Letters to the Editor: ‘Star Wars'-era and feeling removed from politics ‘in a galaxy far, far away'
To the editor: Kudos to film critic Amy Nicholson for a thoughtful piece on the politics of 'Star Wars' ('Did 'Star Wars' teach us the wrong ideas about rebellion?' April 23). When the first film came out in 1977, we were in the midst of President Jimmy Carter-era malaise and stagflation. I remember it. Leadership was scarce or ignored. The courage and clear-sightedness shown on the screen took place 'a long time ago in a galaxy far, far away,' meaning that any possible relevance to 1977's problems was merely coincidental. That political sanitizing has continued in the sequels and prequels.
Patrick Frank, Venice
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
8 hours ago
- Yahoo
Mark Green to resign from House after final vote on ‘big, beautiful bill'
Rep. Mark Green (R-Tenn.) on Monday said he plans to resign from Congress after the House holds a final vote on the party's 'big, beautiful bill,' giving up his seat as well as his leadership post on the House Homeland Security Committee. Green said he has already lined up a job outside of Congress. 'It is with a heavy heart that I announce my retirement from Congress. Recently, I was offered an opportunity in the private sector that was too exciting to pass up. As a result, today I notified the Speaker and the House of Representatives that I will resign from Congress as soon as the House votes once again on the reconciliation package,' Green said in a statement. 'Though I planned to retire at the end of the previous Congress, I stayed to ensure that President Trump's border security measures and priorities make it through Congress. By overseeing the border security portion of the reconciliation package, I have done that. After that, I will retire, and there will be a special election to replace me.' His decision to stay until the House gives the GOP's tax cuts and spending package a final stamp of approval is a relief for Republican leadership, who are contending with a razor-thin majority and passed the same bill by a single vote last month. Senate Republicans are planning to make a host of changes to the legislation, and the House is expected to hold a vote this summer on approving the revised bill. It's the second time Green has said he plans to resign. Green said in February 2024 that he planned to resign from Congress, but he ultimately reversed course and kept his seat, saying he decided to seek reelection after encouragement from the public and President Trump. The decision earned a muted response from Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.), the Homeland Security panel's ranking member. 'While he was only chair for a couple years, I join our colleagues in wishing him well in the private sector,' Thompson said in a statement. Green's resignation will leave the House with 219 Republicans and 212 Democrats, meaning the GOP can only afford to lose three votes and still pass party-line legislation, assuming all members are present — the same dynamic that currently stands. Green's departure will open up a sought-after chair position on a panel that reviews much of Trump's signature immigration policies. Under former President Biden, Green was a vocal critic of the administration, holding numerous hearings focused on fentanyl deaths and bringing in parents who had lost children in deaths they deemed connected to immigration or the border. Under Trump, the committee has held hearings focused on Biden-era immigration policies and budget issues as the White House pushes to vastly expand deportation operations. Green, a physician, is also a veteran, and he served tours of duty in Iraq and Afghanistan. He was given the gavel after just two terms in Congress, and will leave during his fourth term. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
9 hours ago
- Yahoo
GOP lawmakers uneasy about package to codify DOGE cuts ahead of House vote this week
Multiple Republican lawmakers are voicing concerns about backing a high-profile measure later this week to codify Elon Musk's DOGE cuts – raising questions about whether it can pass the House at all. Two Republicans – Reps. Mark Amodei of Nevada and Nicole Malliotakis of New York – separately told CNN they have concerns with the White House's push to defund the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. 'Still mulling,' Amodei said when asked if he would support the package of cuts. 'The impact on local PBS stations appears to be significant.' Other Republicans have heartburn about how it could cut the Bush-era program, PEPFAR, devoted to fighting HIV and AIDS globally. 'If it cuts PEPFAR like they're saying it is, that's not good,' GOP Rep. Don Bacon of Nebraska told CNN last week. House GOP leaders plan to put the package of cuts, totaling $9.4 billion, on the floor as soon as Thursday, according to two people familiar with the plans. But Speaker Mike Johnson will need near unanimity in his conference for the package to pass the House, where he can only lose three votes. Johnson said on Monday that he's 'working on' getting enough votes for the Department of Government Efficiency spending cuts package he hopes to bring to the floor this week. 'The only concern I heard initially was some wanted a little more specificity and detail on what was in the package,' Johnson continued. Asked how he would persuade members that wanted more specificity in the package, Johnson replied, 'I'm gathering up all their questions and we'll try to get them all answered. I mean, that's what we do in every piece of legislation.' If it can survive the House, it will face major obstacles in the Senate. Sen. Susan Collins of Maine told CNN on Monday that she has major misgivings about the global health cuts, including PEPFAR. 'I think we can change it. We're still figuring out what the set rules are,' Collins said. The White House sent its long-awaited spending cuts request to Congress as it seeks to formalize a slew of DOGE slashes to federal funding. The $9.4 billion package – known as 'rescissions' on Capitol Hill – would claw back previously appropriated government funding. The move to cancel the funding through Congress would insulate the administration from legal challenges related to its cuts to federal funding. Johnson said on Monday, 'We'd like to do multiple rescissions packages, and this first one I'm sure will be successful.' This initial request, however, is far more limited in scope than the more than $1 trillion in spending cuts that DOGE has promised. The lengthy time it took the White House to send over a first round of cuts underscores the uphill battle for even a Republican-led Congress to codify DOGE's work. CNN's Molly English contributed to this report.
Yahoo
11 hours ago
- Yahoo
Mass. AG Campbell sues Trump admin over plan to distribute machine gun conversion tech
Massachusetts Attorney General Andrea J. Campbell is taking the Trump administration to court — again. This time over a plan to distribute thousands of machinegun conversion devices to communities across the United States. The suit, filed by Campbell and 16 state attorneys general nationwide, specifically targets the U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives. In a statement, Campbell's office said the ATF's action involves so-called 'Forced Reset Triggers,' which allow shooters to reach the firepower of a military-grade machine gun. The federal agency previously had classified the devices as machine guns, keeping them off the streets and out of the hands of gun owners. However, the ATF, under a directive from the White House, signed a settlement agreement that would stop enforcing federal law against the FRTs, as they're known, and would redistribute thousands of the devices the agency had previously seized. The multistate litigation seeks to prevent that imminent redistribution, because FRTs are illegal to possess under federal law, Campbell's office said. 'Weapons of war and tools of mass destruction like FRTs have no place or purpose in everyday society—nor in any home, community, or school within the Commonwealth,' Campbell said in a statement. Read More: This $150 device turns pistols into machine guns. Here's why Mass. should worry 'The ATF's actions are a direct assault on every American's inalienable right to feel safe in their homes, schools, and grocery stores—free from the fear or threat of gun violence. I will continue to defend enforcement against FRTs and fight to protect the safety and well-being of Commonwealth residents.' The lawsuit argues that the federal government cannot violate U.S. law, even when it tries to bury those violations in a settlement agreement. Campbell and the other state attorneys general are seeking a a preliminary injunction to halt the Trump Administration from distributing the devices 'in ways that directly harm plaintiff states in contravention of federal law,' they argued. Machine gun conversion devices such as the FRTs have been frequently used in violent crimes and mass shootings, Campbell's office said, contributing to worsening gun violence. Firearms equipped with the conversion devices can exceed the firing rate of many military machine guns, firing up to 20 bullets per second. The ATF has noted a 'significant' rise in the use of the devices, leading to a 1,400% increase between 2019 and 2021, Campbell's office said. The ATF has classified devices that act similarly to FRTs as machine guns since at least 1975, which means they've been banned under federal law. Even so, the ATF has estimated that at least 100,000 FRTs have been distributed across the country. And they have been showing up more often at crime scenes, Campbell's office said. Last month, the Trump administration announced that it had settled Biden-era litigation dealing with the devices, doing so in a way that 'eviscerates' the existing prohibition in federal law, Campbell's office said. In addition to Massachusetts, attorneys general from Colorado, Delaware, the District of Columbia, Hawai'i, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Washington State, also are participating in the litigation. Mass. labor groups rally against ICE arrest of California union leader Here are 10 NASA missions that could be grounded under Trump's 2026 budget 'I don't know if I want to do this anymore': leaked audio highlights turmoil among Dems Graffiti on tank in Trump's parade calls for hanging 2 well-known Americans 'I would': Trump calls for arrest of California's Newsom amid lawsuit over National Guard in LA Read the original article on MassLive.
