Read full article on:
How Andrew Cuomo Sold out New York's Seniors | Opinion
Governor Andrew Cuomo has disastrously mishandled nursing homes in New York state.
8 m
John Cusack Shares Video, Says Police Came at Him With Batons During Chicago Protests
"Cops didn't like me filming the burning car so they came at me with batons. Hitting my bike," the actor wrote on Twitter.
People more important than the economy, pope says about Covid crisis
Pope Francis said on Sunday that people are more important than the economy, as countries decide how quickly to reopen their countries from coronavirus lockdowns.
Distinguished politicians of the week: They spoke to the country when POTUS would not
We were lucky to have both Tim Walz and Joe Biden step up.
Police cars burn as violence mars National Day of Protest: George Floyd protests live updates
Minnesota Governor Tim Walz promised to bring "the full force of goodness and righteousness" as law enforcement upheld a curfew in the Twin Cities.
Vicarious racism: You don't have to be the victim to be harmed
Police brutality on video, flame and riots on our smartphones. You don't have to be the victim of racism to be harmed by it, experts say.
Clashes continue for 5th night in dozens of cities as anger boils over
Mayors in Minneapolis, Los Angeles, Atlanta and more declared curfews after violent protests.
What you need to know about coronavirus on Sunday, May 31
Hundreds of schools reopened. Then they closed again. South Korea offers a window into the challenges of lifting lockdowns.
Evictions loom as state freezes on rent payments expire
As states reopen, tenants are facing the end of freezes on rent payments and evictions put in place at the start of the pandemic despite still-rising joblessness and a stalled economy.
What's It Like To Be Black In America Right Now?
We want to hear your thoughts about recent high-profile incidents involving harm to black people.
Why Jennifer Lopez, Alex Rodriguez buying stake in New York Mets would be good for MLB, team
The New York Post reported that Jennifer Lopez and Alex Rodriguez have been planning a second bid for the Mets, after their initial bid came up short.
Should I Get Tested For Coronavirus Just For The Heck Of It?
Access to tests has improved significantly, and in some places, people can now get tested without having to demonstrate any symptoms. We asked experts how much you can really learn from the result.
Paul Batura: Pentecost at a time of chaos, pain – these fruits of the Spirit can begin healing process
At the root of our current crisis, and the reason for the madness is our sin and our failure to see that all people are made in God’s image.  
1 h
Desperate retailers to ask Fed, Treasury for emergency help amid worries that economic turmoil could worsen
1 h
Rep. Steve King Fights For His Seat As GOP Works To Push Him Out
King has a history of making offensive and racist comments. Now, some Republicans are worried that his district could be in jeopardy of getting picked up by Democrats.
1 h
Navajo Nation Loses Elders And Tradition To COVID-19
COVID-19 is disproportionately affecting older tribal members throughout Indian Country. The deaths of these elders means the loss of ceremonies, stories, language and cultural wisdom.
1 h
Column: Washington might take Silicon Valley down a notch
Twitter, Facebook and other social media companies are a rare bipartisan target. They should reform before Congress makes them do it.
1 h
Eli Lake: Flynn's policy differences with Obama a key backdrop to Russia investigation
Bloomberg columnist Eli Lake joined "Life, Liberty & Levin" Sunday to discuss the case of former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn.
1 h
Review: Brit Bennett's stunning 'Vanishing Half' explores race and colorism in America
Brit Bennett's deeply compelling new novel "The Vanishing Half" depicts a Southern community born from the legacy of slavery.        
1 h
Negative interest rates: What they are, how they work and whether they are coming to the U.S.
Negative interest rates, in the unlikely event that they become pervasive, would drastically alter the playing field for savers as well as borrowers.      
1 h
Clint Eastwood: The award-winning actor and director's career in pictures
Award-winning actor and director Clint Eastwood celebrates his 90th birthday on May 31. We're looking back at his life and career in photos.       
1 h
Trump's Supporters Are More Excited to Vote, But Biden's Lead is Growing
A recent poll shows the presumptive Democratic nominee's lead growing, though the president's supporters are more enthusiastic in their support.
1 h
Protesters in some cities target Confederate monuments
Confederate monuments have become a target of protesters demonstrating against the police killing of George Floyd
1 h
Warren as Biden's running mate makes no electoral sense
Poll of the week: A new national Ipsos/Reuters poll finds former Vice President Joe Biden with a 45% to 39% lead over President Donald Trump.
1 h
The History Behind Why People Riot
"It's not just people taking advantage. It's not just anger and frustration at the immediate or proximate cause. It's always some underlying issues," one expert said.
1 h
Hundreds of Protesters Converge on White House for Second Straight Day
Trump appeared to cheer on the tougher tactics being used by law enforcement
1 h
Why Norma McCorvey Matters
Last weekend, FX premiered AKA Jane Roe, a documentary on Norma McCorvey, the plaintiff in Roe v. Wade. Backers of the film touted its most explosive revelation—that McCorvey, Jane Roe herself, had converted to the anti-abortion cause only because she was getting paid. This news made waves, and the attention it received has raised, in turn, a bigger question: Why does it matter at all what she really thought about abortion?The constitutional-law expert Michael Dorf has argued that it doesn’t—or at least that clashing social movements have blown its significance way out of proportion. He contends that when it comes to the ultimate fate of abortion rights, McCorvey’s beliefs matter very little.That may be right legally, but McCorvey—and making sense of her—remains central to the abortion debate, and the reason is obvious: Her story has come to stand in for the greater question of whether abortion is good for women—a question the Supreme Court is likely to rule on by the end of next month.[Elizabeth Stone: Before Roe v. Wade]Parts of McCorvey’s story are well known. In 1995, as America’s clinic-blockade movement was fast declining, she converted to Christianity and renounced her role in Roe. McCorvey teamed up with Reverend Flip Benham, then the head of Operation Rescue. Her shift on abortion delighted many anti-abortionist activists, but her choice of Operation Rescue raised eyebrows. At the time, the group was beset by financial difficulties, legal troubles, and controversy surrounding its position on anti-abortion violence. In 1994, Benham had circulated a petition denouncing the murder of abortion doctors; the move shattered his organization. McCorvey, it seemed, tied herself to a strategy that was at the margins of American political life.Less well known is that McCorvey also played a central role in arguably the most effective plan to reverse Roe v. Wade—one that may produce explosive results at the end of June, when the Supreme Court is expected to render a decision in June Medical Services v. Russo.In the late 1990s, a fractious anti-abortion legal movement managed to agree on a new strategy: the argument that abortion hurts women. For some, this was not just a strategy but a genuine concern, responding in part to the recent formation of support groups for women who regretted their abortions. But there were other reasons to highlight these arguments: For many, Operation Rescue had branded the anti-abortion movement as misogynists willing to break the law.Moreover, the Supreme Court had saved abortion rights in 1992 because the justices believed that abortion access helped women. In Planned Parenthood v. Casey, the justices reasoned that women had relied on abortion in achieving a more equal form of citizenship. Anti-abortion groups believed if they could prove that abortion harmed women, the right to choose would crumble.[Garrett Epps: America may be nearing the end of the Roe era]Norma McCorvey provided just that kind of evidence. She called Harold Cassidy, a lawyer who had embarked on a new anti-abortion legal initiative. Cassidy believed that abortion itself violated a woman’s rights by ending a fundamental relationship between a mother and her child. His idea convinced major conservative donors and anti-abortion academics. And it persuaded McCorvey, who asked Cassidy to help her reopen her case. She claimed that she had not understood the facts about abortion—and that without a factual record, the Supreme Court had not understood the damage abortion was doing to women.McCorvey didn’t succeed in getting rid of Roe v. Wade, but her phone call with Cassidy set the country on a path that leads directly to June Medical. Cassidy handed McCorvey’s request—and one made by Sandra Cano, the plaintiff in Doe v. Bolton—to Allan Parker, an attorney who had launched a project to collect affidavits from women who regretted their abortions. In 2007’s Gonzales v. Carhart, Parker’s Operation Outcry helped convince the Supreme Court that many women regretted abortions—and that women’s regret served as a justification for abortion restrictions.The anti-abortion establishment largely dismissed Cassidy’s plan as a harebrained scheme. But most in the movement agreed that abortion rights would remain intact forever unless the Supreme Court (and the majority of Americans) believed that women suffered from abortions. Who better than Norma McCorvey to make that argument? Her involvement suggested that Roe had been rotten from the start.That belief still guides many of the nation’s leading abortion opponents. Just take a look at the Court’s pending decision in June Medical. Most simply, the Court will decide whether Louisiana can require abortion doctors to have admitting privileges at a nearby hospital. But June Medical is part of the same strategy to which McCorvey was so important. The backers of the Louisiana law claim to protect women from careless profiteers. They are asking the Court to hold that abortion providers care so little about women’s welfare that they can’t be trusted to bring lawsuits. If Louisiana succeeds, the anti-abortion movement will be a step closer to a ruling that women have never benefited from abortion rights. Norma McCorvey is patient zero in this narrative—the first victim of abortion rights.[Caitlin Flanagan: The dishonesty of the abortion debate]So McCorvey’s confession threatens the very strategy that has the best chance of undoing Roe. And the image of McCorvey that emerges from AKA Jane Roe is dangerous to both the anti-abortion and pro-abortion-rights movements. The McCorvey on our screens is an irreverent, complicated woman, a survivor with more faith in herself than in any social movement. She is not a symbol of why the Supreme Court should uphold Louisiana’s abortion law—or why the justices should strike it down. She appears, if anything, to be a perfect symbol of abortion politics in a country where many support Roe v. Wade but also endorse far-reaching abortion restrictions. Who was Norma McCorvey? The answer to that question is messy, and that’s exactly what makes this so hard.
2 h
New video shows moments before George Floyd was pinned
Surveillance video shows police load George Floyd into the back of a police car in Minneapolis. Floyd later died.
2 h
Chrissy Teigen, Seth Rogan, Celebrities Donate Money to Bail Out Those Arrested in Nationwide Protests
Teigen, 34, said she decided to make a $200,000 donation after President Donald Trump declared Saturday night was "MAGA night" at the White House.
2 h
Protests rage for a fifth night across America
Protests erupted in at least 30 US cities over the death of George Floyd in Minneapolis, Minnesota, with violent clashes across the country. CNN's Polo Sandoval reports.
2 h
Letters to the Editor: The GOP won't allow election security bills. Now, it opposes mail-in ballots?
If the Republicans were truly concerned about fair elections, they would require paper backups for electronic voting machines.
2 h
Op-Ed: Coronavirus brought economic catastrophe. Here are 10 experts on how to recover
Ten economists suggest remedies, ranging from aiding state and local governments, paying employers to keep workers and offering universal coronavirus testing to restore public confidence.
2 h
Letters to the Editor: Stacey Abrams lost in Georgia, but she could lift Biden as his VP.
Even with alleged voter suppression, Stacey Abrams came very close to winning in Georgia. She would make a great VP pick for Biden.
2 h
L.A. turns to National Guard, curfew as violence, looting escalate
The last time the National Guard patrolled the streets of L.A. was during the 1992 riots, which erupted after the police officers who beat Rodney King were found not guilty.
2 h
Op-Ed: My father insisted he wasn't a writer. But when I read him on the page I can still hear him speak
People in the community liked to say I was following closely in my father's footsteps. I hope that's true.
2 h
Newt Gingrich: Coronavirus and seniors — Cuomo sold them out. Here are the astonishing details
Of course, the news media has been utterly unwilling to tell the truth about New York state.
2 h
Unemployed because of coronavirus? How to make money from home right away
The unemployment rates is at the highest peak in decades, and 1 of 6 people are without jobs, but there's work out there, and it might just be a few clicks away.       
2 h
Op-Ed: Would the guy who spelled out our inalienable rights wear a mask? You bet.
In Thomas Jefferson's quasi-utopian view, 'self-governance' meant humans would choose to internalize their obligations to others.
2 h
Pandemic historian: Don't rush reopening. In 1918, some states ran straight into more death.
Over a decade ago, I looked at state lockdown measures during the 1918 influenza pandemic. My takeaway: Longer is better than shorter.      
2 h
Letters to the Editor: Trump is wrong about social media, but should Twitter be the arbiter of truth?
The president wants to undo important free speech protections for social media. Companies such as Twitter should follow Facebook's hands-off approach.
2 h
Editorial: The UC regents' risky bet on a custom admissions test
The regents have locked themselves into a scenario in which UC either comes up with a brilliant new test soon or drops entrance exams altogether.
2 h
A Brighter Summer Day (1991)
A Taiwanese epic that follows the violence and the sorrow that happens when the system fails you.
2 h
How Documentary Theater Goes From Interviews to Final Production
“You’re sort of playing theatrical DJ.”
2 h
Average Workers Can’t Bear Any More Risk
As economies reopen across the United States, tens of millions of Americans who can’t work remotely have become armchair actuaries, forced to figure out for themselves just how risky clocking in to their jobs might be. Of course, for many, the calculation is largely hypothetical. In April, President Donald Trump signed an executive order that declared virus-plagued meatpacking plants “essential infrastructure,” pressuring employees to return to work. The president also promised that his order would “solve any liability problems” plants might face.The legal grounds for the president’s order are shaky. Yet it encapsulates the grim bargain more and more Americans will face. Whether deemed essential or not, workers are being pushed by public policy and financial necessity back into restaurants, bars, stores, offices, warehouses, work sites, and factories. Expanded unemployment benefits are set to end well before the threat of COVID-19 does, and many states are poised to cut off benefits for workers whose employers are operating, no matter how dangerous those operations might be. And if workers get sick? Well, that’s not their employer’s problem—at least not if elected officials heed corporate lobbyists’ call for immunity from legal claims related to on-the-job infections.[Juliette Kayyem: Never go back to the office]Liability relief has become the Republicans’ “red line,” according to Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell—the one thing he’s “going to insist” on as a condition of additional federal assistance, including aid to battered states and localities. The president has said much the same, and White House officials have even suggested they could indemnify companies without congressional action (legal experts say otherwise). If corporate America gets what it wants, not only will employees who become sick lose a means of legal recourse, but employers will also have less incentive to make workplaces safe. A huge set of life-or-death risks will fall on workers and their families, rather than being shared more broadly across our society.If that happens, it won’t be new. Over the past generation, a transformation that I have called the “great risk shift” has played out in nearly every domain of economic life: job security, work-family balance, retirement, health care. The growth of contingent employment, the rise of dual-earner and single-parent families who must juggle work and caregiving, the decline of employment-based health benefits, and the near-extinction of defined-benefit pension plans have all forced working Americans to take on responsibilities that corporations and government once bore jointly. Although public policies have occasionally pushed in the other direction—as with the broadening of health insurance under the Affordable Care Act—the trends have mostly pointed one way: toward making workers and their families bear more risk and responsibility on their own.Now, in the midst of the greatest economic catastrophe since the Great Depression, this rapidly accelerating risk-shifting presents the United States with a fateful choice. We can ensure we really are all in this together. Or we can allow the risk-pooling systems that sustain a modern market economy to collapse, with all the fallout that would cause.[Derek Thompson: Social distancing is not enough]Workers’ situation today may seem unprecedented. But in fact, it’s strikingly similar to Americans’ grim realities at the end of the 19th century. As the United States rapidly industrialized, workplaces became sites of death and disability on a scale that’s now hard to fathom. According to the legal historian John Fabian Witt, high-risk industries had an annual death rate from 3 in 1,000 (railroads) to an almost unbelievable 60 in 1,000 (anthracite-coal mining). In all, roughly 1 in every 1,000 Americans died as the result of a workplace accident each year. That’s higher than the death rate from COVID-19 in any country today. (As of May 28, Belgium had the highest coronavirus fatality rate, at 0.82 deaths per 1,000 people.)In one respect, however, the state of affairs for workers back then may have been better than it will be for workers who face the risk of COVID-19. At the dawn of the last century, wage earners and their families could sue their employers over workplace deaths and injuries, and many did. Big judgments were rare, settlements the norm, and the large majority of accidents never litigated. Still, mounting liability costs were a major reason employers swung behind the nation’s first system of “social insurance” for wage earners: Workers’ compensation programs were passed in almost all states by 1920. More than a decade before Social Security, in short, the United States socialized most of the responsibility for workplace death and disability—the very responsibility that corporations and Republicans are eager to shift back onto workers today.Of course, those workers’ compensation programs still exist. But they were set up for easy-to-verify workplace injuries, not the ambiguity of virus transmission. Workers’ compensation typically doesn’t cover community-borne illnesses, and even some health-care facilities are fighting claims from employees who have contracted COVID-19. Indeed, at the same time that business groups have lobbied for liability relief, they’ve resisted state-level efforts to ensure that employees who become sick can receive compensation. If employers achieve broad immunity from claims and preserve the status quo for workers’ comp, they will have transported the nation a long way back toward the risks of early industrial America.[Rob Anderson: I’m a chef in a seaside town. I’m not an epidemiologist.]The history of workers’ compensation, regardless of its shortcomings in the current crisis, lights another path. The welfare-state breakthroughs of the 20th century—unemployment insurance, old-age protections, disability insurance, Medicare—showed that protection for those hit by largely unavoidable economic shocks could be effectively provided through public programs paid for by contributions from those potentially affected. In theory, individual employers and employees could all buy enough private insurance to cover all potential workplace injuries. In practice, however, the usual alternative to social insurance is a system in which workers and their families bear all the risks, with profoundly dislocating and unequal consequences.Unfortunately, as simultaneous health and economic catastrophes lay bare the long erosion of American social insurance, that’s the alternative we’re facing today. COVID-19 has hit the American safety net like an asteroid striking Earth. Despite recent state and federal efforts to improve protections for families, the system’s weaknesses have become all too apparent. No one should be surprised that the unemployment-insurance system, which reached fewer than 1 in 3 unemployed workers in 2018, would struggle to meet an unprecedented spike in joblessness, or that most Americans’ dependence on their employer for health coverage would create a crisis when work disappeared just as the need for health insurance swelled. These were glaring problems before the pandemic. Without fundamental reforms, they will be only worsen.[Annie Lowrey: This summer will scar young Americans for life]During the pandemic, the great risk shift continues in other ways. Since the 1930s, the United States has had a basic public pension that provides a floor of protection for older Americans. Yet Social Security has been in a holding pattern since the early ’80s, while the private retirement system that was supposed to build on that floor has radically changed, offloading what were companies’ responsibilities onto workers. Most employees are left to fund an adequate retirement by themselves. Those nearing retirement are facing a one-two punch of market declines and the loss of their job, and many will have to labor long after they expected to retire.To make matters worse, economic shocks tempt workers to tap into their retirement accounts, sinking their post-work plans to stay afloat in the present. Indeed, Congress essentially ratified this Hobson’s choice in its March relief bill. The law waives the penalty for early withdrawals from retirement accounts, actively encouraging laid-off Americans to cash out up to $100,000 in retirement savings. More recently, Republicans floated the idea of offering people immediate cash relief in return for lower Social Security benefits in the future. That idea—so toxic it was immediately shelved—only replicates a feature of our private retirement system: If Americans need help now, they are free to mortgage their future well-being.The current crisis has underscored other weaknesses in America’s safety net. With regard to child care and paid leave, the United States is a stark outlier among rich democracies. That adequate child care is essential to keeping the economy growing should now be evident to every parent of young kids who is trying to work remotely. Those who are sick should not be struggling to go to work for fear of termination or immiseration, endangering their fellow workers in the process. And those who care for others—whether younger children or older parents—should not have to choose between helping their family and feeding it.All these problems were on vivid display before the first case of COVID-19, and the reforms required are no secret: universal health insurance, universal paid leave and sick pay, a broader and more generous unemployment-insurance system, improved Social Security benefits, and measures to make private retirement plans universal, automatic, and secure. All these ideas would reverse the risk shift. All are popular. And all of them have plenty of backers in government—just not enough within the party that controls the White House and Senate.But nothing guarantees that our nation will heed these calls for expanded social insurance. As business’s hunt for liability relief today suggests, the United States could follow a different and much darker path.The expert advice about reopening is simple: The economy won’t really get going again unless Americans feel secure. So long as people face enormous risks, they won’t be confident about investing in new skills or new businesses or big purchases or, indeed, even about showing up to work. A safety net that reassures workers they won’t face devastation isn’t a barrier to economic opportunity. It’s a precondition for it.This isn’t something unique to a pandemic. It’s always been true, and the countries that have most successfully combined free markets and social insurance—particularly the Scandinavian societies of northern Europe—have proved it. These countries have big welfare states, strong economies, and happy, healthy, highly educated citizens who accept and thrive amid the creative destruction of capitalist markets. “Not only are sound safety nets popular,” the former libertarian Will Wilkinson has written, “but they also increase the public’s tolerance for the dislocations of a dynamic free-market economy.”The flip side is that a dynamic free-market economy without sound safety nets breeds backlash. And if that backlash doesn’t deliver social insurance—because, say, the party in power is hostile to the welfare state—it will deliver social discord instead. Denying risks doesn’t make them disappear. It just puts democracy and markets on a collision course.Which brings us back to that darker path. As in the late 19th century, corporations have gained enormous sway over workers, and they have turned to government to reinforce that sway. Americans are learning again that laissez-faire is anything but free. It requires the coercive power of government to enforce the unjust and to hold at bay those who would demand something better.If Americans are forced back to work without assurances, while those who direct and profit from their labor receive immunity, Americans will be on a road to serfdom very different from the one feared by the libertarian right. Armed with digital tools for monitoring workers even when they’re not at work—tools honed during the pandemic—employers will seek to extract more from employees while providing less: less pay, less safety, less security, and, yes, less freedom.In the early 20th century, a strengthened democracy ensured that government and business worked together to protect citizens against the biggest risks they faced. If government and business work together today to achieve the opposite, the greatest risk will be to our democracy itself.
2 h
George Floyd, fired officer Derek Chauvin worked at same Minneapolis nightclub
A white Minneapolis police officer and the black man he's charged with killing both worked as security guards at the same Latin nightclub as recently as last year, but its former owner says she's not sure if they knew each other.
2 h
The thousands of wishes the pandemic put on hold
Emberlyn Hemmer's wish would have been granted just three weeks before her seventh major surgery.
2 h
George Floyd protest updates: Biden says nationwide protests are 'utterly American'
The death of George Floyd, a black man seen in a video pinned down by a white police officer and who later died, has caused outrage in Minneapolis and across the U.S.
2 h
It Took 35 Years, but Bruce Springsteen’s “Glory Days” Is Finally Perfect
The classic anthem was right about nostalgia but wrong about baseball. Luckily, I fixed it.
2 h