ReportWire

Tag: Opinion

  • Opinion | When Irish Eyes Are Glaring

    Tensions with the U.S. will heighten under the new left-wing president.

    Robert C. O’Brien

    Source link

  • Opinion | Trump Changed the Stakes in the Middle East

    In the 77 years since the formation of the Jewish state, and for the 2,000 years since the destruction of the Second Temple, the West has understood peace in the Middle East—peace between Arabs and Jews—as impossible.

    Semantically, the “Peace Process” was the continuing enjoyment of a process which could be ended only by peace. What, then, have the West, the world and the United Nations been doing in regard to the Mideast since 1948?

    Copyright ©2025 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 87990cbe856818d5eddac44c7b1cdeb8

    David Mamet

    Source link

  • Student Engagement Is Key, Defining and Measuring it Is the Challenge


    Get stories like this delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for The 74 Newsletter

    Student engagement is critical to student success: The more deeply students connect with their learning, the more they see learning as relevant and motivating, and the more likely they are to succeed. But as Discovery Education’s Education Insights 2025–2026 report reveals, engagement is not a simple concept — and often viewed differently depending on point of view and context. 

    Drawing on the responses of 1,400 K–12 superintendents, principals, teachers, parents and students across the United States, the Insights report spotlights the promise and the challenge of keeping students connected to learning.

    More than 90% of teachers, principals, and superintendents agree that engagement is one of the most important predictors of student success. Nearly all students (92%) say that engaging lessons make school more enjoyable. And 99% of superintendents rank engagement as one of the top indicators of achievement. 

    But they don’t agree on how to measure engagement – or even how to define it. For example, students report higher levels of engagement than teachers do, but even then, only 63% of students say they feel “highly engaged” in class. There is an almost 20-point gap between students reporting being highly engaged and what teachers believe. 

    And teachers overwhelmingly point to outward indicators of engagement, such as asking thoughtful questions or contributing to discussions. Less obvious signs, like persistence, are often overlooked. 

    This gap in the perceptions between students and teachers is an essential challenge to address. When educators miss the signals of engagement, they may misinterpret students as being disengaged, even when they are fully vested in learning. 

    Superintendents, unsurprisingly, view student engagement from a lens focused on student outcomes. Nearly all surveyed superintendents rate engagement as a top predictor of success and are far more likely than teachers to see test performance as a leading sign of engagement. 

    These differences — leaders equating engagement with performance, teachers seeking observable behaviors and students experiencing quiet or compliance-based engagement — undercut the effectiveness of efforts to increase student engagement. Often, leaders’ emphasis on systems of measurement collides with teachers’ limited time and tools to enact engaging, personalized learning at scale. 

    Students are clear about what fuels their motivation. They want relevance: learning that connects with their lives and future plans. Across all groups surveyed, relevance consistently ranked as one of the most critical factors impacting engagement. Students also seek challenge. Somewhat surprisingly, nearly four out of five say that school often feels easy, while wanting deeper, more meaningful work. Students report that challenging lessons can spark curiosity and engagement, which is consistent with teachers’ views.  

    Educators are aware of the obstacles to greater student engagement. One of the biggest is that engagement can vary by learner, subject and even the day of the week. Teachers also point to the lack of time and resources as a barrier to creating the right conditions.  

    In the Insights report, teachers identify a concern around the lack of tools to measure engagement. While nearly all superintendents say their district has a system for measuring it, only about 60% of teachers agree. This disconnect is a tall hurdle to overcome in fostering more engagement for all students.  

    Alignment across teachers, principals and district leaders can create the clarity needed to recognize different forms of engagement and respond effectively. Students thrive when teachers have the time they need to prepare and personalize lessons.  

    The report’s findings emphasize that engagement isn’t a “nice to have.” It is a precondition for student success. Without it, students may comply but not necessarily thrive. With it, they are more motivated, ready for challenges and more likely to succeed in the present and the future. 

    It is imperative that districts build more coherent strategies that move beyond encouraging engagement to shared definitions, frameworks and measurement. The approach should recognize that quiet, reflective or multilingual learners may demonstrate engagement differently than more outwardly expressive students do. Districts should also provide the time, tools and training for teachers to design relevant, personalized lessons; and harness engaging multimodal content and digital tools to support, not distract from, engagement. 

    Engagement is a prerequisite to learning. However, as the Insights eport shows, engagement doesn’t just happen, and it doesn’t have a widely or universally accepted definition or measurement. Instead, fostering and sustaining engagement requires clarity, alignment, intentional strategies and purposeful resources. Garnering widespread agreement on a definition — and adoption of that definition — will enable engaging and successful learning experiences for all students. 


    Did you use this article in your work?

    We’d love to hear how The 74’s reporting is helping educators, researchers, and policymakers. Tell us how

    Grace Maliska

    Source link

  • Written in Granite: Historic buildings and our connection to them

    People, places and things…

    It’s not unusual for individuals to feel attached to certain historical sites and buildings and have an emotional connection to them.

    Maybe that is why many of us shed a tear when a wrecking ball recently tore a huge hole into the White House, decimating the entire iconic East Wing and ruining the elegant symmetry of the building for the construction of an oversized ballroom for President Trump.

    I’m not going to get into the politics of the undertaking, the legalities or the ethics of this estimated $300 million project, but historic urban places have their own unique “personalities,” and individuals can often feel very strongly about them.

    Nashua City Hall Plaza is one of these special sites for me. When it was first installed in 1965, a bronze bust of the late President John F. Kennedy stood directly in the center of the plaza, Nashua City Hall’s brick facade and its cement staircase. The symmetry was perfect as one’s eyes would travel straight from the monument all the way up to the cupola and gold eagle statue perched atop City Hall.

    A school field trip once took us to visit the famous monument. I recall circling the bust mounted on top of a black granite base with my fellow classmates and gazing upward at JFK’s head. Years later, this very spot became a favorite as a reassuring sign for me whenever I drove down Main Street and was stopped at the lights at the East Hollis and West Hollis streets intersection. I know it sounds corny, but I would look over to my right and see the late president’s handsome face looking eastward to traffic and keeping a watchful eye over the city.

    When the plaza was redesigned in 2016, the JFK bust was curiously moved off-center a few yards to the left and repositioned, and he now forever faces northward. Yeah, I freaked out. It’s not the end of the world, but some of us took exception to the decision.

    Another site many Nashuans feel a connection to is the Hunt Memorial Building atop Main Street’s Library Hill. As a little girl, I saw the Gothic Revival design with its three-story square tower as a princess’s castle. Whenever my parents drove by it, I marveled at its unique beauty, and I still feel this way today.

    At the moment, this former public library, built in 1903 by Cram and Ferguson Architects, is undergoing tower window replacement. It’s a delicate process, and a crane is handling the heavy lifting. From what I understand, these elegant, stately windows are coming from Quebec and will retain the integrity of the original Gothic wooden framing design.

    Cram and Ferguson Architects, based out of Concord, MA, has an impressive background, especially in traditionally inspired religious architecture. It’s fantastic that the city has retained these gifted artists under the direction of Ethan Anthony for the Hunt’s ongoing restoration and preservation projects over the years.

    The Hunt Memorial Building is a treasure and has been listed on the National Registry of Historic Places since 1971. Mayor Jim Donchess calls it “one of Nashua’s iconic pieces of history.”

    But what if the Hunt building was torn down in the name of progress, as so many old buildings meet this fate?

    Well, that almost happened. In the 1990s, the Board of Aldermen decided to sell the Hunt building to Grace Fellowship Church for $50,000. Then-Mayor Rob Wagner said “No way” and vetoed the sale.

    Here’s to the preservation of historic buildings!

    Joan T. Stylianos

    Source link

  • The president has no ‘foreign policy’ discretion to impose sweeping global tariffs

    On Wednesday, the U.S. Supreme Court will hear oral arguments to scrutinize the tariffs President Trump’s sweeping levied against every nation on earth. Trump invoked emergency powers from an obscure law to justify this move. Those now petitioning the Supreme Court to declare the tariffs unconstitutional have argued that whatever that obscure law says, Congress cannot delegate its exclusive powers — including the power to tax and to regulate foreign commerce — to the president. If that law delegates these powers, it is unconstitutional.

    The petitioners have a point: Trump claims that his tariffs are not unconstitutional, because his unique discretion over foreign policy means Congress has not delegated away its powers. But in its attempt to sanction unprecedented authoritarian powers over domestic affairs, this argument distorts the meaning of the president’s actual foreign policy power. The president’s discretion over trade applies only in wartime against specific belligerents — not in perpetuity or even against our allies.

    Trump’s argument’s kernel of truth is that the Constitution makes the president the commander in chief of the armed forces and chief negotiator of treaties. He does need discretion to repel imminent threats of force by foreign powers and to make alliances against them. In genuine crisis situations, he cannot wait for Congress to debate if he’s to defend the lives, liberties, and property of American citizens.

    The law Trump cites to justify his tariff power, the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), in fact bears the mark of this constitutional legacy. As a useful amicus brief (by Aditya Bamzai of the UVA  School of Law) in the current tariffs case indicates, the law is heir to the Trading with the Enemy Act of 1917, passed in World War I to allow the president to cut off all trade with an enemy nation in the event of a declared war against it. Obviously, to conduct a war, the commander in chief needs to be able to embargo trade that supplies material support to the enemy.

    At first blush it might seem that if the law empowers the president to cut off all trade, it should allow him to regulate trade through tariffs. Jill Homan of the America First Policy Institute makes just the argument in another amicus brief in support of the president. But it is a slipshod argument. The IEEPA arises from the need to allow the president to impose powerful embargoes against specific military belligerents during declared wars. That is a more powerful use of force, but against a specific, threatening target. Trump’s tariffs, by contrast, have been imposed indefinitely against the whole world — including closely allied peaceful nations such as the UK, Canada, and France — in response to a merely “economic” threat.

    The idea of a tariff on commerce with an enemy in wartime makes little sense. If an “enemy” can safely be traded with as long as he pays an extra bribe, he must not be very threatening. A truly threatening enemy, such as Germany or Japan during World War II, is one you’d embargo entirely to cut off fuel for their war effort.

    Professor Bamzai points out that most of history leading up to the Trading with the Enemy Act involves total embargoes. The few exceptions are revealing. A fee was imposed on trade in cotton with Tennessee during the U.S. Civil War, but only when Tennessee had been militarily occupied and hostilities were ceasing. He also notes that fees were imposed on trade with Mexican ports during the Mexican-American War. But as another amicus brief against the tariffs points out, they were only against Mexican nationals ­— not U.S. citizens who pay tariffs ­— and only in ports that were occupied by the American military.

    Whatever the trade restrictions in wars that were part of the president’s genuine foreign policy power, they applied only to trade with belligerent or occupied nations and only for the duration of the war. Contrast that with Trump’s tariffs: in the name of “foreign policy,” President Trump is, in effect, declaring economic “war” against the entire world, enemies and allies alike. But a real American foreign policy does recognize allies, like the United Kingdom and Canada.

    The idea that the president is due some deference to manage his sweeping global tariffs in the name of “foreign policy” is a complete sham.

    Ben Bayer

    Source link

  • Opinion | The U.K. Stabbing Is Every Commuter’s Nightmare

    For those of us who ride the commuter rails and subways daily, Saturday night’s mass stabbing on a London-bound train is a nightmare brought to life. In such confined and well-lit spaces, there isn’t any way to do what the experts say you should: run, hide and, as a last resort, fight.

    A train car moving at high speed with the doors and windows closed is a violent psychopath’s dream—a veritable barrel full of unarmed, unsuspecting fish. Most of us have our heads buried in our phones, our ears distracted by music or podcasts. Some of us are poring over newspapers or dreamily watching the countryside fly by. Rarely do any of us do a threat assessment of those nearby. We are in our own little in-between place—not home, not at work. En route. Vulnerable.

    Copyright ©2025 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 87990cbe856818d5eddac44c7b1cdeb8

    Matthew Hennessey

    Source link

  • Sen. Tom Umberg: Protecting the right to vote in the face of intimidation

    Voter intimidation, unfortunately, is nothing new. I saw it 37 years ago, on Election Day in 1988, when I was an Assistant U.S. Attorney on duty at a local polling place. A person dressed as a police officer, carrying a large sign that said “Non-Citizens May Not Vote,” was questioning a Latino couple and asking for proof of citizenshipas they approached the polling station. I called the FBI, and it turns out this bad actor wasn’t acting alone – he was part of an orchestrated effort to intimidate Latino voters at 20 polling locations across Santa Ana.

    The candidate who was the beneficiary of this racist and illegal effort went on to narrowly win the election, and that moment ultimately shaped my career and my commitment to protecting every American’s fundamental right to participate in our democracy.

    Today, we are facing a similar and no less serious threat. The Trump administration’s ICE raids have had a devastating impact on thousands of people here in Orange County and across California. Images of masked ICE agents arresting or harassing community members simply because of their language, skin color or occupation as they go about their daily lives – including U.S. citizens and legal residents – has created a real and understandable fear among too many of our families, friends, neighbors and communities. This intimidation campaign has deterred kids from going to school, kept families from attending church, and stopped workers from doing their essential jobs.

    Adding to this heightened state of fear, President Trump now plans to send federal poll watchers to California to “monitor” the election. Given his record of trying to overturn legitimate elections and spreading false accusations about undocumented Latinos voting, his intentions are clear: to control and suppress the vote. Combined with Republicans’ reckless and debunked rhetoric about widespread voter fraud, these actions are a thinly veiled attempt to justify the sort of voter intimidation that you see in authoritarian regimes around the world.

    As we approach our next Election Day on Tuesday, Nov. 4, we cannot allow these intimidation tactics to prevent Californians from exercising their constitutional right to vote.

    A recent article from the Daily News underscores this exact fear, particularly among Latino and immigrant populations, about the safety of showing up at the polls amid ICE’s ongoing raids. In fact, two out of three U.S.-born, registered Latino voters in a recent California survey said they were concerned about encountering immigration enforcement agents at a polling location in next week’s election.

    To be clear: Legal U.S. citizens fear that simply going to a polling place could put them at risk of physical harm or unlawful detention.

    Thankfully, in California, we have a safeguard.

    Tom Umberg

    Source link

  • I think the Atari Gamestation Go could become my favourite retro handheld | Stuff

    Most people claw their mitts around a gamepad when playing games. One controller rules them all, with a D-pad, buttons, thumbsticks and triggers. But life wasn’t always so tidy. Early arcades were a mad lab of experimentation – a mess of oddball controls while everyone figured out what ‘standard’ could be.

    Take Defender. This hard-as-nails sideways scrolling Space Invaders had a stick that only went up and down, along with a bevvy of buttons for thrust, fire, reverse, smart bomb and hyperspace. Meanwhile, Tempest had you spin a dial to whirl a spaceship around 3D vector webs, while Centipede’s trackball sent your Bug Blaster skittering at speed around a back garden of doom. And that’s before you even consider steering wheels and yokes.

    All of which caused problems when translating arcade fare to home consoles. Atari initially dabbled with joysticks and paddles, but the former won out and dominated the 8-bit era. Commercial realities meant most games typically – and disappointingly – had to awkwardly conform to that single controller type, rather than creators having the freedom to make each experience bespoke. Later, the joystick was dethroned by the gamepad, and that’s where we are today. Doubly so on handhelds, where few venture beyond the traditional array of controls. Until now. 

    Spin doctor

    Never again lose your controls after night falls.

    My Arcade’s Atari Gamestation Go ($179.99) rethinks Atari’s arcade legacy for the home in an entertainingly literal sense. And it’s bonkers. The device is the size of a Switch, complete with a kickstand, HDMI out, and all the usual controls. But it’s also got a spinner. And a trackball. And a number pad. To which you might say WHAT? Quickly followed by WHY? And that’s when I might suggest you haven’t been paying attention. Because, again, games designed for specific control setups work best when they’re not then turned into square pegs being smashed into round holes.

    The Atari Gamestation Go’s game selection is less unusual – mostly a grab bag from Atari’s history. It in many ways echoes the Atari Hyper Mega Tech Super Pocket. But while titles like Centipede and Tempest feel cumbersome with a D-pad, they sing when played using their intended controls. Heck, even crusty old Atari 2600 paddle games are enjoyable again when an analogue spinner replaces a D-pad. And while the Gamestation Go isn’t perfect – the trackball’s too twitchy and the spinner’s a tad stiff – I was properly grinning while playing the bundled classics. Mostly.

    Extra life?

    Gamestation Go running NES gameGamestation Go running NES game
    Running (legally downloadable – so there) NES ROM Alter Ego.

    I say mostly because the Atari Gamestation Go has issues. The console’s ‘SmartGlow’ system helpfully lights up relevant controls for each game, so you don’t have to guess, but the screen is merely OK. There are loads of games, but their presentation is occasionally rough: Tempest’s vectors look like they’ve been fed through a shredder, and the Atari Pac-Man runs at a very weird aspect ratio. Although if the latter puts you off, that’s arguably for the best.

    Perhaps the biggest disappointment, though, isn’t My Arcade’s fault. An undocumented and unofficial feature lets you load your own games via a micro SD card. But with the exception of Atari 2600 paddle efforts, they all stick resolutely to the D-pad and buttons. So my dream of a proper handheld Marble Madness with trackball controls was dashed. Bah.

    Still, most niggles here are down to software. With control remapping, better scaling, and extra (paid, even) game packs, the Atari Gamestation Go could be amazing. Whether it’ll get there, who knows? These units can be ‘fire and forget’. So, for now, I’m intrigued by the most creative handheld since the Playdate – the rough equivalent of an AtGames Legends in my hands. But I hope it’ll get the updates that’d let me wholeheartedly recommend it. And then a follow-up that somehow bolts on a steering wheel and a yoke, obviously.

    Source link

  • Letters: San Jose animal shelter still turning deaf ear to community

    ”]

    Submit your letter to the editor via this form. Read more Letters to the Editor. 

    Animal shelter still turns
    deaf ear to community

    San Jose continues to fail to improve animal shelter services to the community.

    A scathing city audit of one year ago has failed to deliver measurable results. The city still fails to provide low-cost public spay and neuter, nor is outreach to rescue groups or trap-neuter-return a priority. The San Jose animal welfare community continues to be ignored.

    Letters To The Editor

    Source link

  • Op-Ed | Silencing Black, Latino and Asian communities won’t solve our housing crisis | amNewYork

    Before becoming Council Members, we first met years ago while organizing with tenants, fighting egregious rezonings and gentrification that was disempowering communities of color. We understood then, as we understand now, the need for affordable housing – we were in court rooms with tenants who were getting evicted after their rents skyrocketed. Our city’s diverse communities, especially our Black, Latino and Asian communities, have a major stake in the need for more affordable housing, and their voices matter as we make decisions about the development of our city.

    It’s why we, as representatives of these communities, have been among those leading the Council to approve the creation of historic amounts of new housing.

    The Council has approved over 94% of housing applications that have come before us to produce over 130,000 homes, and we have successfully pushed for these homes to be more affordable for the families and residents in our neighborhoods. As part of approving this new development, we have also secured billions of dollars in critical investments to confront persistent racial inequities in economic opportunity, health outcomes, and overall well-being in communities.

    Yet, it would be easy to find yourself confused about these realities based on the arguments being advanced to support Mayor Adams’ misleading ballot proposals 2, 3, and 4 in this election. 

    The misleading language voters will encounter on ballots hides the proposals’ impact: to take away communities’ power used to hold developers accountable for delivering truly affordable homes and investments for residents who molded our neighborhoods.

    The core argument in support of these proposals, like so much of the recent conversation about housing, has been deceptively simplified to be about creating homes. Those arguing in support of the proposals ignore any critical racial analysis and the history of how Black, Latino and Asian communities have been hurt most when they lacked power in development decisions.

    When the power to approve development was unequally concentrated in our city, Robert Moses used it to displace Black and Latino communities. Decades later, these working-class communities are still struggling to recover from the layered injustices. Mayor Adams’ Ballot Proposals 2, 3 and 4 risk leaving our city vulnerable to repeating this history. 

    The current democratic land use process emerged as a way to protect against these injustices, and was paired with successful efforts to increase racially equitable representation on the City Council. It took groundbreaking legal victories that were brought all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court to require New York City to have a City Council with adequate representation for racially diverse neighborhoods.

    Now that we have the most diverse City Council in history, with record representation for women, Black, Latino and Asian New Yorkers while approving record amounts of housing with demanded investments, it should raise alarms that there is an effort to take away this hard fought-for democratic power. It’s important that we question: who benefits when power that belongs to the people is taken away and placed in the hands of a few? And who is behind this?

    We know that Mayor Adams has sold our city to Donald Trump and his billionaire buddies– even going as far as to veto our bills that protect immigrants and workers of color to appease corporate interests and Donald Trump. At every turn, Mayor Adams has fought the City Council’s efforts to champion workers and make this city more affordable. These ballot proposals are more of the same. 

    We know that private development is needed to confront our housing crisis, and we understand that the land use process has problems that we must confront. However, powerful interests have never voluntarily ceded to the interests of Black, Latino and Asian communities without demands backed by power.

    It matters what we build and for whom. Simply building housing, without investing in our communities or ensuring truly affordable homes for racially diverse and working-class people, will not solve the housing crisis. It will only deepen historical injustices and widen inequity. We want housing that delivers a more equitable future, alongside opportunities that help working families raise their children, New Yorkers advance, and seniors age-in-place, right here in our city.  

    Mayor Adams’ misleading Ballot Proposals 2, 3 and 4 are a false promise that will undermine these goals.

    To deliver a just future for our city, we must remember our past, which is one that Black, Latino, and Asian New Yorkers don’t have the privilege of forgetting.

    By Sandy Nurse and Shekar Krishnan

    Source link

  • Affinity just made pro editing and design free forever, and I think Adobe should be worried | Stuff

    Serif’s Affinity suite was already an audacious land-grab. It challenged Adobe’s increasingly spendy Creative Cloud subscription by making pro-grade photo editing and design tools more accessible through affordable and old-school pay-once pricing. The suite started on desktop and later headed to iPad. Those weren’t watered down versions either, but effectively the originals, optimised for touch.

    All was good for a while. But fans got twitchy last year when Serif was snapped up by Canva, a company rather fond of subscriptions itself. Such concern escalated to full-blown panic this October when Affinity desktop apps vanished from sale, replaced by the cryptic slogan “Creative Freedom Is Coming”.

    Everyone assumed the worst. Enshittification felt imminent. Surely Affinity would be folded into Canva or become a subscription zombie? Perhaps both? Either way, the consensus was the Affinity people loved was gone forever. But no, because Affinity’s latest play is the most audacious yet, making the software free forever.

    One app to rule them all

    Affinity layout

    In fact, it goes further. Historically, Affinity’s trio – Photo, Designer, Publisher – made it easy to hop between photo editing, vector illustration and page layout work. Now those apps have been merged into one unified beast. Affinity says this lets you “design, edit, and publish without switching apps or breaking flow”. 

    That flow can be heavily customised, by users mixing and matching tools from Pixel, Vector and Layout studios to build workspaces that work for them. This is all twinned with non-destructive adjustments that let you experiment without wrecking your work, and features like thousands of layers and a ridiculous 10,000,000x zoom.

    So what’s the catch? Well, the iPad version won’t be ready until next year, which explains why the iPad Affinity suite quietly went free rather than being pulled from the App Store. And there’s the integration of Canva AI tools, such as Generative Fill, Expand & Edit and Remove Background. GenAI is… divisive (let’s say) in the creative world. But those tools are entirely optional and Canva promises your work in Affinity “is not accessed to train AI features” anyway.

    Photoshock

    Affinity pixelAffinity pixel

    As someone who’s funnelled a small fortune into Adobe’s coffers since Photoshop 1.0, I think Adobe should be worried. Affinity was already quietly disruptive in the creative industry. But a free Affinity could upend everything in the wider landscape.

    Pro-grade creative tools are now free, but not just for pros. They’re for everyone. That means a new generation of wannabe photo editors, designers and illustrators can grow up using Affinity by default. And those people who occasionally need to open or tweak a PSD, AI, SVG or IDML can do so instantly, without taking out a subscription they otherwise don’t need.

    There are still concerns. Products that don’t make obvious money are usually the first to be culled. Canva counters that this isn’t a charity move, though, but a continuation of its existing business model: free tools for all and premium extras for those who want them (in this case, through those AI tools). However, this is now also applied to pro apps.

    It does technically break Canva’s pledge to “offer perpetual licenses”, but given that the new price is literally zero, I think we can forgive the company for that. What I’m interested in now is not just how Affinity evolves, but also how Adobe responds. Affinity is no plucky upstart anymore. It’s part of a massive platform with designs (oho!) on democratising creativity for everyone, not just those with deep pockets.

    The all-new Affinity is available today for Mac and Windows. Affinity for iPad will be released in 2026.

    Source link

  • MORNING GLORY: Among America’s allies, Israel is ‘first among equals’

    NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

    Which country is America’s most important ally?

    Hands down, it is Israel. Israel is the only other genuine democracy on the planet that is a nuclear superpower with the will and ability to project hard power across vast distances and which provides the United States with a reliable ally in what has been the most turbulent area of the world since the end of World War II.

    Israel, is, of course, not our only ally in the free world, or even our only ally in that region. Former Secretary of Defense General James Mattis has routinely referred to the United Arab Emirates, to cite the obvious example, as “little Sparta” for two decades, and the general is right to call attention to the U.A.E.’s reliable friendship and commitment to our shared interests.

    US COULD LOSE NEXT MAJOR WAR DUE TO PENTAGON’S ‘BROKEN’ ACQUISITION SYSTEM

    In the Pacific, we rely on Australia, India, Japan, the Philippines, Singapore and South Korea to help the U.S. maintain freedom of the seas and pose a balancing force to the hegemonic ambitions of General Secretary Xi and the People’s Liberation Army and Navy. Even communist Vietnam is tipping towards the status of “ally.”

    Our old allies remain, in theory at least, our partners in protecting freedom around the globe, but increasingly are limited by their growing anti-Israel and generally left-leaning populations when it comes to joining with the U.S. to project power anywhere outside of Europe.

    Did you see any British or French fighter aircraft alongside our B-2s and fighter planes and the Israeli Air Force when it came time to demolish the imminent nuclear threat of Iran? Of course not, and not just because of the political pressures generated by waves of new immigrants from the devastated countries of Libya and Syria and the poverty-stricken countries of Africa.

    Europe is changing before our eyes, and we should be happy that it can still summon the will to join with Ukraine on one “hot” front in the second Cold War. Both France and the United Kingdom will point to their efforts alongside ours in helping Israel protect itself against the missile assaults by Iran in 2024, but both nations were missing during the 12-day war of Israel and the United States against Iran in June of this year. All of Europe benefited from defanging the mullahs, but they were not there when Iran’s nuclear capabilities were obliterated, even as Iran’s ballistic missiles rained down on the Jewish state. Both then engaged in a “two-state theater” when the U.S. and its Gulf allies were imposing a cease-fire on Hamas, one which included the return of the last 20 living hostages from the tunnels of Gaza.

    We have to hope that India grows closer to the U.S. and that Japan and Australia join South Korea in ramping up their defense spending. (South Korea expends 2.8% of its GDP on defense while the other two nations are below 2%.)

    CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

    We don’t have to “hope” for anything when it comes to Israel. Israel is spending 8.8% of its GDP on the IDF in these years of war and is closer to 5% than 4% even in the most peaceful of years. Israel’s high-tech defense sector also powers much of the innovation the free world requires to remain free. Even its critics recognize Israel as an “intelligence superpower,” and its democracy as genuine as any Western nation.

    When it comes to assessing America’s allies, Israel is “first among equals.”

    Hugh Hewitt is host of “The Hugh Hewitt Show,” heard weekday mornings 6am to 9am ET on the Salem Radio Network, and simulcast on Salem News Channel. Hugh wakes up America on over 400 affiliates nationwide, and on all the streaming platforms where SNC can be seen. He is a frequent guest on the Fox News Channel’s news roundtable hosted by Bret Baier weekdays at 6pm ET. A son of Ohio and a graduate of Harvard College and the University of Michigan Law School, Hewitt has been a Professor of Law at Chapman University’s Fowler School of Law since 1996 where he teaches Constitutional Law. Hewitt launched his eponymous radio show from Los Angeles in 1990.  Hewitt has frequently appeared on every major national news television network, hosted television shows for PBS and MSNBC, written for every major American paper, has authored a dozen books and moderated a score of Republican candidate debates, most recently the November 2023 Republican presidential debate in Miami and four Republican presidential debates in the 2015-16 cycle. Hewitt focuses his radio show and his column on the Constitution, national security, American politics and the Cleveland Browns and Guardians. Hewitt has interviewed tens of thousands of guests from Democrats Hillary Clinton and John Kerry to Republican Presidents George W. Bush and Donald Trump over his 40 years in broadcast, and this column previews the lead story that will drive his radio/ TV show today.

    CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM HUGH HEWITT

    Source link

  • Letters: Vote no on the unfair Proposition 50

    Submit your letter to the editor via this form. Read more Letters to the Editor.

    Say no to unfairness;
    vote down Prop. 50

    In 2010, Californians voted to create a nonpartisan Citizens Redistricting Commission to stop decades of gerrymandering. That reform was meant to restore fairness and ensure that all Californians — regardless of political affiliation — had a meaningful voice in representation.

    Letters To The Editor

    Source link

  • I’m Abigail Spanberger. This is why I want Virginia’s vote for governor

    NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

    Back in May, I spent a morning at a family-owned pharmacy in Hanover County — a locality that voted for President Donald Trump in 2024 by a margin of more than 25 points.

    I was there alongside local pharmacists and students, a Hanover County mother whose daughter is battling cancer, and a crush of reporters to roll out my plan to lower Virginians’ healthcare and prescription drug costs as their next governor. The event caught the attention of some community members who greeted me donning red T-shirts, Make America Great Again hats and Trump campaign buttons.

    Among the group was a local Tea Party member. After we briefly joked about our party allegiances, the conversation quickly turned to the issues.

    Democratic gubernatorial candidate Abigail Spanberger addresses a get-out-the-vote rally on the first day of early voting outside the Eastern Government Center on Sept. 19, 2025, in Henrico County, Virginia. (Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

    His daughter, who had been battling cancer, had recently lost her healthcare benefits. As her pile of medical bills and worries grew, so had his frustration.

    LOOK BEYOND THE BIG APPLE’S SOCIALIST VICTORY TO FIND DEMOCRATIC PARTY LEADERS IN 2025

    What started as him leaving home on a rainy Wednesday morning to hold me accountable turned into a meaningful conversation about one of the challenges I hear about most from families, veterans, seniors and young people across our commonwealth — the rising cost of medical care.

    But it’s not just high healthcare costs that are keeping Virginians up at night. Everywhere I travel across the commonwealth — since I first launched my campaign to serve as Virginia’s next governor, the No. 1 challenge Virginians share with me is the squeeze of high costs. Rising rent and mortgage payments, energy bills, and prices at the pharmacy counter are stretching Virginians’ paychecks thin. Virginians who are working hard to get by deserve a governor who is laser-focused on doing everything in her power to deliver them real relief.

    Right now, as we race toward Election Day, I’m on the road for my 40-plus-stop, 11-day statewide bus tour. We’re going everywhere from “Where Virginia Begins” in Lee County up to Leesburg, from Norfolk to Nelson County to lay out the stakes in this year’s elections — because this year, Virginians have the opportunity to choose leadership that actually puts our commonwealth first.

    Abigail Spanberger campaigns

    Virginia Democratic gubernatorial candidate Abigail Spanberger speaks during an Everytown for Gun Safety rally on April 10, 2025, in Alexandria, Virginia. (Win McNamee/Getty Images)

    Since that rainy morning in May, I’ve also rolled out my plans to lower Virginians’ housing costs and Virginians’ energy bills. I’ve rolled out my plans to grow workforce training opportunities — because a four-year degree isn’t the right path for everyone. And I’ve rolled out my plan to make sure Virginia’s public schools are the best in the nation. My opponent — Winsome Earle-Sears, the current lieutenant governor of Virginia — has not shown an inkling of interest in tackling these challenges. She’s laid out no real plans to make Virginia more affordable or grow our economy.

    WITH LEGACY ON THE LINE, OBAMA HITTING CAMPAIGN TRAIL TO BOOST DEMOCRATS IN KEY GOVERNOR ELECTIONS

    Virginians — including the more than 300,000 federal employees who call our commonwealth home — are grappling with the consequences of the Trump administration’s DOGE firings, use of this devastating government shutdown to escalate those firings, and unpredictable tariffs. My opponent dismissed the devastating impacts of these cuts on Virginia’s economy and even mocked Virginians for worrying about losing their jobs. As Virginia’s next governor, I am clear-eyed about threats to our commonwealth — and I will always stand up for Virginians’ jobs and Virginia’s economy.

    If you’re a registered voter in Virginia, my name is on your ballot this year. You may still be making your mind up about who to trust with your vote. You might even be reading this right now and thinking, “I’m a Republican, so why would I vote for a Democrat?”

    Abigail Spanberger during a rally

    Abigail Spanberger, Virginia Democratic Party nominee for governor, speaks at a campaign event in Richmond on April 8, 2025. (Max Posner/The Washington Post/Getty Images)

    I won my first campaign in 2018 — in a district that hadn’t elected a Democrat in 50 years — in part because thousands of Virginians asked themselves that very question. And ultimately, those voters believed in electing a leader who would put the people of Virginia — not a political party, not a group of donors and not a president — first.

    CLICK HERE FOR MORE FOX NEWS OPINION

    Since I first got into politics, I’ve been focused on addressing some of the most pressing issues facing Virginia’s families and businesses — from protecting Virginians’ access to healthcare coverage to bringing down the cost of living to keeping our communities safe. My focus hasn’t changed — and I’m ready to get to work on day one to deliver for Virginians.

    And like I always say: I might be a Democrat, but you don’t have to be one to vote for me. I would be honored to earn your vote and grateful to serve as your governor.

    CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

    Former Congresswoman Abigail Spanberger represented Virginia’s 7th District in the U.S. House of Representatives from 2019 to 2025. She is a former federal law enforcement officer and former CIA case officer. She is now the Democratic nominee for governor of Virginia.

    Source link

  • Written in Granite: Homelessness again on Nashua’s agenda Tuesday

    When enough is enough. Has the city of Nashua reached this point?

    The growing homeless encampments popping up across the Gate City have been dominating headlines. And people seem split on what should be done.

    The latest challenge concerns the largest homeless encampment located on Nashua’s west side in the Millyard by the Pine Street Extension (about 80 people). A man living at the encampment was arraigned on second-degree assault charges for allegedly strangling a woman and threatening her with a knife near busy Pine Street and Veterans Memorial Parkway.

    Homelessness is not going away, but how can the crisis be stemmed?

    Last Tuesday evening, the Government Committee on Infrastructure met at City Hall. Mayor Jim Donchess, several aldermen and other city officials sat down trying to hammer out a thoughtful, proper approach. The room was filled with concerned citizens who took their turn at the podium.

    Cynthia Whitaker, the president and CEO of Greater Nashua Mental Health, asked the committee and the Mayor to use humane and respectful approaches rather than punitive ones. She delivered perhaps the most poignant message of the evening:

    “We’re asking people to be invisible without giving them anywhere to go.”

    “We cannot simply remove camping and parking without providing sustainable options,” Whitaker explained. Police enforcement is costly and without alternatives, “It doesn’t reduce homelessness; it merely moves people from one location to another, often into more dangerous and isolating situations, where it becomes harder for outreach workers to connect them with the services they need.”

    A few months ago, an encampment developed in Ward 1 along Celina Avenue, consisting of individuals sheltering inside a row of campers and trailers parked along the road. Nashua Police had their hands full, towing five to seven unregistered vehicles at any time and then having to find holding space in the city for these large, disabled vehicles.

    The committee voted to recommend imposing a 2-hour parking limit on Celina Avenue to prevent another encampment from developing in an area where multiple companies are trying to operate their businesses.

    As far as prohibiting camping on public property and giving Nashua Police the authority to enforce the ban, Mayor Donchess says the police need the tools to do something now.

    Donchess says the city is in the process of establishing a resource center for the homeless, but in the meantime, Nashua and the rest of Granite State cities and towns don’t get much financial help. “The city of Lowell receives $258 million annually of school aid and $30 million of general aid,” the Mayor explained.

    “Nashua receives about 20% of that amount… It’s different here. The state gives us nothing for the homeless, no general aid, no support, no help. We don’t have the resources to spend $10 to $20 million a year on any new project.”

    Donchess told the crowd he understands the need to treat all individuals with humanity, but “Are we treating the people at the Pine Street Extension with humanity when we let that situation exist?”

    Ward 5 Alderman Ernest Jette is against the ordinance. The longtime attorney says, “These citations are pieces of paper; they don’t have the money. How are they going to pay?” Jette asked. “Not all the homeless are criminals. Let the homeless who are not violating any laws, not a threat to anyone, live peacefully. Don’t remove the homeless people from the only place they have to live.”

    The full aldermanic board will vote on these measures at its next meeting on Oct. 28.

    Joan T. Stylianos

    Source link

  • Scott Bessent is wrong. Tariffs are taxes that hurt Americans.

    If U.S. tariffs on imports raise prices on American consumers, should we care if the government calls them taxes or fees?

    Throughout his time as Treasury Secretary, Scott Bessent has regularly fought against claims that the tariffs adored by his boss, President Donald Trump, are really just taxes on consumers.

    “Tariffs are a surcharge, not a tax,” Bessent told a reporter this week. “They could be paid by the exporter, they could be paid by the country.”

    Bessent likely thinks that’s a great point, but he shouldn’t drop the mic just yet. Regardless of the word games, Americans are suffering from the end result.

    We are paying higher prices as a result of Trump’s tariffs. According to analysis from the Tax Foundation, Trump’s tariffs have raised consumer prices by 4.9 percentage points.

    We’re paying more so the word games matter little, but Bessent does have an interest in calling tariffs fees. Fees are much more politically palatable (though I have no idea why) and the matter is before the U.S. Supreme Court.

    But make no mistake: tariffs are taxes.

    When it is a broad-based sales tax, the tax is levied when the goods are purchased by the consumer. When it is a tax on imports (e.g. a tariff) the tax is levied when the importer takes possession of the goods.

    Just like sales taxes, the ultimate burden of tariffs can theoretically be paid by the consumers or the foreign manufacturer. Previous experience has demonstrated, however, that they’re mostly paid by American consumers, which is why prices on imports keep going up.

    Bessent should know all this and is simply towing the party line.

    “When you go and get your driver license, you pay a fee,” Bessent added. “Is that a tax?”

    Debating the meaning of taxes and fees might be an ok rhetorical strategy, but invoking the DMV is not. Not only does this give listeners PTSD remembering the last painful visit to one of the least popular American government institutions, it also reminds us that the government has its hand in our wallets at every turn.

    Apparently, it’s not enough that our tax dollars fund DMV operations; we need to pay additional charges as well. What is that ID charge for, exactly? To fund something I already funded?

    It makes no sense, and neither do tariffs.

    We’re told regularly that tariffs are essential to stop other countries from ripping off Americans. So the solution is for America to rip off Americans instead?

    Not only are tariffs at least partially passed through to consumers, but, as the Tax Foundation points out, tariffs hurt in indirect ways as well.

    When the cost of imports rise, American firms and consumers might switch to cheaper, domestically-available substitutes. But the makers of these alternatives have an incentive to increase prices to stay competitive with the tariffed imports. That’s assuming that there is a cheaper substitute.

    One recent study of the effect of tariffs on the cost of wine imports published by a team of economists in the National Bureau of Economic Research found that the cost of bottles of wine exceeded the cost of the tariff even when the tariff itself wasn’t entirely passed on to consumers.

    Matt Fleming

    Source link

  • These DPS incumbent candidates don’t support school choice (Opinion)

    As former members of the Denver Public Schools Board of Education, we have long respected the complexity and responsibility of serving on the board. It is a demanding and often thankless role. Yet, the gravity of our district’s challenges and the content of the Denver Post editorial from September 28, 2025, compel us to speak out.

    The editorial referenced “some candidates running for the Denver Board of Education who would rather see the district’s world-class lottery system go away,” and accused them of wanting to “keep the best schools in Denver a secret.” Let’s be clear: the three incumbents — Scott Esserman, Xóchitl Gaytán, and Michelle Quattlebaum — have led efforts to dismantle school choice in Denver. They have also collaborated with the Superintendent to only publicize the positive results and limit public access to negative school performance data especially among low income students. The public deserves to see the disaggregated achievement by race, ethnicity, and income.

    Despite campaigning on promises of transparency and accountability, the incumbents’ actions have too often produced the opposite. The current board has made critical decisions behind closed doors, minimized authentic community engagement, and failed to deliver measurable improvement for Denver’s students.

    This November, Denver voters have the opportunity to elect four new board members who will restore integrity, transparency, and student-centered decision-making. These candidates–Mariana del Hierro (District 2), Caron Blanke (District 3), Timiya Jackson (District 4), and Alex Magaña (At-Large)—represent the best of Denver’s civic and educational leadership. Two are accomplished educators, and two bring executive management experience
    rooted in community service. Collectively, they are prepared to govern responsibly and help rebuild a system that prioritizes student success above all else.

    The data tell a sobering story. While 75% of white students in DPS are proficient in reading, only 30% or fewer Black, Latino, and low-income students meet grade-level expectations–a gap that continues to widen. In mathematics, the disparities are even starker, with up to 80% of students from these groups performing below grade level.

    Standardized scores are not the only indicator of educational health, but they are an important one. Denver Public Schools has not returned to pre-pandemic levels of achievement and, alarmingly, has no clear plan to get there. The current leadership has failed to set ambitious goals, measure progress transparently, or hold itself accountable for student outcomes.

    It is deeply concerning that a board responsible for $1.5 billion in taxpayer funds, 90,000 students, and 15,000 employees demonstrates so little urgency or accountability. Under this leadership, Denver students have fallen even farther behind academically, socially, and emotionally.

    This election offers a turning point. Denver voters can choose leaders who bring urgency, competence, and a clear sense of responsibility to public education. Blanke, del Hierro, Jackson, and Magaña are ready to collaborate with the Superintendent on an aggressive, student-centered plan to raise achievement and restore public confidence.
    The pandemic presented an opportunity to reimagine a district that works for every child. The current board–and the incumbents seeking reelection—failed that test. Denver cannot afford another generation of lost potential.

    This November, we urge voters to support new leadership committed to transparency, accountability, and the belief that every Denver student deserves the opportunity to learn, thrive, and succeed.

    Elaine Gantz Berman, Theresa Peña and Mary Seawell are all former elected directors of the Denver Public Schools Board of Education.

    Sign up for Sound Off to get a weekly roundup of our columns, editorials and more.

    To send a letter to the editor about this article, submit online or check out our guidelines for how to submit by email or mail.

    Elaine Gantz Berman, Theresa Peña, Mary Seawell

    Source link

  • Ballot measure would broaden reform of California’s key environmental law

    Former Gov. Jerry Brown once referred to overhauling the California Environmental Quality Act as “the Lord’s work” because, he said, it made building much-needed things — housing, transportation improvements, water storage, etc. — too difficult and too expensive.

    In 2018, as he neared the end of his second stint as governor, Brown vetoed a bill that would have prevented developers from circumventing CEQA’s laborious provisions by persuading local voters to directly approve projects.

    It was one of hundreds of legislative measures CEQA’s defenders — environmental groups primarily — and its critics have proposed in the nearly half-century since then-Gov. Ronald Reagan signed CEQA in 1970.

    “Instead of the piecemeal approach taken in this bill, I prefer a more comprehensive CEQA review, which takes into account both the urgent need for more housing and thoughtful environmental analysis,” Brown said in vetoing the bill.

    However during his 16 years in the governorship, Brown did virtually nothing to make the fundamental changes he said were needed. CEQA reform was in a political stalemate and, without that “comprehensive review,” governors and legislators have been dealing with the law’s impacts on a case-by-case basis.

    Projects that had heavyweight backing — professional sports venues in particular — and the Legislature’s own Capitol construction project could get relief from CEQA’s requirements.

    In more recent years, during Gavin Newsom’s governorship, the state’s housing shortage became a frontline political issue. CEQA became a contentious aspect of it as Newsom and legislators enacted numerous bills to remove or reduce procedural barriers to construction.

    Pro-housing groups saw CEQA as a tool development opponents were using to delay or kill projects and that construction unions were misusing to compel developers to employ their members.

    Newsom, whose 2018 campaign promises to jump-start housing construction had not borne much fruit, took up the cause of reforming CEQA. A few months ago, in a bill attached to the state budget, he and legislators enacted a major overhaul of the law’s application to housing, particularly high-density, multi-family projects.

    “Saying ‘no’ to housing in my community will no longer be state sanctioned,” said Assemblymember Buffy Wicks, an Oakland Democrat who is one of state’s the most pro-housing legislators. “This isn’t going to solve all of our housing problems in the state, but it is going to remove the single biggest impediment to building environmentally friendly housing.”

    The law’s passage raises another question: Would it be a one-off, or the beginning of a more sweeping change in CEQA that would make other, non-housing projects easier to build?

    The California Chamber of Commerce hopes it will be the latter and recently unveiled a ballot measure for the 2026 election that would make it happen. In the main the measure would, if approved by voters, tighten up and streamline the processes for environmental reviews for “essential projects.”

    Dan Walters

    Source link

  • Vote “No” on Denver’s bonds to reject irresponsible debt (Letters)

    Vote “No” on Denver’s bonds to reject irresponsible debt

    After reading my ballot, I researched previous bonds that were passed by voters. The Rise Denver bond in 2021 was $260 million, and the Elevate Denver Bond in 2017 was $937 million. I added up the 2A to 2E bonds this year, and the total is up to $950 million. The total for all of these bonds adds up to more than $2 billion.

    The debt repayment for the current bonds is about $1.9 billion. The ballot states, “without imposing any new tax,” but that is not completely correct. The reason is that all these bonds are paid through commercial and residential property taxes in Denver County. The mill levy could go down if voters say no, and if voters say yes it also could have to increase to pay for these billions of dollars if property values decrease. Denver County is where I live, and expenses have gone significantly higher this year. Why do we keep adding to the bond debts? We should not vote to increase the county’s debt.

    Pete Hackett, Denver

    Denver clerk errs in leaving out information on ballot issues

    Did I hear that correctly?

    Denver’s “Ballot Issue Notice” does not provide any information about three matters: 2F, 2G and 310.  I called Denver’s Clerk and Elections Office to ask why the omissions. I was told two things: 1) Those three ballot issues have no fiscal impact on government, so applicable law does not require their inclusion in the notice. 2) Due to “budget cuts,” it was decided not to address them in the notice.  Then, I was informed that I could garner information about them at denvervotes.org.

    Denver voters expect the notice each year to address all matters on the ballot. The current notice does not highlight that 2F, 2G and 310 are not included and does not highlight denvervotes.org as a source of information about them.

    I have no way of learning how much money was “saved” by excluding these ballot matters. What I do know is that it would have been money well spent.

    Vic Reichman, Denver

    Trump’s cuts to education funding risk America’s future

    Re: “Federal government’s cuts cost state colleges millions,” Oct. 9 news story

    As an educator, I was saddened to read: “Trump administration cuts grants to Colorado colleges serving high percentage of diverse students,” October 9.

    Every American, regardless of race, gender or religious persuasion, should have the opportunity to realize their natural potential via education. Yet, there are wide swaths of America that are not properly educating students and where students are just unable to succeed for economic or other reasons. As a result, America is not producing sufficient STEM graduates to sustain, let alone grow, America’s high level of technology upon which we all heavily depend for our economy, well-being and national defense.

    On top of that, President Donald Trump has made it significantly more challenging for foreign students (who would often pursue STEM careers) to enter American schools.

    Given the fact that the president is seeking to reindustrialize America, I would like to ask him from where will the required scientists, engineers, technicians, doctors and other highly educated specialists come? America is now in crisis as we seek to pay down our $37 trillion debt and stay competitive internationally. One way to do this would be to encourage and help all groups of Americans — particularly those who are underrepresented in STEM (as an untapped talent pool) — to pursue STEM careers. Persecuting and defunding schools that seek to help underrepresented students succeed and contribute to America’s recovery is absolutely the wrong thing to do.

    Education is the only hope for the next generation of Americans to move forward.

    Michael Pravica, Henderson, Nevada

    If the U.S. doesn’t support Ukraine, we are complicit in its destruction

    Recent news articles galvanized my thought that America is sleepwalking while Ukraine is fighting for survival against Russia’s genocidal invasion. We need to take a moment to answer the question: Are we really supporting Ukraine to win? It is in America’s interest that Ukraine is successful. Our future prosperity, and that of our children, depends on what we do right now.

    Either the United States supports Ukraine to win, or we will be complicit in its destruction. Such complicity will damage national security by strengthening enemies, driving away allies, harming international trade, increasing nuclear proliferation, encouraging new wars of territorial conquest, and ending America’s role as leader of the free world. There will be less stability and fewer allies within the West, investments abroad will be less safe, and the entire West will be less prosperous. Therefore, what all of us should strive for in Ukraine is not peace at any price, because that will be bad for all countries, but a future that makes Ukraine, America, and the West stronger by making its enemies weaker.

    Take a moment to consider our future and then do what you feel is best: take up a keyboard and send a note, pick up a pen and write your political leadership, sit down with friends or family and discuss this letter, or pull out your checkbook, but just do something now. History will judge what we do today; which side will you be on?

    Arthur Ives, Highlands Ranch

    Don’t just give away national forest lands

    Should our beloved but flat-broke White River National Forest sell an asset worth more than half its annual budget or just give that asset away?

    Retired White River National Forest Supervisor Scott Fitzwilliams’ 2021 plan to effectively donate 832 acres surrounding Sweetwater Lake to Colorado Parks and Wildlife for the creation of a state park might have made sense prior to DOGE’s cuts to the forest service’s budget. It also might have made sense before the $23,860,000 Derby Fire burned 5,453 acres in the national forest  just one mile east of the lake.

    DP Opinion

    Source link

  • DAVID MARCUS: Trump’s ballroom is no vanity project, it’s about American grandeur

    NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

    The Democrats, or Socialists, or whatever they are these days, are hopping mad over President Donald Trump’s construction of a ballroom in the East Wing of the White House, and while it may be their silliest freakout of the entire Trump era, it is also quite telling.

    The ladies on ABC’s “The View” were apoplectic when they saw images of demolition, a fairly ordinary way to begin renovations, at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. They echoed one-time resident Hillary Clinton’s complaint that Trump doesn’t own the White House, even taking to song about it.

    A McCrery Architects rendering provided by the White House of the exterior of the new ballroom. (White House)

    What makes this argument so absurd, is that Trump is not building this ballroom for his personal use or glory. It’s not a vanity project. It is a long-considered addition to an executive home that lacked the capacity to hold large indoor events.

    Trump, as has always been his wont, is looking to create grandeur, and that seems to be something to which leftists reflexively object.

    TRUMP BREAKS GROUND ON MASSIVE WHITE HOUSE BALLROOM PROJECT WITH PRIVATE FUNDING FROM ‘PATRIOTS’

    Trump is obviously not the first president to renovate the White House. President Franklin Delano Roosevelt put in a swimming pool. His successor, President Harry Truman, practically gutted the place to add a balcony. President Nixon covered the swimming pool but added a bowling alley. Finally, President Obama transformed the tennis court into a basketball court.

    Note that these are all changes that were made to serve the respective president’s personal taste or enjoyment, like a Roman emperor adding a water feature to his personal dining area.

    What Trump is doing is completely different. The ballroom he is constructing will likely survive as a symbol of American power long after we are all gone. It will be, in a sense, our generation’s contribution to the people’s home.

    TRUMP CELEBRATES WHITE HOUSE DEMOLITION AS NEW BALLROOM RISES: ‘MUSIC TO MY EARS’

    Trump wants this venue, this symbol of America, to be grand and classically inspired, a timeless marble monument to a United States that emerged from the 20th century as the world’s only super power.

    And in a way, this is part of what the left objects to, not just in regard to the White House project, but to Trump’s proposed new arch in Washington, D.C., and great statuaries of American heroes, not to mention the recent massive military parade.

    white house ballroom

    A McCrery Architects rendering provided by the White House of the new ballroom. (The White House)

    In the post-Cold War era, part of America’s international style and sensibility was to be understated. Like the star quarterback who is also a model and a chess prodigy, we learned not to rub it in.

    HILLARY CLINTON FIRES UP VOTERS AGAINST TRUMP’S WHITE HOUSE BALLROOM CONSTRUCTION: ‘NOT HIS HOUSE”

    In that time, very little public art or architecture was done on a grand and classic scale, and in more recent times, our society has been so hellbent on taking statues and monuments down, that we gave little thought to putting them up.

    Trump instinctively understands that in 2025, America may still be the world’s only superpower, but not by so hegemonic a distance as in the recent past. China, among others have been catching up, and the “aw, shucks” attitude of the past needs some adjusting.

    World leaders as well those on public White House tours should have their breath taken away when they walk into the presidential ballroom. Such displays are as old as nations themselves, from the pyramids to the Coliseum, it’s nothing to be ashamed of.

    HILLARY CLINTON MOCKED FOR 2001 FURNITURE SCANDAL AMID TRUMP BALLROOM MELTDOWN: ‘AT LEAST HE DIDN’T STEAL’

    Though this expansion of the White House would be well worth taxpayer money, Trump has found a way to build it with private donations, as well as his own funds. Still the left is throwing a fit. Why?

    White House demolition for new ballroom

    The White House has started tearing down part of the East Wing to build the ballroom President Donald Trump wants added to the building. Demolition started Monday. (The Associated Press)

    Recent polling showed that only 36% of Democrats are very, or even just somewhat, proud of America. This being the case, it’s easy to understand why they object to building testaments to its power and glory.

    What Democrats and socialists are really objecting to here is not that Trump’s ballroom celebrates himself, it’s that his ballroom unabashedly celebrates America.

    Fifty years from now, when King George VII of Great Britain dines at the White House, people will little remember that it was built by Trump, even if all the gold leaf remains. By then, it will simply be a great piece of American architecture we can all be proud of.

    CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

    Americans want and deserve a big, beautiful ballroom for their nation’s executive mansion, and there has never been a president more capable of delivering it than our real estate mogul-in-chief.

    Liberals can stamp their feet in anger all they want. But the ballroom is going to be built, and eventually, most of them will come to appreciate it.

    Source link