Aurelia Butler

More stories

  • 88 Shares179 Views

    in Elections

    NYT Crossword Answers for Nov. 29, 2024

    Willa Angel Chen Miller makes her New York Times Crossword debut, in a collaboration with Matthew Stock.Jump to: Tricky CluesFRIDAY PUZZLE — What makes a crossword difficult? There are a few reasons solvers struggle with puzzles, and I believe everyone does so in different ways. Some people have a hard time with wordplay and misdirection; others are just not in the constructor’s wheelhouse.I’m not ashamed to admit that I had to fight to finish today’s puzzle, constructed by Willa Angel Chen Miller and Matthew Stock. The battle was serious, but I had a lot of fun along the way, especially when I reviewed the stacks in the northwest and southeast corners. Nicely done, Ms. Miller and Mr. Stock.Your thoughts?Tricky Clues15A. The answer to a [Question that can’t possibly be answered “No”] is ARE YOU AWAKE. I beg to differ: Any sleep-deprived parent will tell you that it actually is possible to continue to sleep and answer this question.16A. The clue [Solid :: glace : liquid :: ___] needs an answer in French. Glacé means ice, so the answer is EAU, or water, to complete the analogy.31A. I was stuck for a long time on this one: I understood that the mohawk in [Mohawk culture] referred to the hairstyle, but I just couldn’t make the mental leap away from Indigenous culture.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • 163 Shares169 Views

    in Elections

    Art Collector Who Bought a $6 Million Banana Offers to Buy 100,000 More

    The vendor who sold the banana only received a quarter for the fruit. Now the buyer of the conceptual work has offered his fruit stand a bigger payday.A week after a Chinese cryptocurrency entrepreneur bought an artwork composed of a fresh banana stuck to a wall with duct tape for $6.2 million at auction, the man, Justin Sun, announced a grand gesture on X. He said he planned on purchasing 100,000 bananas — or $25,000 worth of the produce — from the Manhattan stand where the original fruit was sold for 25 cents.But at the fruit stand at East 72nd Street and York Avenue, outside the doors of the Sotheby’s auction house where the conceptual artwork was sold, the offer landed with a thud against the realities of the life of a New York City street vendor.It would cost thousands of dollars to procure that many bananas from a Bronx wholesale market, said Shah Alam, the 74-year-old employee from Bangladesh who sold the original banana used in “Comedian,” an absurdist commentary on the art world by the Italian artist Maurizio Cattelan. And, it wouldn’t be easy to move that many bananas, which come in boxes of about 100.And then there is the math: The net profit from the purchase of 100,000 bananas by Mr. Sun — who once bought an NFT of a pet rock for more than $600,000 — would be about $6,000.“There’s not any profit in selling bananas,” Mr. Alam said.Plus, as an employee who makes $12 an hour during 12-hour shifts, Mr. Alam pointed out that any money would by rights belong to the fruit stand’s owner, not him.Reached by phone, the stand’s owner, Mohammad R. Islam, 53, who goes by Rana, said he would split any profit between himself, Mr. Alam and the six other people he employs at his two fruit stands. No one had contacted him about any such purchase, though, he said.Mr. Islam had learned from a reporter of Mr. Sun’s plans, which also included offering the bananas from Mr. Islam’s stand for free worldwide, to anyone who showed identification, according to his post on X. Mr. Sun — who has also announced plans to eat the original banana during a Friday news conference at a Hong Kong luxury hotel — did not respond to a request for comment.Working in the rain on Thanksgiving Day, Mr. Islam’s brother, Mohammad Alam Badsha (who is not related to Mr. Alam) said he would welcome the bulk purchase. But it would have little tangible impact, Mr. Badsha said, either on the daily life of the fruit vendors, or on the gulf laid bare by the $6.2 million banana and the stand that sold it for a quarter.“It’s definitely an inequality,” Mr. Badsha said in Bengali.He added a Bangladeshi idiom: It was, he said, the difference between heaven and hell.Zachary Small More

  • 113 Shares99 Views

    in Elections

    Lebanese Residents of Baalbek Return to a Bombed-Out City

    Tens of thousands of people who had fled the city of Baalbek returned to bombed-out restaurants, flattened apartment buildings and many of the dead still buried under the rubble.Hammers clanged against brick and metal as the residents of Baalbek set to work repairing their homes, desperate to restart their lives again.A day after a cease-fire ended Lebanon’s deadliest war in decades, tens of thousands of people who fled the violence had already returned on Thursday to the hard-hit city in the country’s east.Teenage girls snapped selfies in front of the ancient Roman temples. Excited young men on motorcycles performed doughnuts in the street, their back tires spinning up dust and shards of glass.But after weeks of pounding Israeli airstrikes, the scars were not easy to ignore: bombed-out restaurants, flattened apartment buildings, trees snapped like twigs. And many of the dead were still buried under the rubble, residents said.“I’m an old woman. I’m not affiliated with anyone. What did I do to deserve this?” said Taflah Amar, 79, as she swept debris from the front of her house, one of the few still standing on her street.“I’ve been crying all day,” she said.“What did I do to deserve this?” said Taflah Ammar, 79, at her home in Baalbek.Diego Ibarra Sanchez for The New York TimesWe are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • 88 Shares109 Views

    in Elections

    Why Mexico Is Eliminating Independent Watchdog Agencies

    A vote in the country’s Senate has cleared the way to abolish seven independent organizations that provided oversight on issues such as public information and price fixing.Mexico’s Senate on Thursday night passed a sweeping proposal to dissolve several government-financed yet independent watchdog organizations, a move the president and her supporters said would help reduce corruption and waste. Critics have called it a step backward for transparency and regulation.The duties of most of the seven agencies, which provided oversight on a host of issues, such as public information requests and price fixing in the telecommunications, pharmaceutical and energy sectors, would be absorbed by other parts of the federal government, overseen by the president.Perhaps the most noteworthy of the agencies — the National Institute for Transparency, Access to Information and Protection of Personal Data, known as INAI — would have its responsibilities divided among a handful of existing federal agencies.“The disappearance of these autonomous bodies represents a democratic setback,” the Mexican Association for the Right to Information, a nongovernmental group, said in a statement. The move, the group added, “weakens the mechanisms of control, transparency and protection of rights that have been built with great effort in our country.”The constitutional amendment dissolving the agencies is part of a series of far-reaching proposals pushed by the former Mexican president, Andrés Manuel López Obrador, that are supported by his successor and mentee, Claudia Sheinbaum, and by their political party, Morena.In September, Mexico passed an amendment overhauling the country’s judiciary, which supporters of the proposal said was riddled with graft, influence-peddling and nepotism. Critics warned that the move, which will see nearly all Mexican judges elected rather than appointed, undermines judicial independence and politicizes the courts.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • 100 Shares99 Views

    in Elections

    Canada Accuses Google of Creating Advertising Tech Monopoly

    The case largely echoes an antitrust action in the United States and seeks to force Google to sell off sections of its online ad business.Canada’s competition authority on Thursday accused Google of abusing its tools for buying and selling online advertising to create a monopoly, and filed a complaint seeking to force the company to sell two of its main advertising technology services.The case strikes at the heart of Google’s business and echoes an ongoing U.S. antitrust lawsuit against the Silicon Valley giant.Both cases come amid four other lawsuits filed in the United States against Google since 2020 and other efforts by officials around the world to reign in the power that large technological companies like Google, Amazon and Apple hold over information and commerce online.Canada is also attempting to use new laws to limit harms caused by social media and to require tech companies to compensate traditional news organizations.In a statement, Canada’s Bureau of Competition Policy, a law enforcement agency, charged that Google has used its position as the largest provider of software for buying and selling ads, its marketplace for ad auctions and its services for showcasing the ads to illegally dominate the sector.The company’s conduct, it said, ensured that the Alphabet-owned Google “would maintain and entrench its market power,” adding that it “locks market participants into using its own ad tech tools, prevents rivals from being able to compete on the merits of their offering.”We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • 63 Shares109 Views

    in Elections

    The Inverted Morality of MAGA

    I admire Mitt Romney. He is, by all accounts, an outstanding husband and father. He built a successful investment firm by supporting successful young businesses like Staples. He served the public as head of the 2002 Winter Olympics and as a governor. As a senator, he had the courage to vote to convict Donald Trump twice, in the two separate impeachment trials, when few other Republicans did.But as Noah Millman writes on Substack, people in the MAGA movement take a different view of Romney. In private life, Romney compliantly conformed to the bourgeois norms of those around him. In business he contributed to the bloating of the finance and consulting sector. As a politician he bent himself to the needs of the moment, moving from moderate Republican to “extreme conservative.” As a senator, he sought the approval of the Washington establishment.Millman’s underlying point is it’s not sufficient to say that Trump is leading a band of morally challenged people to power. It’s that Trumpism represents an alternative value system. The people I regard as upright and admirable MAGA regards as morally disgraceful, and the people I regard as corrupt and selfish MAGA regards as heroic.The crucial distinction is that some of us have an institutional mind-set while the MAGA mind-set is anti-institutional.In the former view, we are born into a world of institutions — families, schools, professions, the structures of our government. We are formed by these institutions. People develop good character as they live up to the standards of excellence passed down in their institutions — by displaying the civic virtues required by our Constitution, by living up to what it means to be a good teacher or nurse or, if they are Christians, by imitating the self-emptying love of Christ. Over the course of our lives, we inherit institutions, steward them and try to pass them along in better shape to the next generation. We know our institutions have flaws and need reform, but we regard them as fundamentally legitimate.MAGA morality is likely to regard people like me as lemmings. We climbed our way up through the meritocracy by shape shifting ourselves into whatever teachers, bosses and the system wanted us to be. Worse, we serve and preserve systems that are fundamentally corrupt and illegitimate — the financial institutions that created the financial crisis, the health authorities who closed schools during Covid, the mainstream media and federal bureaucracy that has led the nation to ruin.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • 150 Shares179 Views

    in Elections

    Peggy Caserta, Who Wrote a Tell-All About Janis Joplin, Dies at 84

    Her Haight-Ashbury clothing store was ground zero for the counterculture. But she was best known for a tawdry book — which she later disavowed — published after Ms. Joplin’s death.Peggy Caserta, whose funky Haight-Ashbury clothing boutique was a magnet for young bohemians and musicians, and who exploited her relationship with Janis Joplin in a much-panned 1973 memoir that she later disavowed, died on Nov. 21 at her home in Tillamook, Ore. She was 84.Her partner and only immediate survivor, Jackie Mendelson, confirmed the death but did not specify a cause.The Louisiana-born Ms. Caserta was 23 and working at a Delta Air Lines office in San Francisco when she decided to open a clothing store for her cohort, the lesbians in her neighborhood. She found an empty storefront on Haight Street, near the corner of Ashbury, which she rented for $87.50 a month.At first Ms. Caserta sold jeans, sweatshirts and double-breasted denim blazers that her mother made. Then she added Levi’s pants, which a friend turned into flares by inserting a triangle of denim into the side seams. When the friend couldn’t keep up with the orders, Ms. Caserta persuaded Levi Strauss & Company to make them.She named the place Mnasidika (pronounced na-SID-ek-ah), after a character in a poem by Sappho. “It’s a Greek girls’ name,” Ms. Caserta told The San Francisco Examiner in 1965, for an article about the “new bohemians” colonizing the Haight-Ashbury district.Ms. Caserta was 23 when she opened a clothing store, Mnasidika, in the Haight-Ashbury district of San Francisco.via Wyatt MackenzieWe are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • 175 Shares189 Views

    in Elections

    Trump Team’s Rejection of a Transition Deal Adds a Wrinkle to Its Transparency Pledges

    The president-elect’s team said it would disclose its donors’ names and not take donations from foreigners, but it isn’t legally bound to adhere to those promises.The refusal by President-elect Donald J. Trump’s team to sign a transition agreement with the General Services Administration means that, despite the team’s pledges to abide by several transparency customs of presidential handovers, it isn’t legally bound to follow through on its promises.Presidential transitions abide by a series of laws and norms that enable the outgoing administration to brief incoming officials with nonpublic information and to fund transition operations. Mr. Trump’s transition team, after forgoing the $7.2 million in government funds that the G.S.A. would have provided if they had reached an agreement, has promised to be transparent by disclosing the names of its donors and said it would not accept donations from foreigners. In an agreement with the White House, the transition team also released an ethics pledge, but the pledge may not be compliant with transition rules.Mr. Trump’s transition team released a statement this week saying the decision to opt for private funding alone saves taxpayer dollars.But the Trump team did not indicate when donors’ names would be made public, or if the amounts of their donations would also be released. If Mr. Trump’s team accepted the help of the G.S.A., donors would need to be disclosed within 30 days of the inauguration, which is set for Jan. 20. Past presidential transitions have also limited individual donations to $5,000, a cap that Mr. Trump’s team has not committed to. The G.S.A. would also have provided secure lines of communication and office space to conduct internal meetings.After initially missing an Oct. 1 deadline, Mr. Trump’s team this week signed an agreement with the White House that will begin formal briefings led by departing administration members. But Mr. Trump has continued to refuse to sign an agreement with the Justice Department that would allow the F.B.I. to run security checks for transition staff. Without clearances, Biden administration officials cannot share classified information with many transition team members.This week, Mr. Trump’s team published an ethics plan for its transition staff. Though President Biden’s staff accepted the plan in its agreement with Mr. Trump, the plan may run afoul of the Presidential Transition Act, which mandates that such plans detail how a president-elect himself will address his own conflicts of interest. Mr. Trump’s plan does not appear to do that.Representatives for the Trump transition team and the White House did not immediately respond to requests for comment.“This engagement allows our intended cabinet nominees to begin critical preparations, including the deployment of landing teams to every department and agency, and complete the orderly transition of power,” Susie Wiles, Mr. Trump’s incoming chief of staff, said in the statement on Tuesday about the agreement with the White House.During his 2016 presidential transition, Mr. Trump signed the agreement with the G.S.A. By his inauguration, the transition had about 120 employees and disclosed $6.5 million in funds raised, as well as $2.4 million in reimbursements from the federal government.Ken Bensinger More