Latest news with #SanJoséState
Daily Mail
03-05-2025
- Entertainment
- Daily Mail
EXCLUSIVE 80s action film and sitcom star is unrecognizable on very rare sighting in LA... can you guess who?
One of the most unforgettable faces from '80s action cinema— and later a beloved sitcom curmudgeon—was spotted looking worlds away from his tough-guy roles during a rare outing in Los Angeles on Wednesday. Now 81, the actor rose to fame as the chilling villain Clarence Boddicker in 1987's RoboCop, and followed it up with a memorable turn as CIA operative Robert Griggs in Rambo III. But for a whole generation, he'll always be Red Forman—the gruff, no-nonsense dad from That '70s Show, where he sparred lovingly with Ashton Kutcher 's dim-witted Kelso and delivered classic one-liners with perfect timing. He even reunited with Kutcher years later on The Ranch, slipping right back into the role of a grumpy father figure with ease. Dressed casually in a bright blue polo and slacks, the Wisconsin native looked relaxed and content—nothing like his stern on-screen personas. Can you guess the star? But for a whole generation, he'll always be Red Forman—the gruff, no-nonsense dad from That '70s Show, where he sparred lovingly with Ashton Kutcher 's dim-witted Kelso and delivered classic one-liners with perfect timing If you said Kurtwood Smith, you're absolutely right! Back in 2023, Kurtwood Smith opened up about his audition for That '70s Show — and the instant chemistry he shared with his future TV wife, Debra Jo Rupp. 'She was already cast, and they were casting my role. I was the last person cast,' he told Smashing Interviews. 'So when I went in to read the final reading, I don't know what his position was at the time, but he had a really big office (laughs). So I read with Debra Jo there. I guess we must've hit it off, you know. 'I thought she was very funny, and she was. We had a great time.' Smith, who grew up in the San Fernando Valley, graduated from Canoga Park High School in 1961. He earned a B.A. from San José State and an M.F.A. from Stanford. He later taught theater arts at Cañada College before diving into acting full-time. The film not only solidified Kurtwood Smith's iconic role as the ruthless villain Clarence Boddicker, but also pushed the boundaries of special effects and became a defining entry in the sci-fi action genre of the 80s But for a whole generation, he'll always be Red Forman—the gruff, no-nonsense dad from That '70s Show, where he sparred lovingly with Ashton Kutcher 's dim-witted Kelso and delivered classic one-liners with perfect timing Beyond That '70s Show, Smith's career spans decades — from playing a KKK leader in A Time to Kill to memorable roles in Dead Poets Society, Star Trek, and even voice work in Green Lantern: First Flight and Fallout Tactics Smith, who grew up in the San Fernando Valley, graduated from Canoga Park High School in 1961 and earned a B.A. from San José State and an M.F.A. from Stanford Kurtwood is actually his real first name — a unique creation by his mother, who, inspired by a country singer named Kurt (or Curt) in the 1940s, thought 'Kurt Smith' sounded too plain and tacked on 'wood' to make it one of a kind Beyond That '70s Show, Smith's career spans decades — from playing a KKK leader in A Time to Kill to memorable roles in Dead Poets Society, Star Trek, and even voice work in Green Lantern: First Flight and Fallout Tactics. He also voiced Carpenter K. Smith in AMC+'s Ultra City Smiths. And Kurtwood is actually his real first name. According to a past interview on The Caroline Rhea Show, Smith's mother was a fan of a country singer named Kurt (or Curt) back in the 1940s. She felt that 'Kurt Smith' sounded too short, so she added 'wood' to the end — making him likely the only Kurtwood out there.
Washington Post
06-02-2025
- Politics
- Washington Post
How Trump's executive order could affect transgender college athletes
On Wednesday, President Donald Trump signed an executive order that aims to ban transgender athletes from competing in girls' and women's sports. Here's a look at some of the questions surrounding Trump's decree. Trump's executive order directs the Education Department to inform schools they will be violating Title IX, the federal law banning sex discrimination in schools, if they allow transgender athletes to compete in girls' or women's sports. Under the law, schools that discriminate based on sex are not eligible for federal funding. Trump had promised to curtail rights for transgender people during last year's election campaign, and he signed an order declaring that only two genders exist on his first day in office. 'From now on, women's sports will be only for women,' Trump said Wednesday after signing the executive order. 'The war on women's sports is over.' Trump's executive order directs the Education Department to inform schools they will be violating Title IX, the federal law banning sex discrimination in schools, if they allow transgender athletes to compete in girls' or women's sports. Under the law, schools that discriminate based on sex are not eligible for federal funding. Trump had promised to curtail rights for transgender people during last year's election campaign, and he signed an order declaring that only two genders exist on his first day in office. 'From now on, women's sports will be only for women,' Trump said Wednesday after signing the executive order. 'The war on women's sports is over.' During a congressional hearing in December, NCAA President Charlie Baker said he believed there were fewer than 10 transgender athletes out of the more than 500,000 competing at the three levels of NCAA sports. The most prominent transgender college athlete was Lia Thomas, a swimmer for the University of Pennsylvania who spent three years on the Quakers men's team before joining their women's team after more than two years of hormone-replacement therapy as part of her transition. Thomas's presence on the women's team divided her teammates; 16 anonymously wrote a letter to school officials claiming she had an 'unfair advantage,' and a smaller group defended her right to compete on the women's team. In March 2022, Thomas became the first known transgender swimmer to win a Division I championship. More recently, several opponents decided to forfeit matches against the San José State women's volleyball team because it allegedly had a transgender player this past season. The Spartans' team captain and nine other players from the Mountain West conference sued the conference's commissioner and San José State Coach Todd Kress, among others, seeking an emergency order to bar the player from competing in the Mountain West tournament. The lawsuit also asked for forfeits against SJSU not to count as conference losses and to have the standings redrawn without factoring in those matches. In late November, a U.S. district judge threw out the lawsuit, saying the conference adhered to its policy regarding transgender athletes. During a congressional hearing in December, NCAA President Charlie Baker said he believed there were fewer than 10 transgender athletes out of the more than 500,000 competing at the three levels of NCAA sports. The most prominent transgender college athlete was Lia Thomas, a swimmer for the University of Pennsylvania who spent three years on the Quakers men's team before joining their women's team after more than two years of hormone-replacement therapy as part of her transition. Thomas's presence on the women's team divided her teammates; 16 anonymously wrote a letter to school officials claiming she had an 'unfair advantage,' and a smaller group defended her right to compete on the women's team. In March 2022, Thomas became the first known transgender swimmer to win a Division I championship. More recently, several opponents decided to forfeit matches against the San José State women's volleyball team because it allegedly had a transgender player this past season. The Spartans' team captain and nine other players from the Mountain West conference sued the conference's commissioner and San José State Coach Todd Kress, among others, seeking an emergency order to bar the player from competing in the Mountain West tournament. The lawsuit also asked for forfeits against SJSU not to count as conference losses and to have the standings redrawn without factoring in those matches. In late November, a U.S. district judge threw out the lawsuit, saying the conference adhered to its policy regarding transgender athletes. In January 2022, the NCAA updated its policy on transgender athletes to more closely follow rules employed by Olympic sports. Eligibility of transgender athletes is determined by rules set for each sport's national or international governing body. Athletes must provide documentation of their testosterone levels at multiple points during the season. In most sports, the concentration of testosterone in a transgender athlete's blood must be less than 10 nanomoles per liter if they wish to compete with women, though some sports have a lower threshold (in hockey, swimming and diving, and tennis, for instance, the requirement is less than 5 nanomoles per liter). In January 2022, the NCAA updated its policy on transgender athletes to more closely follow rules employed by Olympic sports. Eligibility of transgender athletes is determined by rules set for each sport's national or international governing body. Athletes must provide documentation of their testosterone levels at multiple points during the season. In most sports, the concentration of testosterone in a transgender athlete's blood must be less than 10 nanomoles per liter if they wish to compete with women, though some sports have a lower threshold (in hockey, swimming and diving, and tennis, for instance, the requirement is less than 5 nanomoles per liter). The NCAA seems poised to conform with Trump's executive order. On Wednesday, Baker said in a statement that the order 'provides a clear, national standard' and that the NCAA Board of Governors 'will take necessary steps to align NCAA policy in the coming days, subject to further guidance from the administration.' The NCAA seems poised to conform with Trump's executive order. On Wednesday, Baker said in a statement that the order 'provides a clear, national standard' and that the NCAA Board of Governors 'will take necessary steps to align NCAA policy in the coming days, subject to further guidance from the administration.' Rules regarding transgender athletes in high school sports vary from state to state. In 27 states, transgender athletes are prohibited from competing in girls' sports, either because of state law or the policy of state athletic agencies. In the other 23 states, D.C. and five U.S. territories, transgender athletes may compete in girls' sports, though schools now risk losing federal funding under Trump's executive order. Rules regarding transgender athletes in high school sports vary from state to state. In 27 states, transgender athletes are prohibited from competing in girls' sports, either because of state law or the policy of state athletic agencies. In the other 23 states, D.C. and five U.S. territories, transgender athletes may compete in girls' sports, though schools now risk losing federal funding under Trump's executive order. Lawsuits challenging state-level bans on transgender athletes have been filed, and those bans have been put on hold in four states as the cases work their way through the legal system. In December, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton sued the NCAA, saying its transgender policies mislead that state's consumers by allowing people who were assigned male at birth to compete in women's sports. Lawsuits challenging state-level bans on transgender athletes have been filed, and those bans have been put on hold in four states as the cases work their way through the legal system. In December, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton sued the NCAA, saying its transgender policies mislead that state's consumers by allowing people who were assigned male at birth to compete in women's sports. Also Wednesday, Trump said he is directing Secretary of State Marco Rubio to tell the International Olympic Committee 'that America rejects transgender lunacy' and that he is directing Homeland Security Secretary Kristi L. Noem to deny visa applications 'made by men attempting to fraudulently enter the United States while identifying themselves as women athletes.' In doing so, Trump repeated false claims that two male athletes competed in last year's Olympic women's boxing competition. The 2028 Summer Olympics will take place in Los Angeles, and organizers have promised to privately fund those Games. Also Wednesday, Trump said he is directing Secretary of State Marco Rubio to tell the International Olympic Committee 'that America rejects transgender lunacy' and that he is directing Homeland Security Secretary Kristi L. Noem to deny visa applications 'made by men attempting to fraudulently enter the United States while identifying themselves as women athletes.' In doing so, Trump repeated false claims that two male athletes competed in last year's Olympic women's boxing competition. The 2028 Summer Olympics will take place in Los Angeles, and organizers have promised to privately fund those Games.
Yahoo
26-01-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Column: The rise of Silicon Valley, from indifference to lords of the political universe
When the high and mighty of Silicon Valley assumed their privileged perch at the swearing-in of President Trump, it was an ostentatious show of wealth and power unlike any before. "You could go back to the Gilded Age and you could have a similar concentration of capital and power. You know, Rockefeller and Carnegie," said historian Margaret O'Mara, citing two of the richest men who ever bestrode the earth. "But they weren't on the dais of the inauguration." The moment was open to varied interpretation. Was it Trump, that most status-conscious of alpha males, bringing to heel the formidable likes of Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos and Mark Zuckerberg? Or were all those billionaire potentates in the Capitol Rotunda — seated in front of Trump's Cabinet picks — asserting their social, economic and cultural hegemony? Maybe both. Regardless, there is no denying the remarkable ascendance of Silicon Valley and its tech leaders, in a single generation, from a collection of indifferent and often politically naive entrepreneurs into king-making, proximate-to-power lords of the political universe. Only in America. And, yes, that's sarcasm you detect. Read more: Side-by-side, two friends watch Trump's inauguration from their partisan corners The explanation for their propinquity lies not in the creation of some whiz-bang, life-changing, paradigm-bending consumer product, or the shining virtues or particularly fertile minds that grace Silicon Valley's fruited plain. "It's one of the oldest truisms in politics," said Larry Gerston, a San José State political science professor emeritus, who's followed the tech industry from a front-row seat for decades. "Money buys access." Bezos' Amazon and Zuckerberg's Meta were among the tech firms that tithed $1 million each to help pay for Trump's inauguration. Musk invested more than a quarter of a billion dollars to help elect Trump. Given his conjoined-twin closeness to the 47th president, it appears money well spent. Let's travel back to another lifetime, July 1997, when, with great fanfare, some of Silicon Valley's top entrepreneurs and executives announced formation of a venture dubbed the Technology Network. Based in Palo Alto, it was founded as a one-stop shop to promote political causes, lobby on issues, and support preferred candidates. Creation of the organization and its seeding with $2 million in pocket change was a notable departure for the industry which, up to then, had only fleetingly and peripherally been involved in campaigns and elections. As Gerston put it at the time, 'These guys don't know from politics. Their mentality has always been to take every dime they had and put it into research and development, and then product.' That head-down insularity began to change with the realization that issues such as taxes, tariffs, foreign trade and legal liability mattered a great deal to high-tech's prosperity and long-term future. Industry leaders grew more involved in regional affairs, focusing on subjects such as permitting and transportation. On the state level, they spent tens of millions to defeat a 1996 California ballot measure that would have facilitated the filing of security-fraud lawsuits. (High-tech companies were a particular target of such shareholder suits because of the volatility of their stocks.) Read more: Tech billionaires Zuckerberg, Bezos and Altman help bankroll Trump's inauguration. What to know In Washington, President Clinton and his techie vice president, Al Gore, broke ground by assiduously courting the industry, eager to associate themselves with its perceived coolness and cutting-edge cachet. Back then, the internet was in its infancy and Silicon Valley's fledgling firms were seen as upstarts in need of nurturing and protection as they faced Goliaths like the software giant Microsoft. One upshot was Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996, which to this day insulates social media from legal liability for the content — however incendiary or scurrilous — that users post. (At the time, there was no such thing as Google, YouTube, Twitter or the like. Zuckerberg was 12 years old.) "Even though the internet was commercialized and everyone was all excited about the World Wide Web, it was still a thing on your desk that you walked away from," said O'Mara, a University of Washington professor and author of "The Code: Silicon Valley and the Remaking of America." "You didn't have software, platforms and tools produced by these companies that were disrupting all types of industries from taxis to hotels to politics," O'Mara said. As the industry grew — massively, exponentially — and technology embedded itself in every fiber of daily life, it drew increased and much less favorable notice from Washington. Concerns about personal privacy, election interference, exploitative labor practices and the toxic effects of social media scraped much of the sheen off the tech industry and its shiny gadgets, especially among Democrats. Republicans had their own gripes. Trump, in his first turn in the White House, assailed Google, Facebook and other social media companies, accusing them of censorship and anti-conservative bias. Apathy had long since fallen out of fashion. Tech leaders and venture capitalists did what the railroad, steel, oil and gas and so many other industries had done before, hiring an army of lobbyists and investing heavily in politics and politicians to defend and preserve their interests. "The guys who wanted to be left alone and stay away from politics realized their only chance of surviving was inserting themselves into the policymaking process," Gerston said. Which is just plain business sense. Read more: Smart business? Currying favor? Why big tech leaders are friending and funding Trump But there's something dingy and gross, like mottled drifts of old snow, about the overweening influence of Trump's courtiers and their grubbing relationship with a president so obviously enamored of money and flattery. Zuckerberg eliminated third-party fact-checking on Facebook, lest it contravene Trump's fact-free effusions. Amazon paid $40 million to license a Melania Trump documentary. Worse is the tech moguls' unholy financial influence. With Midas-size endowments and a Supreme Court that equates political contributions with free speech, they can shout while most of the rest of us can only whisper. Once again, it may prove money well spent. Over the next few years Trump will have major influence over antitrust policy, the development and use of artificial intelligence and the growth and prevalence of cryptocurrency, to name just some of the issues of vital and remunerative interest to the tech industry. Meantime, the Justice Department is pursuing — for now — cases that seek to end Google's search hegemony and Apple's alleged practice of making it harder for consumers to switch software or hardware. Tim Cook and Sundar Pichai, the chief executives of Apple and Google, respectively, were among the tech barons paying homage to Trump. Whatever their tastes in art, you can be sure they weren't there to admire the statues and oil paintings lining the gilded Capitol Rotunda. Get the latest from Mark Z. BarabakFocusing on politics out West, from the Golden Gate to the U.S. me up. This story originally appeared in Los Angeles Times.
Los Angeles Times
26-01-2025
- Business
- Los Angeles Times
Column: The rise of Silicon Valley, from indifference to lords of the political universe
When the high and mighty of Silicon Valley assumed their privileged perch at the swearing-in of President Trump, it was an ostentatious show of wealth and power unlike any before. 'You could go back to the Gilded Age and you could have a similar concentration of capital and power. You know, Rockefeller and Carnegie,' said historian Margaret O'Mara, citing two of the richest men who ever bestrode the earth. 'But they weren't on the dais of the inauguration.' The moment was open to varied interpretation. Was it Trump, that most status-conscious of alpha males, bringing to heel the formidable likes of Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos and Mark Zuckerberg? Or were all those billionaire potentates in the Capitol Rotunda — seated in front of Trump's Cabinet picks — asserting their social, economic and cultural hegemony? Maybe both. Regardless, there is no denying the remarkable ascendance of Silicon Valley and its tech leaders, in a single generation, from a collection of indifferent and often politically naive entrepreneurs into king-making, proximate-to-power lords of the political universe. Only in America. And, yes, that's sarcasm you detect. The explanation for their propinquity lies not in the creation of some whiz-bang, life-changing, paradigm-bending consumer product, or the shining virtues or particularly fertile minds that grace Silicon Valley's fruited plain. 'It's one of the oldest truisms in politics,' said Larry Gerston, a San José State political science professor emeritus, who's followed the tech industry from a front-row seat for decades. 'Money buys access.' Bezos' Amazon and Zuckerberg's Meta were among the tech firms that tithed $1 million each to help pay for Trump's inauguration. Musk invested more than a quarter of a billion dollars to help elect Trump. Given his conjoined-twin closeness to the 47th president, it appears money well spent. Let's travel back to another lifetime, July 1997, when, with great fanfare, some of Silicon Valley's top entrepreneurs and executives announced formation of a venture dubbed the Technology Network. Based in Palo Alto, it was founded as a one-stop shop to promote political causes, lobby on issues, and support preferred candidates. Creation of the organization and its seeding with $2 million in pocket change was a notable departure for the industry which, up to then, had only fleetingly and peripherally been involved in campaigns and elections. As Gerston put it at the time, 'These guys don't know from politics. Their mentality has always been to take every dime they had and put it into research and development, and then product.' That head-down insularity began to change with the realization that issues such as taxes, tariffs, foreign trade and legal liability mattered a great deal to high-tech's prosperity and long-term future. Industry leaders grew more involved in regional affairs, focusing on subjects such as permitting and transportation. On the state level, they spent tens of millions to defeat a 1996 California ballot measure that would have facilitated the filing of security-fraud lawsuits. (High-tech companies were a particular target of such shareholder suits because of the volatility of their stocks.) In Washington, President Clinton and his techie vice president, Al Gore, broke ground by assiduously courting the industry, eager to associate themselves with its perceived coolness and cutting-edge cachet. Back then, the internet was in its infancy and Silicon Valley's fledgling firms were seen as upstarts in need of nurturing and protection as they faced Goliaths like the software giant Microsoft. One upshot was Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996, which to this day insulates social media from legal liability for the content — however incendiary or scurrilous — that users post. (At the time, there was no such thing as Google, YouTube, Twitter or the like. Zuckerberg was 12 years old.) 'Even though the internet was commercialized and everyone was all excited about the World Wide Web, it was still a thing on your desk that you walked away from,' said O'Mara, a University of Washington professor and author of 'The Code: Silicon Valley and the Remaking of America.' 'You didn't have software, platforms and tools produced by these companies that were disrupting all types of industries from taxis to hotels to politics,' O'Mara said. As the industry grew — massively, exponentially — and technology embedded itself in every fiber of daily life, it drew increased and much less favorable notice from Washington. Concerns about personal privacy, election interference, exploitative labor practices and the toxic effects of social media scraped much of the sheen off the tech industry and its shiny gadgets, especially among Democrats. Republicans had their own gripes. Trump, in his first turn in the White House, assailed Google, Facebook and other social media companies, accusing them of censorship and anti-conservative bias. Apathy had long since fallen out of fashion. Tech leaders and venture capitalists did what the railroad, steel, oil and gas and so many other industries had done before, hiring an army of lobbyists and investing heavily in politics and politicians to defend and preserve their interests. 'The guys who wanted to be left alone and stay away from politics realized their only chance of surviving was inserting themselves into the policymaking process,' Gerston said. Which is just plain business sense. But there's something dingy and gross, like mottled drifts of old snow, about the overweening influence of Trump's courtiers and their grubbing relationship with a president so obviously enamored of money and flattery. Zuckerberg eliminated third-party fact-checking on Facebook, lest it contravene Trump's fact-free effusions. Amazon paid $40 million to license a Melania Trump documentary. Worse is the tech moguls' unholy financial influence. With Midas-size endowments and a Supreme Court that equates political contributions with free speech, they can shout while most of the rest of us can only whisper. Once again, it may prove money well spent. Over the next few years Trump will have major influence over antitrust policy, the development and use of artificial intelligence and the growth and prevalence of cryptocurrency, to name just some of the issues of vital and remunerative interest to the tech industry. Meantime, the Justice Department is pursuing — for now — cases that seek to end Google's search hegemony and Apple's alleged practice of making it harder for consumers to switch software or hardware. Tim Cook and Sundar Pichai, the chief executives of Apple and Google, respectively, were among the tech barons paying homage to Trump. Whatever their tastes in art, you can be sure they weren't there to admire the statues and oil paintings lining the gilded Capitol Rotunda.
