Iowa in 2015, Trump said Bergdahl should be “thrown out of an airplane without a parachute,” according to the motion. The motion argues that the charges should be dismissed because “President Trump’s statements are prejudicial to Sergeant Bergdahl’s right to a fair trial and inimical to public confidence in the administration of military justice.” Lawyers played a video of Trump at campaign rallies in court on Monday. Trump referred to Bergdahl as a “traitor” or a similar insult at least 45 times at rallies or in media interviews, according to defense lawyers. The slurs included calling Bergdahl a “no-good, dirty, rotten traitor,” a “horrible, terrible, dirty, rotten traitor,” a “dirty rotten deserter,” a “whack job,” a “son of a bitch” and a “bum.” He said Bergdahl “should be shot,” and in the “good old days” would have been executed. Trump told campaign crowds that “at least six soldiers” were killed trying to rescue Bergdahl. In fact, former Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel testified before Congress in 2014 that there was no evidence linking any U.S. combat deaths to the search for Bergdahl. The sergeant was heavily criticized at the time for placing colleagues searching for him at risk.  Critics attacked Obama’s prisoner exchange as a compromise with terrorists. Hagel said that none of the detainees released by the U.S. had been linked to any terror attack. Bergdahl appealed in vain for a pardon from then-President Barack Obama in December.  The case isn’t the first time Trump’s words have complicated a court action. In upholding an order blocking Trump’s travel ban last week, a U.S. Court of Appeals panel said Trump’s campaign promise of a “Muslim ban” may be “considered in evaluating ... Equal Protection Clause claims,” even though the president didn’t use the phrase in his executive order. Trump’s criticism of military personnel is a sensitive subject, because he received four student deferments during the Vietnam War and never served in the military. He has said he suffered through his own “personal Vietnam” dodging sexually transmitted diseases during war-era frolicking.  During his campaign, Trump attacked war hero Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.). Trump claimed McCain “wasn’t a war hero” because he was captured. “I like people that weren’t captured,” Trump added. type=type=RelatedArticlesblockTitle=Related Coverage + articlesList=566b22d2e4b080eddf581bf2,567327d5e4b0b958f655ee08,58433d32e4b09e21702f0796,56a2466fe4b0d8cc1099b6da,566f2eace4b011b83a6c29cd -- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

14 февраля, 03:09

7 Great Romantic Comedies You Can Watch on Netflix

In the mood for love? Here are seven great romantic comedies that you can watch right now on Netflix's streaming service.

Выбор редакции
14 февраля, 01:03

THE DODGE VIPER DIED because it ran out of reasons to live….

THE DODGE VIPER DIED because it ran out of reasons to live.

Выбор редакции
13 февраля, 23:30

GERALD CELENTE on Tax Dodging Investor George Soros. Soros Facing $7 Billion Tax Bill

Liberal billionaire George Soros could soon be facing an enormous tax bill of nearly $7 billion dollars In the past, Soros has made calls in the past for higher taxes on wealthy Americans and it appears he may soon have one of his own to pay off. After years of deferring income, it's estimated he... [[ This is a content summary only. Visit http://FinanceArmageddon.blogspot.com or http://www.figanews.com/ or http://goldbasics.blogspot.com for full links, other content, and more! ]]

13 февраля, 10:57

Website On Disabilities Act That Tripped Up Betsy DeVos Disappears

function onPlayerReadyVidible(e){'undefined'!=typeof HPTrack&&HPTrack.Vid.Vidible_track(e)}!function(e,i){if(e.vdb_Player){if('object'==typeof commercial_video){var a='',o='m.fwsitesection='+commercial_video.site_and_category;if(a+=o,commercial_video['package']){var c='&m.fwkeyvalues=sponsorship%3D'+commercial_video['package'];a+=c}e.setAttribute('vdb_params',a)}i(e.vdb_Player)}else{var t=arguments.callee;setTimeout(function(){t(e,i)},0)}}(document.getElementById('vidible_1'),onPlayerReadyVidible); A Department of Education website explaining the rights of students under the federal Individuals with Disabilities Education Act has vanished. That’s the same law that confounded new Education Secretary Betsy DeVos during her confirmation hearings. DeVos dodged questioning about the law last month, insisting it was up to individual states on whether to grant disabled students their educational rights, even though it’s a federal law that applies across the nation. New U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions has also blasted the act for its “special treatment of certain children,” blaming it for the “acceleration in the decline of civility and discipline in classrooms across America.” The website appeared to stop working shortly before DeVos took office, the Seattle Post Intelligencer reported.  The Department of Education site now attributes the broken link to “technical difficulties” and instead sends people to the 159-page text of the very technical, complicated statute. The department site also lists available special education programs. The disabilities act information site that has now vanished was established under George W. Bush’s administration as an aide for parents, students, teachers and school administrations to help them understand the rights of disabled students to an appropriate free public education under the law. The site was updated as modifications were passed and courts continued to interpret the law. Washington Democratic Sens. Maria Cantwell and Patty Murray, who both voted against DeVos’ confirmation, issued a statement Friday demanding to know why the information had been scrubbed. “The Department’s failure to keep this critical resource operational makes it harder for parents, educators, and administrators to find the resources they need to implement this federal law and protect the rights of children with disabilities,” they said. The Washington senators demanded  a “detailed timeline” of when the information was taken down and when it will be restored. They also criticized President Donald Trump for being someone who is not an “advocate for disability rights [and who] famously mocked the physical disability of a New York Times reporter who asked him a question at a news conference” during his presidential campaign. During DeVos’ confirmation hearings last month, Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) quizzed the nominee on the law. DeVos responded that it was a “matter best left to the states.” Kaine then asked: “So some states might be good to kids with disabilities and other states might not be so good and, what then, people can just move around the country if they don’t like how kids are being treated?” DeVos again repeated that it’s an issue “best left to the states,” seemingly unaware of how federal law works. Sen. Maggie Hassan (D-N.H.), who has a son with special needs, clarified that the act is a federal civil rights law, adding: “So do you stand by your statement a few minutes ago that it should be up to the state whether to follow it?” DeVos responded: “I may have confused it.”  Sessions spoke out against the law in 2000 from the Senate floor when he was representing Alabama. “We have created a complex system of federal regulations and laws that have created lawsuit after lawsuit, special treatment for certain children, and that are a big factor in accelerating the decline in civility and discipline in classrooms all over America. I say that very sincerely,” Sessions said. function onPlayerReadyVidible(e){'undefined'!=typeof HPTrack&&HPTrack.Vid.Vidible_track(e)}!function(e,i){if(e.vdb_Player){if('object'==typeof commercial_video){var a='',o='m.fwsitesection='+commercial_video.site_and_category;if(a+=o,commercial_video['package']){var c='&m.fwkeyvalues=sponsorship%3D'+commercial_video['package'];a+=c}e.setAttribute('vdb_params',a)}i(e.vdb_Player)}else{var t=arguments.callee;setTimeout(function(){t(e,i)},0)}}(document.getElementById('vidible_2'),onPlayerReadyVidible); DeVos, a billionaire Republican donor, was confirmed last Tuesday on a 50-50 Senate vote that required a tie-breaking vote from Vice President Mike Pence. She has no formal experience working in public schools and has spent years supporting school vouchers and charter schools. During her first visit as education secretary to a public school in Washington, D.C., last week, protesters blocked her from entering through the main doors. There has been no response to the website changes from DeVos. type=type=RelatedArticlesblockTitle=Related Coverage + articlesList=583cf751e4b06539a78a3bdc,587f7c0fe4b0c147f0bc01ea -- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Выбор редакции
13 февраля, 00:00

Новая статья: Автодайджест №390: новый «Солярис»

Новый Hyundai Solaris для России, американские мастодонты Ford Expedition и Dodge Durango SRT, «проточный» электрокар NanoFlowcell Quant 48Volt, европейский водородный проект Hydrogen Mobility Europe, строительство экологически чистого водородного завода H2FUTURE, концепт Citroen C-Aircross, заезд Porsche 918 Spyder и Nissan Patrol, а также детский электрокар Morgan EV3 Junior

12 февраля, 19:30

The Only Way To Know What Neil Gorsuch Really Thinks About Gay Sex Is To Ask Him About It

A few days ago I wrote about Donald Trump’s Supreme Court nominee, Neil Gorsuch, suggesting that, considering his judicial philosophy, it’s likely he’d be perfectly fine with state sodomy bans, which the Supreme Court threw out in the Lawrence v. Texas case in 2003. As NPR’s Nina Totenberg and Lauren Russell noted, Gorsuch is a “self-proclaimed disciple of [the late Justice] Scalia’s crusade” of originalism ― taking the Constitution as it was literally intended by those who wrote it in its time. Gorsuch reveres Scalia, who many of us remember for his blistering dissent in Lawrence, using originalism to argue that states should have the right to ban sodomy, thus criminalizing homosexuality. We also remember Scalia for many other horrifically anti-gay comments and opinions, including his unhinged dissent in Obergefell v. Hodges in 2015, the landmark marriage equality decision. So it’s certainly warranted to be concerned about where Gorsuch stands. The response to my piece, however, included criticism from some gay Gorsuch defenders, including a gay student of Gorsuch’s at the University of Colorado at Boulder, where Gorsuch teaches, who accused me of portraying the judge as homophobic and said such a characterization couldn’t be further from the truth. But in fact, I specifically stated:  Just because Scalia was rabidly anti-gay, of course, doesn’t mean that Gorsuch is. Indeed, Gorsuch reportedly offered support to one of his own former clerks upon the former clerk’s same-sex marriage in 2014. But that, conversely, doesn’t mean Gorsuch believes the clerk should have had a constitutional right to marry.   Now, a few days later, the New York Times has published an interesting piece by reporter Sheryl Gay Stolberg, with an equally interesting headline,”Gorsuch Not Easy to Pigeonhole on Gay Rights, Friends Say.” The headline is interesting because of the last two words, “friends say.” A judge’s rulings and judicial philosophy, after all, should not be judged by friends, but rather by legal scholars based on the judge’s writings, comments and decisions. I think most people would agree with that. And the few relevant cases and writings we have to go on should make LGBTQ people very worried about Gorsuch. Yet, Gorsuch has gay friends and colleagues who are quoted in Stolberg’s article, speaking of him as very accepting of them. The implication is that if he’s accepting of them then he’d likely rule in favor of LGBTQ rights while on the high court. Phil Berg, who went to Harvard with Gorsuch, talks about the “special bond” he and Gorsuch have had for many years, and explains how supportive Gorsuch is of him and his husband: “We have had a standing invitation to stay with Neil and Louise in Denver.”  The former clerk, Joshua Goodbaum, says Gorsuch was “thrilled” for him and his husband when they got married in 2014: “He was actually kind of syrupy about it. I remember him saying, ‘You’re going to see how wonderful this is for your relationship.’’’ I don’t think I have to point out ― but will ― that all eight of the current Supreme Court justices likely have black friends (and one is black himself), but that doesn’t mean they all uphold affirmative action and voting rights, or that some aren’t downright hostile to laws protecting African-Americans. So. just because a judge is “syrupy” with a friend doesn’t mean it translates to judicial philosophy or court decisions. But there’s something even more naive and in the realm of wishful thinking about these gay friends’ opinions (unless Gorsuch has told these friends more concrete things that they’re not telling us). Stolberg notes that Gorsuch’s acceptance of them “leads some friends to wonder if his jurisprudence might be closer to that of Justice Anthony Kennedy, who has carved out a name for himself as the court’s conservative defender of gay rights.” Stolberg quotes Christian Mammen, a San Francisco lawyer who got to know Gorsuch when they both attended Oxford many years ago, stating, “Everybody’s got him pegged as being more Scalia, I’m not sure I see that.” But here’s the rub: It’s not “everybody” else who has Gorsuch pegged as being like Scalia ― it’s Gorsuch who has willingly, unequivocally pegged himself that way. He gave a major speech about the importance of the late justice and his philosphy last year and, again, publicly adheres, like Clarence Thomas, to Scalia’s philosophy of originalism. Based on that and his decisions, the Times put Gorsuch on a chart as just to the right of Scalia, with only Thomas further to the right. And, much as Gorsuch’s gay friends would like to believe otherwise, Justice Kennedy is not an originalist. In fact, his sound rejection of originalism is what had him lead the court majority in ruling that gays are protected against discrimination in the Constitution, should not be criminalized, and and most certainly have the right to marry. As Totenberg and Russell note (bold added for emphasis): Those disagreements [among conservative justices] were never more apparent than in a series of decisions about gay rights written by the usually conservative Justice Anthony Kennedy...In a decision striking down a Texas law that criminalized private, consensual “homosexual conduct,” Kennedy asserted that the Founding Fathers did not specify all liberties because they expected that list to change. “They knew times can blind us to certain truths, and later generations can see that laws once thought necessary and proper in fact serve only to oppress,” Kennedy said while summarizing his opinion from the bench. “It is the promise of the Constitution that there is a realm of personal liberty which the government may not enter,” he said. And the New York Times’ respected chronicler of the Supreme Court, Linda Greenhouse, noted recently that Kennedy was nominated by President Ronald Reagan after Democrats filibustered Judge Robert Bork, an originalist:  Judge Bork’s insistence that the Constitution must be interpreted in light of the original understanding of its authors, a view Judge Gorsuch is said to share, was a fringe notion in 1987. [During his confirmation hearings] Justice Anthony M. Kennedy reassured the Senate by rejecting originalism; the Constitution’s framers had “made a covenant with the future,” he declared in his confirmation hearing.  Stolberg’s article is comprehensive. While she refers to these friends supporting Gorsuch ― including former Republican National Committee chairman and George W. Bush 2004 campaign manager Ken Mehlman, whom she reports is circulating a letter in support of the nomination ― she also quotes legal scholars and the preeminent LGBT legal group, Lambda Legal, and she looks at Gorsuch’s past cases and writings. Stolberg concludes that Gorsuch would not be with the majority that handed down the most important gay rights decision in history:  If Judge Gorsuch is confirmed, the composition of the court that made up the Obergefell majority will be unchanged. Michael Dorf, a law professor at Cornell who knows Judge Gorsuch in passing — they were both clerks to Justice Kennedy and run into each other at clerk reunions — says gay rights advocates “have reason to be afraid,” based on the existing evidence about Judge Gorsuch. Stolberg also reported on Gorsuch’s opinion in the Hobby Lobby case (in a decision he joined on the 10th circuit), in which he showed a will to give religious exemptions to corporations, and she also quoted the piece he’d written in National Review in 2005, before he was a judge, which I had quoted and which clearly states his position that issues such as marriage equality should be left to the voters and states, and not to the courts. That is a tenant of originalism. So, how much does it really matter that Gorsuch has gay friends to whom he has been wonderful on a personal level? Shouldn’t we know where he stands on whether or not LGBT people are protected within the U.S. Constitution and how he will rule while on the Supreme Court? Let’s not forget that we were told similar things about John Roberts when George W. Bush nominated him to the Supreme Court in 2005. The New York Times at the time reported how he’d done pro bono work for gay groups in the historic Romer v. Evans case before the Supreme Court in 1996 ― the first case in which Justice Kennedy, writing the majority decision, gave LGBT people a victory. We were told Roberts had a lesbian cousin (who even would later attend the Prop 8 arguments at the Supreme Court, along with her partner). But none of that stopped Roberts from writing a full-throated dissent in the Obergefell case. So, the only way to know about Gorsuch and gay sex ― and marriage equality ― is to ask. I’ve tried, but Ron Bonjean, Gorsuch’s spokesman, did not return repeated email requests for comment. But maybe his friends, like Phil Berg or Ken Mehlman, can simply ask him if he supports Justice Scalia’s position in the Lawrence case, believing sodomy bans are allowed under the Constitution. Gorsuch should not be allowed to dodge by telling us it’s “settled law” either. As columnist Steve Chapman noted:  No Republican has endorsed Gorsuch on the grounds that he would uphold laws against gay sex. But given the chance, why wouldn’t he? If he reveres Scalia and his approach, it would be logical for him to agree that oral and anal sex can be banned. But to admit as much would alarm most Americans — who think that adult partners should be free to do whatever floats their boats. To repudiate Scalia, however, would suggest there is something fundamentally defective in Gorsuch’s entire approach to judging. It would imply that the late justice was not all-wise. And U.S. senators must ask the question, in private meetings they’re currently having with Gorsuch and during any confirmation hearing ― and demand a clear and unequivocal answer. I’ve stated that Gorsuch’s nomination should be filibustered by Democrats because it is a stolen seat belonging to Merick Garland (even if it means the GOP nukes the filibuster). But certainly if Gorsuch cannot answer a simple question about basic protections for LGBT people in the Constitution, and how his position gels with his judicial philosophy, any senator who cares about LGBT rights must vote against his nomination.  Follow Michelangelo Signorile on Twitter: www.twitter.com/msignorile -- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Выбор редакции
11 февраля, 18:29

THE NEW DODGE DEMON: It Will Probably Be the Fastest Muscle Car Ever at Over 900hp. The Demon wil…

THE NEW DODGE DEMON: It Will Probably Be the Fastest Muscle Car Ever at Over 900hp. The Demon will weigh about 215 pounds less than a Hellcat, reported Motor Authority. A Hellcat weighs in at about 4,448 pounds. To cut the weight, Dodge has reportedly removed the passenger front seat and rear bench seat. Dodge […]

10 февраля, 19:24

Trump Tried to Intimidate the Judges Over His Ban, and He Failed

Presidents have thought before that they could roll those wimpy-looking nerds with their gavels and robes. It usually doesn’t work out all that well.

09 июня 2015, 19:50

Пикапы Chevrolet. История начинается.

Пикапы - самые американские и самые, на мой взгляд, интересные автомобили. Я их люблю и хочу о них рассказать. А чтобы меня не обвиняли в "монетизации" сделаю это на примере марки, больше не представленной на нашем рынке. Не думаю, что GM хотя бы поблагодарит меня за эту публикацию.По некоторым данным, несколько самых первых пикапов Chevrolet были произведены еще в 1914 году. Они предназначались не для продажи, а для перевозки всевозможных грузов по территории автомобильного завода. так сказать, для внутреннего пользования! Понято, что ни один такой автомобиль не сохранился. Первые серийные пикапы были построены в городе Флинт, штат Мичиган, 22 ноября 1916-го и отгружены с завода 2 декабря того же года. Эта дата считается официальным выходом Chevrolet на рынок легких грузовиков. Машина, которую вы видите на фото, это современная реплика одного из первых пикапов Chevrolet 490.1918 модельный год ознаменовался выпуском сразу двух грузовых моделей. Обе они представляли собой грузовое шасси с металлическим капотом, под которым был установлен четырехцилиндровый бензиновый двигатель. В то время покупатели обычно сами оснащали автомобили деревянными кабинами, грузовыми платформами или кузовами, в зависимости от своих потребностей. На картинке вверху, пассажирская модификация модели Light Delivery. Я где-то читал, что в те годы за такой автомобиль просили $595. Немало, ведь это были другие, полновесные доллары, не те, что сейчас... Более тяжелая модель, построенная на той же базе, носила индекс T (Truck). Она отличалась усиленным шасси и ее грузоподъемность достигала одной тонны - вдвое больше, чем у Chevrolet 490. На машину устанавливался 37-сильный двигатель. Его мощности хватало, чтобы грузовик развивал скорость до 40 км/ч. В 1918 году чтобы купить такое транспортное средство нужно было выложить более 1000 долларов!В 1930 году на смену грузовым шасси пришли полноценные пикапы заводского производства. Компания Chevrolet приобрела кузовную фирму Martin-Parry и начала сама производить пикапы со стальной кабиной и установленным на заводе кузовом. Сердцем новых пикапов стал рядный шестицилиндровый двигатель. Его конструктивная особенность заключалась в верхнем расположении клапанов. Такие моторы стали характерной чертой практически всех пикапов Chevrolet следующих десятилетий.На фотографии модель Chevrolet Roadster Delivery, который впервые "засветился" в музыкальной кинокомедии "Follow Thru", вышедшей на экраны в 1930-м году. Видимо, в этом фильме что-то было связанно с гольфом, не случайно же сидящие в кузове актрисы держат в руках клюшки!К середине 1930-х полутонные автомобили с заводскими стальными кузовами стали основой рынка пикапов, где фирмы Mack, Studebaker и International конкурировали с Chevrolet, GMC, Ford и Dodge.В середине 1930-х годов, когда экономика США начала восстанавливаться после Великой депрессии компания Chevrolet вывела на рынок новые модели легких грузовиков обтекаемой аэродинамической формы, которая до сих пор считается эталоном дизайна той эпохи. Помимо прочих усовершенствований, модели образца 1937 года обрели усиленный кузов и более мощный 78-сильный двигатель.Этот пикап Chevrolet образа 1937 года с честью выдержал изнурительное путешествие длиной 10 245 миль по Соединенным Штатам, проходившее под наблюдением Американской автомобильной ассоциации (ААА). Кстати, средний расход топлива составил 11,3 л/100 км - неплохо даже по современным меркам!В начале 1947 года Chevrolet представила легкие грузовики серии Advanced Design – первые среди всех автомобилей корпорации General Motors, полностью обновленные после Второй мировой войны. Замысел рекламщиков и производителей состоял в том, чтобы сделать утилитарные машины более яркими, выразительными и привлекательными для потребителей. Дизайнеры компании, действую по команде маркетологов, шире расставили фары, установив их на крылья, а также подчеркнули решетку радиатора пятью горизонтальными планками. Получилось неплохо! На фото - полутонный пикап Chevrolet Advanced Design 1947-го модельного года.Машины, выполненные в этой, удачно найденной, стилистике, продержались на конвейере с 1947 по 1953 год, а затем, в начале 1955 года, был обновлен дизайн передней части (на фото вверху).После выхода на рынок моделей серии Advanced Design предпочтения американских покупателей стало постепенно смещаться в сторону пикапов. Если перед войной соотношение между продажей пассажирских автомобилей и легких грузовиков составляло примерно 4:1, то 1950 году уже 2,5:1. Пикапы стремительно набирали популярность! В середине 1950-х годов, полностью восстановившаяся после войны Америка переживала потребительский бум. Покупатели стали еще более разборчивыми и требовательными к дизайну и техническим характеристикам автомобилей. В связи с этим, в 1955 году Chevrolet представила публике совершенно новую линейку пикапов Task Force, дизайн которых перекликался с престижной легковой моделью Chevrolet Bel Air. А в качестве опции на пикапы стали устанавливать более мощные двигатели V8.В 1955 году была выпущена специальная версия пикапа Cameo Carrier. Это была уже не "рабочая лошадка", а стильный автомобиль, более уместный на подъездной дорожке к роскошному особняку, чем на ферме или заводской площадке. Можно считать, что именно с этого момента большие американские пикапы перестали быть чисто утилитарными транспортными средствами. Модель Cameo Carrier производился относительно недолго, всего лишь до 1958 года. Но ей на смену уже шли новые еще более роскошные пикапы. 1959 год. Красавица Chevrolet El Camino просто очаровала публику эффектным дизайном с характерными для того времени «килями» как у легковых моделей Chevrolet и функциональностью полутонного пикапа. Впрочем, грузить в такую машину сено и солому вредил кто-то стал. "Фермерской" эта машина могла быть только на постановочных рекламных фотографиях а в повседневном использовании ее практичность, как говорится, оставляла желать... Вскоре это поняли и покупатели. Восторги поутихли и производство El Camino по-быстрому свернули, для того... чтобы возродить через три года! Но уже в новом качестве. С мощным двигателем V8 под капотом Chevrolet El Camino 1964 модельного года стала одним из первых маскл-каров компании. Еще за два года, до появления легендарного Camaro! А в 1968 году появилась спортивная версия пикапа. Ее назвали El Camino Super Sport. С тех пор все самые "заряженные" модели Chevrolet стали носить индекс SS.Но я как-то забежал вперед. Помимо El Camino в 60-е годы встречались еще более причудливые пикапы. Например Chevrolet Corvair Rampside 1961-го года.Интереснейшей особенностью этой модели стал второй откидывающийся борт, находящийся сбоку, как дверь у микроавтобуса. Да и внешне пикап Chevrolet Corvair здорово напоминал автобус. А еще он был заднемоторным - шестицилиндровый опоенный двигатель находился под полом. Конструкция получилась слишком уж оригинальной и покупатели ее не оценили. Источники утверждают, что таких машин было выпущено всего-то около 800 штук. Тем не менее, своей страницы в истории пикапов Chevrolet модель Corvair достойна!На этом мы пока остановимся. Продолжение следует!