Paradise News

Tag: General News

  • SF Giants manager Bob Melvin requiring players to stand during anthem

    The San Francisco Giants manager has gone viral.

    Bob Melvin, in his first year as Giants skipper, made a new team rule that’s been turning heads on a national scale.

    The Athletic reported last week that Melvin is requiring his entire team – from the bullpen coaches, to the non-roster invitees, to the batboys and the trainers – to stand on the field for the national anthem.

    After the USA Today ran a similar story over the weekend, Melvin’s rule has become a talking point in major media outlets, with his decision earning headlines on both Fox News and CNN, among others, over the last 48 hours.

    Melvin explained last week that the mandate to stand during the anthem is “all about the perception that we’re out there ready to play. That’s it. You want your team ready to play and I want the other team to notice it, too. It’s really as simple as that.”

    While standing during the anthem may be a simple thing to Melvin, it’s been anything but simple since 2016, when 49ers quarterback Colin Kaepernick took a knee before a preseason game as a way of silently protesting racial injustice. His protest drew national attention and became a frequent talking point from politicians, including former President Donald Trump, who said players should be fired for protesting during the anthem.

    MLB players and managers have taken turns finding their own ways to protest. And in 2020, former Giants manager Gabe Kapler took a knee during the anthem for several games after the George Floyd killing. Following the 2022 mass shooting at an elementary school in Uvalde, Texas, that killed 21 people, Kapler made the decision to regularly stop standing on the field during the anthem.

    He explained on his personal blog that he didn’t feel like standing was appropriate.

    “We thoughtlessly link our moment of silence and grief with the equally thoughtless display of celebration for a country that refuses to take up the concept of controlling the sale of weapons used nearly exclusively for the mass slaughter of human beings,” he wrote. “We have our moment (over and over), and then we move on without demanding real change from the people we empower to make these changes. We stand, we bow our heads, and the people in power leave on recess, celebrating their own patriotism at every turn.”

    Melvin insists his decision to require all players to stand isn’t political. He told USA Today on Friday that it’s about bonding a group of new players.

    “Look, we’re a new team here, we got some good players here,’’ Melvin said, “it’s more about letting the other side know that we’re ready to play. I want guys out here ready to go. There’s a personality to that.

    “It has nothing to do with whatever happened in the past or whatever, it’s just something I embrace.”

    While current Giants outfielders Austin Slater and Mike Yastrzemski were among those to take a knee following the Floyd killing, they don’t seem to be offended by Melvin’s policy.

    Slater told The Athletic that it “sets the example of hey, we’re in this together.”

    And it highlights the differences between Melvin and Kapler, who was more of an individualist.



    Source

  • How Can I Find Out If I Have Prostate Cancer? A Urologist Explains

    By the age of 50, men should be having prostate-specific antigen, or PSA, testing done annually. (SDI Productions/E+/Getty Images via CNN Newsource)

    By Dr. Jamin Brahmbhatt, CNN

    (CNN) — Editor’s note: Dr. Jamin Brahmbhatt is a urologist and robotic surgeon with Orlando Health and past president of the Florida Urological Society.

    Prostate cancer remains a significant concern in my practice, which is why I emphasize the importance of early detection. The American Cancer Society estimates there will be nearly 300,000 new cases of prostate cancer and about 35,000 deaths in 2024.

    One vital tool in this quest to diagnose and treat this common cancer is prostate-specific antigen, or PSA, testing, which is a simple blood test offering valuable insights into prostate health. By the age of 50, men should be having the test done annually. If you have a family history, have risk factors, or if you are Black, you may need to start as early as age 40.

    What is prostate-specific antigen testing?

    Prostate-specific antigen testing serves as a cornerstone in the early detection of prostate cancer. When combined with other diagnostic tests and clinical assessments, it aids in identifying prostate cancer in its early stages, when treatment outcomes for prostate cancer surgery and radiation have the best odds for cure.

    Regular PSA screenings are particularly crucial for high-risk individuals, such as those with a family history of prostate cancer or advanced age. The blood test is also essential for the average man during his routine annual checkup with his primary care doctor.

    What else can affect PSA levels?

    Conditions such as an enlarged prostate, recent sexual activity or prostate infections can all contribute to elevated PSA levels, potentially leading to unnecessary alarm. By considering these factors alongside PSA test results, health care providers can provide more informed guidance and avoid unnecessary interventions.

    Going beyond PSA for screening

    Prostate-specific antigen testing has also evolved beyond its traditional bounds, with advancements in molecular urine and blood tests and imaging technology.

    Blood and urine-based tests can now pinpoint specific genetic markers associated with prostate cancer, providing insights into each patient’s unique risk profile.

    When combined with traditional PSA testing, these tests offer an even more comprehensive picture of a patient’s prostate health and cancer risk. These tests in combination with the initial PSA can help us determine who may benefit most from further investigation such as a prostate biopsy.

    Prostate MRI technology offers a detailed, high-definition view of the prostate gland. It enables us to identify suspicious lesions within the prostate gland that could harbor prostate cancer. These “hot spots” are then targeted using MRI fusion technology in which the MRI images are fused to the live ultrasound images during a prostate biopsy. The use of this imaging tool allows for more accurately detecting cancer during a prostate biopsy.

    Together, these additional tests can increase our ability to detect prostate cancer, ultimately leading to more effective and personalized treatments.

    More prostate cancer testing and detection for Black men

    Recent research and guidelines from the Prostate Cancer Foundation highlight a significant update in prostate cancer screening for Black men. Recognizing their heightened risk, the guidelines recommend initiating baseline PSA testing between ages 40 and 45, earlier than current recommendations from other organizations. Regular screenings, preferably annually, should continue until at least age 70. These updates aim to address disparities in prostate cancer outcomes among Black men, offering essential lifesaving screening recommendations.

    Lowering the recommended age for baseline PSA testing in Black men could reduce prostate cancer deaths by about 30% without significantly increasing overdiagnosis rates, according to recent findings. Doing so emphasizes the importance of tailored screening approaches for high-risk populations, particularly Black men, who are about two times more likely to be diagnosed with and die from prostate cancer than White men.

    Proactive steps toward prostate health for all men

    The PSA test remains a critical tool in prostate cancer detection, offering men an opportunity for early intervention and improved outcomes. Staying informed about updates in screening guidelines and understanding individual risk factors is vital. By prioritizing proactive health care and engaging in open discussions with health care providers, men can take charge of their prostate health and contribute to reducing the burden of prostate cancer in our communities.

    The-CNN-Wire
    & © 2024 Cable News Network, Inc., a Warner Bros. Discovery Company. All rights reserved.

    Source

  • The president’s State of the Union: Why it matters

    Millions of people around the world are expected to tune in to catch President Biden’s State of the Union address March 7.

    The speech to a joint session of Congress is an opportunity for the president to review the past year’s accomplishments and preview his agenda for the coming year.

    But the speech at the U.S. Capitol every year (except during a president’s first year in office) also illustrates U.S. democracy in action. It is the only time — other than inaugurations and state funerals — that all branches of the federal government are in the same room. The president represents the executive branch, members of the House of Representatives and Senate represent the legislative branch, and Supreme Court justices represent the judicial branch.

    Most of the president’s trusted department officials and advisers, called the Cabinet, also attend.

    The address originates in the U.S. Constitution. Article II, Section 3, clause 1 of the Constitution states that the president “shall from time to time give to the Congress Information of the State of the Union, and recommend to their Consideration such Measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient.”

    This will be President Biden’s third State of the Union speech. But he can claim close familiarity to such addresses, having been in attendance as a senator or the vice president on scores of such occasions as eight presidents who served before him gave their reports.

    A look back

    Some presidents’ words from State of the Union speeches have become famous.

    Franklin Roosevelt at lectern with officials seated around him (© AP)
    U.S. President Franklin D. Roosevelt (© AP)

    Franklin D. Roosevelt outlined his “Four Freedoms” on January 6, 1941 — freedom of speech, freedom of worship, freedom from want, and freedom from fear — to make the case for more U.S. involvement in World War II.

    George W. Bush in crowd, shaking hands (© Pablo Martinez Monsivais/AP)
    President George W. Bush (© Pablo Martinez Monsivais/AP)

    George W. Bush coined the “axis of evil” phrase during his 2002 State of the Union address, designating Iran, Iraq and North Korea as sponsors of terrorism.

    Ronald Reagan writing at his desk (© Barry Thumma/AP)
    President Ronald Reagan puts the final touches on his State of the Union speech in the Oval Office of the White House. (© Barry Thumma/AP)

    And sometimes the speech becomes well known for the invited guests who attend. The administration of President Ronald Reagan started a tradition in 1982 when the first lady invited Lenny Skutnik to sit with her. He had saved a passenger’s life after an Air Florida plane crashed into the Potomac River in Washington (see sidebar).

    Shortest speech: George Washington (1,089 words)

    Longest: Jimmy Carter (33,667 words)

    First televised: Harry S. Truman in 1947

    First live webcast: George W. Bush in 2002

    A version of this article was previously published February 3, 2023.



    Source

  • Radical Democrat Colorado Sec. of State ‘Disappointed’ In SCOTUS Decision Keeping ‘Insurrectionist’ Trump On Ballot


    Social media users slammed the leftist politician

    The far-left Democrat Colorado Secretary of State who tried keeping GOP presidential candidate Donald Trump off the state’s 2024 Republican Primary ballot voiced her frustration after the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously ruled against her attempts to disqualify Trump on Monday.

    “I am disappointed in the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision stripping states of the authority to enforce Section 3 of the 14th Amendment for federal candidates. Colorado should be able to bar oath-breaking insurrections from our ballot,” wrote Colorado Sec. of State Jena Griswold.

    The complaint comes in the aftermath of the Supreme Court’s 9-0 ruling against the Colorado Supreme Court trying to take Trump off ballots by claiming he incited an insurrection on January 6th.

    Griswold also appeared on MSNBC after the court’s ruling, saying, “My larger reaction is disappointment. I do believe that states should be able under our Constitution to bar oathbreaking insurrectionists. And ultimately this decision leaves the door open for Congress to act to pass authorizing legislation. But, we know Congress is a nearly non-functioning body. So, ultimately it will be up to American voters to save our democracy in November.”

    • URGENT! Keep Alex Jones in the fight against the NWO! Please pray & contribute at DefendJones.com today!

    Griswold isn’t the only Democrat suggesting Congress introduce legislation to keep Trump off ballots as Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) made similar remarks on CNN Monday.

    “I am working with a number of my colleagues like Debbie Wasserman-Schultz and Eric Swalwell to revive legislation that we had to set up a process by which we could determine that someone who committed an insurrection is disqualified by Section 3 of the 14th Amendment,” Raskin said.

    Social media users blasted the Colorado Democrat for trying to block Trump from her state’s GOP Primary:



    Source

  • Trump Reacts As Supreme Court Declares Him Eligible To Contest Presidential Election

    The United States Supreme Court has ruled that former President Donald Trump can run for the next presidential election.

    A group of Colorado voters had contended that Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment to the US Constitution prohibits Trump, who seeks the presidential nomination of the Republican Party in this year’s election, from becoming president again over his fuelling of insurrection during the previous election.

    The Colorado Supreme Court had agreed with that contention and ordered the Colorado secretary of state to exclude the former president from the Republican primary ballot in the State and to disregard any write-in votes that Colorado voters might cast for him.

    But the legal team of Trump challenged the decision on several grounds, insisting that the Constitution makes Congress, rather than the states, responsible for barring election defaulters.

    In a unanimous decision of the apex court, it reversed the initial lower court ruling.

    “The contrary conclusion that a handful of officials in a few States could decide the Nation’s next President would be especially surprising with respect to Section 3. Section 3 marked the first time the Constitution placed substantive limits on a State’s authority to choose its own officials,” the court ruled.

    Reacting to the judgement, Trump described it as a “big win” for America.

    Trump Reacts As Supreme Court Declares Him Eligible To Contest Presidential Election is first published on The Whistler Newspaper

    Source

  • Fact Check: No, Michael Moore is not supporting Trump’s 2024 candidacy

    Michael Moore, a liberal filmmaker, did not announce his support for President Donald Trump in the 2024 election. A 2016 video of Moore telling Donald Trump supporters in Ohio not to vote for Trump has been misleadingly edited. 

    In a Instagram reel from January with text that reads “Michael Moore Supporting Trump,” Moore speaks to an audience and says, “Whether Trump means it or not is kind of irrelevant because he’s saying the things to people who are hurting and it’s why every beaten-down, nameless, forgotten working stiff who used to be part of what was called the middle class loves Trump.” 

    Moore also says that  disenchanted voters will Nov. 8 “put a big f- – – ing yes on the box by the name of the man who has threatened to upend and overturn the very system — that has ruined their lives — Donald J. Trump.” The video clip ends with Moore saying, “Trump’s election is going to be the biggest ‘f— you’ ever recorded in human history and it will feel good.” 

    This post was flagged as part of Meta’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Meta, which owns Facebook and Instagram.)

    The video was taken from Moore’s 2016 documentary, “Michael Moore in TrumpLand,” during which he delivered a stand-up special in Ohio to persuade Trump supporters not to vote for Trump. 

    Trump reposted the edited version of the video to his Truth Social account in April with no caption. 

    But a longer version of the video shows Moore saying that Trump voters will regret their decision. 

    “So, when the rightfully angry people of Ohio and Michigan and Pennsylvania and Wisconsin, find out after a few months in office that President Trump wasn’t going to do a damn thing for them, it’ll be too late to do anything about it,” Moore said. “But I get it, you wanted to send a message. You had righteous anger, and justifiable anger. Well, message sent. Good night America, you’ve just elected the last president of the United States.” 

    An Feb. 27 article by The Nation says Moore has supported Democratic candidates since 2002. On an episode of his podcast “Rumble with Michael Moore” that aired Feb. 27, Moore said he voted for Joe Biden in 2020 and encouraged Michigan voters to cast their ballots for “uncommitted” in the 2024 Michigan presidential primary to protest the Biden administration’s support of Israel’s bombardment of Gaza. 

    In the podcast, Moore emphasizes that he doesn’t support reelecting Trump in 2024.

    “President Biden, this is what’s really upsetting us, is that you are risking putting Trump back in the White House,” Moore says. “What is wrong with you?”

    We rate the claim that Moore is supporting Trump in the 2024 election False. 



    Source

  • 6 in 10 US adults doubt mental capability of Biden and Trump

    By JOSH BOAK and AMELIA THOMSON-DEVEAUX (Associated Press)

    WASHINGTON (AP) — A poll finds that a significant share of U.S. adults doubt the mental capabilities of 81-year-old President Joe Biden and 77-year-old Donald Trump, the former president and current Republican front-runner in what could be a rematch of the 2020 election.

    More than 6 in 10 (63%) say they’re not very or not at all confident in Biden’s mental capability to serve effectively as president, turning his coming State of the Union address into something of a real-time audition for a second term. A similar but slightly smaller share (57%) say that Trump lacks the memory and acuity for the job.

    The findings from a new survey by The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research point to a tough presidential election in which issues such as age and mental competence could be more prevalent than in any other political contest in modern times.

    People’s views of Biden’s memory and acuity have soured since January 2022, when about half of those polled expressed similar concerns. (That survey didn’t ask a similar question about Trump.)

    In a major risk for Biden, independents are much more likely to say that they lack confidence in his mental abilities (80%) compared with Trump’s (56%). And Democrats are generally more concerned about Biden’s mental capabilities than Republicans are with Trump’s, raising the stakes of Biden’s upcoming speech to a joint session of Congress on Thursday.

    Going into the big event, just 38% of U.S. adults approve of how Biden is handling his job as president, while 61% disapprove. Democrats (74%) are much likelier than independents (20%) and Republicans (6%) to favor his performance. But there’s broad discontent on the way Biden is handling a variety of issues, including the economy, immigration and foreign policy.

    About 4 in 10 Americans approve of the way Biden is handling each of these issues: health care, climate change, abortion policy and the conflict between Russia and Ukraine. But people are less satisfied by Biden’s handling of immigration (29%), the conflict between the Israelis and the Palestinians (31%) and the economy (34%) — all of which are likely to come up in the speech before a joint session of Congress.

    Nearly 6 in 10 (57%) Americans think the national economy is somewhat or much worse off than before Biden took office in 2021. Only 3 in 10 adults say it’s better under his leadership. Still, people are more optimistic about the state of their own bank accounts: 54% say their personal finances are good.

    Many respondents to the survey were deeply pessimistic about their likely choices in November because of age and the risk of cognitive decline.

    Paul Miller, himself 84, said Biden is just too old — and so is Trump.

    “He doesn’t seem to have the mental whatever to be a president,” Miller said of Biden. He added that Trump is “too old, too, and half crazy.”

    The retiree from Carlisle, Pennsylvania, said he voted for Trump in 2020 but he wouldn’t do so again.

    “I don’t think I’m going to vote for either one of them,” he said. “I hope somebody else is available.”

    Source

  • Seattle Ranks As The Least-Religious Large Metro Area In The U.S.

    Recent survey data has revealed that Seattle holds the distinction of being the least-religious large metro area in the United States. As Americans become less religious overall, with declining attendance at religious services across the country, certain regions stand out as particularly non-religious. Seattle is one such place, where a significant majority of adults, approximately 64%, never attend church or religious services or go less than once a year.

    The survey data, collected through the ongoing Household Pulse Survey conducted by the U.S. Census Bureau, provides insight into the religious landscape of the Seattle area. Out of the total population of 3.1 million adults aged 18 and older in the metro area, which includes King, Pierce, and Snohomish counties, around 1.98 million individuals identify as non-attenders of religious services.

    The survey, conducted from January 9 to February 5, encompassed approximately 68,500 respondents nationwide and included data from all 50 states and the nation’s 15 largest metro areas, including Seattle. Among these 15 metro areas, Seattle emerged as the least religious, narrowly surpassing San Francisco, where 63% of respondents reported never attending religious services or going less than once a year. Boston ranked a distant third with 56% non-attenders.

    It is not surprising that the southern parts of the U.S., known as the Sunbelt, tend to be more religious compared to the Pacific Northwest. In Dallas, for instance, 40.5% of respondents reported never attending religious services or going less than once a year, while Houston and Atlanta had slightly higher percentages.

    The survey sheds light on the shifting religious landscape in the country, as fewer Americans identify with organized religion and engage in regular religious activities. Factors contributing to this trend may include changing societal attitudes, increased secularism, and a growing emphasis on individual spirituality.

    In Seattle, a city known for its progressive and diverse culture, the low attendance at religious services reflects the secular nature of the community. People in the area may find spiritual fulfillment through alternative means or prioritize personal beliefs and values over formal religious institutions.

    Source

  • Return-to-office mandates will be worse for federal employment than leaders realize

    For many months, public sector unions warned about the damaging consequences to federal employee retention and recruitment posed by the federal government’s planned mandate to force staff to return to the office.

    As a hint of things to come, we now have initial assessments of what has happened at a number of companies that were early movers in demanding that employees return to working in-person. It’s not a pretty picture.

    A trio of compelling reports — the Greenhouse Candidate Experience Report, the Federal Reserve’s Survey of Household Economics and Decisionmaking (SHED) and Unispace’s “Returning for Good” report — offer grim hints of what will happen when government employees are forced to return to office.

    Unispace finds that nearly half (42 percent) of companies that mandated office returns witnessed a higher level of employee attrition than they had anticipated. In other words, they knew it would cause some attrition, but they weren’t ready for the serious problems that would result.

    Perhaps they should have. According to the Greenhouse report, a staggering 76 percent of employees stand ready to jump ship if their companies decide to pull the plug on flexible work arrangements. Employees from historically underrepresented groups are 22 percent more likely to consider other options if flexibility goes out the window.

    The SHED survey helps explain why. The displeasure of shifting from a flexible work model to a traditional one has the same effect on employee satisfaction as a pay cut of up to 3 percent.

    When it comes to recruitment, Greenhouse finds that 42 percent of candidates would outright reject roles that lack flexibility. Curious about what’s luring employees away? The Greenhouse report finds the following: increased compensation (48 percent); greater job security (34 percent); career advancement opportunities (32 percent); better flexible work policies (28 percent); a more positive company culture (27 percent). In other words, excluding career-centric factors such as pay, security, and promotion, flexible work policies are paramount among employee desires.

    Interestingly, Unispace throws another factor into the mix: choice. According to their report, the top feelings employees feel overall toward their work are happiness (31 percent), motivation (30 percent) and excitement (27 percent). However, all three of these feelings decrease for those with mandated office returns (by 27 percent, 26 percent, and 22 percent, respectively). The finding highlights that staff are more open to returning to the office if it is a choice rather than a mandate.

    How does this information square with data on government agencies? Just like private companies whose employees threatened to walk before the forced return-to-office mandates, we have similar data from pre-mandate statistics in government agencies.

    A recent Environmental Protection Agency internal survey paints a compelling picture of employee sentiment toward remote work arrangements. The EPA’s survey reveals a strong preference for telework among its employees, with a staggering 65.9 percent indicating that they would consider leaving the agency if telework and remote work opportunities were diminished.

    This is a resounding statement about how much value employees place on the flexibility and autonomy that telework provides. Furthermore, 80 percent of respondents anticipated experiencing “personal hardships” if telework were reduced.

    Similarly, at the National Science Foundation (NSF), a survey revealed a palpable concern among employees regarding increased in-office mandates. Conducted by the American Federation of Government Employees, the union representing NSF staff, the survey revealed that 42 percent of respondents feel that being required to work in the office four days per pay period would significantly affect them, complicating their adjustment to the new mandate. Furthermore, 27 percent of NSF employees view such in-office expectations as “unworkable,” stating that they would contemplate finding new employment or retiring under these conditions.

    The NSF survey also highlighted the financial implications of reduced telework flexibility, with nearly half of the respondents citing cost of living and related financial reasons as a key factor driving their desire for more workplace flexibility.

    Broader assessments spanning the whole federal workforce rather than individual agencies find similar outcomes. A survey by Federal Times revealed that half of federal employees have sought new horizons since the inception of return-to-office mandates, with a significant portion of the workforce yearning for the autonomy and flexibility that telework affords. As teleworking becomes less prevalent, with 41 percent of federal employees reporting a decrease since the pandemic’s peak, the quest for remote opportunities intensifies, highlighting telework not as a perk but as a pivotal factor in career decisions.

    For instance, consider the overwhelming response to remote job listings on the USA Jobs portal, which garnered 17 times more applications than their in-office counterparts. This trend underscores a broader shift in the labor market, where flexibility and autonomy are increasingly prized, presenting a unique challenge to traditional office-centric models.

    We can thus anticipate that the consequences of the federal return-to-work mandates will be similar to the surprisingly damaging consequences of the mandates in the private sector. They will cause a substantially higher loss of employees and greater obstacles to staff recruitment than leaders anticipate.

    The reality of the post-pandemic environment involves a shift toward employees valuing flexible work arrangements over traditional office-centric models, and to a much greater extent than either corporate or government leaders appreciate. To remain competitive and retain top talent, it is imperative to adopt more adaptive hybrid work policies that reflect the changing dynamics of the modern workplace, ensuring organizational resilience and employee satisfaction.

    Dr. Gleb Tsipursky serves as the CEO of the hybrid work consultancy Disaster Avoidance Experts. He is the author of Returning to the Office and Leading Hybrid and Remote Teams.

    Copyright 2024 Nexstar Media Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

    Source

  • Breaking! SCOTUS Rules 9-0 In Favor Of Trump Remaining On State Primary Ballots


    Major victory for MAGA movement comes just ahead of Super Tuesday

    The United States Supreme Court ruled in favor of GOP presidential frontrunner Donald Trump on Monday, allowing his name to appear on 2024 primary ballots in states where Democrats tried to disqualify him from running for office.

    The ruling comes just one day before the Super Tuesday primaries taking place across the country and signals a huge victory of the Trump campaign.

    The decision was made unanimously by the Supreme Court’s nine justices, overruling the Colorado Supreme Court that barred Trump from the state’s primary ballot by claiming he incited an insurrection on January 6th.

    Trump now has the greenlight to be named on ballots in every state despite the Democrat attempts at thwarting his return to the White House.

    Trump supporters celebrated on social media:

    • Winter Sun Plus is NOW 40% off! Boost your natural defenses with this powerful vitamin D3 and K formula!

    Alex Jones will be covering this news live from 11am-3pm CST:



    Source