Jeopardy! champion Amy Schneider’s history-making run comes to an end!

This 'Jeopardy!' clue ended Amy Schneider's winning streak - Los Angeles  Times

 

Dear Commons Community,

On Tuesday night, I attended a community meeting where I live with about twenty people in attendance.  The meeting normally would have been at 7:00 pm but was changed to 6:00 pm not to conflict with the TV program “Jeopardy!“.  At 7:00 pm, several people in attendance announced that they were leaving because they wanted to watch Amy Schneider’s run on the quiz show.  Well last night (Wednesday) Schneider’s dazzling streak came to an end after 40 consecutive wins and nearly $1.4 million in prize money.

Schneider’s success put her in the ranks of Ken Jennings, who’s serving as guest host, and the quiz show’s other all-time greats. It also made Schneider, a trans woman, a visible symbol of achievement for often-marginalized people.

“It’s still a little hard to believe,” she said of her impressive run. “It’s something that I’m going to be remembered for, and that’s pretty great,”

The new champ, librarian Rhone Talsma, had the correct response to the final “Jeopardy!” clue for a winning total of $29,600. Schneider, who found herself in the unusual position of entering the last round short of a runaway, was second with $19,600.

“I’m still in shock,” Talsma said in a statement. “I did not expect to be facing a 40-day champion, and I was excited to maybe see someone else slay the giant. I just really didn’t think it was going to be me, so I’m thrilled.”

Schneider told The Associated Press that Talsma played well and did a “great job of taking the opportunities when they came up and putting himself position to be able to win.”

The answer that stumped Schneider was about countries of the world: The only nation whose name in English ends in an “h” and which is also one of the 10 most populous. (Cue the “Jeopardy!” music — and the response is, “What is Bangladesh?”)

Among her immediate reactions when the game and her streak ended: She was sad but also relieved that “I don’t have to come up with anymore anecdotes,” the stories that contestants share during game breaks.

Contestants receive their winnings after their final game airs, and Schneider’s spending plans include clothes shopping and, especially, travel.

An engineering manager and Dayton, Ohio, native who lives in Oakland, California, Schneider’s regular-season play made her No. 2 in consecutive games won, placing her between Jennings with 74 games and Matt Amodio, winner of 38 games in 2021.

Schneider’s prize total of $1,382,800 puts her in fourth place on the regular-season winnings list, behind Jennings ($2,520,700), James Holzhauer ($2,462,216) and Amodio ($1,518,601).

She was braced for her streak to end, she told AP.

“I had a feeling my time was winding down, even though it didn’t look that way in the scores,” Schneider said. The routine of traveling to Los Angeles for tapings — five shows a day, two days a week — was tiring, and that took a toll.

After she surpassed Amodio’s tally of consecutive victories, she added, the prospect of trying to break Jennings’ long-standing record was “hard to imagine.”

Schneider’s depth of knowledge, lightning-fast answers and gracious but efficient manner won her a devoted fan base. Comedy writer Louis Virtel, a former “Jeopardy!” contestant, tweeted earlier this month that Schneider was like a “case worker assigned to each episode, and when she’s done she picks up her briefcase, nods, and leaves.”

She was also admired for her handling of anti-trans trolls, with one measured reply prompting a shoutout to her from writer and Broadway star Harvey Fierstein.

“The best outcome of all of this always is going to be whatever help I’ve been able to offer the trans community,” Schneider said. “I’m here because of the sacrifices countless trans people have made, often to the extent of risking their lives. To do my part to move that cause forward, it’s really special.”

Schneider has a message for “Jeopardy!” viewers who will miss making her part of their daily routine: “I realized that I am really just so sad for all my fans. … I want to thank them for all their support, and tell them that’s it’s OK.”

For the season through Jan. 17, “Jeopardy!” ranked as the most-watched syndicated program with an average 9.4 million viewers – a substantial increase of 563,000 over the last season. The show averaged 11 million viewers for the week of Jan. 10-17, according to Nielsen.

Congratulations to a gracious champion!

Tony

US Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer to Retire – Biden Likely to Nominate First Black Woman!

Progressives Demand 'Breyer Retire' So Biden Can Appoint Supreme Court  Justice

 

Dear Commons Community,

US Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer is retiring, numerous sources said yesterday, giving President Joe Biden his first high court opening, which he has pledged to fill with the historic naming of the court’s first Black woman.

Breyer, 83, has been a force on a court that has grown increasingly conservative, trying to forge majorities with more moderate justices right and left of center. His retirement will give Biden the chance to name and win confirmation of a replacement before next fall’s election when Republicans could retake the Senate and block future nominees.

Biden and Breyer are expected to hold an event at the White House today to formally announce Breyer’s plans to retire, according to a person briefed on the planning who was not authorized to publicly discuss it in advance. Democrats are planning a swift confirmation, perhaps even before Breyer officially steps down, which is not expected before summer.

He has been a justice since 1994, appointed by President Bill Clinton. Along with the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, he opted not to step down the last time the Democrats controlled the White House and the Senate during Barack Obama’s presidency. Ginsburg died in September 2020, and then-President Donald Trump filled the vacancy with a conservative justice, Amy Coney Barrett.

Breyer’s departure won’t change the 6-3 conservative advantage on the court because his replacement will almost certainly be confirmed by a Senate where Democrats have the slimmest majority. It will make conservative Justice Clarence Thomas the oldest member of the court. Thomas turns 74 in June.  As reported by the Associated Press.

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer said Biden’s nominee “will receive a prompt hearing in the Senate Judiciary Committee and will be considered and confirmed by the full United States Senate with all deliberate speed.” A White House decision on a nominee could take several weeks, Biden aides and allies said.

Republicans who changed the Senate rules during the Trump era to allow simple majority confirmation of Supreme Court nominees appeared resigned to the outcome.

Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, a Republican who previously chaired the Senate Judiciary Committee, said in a statement: “If all Democrats hang together – which I expect they will – they have the power to replace Justice Breyer in 2022 without one Republican vote in support.”

Liberal interest groups expressed relief. They have been clamoring for Breyer’s retirement, concerned about confirmation troubles if Republicans retake the Senate.

“Justice Breyer’s retirement is coming not a moment too soon, but now we must make sure our party remains united in support of confirming his successor,” Demand Justice Executive Director Brian Fallon said.

Among the names being circulated as potential nominees are California Supreme Court Justice Leondra Kruger, U.S. Circuit Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson, prominent civil rights lawyer Sherrilyn Ifill and U.S. District Judge Michelle Childs, whom Biden has nominated to be an appeals court judge. Childs is a favorite of Rep. James Clyburn, D-S.C., who made a crucial endorsement of Biden just before South Carolina’s presidential primary in 2020.

Biden’s pledge to name the first Black woman to the Supreme Court was made during the 2020 presidential campaign. Since he took office a little more than a year ago, he has been focused on increasing racial, ethnic and experiential diversity in the lower federal courts. He has doubled the number of Black women who serve on appellate courts just below the Supreme Court, with three more nominees pending.

Democratic Rep. Joyce Beatty of Ohio, the chairwoman of the Congressional Black Caucus, said, “We know that when America’s boardrooms, legislatures and even the Supreme Court start to resemble America, we all benefit.”

 America thanks Justice Breyer for his service and for retiring at this point in his career.

Tony

Don Lemon and Rachel Maddow Call Out Fox News for “Praising” Vladimir Putin during the Ukraine Crisis!

 

How Tucker Carlson Is Boosting Russia's New Propaganda War

Tucker Carlson Praises Putin

Dear Commons Community,

Last night, CNN’s Don Lemon called out Fox News for supporting Russia as tensions continue to rise with Ukraine. Fox’s most popular opinion host, Tucker Carlson, has repeatedly defended Russia’s escalation of the situation, while others have been very complimentary of Russian President Vladimir Putin.

“With tensions at an all-time high, you’ve gotta wonder, why does a certain network seem to love Vladimir Putin so much?” Lemon wondered. “You all know who I’m talking about. I’m talking about the Fox propaganda network. What we’re seeing is a whole lot of praise for the authoritarian strongman who rules Russia with an iron fist.”

As the possibility of a Russian invasion of Ukraine remains a strong possibility, tensions between Russia and the United States have reached heights not seen in decades. But Fox’s narrative has reportedly swayed some viewers to side with Russian aggression, causing Lemon to question why some at the network are pushing that message.

“That can come straight out of the Putin playbook. To Russia with love,” Lemon said. “And it raises a whole lot of questions about what the Fox propaganda network is up to. What are they up to? And whose propaganda they’re pushing, really.”

Earlier in the night on MSNBC, Rachel Maddow also took a jab at Fox’s coverage of the burgeoning conflict.

“Every country in the West is worried about Russia potentially starting this new war,” Maddow said. “Everybody except our friends at Fox News primetime who are apparently rooting for Russia in this instance and wouldn’t mind a war. But elsewhere in the West, everybody’s worried about it.”

No surprise from a Murdoch-owned company!

Tony

Fiona Hill: Putin Has the U.S. Right Where He Wants It!

Illustration by Shoshana Schultz/New York Times; photographs by Aurelien Meunier, Chip Somodevilla, Mikhail Svetlov, Ira Wyman via Getty Images.

Dear Commons Community,

Fiona Hill, an intelligence officer on Russia and Eurasian affairs for Presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama and served on the National Security Council under President Donald Trump, has a sobering guest essay in today’s New York Times on Vladimir Putin’ goals in the Ukraine.  She provides a history lesson for the last thirty years that have pushed Putin to this point in his relationships with the U.S. and the rest of Europe. Here is an excerpt.

“George, you have to understand that Ukraine is not even a country. Part of its territory is in Eastern Europe and the greater part was given to us.” These were the ominous words of President Vladimir Putin of Russia to President George W. Bush in Bucharest, Romania, at a NATO summit in April 2008.

Mr. Putin was furious: NATO had just announced that Ukraine and Georgia would eventually join the alliance. This was a compromise formula to allay concerns of our European allies — an explicit promise to join the bloc, but no specific timeline for membership.

At the time, I was the national intelligence officer for Russia and Eurasia, part of a team briefing Mr. Bush. We warned him that Mr. Putin would view steps to bring Ukraine and Georgia closer to NATO as a provocative move that would likely provoke pre-emptive Russian military action. But ultimately, our warnings weren’t heeded.

Within four months, in August 2008, Russia invaded Georgia. Ukraine got Russia’s message loud and clear. It backpedaled on NATO membership for the next several years. But in 2014, Ukraine wanted to sign an association agreement with the European Union, thinking this might be a safer route to the West. Moscow struck again, accusing Ukraine of seeking a back door to NATO, annexing Ukraine’s Crimean peninsula and starting an ongoing proxy war in Ukraine’s southeastern Donbas region. The West’s muted reactions to both the 2008 and 2014 invasions emboldened Mr. Putin.

This time, Mr. Putin’s aim is bigger than closing NATO’s “open door” to Ukraine and taking more territory — he wants to evict the United States from Europe. As he might put it: “Goodbye, America. Don’t let the door hit you on the way out.”

As I have seen over two decades of observing Mr. Putin, and analyzing his moves, his actions are purposeful and his choice of this moment to throw down the gauntlet in Ukraine and Europe is very intentional. He has a personal obsession with history and anniversaries. December 2021 marked the 30th anniversary of the dissolution of the Soviet Union, when Russia lost its dominant position in Europe. Mr. Putin wants to give the United States a taste of the same bitter medicine Russia had to swallow in the 1990s. He believes that the United States is currently in the same predicament as Russia was after the Soviet collapse: grievously weakened at home and in retreat abroad. He also thinks NATO is nothing more than an extension of the United States. Russian officials and commentators routinely deny any agency or independent strategic thought to other NATO members. So, when it comes to the alliance, all of Moscow’s moves are directed against Washington.

In the 1990s, the United States and NATO forced Russia to withdraw the remnants of the Soviet military from their bases in Eastern Europe, Germany and the Baltic States. Mr. Putin wants the United States to suffer in a similar way. From Russia’s perspective, America’s domestic travails after four years of Donald Trump’s disastrous presidency, as well as the rifts he created with U.S. allies and then America’s precipitous withdrawal from Afghanistan, signal weakness. If Russia presses hard enough, Mr. Putin hopes he can strike a new security deal with NATO and Europe to avoid an open-ended conflict, and then it will be America’s turn to leave, taking its troops and missiles with it.

Ukraine is both Russia’s target and a source of leverage against the United States. Over the last several months Mr. Putin has bogged the Biden administration down in endless tactical games that put the United States on the defensive. Russia moves forces to Ukraine’s borders, launches war games and ramps up the visceral commentary. In recent official documents, it demanded ironclad guarantees that Ukraine (and other former republics of the U.S.S.R.) will never become a member of NATO, that NATO pull back from positions taken after 1997, and also that America withdraw its own forces and weapons, including its nuclear missiles. Russian representatives assert that Moscow doesn’t “need peace at any cost” in Europe. Some Russian politicians even suggest the possibility of a pre-emptive strike against NATO targets to make sure that we know they are serious, and that we should meet Moscow’s demands.

The entire essay is below.  Ms. Hill knows what she is talking about!

Tony

—————————————————————————————————-

The New York Times

Putin Has the U.S. Right Where He Wants It

Jan. 24, 2022

We knew this was coming.

“George, you have to understand that Ukraine is not even a country. Part of its territory is in Eastern Europe and the greater part was given to us.” These were the ominous words of President Vladimir Putin of Russia to President George W. Bush in Bucharest, Romania, at a NATO summit in April 2008.

Mr. Putin was furious: NATO had just announced that Ukraine and Georgia would eventually join the alliance. This was a compromise formula to allay concerns of our European allies — an explicit promise to join the bloc, but no specific timeline for membership.

At the time, I was the national intelligence officer for Russia and Eurasia, part of a team briefing Mr. Bush. We warned him that Mr. Putin would view steps to bring Ukraine and Georgia closer to NATO as a provocative move that would likely provoke pre-emptive Russian military action. But ultimately, our warnings weren’t heeded.

Within four months, in August 2008, Russia invaded Georgia. Ukraine got Russia’s message loud and clear. It backpedaled on NATO membership for the next several years. But in 2014, Ukraine wanted to sign an association agreement with the European Union, thinking this might be a safer route to the West. Moscow struck again, accusing Ukraine of seeking a back door to NATO, annexing Ukraine’s Crimean peninsula and starting an ongoing proxy war in Ukraine’s southeastern Donbas region. The West’s muted reactions to both the 2008 and 2014 invasions emboldened Mr. Putin.

This time, Mr. Putin’s aim is bigger than closing NATO’s “open door” to Ukraine and taking more territory — he wants to evict the United States from Europe. As he might put it: “Goodbye, America. Don’t let the door hit you on the way out.”

As I have seen over two decades of observing Mr. Putin, and analyzing his moves, his actions are purposeful and his choice of this moment to throw down the gauntlet in Ukraine and Europe is very intentional. He has a personal obsession with history and anniversaries. December 2021 marked the 30th anniversary of the dissolution of the Soviet Union, when Russia lost its dominant position in Europe. Mr. Putin wants to give the United States a taste of the same bitter medicine Russia had to swallow in the 1990s. He believes that the United States is currently in the same predicament as Russia was after the Soviet collapse: grievously weakened at home and in retreat abroad. He also thinks NATO is nothing more than an extension of the United States. Russian officials and commentators routinely deny any agency or independent strategic thought to other NATO members. So, when it comes to the alliance, all of Moscow’s moves are directed against Washington.

In the 1990s, the United States and NATO forced Russia to withdraw the remnants of the Soviet military from their bases in Eastern Europe, Germany and the Baltic States. Mr. Putin wants the United States to suffer in a similar way. From Russia’s perspective, America’s domestic travails after four years of Donald Trump’s disastrous presidency, as well as the rifts he created with U.S. allies and then America’s precipitous withdrawal from Afghanistan, signal weakness. If Russia presses hard enough, Mr. Putin hopes he can strike a new security deal with NATO and Europe to avoid an open-ended conflict, and then it will be America’s turn to leave, taking its troops and missiles with it.

Ukraine is both Russia’s target and a source of leverage against the United States. Over the last several months Mr. Putin has bogged the Biden administration down in endless tactical games that put the United States on the defensive. Russia moves forces to Ukraine’s borders, launches war games and ramps up the visceral commentary. In recent official documents, it demanded ironclad guarantees that Ukraine (and other former republics of the U.S.S.R.) will never become a member of NATO, that NATO pull back from positions taken after 1997, and also that America withdraw its own forces and weapons, including its nuclear missiles. Russian representatives assert that Moscow doesn’t “need peace at any cost” in Europe. Some Russian politicians even suggest the possibility of a pre-emptive strike against NATO targets to make sure that we know they are serious, and that we should meet Moscow’s demands.

For weeks, American officials have huddled to make sense of the official documents with Russia’s demands and the contradictory commentary, pondered how to deter Mr. Putin in Ukraine and scrambled to talk on his timeline.

All the while, Mr. Putin and his proxies have ratcheted up their statements. Kremlin officials have not just challenged the legitimacy of America’s position in Europe, they have raised questions about America’s bases in Japan and its role in the Asia-Pacific region. They have also intimated that they may ship hypersonic missiles to America’s back door in Cuba and Venezuela to revive what the Russians call the Caribbean Crisis of the 1960s.

Mr. Putin is a master of coercive inducement. He manufactures a crisis in such a way that he can win no matter what anyone else does. Threats and promises are essentially one and the same. Mr. Putin can invade Ukraine yet again, or he can leave things where they are and just consolidate the territory Russia effectively controls in Crimea and Donbas. He can stir up trouble in Japan and send hypersonic missiles to Cuba and Venezuela, or not, if things go his way in Europe.

Mr. Putin plays a longer, strategic game and knows how to prevail in the tactical scrum. He has the United States right where he wants it. His posturing and threats have set the agenda in European security debates, and have drawn our full attention. Unlike President Biden, Mr. Putin doesn’t have to worry about midterm elections or pushback from his own party or the opposition. Mr. Putin has no concerns about bad press or poor poll ratings. He isn’t part of a political party and he has crushed the Russian opposition. The Kremlin has largely silenced the local, independent press. Mr. Putin is up for re-election in 2024, but his only viable opponent, Aleksei Navalny, is locked in a penal colony outside of Moscow.

So Mr. Putin can act as he chooses, when he chooses. Barring ill health, the United States will have to contend with him for years to come. Right now, all signs indicate that Mr. Putin will lock the United States into an endless tactical game, take more chunks out of Ukraine and exploit all the frictions and fractures in NATO and the European Union. Getting out of the current crisis requires acting, not reacting. The United States needs to shape the diplomatic response and engage Russia on the West’s terms, not just Moscow’s.

To be sure, Russia does have some legitimate security concerns, and European security arrangements could certainly do with fresh thinking and refurbishment after 30 years. There is plenty for Washington and Moscow to discuss on the conventional and nuclear forces as well as in the cyber domain and on other fronts. But a further Russian invasion of Ukraine and Ukraine’s dismemberment and neutralization cannot be an issue for U.S.-Russian negotiation nor a line item in European security. Ultimately, the United States needs to show Mr. Putin that he will face global resistance and Mr. Putin’s aggression will put Russia’s political and economic relationships at risk far beyond Europe.

Contrary to Mr. Putin’s premise in 2008 that Ukraine is “not a real country,” Ukraine has been a full-fledged member of the United Nations since 1991. Another Russian assault would challenge the entire U.N. system and imperil the arrangements that have guaranteed member states’ sovereignty since World War II — akin to the Iraq invasion of Kuwait in 1990, but on an even bigger scale. The United States and its allies, and Ukraine itself, should take this issue to the United Nations and put it before the General Assembly as well as the Security Council. Even if Russia blocks a resolution, the future of Ukraine merits a global response. The United States should also raise concerns in other regional institutions. Why is Russia trying to take its disputes in Europe to Asia and the Western Hemisphere? What does Ukraine have to do with Japan, or Cuba and Venezuela?

Mr. Biden has promised that Russia “will pay a heavy price” if any Russian troops cross Ukraine’s borders. If Mr. Putin invades Ukraine with no punitive action from the West and the rest of the international community, beyond financial sanctions, then he will have set a precedent for future action by other countries. Mr. Putin has already factored additional U.S. financial sanctions into his calculations. But he assumes that some NATO allies will be reluctant to follow suit on these sanctions and other countries will look the other way. U.N. censure, widespread and vocal international opposition, and action by countries outside Europe to pull back on their relations with Russia might give him pause. Forging a united front with its European allies and rallying broader support should be America’s longer game. Otherwise this saga could indeed mark the beginning of the end of America’s military presence in Europe.

 

SAT:  Put Down Your No. Pencils – Forever – Oh My!

 

 

More than two dozen schools announced that standardized tests would be optional for applicants seeking to enroll in 2021.

Dear Commons Community,

The College Board announced yesterday that the era in which high-schoolers had to make sure their No. 2 pencils were sharpened and their answer bubbles were completely filled in, has ended. Starting in 2024, the SAT exam will only be offered digitally on laptops or tablets at testing centers. It will also be shortened from three hours to two hours. As reported by The New York Times.

The College Board is trying to retool the exam that has stressed out millions of students in the face of questions about whether college admissions tests are fair, or even necessary.

A growing number of colleges have eliminated the requirement that applicants submit scores from the SAT or the competing ACT, and the trend of “test-optional” admissions accelerated greatly during the coronavirus pandemic. More than 1,800 schools did not require standardized test scores for 2022 admissions, according to the nonprofit organization FairTest.

The number of SAT test takers declined from 2.2 million high schoolers who graduated in 2020 to 1.5 million in the class of 2021, according to the College Board. About 1.7 million students in the class of 2022 have taken the test to date.

In addition to its transition to a digital test, the College Board will also allow calculators on the entire math section, shorten reading passages and reflect a wider range of topics.

In pilot runs that were conducted last year, 80 percent of students said they found the digital tests less stressful, according to the College Board, which said laptops or tablets would be provided for students who need them.

Priscilla Rodriguez, vice president of college readiness assessments for the College Board, said the changes would make the test more relevant.

“In a largely test-optional world, the SAT is a lower-stakes test in college admissions,” Ms. Rodriguez said in a statement. “Submitting a score is optional for every type of college, and we want the SAT to be the best possible option for students.”

Christal Wang, a junior at Thomas Jefferson High School for Science and Technology in Alexandria, Va., took both the digital test and the pencil test last year. She said the digital version had shorter reading passages with one or two questions, while the traditional test had longer passages that required several responses.

“I definitely preferred that format with the shorter passages, just because it was a lot easier to read and easier to stay focused,” Ms. Wang, 16, said. “I also felt less drained at the end.”

In recent years, the SAT has come under increasing criticism from those who say that standardized tests handicap poor and minority students, partly because they may not have access to expensive test preparation classes.

Bob Schaeffer, executive director of FairTest, which questions the use of standardized tests in college admissions, said in a statement that the shift to a digital SAT “does not magically transform it to a more accurate, fairer or valid tool for assessing college readiness.”

In response to criticism of its test, the College Board has said that SAT scores serve to strengthen the applications of many students who test better than their high school grade-point averages would indicate.

Some college administrators said the upcoming move to a digital platform was overdue. A year ago, the College Board announced it would do away with SAT subject tests and the essay question.

“It’s about time that they’ve moved away from paper and pencil,” said Kent R. Hopkins, vice president for academic enterprise enrollment at Arizona State University. Mr. Hopkins, who serves on a College Board advisory panel, said he was hopeful that the new format would enhance security and make the test less “clunky.”

The large public school has historically been test-optional, although most of its applicants submit standardized test scores, Mr. Hopkins said.

College admissions testing centers were forced to shut down early in the pandemic, and many colleges — including some of the nation’s leading institutions — waived the requirements, at least temporarily. Some have eliminated them altogether.

The University of California system announced last year that standardized test scores would no longer be a factor in admissions decisions at its 10 schools after it settled a lawsuit claiming that the test created inequities in assessing a student’s chances of success in college.

After the decision by California’s prestigious public system, Harvard, one of the country’s most elite private schools, announced in December that it would not require the SAT or ACT through the next four years, a move observers thought would expedite the movement to eliminate standardized test scores.

This is probably a good move by the College Board.  As for me, I keep a supply of No. 2 pencils in my desk as well as a case of large erasers that neatly fit on top of them.

Tony

James Webb Space Telescope Arrives At Observation Post 1 Million Miles Away!

Dear Commons Community,

The world’s biggest, most powerful space telescope arrived at its observation post 1 million miles from Earth yesterday, a month after it lifted off on a quest to behold the dawn of the universe.

On command, the James Webb Space Telescope fired its rocket thrusters for nearly five minutes to go into orbit around the sun at its designated location, and NASA confirmed the operation went as planned.

The mirrors on the $10 billion observatory still must be meticulously aligned, the infrared detectors sufficiently chilled and the scientific instruments calibrated before observations can begin in June.

But flight controllers in Baltimore were euphoric after chalking up another success.  As reported by NASA.

“We’re one step closer to uncovering the mysteries of the universe. And I can’t wait to see Webb’s first new views of the universe this summer!” NASA Administrator Bill Nelson said in a statement.

The telescope will enable astronomers to peer back further in time than ever before, all the way back to when the first stars and galaxies were forming 13.7 billion years ago. That’s a mere 100 million years from the Big Bang, when the universe was created.

Besides making stellar observations, Webb will scan the atmospheres of alien worlds for possible signs of life.

“Webb is officially on station,” said Keith Parrish, a manager on the project. “This is just capping off just a remarkable 30 days.”

The telescope was launched from French Guiana on Christmas. A week and a half later, a sunshield as big as a tennis court stretched open on the telescope. The instrument’s gold-coated primary mirror — 21 feet (6.5 meters) across — unfolded a few days later.

The primary mirror has 18 hexagonal segments, each the size of a coffee table, that will have to be painstakingly aligned so that they see as one — a task that will take three months.

“We’re a month in and the baby hasn’t even opened its eyes yet,” Jane Rigby, the operations project scientist, said of the telescope’s infrared instruments. “But that’s the science that we’re looking forward to.”

Monday’s thruster firing put the telescope in orbit around the sun at the so-called second Lagrange point, where the gravitational forces of the sun and Earth balance each other. The 7-ton spacecraft will loop-de-loop around that point while also circling the sun. It will always face Earth’s night side to keep its infrared detectors as frigid as possible.

At 1 million miles (1.6 million kilometers) away, Webb is more than four times as distant as the moon.

The Webb is expected to operate for well over a decade, maybe two.

Considered the successor to the Hubble Space Telescope, which orbits 330 miles (530 kilometers) up, Webb is too far away for emergency repairs. That makes the milestones over the past month — and the ones ahead — all the more critical.

Spacewalking astronauts performed surgery five times on Hubble. The first operation, in 1993, corrected the telescope’s blurry vision, a flaw introduced during the mirror’s construction on the ground.

Whether chasing optical and ultraviolet light like Hubble or infrared light like Webb, telescopes can see farther and more clearly when operating above Earth’s distorting atmosphere. That’s why NASA teamed up with the European and Canadian space agencies to get Webb and its mirror — the largest ever launched — into the cosmos.

Congratulations Webb!

Tony

 

Former New York Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver Dies!

 

Sheldon Silver gets support from ex-NYC mayor

Dear Commons Community,

Former New York Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver, one of the most powerful figures in state government for two decades before his conviction on corruption charges, has died in federal custody. He was 77.

Silver died yesterday, the federal Bureau of Prisons said, adding that the official cause of death would be determined by the medical examiner.  As reported by the Associated Press.

Silver’s supporters had said he was in failing health from multiple medical conditions. He had been serving his sentence at the Federal Medical Center in Devens, Massachusetts, but was in a hospital in nearby Ayer, Massachusetts, at the time of his death, the bureau said. 

The Manhattan Democrat, who told a judge he prayed he would not die in prison, was serving a more than six-year sentence for using his clout in state government to benefit real estate developers, who rewarded Silver by referring lucrative business to his law firm. 

Silver’s conviction ended a nearly four-decade career in the Assembly. He first won a seat representing Manhattan’s Lower East Side in 1976. Although he cut a low-key figure in the halls of the state Capitol, carefully parsing out comments in a baritone mumble, he was a consummate practitioner of Albany’s inside game.

He became Assembly speaker in 1994, a powerful position that made him one of Albany’s “three men in a room” negotiating annual budgets and major legislation with the governor and state Senate leader.

In all, Silver served as speaker during the tenure of five New York governors, from Mario Cuomo to Andrew Cuomo.

He became known as an inscrutable and stubborn negotiator, blocking proposals so often he was sometimes called “Dr. No.” Some of his obstructionist reputation had to do with being the lone Democrat at the negotiating table during Republican Gov. George Pataki’s three terms, during which time the GOP also controlled the state Senate.

He helped scuttle former New York City Mayor Mike Bloomberg’s plan to locate a football stadium on Manhattan’s West Side. And he took the brunt of the blame for the collapse in 2008 of Bloomberg’s congestion-pricing plan for Manhattan, which would have charged electronic tolls for driving through the borough’s most highly trafficked neighborhoods.

The exasperated mayor put out a press release saying it “takes a special kind of cowardice” not to have lawmakers vote on the plan. Silver said he didn’t have the votes.

He survived an early tenure coup attempt and became adept at horse-trading to secure education funding, tenants rights legislation and other policies favored by Assembly Democrats. 

“For more than two decades, he held back a tide of repressive legislation while advancing an agenda that provided equity, justice and opportunity for all,” Democratic Assembly member Kevin Cahill of the Hudson Valley said in a prepared statement.

An Orthodox Jew, Silver was known to observe Sabbath even during the marathon negotiation sessions that preceded annual budget deadlines and the end of legislative sessions.

Over time, he became a symbol of Albany’s much-maligned opaque style of governance and, ultimately, a target of federal prosecutors.

Prosecutors accused Silver of trading his influence for money. In one instance, they argued that Silver persuaded a physician to refer asbestos cancer patients to his law firm so it could seek multimillion-dollar settlements from personal injury lawsuits, a secret arrangement that allowed him to collect about $3 million in referral fees. In return, prosecutors said he directed hundreds of thousands of dollars in state grants to a research center run by the doctor.

Silver’s lawyer argued that his client was entitled to accept payments for outside work.

His original 2015 conviction was tossed out by an appeals court after a U.S. Supreme Court ruling that narrowed the definition of a corrupt act. He was convicted again at a second trial in 2018 tailored slightly to conform to the high court ruling.

But an appeals court ultimately threw out the conviction related to the asbestos cancer patients, citing a faulty instruction to the jury. Prosecutors decided not to retry him on that charge. In the part of his conviction that stuck, the court found that he had supported legislation that benefited real estate developers who were referring tax business to a law firm that employed him.

Silver gave up his leadership position following his arrest in January 2015 and lost his legislative seat upon his first conviction that November. 

Silver joined a long list of state lawmakers, including other top leaders, who have been sentenced for crimes including bribery, conspiracy, tax evasion, fraud and racketeering. One of the leaders with whom he shared power during his time as speaker, Republican state Senate Majority Leader Dean Skelos, was convicted of extortion, wire fraud and bribery in a case that moved through the courts at roughly the same time as Silver’s case.

Gov. Andrew Cuomo, who had shared power with Silver, resigned from office last summer amid sexual harassment allegations.

Silver begged for mercy ahead of his sentencing in a letter to the judge.

“I pray I will not die in prison,” Silver wrote, saying he was “broken-hearted” that he damaged the trust people have in government.

Silver was furloughed from prison for several days in May before federal authorities denied him home confinement.

Silver was the youngest of four children of Russian immigrants. His father ran a wholesale hardware store. As an adult, he and his wife had four children and lived in a lower Manhattan apartment blocks from his first home.

He received a bachelor’s degree from Yeshiva University and a law degree from Brooklyn Law School.

May he rest in peace!

Tony

Pandemic Causes High School Graduation Rates to Dip across US!

Poets&Quants - The Coronavirus Commencements: MBAs Celebrate In Quarantine

 

Dear Commons Community,

High school graduation rates declined in at least 20 states after the first full school year disrupted by the pandemic, indicating the coronavirus may have ended nearly two decades of nationwide progress toward getting more students diplomas.

The decline came even as some states and educators eased standards to help struggling students.

The results, according to data obtained from 26 states and analyzed by Chalkbeat, are the latest concerning trend in American education, which has been rocked by a pandemic that left many students learning remotely last year and continues to complicate teaching and learning. Some fear that the next several graduating classes could be even more affected.  As reported by the Associated Press.

“It does concern me,” said Chris Reykdal, the schools superintendent in Washington state, where the graduation rate fell by about half a point. “I don’t ever want to see a decline. We’ve made such steady progress.”

In 2020, when schools shuttered for the final months of the school year, most states waived outstanding graduation requirements and saw graduation rates tick up. But the picture was different for the class of 2021. In 20 of 26 states that have released their data, graduation rates fell. Comprehensive national data will likely not be available until 2023.

Those declines were less than a percentage point in some states, like Colorado, Georgia and Kansas. Elsewhere, they were larger. Illinois, Oregon, and North Dakota saw graduation rates drop 2 points, and Indiana, Maine, Nevada, South Dakota, and West Virginia saw declines of at least 1 point.

Where rates increased, growth was modest. Florida had seen graduation rates jump by more than 2 points every year for a decade but gained just a tenth of a point in 2021, even as state officials waived certain diploma requirements.

“We do have to be concerned that grad rates are down and that some number of kids that earned a diploma, they’ve learned less than prior years,” said Robert Balfanz, a professor at the Johns Hopkins School of Education and director of a research center focused on high school graduation. “What we’re going to have to learn in the future is, how great is the concern?”

Last year’s senior class saw school disrupted in distinct ways. In Nevada’s Washoe County schools, for example, the graduation rate tumbled by 2.6 points as many teens worked longer hours or spent more time caring for siblings.

Carly Lott, a counselor at Hug High School in Reno, grew concerned last year as the hours on her students’ pay stubs, which the school collects to offer elective credits, rose from 20 to 30 a week to 40 to 50. Some students worked during remote school days, while others took late-night shifts that left them too tired to concentrate on schoolwork.

Lott made sure students knew about the district’s food bank and grew used to asking, “Do you absolutely need to work, or can you cut back?” As course failures stacked up, a trend schools reported nationwide, counselors nudged seniors to come to school in person to make up missed credits.

“If they were at home, they weren’t engaged — they were doing other things,” Lott said.

One of last year’s graduates, 19-year-old De’karius Graham, had an up-close view of how 12th graders struggled.

There was no prom to look forward to, and all his senior classes at Florida’s Polk County schools were online, an experience he describes as “​​low social interaction, low teacher interaction.” He often turned to YouTube to figure out confusing assignments.

“It was a lot of self-teaching and self-motivation,” he said. “I was just really alone with it all.”

At the same time, Graham was running his own landscaping business to make money and helping seven school-age siblings with their homework. He also spent time working with a close friend who struggled with online assignments without reliable internet.

Other students got derailed. Eighteen-year-old Lailani Greaves had been behind before the pandemic but was aiming to graduate with the class of 2021. Without in-person connections, her motivation plummeted.

“I didn’t have a clear head where I was focused and able to go every day and catch up on some work and log in to the computer,” she said. “Just talking to a computer — it didn’t feel real.”

The New York City student contemplated dropping out and getting her GED but ultimately transferred to a smaller high school and is hopeful she’ll graduate this year.

“I realized that I could go farther with my high school diploma,” said Greaves, who wants to pursue a career in medicine.

Despite those challenges, statewide graduation rates are still typically higher now than they were a few years ago. But the modest declines are striking departures from recent trends.

In 2001, an estimated 71% of U.S. students who started ninth grade at a public high school graduated four years later. By 2019, that number had jumped to 86%, although the nation’s way of calculating that has changed slightly.

On its face, that increase is one of the biggest recent success stories in American education. A recent Brookings Institution study concluded that the gains were a result of new federal pressure on states and schools and found little evidence that the long-term improvements were due to lower standards.

The causes are much debated, though. A 2015 NPR investigation found that many students graduated with the help of hasty, low-quality credit recovery courses. Some of the states with the nation’s top graduation rates, like Alabama and West Virginia, also have very low test scores.

Some fear that cumulative effects of the pandemic stand to hit future graduating classes hardest. In both Oregon and Nevada, the share of high school freshmen who finished last school year on track to graduate was about 10 percentage points lower than before the pandemic. This school year, attendance has also been unusually low.

Lott worries many seniors won’t graduate on time this year, either.

“​We have a significant group of kids on our campus who failed an entire year of high school,” she said. Those students get extra check-ins with Lott, who says it will be hard but not impossible to make up those classes through online credit recovery.

“I tell them, there will be a time that you’re going to want to give up,” she said. “That’s when we need to talk with you, because we can help you through that motivational slump.”

Schools have received large sums of federal aid that could be used to help students to graduate, but Washington’s Reykdal said schools have recently been focused on staffing and safety.

“If I had talked to my districts a year ago, they all would have said graduation and recovery, and right now they’re saying more PPE, finding substitutes,” he said.

Still, some educators are hopeful last year’s dip represents an anomaly. In Peoria, Illinois, where the graduation rate fell 4 points after climbing steadily for years, Superintendent Sharon Desmoulin-Kherat thinks the district’s expanded “safety net” for struggling students will help.

Every week, a team of educators identifies students with failing grades for extra support. The district has also added ways for working students to earn credits in the evenings or on weekends, and has hired three “navigators” to help students who are in the juvenile justice system to finish school.

“It is not easy,” Desmoulin-Kherat said. “It’s definitely a marathon, not a sprint.”

COVID just keeps rearing its ugly head!

Tony

 

Judge Blasts U of Florida – Says Professors’ Testimony Can’t Be Blocked!

Judge Mark Walker is at the center of Florida recount legal fight

 

Dear Commons Community,

In an opinion on Friday, a federal judge ruled that the University of Florida may not block professors from testifying against the state under the institution’s conflict-of-interest policy. The decision is the latest turn in a closely watched case that arose from concerns that the university, in barring professors from testifying in a voting-rights case, had violated the faculty members’ First Amendment rights and infringed on academic freedom.

In granting six faculty members’ request for a preliminary injunction, Judge Mark E. Walker, of the U.S. District Court in Tallahassee, rejected the university’s argument that its recently revised policy passed constitutional muster.

For the time being, the judge ruled, UF may still enforce a policy that, in some cases, allows it to prohibit faculty members from citing their university affiliations when serving as expert witnesses. Also left standing is the university’s conflict-of-commitment policy for outside work.  As reported by The Chronicle of Higher Education.

The university came under fire in October after The New York Times first reported that administrators, applying the university’s conflict-of-interest policy, had blocked professors from serving as expert witnesses in litigation against the state. Doing so, professors were told, would be “adverse to UF’s interests.” Within days, amid a blizzard of criticism, the university reversed its decision and said the professors were free to testify.

In November, W. Kent Fuchs, the university’s president, accepted a task force’s recommendations that the policy be revised to reflect a “strong presumption” that UF will approve requests from faculty and staff members to testify as private citizens in litigation that involves the State of Florida, “regardless of the viewpoint” of the testimony. The university would deny requests only if there were “clear and convincing evidence” of a particular harm that the testimony could bring to UF.

In his 74-page ruling, Walker sided with the plaintiffs, saying that the policy contains “myriad constitutional infirmities.” The revised policy is nothing more than a “dolled-up version of the same old conflict-of-interest policy,” the judge wrote, and the university has still never “disavowed” its original policy.

The controversy has brought undeniable reputational damage to UF, a university that has risen in rankings and prestige in recent years. Given that, Walker suggested, it is significant that the university has stuck with a policy that would still allow the restriction of professors’ work in politically controversial cases. “Consider the costs UF is willing to bear to maintain its power to discriminate based on viewpoint,” Walker wrote. “It is willing to suffer threats to its accreditation, congressional inquiries, unrelenting bad press, an all-but-certain hit to its rankings, and the substantial monetary cost of hiring an experienced D.C. firm to defend its policy. The only thing UF will not do, it seems, is amend its policy to make clear that it will never consider viewpoint in denying a request to testify.”

Even now, the judge said, the professors “are self-censoring because of UF’s policy, and I find that their chilled speech stems from reasonable fears that the policy will be enforced against them moving forward.”

The plaintiffs include Sharon Wright Austin, Michael McDonald, and Daniel A. Smith, the three political-science professors who were initially barred from testifying. Joining them are Jeffrey L. Goldhagen, a pediatrics professor, and the law professors Kenneth Nunn and Teresa Reid.

In an opinion that referenced Communist China, Walker sounded baffled at times by arguments the university had put forward in defense of its policy. UF claimed to have “unlimited discretion” to restrict professors’ speech if it determined the speech “would harm an ill-defined’ ‘interest’ of the university.”

“It’s worth pausing to note just how shocking the defendants’ position is,” the judge wrote.

Walker, who earned his bachelor’s and law degrees from UF, has in two previous public hearings on the case engaged in prickly exchanges with the university’s lawyers. Last week the judge suggested that H. Christopher Bartolomucci, a partner at a firm in Washington D.C., representing UF, had been “squirrely” in his defense.

In his opinion, the judge blasted the university for taking the “remarkable position” that professors might not have a First Amendment right to testify about topics related to their expertise against the state while working at UF. In so arguing, Walker wrote, university officials had “denigrated their own professors as being no better than two-faced mercenaries when they seek to testify as experts in their field in cases challenging Florida law.”

David A. O’Neil, a lawyer representing the professors, said in a written statement that the decision was a boon for free speech and academic freedom.

“Today’s decision is a ringing endorsement of the critical importance of faculty free speech and academic freedom to the health of our democracy,” he said. “The university may no longer prohibit faculty members from sharing their views with courts and the public just because the ruling political party doesn’t want to hear their truth. The decision sends a clear message to public universities across the country — and to politicians who would try to interfere with them — that they too must honor the constitutional principles that make the college campus a vital engine of a free society.”

Asked for comment, Steve Orlando, a university spokesman, said in an email to The Chronicle that “we’re reviewing the order and will determine our next steps.”

Apart from its effect on university policy, the judge’s ruling preserves for posterity and formalizes one of the central criticisms of the university’s handling of the case: UF has still never said it did anything wrong. Fuchs, the president, reversed course, Walker wrote, only “when the onslaught of bad press refused to ebb.”

“It was not until the wider world caught on to what was happening,” the judge said, “that the muzzle was lifted.”

Yes!

Tony

Donald Trump crying that the January 6th Committee is “going after children” – Give us a break!

Trump kids in legal hot water

The Trumps

Dear Commons Community,

Former President Donald Trump is crying because the House committee investigating the January 6th Capitol riot is requesting that his daughter and former senior adviser Ivanka Trump cooperate with the probe, and accusing lawmakers of going after “children.”

“It’s a very unfair situation for my children. Very, very unfair,” Donald Trump told the Washington Examiner in an interview for an opinion piece published Friday.

“It’s a disgrace, what’s going on…And they don’t care. They’ll go after children.”

Ivanka Trump is not a child. She is, in fact, a 40-year-old adult woman with children of her own.

Trump’s niece  Mary Trump commented yesterday that he and his daughter are out to primarily protect themselves in the intensifying investigation into the Capitol riot in January 2021 and would turn on each other to do that if necessary,.

Ivanka Trump, was at the White House on Jan. 6 and may have critical information about her father’s actions that day, is in a “very bad situation because she must understand that if Donald feels it’s necessary he will stop protecting her,” the former president’s niece told MSNBC’s Alex Witt.

His daughter is “making the same calculation: What will help her in the long run?” Mary Trump explained.

Investigators probing Trump Organization finances are also seeking to talk to Ivanka and her brothers Eric Trump, 38, and Donald Trump Jr., 44.

All three of his adult children have held senior positions in the Trump Organization.

“The whole ‘she should be protected because she’s his child’ is absurd on its face,” Mary Trump said. “She owes the [Jan.6] committee truthfulness about what happened that day because it is crucially important that we know what happened that day.”

“As a government employee … who was there that day and wasn’t taking any direct action that we’re aware of to stop what was going on … she knows she has to come down on the right side of things, or she’ll continue to stay her father’s ally and then she’ll have to see how that plays out,” she added.

She added: “Donald isn’t playing the card that she’s his child to protect her. He’s doing that to protect himself because he knows she may, indeed, have potentially damning information.”

She pointed out Ivanka Trump wasn’t simply Trump’s “child,” but a senior White House official serving the nation. “She has information” — particularly concerning last Jan. 6 — “that the American people deserve,” said Mary Trump. “She worked for the American people, not her father.”

Trump’s former attorney and fixer Michael Cohen also said on MSNBC on Saturday that father and daughter will look out for themselves first in both the Jan. 6 probe and ongoing investigations into Trump Organization finances.

Asked if the former president would protect his daughter from the probes, Cohen laughed: “Not a chance.”

As for the former first daughter, Cohen noted she is “very much like her father: Ivanka is interested only in Ivanka.”

It is incredible that Trump and his family were in the White House for four years.

Tony