Monthly Archives: April 2017

On Friday, President Donald Trump got the first real win of his presidency with the confirmation of Colorados Neil Gorsuch to be the next justice of the Supreme Court. Although there have been other useful actions by the president during his first 80 days such as his welcome assault on the growth of the regulatory state, those were lightly covered by the media and did not involve showing any ability to maneuver Congress into accomplishing any of his or any other Republicans major campaign goals.

On one hand, it may have been overly ambitious to hope for a repeal of Obamacare within the first dozen weeks of a Trump presidency. On the other hand, the failure to do so was a spectacular example of Republican legislators still unsure how to operate as the governing party, of spineless GOP moderates who cant bear to take away an entitlement no matter how harmful to the literal and figurative health of the nation, and of a president whose lack of political experience is not the unvarnished blessing that his supporters thought it to be.

At this point, Mr. Trump is in the unenviable position of needing to expend political capital to nudge House (and then Senate) Republicans to yes on a real Obamacare repeal bill (and later on tax reform and other major agenda items) but having begun his presidency with far less political capital than a new president typically does and having lost much of that through a combination of his own unforced errors, uncompliant members of Congress, and incessant and often unfair attacks by the mainstream media.

When a new presidents approval ratings are hovering around 40%, he has little leverage over members of his party, particularly those very moderates and Tea Party/Freedom Caucus types who are trying to get to yes on Obamacare repeal but who do not see their political fortunes tied to Trumps.

A modest bump in Mr. Trumps approval ratings is to be expected following the missile strike on Syria, but even that may fade quickly if the public sees it as no more than the unbelievably small strike that former Secretary of State John Kerry promised more than three years ago. Reports that Syrian Air Force jets were taking off from the Shayrat air base less than a day after Mr. Trump ordered it targeted with 59 Tomahawk missiles are something of a propaganda win for Bashar Assad and Vladimir Putin. Within a few hours more, the town of Khan Sheikhoun, where 86 people died in the chemical attack that stirred Trump to action, was bombed again. That it was not a chemical weapon this time probably does not make the towns remaining population feel much better. Russia and Syria are all but daring Mr. Trump to take more significant action, knowing that he probably wont. With each passing hour, the strike feels to have been much more bark than bite.

However, the fact that there was a U.S. strike on Syria is far more important than what the strike accomplished. To wit: It put distance between Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin, helpful for Mr. Trump both domestically and internationally. It told the world that this is no longer Barack Obamas U.S. foreign policy. It reminded Chinese and North Korean leaders that Mr. Trumps recent statements of willingness to act unilaterally must be taken seriously. (Whether that increases or raises risks on the Korean peninsula in the short term is another matter, with North Korea claiming that the U.S. air strike on Syria proves its need for nuclear weapons. A DPRK statement Sunday blustered, We will bolster up in every way our capability for self-defense to cope with the U.S. evermore reckless moves for a war) Back on the home front, the strike distracted from the ongoing media-fueled conversation of an administration at war with itself.

And perhaps most importantly for the longer-term prospects for Donald Trumps presidency, it showed a man willing to change his position on an issue that had been a consistent campaign theme for him: that Syria is not enough of an American strategic interest to justify our military involvement.

We can debate whether his campaign position remains the correct one certainly many of his supporters continue to believe it does and are unhappy with last weeks actions or whether other changes in the strategic situation justify what appears to be an emotional reaction by the president to images of dead children.

The change in Trumps Syrian position would be less remarkable were it not for its being one of many recent changes in Trumpworld and an increasing separation between the presidents current actions and his campaign rhetoric.

For example, on Wednesday, President Trump removed his chief strategist, Steve Bannon, from the National Security Council, a group that Mr. Bannon should never have been a member of in any case. There are opposing assertions among White House leaks as to whether Mr. Bannon had to be cajoled into not resigning from the administration over the move.

Given the presidents undoubted respect and appreciation for Mr. Bannon, removing him from the RSC shows that Trump is taking guidance from elsewhere, in this case Secretary of Homeland Security John Kelly, Secretary of Defense Jim Mattis, and National Security Advisor H.R. McMaster. It is unlikely to be a coincidence given Mr. Trumps obvious admiration for military leaders that all three are/were U.S. Army generals.

It has also been impossible not to notice the prominence of Jared Kushner in surprisingly many reports of the president assigning him to oversee tasks from restarting an Israeli/Palestinian peace process to overhauling the way the federal government operates, each of which is a near-impossible feat, not least for a 36-year old with approximately no relevant experience.

This represents a significant change in which faction currently has the greatest influence over the president. If the New York Times is to be believed (a significant if, I grant you), the relationship between Bannon and Kushner has deteriorated to the point where Bannon has called Kushner a Democrat (which may in fact be true, but which cant be viewed as a compliment in the Trump White House, nor in my house). On Friday, the president told Bannon and Kushner, We gotta work this out, leading to a meeting moderated by Chief of Staff Reince Priebus. If I were a betting man, Id put a few bucks on Steve Bannon being out of the White House by Labor Day, perhaps with policy advisor Stephen Miller, representing a major transformation of Trumps inner circle.

Another story that received less media attention was the recent signing by the president of two executive orders regarding trade. Despite all the sturm und drang of months of railing against China and TPP (which the president withdrew the U.S. from as one of his earliest actions) and NAFTA, the executive orders were something of a yawn. One aims to ensure the collection of duties based on existing tariffs and anti-dumping regulations. The other orders various departments of government to work together to create an Omnibus Report on Significant Trade Deficits.

No sudden tariff hikes, no renegotiating of NAFTA, no trade war at least not yet. It is a welcome change from the ill-considered anti-trade rhetoric of Mr. Trump and some of his advisors, though the executive order itself does contain some economic illiteracy when worrying about the challenges to economic growth and employment that may arise from large and chronic trade deficits.*

Mr. Trump has turned into a supporter of NATO since alliance leadership seems to have taken seriously his insistence that its members spend their treaty obligation share of GDP on defense and look at increasing their counter-terrorism activities. At the same time, the president seems to have become more in favor of supporting Japans defense even if Japan does not raise its own military spending.

Recent inside baseball stories suggest that Trump loyalists who were placed inside of executive branch agencies are being pushed into irrelevant roles or out of the buildings entirely as the establishment pushes back. This even as leaders like Rick Perry (Energy), Scott Pruitt (EPA), and Tom Price (HHS) bring a distinctly revolutionary approach to those bloated petty tyrannies.

Not even three months into Donald Trumps presidency, the administration seems to be a very different creature from what it was on Inauguration Day, or from what it promised to be three months before that. And thats probably a good thing.

Last weeks U.S. missile strikes on Syria have wide-ranging implications, but probably none as significant as proving what these other pieces of evidence have increasingly suggested: that, to the chagrin of many in his nationalist-populist base, Donald Trump is a man rapidly evolving in office.

- * If trade surpluses cause economic growth, one might wonder why the U.S. ran trade surpluses throughout almost the entirety of the Great Depression and, as a 2011 Cato Institute report notes, since 1980, the U.S. economy has grown more than three times faster during periods when the trade deficit was expanding as a share of GDP compared to periods when it was contracting.

See the original post here:

The Trump Evolution - American Spectator

Most people think of science and theology as standing on opposite ends of the spectrum when it comes to things such as climate change and evolution. But in a lecture on Thursday titled Climate Change as a Consequence of Human Presence: A Dialogue between Anthropology and Biblical Studies, Carol Newsom explained how the two are not as opposed as people believe.

Newsom is the Candler Professor of the Old Testament and the Hebrew Bible in the Candler School of Theology at Emory University. She is known for her work translating the Dead Sea Scrolls and challenging long-held assumptions about women in the Bible. This lecture was part of the annual lecture series given in honor of Rev. Richard J. Clifford, S.J, sponsored by the by School of Theology and Ministry and supported by the Kitz family.

Newsom then discussed climate changes relationship with theology. In her interpretation, the creation story of Genesis 2-3 is not against the theory of evolution but instead supports it.

Newsom elaborated, saying that when God first created human beings, they did not have rational thought and were on the same level as other animals. When Adam and Eve ate from the Tree of Knowledge, they gained rational thought that was meant only for divine beings. Newsom likened this transformation to evolution.

Newsom also cited Adam and Eve eating from the tree and gaining rational thought as the driving force behind why humans speed up climate change.

Newsom spoke about the impact that climate change has on peoples lives. In the past few years, the World Bank, the Pentagon, and other organizations have published reports that predict a bleak future for Earths climate, showing that the global temperature has gone up 1.5 degrees celsius, approaching the 2 degree Celsius point which has been regarded as the critical temperature.

She also talked about how scientists have said that the earth is currently in the beginning stages of the next mass extinction. This man-made extinction is different from the first five mass extinction events in the earths history, which were caused by natural events.

Over the past 250 years, the Industrial Revolution and growth of technology has sped up climate change exponentially, but humans have altered the world around them long before then. Since the time of hunting and gathering, humans have contributed to the extinction of prey species, and because the prey species would die, so would the predators that would hunt them.

The biodiversity, the vast amount of biologically different species, on earth has been able to exist because of the separation of different ecosystems. Before humans were able to migrate easily from one continent or country to another, these ecosystems existed apart from each other without any contamination. When humans began to migrate to other parts of the world, they brought new species to ecosystems and these ecosystems were not able to adapt quickly enough and were harmed.

This is a time of immense change for the earth, but this is also a time for change for us as the human species and I hope that well be more self aware, more humble, more wise than we have been, she explained

Human beings have rational thought but do not wield it correctly, according to Newsom. She explained how the knowledge from the tree that Adam and Eve ate from was only meant for divine beings and, in human beings, it leads them to make decisions that harm the environment. The rational thought that makes human distinct from other species is that same thing that makes us incompatible with the earth and its biodiversity.

Newsom talked about reasons to be hopeful. She explained that along with research into the degree of damage done to the earth so far, there are also a positive things that are being discovered, like cheaper and more efficient ways to harvest wind and solar power.

While there are reasons to be optimistic, we have to realize that not everything will be saved, she said. The world that comes after this century will be very different than the one that existed before but I dont see it in dystopian terms.

The realities of climate change are very serious, but Newsom holds hope in human beings ability to reverse or lessen its effects.

The resources of both science and our religious traditions offer us ways of living with an understanding of who we are, with seriousness of purpose and yet with humility, that our actions, successful or not, are involved in a process that will incorporate them into a larger story of this marvelous world and Gods intentions for it, she said.

Featured Image by Jake Catania / Heights Staff

See the original post:

Bible Supports Theory of Evolution, Newsom Says - The Heights

From pacemakers that keep the heart beating to swallowable sensors that can tell when someone takes their meds, people have been implanting machines into their bodies for decades.

But a growing trend in bodily implants inserting a computer chip under the skin is more about morphing people into literal cyborgs than addressing a medical condition.

Im turning the internet of things into the internet of us, said Jowan Osterlund in an interview with Recode. Osterlund is the founder of Biohax, a Swedish company that specializes in injecting small microchips, about the size of a grain of rice, under peoples skin.

The microchips, says Osterlund, can be programed to speak to other networked devices, like coffee makers, speakers or doors with electronic locks. The idea is that its more convenient to wave your hand in front of the door than use a key card.

Inserted by a syringe into the skin between the thumb and the index finger, the chips communicate with other devices using Near Field Communication. Its a wireless way of linking devices in close proximity to each other, similar to the way Bluetooth works. Contactless payment systems, like Apple Pay, also use NFC.

Last year, Microsoft invited Biohax to its TechDays conference in Sweden to implant some of the speakers at the conference, as well as a few Microsoft executives in attendance, according to Osterlund.

Scientists have been implanting animals with microchips for years to help track down lost pets or monitor endangered species. In the U.K., microchipping dogs became a mandatory practice in 2016.

The procedure for humans, though, could raise concerns about security. If hacked, microchips implanted inside the body could be read to reveal a persons location and length of time spent somewhere, as well as information about your health or any data stored on the chip.

All kinds of medical devices can be hacked, after all. In 2015, the Food and Drug Administration recommended hospitals stop using a line of drug infusion devices after a security researcher discovered how easy it would be for a hacker to commandeer the device and overdose a patient.

Biohacking has become kind of a niche community in the past few years. Companies like Dangerous Things, a biohacking supply company based in Seattle that sells microchips and all the gear needed to insert the devices under the skin, have sprouted up. Theres also Grindhouse Wetwear, a biohacking company based out of Pittsburgh, thats created a LED star that can be implanted under the skin to light up when activated by a magnet.

Elon Musk is even reportedly starting a new company, Neuralink, which will make implants for the human brain that can wirelessly interface with a computer. Though details on the new venture are thin, Musk hinted at the idea at Recodes Code Conference last year, when he described a digital layer located above the cortex, built into the brain.

Musk hopes that one day the technology, which he calls neural lace, could be used to improve brain function and help humans keep apace with rapid advancements in artificial intelligence.

More:

The next evolution in office working could be employees getting implanted with a microchip - Recode