- Oops!Something went wrong.Please try again later.
A ceremony in Tucson, Ariz., marked 10 years since a mass shooting killed six people and left 14 injured, including former Rep. Gabrielle Giffords.
A ceremony in Tucson, Ariz., marked 10 years since a mass shooting killed six people and left 14 injured, including former Rep. Gabrielle Giffords.
The withdrawal could have a major impact on state’s economy
Halfway through his flight home to Dallas, Bryson DeChambeau’s agent texted him. ‘Hey, you’re 68th now,’ his agent said.
Melinda Gates is ‘haunted’ by Microsoft founder’s association with sex offender, sources say
Animals with a backbone will have a legal right to feel happiness and suffering in a Government drive to raise welfare standards in Tuesday's Queen’s Speech. An Animal Sentience Bill will enshrine in law that animals are aware of their feelings and emotions, and can experience joy and pleasure, as well as pain and suffering. "Sentience” will apply to “vertebrate animals - anything with a spinal cord", Environment secretary George Eustice told The Telegraph in an exclusive interview below. An existing committee of experts and civil servants in Defra will be tasked with ensuring Government’s policies take into account animal sentience. Ministers were criticised in 2018 when the duty was not carried across into UK law from the European Union after Brexit. The Government wants to make the UK a world leader in animal welfare and laws that protect animals form the centrepiece of this week’s Queen’s Speech. As well as an Animal Sentience Bill, an Animals Abroad Bill will ban the import of trophies from animal hunting. A third measure - a Kept Animals Bill - will stop live animal exports and ban families from keeping primates as pets. The Government will also publish an animal welfare strategy which will raise the prospect of banning fur imports, microchipping all domestic cats and calling time on the cruel killing of pigs by gassing them with carbon dioxide. Animal welfare is not at odds with caring about our rural communities The Conservative government has certainly come a long way since the party first won power in 2010 on a pledge to offer a free vote on legalising fox hunting, writes Christopher Hope. This week’s Queen’s Speech will see the Tory government publish draft laws that enshrine in law the right of animals to feel pain, as well as bans on live animal exports, importing hunting trophies and keeping primates as pets. A separate animal welfare strategy document will set the direction of travel, raising the prospect of banning fur imports, microchipping all cats and calling time on the cruel killing of pigs by gassing them with carbon dioxide. It is some journey from “hoodie hugging” when David Cameron was leader in the 2000s to “bunny hugging” under Boris Johnson in the 2020s. And it has been witnessed at first hand by George Eustice, a party press officer in the 2000s and now the Environment secretary. When we met in his office at the Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs late on Friday, I asked him if he thinks this lurch towards saving animals rather than hunting them with packs of dogs will sit well with the party’s traditional voters.
Check out these top schemes inspired by drivers like Alan Kulwicki, John Andretti, Wendell Scott and more.
The new Division of Motor Vehicles office opens Monday morning.
Lakers forward Anthony Davis didn't return to Thursday's game against the Clippers because of back spasms, the team said.
Scottish Labour has recorded its worst-ever election result north of the Border since devolution, with the party down two MSPs to 22 compared with 2016. The party continued its downward trend finishing third behind the Tories and SNP, despite new leader Anas Sarwar enjoying strong personal approval ratings among Scots since taking over the top job. Mr Sarwar, who has only been in the leadership role for ten weeks, insisted his party is “on a journey” to build “a credible alternative to the SNP” and “back on the pitch” after an “energetic and enthusiastic” campaign. “We are significantly ahead of where we were just ten weeks ago, and I’m incredibly proud of everything our activists have achieved,” he said, adding that Scottish Labour has “a credibility again” and that people “aren’t embarrassed anymore to say they’re voting Labour”. After delivering a credible nine-point increase in his party’s vote share in Glasgow Southside but ultimately losing the seat to Nicola Sturgeon, Mr Sarwar will return to Holyrood via the Glasgow regional list.
Jonathan Marchessault scored with 17 seconds left in overtime to lift the Vegas Golden Knights to a 4-3 victory over the St. Louis Blues on Friday night. After clearing the puck cross-ice to Alex Tuch on a give-and-go, Marchessault took the return pass after slipping behind two Blues skaters and beat Jordan Binnington over his glove, sending the NHL’s biggest crowd of the season of 7,567 into a frenzy. “It was a great feeling,” Marchessault said.
Former President Barack Obama’s dog Bo died Saturday after a battle with cancer, the Obamas said on social media. News of Bo's passing was shared by Obama and his wife Michelle on Instagram, where both expressed sorrow at the passing of a dog the former president described as a “true friend and loyal companion.” “He tolerated all the fuss that came with being in the White House, had a big bark but no bite, loved to jump in the pool in the summer, was unflappable with children, lived for scraps around the dinner table, and had great hair,” Barack Obama wrote.
A section of a Chinese rocket is falling to Earth and could hit late Saturday. China's government expects most of it will burn up during reentry.
Tensions remain present behind the scenes, ahead of the Tesla CEO's "SNL" hosting debut, an industry source told the New York Post.
Dave Bautista told IGN that James Gunn once suggested a spin-off movie starring Drax the Destroyer and Pom Klementieff's Mantis.
His fellow pilots fired on the terrified French airman for 20 minutes of the incident in March 2019, according to the man's lawyers.
Bill Gates and Melinda French Gates were stuck at home. When the pandemic hit last March, the couple retreated to their 66,000-square-foot home on the shore of Lake Washington, venturing out infrequently to minimize their potential exposure to the virus. From their home offices they continued running the influential foundation that bears their name, video chatting with world leaders to secure financial commitments for vaccine distribution, and talking about the health of American democracy with their youngest daughter, who was finishing her senior year of high school remotely. For a couple who had spent much of the past three decades traveling the world, so much time together at home was an abrupt change of pace. “Working from home — that was a piece that I think we hadn’t really individually prepared for quite as much,” she told The New York Times in October. Sign up for The Morning newsletter from the New York Times In a November podcast, Bill Gates also spoke about adjusting to life at home after decades on the road. “My life has changed utterly,” he said. “It’s very abnormal.” Now, life has changed in another way, too. The news on Monday that the power couple of global philanthropy would be dissolving their marriage sent shock waves through the field. For those who, unlike the Gateses, had never thought about mRNA vaccines before COVID-19 hit, the pandemic brought home in the clearest way possible just how influential their foundation is in the field of global public health. And the divorce announcement, and subsequent spotlight, has made clear how dependent such an essential organization is on its ultrawealthy founders. Foundation staff members were surprised by the announcement. Bill Gates, 65, and Melinda French Gates, 56, are both hands-on leaders, and much of the power of the foundation lies not just in the billions of dollars they have given it but also in their public standing and connections. But for years the couple had already been building out closely connected but different worlds, nurturing their respective — and sometimes overlapping — interests through independent channels. She had spent more time supporting women’s issues while he had been pursuing clean energy projects. Inside the foundation, they each had their own areas of focus, too. “Institutionally, the foundation had already absorbed the separation,” said Benjamin Soskis, a philanthropy expert and senior research associate at the Urban Institute. “They each have their own areas of interest. It’s not as if this was a unitary entity that is suddenly shattered.” Sharing a Global Stage The foundation has made reassuring statements that nothing will change. It will continue with its $50 billion endowment and important range of issues. But because each co-founder has a separate project — Gates Ventures for him, Pivotal Ventures for her — there is anxiety within the foundation that it may no longer be the dynamic center of their work. “If you’re at the ventures, you think the foundation is slow, doesn’t get it, is mired in the wonkery of development,” said a former foundation staff member who has worked with both Gateses and requested anonymity to discuss the internal rivalries. “Whereas if you’re at the foundation, your theory is, ‘We do the real work and these cowboys are rushing in at the last-minute demanding to change things, demanding to justify things.’” Hovering over everything is the question of what caused their breakup and how deep the rift ultimately is between them. Why they announced the divorce when they did is a mystery. With their youngest child about to graduate from high school, several observers in their orbit noted it is often a time of reassessment for couples, and a moment that partners go their separate ways. The timing of the announcement also came just days after Warren Buffett, a close friend and the foundation’s third trustee, had his annual meeting, which may not have been a coincidence. “They spared Warren having to deal with it, by waiting until after his annual meeting,” one associate said. The recent example of MacKenzie Scott, who divorced Amazon founder Jeff Bezos and went on to a higher profile as a solo philanthropist than she ever had in the marriage, cannot have escaped Melinda French Gates’ attention. Indeed the two women worked together on a project on women and power, the Equality Can’t Wait Challenge. In the past few years there were few obvious signs that the Gateses were growing apart, at least to the public. Melinda French Gates continued to appear at Microsoft functions alongside Bill Gates, including an annual dinner for chief executives and other business leaders the couple hosted at their home each spring. Melinda French Gates, however, had hinted that she had sometimes felt overlooked when sharing a stage with her husband. She wrote candidly about those feelings in her book, “The Moment of Lift,” which was published in 2019. “I’ve been trying to find my voice as I’ve been speaking next to Bill,” she wrote, “and that can make it hard to be heard.” A person who knows her well but spoke on condition of anonymity about such a private family matter said anyone watching her body language at events for the Giving Pledge — through which billionaires promise to give away at least half of their fortunes — and other public engagements could see that she was unhappy. To many who saw the couple only in the professional setting of the foundation, it was more surprising. “People just seemed shocked,” a former longtime foundation executive said. “They’re speechless. They’re really blindsided. After such a difficult year of people working so hard it just feels like more whiplash.” The question everyone is asking now is how it will affect the foundation moving forward. “There’s already these divisions, how are they not going to be more reinforced?” ‘This Just Might End the Marriage’ In the annual letter for the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, Bill Gates became accustomed to recapping the past year and setting the agenda for the next. In late 2012, following some especially formative travels and a global conference on family planning, his wife asked to write that dispatch with him. “I thought we were going to kill each other,” Melinda French Gates, as she now prefers to be known, incorporating her maiden name, wrote in her book. “I felt, ‘Well, this just might end the marriage right here.’” The heated dispute paved the way for a fuller public partnership, but that didn’t come instantly: In January 2013, Bill Gates’ signature still stood alone, with their compromise being a short piece on contraceptives by Melinda French Gates that accompanied his letter. “I told him that there are some issues where my voice can make an impact, and in those cases, I should be speaking — separately or along with him,” she wrote. “It got hot. We both got angry. It was a big test for us — not about how you come to agreement but about what you do when you can’t agree. And we took a long time to agree.” Following their divorce, how the couple will collaborate on joint projects like their annual Goalkeepers report, the Giving Pledge and the foundation’s major communications, are open questions. When the Gates Foundation was formally established more than two decades ago, Melinda French Gates took on a bigger role in running it than her husband did because of the demands of his work at Microsoft. In spite of that, she initially shied away from a public role, leaving speeches and appearances to him. “I wanted to work behind the scenes,” she wrote, noting she had wanted to guard her privacy. But that changed after Buffett made his historically large gift in 2006. He announced that he would give $31 billion to the foundation, vaulting the already huge organization to a new level, handing out billions of dollars each year equivalent to the entire endowments of sizable philanthropies. At an appearance addressing Buffett’s gift at the New York Public Library, Melinda French Gates participated in her first news conference on behalf of the foundation. She outlined plans to invest in agricultural yields, microlending and fighting infectious disease, and she did so in personal terms that invoked her own travels. She has called that moment a turning point, one that made her want to take on a more prominent public role. “She started to speak out as she started to observe some things the foundation wasn’t focused on that she thought were really important, around social and cultural elements, the importance of behavior change, the importance of systems, the importance of an integrated approach,” said Gary Darmstadt, a medical doctor who teaches at Stanford. He worked closely with Melinda French Gates at the foundation, focused on maternal health and access to contraceptives. “She realized ‘OK, I’m going to have to step into a global leadership position on this issue because no one else is really doing it, and I’ve been equipped,” said Darmstadt, who joined the foundation in 2008 and traveled widely with French Gates to places like India, Malawi and Tanzania. “I think it became clear to her that she had to use her voice on behalf of women.” Creating Parallel Ventures It was also in 2008 that Bill Gates announced that he was stepping down from his full-time duties at Microsoft. He would remain chairman of the board and the company’s largest shareholder, but he said that he would devote himself to the foundation. Yet that year he quietly incorporated a new company, called bgC3 LLC, in Washington state, for pet projects that were related to neither Microsoft nor the Gates Foundation. There, he incubated work on climate change and clean energy that became Breakthrough Energy, along with education and health projects separate from the foundation, especially work on Alzheimer’s. (He changed the organization’s name to Gates Ventures in 2018.) In 2015, Melinda French Gates created a parallel world of her own, starting Pivotal Ventures, an enterprise focused on gender equality and social progress. In doing so, she was able to more fully explore interests that had been of little prominence in the early years of the foundation. “I thought, ‘I want to have a company that has all the tools to work on social issues for women and minorities, even in addition to our education work that we were already doing in the foundation,” she said to The Times in October. “What I’m doing with Pivotal Ventures is gathering many other people around me to have these cohorts who work on these issues, and then also fund them at scale. We don’t fund things for women at scale. And we should.” In recent years, Melinda French Gates began to shift her focus not just to the broad problems of global health and early childhood education but more specifically to the lack of equal opportunity for women. In 2019, she pledged $1 billion to an effort aimed at expanding women’s power and influence in the United States by 2030, a sign that Pivotal would be an important player moving forward. “I think Melinda has become a force of nature in this space and really thoughtfully, selectively using her voice,” said Gary Barker, founder of Promundo, an organization focused on positive masculinity and gender equality. Barker received a crucial early grant from the Gates Foundation in the early 2000s, he said, and has received subsequent support from both the foundation and Pivotal. That support is powerful for its domino effect, he said, which goes beyond money. “They’re using the celebrity influencer status to say ‘We’re behind this idea more than just giving tons,’” he said. An Organization ‘Filled With Uncertainty’ Former foundation insiders noted another force pushing the Gateses toward their separate initiatives: Struggles at the foundation over staffing levels. “It was a constant tension point of the foundation,” the former executive said. “It was Warren who limited it, but Bill’s appetite is always, ‘We should do this, we should do this.’ Teams end up with this massive to-do list.” Buffett acknowledged in an interview with The Times last year that he opposed institutional bloat. “That’s the one piece of advice I don’t shut up on, ever, because it’s the natural tendency of every organization,” he said. Employees at the foundation often have to wear multiple hats to keep up with the demands. For instance, one staff member, Anita Zaidi, serves in the highly technical role of director of vaccine development and surveillance but also serves as president for gender equality. Bill Gates famously gave a TED Talk in 2015 warning about the global threat posed by contagious respiratory viruses. The foundation was packed with top talent working on developing new vaccines. It did not, however, have a single person out of roughly 1,600 staff members at the time devoted full time to pandemics before the COVID-19 outbreak began. For all the workarounds with contract employees and consultants, there was only so much bandwidth, and the decision was made not to have a dedicated team working on the matter. Instead the foundation threw its weight behind the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, which helped develop vaccines to combat outbreaks. When the pandemic struck, the foundation put its resources and expertise to work. It has dedicated $1.75 billion to combating the pandemic so far and played a key role in shaping the global response. Even without the divorce, the foundation was in the midst of change. Buffett, the third trustee, turns 91 this summer. Bill Gates’ father, Bill Gates Sr., who was co-chairman and a guiding hand at the foundation, died this past September. Some observers have wondered if the couple’s three children could get involved soon. The elder two are already in college and medical school. Others have raised the possibility that this is the moment to loosen the family’s grip and install a board drawn from professionals outside the inner circle. “It’s a family foundation,” said the former foundation executive. “Bill and Melinda’s names are on the door, which means anytime something changes there’s just this whole ripple effect. You put this in the middle of it, it just feels like it creates even more uncertainty in an organization that’s always filled with uncertainty.” This article originally appeared in The New York Times. © 2021 The New York Times Company
One SpaceX official reportedly told homeowners the company would pursue a "different route" if they refused to sell their properties.
An image posted to Twitter showed the Cybertruck in New York's Meatpacking District. Musk responded by saying "Great pic."
FORT LAUDERDALE, Fla. – The Florida wildlife commission has identified a new menace to the marine environment: volunteers who protect sea turtle nests. For more than a decade, unpaid guardians have watched over sea turtle nests in Broward County, rescuing thousands of hatchlings led astray by artificial lights. Now the state wants to cut the number of volunteers as a step toward ejecting them ...
Cheney privately called Republicans’ embrace of the stolen-election conspiracy theory ‘a poison in the bloodstream of our democracy’. She’s right ‘If Cheney’s Republican colleagues resent that her resolve makes them look like cowards by contrast, voting to retain her in her leadership post would be a small step in the direction of integrity.’ Photograph: Getty Images Odds are that the erstwhile Republican party comrades of Representative Liz Cheney of Wyoming will soon vote to purge her from the ranks of their leadership. Cheney, who occupies the third-highest position in the House Republican Conference and is the daughter of former vice-president Dick Cheney, survived a similar removal effort in early February, after she was one of only 10 House Republicans who voted to impeach former president Donald Trump. At the time, House Republicans decided to retain Cheney as conference chair by a 145-61 margin, while the House minority leader, Kevin McCarthy, told reporters that “Liz has a right to vote her conscience.” But that was three months ago, when even Republican leaders like McCarthy and Senator Mitch McConnell acknowledged that Trump was “practically and morally responsible” (in McConnell’s words) for provoking the mob that stormed the Capitol on 6 Januaryin an attempt to overturn the election. Since then, however, the Republican base has continued to uphold Trump’s false claim that the election was stolen from him and have pushed to remove any party officeholders who say otherwise. A recent CNN poll confirmed that 70% of Republicans say Biden did not win enough votes to be president and half believe (without evidence) that solid proof of Trump’s victory exists. So congressional Republicans, always reluctant to stand up against Trump and his supporters, are edging toward the view that Cheney must go. Her crime, as they see it, is that unlike McConnell and McCarthy she did not fall silent about Trump in the aftermath of impeachment and publicly declared that she would not support him if he were to run for the presidency again in 2024. As Trump has howled for Cheney’s political demise, internal Republican criticism of her has mounted. McCarthy has openly withdrawn his support for her. She has responded with a defiant op-ed in the Washington Post calling on Republicans to “steer away from the dangerous and anti-democratic Trump cult of personality” and support the creation of a bipartisan, fact-finding commission to investigate the 6 January attack on the Capitol. Republican critics of Cheney aren’t wrong, exactly, when they say she’s being divisive. Focusing on the Biden administration’s overreach, rather than waging an intra-party debate over Trump, would give the Republican party a better chance of retaking the House majority in 2022. But unity on those terms would amount to putting party over country in the worst possible way. Cheney was absolutely correct when she told the former House speaker Paul Ryan, at a recent conservative conference, that Republicans can’t embrace the view that the election was stolen: “It’s a poison in the bloodstream of our democracy. We can’t whitewash what happened on January 6 or perpetuate Trump’s Big Lie … What he did on January 6 is a line that cannot be crossed.” Republican hopes that this anti-democratic movement within their ranks can be ignored or will somehow go away are futile Trump’s fraudulent claim of a stolen election, and his continuing efforts to undermine the legitimacy of his successor, is an intense and very real danger to American democracy. In the recent observation of Michael Gerson, the former chief speechwriter for ex-president George W Bush, “the lie of a stolen election is the foundational falsehood of a political worldview”, one that makes facts and evidence irrelevant and encourages “distrust of every source of social authority opposed to the leader’s shifting will”. Republican hopes that this anti-democratic movement within their ranks can be ignored or will somehow go away are futile. It will have to be confronted sooner or later, and the plausible outcomes become more ominous the longer the confrontation is deferred. If Cheney’s Republican colleagues resent that her resolve makes them look like cowards by contrast, voting to retain her in her leadership post would be a small step in the direction of integrity. Even Republicans who prefer to place party over country should consider that under these circumstances purging Cheney inevitably will amount to choosing Trump and his lies over what Cheney called “critical elements of our constitutional structure that make democracy work – confidence in the result of elections and the rule of law”. How will that look to the college-educated middle-class voters whose revulsion from Trump in 2018 and 2020 gave Democrats control of both houses of Congress and the White House? For that matter, how will defenestrating the sole woman in the party’s congressional leadership help Republicans shore up their declining support among female voters? Many Democrats in the grip of their own version of party-over-country consider Cheney’s likely downfall a form of karmic retribution. It’s true that Liz Cheney is as deeply conservative as her father, the former vice-president under George W Bush. It’s also true that both Cheneys, in different ways, played a role in marginalizing the Republican party’s once-robust moderate wing, and that the party’s resulting monolithic ideological rigidity made it ripe for Trump’s authoritarian-populist takeover. But in this moment of national crisis, the critical factor on which a politician must be judged is his or her commitment to liberal democracy. It’s irrelevant that the leading candidate to replace Cheney as conference chair, Representative Elise Stefanik of New York, once had a reputation for moderation and bipartisanship. She now endorses Trump’s massive lie of a stolen election, and that negates anything else she has ever stood for. I hope that Americans from both sides of our widening partisan divide who share a common interest in preserving democracy can come to see the necessity of uniting around that principle, at least, before it’s too late. Geoffrey Kabaservice is the director of political studies at the Niskanen Center in Washington, as well as the author of Rule and Ruin: The Downfall of Moderation and the Destruction of the Republican Party
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention on Friday updated its public COVID-19 guidance to explicitly state that the coronavirus can be transmitted via aerosols — smaller respiratory particles that can float — that are inhaled at a distance greater than six feet from an infected person. The risk is higher while indoors, bringing ventilation practices to the forefront. The new language marks a change from the federal health agency's previous stance that transmission of the virus typically occurs through "close contact, not airborne transmission." Infectious disease experts have warned that the CDC and the World Health Organization (which has also updated its guidance) were overlooking evidence of airborne transmission during the pandemic, The New York Times notes, and some have stressed the need for the CDC to strengthen its recommendations for preventing exposure to aerosolized virus, especially in indoor workplaces like meatpacking plants. Good ventilation should be one of the primary things to focus on, Dr. David Michaels, an epidemiologist at George Washington School of Public Health and the head of the Occupation and Safety Health Administration during the Obama administration, told the Times. Dr. Linsey Marr, an aerosol expert at Virginia Tech, explained that "if you're in a poorly ventilated environment, virus is going to build up in the air, and everyone who's in that room is going to be exposed." Sociologist Zeynep Tufekci, who has long been pushing for such a change, called it "one of the most crucial scientific advancements of the pandemic" that should provide a lot of clarity about what is and isn't safe going forward. Read her Twitter thread on the issue here and learn more at The New York Times. The WHO just updated its page on how COVID-19 transmits. Those few sentences on aerosols represent one of the most crucial scientific advances of the pandemic. My NYT piece on the century-long history of the error, the year of delay—and what it means now. https://t.co/B9y2Mf6LC7 pic.twitter.com/3b5K650nB4 — zeynep tufekci (@zeynep) May 7, 2021 More stories from theweek.comThe secret truth of the student debt crisis5 brutally funny cartoons about the GOP's shunning of Liz CheneyMexico's most popular sandwich