Paradise News

Tag: General News

  • Fact Check: Did TSA find a record number of guns at airports last year?

    In a recent press release warning about the dangers of ghost guns — untraceable guns that users can assemble from parts — Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., touted the Transportation Security Administration’s efforts to find guns in airport passengers’ bags.

    “We already saw that TSA found with metal detectors nearly 7,000 firearms at airports last year — an all-time high.” said Schumer said in the Jan. 29 press release.

    Official data shows that Schumer is correct, though law enforcement experts add that proportionally, the rate of discovery has fallen.

    TSA’s data

    To properly store a firearm for flight, the TSA asks passengers to place “unloaded firearms in a locked hard-sided container as checked baggage only,” then, “declare the firearm and/or ammunition to the airline when checking your bag at the ticket counter.”

    When a firearm is detected at an airport security checkpoint, a TSA officer will notify local law enforcement, which will then remove the passenger and the firearm from the checkpoint. The passenger may be arrested or ticketed. 

    TSA does not confiscate the firearms found, though it can issue civil fines up to $15,000 and typically revokes eligibility for the TSA PreCheck program for at least five years.

    In 2023, TSA reported seizing 6,737 firearms at airport security checkpoints — the most in its history. That was up from the previous record of 6,542 set the year before.

    The most firearms were discovered at the airports in Atlanta and Dallas-Fort Worth, which are also the two busiest U.S. airports.

    TSA also reported that about 93% of these firearms were loaded.

    “We are still seeing far too many firearms at TSA checkpoints, and what’s particularly concerning is the amount of them loaded, presenting an unnecessary risk to everyone at the TSA checkpoint,” said TSA Administrator David Pekoske in a press release.

    Law enforcement experts said the increased number of seizures stems partly from an increase in gun ownership. 

    “Between 2020 and 2022, 60 million guns were sold,” according to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, said Keith Jeffries, a former federal security director at Los Angeles International Airport. “With that, about 7.5 million of those were new gun owners. So, anytime you see more guns or firearms flood the market, you’re probably going to see that chain reaction at the airport.”

    Jeffries added that security technology has significantly improved over the last 21 to 22 years. 

    “The older, two-dimensional X-rays are being replaced by the CT (computer tomography) technology, which gives you a 3-D image that is significantly better,” he said.

    The rate of seizures

    2023’s  record-setting airport gun seizure number needs one caveat: The rate of detection fell, said Sheldon H. Jacobson, a University of Illinois computer science professor who has studied aviation security for more than 25 years. Jacobson provided the technical foundations for risk-based security that informed the TSA’s PreCheck program’s design.

    In 2023, TSA screened more than 858 million people. That means the agency intercepted 7.8 firearms per million passengers — a decline from 8.6 firearms found per million passengers in 2022.

    Should air travelers feel safe?

    Experts say that the rising number of gun seizures shouldn’t panic travelers.

    “The majority of folks” who are found with firearms “are what we call low-risk passengers,” Jeffries said. “These are your more frequent travelers. They’re the ones usually in PreCheck. I don’t think there’s any malicious intent. The number one thing that we would hear out there, and I’m sure it still stands to this day, is, ‘I forgot it was in my bag.’”

    Our ruling

    Schumer said, “We already saw that TSA found with metal detectors nearly 7,000 firearms at airports last year — an all-time high.”

    That number aligns with what TSA has reported for 2023. However, the rate of discovery fell compared with 2023 because the number of passengers increased even more.

    We rate the statement Mostly True.



    Source

  • Dueling pro-Trump factions in Michigan throw the swing state’s Republicans into disarray – Paradise Post

    By THOMAS BEAUMONT and JOEY CAPPELLETTI (Associated Press)

    WATERFORD TOWNSHIP, Mich. (AP) — The Michigan Republican Party was deep in debt when a longtime party donor who had given more than $1 million over the past decade asked for a meeting with its chairwoman.

    Kristina Karamo turned down the donor. Her reasoning, according to two people familiar with the matter, was that he was a “Republican in Name Only,” or a “RINO,” an insult long used to denigrate members of the party seen as not conservative enough.

    Today, the party’s finances are so dire that Karamo has sued former party leaders so she can get permission to sell the organization’s headquarters. And she’s refusing to leave her post even as former President Donald Trump and national Republicans have installed a new ally in her place.

    The cash crunch and power struggle within the Michigan GOP, long a bastion of traditional conservatism, is a case study in the party’s new phase nationally in the era of Trump, where no longer are the competing elements simply for or against him. Instead, pro-Trump factions in Michigan and elsewhere are fighting over how best to represent his “Make America Great Again” movement, with some openly alienating lifetime Republicans and undermining the party’s work in key swing states.

    While Trump is widely expected to win Tuesday’s Michigan primary, his campaign is trying to improve Republican standing in a state that could decide a potential Trump rematch in November with Democratic President Joe Biden. But some of Trump’s most ardent supporters aren’t going along with his efforts to replace Karamo and they openly question his judgment.

    “I don’t think he should be involved in state politics to begin with,” said Steve Willis, chair of the Clinton County GOP, in south central Michigan near Lansing. “He’s just listening to people that have his ear and he makes a decision.”

    Trump’s allies have moved to replace Karamo with Pete Hoekstra, a former nine-term congressman who was Trump’s ambassador to the Netherlands. Hoekstra is now responsible for assembling a functioning network of activists, donors and political staff while acknowledging, as he said in an interview, that he “can’t build a whole political party in eight months.”

    “We need to build the brand back, with our grassroots and our donor class,” Hoekstra said. “My intention is to rebuild those relationships.”

    Karamo, who did not respond to several text messages and phone calls seeking comment, retains control of the party’s bank accounts, social media and email. A lawsuit seeking to force her to relinquish power is being heard by a Michigan judge.

    Elected party chairwoman last year, Karamo is an ardent Trump supporter who rose to prominence by repeating false claims about voter fraud in Detroit and denying that Trump lost the 2020 election.

    She inherited a state party torn by infighting and facing millions in debt. Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, a rising Democratic Party star, had easily won reelection and Democrats clinched control of the Legislature.

    But many donors and longtime activists say Karamo refused to work with them. In turn, many of them stopped giving, cutting off resources to a party that had been accustomed to raising at least $20 million — and at times more than $30 million — to help candidates statewide.

    John Kennedy, the longtime CEO of a medical implant manufacturer and part of a core of Michigan’s most loyal donors, was told that Karamo would not meet with “RINOs,” according to two people familiar with his story who weren’t authorized to discuss it publicly and spoke on condition of anonymity.

    Kennedy declined to comment in response to an email inquiry.

    Source

  • 3 Ways To Fix Math’s Racial Divide

    A new report from RAND pinpoints three main reasons why elementary and middle school students aren’t excelling at math. (Credit: Photo by Monstera Production)

    by Aziah Siid

    Some of the highest-paying jobs — data scientist, software engineer, actuary — require proficiency in mathematics. But every time a Black child is funneled into a lower level of math, made to feel like they’re “not a math person,” or taught by an unskilled teacher, it becomes less likely they’ll grow up and get one of those jobs  

    Indeed, math scores for Black 13-year-olds dropped a staggering 13 points between the 2019-20 and 2022-23 school years, according to the latest National Assessment of Educational Progress data. That’s more than double the 6-point decline for white students over the same period. 

    Now, a new report from RAND pinpoints three reasons why K-8 students in public schools across the United States aren’t making progress in math: the grouping of students by achievement levels for mathematics instruction — also known as tracking — underqualified teachers, and the lack of effective supports for struggling students.

    “K–12 public schools have long wrestled with the dilemma of ensuring that all children have equitable learning opportunities in mathematics while also attending to diverse needs that often require different instructional strategies and approaches,” the researchers wrote in the report, Elementary and Middle School Opportunity Structures That Factor into Students’ Math Learning. 

    The authors analyzed data from a nationally representative survey of principals and teachers to examine “school opportunity structures” that can impact K-8 students’ math learning experiences. 

    These structures don’t center on how much students have learned, but rather on the ways elementary and middle schools are organized on an administrative and instructional level to either help or hinder mathematics learning opportunities. 

    Trained, Certified, Knowledgeable Teachers

    RAND’s findings suggest students who struggle in mathematics are less likely to get “certified, knowledgeable mathematics teachers.” They are typically not placed with teachers who have the most knowledge about math content or pedagogy, when those are exactly the teachers struggling students need most. 

    As Word In Black previously reported, “early career teachers are in majority-Black schools 47% more than in the majority-white schools.”

    Only one in three U.S. principals, on average, reported “assigning students who are struggling to teachers with the most knowledge of mathematics pedagogy and content.”  

    Overall, middle school math teachers are seen by administrators as far more knowledgeable about math content and pedagogy than their elementary counterparts. But only about one-quarter of elementary principals indicated that all or nearly all of their teachers have deep knowledge of mathematics pedagogy and content.

    Solution: States should provide more opportunities for teachers, especially at the elementary level, to deepen their math content knowledge and instructional skills.

    The Tracking Trap

    It’s common for schools to group students according to ability level — putting an eighth grader into regular algebra or honors algebra, for example. But moving up year-over-year is difficult, particularly if a Black student is automatically seen as having low mathematical ability because of their skin color. The report’s authors point out that previous research has found “tracking has some significant drawbacks: Black, Hispanic, and low-income children are disproportionately placed in lower-level tracks.”

    The researchers found assessments and teacher recommendations were cited as grouping factors by the majority of principals across grade levels. The result? “Tracking likely limits mathematics learning opportunities for many students who might want to take higher-level courses but are not able to enroll in those courses.”

    Akil Bello, an education expert at FairTest told Word In Black in 2022 that students end up having to pass Algebra 1 in seventh grade to be eligible to take calculus in their junior or senior year of high school. And if they can’t do that, or are similarly excluded from honors or advanced placement courses, that makes it less likely they’ll get into a competitive four-year college or university.

    Solutions: 

    • Researchers recommend that districts and schools should look for ways to reduce bias in how students are grouped by achievement level for math classes. 
    • They also suggest schools work more closely with teachers, guidance counselors, parents, and students to make sure students are getting the challenge they want and need in their classes.
    • Principals could “ask teachers to report at various times during the year whether all their students are receiving the appropriate level of challenge” and whether it might make sense to shift any students to a different track rather than grouping them all together throughout the year. 

    Student Supports

    RAND’s researchers also set out to learn what kinds of supports are available for kids who aren’t catching on to math concepts — and are students getting the help they need? 

    Most principals reported offering support like interventions for struggling math students — tutoring, studying after school, or additional family engagement, for example. However, principals said only a quarter of students who need it actually receive that help. 

    Solution: School systems need to evaluate why some struggling math students don’t take advantage of the interventions and supports that are offered.

    Overall, as the report’s authors note, these possible solutions “are aimed at helping leaders at the state, district, and school levels reflect on how schools support math learning and how school structures might be improved to set up all students for success in high school and beyond.”

    Source

  • FCC Commissioner: Ending affordable internet is a gut punch to US prosperity

    The Affordable Connectivity Program helps 23 million American households afford the internet. But on Feb. 8, the program began winding down due to a lack of funding.  

    Today, new households no longer can enroll. Soon, current households will confront a choice between bill shock and disconnection. We cannot let this happen.

    Established in the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, the Affordable Connectivity Program connects low-income households to high-quality internet access service, often for free. Americans in all 50 states use it — from 130,000 households in my home state of Kansas to 1.1 million in Ohio and 270,000 in Nevada.  

    These households live in rural areas and urban centers; in fact, the program has surpassed expectations in rural enrollment. They also live on Tribal lands. They include young learners, grandparents and everyone in between. 

    To put it plainly, the Affordable Connectivity Program is the most effective program we’ve had in helping low-income Americans get online and stay online. Indeed, it has been the most successful program ever in our decades-long bipartisan effort to solve the digital divide.

    But the Affordable Connectivity Program is in jeopardy. Without additional appropriations from Congress, the program will run out of money as soon as April.

    This means that millions of Americans will lose access to affordable broadband. As soon as funding runs out, monthly internet bills for these low-income households will skyrocket. I expect many of them will be unable to stay connected.  

    Nationally, 49 percent of these households are “subscription vulnerable,” meaning they find the internet very difficult to fit into their monthly budgets and are constantly on the edge of disconnection. Few states offer internet affordability programs for these households to fall back on. Some may step in and try to create them, but others may not, and any state efforts are unlikely to match the Affordable Connectivity Program’s scale, let alone reach full implementation, in just a few months.  

    That leaves only the charity of internet service providers. While many of them agreed to create low-cost plans in partnership with the Affordable Connectivity Program, there’s no business case for them to keep 23 million households connected for free without federal support. It’s no wonder internet service providers themselves are calling for the program to be funded. 

    The removal of an internet connection could fundamentally change the destiny of these families. For example, nearly a quarter of teens living in households making less than $30,000 per year say that they sometimes cannot complete their homework due to a lack of reliable computer or internet access. 

    Internet access also increases employment and earnings for low-income users. Access to telehealth services increases access to care and decreases costs.  

    These studies show that today, internet access is critical for nearly every part of life. They also show that the times when families struggle to afford broadband — like during job transitions or health scares, for example — are exactly when they need a connection the most.

    The broader impact of the end of the Affordable Connectivity Program won’t just be felt by individual households. It will handcuff the biggest investment this country has ever made in broadband infrastructure deployment, the Broadband Equity Access and Deployment Program.  

    That program put $42.5 billion into building new networks that reach millions of unserved and then-underserved homes, primarily in rural communities. But without the Affordable Connectivity Program, Broadband Equity Access and Deployment dollars will not reach as far as they could. The Affordable Connectivity Program makes building out to these rural homes less risky and less expensive, because more of the serviceable population can afford to subscribe.  

    A recent study concluded that the Affordable Connectivity Program reduces the subsidy needed to incentivize building in rural areas by a whopping 25 percent. With the program, states can stretch their dollars farther and connect more rural homes. Without it, they can’t.

    I’m glad to say there is reason for hope. Because of the program’s widespread adoption, calls to restore funding have come from every part of the country. 

    President Biden asked Congress to fund the program as part of his budget. Twenty-six bipartisan governors and 174 mayors have also urged Congress to do so. 

    Support within Congress itself is bipartisan and bicameral; the Affordable Connectivity Program Extension Act, which would provide $7 billion to restore funding to the program, has Democratic and Republican sponsors in both the House and the Senate. The Senate Republican sponsors were part of a group of eight Republican senators who urged continuity of the program as early as June 2023. 

    As President Biden said in North Carolina just a few weeks ago, “[high]-speed internet isn’t a luxury anymore, it’s an absolute necessity.”  

    Closing the digital divide is about opening opportunities for all, including the millions of Americans who lack broadband because they can’t otherwise afford it. At this pivotal moment, we can’t turn back.

    Geoffrey Starks is a commissioner of the Federal Communications Commission.

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

    Source

  • Flashback: Infowars Has Been Warning Of ‘Cyber Pandemic’ For Decades


    Infowars provides you with next decade’s news today!

    With Thursday’s cellular service outages in America leaving many wondering if a cyberattack took place, let’s look back at the past years of Infowars exposing the fact that the global elite are TELLING YOU a “Cyber Pandemic” is coming.

    In the aftermath of the COVID-19 pandemic, globalist WEF founder Klaus Schwab warned the world the 2020-21 lockdowns and forced mRNA jabs will look like a walk in the park once the major cyber attacks begin.

    “Pay insufficient attention, to the frightening scenario of a comprehensive cyber attack, which would bring a complete halt to the power supply, transportation, hospital services, our society as a whole. The COVID-19 crisis would be seen in this respect as a small disturbance in comparison to a major cyber attack,” Schwab eerily predicted.

    He made the remarks at the 2021 Cyber Polygon event where the WEF and Russia took part in a simulation where cyberattacks targeted the financial industry, an event that would pave the way for a “Great Reset” of the global economy.

    Watch this February 2022 Infowars report to hear Schwab’s words:

    • Our fan-favorite Turbo Force Plus is now 40% off! See for yourself the delicious one-of-a-kind energy boost infowarriors CRAVE!

    Alex Jones has been constantly trying to warn his countrymen over the past few years that the elite will go through with this plan, saying, “Their next move will be cyberattacks and power outages. The globalists are going to cut our power off and say the Russians did it.”

    He has also suggested the Deep State could claim Trump supporters attacked the power grid to further divide the nation and set up their political opponents.

    Jones has been urging Americans to prepare for potential cyberattacks since the 1990s!

    And don’t forget, a recent Netflix movie created with the help of Barack Obama portrayed a society suffering through a massive cyberattack in what many called an example of predictive programming.

    In the event of an actual massive cyberattack on the American power grid or water supply, people would quickly resort to barbaric means in order to feed themselves and their families.

    Jones recently broke down a conversation between podcast host Joe Rogan and NFL quarterback Aaron Rodgers about this exact hypothetical situation.

    Related:

    Source

  • FCTA Denies Increasing School Fees In Public Boarding Schools

    The Federal Capital Territory Administration (FCTA) says there is no increment of school fees in public boarding schools in the federal capital.

    The Mandate Secretary, Education Secretariat, FCTA, Dr Danlami Hayyo, disclosed this in an interview on Thursday in Abuja.

    Recall that some parents had claimed that the FCT Administration increased school fees for students in FCT public boarding schools.

    They claimed that the fee was increased from between N29,000 and N32,000 to N47,000, a development they claimed had forced some parents to withdraw their children from boarding schools to day schools.

    “The Minister of FCT, Mr Nyesom Wike, had even approved the increase in the feeding allowances for boarding schools due to rising cost of food items.

    “Look at the situation, how much is a bag of rice in the last two years and how much is a bag or rice currently? He asked.”

    The mandate secretary also denied the claim that some parents have withdrawn their children from public boarding schools in the FCT.

    According to him, FCT public boarding schools are positioned to provide quality education at affordable cost and within the means of parents.

    “I don’t think there is someone that will remove his children or his son from public school as a result of the feeding cost; I doubt much.”

    He added that the quality of education in public schools was very encouraging, stressing that the best student in the 2023 West African Examination Council was from a public school.

    He also said that students from public schools won more trophies from debates, quizzes and other academic and sports competitions in 2023 than private schools.

    “In fact, in Abuja, so many parents are removing their children from private schools to public schools because of the quality of education the public schools provide.

    “There is a high number of enrolments in public schools in Abuja currently and we are trying to bridge the infrastructural gap to accommodate more pupils and students,” he said.

    Hayyo said that FCTA has concluded plans to inaugurate the schools recently rehabilitated, while plans are underway for the construction of new ones.

    FCTA Denies Increasing School Fees In Public Boarding Schools is first published on The Whistler Newspaper

    Source

  • Fact Check: What is Wisconsin U.S. Senate candidate Eric Hovde’s stance on abortion?

    Republican U.S. Senate candidate Eric Hovde has made his current stance on abortion public: He supports exceptions for rape, incest and the life of the mother, and also thinks voters should decide the issue.

    Hovde made his position clear when asked by PolitiFact Wisconsin to respond to a radio ad that targeted his stances on abortion, based on comments he made while running for the same office in 2012. 

    Here’s the main claims on Hovde’s abortion stance in the ad, which was launched by A Better Wisconsin Together, a progressive research and communications group:

    “Hovde said, ‘I am totally opposed to abortion’ and ‘I’m 100% pro-life.’ And he supported overturning Roe v. Wade,” says the ad, which began airing Feb. 21, a day after Hovde officially entered the race.

    The ad also implies that Hovde opposes exceptions for rape and incest, because he’s been backed by Wisconsin Right to Life, a group that tracks its endorsed candidates’ stances on rape and incest. 

    “With views like that, Hovde could be a crucial vote in favor of a national abortion ban,” the ad says.

    We ultimately do not rate the claims in the ad. Hovde’s position has changed since he first ran for U.S. Senate in 2012 and made those claims, and he is just now publicly stating his new position.

    But let’s dig into the claims for the purposes of this PolitiFact as the race gets started.

    Claims in ad based on statements Hovde made while campaigning in 2012

    When asked for backup, A Better Wisconsin Together Communications Director Lucy Ripp sent a memo that details the sources behind each claim in the ad.

    Let’s tackle the claims one by one. 

    First, the ad claims Hovde said he is “totally opposed to abortion.” That comment comes from Hovde’s appearance on “The Jerry Bader Show” in 2012, when he was running in the Republican primary for Senate.

    Hovde was asked to address concerns from voters that his charity donated to embryonic stem cell research. 

    “I am a strong believer in pro-life. I am totally opposed to abortion,” Hovde told the conservative radio show. 

    He defended donating to research into multiple sclerosis, which he was diagnosed with in 1991, but disputed his money went to embryonic stem cell research.

    So, the ad is correct in the first aspect: Hovde — albeit in 2012 — said he was “totally opposed to abortion.”

    A Better Wisconsin Together says the second claim, that Hovde said he is “100% pro-life,” came from the same radio interview. 

    Hovde didn’t say “100%” exactly, rather that he is a “strong believer.” Although that caveat is important, the sentiment is similar enough.

    Now, for the third claim: Did Hovde say he supports overturning Roe v. Wade, the Supreme Court case that guaranteed abortion rights? 

    That claim is based on a WisconsinEye interview with Hovde. That was also in 2012, a full decade before Roe v. Wade was overturned.

    Hovde did not elaborate on his stance when asked whether he thought Roe v. Wade should be overturned, beyond saying “yes” and repeating his answer when asked a second time.

    So, all of those things, apart from one of the wordings, are things that Hovde did say. But a lot has changed since 2012.

    Some Wisconsin Republicans have softened their stance on abortion after Democrats mobilized voters on the issue in 2022. 

    Let’s check in with Hovde’s campaign to set the record straight on his stance.

    Hovde’s campaign says he supports exceptions for rape, incest, the mother’s life

    Ben Voelkel, a Hovde campaign spokesman, sent a statement from Hovde that shows his position has changed since 2012. 

    Hovde said, “I believe we need exceptions for cases of rape, incest and to protect the life of the mother.”

    The ad does not explicitly state that Hovde himself opposes exceptions for rape and incest, but suggests he would because Wisconsin Right to Life has supported him in the past.

    Wisconsin Right to Life did endorse Eric Hovde in 2012, as well as Tommy Thompson, who eventually won the Republican primary. 

    “Eric Hovde has indicated strong support for federal right-to-life issues should he be elected,” the anti-abortion group said.

    The group said in 2023 that it opposes exceptions for rape and incest, but does support emergency medical exceptions.

    Hovde also supports posing the issue to Wisconsin voters via referendum

    Here’s the other part of Hovde’s stance. He says, “It is clear after the Dobbs decision that the people of Wisconsin are the ones who should decide this issue.”

    Assembly Republicans voted last month to pass a bill asking voters whether Wisconsin should ban abortions after 14 weeks of pregnancy. 

    U.S. Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wis., also pushed a referendum that would ask Wisconsin voters: “At what point does society have the responsibility to protect the life of an unborn child?” 

    However, neither path looks viable at this point. 

    The first proposal deploys a seldom-used process by which a law passed by the Legislature and signed by the governor can be enacted only with voters’ approval, and Democratic Gov. Tony Evers opposes the effort. 

    Johnson’s suggestion could be used, under current state law, only as a nonbinding vote — one that would measure public opinion but not change the law.

    However, both processes don’t look possible at this point. Vos’ move would require Evers’ approval, which he wouldn’t give, and voters could not change the law the way Johnson suggested.

    Bottom line: Hovde was “totally opposed” to abortion in 2012, but not in 2024

    A Better Wisconsin Together ad that targets Republican U.S. Senate candidate Eric Hovde’s stances on abortion says: 

    “Hovde said, ‘I am totally opposed to abortion’ and ‘I’m 100% pro-life.’ And he supported overturning Roe v. Wade,” the ad reads. 

    Those three things, except for one slightly off wording, are true. But Hovde said those things more than a decade ago. 

    Now, he says he supports exceptions for rape, incest and the mother’s life. He also favors posing the issue to voters through a referendum. 



    Source

  • Three burning questions as the SF Giants (really) start spring training

    The Giants are going to start their spring training exhibition schedule on Saturday, which is, itself, a reason to celebrate.

    We did it, folks. We survived the long, cruel months without Major League Baseball. (Thanks for the help, Niners and Caribbean Series.)

    But while (fake) games are about to be played, buddy, things are not hunky dory with the Giants.

    After another underwhelming offseason, the Giants head into the exhibition schedule carrying questions galore.

    But three stand out above the others.

    Here’s what I want answered this spring:

    Can this team really count on Jung Hoo Lee?

    I have no problem with the Lee signing. He seems like a nice player, and it’s not my money.

    But being a “nice” player on this roster makes you a bit of a unicorn — it makes you someone this team will rely upon day in and day out this season.

    And that all seems like a lot to ask of Lee.

    The glove will play in center. That’s worth something. Lee’s bat-to-ball skills should translate just fine. That’s worth something, too.

    The question is, what happens to the ball once the bat finds it?

    Lee is unlikely to be a big home run hitter — the transition to the big leagues and Oracle Park should zap whatever power he has beyond roughly 10 home runs.

    But there’s nothing wrong with being a doubles guy. You can lead by being a doubles guy.

    Is Lee going to be a doubles guy?

    Some of the projection systems love him. The Bat X — my favorite — thinks Lee will be 14 percent better than league average this season. They also project him for a 10.6 percent strike-out rate — the highest of all the major projection systems, but still the fifth-lowest mark in the big leagues.

    This will work.

    But projection systems and sportswriter guesses don’t mean much.

    Lee actually has to go out there and do the thing, and his challenge to do that is so much different from some kid being called up from the minors.

    Lee must adapt to living and working in a different country and to a much higher level of competition.

    Oh, all while there are serious expectations on him, because, again, the Giants need him to be good to make the playoffs this season.

    It all sounds like a lot — enough to make you second-guess immediate success.

    The Giants have cited the success of Padres shortstop Ha-Seong Kim as a reason to believe Lee will make an immediate impact in the big leagues.

    What is not mentioned in those comparisons is that Kim struggled at the plate his first two seasons, posting a 94 OPS+ before breaking out as a down-ballot MVP candidate last year.

    The Giants have Lee locked up for a long time, but they can’t wait three years for the best version of him to arrive in San Francisco.

    Does this team have enough pitching?

    Source

  • Biden Administration To Issue New Cyber Directives Aimed At Defending Ports

    A US Coast Guard ship sits near the United Nations headquarters in New York City on September 18, 2023. (Ed Jones/AFP/Getty Images via CNN Newsource)

    By Sean Lyngaas, CNN

    (CNN) — The Biden administration on Wednesday will issue multiple cybersecurity directives aimed at shoring up vulnerabilities at US maritime ports that could be exploited by hackers and addressing security risks from Chinese-made cranes, according to senior US officials.

    Administration officials also plan to invest more than $20 billion over the next five years in new port infrastructure, including cranes built in the US that officials say will present less of a cybersecurity and counterintelligence risk.

    A new executive order from President Joe Biden will require US ships and port facilities to report cyberattacks, while giving the Coast Guard greater authority to inspect or control ships that “present a known or a suspected cyber threat,” Rear Adm. John Vann, head of the Coast Guard Cyber Command, told reporters in a call previewing the directives.

    US officials are also making their most direct public statement yet on the security risks from Chinese-made cranes, which Vann said account for nearly 80% of the cranes used at US ports. The Coast Guard will impose new cybersecurity requirements on the operators of those cranes to mitigate the risk they pose, Vann said on the call.

    The cranes can be controlled remotely, meaning that a hacker with access to the cranes’ networks could collect intelligence from ports or, in theory, even cause disruptions of equipment.

    Any disruption to US maritime networks “has the potential to cause cascading impacts to our domestic or global supply chains,” Vann said.

    There are more than 200 Chinese-made cranes at “US ports and regulated facilities,” according to Vann. Coast Guard cyber experts have done security assessments and hunted for malicious cyber activity on 92, or less than half, of those cranes, he said.

    The new maritime policies were many months in the making, but they come on the heels of congressional testimony from FBI Director Christopher Wray that Chinese hackers are “preparing to wreak havoc” on US critical infrastructure.

    Chinese hackers have burrowed into US maritime networks, energy companies and other key American infrastructure, according to Wray and other US officials, and are lying in wait to potentially cause disruptions in the event of a US-China crisis. Among the targets of the hacking was US critical infrastructure in Guam, and the Coast Guard has been on the frontlines of response to the digital intrusions.

    China has strongly denied the allegations and has accused the US of conducting its own hacking campaigns against China.

    The new directives are also aimed at protecting a key artery of the economy. US maritime ports generate trillions of dollars in economy activity each year, according to experts.

    “A cyberattack can cause just as much, if not more, damage than a storm or another physical threat,” said Anne Neuberger, deputy national security adviser for cyber and emerging technology at the White House.

    Suspected foreign government-backed hackers in August 2021 breached a computer network at the Port of Houston, one of the largest ports on the US Gulf Coast, but early detection of the incident meant the intruders weren’t in a position to disrupt shipping operations, according to a Coast Guard advisory previously obtained by CNN. The advisory did not identify the foreign government.

    This story has been updating with additional information.

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

    Source

  • Are Democrats ignoring the next Obama to save Biden’s struggling campaign?

    The current governor of Maryland possesses quite an impressive pedigree. After emerging from a troubled youth, Wes Moore became a Rhodes Scholar and served in Afghanistan in the famed 82nd Airborne as an Army Reserve intelligence officer. He then earned a spot as a White House fellow in the secretary of State’s office after having already interned for Homeland Security before his deployment.  

    The son of Cuban-Jamaican immigrants, Moore went on to work in the banking sector and then ran the Robin Hood Foundation, an advocacy organization with the “common commitment to helping low-income New Yorkers escape poverty’s grasp.” 

    Moore is currently the nation’s third African-American to be elected governor of any state. He is Maryland’s first.

    Given this record, why are Democrats still sticking with Biden-Harris instead of someone who possesses at least as much charisma as a 2004-era Obama?

    As a contributor to The Hill wrote of Moore’s 2022 gubernatorial race, his competitor “ran into a buzzsaw of charisma embodied by Wes Moore.” Why not use that and improve your chances of winning? Why not the person whom then-President Obama appointed to the Corporation for National and Community Service Board in 2014?

    Moore told the story of his rise in his 2010 bestseller, “The Other Wes Moore: One Name, Two Fates.” In it, Moore explains the tragic life of another Wes Moore from Baltimore. The other Wes Moore was sentenced to life without the possibility of parole for the February 2000 murder of off-duty Baltimore County police Sgt. Bruce A. Prothero. 

    The central question the book answered: Why were the lives of these two African American males from the same neighborhood, similar ages, single-parent households and with very similar names so incredibly different? One enjoyed the American dream; the other succumbed to the stereotypical fate of the American Black man. But why? 

    Governor Moore concluded that a key reason is the poisoned reservoir of low expectations from which too many Black Americans are forced to drink. As he explained in one interview about this similarity that “haunted” him, “We know that we are not just products of our environments, but we are products of our expectations.” 

    Moore’s mother and other family members played a nurturing role in getting him off the streets. That made the difference. Moore quoted his mother, who often said, “Kids need to think that you care before they care what you think.” She clearly cared.  

    Moore elsewhere stated, “We are not promised anything — in a moment’s notice things can change by the decisions that we make.” How we play the cards we are dealt determines so much, the governor would say.  

    With all of these pluses in Moore’s toolkit, why, pray tell, are the Democrats making such a poor decision when, as Moore might put it, they are not promised anything? Why is that party choosing to remain in the quagmire in which it has placed itself with Biden?  

    On the one hand, the sitting present is a sitting president. Forcing him out would be a slap in the face to him and to those who choose to think their eyes are lying about the aging and increasingly deteriorating 46th president. Indeed, several publications have put out pieces articulating their concerns. A Washington Post opinion piece said the worst mistake Biden made in 2023 was deciding to run for president in 2024. 

    Biden has done some good things, but there is growing evidence that his mental acuity is slipping. It is sad to watch him make so many cringy comments. One directed at Moore is not an exception. In 2023, Biden referred to Maryland’s first Black governor as “the boy.” This is not only strikingly racist but demonstrative of political cluelessness. 

    How can a president who won with barely over half the electorate in 2020 think he can call the Marylander who, one year before the 2022 gubernatorial election day, was polling a little over 1 percent and went on to win the race with more individual votes to winning his 2022 race in a historic landslide “the boy?”  

    Moore, like most Democrats, is playing nice in the sandbox. He isn’t stepping on the elder statesman’s toes, a wise act under normal circumstances. 

    Are these normal circumstances, though? Isn’t it time for the Maryland governor, or some other Democrat, to stand up and take the swing from the guy who’s been on it for more than half a century? That is for the Democratic National Committee to decide.

    Christopher Brooks is a professor of history at East Stroudsburg University. 

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

    Source