Why There's a Modern Measles Epidemic

Article Link

Measles is a disease which, until recently, was considered totally extinct as of the year 2000. But recent waves of measles outbreaks has changed that. In 2019, measles has experienced a resurgence of impressive proportions, with more than 700 cases being reported in 22 states, and growing. This is the highest national presence of measles in 25 years. The culprit for this resurgence is no mystery: in recent years, anti-vaccination sentiment has become increasingly prominent among parents, causing tens thousands of the new generation to avoid inoculation. The sheer quantity of unvaccinated children has permitted measles to propagate to its previous levels, causing a nationwide epidemic. States have historically required inoculation as a condition for matriculation, but recently, vaccination laws and their respective enforcing parties have become embarrassingly lackadaisical. The new measles epidemic will cause the states and federal government millions of dollars to contain, a heavy price to pay for "more freedom." Few states have reformed their inoculation laws. Currently, the federal government has not established any national codes with respect to vaccination, opting for a controversial federalist attitude towards the problem.

Discussion questions:

1. Should states tighten up their vaccination requirements/enforcement?
2. Should the US government develop laws to make vaccination mandatory at the Federal level?
3. What might be the sociopolitical implications/repercussions of enforcing inoculation

New York Times Criticized for Publishing Anti-Semitic Cartoon

Caption: The anti-Semitic cartoon that appeared in The New York Times International paper last Thursday.

Last Thursday, the international print edition of The New York Times included an anti-Semitic cartoon of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu playing a dog on a leash held by a blind President Donald Trump. While there was no accompanying article, the cartoon was meant to criticize President Trump's approach to Israel. However, with Prime Minister Netanyahu being dehumanized into a dog, the cartoon clearly held anti-Semitic tones.

In response, The New York Times issued a statement apologizing for its publication of the cartoon. The newspaper explained that the cartoon ran through with an okay after being approved by a single editor. However, many have deemed the statement as inadequate. The American Jewish Committee was one of the critics, saying in a tweet, "Apology not accepted...What does this say about your processes or your decision makers? How are you fixing it?"

This is not the first time that The New York Times has been under fire for anti-Semitic print. Last December, the paper's Sunday Book Review included an interview of writer Alice Walker - author of 'The Color Purple" - that included controversial books. When asked about the books on her nightstand, Walker mentioned "And the Truth Shall Set You Free", a notoriously anti-Semitic book that endorses "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion" and encourages the questioning of the occurrence of the Holocaust in schools. The paper similarly was criticized by its readers, arguing that the book should have been flagged as an anti-Semitic book. The New York Times responded saying that it was not their job to censor what was said in an interview. Most alarming was the book review editors' explanation: "We never question people on their choices. The people's answers are a reflection of their opinions, taste and judgement."

Frankly, I am appalled by The New York Times' inclusion of such a cartoon. It is upsetting to see that anti-Semitic views continue and seem to be on the rise with synagogues often being attacked. This truly brings to light how Post-Holocaust prejudice against Jews still remains, and how it is yet another example of the many religious and racial tensions in America right now. It also leaves room for questions on whether the public's view on how America should approach the Israel conflict will change; will Trump's back out approach be approved by the general public or not in the rest of his term and in the upcoming presidential election?

Questions:

1. Do you think Anti-Semitic views are on the rise?

2. Should there be universal guidelines on what cartoons are allowed to be published in news outlets? If so, what are they?

3. Do you think self-described non-partisan news outlets should include content from those with controversial beliefs? Does the inclusion of content such as the mention of "And the Truth Shall Set You Free" count as endorsement and approval from the news source?

News Links:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/anti-semitism-is-not-just-another-opinion-the-new-york-times-should-know-better/2018/12/24/7531887a-07b9-11e9-a3f0-71c95106d96a_story.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.7645030f8698

https://www.cnn.com/2019/04/28/media/ny-times-anti-semitic-cartoon/index.html

Leaked recording reveals Michael Cohen reneging on some guilty pleas

Link

Michael Cohen, former attorney for President Donald Trump went back on his admissions for some of his alleged crimes. This could indicate that he only plead guilty to avoid putting his wife through the long legal battle. The Wall Street Journal obtained the audio of a phone call between Cohen and his close friend Tom Arnold. "Although Cohen reportedly stood by his plea on campaign finance violations, which implicated the president over his alleged affair with porn star Stormy Daniels, he appeared to reverse admissions related to tax evasion and a charge related to a home equity line of credit" (HELOC)." Cohen portrayed himself as a victim during the phone call, specifically saying: "There is no tax evasion... and the HELOC? I have an 18 percent loan-to-value on my home. How could there be a HELOC issue?" It would be interesting to know if he knew that he was being monitored during this phone call. I believe he did because the things he said supported him and portrayed him in a better light. At one point he says: "I needed to get the truth out there,and (it's) very hard when you spend 10 years taking care of somebody and their family..." As he plays the victim card, it allows people to empathize for him and hopefully lessen his sentence, if not it could be to at least, just slightly, protect his name.


Questions:
1. Do you think Cohen knew he was being recorded when he said this?
2. Do you believe the claims he is making in these phone calls?
3. Do you think it's true that he pleaded guilty out of respect for his wife?

Kim Jong-un to meet with Vladimir Putin

Kim Jong-un to meet with Vladimir Putin

North Korean and Russian leaders Kim Jong-un and Vladimir Putin
are scheduled to meet on April 25th for the Vladivostok summit.
Russia aims to regulate nuclear weapon usage near the North Korean
Peninsula while North Korea intends to seek support. This meeting was
scheduled soon after discussions with the United States earlier this year
failed to reach a conclusion surrounding North Korea's nuclear weapons
program. North Korea and Russia had maintained relations as allies
during the Cold War. However, Russia, along with the United States and
China, is uncomfortable with North Korea becoming a nuclear state.

Questions:

1. What are your expectations for this meeting?

2. How will this meeting effect how the United States will approach the
next summit with North Korea?

3. What will countries surrounding North Korea, such as China and South
Korea expect from this meeting, and how will they interact with North Korea depending on the outcome?

Source: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-48047279

200+ Killed in Nine Bombings Across Sri Lanka

This Easter Sunday, nine churches were subject to acts of terrorism all across Sri Lanka. More than 200 were killer and 450 others were harmed. It is being described by the Sri Lankan defense ministry as a "coordinated act of religious extremism." At 8:45 am in Sri Lanka, attacks began in the cities of Colombo, Negombo, and Batticaloa. Churches were the main target of the attack, but Christian-owned hotels were also targeted. Several foreigners, including US nationals, were casualties in the attacks. While the government begins investigations, (in which 13 suspects have already been aprehended, although it is thought that the attacks were mainly carried out by suicide bombers) many social media sites have been temporarily blocked in order to stop misinformation.

It is no mistake that the attacks were executed on Easter Sunday while targeting churches and Christian-run, American associated businesses. Sri Lanka suffered through a long civil war until 2009, and it has been theorized that these attacks are the actions of the disgruntled minority who lost the civil war to the incumbent, American-supported majority. Many witnesses to the attacks called them reminiscent of the civil war, and fear that this will signal the resurgence of conflicts across Sri Lanka.


Questions:

1. What action should the Sri Lankan government take? What action should the greater world take?
2. What does it take to change culturally ingrained political dissatisfaction?
3. What other current world events does this remind you of?


https://www.cbsnews.com/live-news/sri-lanka-bombings-explosions-easter-sunday-colombo-churches-hotels-2019-04-21-live-updates/

Think the Fed is truly independent? Wrong. Think it’s a lackey? Wrong again.

With spots open on the Federal Reserve Board, President Trump has selected Stephen Moore and Herman Cain. Although it is uncertain whether Moore and Cain will be confirmed by the Senate, this situation demonstrates that the Fed is neither “truly independent” nor “simply a political lackey of the president or Congress.” The article then gives historical examples from the presidencies of Truman, Johnson, Nixon, Reagan, Bush, and Obama, showing how the Fed is “an elastic concept, meaning different things at different times for different reasons,” and that its independence largely comes from its “ambiguity and flexibility.” I believe that having a solid and nonpartisan Board is crucial so that the nation’s monetary policy ensures economic stability and success. The Fed’s job is highly technical, requiring careful consideration of various factors (interest rates, inflation, credit conditions, etc), and having a group of competent Board members is necessary to maintain the US’s reputation and credibility as a world leader.

Questions:

1. Do President Trump’s selections for the Federal Reserve Board signal a shift towards more White House control over the Fed?

2. Do Stephen Moore and Herman Cain have the necessary background to serve responsibly on the Federal Reserve Board of Governors, or do their histories as a businessman and a conservative public-policy advocate, respectively, show otherwise?

3. Although Moore and Cain would be more loyal to Trump than to the Fed, would this be harmful to the Fed and the economy? Do you think they would influence the Fed to make decisions based on presidential and/or Congressional politics, or would their conservative opinions help the Fed operate as a nonpartisan body?

Link:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/can-the-fed-stay-independent/2019/04/21/edd4e54e-63b5-11e9-bfad-36a7eb36cb60_story.html?utm_term=.6aa246e29538

North Korea Has Demanded the Removal of US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo from Nuclear Talks

During a sub committee hearing last week, Mike Pompeo was asked if he agreed with descriptions of Kim Jong-Un as a "tyrant", to which he then responded, "Sure, I'm sure I've said that." This prompted a senior foreign ministry official, named Kwon Jong-gun, to said that Mr Pompeo "spouted reckless remarks, hurting the dignity of our supreme leadership... to unveil his mean character" and that further talks would be "lousy" if Pompeo were to be present, asking that he be replaced by someone "more careful." He also attributes the abrupt ending of the summit in Hanoi to Pompeo, which was followed by North Korea testing a new "tactical guided weapon."

So where does this leave the nuclear talks? As of today, not much has changed since the summit at Hanoi which ended in no agreement. In Kim Jong-Un's most recent comments, he urged President Trump to pursue a deal that was "mutually acceptable" but then later spoke of his excellent ties with the Trump. This led to Trump responding on twitter, giving praise of Kim Jong-Un while also welcoming the idea of another summit.


1. Do you think Mike Pompeo's comments went too far when referring to the leader of another country? Why or why not?

2. Do you think North Korea's response was justified?

3. How should the US approach the next summit in regards to deal with is and moving towards a solution?

Source:
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-47971164