Latest news with #FranklinRoosevelt
Wall Street Journal
12 hours ago
- Business
- Wall Street Journal
JD Vance Takes On JD Vance
In his May 29 letter, JD Vance encourages policymakers to enlist the 'tools' of government to direct the American economy in a style reminiscent of Franklin Roosevelt. Such actions, he contends, are necessary to attain 'fairer treatment from foreign partners' and to solve a variety of ills that have allegedly decimated productive American industries. Mr. Vance faults Mexico and China by name for his complaints and presents the Trump administration's tariff agenda as a prudential government corrective, neglecting to substantiate the efficacy of his preferred economic policies. While reading these claims, I was reminded of an author who once urged Americans to take responsibility for their lives instead of turning to the government for solutions or constantly blaming others for 'some perceived unfairness.' This author dismissed excuses such as 'Obama shut down the coal mines, or all the jobs went to the Chinese,' describing them as 'lies we tell ourselves to solve the cognitive dissonance—the broken connection between the world we see and the values we preach.'
India.com
3 days ago
- India.com
World's largest railway station, can halt 44 trains at once, has 67 tracks and a secret…, name is..., located in....
New Delhi: Grand Central Station in New York is one of the most renowned and impressive train stations in the world. Built in 1913, this grand railway station has 44 platforms and 67 tracks. The Grand Central Station holds the title of the largest railway station. Many would not know that 41 tracks are situated on the upper level, while 26 are on the lower level. The station also has stunning architectural details, like the grand ceiling mural and the iconic clock in the main hall. Here are some of the key features of the station: Grand Central Terminal, commonly referred to as Grand Central Station, is located in the Midtown area of Manhattan. It was opened to the public on February 2, 1913, and today it stands as a historic landmark. Grand Central Terminal has a total of 44 platforms, which is more than any other railway station in the world. These platforms are spread across two levels — an upper floor and a lower level. Grand Central Station has a total of 67 tracks. This also makes it the largest railway station in the world in terms of track network Grand Central Station covers an area of approximately 48 acres. Its building is considered a magnificent example of grand architecture. The design of Grand Central Station is an excellent example of fine art. The celestial artwork on its ceiling is very famous. Additionally, this station has also been featured in many films and TV shows. Grand Central Station: Location The Grand Central Station is situated under the Waldorf Astoria Hotel. This spot of the station has grabbed the attention not just local New Yorkers but visitors from around the world, as reported by 6sqft. Track 61, originally built in the 1930s for President Franklin Roosevelt, allowed him to travel between NYC and Washington DC without the public knowing he was paralysed from the waist down due to polio, which he contracted at the age of 39. After Roosevelt's death, the specific track was never inaugurated for regular passengers.
Irish Times
27-05-2025
- Politics
- Irish Times
Did the media fail to do its job covering Joe Biden's decline?
In late 1919 US president Woodrow Wilson suffered a stroke that would physically and mentally incapacitate him for many months, but which was concealed from the American people by his inner circle. In the 1930s Franklin Roosevelt's inability to walk was similarly hushed up, as were Dwight Eisenhower's two heart attacks in office in the 1950s, John F Kennedy's crippling back pain in the 1960s, and Ronald Reagan 's symptoms of dementia in the mid-1980s. For a time at least, all of these were kept from voters despite being known in elite circles, including parts of the media. In that sense, the controversy over the alleged cover-up of Joe Biden 's physical and cognitive decline during his presidency (an allegation that looks increasingly plausible following the publication of Jake Tapper and Alex Thompson's book, Original Sin) is just the latest instalment in a long presidential tradition. READ MORE It has, admittedly, proved the most consequential of the lot; none of the others caused a sitting president to drop out of his re-election race with just three months to go. But that dramatic reversal was ultimately due to a catastrophic debate performance that in a few short minutes crystallised all the whispers and suspicions about Biden's real condition. In that crude sense, the media did its job. The cameras in the Atlanta studio brutally revealed the truth. But the broader question of whether journalists could have done more and earlier to uncover that truth remains contentious. In some of the responses to Original Sin you can see a desire to move on. After all, there's a real and present threat to media freedom under way right now from the current administration's legal assaults on ABC and CBS. And there's alarming evidence that those networks' corporate owners, Disney and Paramount, are only too willing to bend the knee. But the questions won't go away. 'Biden's decline, and its cover-up by the people around him, is a reminder that every White House, regardless of party, is capable of deception,' Thompson told the White House Correspondents' Dinner in Washington, DC a few weeks ago. 'But being truth-tellers also means telling the truth about ourselves. We – myself included – missed a lot of this story, and some people trust us less because of it.' [ Maureen Dowd: The tragedy of Joe Biden is that he was poisoned by power Opens in new window ] That statement provoked a furious response from veteran broadcaster Chuck Todd, who, in a tone that will startle those familiar with his TV persona, posted on Substack that 'the virtue-signalling that some people have done, to try to say that the media missed this story – they didn't miss this story ... You know why that's all out there? Because the media fucking showed it!' Perhaps. Certainly, if you search for 'Biden' and 'cognitive' across US media in 2023 and the first half of 2024 you'll get plenty of results. Many, but not all, came from the right-wing media sphere, and were often just overwrought punditry with little in the way of supporting evidence. It seems probable that the ferocity of these partisans attacks on Biden's cognition contributed to the excessive caution with which the story was treated by the likes of the New York Times, Washington Post and CNN. The attacks haven't ended. Reacting to Thompson's words, current White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said the 'legacy media' were responsible for 'one of the greatest cover-ups and scandals that ever took place in American history'. Not for the first time, polarised hyperbole has poisoned US media's capacity to do its supposed job of reporting factual information in an objective manner. It's inconceivable that antipathy to Trump did not contribute to undue deference to his opponent. But as Jon Allsop pointed out in the New Yorker last week , 'the media' is not some sort of coherent, unified entity. Conspiracy theories are seductive because they offer an over-arching black and white narrative in which everything can be explained. Random errors, muddled thinking and unexamined motives are a little less attractive. The truth is that while reporters such as Thompson at Axios and opinion writers such as Ezra Klein at the New York Times became increasingly vocal about their concerns over Biden's condition, the subject was not addressed by their employers with the tenacity and resources it deserved. One element of this sorry saga that makes it different, I think, from Wilson, Roosevelt, Eisenhower, Kennedy and even Reagan is the 'hiding in plain sight' part. Yes, Biden's inner circle were deliberately concealing his low energy levels, making sure he would only be seen in public within his few 'good' hours. And yes, it is clear they made sure any expressions of concern from within the Democratic Party were ruthlessly crushed. But this is not the 1920s. Even in a presidential system, where the leader of the country is not held to account by parliament, there will be video evidence and eyewitness accounts available, as there were here. In a way, the most damning indictment of the media's performance is that it failed to reflect the clear public judgment, recorded unambiguously over three years' worth of opinion polls, that Biden was too old and should not run again. That failure gives fuel to the accusation that modern journalists – not just in the US – have become a disconnected elite, excessively monocultural, politically conformist and too close to the institutions that they are supposed to hold to account. There is some truth to all that, but it doesn't fully account for how this saga played out. Donald Trump , inevitably, plays a role. Discussions about mental acuity and fitness for office might have taken a different course if Nikki Haley had been the Republican nominee. Regardless, when both your emperors are naked, the media's role is to report that fact, not decide that one of them is partially clothed.
Arab News
25-05-2025
- Business
- Arab News
Trump in Riyadh: Saudis shift the storyline
As US President Donald Trump's plane descended toward Riyadh on May 13, escorted by Saudi F-15 fighter jets, preparations on the ground evoked a quiet cultural confidence. Across the tarmac stretched the lavender ceremonial carpet, officially adopted in 2021, inspired by the desert khuzama flower and bordered with the geometric patterns of the UNESCO-inscribed traditional sadu weaving. Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, 'the visionary leader who never sleeps,' as Trump described him, welcomed his guest into the reception hall, where Saudi coffee was served in traditional Arabian style. And within two days, perceptions built up over decades began to shift. Riyadh was once again Trump's first foreign trip in office, this time coinciding with the 80th anniversary of the 1945 Quincy meeting between King Abdulaziz and President Franklin Roosevelt. Back in 2017, Trump's first summit in Riyadh had introduced a new political chemistry between a Saudi leadership with an ambitious vision and an outsider American administration driven more by deal-making than by bureaucratic routine. The 2025 meeting, however, took place between two well-acquainted partners, at a rare moment of symmetry: an American president returning to power after a sweeping victory, and a young Saudi leader who is the architect of regional transformation and the subject of global fascination, thanks to a vision that repositioned his country as a rising force on the global stage. While analysts were preoccupied with the headlines of political understandings, investment deals, and bilateral economic agreements, the deeper meaning of this visit lay in how the Saudis chose to present themselves, and how the Americans responded. For decades, visits by Western, especially American, leaders to the region followed a familiar script: security cooperation in exchange for energy stability, filtered through a condescending outsider's gaze and quiet assumptions of superiority. But this time, something fundamental had changed. The inspiring Saudi reality on the ground turned old expectations on their head and signaled a new way of seeing. The visit became an opportunity for Saudi Arabia to reintroduce itself to the world through its most authentic symbols, to reshape the storyline through which it has long been seen — the lavender carpet; dallah pots pouring Saudi coffee into finjan cups; Arabian horses escorting the presidential motorcade through Al-Yamamah Palace; and the samri dance that greeted Trump in At-Turaif, the UNESCO-listed district in Diriyah, birthplace of the Saudi state that restored the Arabian Peninsula's central role after a millennium away from the geopolitical spotlight. This was a live act of meaning-making from a nation that knows its own cultural weight. On air, in real time, the Kingdom projected a narrative of itself as confident, visionary, ambitious, and economically powerful. A country shaping how it wants to be seen. Western media captured the symbolism with awe, while Saudi digital majlises erupted with pride. The message was unmistakable: Welcome to the new Saudi Arabia, a nation proud of its roots, open to the world, and carrying a heritage unfolding toward the future. Beyond symbolism, the perception shift was clearest in Trump's own speech. In one of its most striking moments, he delivered a sharp critique of 'Western interventionists ... giving you lectures on how to live or how to govern your own affairs ... intervening in complex societies that they did not even understand.' Then he declared that 'the gleaming marvels of Riyadh and Abu Dhabi were not built by so-called nation-builders, or neocons, or liberal nonprofits. They were built by the people of this region themselves, developing their own sovereign countries, pursuing their own visions, and charting their own destinies.' The 2025 Riyadh Summit marks a new chapter in the Saudi-US story, one defined by mutual respect and a new understanding of the region from within, rather than through borrowed frameworks. Dr. Hatem Alzahrani This echoed Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman's 2018 remarks at the Future Investment Initiative, two years after Vision 2030 was launched: 'The new Europe is the Middle East' and that achieving this vision is 'the Saudis' war, my war personally. I do not want to die without seeing the Middle East at the forefront of the world. This goal will be achieved 100 percent.' Some at the time saw those words as a visionary promise still far from reach. Even Trump acknowledged that: 'Critics doubted whether what you achieved at home was even possible.' But what once sounded like a distant ambition is now an undeniable reality, and the US leader's remarks were a direct response to that. Moreover, these remarks marked a shift in how Washington perceives its relationship with the region. They pushed back against the 'Western savior' narrative, returned credit to local agency, and acknowledged that real change is now coming from within. The outcomes of the visit reflected this shift as well, culminating in a strategic economic partnership covering vital sectors. For years, the Middle East figured in American discourse as a problem to fix, a threat to contain, or a place waiting to be saved. These portrayals were largely imagined constructs, shaped by entrenched Western frameworks built on outdated assumptions and ideological baggage. As historian Zachary Lockman reminds us in 'Contending Visions of the Middle East,' much of the Western scholarly engagement with the region was historically tied to the priorities of foreign powers, rather than a genuine intellectual quest for understanding. The Middle East was treated as the 'Other,' an object to be studied and explained in service of Western strategy. Now, the lens is changing. The developmental models taking shape in the wider region are not imported templates, but strategies born from lived experience and cultural depth. Now reality leads perception, after decades in which perception shaped reality. Thanks to countries like Saudi Arabia, the region is reclaiming its voice as a fully engaged actor, redefining itself from within what was long considered an 'exotic' or 'mysterious' part of the world. Saudi Arabia is redrawing its global image with clarity of vision and tangible results. Through self-assessment, data-driven governance, and large-scale reforms, the Kingdom has done in a few years what Trump called 'a modern miracle, the Arabian way.' This shift echoes a broader global rebalancing. As Fareed Zakaria outlines in 'The Age of Revolutions,' we are witnessing the rise of 'new powers,' countries that combine bold economic reform with cultural self-confidence and geopolitical ambition. Saudi Arabia stands as a leading example of these emerging global actors. With strategic clarity, Saudi Arabia is reclaiming its place in the global imagination, not as a petro-state anomaly, but a civilizational force rooted in the Arabian Peninsula. For centuries, this land served as a crossroads of trade and a hub of cultural exchange. It gave rise to a language that became a global medium of learning and philosophy. From its historic cities, the people of Arabia, alongside peoples from Asia, Africa, and Europe, helped synthesize ancient knowledge and forge new ideas in science, law, literature, and spirituality. Vision 2030 calls back to this legacy as a strategic resource, reinvesting it to forge global partnerships, articulate a confident Saudi identity, and position the Kingdom as a key player in shaping the future. In that spirit, the 2025 Riyadh Summit marks a new chapter in the Saudi-US story, one defined by mutual respect and a new understanding of the region from within, rather than through borrowed frameworks. 'All of humanity will soon be amazed at what they will see right here in this geographic center of the world and the spiritual heart of its greatest faiths,' Trump declared in his Riyadh address. It was a shift in perception, a recognition that the West will now understand the region through its own successful models. And at the center of those models stands Saudi Arabia as a force actively shaping the narratives of tomorrow. • Dr. Hatem Alzahrani is a writer, cultural adviser, and academic specializing in Middle Eastern cultures. He holds an MA from Yale University and a Ph.D. from Georgetown University. He is a member of the International Arts Advisory Committee at the Middle East Institute. X: @HoYalieOfArabia
Daily Maverick
21-05-2025
- Politics
- Daily Maverick
Race vs unemployment — the changing axis of our politics
Since we became a democracy, the issue of race has overshadowed our political narrative and our elections. It has been the dominant axis of our politics. There may now be some evidence that this is changing, and that the party that can literally change the axis, to change the subject, could grab the initiative. It is well known in politics that when planning a campaign, a party will want to choose the ground on which the campaign is fought. If you can determine what the main argument will be, if you can control the ground, you often win. Because of our history and the racialised inequality which still largely defines our society, race has obviously been the major issue. Even parties that would lose out because of this, such as the DA, have accepted this. In previous elections, the DA has sometimes simply elected to provoke a discussion about race on the grounds that if it cannot control the subject, it could at least control the timing. There is some evidence that this may now be changing. This week, the Institute of Race Relations (IRR) released more data from a poll conducted during March (the poll saw 807 respondents comprising a diverse cross-section using Computer Assisted Telephonic Interviews). While some of the headlines on it, such as the claim that 'most' people prefer appointments on merit rather than race, will be hugely contested, other findings are less controversial. Unemployment, job creation Among the more interesting findings is that nearly 30% of voters believe that 'unemployment and creating jobs' should be the main priority of government. This is far higher than 'illegal immigration' or even 'crime and security', which are seen as the main priority by less than 10% of respondents. While seeking an objective view of 'what is the most important issue' facing a country is probably impossible, it is true that in most democracies, the economy is the most important political issue. Generally speaking, if an economy is growing quickly, the party in charge will win an election. If an economy is stumbling, it will lose support. Both the last US election and our last election are examples of this, and there are many, many more. Inflation rose during the Biden era (largely because of the pandemic), and our economy has not grown significantly in years. This finding by the IRR follows consistent previous findings and would appear to confirm an old insight in our politics: that if all those who were unemployed voted for one party, that party would dominate our politics. But strangely, despite this apparent truth, not one of our political parties has been able to gain traction with an economic plan. From time to time, some parties have played around with their own version of a 'New Deal' that was so effective for President Franklin Roosevelt during the Great Depression. Groups like the DA, Action SA, and even the ANC, from time to time, have claimed to have a plan that would finally move the needle on our economy. And yet, despite the obvious need for it, none has been able to make this the axis of our politics. 'Liberation dividend' wanes Perhaps this might change. As support for the ANC recedes, and as it loses political power as a result, so it loses the ability to control the narrative. Bluntly, the 'liberation dividend' for the party has run out. Attempts to talk about the past, to focus on what it did during the struggle, no longer appear to have the power they once did. At the same time, due to its internal contradictions (and the fact that it is so diverse), it has not been able to craft a new message. There is no singular message that it is sending to voters to encourage them to stay with the party. What is less clear is whether this will result in less support for programmes like BEE. While the IRR says this is the case, there are certainly factors that could make it true. It could be that changing attitudes are a function of both the weakening of the race-based narrative and the focus on our past. But it may also be a reaction to perceived corruption relating to deployment, and how so many people appear to have been appointed to jobs without being properly qualified. Even former Chief Justice Raymond Zondo has claimed that cadre deployment is unconstitutional. Failing government services However, this feeling might also be driven by frustration that so many government services are failing. For many voters, the issue may no longer be about who is getting certain jobs, but whether the jobs are being done and the services are working. This plays into what could become another axis in our politics – which party is better able to provide services. The DA has tried to bring this issue to the fore, to make it the ground on which elections are fought, for many years. It is true that on an objective basis, many services appear to work better for many people in the Western Cape. Read more: Head and shoulders above — Cape Town's success could become a key issue in 2024 elections But this is also highly contested; the Western Cape received more money from the apartheid government in the past (for racist reasons), and it does not have any former homelands. The DA's attempts to improve service delivery in other metros where it has governed, such as Tshwane, do not appear to have won significant traction with voters so far. Unpredictable politics It is also entirely possible that other issues come to the fore. Our democracy is nothing if not unpredictable. It is entirely possible, for example, that someone new to politics might capture the public imagination in a way that is currently unimaginable. The fact that there is so much consistent speculation that someone like Patrice Motsepe or Mcebisi Jonas could mount a campaign for the leadership of the ANC shows an appetite for something new. Both in the US and Lesotho, business people with no previous interest in politics have risen to the top job. Were someone new to enter our politics in a big way, the new dividing line, the new axis of our politics, could then be whether you support a rich person being President or not. It should also be remembered that while some may wish for issues around race to no longer dominate our politics, our racialised inequality means the issue will always come back. Just as issues around land ownership ebb and flow in our politics, so will race. In the US, many thought the election of Barack Obama in 2008 marked the end of race as a political issue. How wrong they were. It was arguably the single biggest factor behind the election of Trump both in 2016 and last year, and is driving his agenda right now. There is plenty of evidence that our society is changing. But there is no difference between South Africans and anyone else. Everyone wants a better life for themselves and their children. Voters can see that economic growth and job creation are key to this. The opportunity for someone to make this the new axis of our politics may now be opening. But someone will have to grab it and use it effectively. DM
