fortune gems v1.0.0.0.apk
Violence that engulfed Mozambique after the country's highest court confirmed ruling Frelimo party presidential candidate Daniel Chapo as the winner of disputed Oct. 9 elections killed at least 21 people, including two police officers, authorities said Tuesday. Mozambique Interior Minister Pascoal Ronda told a news conference in Maputo late Tuesday that a wave of violence and looting was sparked by the court's announcement a day earlier. He said it was led by mostly youthful supporters of losing candidate Venancio Mondlane, who received 24% of the vote, second to Chapo, who got 65%. “From the preliminary survey, in the last 24 hours, 236 acts of violence were recorded throughout the national territory that resulted in 21 deaths, of which two members of the Police of the Republic of Mozambique also died," Ronda said. He said 13 civilians and 12 police were injured. Ronda said 25 vehicles were set on fire, including two police vehicles. He added that 11 police subunits and a penitentiary were attacked and vandalized and 86 inmates were freed. Tensions were high in the country ahead of the The Constitutional Council ruling on Monday and violent protests started immediately after the announcement was made. Footage circulating on various social media platforms showed protesters burning and looting shops in the capital Maputo and the city of Beira, where some city officials were reported to have fled the city. Mondlane has called for a “shutdown” starting Friday but violence in the country has already escalated and the situation remained tense in the capital on Tuesday night following a day of violence and looting by protesters. The country of 34 million people has been on edge since the Oct. 9 general elections. Mondlane’s supporters, mostly hundreds of thousands of young people, have since taken to the streets, and have been met by gunfire from security forces. This brings to more than 150 the number of people who have died from post-election violence since the initial results were announced by the country's electoral body.
Article content Donald Trump says he had a “very productive meeting” with Justin Trudeau amid the threat of harsh trade tariffs the U.S. president-elect announced last Monday. Recommended Videos The Prime Minister jetted to the Sunshine State on Friday night to attend a dinner at Mar-a-Lago in Palm Beach, where Trump’s transition team has set up shop. However, following the meeting, it was not made clear from Trump that his suggested 25% tariff on goods imported from Canada would be off the table once he takes office for a second term in January. In a Truth Social post on Saturday , Trump said both countries agreed to work together on the drug crisis and illegal immigration at the American border. “I just had a very productive meeting with Prime Minister Justin Trudeau of Canada, where we discussed many important topics that will require both countries to work together to address, like the fentanyl and drug crisis that has decimated so many lives as a result of illegal immigration, fair trade deals that do not jeopardize American workers, and the massive trade deficit the U.S. has with Canada,” he wrote. Trump warned that his administration will take immediate action to protect its citizens from toxic drugs coming across the border, which has led to “death and hardship” across the U.S. “I made it very clear that the United States will no longer sit idly by as our citizens become victims to the scourge of this drug epidemic, caused mainly by the drug cartels, and fentanyl pouring in from China,” he wrote, adding Trudeau has made a commitment to help the U.S. end the “terrible devastation” for American families. Trump also said he and Trudeau spoke about energy, trade and the Arctic. “All are vital issues that I will be addressing on my first days back in office,” Trump wrote. Trudeau released a short statement on social media hours later, thanking Trump for hosting him. “Thanks for dinner last night, President Trump,” the Prime Minister wrote on X alongside a photo of both leaders sitting at a dinner table. “I look forward to the work we can do together, again.” Thanks for dinner last night, President Trump. I look forward to the work we can do together, again. pic.twitter.com/lAWFMTtQt7 Trudeau told the press gathered outside his West Palm Beach hotel on Saturday that he had “an excellent conversation” with Trump, but he didn’t elaborate on any details of the meeting. According to Bloomberg, Trudeau’s delegation included Public Safety Minister Dominic LeBlanc and Chief of Staff Katie Telford. Attending the dinner with Trump were incoming Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, incoming Interior Secretary Doug Burgum and incoming National Security Advisor Michael Waltz. Last Monday, Trump promised to charge Canada and Mexico a 25% trade tariff on all products coming into the U.S. once he takes office on Jan. 20 to address the flow of migrants and drugs that cross the border. “This tariff will remain in effect until such time as drugs, in particular fentanyl, and all illegal aliens stop this invasion of our country,” he wrote on Truth Social. “Both Mexico and Canada have the absolute right and power to easily solve this long-simmering problem. We hereby demand that they use this power, and until such time that they do, it is time for them to pay a very big price.”The work trends that dominated the headlines in 2024Kentucky quarterback Brock Vandagriff is retiring from football with one season of eligibility left, the Lexington-Herald Leader reported Sunday. The publication said the school confirmed Vandagriff's retirement. Vandagriff didn't play in the Wildcats' season finale against Louisville. He passed for 1,593 yards, 10 touchdowns and eight interceptions in 11 games this season. Kentucky has added former Incarnate Word signal-caller Zach Calzada out of the transfer portal since the end of the season. Calzada also was the starting quarterback in 2021 for Texas A&M and the 2025 season will be his seventh as a college player. Vandagriff was a five-star recruit in the 2021 class who initially committed to Oklahoma before flipping and choosing Georgia. However, he didn't get much playing time in three seasons with the Bulldogs with Stetson Bennett and Carson Beck ahead of him. He chose to transfer following the 2023 season. This season, Vandagriff was benched on two occasions and only topped 200 passing yards twice. He had a good chance at a third 200-yard outing on Nov. 2 when he had 123 midway through the third quarter before getting knocked out of the 28-18 loss to then-No. 7 Tennessee due to a concussion. Cutter Boley started the 41-14 loss to Louisville. Another quarterback, Gavin Wimsatt, entered the transfer portal after throwing four interceptions in 39 attempts this season. --Field Level MediaRussia, which initially denied the presence of North Korean troops on its soil, has finally acknowledged their deployment. During a press conference at the BRICS summit on the 24th of last month, Russian President Vladimir Putin indirectly confirmed reports of North Korean troop dispatches by saying, "What we do with North Korea is our business." Additionally, on the 1st, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov expressed gratitude to North Korean Foreign Minister Choe Son Hui in Moscow, highlighting the "very close relationship" between Russian and North Korean special services. With North Korea's involvement on the Russian battlefield now clear, the international community warns of the potential risks this development brings. North Korea has reportedly dispatched around 15,000 troops to Russia, seeking to secure vast amounts of foreign currency and advanced military technology in exchange for their soldiers' lives. The Kim regime aims to acquire everything from stealth fighters and advanced missiles to reconnaissance satellites and even nuclear submarines, all in pursuit of modernizing North Korea's military. This deployment may also have been deemed essential for responding jointly with Russia to the United States and South Korea, and ultimately, Kim Jong Un is looking to sustain his regime through Russian support. While the Kim regime demands loyalty and sacrifices from the troops dispatched, the reality is far bleaker. Many of the North Korean soldiers on Russian battlefields are from the so-called "Jangmadang generation," raised amid economic hardship and a reliance on markets, with little to no government assistance. These young people, forcibly conscripted, now find themselves in a foreign land, risking their lives in a war that's not their own. There is significant discontent among these soldiers. Reports indicate that the North Korean government receives about $2,000 per month per soldier sent to Russia, yet this money goes directly to Kim Jong Un. If this compensation were used to support their families, it might inspire some willingness to fight. But given that all their earnings are pocketed by Kim Jong Un, what incentive do they have to risk their lives sincerely? The reality for North Korean soldiers on the Russian front is one of unending fatigue, isolation in a foreign land, and a brutal fight for survival. The Kim regime forces them to "serve the country," yet this is simply a means of ensuring their own survival. Now, these soldiers face a momentous opportunity to break free from the exploitation disguised as patriotism and choose a path toward personal freedom. Choosing Freedom Over Loyalty to Kim Jong Un For the North Korean soldiers deployed to Russia, this foreign battlefield presents an unprecedented opportunity to escape the oppressive regime and seek a new life. They are not mere pawns for Kim Jong Un; as individuals, they can think freely and choose a life where they take control of their own destinies. The future promised by Kim Jong Un offers nothing but a perilous battlefield abroad. Moreover, it's known that Kim's regime has forcibly relocated the families of deployed soldiers to remote mountain areas to keep the deployment secret. Only by leaving behind this injustice and choosing their path can they truly experience the value of freedom. One's life should not be wagered on hollow loyalty to Kim Jong Un. Returning to North Korea only means facing forced labor in mines and rural areas after a 10-year military service. Only in a free country can they unlock their potential and uphold their dignity. Choosing defection would also open a path for their families in North Korea to someday experience freedom and hope. The Courage to Defect: A Choice for Freedom and Peace Defection is not just an act of escaping North Korea's system; it's a courageous step toward a new future. Though it involves risks, defection offers freedom, peace, and security for one's future. One person's courageous choice can challenge the oppression and injustice of North Korea's regime, inspiring new possibilities for others. The international community stands ready to support North Korean soldiers who choose to defect, ensuring their safety and providing programs to help them adapt to a new environment. With vocational training, psychological counselling, and social integration support, defectors are empowered to start a new life. For North Korean soldiers on the Russian front, life itself is more important than loyalty to Kim Jong Un's regime. As someone who has chosen a free life, I urge you: "Choose your own life and leave Kim's regime in pursuit of true freedom and peace!" (The writer is World Institute for North Korea Studies Director Chung Eui-sung, a North Korean defector)
UnitedHealth CEO Brian Thompson was killed in a targeted shooting outside a Hilton hotel in Midtown Manhattan on December 4, 2024, when he was about to speak at an investor conference. While mourning and preoccupation spread among economic and political elites, a mix of celebration and snark dominated social media commentary . There has been an outpouring of empathy for the perpetrator, shirts with the murder scene printed on it, and even a UnitedHealth CEO shooter look-alike contest in Washington Square Park. When a community of internet sleuths was asked to collaborate with the police to find him, they reportedly responded “Absolutely the F– not”. This reaction brings to light a widespread and deep-seated contempt for health insurance companies, who are single-handedly responsible for hundreds of thousands of cases of premature death, disability, and bankruptcy a year. It is well known that the U.S. healthcare system is the most dysfunctional among high-income countries. Not only do the outcomes pale in comparison to countries with similar levels of economic development (and many less-developed countries), but most notably, the U.S. spends twice as much on healthcare. It is important to note, however, that it is private spending that makes the difference: premiums, copays, deductibles, and other out-of-pocket costs. A study by Papanicolas and colleagues found that, whereas public health spending in Germany, France, or the UK in 2016 were comparable to that in the United States, their private health spending was only about 30 percent of their public spending. In the United States, in contrast, private spending was as high as public spending. At the same time, the U.S. had worse outcomes than any of the other 10 OCDE countries in life expectancy, maternal mortality, infant mortality, uncontrolled asthma, and more. Why does healthcare in the United States consume so many resources and deliver such ghastly results? The same study points to a unique characteristic of U.S. healthcare: it is the only system where the main source of basic care is private insurance, whether through employer-based or individual plans. This is key to understanding the paradox between poor outcomes and extraordinary spending. If anything characterizes U.S. healthcare, it is extreme commodification: at every step of the way, there is a private actor making a profit. It resembles a government-sponsored hunting reserve, where a number of predatory industries (private hospitals, Big Pharma, and pharmacy benefit managers) prey on defenseless individuals. Each of these predatory industries takes a cut, inflating the final bill, and at the very center are private health insurance companies, connecting patients with all other players in the health system. The reason why private health insurance plays such a central role in our healthcare system is government policy. It is only because the state does not provide direct access to healthcare, as it does in every other industrialized country, that private companies can play this role. And the reason why this is the case in the U.S. is the relative weakness of the working class at the time when social welfare policy was consolidated. When President Franklin Delano Roosevelt rolled out Social Security, unemployment insurance, and massive public works programs as part of the New Deal, a public health insurance program was left out of the final bill, largely acquiescing to resistance from the American Medical Association (AMA). Notably, however, the AFL and later the AFL-CIO historically refused to fight for government-sponsored healthcare. AFL national secretary Samuel Gompers had explicitly opposed it in the early 20th century on the grounds that union-negotiated benefits were a major incentive for workers to join a union. A similar logic drove national union leaders to give only formal support to a universal health system in the 1940s but do little to wrest that right against the organized opposition of the AMA, the American Hospitals Association, and a small but growing new actor: insurance companies. Without a labor party that could represent the interests of the working class (however distorted this translation might have been in other countries), and with a labor movement that was quickly embracing “business unionism” (treating unions as service providers rather than fighting organizations), the prospects of winning universal healthcare looked grim. These were the social and political forces behind the push for universal healthcare in European countries. As a result, a new proposal that would have introduced public universal health insurance, the Wagner-Murray-Dingell bill, was defeated in Congress in 1945. In the meantime, a tectonic shift was taking place. Since the National War Labor Board froze wages during the Second World War, companies began to offer health insurance as a tactic to attract employees. In 1954, a change in the tax code made employers’ health insurance contributions tax-deductible (a provision that is still in place today) further establishing private insurance’s prominent role in the health system. Between 1940 and 1960, the percentage of people covered by private health insurance skyrocketed from 10 percent to 70 percent. At the beginning, however, the health insurance market was dominated by not-for-profit companies: Blue Cross and Blue Shield, With the former covering hospital services, and the latter physician care. The “Blues” were born out of rising healthcare costs as medical care became more complex and successful in dealing with health problems and became extremely popular, for good reason. The Blues were organized on a principle of solidarity: they accepted everyone, and they charged the same premiums to all individuals, no matter how sick or how old. The increasing need for health insurance and the tax benefits provided by the government with little regulation created fertile ground for profit-making. For-profit insurance companies, such as Cigna and Aetna, grew rapidly in the 1970s and 1980s through aggressive marketing and leveraging their close ties with businesses. The lack of regulation allowed them to deny coverage to high-risk individuals and focus on healthier people, and this in turn allowed them to charge lower premiums while still maintaining high profits. It didn’t take long until the Blues, burdened with the most sick and still committed to inclusion and solidarity principles were driven out of business. When the Blues went bankrupt, private insurance companies cannibalized them They bought their state brands (e.g. Texas Blue Cross) and kept their name with the hope of squeezing some gains from the good reputation attached to them. With the conversion of the Blues into for-profit corporations, a large share of the premiums went into executives’ and investors’ pockets: the percentage of revenues allocated to paying for medical care fell from 95 percent of premiums to 80 percent. Health insurance’s business model is straightforward: given an agreed upon premium, all medical expenses they cover represent a loss for the company. In fact, the percentage spent on healthcare is explicitly called the “medical loss ratio.” In order to reduce this cost, they have engineered a number of strategies. Up until the early 2000s, they continued to deny insurance to high-risk individuals: anyone with “pre-existing conditions” such as diabetes or a kidney disease, could be rejected. Although outright insurance denial is no longer allowed since the passage of the Affordable Care Act (ACA), the next favorite strategy is very much in place today: coverage denial. Michael Moore’s documentary Sicko made a splash in 2007 by exposing health insurance companies’ modus operandi. When a beneficiary incurs costly treatments, like cancer therapies or surgery, an army of bureaucrats is ready to scrutinize the case and find causes for denial — sometimes before, but oftentimes after care was provided. The film shows how medical reviewers working for the company, in charge of ultimately approving or denying care, were given bonuses if they reached high denial rates. Dr. Linda Peeno, former medical reviewer at Humana, is featured giving testimony before Congress in 1996 where she explains that she “denied a man a necessary operation that would have saved his life and thus caused his death.” By doing this, Peeno saved the company half a million dollars, and was promoted to medical executive, securing a six-figure salary. Another former insurance company employee explains, “It’s not unintentional, it’s not a mistake, it’s not an oversight. You’re not slipping through the cracks. Somebody made that crack and swept you towards it. And the intent is to maximize profits.” That is the bottom line: To maximize profits, health insurance companies do anything they can to deny care. But this is only the most brazen tactic in a vast repertoire. Health insurance companies have an even more insidious way to reduce healthcare costs: discouraging insurance holders from seeking care. The most effective way to do this is to penalize them every time they do. Copays, coinsurance, deductibles — these are all cost-sharing mechanisms justified as necessary provisions to avoid “overuse.” Yet “overuse” is a marginal problem in any healthcare system and it is overblown both by the health insurance industry and by pro-market research groups like the RAND Corporation to justify market-friendly restrictions. The main reason these cost-sharing mechanisms exist is to discourage individuals from seeking care. The second reason is to unload part of the cost on the patient. There is overwhelming evidence that when people face copays and coinsurance, they forgo medical visits even if they dearly need them. Of course, lower-income families are hurt the most. Many of them are forced to seek care only when they think it’s a potentially serious condition — the problem is that, in most cases, it is the healthcare professional who can tell whether a situation is severe, life-threatening, or nothing to worry about. This, along with the millions of people who are still uninsured, is a key explanation for embarrassing U.S. health indicators. Another way health insurance companies cut costs is by restricting the network of providers under coverage. Out-of-network care may be outright denied, or may be subject to steep copayments. In certain specialties, such as mental health, finding an in-network provider may prove nearly impossible. This is because insurance companies have recently resorted to “ ghost networks ,” where most of the professionals listed in their directories are no longer taking patients, have dropped the insurance years ago, or don’t even exist. It is worth noting that, despite the overwhelming evidence showing the bankruptcy of our health system, up to these days, the AMA has not endorsed any form of universal healthcare, whether under the label of a single-payer national program or Medicare for All. Most tragically, the AFL-CIO and most major national unions have refused to endorse, much less push for, universal healthcare. This is a great gift to employers, who love to have the power to give or take away workers’ insurance. They leverage this power by threatening to fire (and thus leave uninsured) employees involved in union drives, and they effectively use this power when they suspend health insurance to striking workers, as Boeing did this year. The ACA was an attempt to tweak the healthcare system to address its most dystopian aspects (like those featured in Moore’s film) without changing any of the fundamental problems. With regards to health insurance, it introduced minor regulations in exchange for a big boost. The regulations were simple: insurance companies could no longer deny care based on preexisting conditions, and they were also prevented from charging an outrageous amount on premiums based on the individual’s risk (which is almost equivalent to denying insurance). Why did they accept this change? Because they were given two generous gifts. The most obvious one was the “individual mandate,” a provision by which every adult individual was required to buy health insurance, or they would face a penalty. This was a boon for insurance companies, since most people who choose to be uninsured are young and healthy. The second gift were the premium subsidies, which were presented as a benefit for individuals buying health insurance directly in the marketplace (as opposed to having it through their jobs), but which were in fact a direct flow of federal cash to the insurance industry. There is a less-known provision in the ACA that had unintended consequences. In an effort to reduce overhead costs, the bill mandated that 80 to 85 percent of premiums be spent on medical care, effectively capping profits rates for the health insurance industry. This pushed insurance companies to “vertically integrate,” that is, acquire clinics, doctors’ practices, and other providers to increase their profit margins. If the insurance part of a health conglomerate can’t collect more than a 20 percent in profits, now they can pay themselves handsomely for the services they cover, and reap the profits at the end of the pipeline. This change accelerated a trend of mergers and consolidations that was already underway. UnitedHealth Group has been a pioneer in this practice. Over the past decade, its prescription and medical services arm, Optum, has steadily increased its share of revenue and now accounts for more than half of the company’s earnings. Apart from being one of the largest pharmacy benefit managers, Optum owns or has a direct relationship with over 90,000 doctors’ offices across the country. Other insurance companies and pharmacies have followed suit, in a frenzy of consolidations that has few precedents. The result is a higher consolidation of a handful of monopolistic health conglomerates that colonize new spheres of healthcare, set prices, restrict coverage, and render the whole system more opaque to increase their profits at the expense of our health. To say that U.S. healthcare is in crisis would be a serious understatement. The American people have learned to naturalize a deeply corrupt, inhumane, and deleterious system that allows business people to reap lofty profits even if it brings death, disability, and pain onto millions of families every day. This is why the murder of Brian Thompson is being read by so many as an act of social justice, or revenge of the oppressed. The incident, and the massive display of support for the shooter, are forcing the country to reckon with one of the worst aspects of American capitalism. Our best hope is that this conversation spreads among union members and labor activists. The bureaucratic union leadership will not willingly take up this demand, but the rank and file can organize to force this onto the agenda, vote on a concrete plan of action, and build coordination with other unions. The only chance to overcome the powerful lobby of the medical industrial complex is if the demand for universal healthcare is taken up by a revitalized and militant labor movement, one that can set the record straight, refuse to settle for employer-based benefits, and shows the hegemonic potential of the working class by securing free healthcare for all. Capitalism Health Care Medicare for All
STANFORD, Calif. — Andrew Luck is returning to Stanford in hopes of turning around a struggling football program that he once helped become a national power. Athletic director Bernard Muir announced Saturday that Luck has been hired as the general manager of the Stanford football team, tasked with overseeing all aspects of the program that just finished a 3-9 season under coach Troy Taylor. “I am a product of this university, of Nerd Nation; I love this place,” Luck said. “I believe deeply in Stanford’s unique approach to athletics and academics and the opportunity to help drive our program back to the top. Coach Taylor has the team pointed in the right direction, and I cannot wait to work with him, the staff, and the best, brightest, and toughest football players in the world.” Luck has kept a low profile since his surprise retirement from the NFL at age 29 when he announced in August 2019 that he was leaving the Indianapolis Colts and pro football. Cardinal alum Andrew Luck, left, watches a Feb. 2 game between Stanford and Southern California on Feb. 2 in Stanford, Calif. Josie Lepe, AP File In his new role, Luck will work with Taylor on recruiting and roster management, and with athletic department and university leadership on fundraising, alumni relations, sponsorships, student-athlete support and stadium experience. “Andrew’s credentials as a student-athlete speak for themselves, and in addition to his legacy of excellence, he also brings a deep understanding of the college football landscape and community, and an unparalleled passion for Stanford football,” Muir said. “I could not think of a person better qualified to guide our football program through a continuously evolving landscape, and I am thrilled that Andrew has agreed to join our team. This change represents a very different way of operating our program and competing in an evolving college football landscape.” Luck was one of the players who helped elevate Stanford into a West Coast powerhouse for several years. He helped end a seven-year bowl drought in his first season as starting quarterback in 2009 under coach Jim Harbaugh and led the Cardinal to back-to-back BCS bowl berths his final two seasons, when he was the Heisman Trophy runner-up both seasons. Stanford quarterback Andrew Luck throws a pass during the first quarter of a Nov. 27, 2010 game against Oregon State in Stanford, Calif. Paul Sakuma, AP File That was part of a seven-year stretch in which Stanford posted the fourth-best record in the nation at 76-18 and qualified for five BCS bowl berths under Harbaugh and David Shaw. But the Cardinal have struggled for success in recent years and haven't won more than four games in a season since 2018. Stanford just finished its fourth straight 3-9 campaign in Taylor's second season since replacing Shaw. The Cardinal are the only power conference team to lose at least nine games in each of the past four seasons. Luck graduated from Stanford with a bachelor’s degree in architectural design and returned after retiring from the NFL to get his master’s degree in education in 2023. He was picked No. 1 overall by Indianapolis in the 2012 draft and made four Pro Bowls and was AP Comeback Player of the Year in 2018 in his brief but successful NFL career. Before the 2023 National Football League season started, it seemed inevitable that Bill Belichick would end his career as the winningest head coach in league history. He had won six Super Bowls with the New England Patriots and 298 regular-season games, plus 31 playoff games, across his career. Then the 2023 season happened. Belichick's Patriots finished 4-13, the franchise's worst record since 1992. At the end of the year, Belichick and New England owner Robert Kraft agreed to part ways. And now, during the 2024 season, Belichick is on the sideline. He's 26 wins from the #1 spot, a mark he'd reach in little more than two seasons if he maintained his .647 career winning percentage. Will he ascend the summit? It's hard to tell. Belichick would be 73 if he graced the sidelines next season—meaning he'd need to coach until at least 75 to break the all-time mark. Only one other NFL coach has ever helmed a team at age 73: Romeo Crennel in 2020 for the Houston Texans. With Belichick's pursuit of history stalled, it's worth glancing at the legends who have reached the pinnacle of coaching success. Who else stands among the 10 winningest coaches in NFL history? Stacker ranked the coaches with the most all-time regular-season wins using data from Pro Football Reference . These coaches have combined for 36 league championships, which represents 31.6% of all championships won throughout the history of pro football. To learn who made the list, keep reading. You may also like: Ranking the biggest NFL Draft busts of the last 30 years Bettmann/Contributor // Getty Images - Seasons coached: 23 - Years active: 1969-91 - Record: 193-148-1 - Winning percentage: .566 - Championships: 4 Chuck Noll's Pittsburgh Steelers were synonymous with success in the 1970s. Behind his defense, known as the Steel Curtain, and offensive stars, including Terry Bradshaw, Franco Harris, and Lynn Swann, Noll led the squad to four Super Bowl victories from 1974 to 1979. Noll's Steelers remain the lone team to win four Super Bowls in six years, though Andy Reid and Kansas City could equal that mark if they win the Lombardi Trophy this season. Noll was elected to the Pro Football Hall of Fame in 1993, two years after retiring. His legacy of coaching success has carried on in Pittsburgh—the club has had only two coaches (Bill Cowher and Mike Tomlin) since Noll retired. Focus on Sport // Getty Images - Seasons coached: 25 - Years active: 1946-62, '68-75 - Record: 213-104-9 - Winning percentage: .672 - Championships: 7 The only coach on this list to pilot a college team, Paul Brown, reached the pro ranks after a three-year stint at Ohio State and two years with the Navy during World War II. He guided the Cleveland Browns—named after Brown, their first coach—to four straight titles in the fledgling All-America Football Conference. After the league folded, the ballclub moved to the NFL in 1950, and Cleveland continued its winning ways, with Brown leading the team to championships in '50, '54, and '55. He was fired in 1963 but returned in 1968 as the co-founder and coach of the Cincinnati Bengals. His other notable accomplishments include helping to invent the face mask and breaking pro football's color barrier . Bettmann/Contributor // Getty Images - Seasons coached: 33 - Years active: 1921-53 - Record: 226-132-22 - Winning percentage: .631 - Championships: 6 An early stalwart of the NFL, Curly Lambeau spent 29 years helming the Green Bay Packers before wrapping up his coaching career with two-year stints with the Chicago Cardinals and Washington. His Packers won titles across three decades, including the league's first three-peat from 1929-31. Notably, he experienced only one losing season during his first 27 years with Green Bay, cementing his legacy of consistent success. Born in Green Bay, Lambeau co-founded the Packers and played halfback on the team from 1919-29. He was elected to the Hall of Fame as a coach and owner in 1963, two years before his death. You may also like: Countries with the most active NFL players Bettmann/Contributor // Getty Images - Seasons coached: 29 - Years active: 1960-88 - Record: 250-162-6 - Winning percentage: .607 - Championships: 2 The first head coach of the Dallas Cowboys, Tom Landry held the position for his entire 29-year tenure as an NFL coach. The Cowboys were especially dominant in the 1970s when they made five Super Bowls and won the big game twice. Landry was known for coaching strong all-around squads and a unit that earned the nickname the "Doomsday Defense." Between 1966 and 1985, Landry and his Cowboys enjoyed 20 straight seasons with a winning record. He was elected to the Hall of Fame in 1990. Focus on Sport // Getty Images - Seasons coached: 26 - Years active: 1999-present - Record: 267-145-1 - Winning percentage: .648 - Championships: 3 The only active coach in the top 10, Andy Reid has posted successful runs with both the Philadelphia Eagles and Kansas City. After reaching the Super Bowl once in 14 years with the Eagles, Reid ratcheted things up with K.C., winning three titles since 2019. As back-to-back defending champions, Reid and Co. are looking this season to become the first franchise to three-peat in the Super Bowl era and the third to do so in NFL history after the Packers of 1929-31 and '65-67. Time will tell if Reid and his offensive wizardry can lead Kansas City to that feat. Jamie Squire // Getty Images - Seasons coached: 29 - Years active: 1991-95, 2000-23 - Record: 302-165 - Winning percentage: .647 - Championships: 6 The most successful head coach of the 21st century, Bill Belichick first coached the Cleveland Browns before taking over the New England Patriots in 2000. With the Pats, Belichick combined with quarterback Tom Brady to win six Super Bowls in 18 years. Belichick and New England split after last season when the Patriots went 4-13—the worst record of Belichick's career. His name has swirled around potential coaching openings , but nothing has come of it. Belichick has remained in the media spotlight with his regular slot on the "Monday Night Football" ManningCast. Tom Pennington // Getty Images - Seasons coached: 40 - Years active: 1920-29, '33-42, '46-55, '58-67 - Record: 318-148-31 - Winning percentage: .682 - Championships: 6 George Halas was the founder and longtime owner of the Chicago Bears and coached the team across four separate stints. Nicknamed "Papa Bear," he built the ballclub into one of the NFL's premier franchises behind players such as Bronko Nagurski and Sid Luckman. Halas also played for the team, competing as a player-coach in the 1920s. The first coach to study opponents via game film, he was once a baseball player and even made 12 appearances as a member of the New York Yankees in 1919. He was inducted into the Hall of Fame in 1963 as both a coach and owner. Bettmann/Contributor // Getty Images - Seasons coached: 33 - Years active: 1963-95 - Record: 328-156-6 - Winning percentage: .677 - Championships: 2 The winningest head coach in NFL history is Don Shula, who first coached the Baltimore Colts (losing Super Bowl III to Joe Namath and the New York Jets) for seven years before leading the Miami Dolphins for 26 seasons. With the Fins, Shula won back-to-back Super Bowls in 1972 and 1973, a run that included a 17-0 season—the only perfect campaign in NFL history. He also coached quarterback great Dan Marino in the 1980s and '90s, but the pair made it to a Super Bowl just once. Shula was inducted into the Hall of Fame in 1997. Story editing by Mike Taylor. Copy editing by Robert Wickwire. Photo selection by Lacy Kerrick. You may also like: The 5 biggest upsets of the 2023-24 NFL regular season Bettmann/Contributor // Getty ImagesShopping on Temu can feel like playing an arcade game. Instead of using a joystick-controlled claw to grab a toy, visitors to the online marketplace maneuver their computer mouses or cellphone screens to browse colorful gadgets, accessories and trinkets with prices that look too good to refuse. A pop-up spinning wheel offers the chance to win a coupon. Rotating captions warn that a less than $2 camouflage print balaclava and a $1.23 skeleton hand back scratcher are “Almost sold out.” A flame symbol indicates a $9.69 plush cat print hoodie is selling fast. A timed-down selection of discounted items adds to the sense of urgency. Pages from the Shein website, left, and from the Temu site, right. Welcome to the new online world of impulse buying, a place of guilty pleasures where the selection is vast, every day is Cyber Monday, and an instant dopamine hit is always just a click away. By all accounts, we’re living in an accelerating age for consumerism, one that Temu, which is owned by the Chinese e-commerce company PDD Holdings, and Shein, its fierce rival , supercharged with social media savvy and an interminable assortment of cheap goods, most shipped directly from merchants in China based on real-time demand. The business models of the two platforms, coupled with avalanches of digital or influencer advertising, have enabled them to give Western retailers a run for their money this holiday shopping season. A Christmas tree ornament purchased on Temu. Software company Salesforce said it expects roughly one in five online purchases in the U.S., the United Kingdom, Australia and Canada to be made through four online marketplaces based or founded in Asia: Shein, Temu, TikTok Shop — the e-commerce arm of video-sharing platform TikTok — and AliExpress. Analysts with Salesforce said they are expected to pull in roughly $160 billion in global sales outside of China. Most of the sales will go to Temu and Shein, a privately held company which is thought to lead the worldwide fast fashion market in revenue. Lisa Xiaoli Neville, a nonprofit manager who lives in Los Angeles, is sold on Shein. The bedroom of her home is stocked with jeans, shoes, press-on nails and other items from the ultra-fast fashion retailer, all of which she amassed after getting on the platform to buy a $2 pair of earrings she saw in a Facebook ad. Neville, 46, estimates she spends at least $75 a month on products from Shein. A $2 eggshell opener, a portable apple peeler and an apple corer, both costing less than $5, are among the quirky, single-use kitchen tools taking up drawer space. She acknowledges she doesn’t need them because she “doesn’t even cook like that.” Plus, she’s allergic to apples. “I won’t eat apples. It will kill me,” Neville said, laughing. “But I still want the coring thing.” Shein, now based in Singapore, uses some of the same web design features as Temu’s, such as pop-up coupons and ads, to persuade shoppers to keep clicking, but it appears a bit more restrained in its approach. Shein primarily targets young women through partnerships with social media influencers. Searching the company's name on video platforms turns up creators promoting Shein's Black Friday sales event and displaying the dozens of of trendy clothes and accessories they got for comparatively little money. But the Shein-focused content also includes videos of TikTokers saying they're embarrassed to admit they shopped there and critics lashing out at fans for not taking into account the environmental harms or potential labor abuses associated with products that are churned out and shipped worldwide at a speedy pace. Neville has already picked out holiday gifts for family and friends from the site. Most of the products in her online cart cost under $10, including graphic T-shirts she intends to buy for her son and jeans and loafers for her daughter. All told, she plans to spend about $200 on gifts, significantly less than $500 she used to shell out at other stores in prior years. “The visuals just make you want to spend more money,” she said, referring to the clothes on Shein's site. “They're very cheap and everything is just so cute.” Unlike Shein, Temu's appeal cuts across age groups and gender. The platform is the world’s second most-visited online shopping site, software company Similarweb reported in September. Customers go there looking for practical items like doormats and silly products like a whiskey flask shaped like a vintage cellphone from the 1990s. Temu advertised Black Friday bargains for some items at upwards of 70% off the recommended retail price. Making a purchase can quickly result in receiving dozens of emails offering free giveaways. The caveat: customers have to buy more products. Despite their rise, Temu and Shein have proven particularly ripe for pushback. Last year, a coalition of unnamed brands and organizations launched a campaign to oppose Shein in Washington. U.S. lawmakers also have raised the possibility that Temu is allowing goods made with forced labor to enter the country. More recently, the Biden administration put forward rules that would crack down on a trade rule known as the de minimis exception, which has allowed a lot of cheap products to come into the U.S. duty-free. President-elect Donald Trump is expected to slap high tariffs on goods from China, a move that would likely raise prices across the retail world. Both Shein and Temu have set up warehouses in the U.S. to speed up delivery times and help them better compete with Amazon, which is trying to erode their price advantage through a new storefront that also ships products directly from China. Get the latest local business news delivered FREE to your inbox weekly.
Former TCU quarterback Hauss Hejny has committed to join Oklahoma State out of the NCAA transfer portal, multiple media outlets reported Sunday. Hejny will see a familiar face in new Cowboys offensive coordinator Doug Meacham, who previously was with the Horned Frogs in various roles. Meacham also served on Oklahoma State's coaching staff from 2005-12. Hejny did not attempt a pass while playing in four games this season. He carried the ball 15 times for 65 yards. A four-star recruit out of Fort Worth (Texas) Aledo, Hejny will join redshirt junior Garret Rangel, redshirt sophomore Zane Flores and redshirt freshman Maealiuaki Smith as quarterbacks for the Cowboys next season. The Cowboys were 3-9 (0-9 Big 12) in the 2024 season. --Field Level Media
NoneJJ Redick highlights Lakers' thin margin for error
A Tennessee man is convicted of killing 2 at a high school basketball game in 2021Shopping on Temu can feel like playing an arcade game. Instead of using a joystick-controlled claw to grab a toy, visitors to the online marketplace maneuver their computer mouses or cellphone screens to browse colorful gadgets, accessories and trinkets with prices that look too good to refuse. A pop-up spinning wheel offers the chance to win a coupon. Rotating captions warn that a less than $2 camouflage print balaclava and a $1.23 skeleton hand back scratcher are “Almost sold out.” A flame symbol indicates a $9.69 plush cat print hoodie is selling fast. A timed-down selection of discounted items adds to the sense of urgency. Pages from the Shein website, left, and from the Temu site, right. Richard Drew, Associated Press Welcome to the new online world of impulse buying, a place of guilty pleasures where the selection is vast, every day is Cyber Monday, and an instant dopamine hit is always just a click away. People are also reading... By all accounts, we’re living in an accelerating age for consumerism, one that Temu, which is owned by the Chinese e-commerce company PDD Holdings, and Shein, its fierce rival, supercharged with social media savvy and an interminable assortment of cheap goods, most shipped directly from merchants in China based on real-time demand. The business models of the two platforms, coupled with avalanches of digital or influencer advertising, have enabled them to give Western retailers a run for their money this holiday shopping season. A Christmas tree ornament purchased on Temu. Haleluya Hadero, Associated Press Software company Salesforce said it expects roughly one in five online purchases in the U.S., the United Kingdom, Australia and Canada to be made through four online marketplaces based or founded in Asia: Shein, Temu, TikTok Shop — the e-commerce arm of video-sharing platform TikTok — and AliExpress. Analysts with Salesforce said they are expected to pull in roughly $160 billion in global sales outside of China. Most of the sales will go to Temu and Shein, a privately held company which is thought to lead the worldwide fast fashion market in revenue. Lisa Xiaoli Neville, a nonprofit manager who lives in Los Angeles, is sold on Shein. The bedroom of her home is stocked with jeans, shoes, press-on nails and other items from the ultra-fast fashion retailer, all of which she amassed after getting on the platform to buy a $2 pair of earrings she saw in a Facebook ad. Neville, 46, estimates she spends at least $75 a month on products from Shein. A $2 eggshell opener, a portable apple peeler and an apple corer, both costing less than $5, are among the quirky, single-use kitchen tools taking up drawer space. She acknowledges she doesn’t need them because she “doesn’t even cook like that.” Plus, she’s allergic to apples. “I won’t eat apples. It will kill me,” Neville said, laughing. “But I still want the coring thing.” Is it safe to shop on Temu? Here are 5 scams to avoid on the popular online shopping platform Listen now and subscribe: Apple Podcasts | Google Podcasts | Spotify | Stitcher | RSS Feed | SoundStack | All Of Our Podcasts Shein, now based in Singapore, uses some of the same web design features as Temu’s, such as pop-up coupons and ads, to persuade shoppers to keep clicking, but it appears a bit more restrained in its approach. Shein primarily targets young women through partnerships with social media influencers. Searching the company's name on video platforms turns up creators promoting Shein's Black Friday sales event and displaying the dozens of of trendy clothes and accessories they got for comparatively little money. But the Shein-focused content also includes videos of TikTokers saying they're embarrassed to admit they shopped there and critics lashing out at fans for not taking into account the environmental harms or potential labor abuses associated with products that are churned out and shipped worldwide at a speedy pace. Neville has already picked out holiday gifts for family and friends from the site. Most of the products in her online cart cost under $10, including graphic T-shirts she intends to buy for her son and jeans and loafers for her daughter. All told, she plans to spend about $200 on gifts, significantly less than $500 she used to shell out at other stores in prior years. “The visuals just make you want to spend more money,” she said, referring to the clothes on Shein's site. “They're very cheap and everything is just so cute.” Can AI chatbots make your holiday shopping easier? Unlike Shein, Temu's appeal cuts across age groups and gender. The platform is the world’s second most-visited online shopping site, software company Similarweb reported in September. Customers go there looking for practical items like doormats and silly products like a whiskey flask shaped like a vintage cellphone from the 1990s. Temu advertised Black Friday bargains for some items at upwards of 70% off the recommended retail price. Making a purchase can quickly result in receiving dozens of emails offering free giveaways. The caveat: customers have to buy more products. Despite their rise, Temu and Shein have proven particularly ripe for pushback. Last year, a coalition of unnamed brands and organizations launched a campaign to oppose Shein in Washington. U.S. lawmakers also have raised the possibility that Temu is allowing goods made with forced labor to enter the country. More recently, the Biden administration put forward rules that would crack down on a trade rule known as the de minimis exception, which has allowed a lot of cheap products to come into the U.S. duty-free. President-elect Donald Trump is expected to slap high tariffs on goods from China, a move that would likely raise prices across the retail world. Both Shein and Temu have set up warehouses in the U.S. to speed up delivery times and help them better compete with Amazon, which is trying to erode their price advantage through a new storefront that also ships products directly from China. The right book can inspire the young readers in your life, from picture books to YA novels Small, luxury foods are great as stocking stuffers or other gifts. Ideas for under $50 Game-changing holiday gifts for building fires, printing photos, watching birds and more 2024 Christmas TV Guide: When to watch Rudolph, Charlie Brown and other holiday favorites The business news you needJimmy Carter, the peanut farmer who won the presidency in the wake of the Watergate scandal and Vietnam War, endured humbling defeat after one tumultuous term and then redefined life after the White House as a global humanitarian, has died. He was 100 years old. The longest-lived American president died on Sunday, more than a year after entering hospice care , at his home in the small town of Plains, Georgia, where he and his wife, Rosalynn, who died at 96 in November 2023 , spent most of their lives, The Carter Center said. “Our founder, former U.S. President Jimmy Carter, passed away this afternoon in Plains, Georgia,” the center said in posting about his death on the social media platform X. It added in a statement that he died peacefully, surrounded by his family. x Our founder, former U.S. President Jimmy Carter, passed away this afternoon in Plains, Georgia. pic.twitter.com/aqYmcE9tXi — The Carter Center (@CarterCenter) December 29, 2024 Businessman, Navy officer, evangelist, politician, negotiator, author, woodworker, citizen of the world — Carter forged a path that still challenges political assumptions and stands out among the 45 men who reached the nation’s highest office. The 39th president leveraged his ambition with a keen intellect, deep religious faith and prodigious work ethic, conducting diplomatic missions into his 80s and building houses for the poor well into his 90s. “My faith demands — this is not optional — my faith demands that I do whatever I can, wherever I am, whenever I can, for as long as I can, with whatever I have to try to make a difference,” Carter once said. A moderate Democrat, Carter entered the 1976 presidential race as a little-known Georgia governor with a broad smile, outspoken Baptist mores and technocratic plans reflecting his education as an engineer. His no-frills campaign depended on public financing, and his promise not to deceive the American people resonated after Richard Nixon’s disgrace and U.S. defeat in southeast Asia. “If I ever lie to you, if I ever make a misleading statement, don’t vote for me. I would not deserve to be your president,” Carter repeated before narrowly beating Republican incumbent Gerald Ford, who had lost popularity pardoning Nixon. Carter governed amid Cold War pressures, turbulent oil markets and social upheaval over racism, women’s rights and America’s global role. His most acclaimed achievement in office was a Mideast peace deal that he brokered by keeping Egyptian President Anwar Sadat and Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin at the bargaining table for 13 days in 1978. That Camp David experience inspired the post-presidential center where Carter would establish so much of his legacy. Yet Carter’s electoral coalition splintered under double-digit inflation, gasoline lines and the 444-day hostage crisis in Iran. His bleakest hour came when eight Americans died in a failed hostage rescue in April 1980, helping to ensure his landslide defeat to Republican Ronald Reagan. Carter acknowledged in his 2020 “White House Diary” that he could be “micromanaging” and “excessively autocratic,” complicating dealings with Congress and the federal bureaucracy. He also turned a cold shoulder to Washington’s news media and lobbyists, not fully appreciating their influence on his political fortunes. “It didn’t take us long to realize that the underestimation existed, but by that time we were not able to repair the mistake,” Carter told historians in 1982, suggesting that he had “an inherent incompatibility” with Washington insiders. Carter insisted his overall approach was sound and that he achieved his primary objectives — to “protect our nation’s security and interests peacefully” and “enhance human rights here and abroad” — even if he fell spectacularly short of a second term. Ignominious defeat, though, allowed for renewal. The Carters founded The Carter Center in 1982 as a first-of-its-kind base of operations, asserting themselves as international peacemakers and champions of democracy, public health and human rights. “I was not interested in just building a museum or storing my White House records and memorabilia,” Carter wrote in a memoir published after his 90th birthday. “I wanted a place where we could work.” That work included easing nuclear tensions in North and South Korea, helping to avert a U.S. invasion of Haiti and negotiating cease-fires in Bosnia and Sudan. By 2022, The Carter Center had declared at least 113 elections in Latin America, Asia and Africa to be free or fraudulent. Recently, the center began monitoring U.S. elections as well. Carter’s stubborn self-assuredness and even self-righteousness proved effective once he was unencumbered by the Washington order, sometimes to the point of frustrating his successors . He went “where others are not treading,” he said, to places like Ethiopia, Liberia and North Korea, where he secured the release of an American who had wandered across the border in 2010. “I can say what I like. I can meet whom I want. I can take on projects that please me and reject the ones that don’t,” Carter said. He announced an arms-reduction-for-aid deal with North Korea without clearing the details with Bill Clinton’s White House. He openly criticized President George W. Bush for the 2003 invasion of Iraq. He also criticized America’s approach to Israel with his 2006 book “Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid.” And he repeatedly countered U.S. administrations by insisting North Korea should be included in international affairs, a position that most aligned Carter with Republican President Donald Trump. Among the center’s many public health initiatives, Carter vowed to eradicate the guinea worm parasite during his lifetime, and nearly achieved it: Cases dropped from millions in the 1980s to nearly a handful. With hardhats and hammers, the Carters also built homes with Habitat for Humanity. The Nobel committee’s 2002 Peace Prize cites his “untiring effort to find peaceful solutions to international conflicts, to advance democracy and human rights, and to promote economic and social development.” Carter should have won it alongside Sadat and Begin in 1978, the chairman added. Carter accepted the recognition saying there was more work to be done. “The world is now, in many ways, a more dangerous place,” he said. “The greater ease of travel and communication has not been matched by equal understanding and mutual respect.” Carter’s globetrotting took him to remote villages where he met little “Jimmy Carters,” so named by admiring parents. But he spent most of his days in the same one-story Plains house — expanded and guarded by Secret Service agents — where they lived before he became governor. He regularly taught Sunday School lessons at Maranatha Baptist Church until his mobility declined and the coronavirus pandemic raged. Those sessions drew visitors from around the world to the small sanctuary where Carter will receive his final send-off after a state funeral at Washington’s National Cathedral. The common assessment that he was a better ex-president than president rankled Carter and his allies. His prolific post-presidency gave him a brand above politics, particularly for Americans too young to witness him in office. But Carter also lived long enough to see biographers and historians reassess his White House years more generously. His record includes the deregulation of key industries, reduction of U.S. dependence on foreign oil, cautious management of the national debt and notable legislation on the environment, education and mental health. He focused on human rights in foreign policy, pressuring dictators to release thousands of political prisoners . He acknowledged America’s historical imperialism, pardoned Vietnam War draft evaders and relinquished control of the Panama Canal. He normalized relations with China. “I am not nominating Jimmy Carter for a place on Mount Rushmore,” Stuart Eizenstat, Carter’s domestic policy director, wrote in a 2018 book. “He was not a great president” but also not the “hapless and weak” caricature voters rejected in 1980, Eizenstat said. Rather, Carter was “good and productive” and “delivered results, many of which were realized only after he left office.” Madeleine Albright, a national security staffer for Carter and Clinton’s secretary of state, wrote in Eizenstat’s forward that Carter was “consequential and successful” and expressed hope that “perceptions will continue to evolve” about his presidency. “Our country was lucky to have him as our leader,” said Albright, who died in 2022. Jonathan Alter, who penned a comprehensive Carter biography published in 2020, said in an interview that Carter should be remembered for “an epic American life” spanning from a humble start in a home with no electricity or indoor plumbing through decades on the world stage across two centuries. “He will likely go down as one of the most misunderstood and underestimated figures in American history,” Alter told The Associated Press. James Earl Carter Jr. was born Oct. 1, 1924, in Plains and spent his early years in nearby Archery. His family was a minority in the mostly Black community, decades before the civil rights movement played out at the dawn of Carter’s political career. Carter, who campaigned as a moderate on race relations but governed more progressively, talked often of the influence of his Black caregivers and playmates but also noted his advantages: His land-owning father sat atop Archery’s tenant-farming system and owned a main street grocery. His mother, Lillian , would become a staple of his political campaigns. Seeking to broaden his world beyond Plains and its population of fewer than 1,000 — then and now — Carter won an appointment to the U.S. Naval Academy, graduating in 1946. That same year he married Rosalynn Smith, another Plains native, a decision he considered more important than any he made as head of state. She shared his desire to see the world, sacrificing college to support his Navy career. Carter climbed in rank to lieutenant, but then his father was diagnosed with cancer, so the submarine officer set aside his ambitions of admiralty and moved the family back to Plains. His decision angered Rosalynn, even as she dived into the peanut business alongside her husband. Carter again failed to talk with his wife before his first run for office — he later called it “inconceivable” not to have consulted her on such major life decisions — but this time, she was on board. “My wife is much more political,” Carter told the AP in 2021. He won a state Senate seat in 1962 but wasn’t long for the General Assembly and its back-slapping, deal-cutting ways. He ran for governor in 1966 — losing to arch-segregationist Lester Maddox — and then immediately focused on the next campaign. Carter had spoken out against church segregation as a Baptist deacon and opposed racist “Dixiecrats” as a state senator. Yet as a local school board leader in the 1950s he had not pushed to end school segregation even after the Supreme Court's Brown v. Board of Education decision, despite his private support for integration. And in 1970, Carter ran for governor again as the more conservative Democrat against Carl Sanders, a wealthy businessman Carter mocked as “Cufflinks Carl.” Sanders never forgave him for anonymous, race-baiting flyers, which Carter disavowed. Ultimately, Carter won his races by attracting both Black voters and culturally conservative whites. Once in office, he was more direct. “I say to you quite frankly that the time for racial discrimination is over,” he declared in his 1971 inaugural address, setting a new standard for Southern governors that landed him on the cover of Time magazine. His statehouse initiatives included environmental protection, boosting rural education and overhauling antiquated executive branch structures. He proclaimed Martin Luther King Jr. Day in the slain civil rights leader’s home state. And he decided, as he received presidential candidates in 1972, that they were no more talented than he was. In 1974, he ran Democrats’ national campaign arm. Then he declared his own candidacy for 1976. An Atlanta newspaper responded with the headline: “Jimmy Who?” The Carters and a “Peanut Brigade” of family members and Georgia supporters camped out in Iowa and New Hampshire, establishing both states as presidential proving grounds. His first Senate endorsement: a young first-termer from Delaware named Joe Biden. Yet it was Carter’s ability to navigate America’s complex racial and rural politics that cemented the nomination. He swept the Deep South that November, the last Democrat to do so, as many white Southerners shifted to Republicans in response to civil rights initiatives. A self-declared “born-again Christian,” Carter drew snickers by referring to Scripture in a Playboy magazine interview, saying he “had looked on many women with lust. I’ve committed adultery in my heart many times.” The remarks gave Ford a new foothold and television comedians pounced — including NBC’s new “Saturday Night Live” show. But voters weary of cynicism in politics found it endearing. Carter chose Minnesota Sen. Walter “Fritz” Mondale as his running mate on a “Grits and Fritz” ticket. In office, he elevated the vice presidency and the first lady’s office. Mondale’s governing partnership was a model for influential successors Al Gore, Dick Cheney and Biden. Rosalynn Carter was one of the most involved presidential spouses in history, welcomed into Cabinet meetings and huddles with lawmakers and top aides. The Carters presided with uncommon informality: He used his nickname “Jimmy” even when taking the oath of office, carried his own luggage and tried to silence the Marine Band’s “Hail to the Chief.” They bought their clothes off the rack. Carter wore a cardigan for a White House address, urging Americans to conserve energy by turning down their thermostats. Amy, the youngest of four children, attended District of Columbia public school. Washington’s social and media elite scorned their style. But the larger concern was that “he hated politics,” according to Eizenstat, leaving him nowhere to turn politically once economic turmoil and foreign policy challenges took their toll. Carter partially deregulated the airline, railroad and trucking industries and established the departments of Education and Energy, and the Federal Emergency Management Agency. He designated millions of acres of Alaska as national parks or wildlife refuges. He appointed a then-record number of women and nonwhite people to federal posts. He never had a Supreme Court nomination, but he elevated civil rights attorney Ruth Bader Ginsburg to the nation’s second highest court, positioning her for a promotion in 1993. He appointed Paul Volker, the Federal Reserve chairman whose policies would help the economy boom in the 1980s — after Carter left office. He built on Nixon’s opening with China, and though he tolerated autocrats in Asia, pushed Latin America from dictatorships to democracy. But he couldn’t immediately tame inflation or the related energy crisis. And then came Iran. After he admitted the exiled Shah of Iran to the U.S. for medical treatment, the American Embassy in Tehran was overrun in 1979 by followers of the Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini. Negotiations to free the hostages broke down repeatedly ahead of the failed rescue attempt. The same year, Carter signed SALT II, the new strategic arms treaty with Leonid Brezhnev of the Soviet Union, only to pull it back, impose trade sanctions and order a U.S. boycott of the Moscow Olympics after the Soviets invaded Afghanistan. Hoping to instill optimism, he delivered what the media dubbed his “malaise” speech, although he didn’t use that word. He declared the nation was suffering “a crisis of confidence.” By then, many Americans had lost confidence in the president, not themselves. Carter campaigned sparingly for reelection because of the hostage crisis, instead sending Rosalynn as Sen. Edward M. Kennedy challenged him for the Democratic nomination. Carter famously said he’d “kick his ass,” but was hobbled by Kennedy as Reagan rallied a broad coalition with “make America great again” appeals and asking voters whether they were “better off than you were four years ago.” Reagan further capitalized on Carter’s lecturing tone, eviscerating him in their lone fall debate with the quip: “There you go again.” Carter lost all but six states and Republicans rolled to a new Senate majority. Carter successfully negotiated the hostages’ freedom after the election, but in one final, bitter turn of events, Tehran waited until hours after Carter left office to let them walk free. Jimmy Carter speaks on Feb. 3, 2016, at the House of Lords in London. At 56, Carter returned to Georgia with “no idea what I would do with the rest of my life.” Four decades after launching The Carter Center, he still talked of unfinished business. “I thought when we got into politics we would have resolved everything,” Carter told the AP in 2021. “But it’s turned out to be much more long-lasting and insidious than I had thought it was. I think in general, the world itself is much more divided than in previous years.” Still, he affirmed what he said when he underwent treatment for a cancer diagnosis in his 10th decade of life. “I’m perfectly at ease with whatever comes,” he said in 2015 . “I’ve had a wonderful life. I’ve had thousands of friends, I’ve had an exciting, adventurous and gratifying existence.”
Korea's National Assembly to vote on second impeachment motion today Published: 14 Dec. 2024, 07:00 SEO JI-EUN [email protected] Audio report: written by reporters, read by AI Protesters call for President Yoon Suk Yeol's impeachment in front of the National Assembly in western Seoul on Friday, just one day ahead of the crucial impeachment vote. [CHOI KI-WOONG] The National Assembly is set to vote on a second impeachment motion against President Yoon Suk Yeol at 4 p.m. Saturday. “As it is a matter of national importance and gravity, considering the need for thorough discussion within each party and potential delays, we scheduled the plenary session at 4 p.m.," the spokesperson for National Assembly Speaker Woo Won-shik said Friday. To pass, the impeachment motion requires a two-thirds majority in the 300-member National Assembly, or 200 votes. The liberal bloc, led by the Democratic Party (DP), holds 192 eligible members, meaning at least eight lawmakers from the president's People Power Party (PPP) must break ranks to support the motion. The vote will be conducted by secret ballot, raising the possibility of defections from the PPP. Related Article Seoul city government releases safety plan ahead of mass rallies on Saturday Impeachment vote to take place Saturday at 4 p.m. to 'prevent potential clashes' Broadcaster Kim Eo-jun alleges assassination plot against PPP leader in National Assembly testimony Possibility of Yoon's ousting grows as at least 7 PPP lawmakers say they will vote for impeachment Yoon’s approval rating falls to record-low 11% after martial law declaration During last Saturday’s vote on the first impeachment motion, most PPP lawmakers staged a walkout, leaving only three members — Ahn Cheol-soo, Kim Sang-wook and Kim Yea-ji — to participate. PPP floor leader Rep. Kweon Seong-dong said the party will hold a general meeting ahead of Saturday's vote to discuss whether to maintain official opposition to the impeachment motion and to allow members to vote freely. Rep. Kim Sang-wook of the president's People Power Party urges his fellow lawmakers to join the impeachment of President Yoon Suk Yeol in front of the main hall of the National Assembly in western Seoul on Friday, as another PPP lawmaker walks past him. [KIM SEONG-RYONG] As of Friday, seven PPP lawmakers had publicly declared their intention to support impeachment. “I will vote in favor of impeachment on Saturday, and I know several colleagues who feel the same way," a PPP lawmaker, aligned with party leader Han Dong-hoon, told the JoongAng Ilbo, an affiliate of the Korea JoongAng Daily, anonymously on Friday. The growing dissent within the PPP is attributed to Han's sudden endorsement of impeachment on Thursday and the backlash against Yoon’s same-day address, where he defended his failed attempt to impose martial law last week. Even Rep. Kweon acknowledged that "many expect" more than eight lawmakers to vote in favor. The liberal bloc filed the second impeachment motion on Friday afternoon, focusing on the unconstitutional nature of the president's short-lived martial law declaration. The second motion has omitted earlier accusations that were made in the first attempt, filed on Dec. 4. These included first lady Kim Keon Hee’s alleged stock manipulation and interference in election nominations through a power broker, as well as criticisms of Yoon’s "value diplomacy," which has been seen as dismissive of China and Russia while favoring Japan. BY SEO JI-EUN [ [email protected] ] var admarutag = admarutag || {} admarutag.cmd = admarutag.cmd || [] admarutag.cmd.push(function () { admarutag.pageview('3bf9fc17-6e70-4776-9d65-ca3bb0c17cb7'); });Stock market today: Wall Street ends mixed after a bumpy week
NEW YORK and AMSTERDAM , Dec. 13, 2024 /PRNewswire/ -- S&P Dow Jones Indices ("S&P DJI"), the world's leading index provider, today announced the results of the annual Dow Jones Sustainability Indices (DJSI) rebalancing and reconstitution. The DJSI are float-adjusted market capitalization weighted indices that measure the performance of companies selected using environmental, social and governance (ESG) criteria. The DJSI, including the Dow Jones Sustainability World Index (DJSI World), were launched in 1999 as the pioneering series of global sustainability benchmarks available in the market. The index family is comprised of global, regional and country benchmarks. Javascript is required for you to be able to read premium content. Please enable it in your browser settings.Hypoxic Ischemic Encephalopathy Pipeline Drugs Analysis Report (2024 Updates): FDA Approvals, Clinical Trials, Therapies, Mechanism of Action, Route of Administration by DelveInsight | Xenon Pharmaceuticals Inc., Amzell, Axcella Health, Rebiotix, Vedanta
Hail Flutie: BC celebrates 40th anniversary of Miracle in MiamiS&P Dow Jones Indices Announces Dow Jones Sustainability Indices 2024 Review ResultsCity solicitors may seem to be pampered enough with starting salaries of up to £180,000 and partnership pay averaging more than £2 million at some firms. But one practice is going the extra mile by offering coffee facial scrubs to its lawyers and staff in a push to reduce waste at its headquarters. Bird & Bird, a firm noted for its intellectual property and technology specialisms, is offering bags containing granules from its coffee bar to its employees to take home. While the move, first reported on The Lawyer website, may strike some as the ultimate in professional services wokeism, Dan Noakes, the firm’s “head of responsible business”, was unrepentant. The bags, he explains, “come with instructions on how to creatively reuse them, from making