Datasets:
Recag
/
C4_15

Dataset card Data Studio Files Community
text
stringlengths
11
95.8k
These are just a few examples from a long list of contradictions, inconsistencies, and double standards that are all too common in the way the United States interacts with the world. U.S. officials usually justify the double standards by arguing that the world is too messy and that there is no one-size-fits-all foreign policy. Different situations demand different responses, they say. Perhaps so, critics argue, but cozying up to oil-producing tyrants while trumpeting the spread of democracy and the protection of human rights has less to do with global messiness than with hypocrisy.
Indeed, the inconsistency most anti-American critics cherish regards the dictators the superpower chooses to hate and those it befriends. Why is the United States such a close ally of an oil-rich, Islamist monarchy in the Middle East that was home to almost all the 9/11 hijackers — Saudi Arabia — while remaining the sworn enemy of Iran, another oil-rich, Islamist nation in the same neighborhood? When Gen. Pervez Musharraf came to power, the United States regularly denounced his authoritarian rule while imposing sanctions on Pakistan for becoming less democratic. Until 9/11, that is. Then, almost overnight, the United States dropped the sanctions and started calling Musharraf one of its closest allies.
The rationale behind each one of these double standards is well known and some are perfectly justified. And it is true that a superpower with so many competing interests is bound to respond to a messy and volatile world in contradictory ways. The fact that the United States’ dependence on Saudi oil muffles its criticism of that regime does not mean that the United States should feel constrained from pressuring the tyrants of Burma to abandon their murderous ways. Unfortunately, the valid argument that U.S. double standards are not only inevitable but sometimes even desirable has led to a dangerous complacency. Not all double standards and contradictions in U.S. foreign policy are inevitable, necessary, or beneficial. Some are obsolete and greatly damage America’s reputation in the world. One obvious example is the U.S. embargo of Cuba; the policy’s failure is now even accepted by a growing segment of Cuban exiles in South Florida. Why should the United States keep a useless embargo and stubbornly refuse to engage a regime while happily trading with Vietnam and even talking to North Korea and Syria?
Those are just a few examples, but there are many others. How many? Enough to deserve more scrutiny than they have received in decades. There are many reasons for scrutinizing American double standards, including the broad consensus that repairing the world’s respect for the United States is now a top priority. According to a recent survey by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press, more than 7 in 10 Americans think that the United States is less respected by other countries. And, for the first time, a majority of Americans now see the country’s loss of international respect as a major problem.
Therefore, here is one suggestion for the next president of the United States: Ask for an audit of America’s foreign-policy double standards. Just producing such a list will be a salutary exercise. It will not only show how long the list is, but it will also open the official explanations commonly used to rationalize the contradictions to renewed scrutiny and, in the process, reveal the economic interests or political passions behind them. Understanding the logic that sustains each of the double standards now in place will help in deciding which ones should be jettisoned. Some will emerge as untouchable (Saudi Arabia), while others will be revealed in all their obsolescence (Cuba). Hopefully, some of them will be eliminated.
Of course, reducing U.S. foreign-policy inconsistencies and contradictions will not eliminate the powerful waves of anti-Americanism that have always existed and that have crested in recent years. But it will certainly reduce the rhetorical ammunition available to America’s critics. For free.
Bela Fleck, Ween, and the Dirty Dozen Brass Band are among the acts slated for New Orleans' Superfly During Jazzfest concert series. The seventh annual event will run concurrently with the city's massive multi-stage yearly Jazzfest, which spans over two extended weekends in late April and early May. Local promoter Superfly taps Jazzfest and other acts that fall into the loosely defined "jam band" genre to perform in smaller venues throughout the Big Easy.
Among the highlights on the Superfly During Jazzfest schedule is an 11-night (April 24-May 4) residency by the Dirty Dozen Brass Band. The group will perform nightly at Twiropa, an industrial complex in the New Orleans warehouse district that was recently converted into a full-scale arts and entertainment venue.
Twiropa will also host shows by the Yonder Mountain String Band (April 25), Galactic (April 26), Robert Randolph and the Family Band (May 1), the North Mississippi Allstars (May 2), O.A.R. (May 3), and Soulive (May 3). The city's intimate 1,800-seat Orpheum Theatre will feature moe. (May 2), Bela Fleck & the Flecktones (May 3), and the Funky Meters (May 4).
Elsewhere, the Radiators (April 25) and Keller Williams (May 2) will perform on the Riverboat Cajun Queen, while the State Theatre will welcome the likes of Galactic and Jack Johnson (May 2) and Ween with Col. Claypool's Bucket of Bernie Brains (May 3) -- an occasional group consisting of bassist Les Claypool (Primus, Oysterhead), guitarist Buckethead (Guns'N'Roses), keyboardist Bernie Worrell (P-Funk), and drummer Brain (M.I.R.V., Tom Waits).
Additional shows will be held at the Maple Leaf; more artists will be added as the event approaches. For full details and ticket information, visit Superfly's official Web site.
IBM CEO Ginni Rometty delivers a keynote address at IBM Think 2019 in San Francisco.
Ryan Vlastelica (Bloomberg) -- International Business Machines Corp. is scheduled to report its first-quarter results after the market closes on Tuesday, but when it does, IBM will not be the company that analysts are most interested in.
The company in October announced that it would acquire Red Hat, and while the deal isn’t expected to close until the second half of the year, analysts are looking ahead to the prospects of the combined company, and whether Red Hat’s position in the fast-growing cloud-computing market will be enough to turn sentiment on IBM, which has lagged the overall technology sector for years.
Shares fell 0.4 percent on Tuesday, but have risen about 34 percent from a nine-year low hit in December.
Credit Suisse cheered the Red Hat deal in a note published last week, starting coverage on IBM with an outperform rating and Street-high price target of $173. “IBM and Red Hat together form a powerful competitor to guide customers” into a “hybrid-first” world, analyst Matt Cabral wrote to clients.
The bullishness of this view was something of an anomaly, however. Just six firms have a buy rating on IBM shares, compared with the 15 that recommend holding it. And while the company’s adjusted earnings haven’t missed expectations since the third quarter of 2014, according to Bloomberg data, it also hasn’t done much to inspire much enthusiasm. Both first-quarter earnings and revenue are expected to decline from the year-ago period.
Forty years after the first Earth Day, Mark Hertsgaard talks about the environmental movement, the EPA and cap and trade legislation.
Nation Environmental Correspondent Mark Hertsgaard sits down with GRITtv’s Laura Flanders to talk about the environmental movement and the current climate legislation. Flanders is pessimistic that the current bill will actually reduce emissions. Hertsgaard agrees that the loopholes in the bill will make it difficult to actually cap emissions: "Cap and trade could work if you get tough legislation but that is a very big if in the United States of America," Hertsgaard says.
One glimmer of hope for reducing America’s dependency on coal is that activists and local officials have essentially "created…a de facto moratorium" on coal plants, Hertsgaard explains. The EPA also has the authority and obligation to push through tough regulations, and Hertsgaard warns that the current climate legislation might strip the EPA of that authority.
Hertsgaard also talks about the environmental movement, which seems to have faded since the Copenhagen summit. Hertsgaard describes the movement as the "one unalloyed success out of Copenhagen" because it was "bonafide" and "muscular."
The latest episode of the Love Letters podcast is out today. It's a very important episode. I do recommend starting from the beginning of the season. Find every episode here.
Also, this is a Boston.com survey about the column. If you haven't taken it and have a minute, please do.
A month ago, I began dating "Robby." Robby is so different from me. I am a creative producer, and he's training to be an officer in the military. We have very different lives but seemed to balance each other out. After we began dating, I realized Robby had some anger issues, seemingly flipping a switch and getting annoyed at me for very small issues (like me changing the radio station or trying to rest on him while he was paying attention to a movie). It seems like he is someone who really likes to be in control and when he isn't, he gets angry. When I'd get upset and stop talking during these moments (how I deal with him upsetting me), he'd always apologize for his behavior.
Honestly, at first these just seemed like random one-offs but as time goes on I realize that it's just his personality, maybe one part of himself that he hides at first. I can't help but feel like I'm emotionally detaching myself from him, expecting it to not last. He's said "I love you" (I know ... super quickly) and will often tell me how much he cares about me, etc. It seems confusing, and I would rather invest my time into someone who doesn't make me feel less-than for my normal behavior. I don't know how to break it off. He hasn't exactly done anything really wrong and has always apologized and otherwise been nothing but sweet. None of these "fights" have been a full-blown argument and I guess I'm almost looking for a reason to end things. Thoughts?
You don't have to have a big, obvious reason to end a relationship. There is no need to wait for some awful fight so it's easier to walk away. After a month of dating – just a month! – you've realized that Robby is not the right partner for you. The two of you have very different styles of communication. Also, based on what you said about that "I love you," you might be on different timelines for commitment.
You can talk to Robby about this with the hope that things might change. You've been silent during these angry moments, and I understand why, but it could be worth a conversation. Maybe if you discuss the issues he can change his behavior.
But ... you don't have to do that kind of work. If you've already detached, you can tell him that it's not working and that you need to move on. It won't be pleasant – he'll have no control over the fate of the relationship, and it will not feel good – but ... if you've already made a decision, it's best to let him know.
If you have any concerns about his anger/how he'll take the news, please talk to friends/family about when you're doing this, where you'll be, etc. Support systems are meant to be used.
Readers? Is there any reason to wait to end this relationship?
But many of us aren’t very familiar with listening to our emotions. Maybe we weren’t taught to process our emotions as kids. Maybe instead we avoid or dismiss our emotions. Maybe we’ve convinced ourselves that our emotions are inconvenient or useless at best and wrong at worst.
So how do we explore our emotions and know what they’re trying to tell us?
First, we identify what we’re experiencing and then we stay with the emotion. We sit with it. We don’t judge what we’re feeling. Instead, we simply observe it. And we accept it — whether it’s sadness or anxiety or any other “negative” emotion. Because, again, emotions are crucial.
Hannaford likened emotions to a tailor-made internal GPS. It works “hard to help us navigate our way through life’s journey.” The key is to become familiar with the system and respond in a timely manner, she said.
Listening to our emotions is a skill. Which means that if you don’t have that much experience with processing your feelings or understanding them, you can learn. You can practice. Hannaford shared these suggestions.
Identify physical sensations associated with your emotions.
Pay attention to how different emotions feel in your body. Our physical sensations are actually often the first signal, said Hannaford, who specializes in anxiety, depression, grief, trauma and relationships. For instance, she noted that people commonly experience anxiety in their chest because their heart rate increases and their breathing gets shallower.
Use a scale to measure intensity.
If your emotion feels too big, use a technique that grounds and centers you. Hannaford teaches her anxious clients this exercise, which they can do at any time: Stand with your feet firmly planted on the ground. Push the weight through your feet and into the floor. Become aware of how this feels physically. Take three to four longer, deeper breaths as you count up to four and then back to zero. Pick a color and scan your surroundings to find as many items in this color as you can. Then say aloud the items you can remember.
Assign characters to your emotions.
This is a technique that helps kids, but adults can use, as well. According to Hannaford, “assigning characters to emotions can help us understand the real message these feelings seek to convey.” For instance, anger tries to alert us that something is wrong and we need to take action, she said. Its function is to protect us.
Stay with your emotions to explore them.
When we try to get rid of our emotions or ignore them, we miss out on their meaningful messages. We naturally do this with “negative” emotions, such as sadness. However, giving sadness a voice is an invaluable step in helping us heal, Hannaford said. “Sadness reminds us we’re human and we need to make meaning out of the mess.” She further noted that it tells us that we matter and we’re wired for love.
Like other emotions, sadness tells us what we need. Maybe your sadness is telling you that you need to meet new people because your current friends only upset you. Maybe your sadness reveals that your job has some challenges, which need fixing. Maybe your sadness is showing you a wound that’s yet to heal, which needs processing in therapy.
Our emotions can seem big and confusing. But once we pause, tune into our physical sensations, name what we’re feeling and accept how we’re feeling, the intensity decreases. We can start exploring the important message. Again, if this sounds exhausting or intimidating or impossible, that’s OK. Like anything else, it takes practice. Remember that respecting and honoring your emotions is really about respecting and honoring yourself.
Updated 3 bedroom unit, recently renovated down to the studs with new sheet rock, new plumbing, and flooring. Newer Hot Water heater, plus appliances! Refrigerator, washer, and dryer are included! Over 1,300 sq ft, so plenty of room for everyone! 4,800 sq ft Corner Lot is owned, so no rent to pay! Centrally located in Desert Inn Park. On the grounds there are 2 SWIMMING POOLS, a tennis court, a playground, horseshoe & BBQ pits and a nature trail!
Shares of Royal Caribbean were little changed in premarket trade Thursday, after the cruise ship operator beat third-quarter profit expectations, but provided a downbeat fourth-quarter outlook. Net earnings for the quarter ended Sept. 30 rose to $490.2 million, or $2.19 a share, from $365.7 million, or $1.65 a share, in the year-earlier period. Excluding one-time items, adjusted per-share earnings were $2.20, above the FactSet consensus analyst estimate of $2.19. Revenue increased to $2.39 billion from last year's $2.31 billion, as a rise in passenger ticket sales offset a decline in onboard and other sales. The FactSet consensus revenue estimate was $2.41 billion. The company said it expects fourth-quarter adjusted earnings per share of 35 to 40 cents, below analyst projections of 48 cents. The stock slipped 0.2% in premarket trade. It has rallied 34% year to date, compared with a 4.3% rise in the S&P 500.
NEW YORK -- Jose Valverde almost gave the game away.
Delmon Young made sure the Detroit Tigers got it back.
Valverde blew a four-run lead in the ninth inning Saturday night, but Young delivered an RBI double with one out in the 12th inning to break the tie and lead the Tigers to a 6-4 victory over the New York Yankees.
The victory gives the Tigers a 1-0 lead in the American League Championship Series.
Miguel Cabrera drew a leadoff walk from relief pitcher David Phelps to start the 12th inning and went to second on a slow roller to first off the bat of Prince Fielder. Young then ripped a line drive to right field that eluded a lunging Nick Swisher.
Derek Jeter needed assistance to get off the field after injuring his left leg while diving for what turned out to be an infield single by Jhonny Peralta that put runners on the corners. The Tigers then made it 6-4 when Phelps couldn't handle a comebacker off the bat of Andy Dirks.
The Tigers played a solid game while building a 4-0 lead. They scratched out some runs. The defense made some excellent plays. Doug Fister worked his way out of three bases-loaded jams. But all appeared to be lost when the the game blew up in Valverde's face.
The Tigers had a 4-0 lead when Valverde entered the game in the ninth. Russell Martin drew a leadoff walk and Ichiro Suzuki hit a two-run home run -- his first career postseason homer -- with one out to make it 4-2.
Valverde struck out Robinson Cano for the second out of the inning, but he walked Mark Teixeira to bring Raul Ibanez to the plate. Ibanez then smashed an 0-1 splitter over the wall in right field to make it 4-4.
Young homered and drove in three runs for the Tigers, while Fielder and rookie Avisail Garcia each had RBI singles. The Tigers scored two runs in the sixth and two in the eighth after managing just four singles off Yankees left-hander Andy Pettitte in the first five innings.
Fister escaped bases-loaded jams in three different innings and threw 6 1/3 innings of shutout baseball.
The Yankees loaded the bases in each of the first two innings but came away empty-handed thanks to a pair of excellent defensive plays by Jhonny Peralta … and a missed call at first by the umpire. That allowed the Tigers time to get their bats going after they got a slow start against Yankees starter Andy Pettitte.
-- The Yankees had the bases loaded with two outs in the first inning after Fister issued three walks. But Peralta made a diving snag on a hard-hit ground ball off the bat of Alex Rodriguez, then barely beat the runner with his throw to second base to end the inning.
-- The Yankees loaded the bases again in the second inning before Peralta -- and first-base umpire Rob Drake -- bailed them out again. Cano hit a line drive that hit Fister's wrist and bounded toward the left side of the infield. Peralta barehanded the ball and made a quick throw to first, where Drake ruled that the ball beat Cano for the final out of the inning. Replays indicated that Cano was safe. Instead of leading 1-0 with their cleanup hitter up with the bases loaded, the Yankees saw their threat come to an end.
-- Leading off the sixth inning, Austin Jackson hit a ball that was just fair down the first-base line and then bounced back toward the infield after hitting a part of the wall that juts out from the stands. Instead of a likely double, Jackson ended up on third with a triple. After the Yankees intentionally walked Cabrera with one out, Fielder and Young delivered back-to-back singles to make it 2-0.
-- Cabrera made a heads-up play to score from second on the single by Young. It appeared that Swisher had a chance to catch the blooper to right field, but Cabrera was running the whole way, which allowed him to score.
-- The Yankees had runners at second and third with no outs in the sixth -- the third time they loaded the bases in the game -- but Fister escaped the jam unscathed. He struck out Rodriguez for the first out of the inning before walking Nick Swisher to load the bases. Fister then struck out Curtis Granderson and Russell Martin to preserve his team's 2-0 lead.
-- The home run by Young was a line drive down the line in left field. It was his sixth career postseason home run, which set a franchise record.
-- Pinch-hitter Eric Chavez greeted reliever Joaquin Benoit with a fly ball to deep center, but Jackson made a nice running catch on the play.
-- Tigers left-hander Phil Coke retired all three batters he faced. He threw 16 pitches, 15 of them for strikes.
-- After scoring two runs in the sixth, the Tigers loaded the bases with one out. But Pettitte retired Andy Dirks and Garcia on infield pop-ups to escape further damage.
-- Mark Teixeira led off the sixth inning with a ground ball to second baseman Omar Infante, who was positioned in shallow right field due to the shift. But Infante bobbled the ball and never did make a throw to first, allowing Teixeira to reach on the error.
-- Valverde allowed four runs on three hits and a walk in two-thirds of an inning. He struck out two.
-- Drew Smyly warmed up after the ball bounced off Fister's wrist in the second inning, but Fister remained in the game at that point.
-- Pettitte allowed two runs on seven hits and three walks -- one intentional -- in 6 2/3 innings pitched. He struck out five and allowed a Tigers player to reach second in just one inning, the sixth.
-- Fister allowed six hits, walked four and struck out five in 6 1/3 shutout innings for the Tigers.
-- Download the "Detroit Tigers on MLive app" for your iPhone or Android and follow Chris Iott and James Schmehl on Twitter to keep up with news on the Tigers.
British Columbians want income to be much more equally distributed than they believe it to be now. However, voters significantly underestimated B.C.'s overall income inequality.
Trump's rhetoric about helping the forgotten people turns out to mean cutting taxes and regulations for the 1%. Canadian Conservatives embrace him while Liberals try to get along.
Is crowdfunding just a way to reinforce the idea that if you can't individually overcome systemic inequality you better be good at marketing yourself to a sympathetic audience of potential patrons?
(CNN) -- Whether Moammar Gadhafi stays or goes, the turmoil-wracked country is likely to be in for more of a rough time, two Libya experts told CNN Monday.
"Whichever way this goes, I think there's going to be a good amount of chaos," said Diederik Vandewalle, associate professor of government at Dartmouth College.
During his 42 years in power, Gadhafi has limited the formation of political and other institutions, Vandewalle said. "All civil society organizations have been eviscerated by the regime," he said.
In a telephone interview Monday night, he predicted more bloodshed if Gadhafi steps aside. "We could see some tribal uprisings" as competing groups seek a share of Libya's oil wealth, he said, describing the likely scenario as "not very pretty."
But, he added, oil exports will likely continue after "some" interruption. "It would be in the interest of all parties that oil keep flowing," he said, dismissing as unlikely any apocalyptic scenario in which Libya would descend into civil war.
The current uncertainty will likely be decided in the next few days, he predicted. "It seems to me that we're in an endgame here," he said. "The big question is how much bloodshed we're going to see." He called the violence against unarmed civilians "extraordinary, but not surprising from a regime that's truly entrenched."
There are few candidates in the wings to replace Gadhafi -- "no younger leadership able to assume that mantle of leadership," he said.
But Gadhafi's imminent departure is not a foregone conclusion, he added, putting the odds at "80% go, 20% stay."
Ronald Bruce St John, who has written seven books on Libya, said Gadhafi's reign appears to be drawing quickly to a close. "He's losing support by the hour from critical people in his regime," he said.
But St John said it was unlikely that the next leader would emerge from the military, since Gadhafi has long sought to keep the institution at arm's length.
"Though he was an army officer when he came to power and was supported by the military and all the original members of the Revolutionary Command Council were from the military, he has, from the beginning, evidenced a great distrust for the military," St John said. "He recognized it as the most likely power to overthrow him."
As a result, Gadhafi has routinely rotated commanders "so no one established a base of support."
Unlike Egyptians, who were seeking a more liberal system, Libyans want a new system, St John said. Accomplishing that will mean "a great deal of chaos in the short term," he predicted.
"If he does leave, I think we'll see the tribal leadership of Libya, probably through social leadership committees, trying to come up with some kind of a nonviolent solution," he said.
St John noted that two major tribes had already withdrawn their support of Gadhafi. One of them, the Warfala tribe, has long been a supporter. The other, the Zuwayya, is one of the larger tribes of eastern Libya and is located near the terminals from where oil is exported. "That's a significant loss," he said.
Though another strongman could emerge, St John predicted instead that a nationwide network of "social leadership" committees set up by Gadhafi in 1993 and composed primarily of traditional leaders and tribal leaders would seek to take charge.
Gadhafi had tried without success to eliminate the more than 100 tribes in Libya in an effort that lasted from 1969 to 1980, St John said. So in 1993, the leader made a dramatic move -- reinforcing the tribal system and recognizing its leaders as important by creating social leadership positions, St John said.
The leaders were given power at the local level as well as such "goodies" as housing and scholarships for their tribal members, he said. But the gifts came with a catch: "In turn, you must recognize that you're in charge of your tribe," St John said. "If they step out of line, we'll go to you."
If Gadhafi leaves power, "those tribal leaders will try to find a way to put together some kind of a new government," he predicted. "I think you'll see the tribes being the ones that will, in the short term anyway, try to find a way through the obvious chaos that's going to occur."
Not everyone predicts rough sailing. Sayyid Idris Al-Senussi, an exiled Libyan opposition figure who said his great-uncle was overthrown by Gadhafi, predicted that any transition would go smoothly.
"If Gadhafi departs, there will be no problem," he told CNN in a telephone interview from Washington. "There will be a national council, which would be represented by all the tribes and all the Libyans from all different walks of life."
He said the opposition already has a constitution and a flag ready for use in the event of Gadhafi's departure.
"We will have a democracy," he predicted. "After this experience, I don't think they'll allow anybody to single-handedly rule."