Thursday, 8 March 2018

Why You Should Wear Purple on International Women's Day





















On Election Day 2016 it was white, at the Emmys it was black, and on International Women’s Day, which lands on Thursday, March 8, it’ll be purple.
Purple is the official color of International Women’s Day, founded more than a century ago after some 15,000 women marched in New York City to demand better working conditions and voting rights. The current iteration of the day is intended to celebrate women’s social, economic, and political achievements and to call for gender equality.
And given the variety of ways different nations celebrate the day—from marches to cultural outings—there’s not an obvious wardrobe choice. The official International Women’s Day website, IWD.com, has you covered there. It explains why purple is International Women’s Day’s shade of choice:
In the past year and a half, women have relied on clothing color as symbol of protest. It started in earnest with women wearing white on Election Day 2016 to pay homage to the historic nature of the contest, which saw Hillary Clinton run as the first female candidate from a major political party. Similar to U.K. history, white was an official color of the U.S. suffrage movement that took place early last century. Clinton supporters, in particular, latched onto the #wearwhitetovote movement after the candidate appeared at the third and final presidential debate in an all-white pantsuit. (She also wore white to the final night of the Democratic National Convention.)
Women have also relied on black in recent months as a nod to the #MeToo movement and as a statement against the abusive behavior of men. Female film industry elite famously wore black to the Emmy Awards in early January, flooding the red carpet with dark ensembles in a sign of protest against Hollywood’s institutionalized sexism.
Democratic women in Congress picked up on Hollywood’s cue, donning black for President Donald Trump’s State of the Union speech in late January in protest of sexual harassment.
 If the choice of purple sounds familiar, it may be because Clinton wore a suit with a vibrant purple lapel as she gave her concession speech on November 9, 2016. Her husband Bill wore a matching purple tie. At the time, commentators suggested that the color was an acknowledgement of the shade’s ties to the suffrage movement or its significance in Methodist tradition as a sign of royalty and penitence, since Clinton is Methodist.
Clinton later revealed in her book What Happened that the purple suit was supposed to illustrate bipartisanship. She had planned to wear white in the event of an election win but “the white suit stayed in the garment bag,” she wrote.
“The morning after the election, Bill and I both wore purple,” she wrote. “It was a nod to bipartisanship (blue plus red equals purple).” 

Wednesday, 7 March 2018

What is the Hatch Act?

White House aide Kellyanne Conway on Tuesday became the latest of President Donald Trump's top employees to receive an official reprimand for violating the Hatch Act, a 1939 law that seeks to keep government functions nonpartisan.
The Office of Special Counsel, an independent agency tasked with enforcing the law, declared Conway in violation of the law two times last year, citing interviews she gave from White House grounds defending Trump's decision to back Roy Moore, who had been accused of sexual abuse, in the Alabama Senate race.
The OSC said in its letter declaring Conway in violation of the law that it would leave the matter to the President, and the White House promptly issued a statement defending Conway.
    But what exactly is the Hatch Act, and is Conway's violation out of the norm?

    What the law does

    The Office of Special Counsel -- not to be confused with the Department of Justice's special counsel investigation led by Robert Mueller -- is a unique government body charged with enforcing a handful of rules, including the Hatch Act.
    The law is supposed to stop the federal government from affecting elections or going about its activities in a partisan manner, and according to the OSC's own explanation of the rule, it applies to federal employees as well as state and local employees who work with federally funded programs. The rule is a workplace guideline, and violating it is not a crime. Responses can vary significantly after employees violate the rule, from a slap on the wrist to loss of a job.
    The OSC has its own guidelines for those covered by the Hatch Act to avoid violations, and more recently it has posted specific guidelines for social media. Some federal entities, like the Justice Department, have their own guidelines around political speech that go beyond the broad outlines of the Hatch Act.
    Complaints are somewhat routine, and the debate over high-profile violations can be sharp, with interest groups and legal experts regularly weighing in and accusing government officials of violations.
    Former FBI Director James Comey was himself at the center of a heated Hatch Act debate in the final days of the 2016 campaign. His decision to update Congress on the status of the Hillary Clinton email investigation received widespread criticism, and CNN legal analyst Steve Vladeck noted the varying Hatch Act complaints at the time, although Comey was not ultimately found in violation of the Hatch Act.
    While the debate over Comey's actions and cases like Conway's receive the lion's share of attention, the act is a routine boundary for rank-and-file government employees, who have to follow specific protocols to keep political beliefs from being perceived to affect the performance of the government.
    Just this week, the OSC handed down an announcement, citing the Hatch Act, telling employees to leave their "Make America Great Again" hats at home now that the President is officially running for re-election.

    Who has violated it?

    Conway is far from the first person in a high-profile role to violate the Hatch Act. Last year, White House social media director Dan Scavino and US Ambassador to the UN Nikki Haley both received official warnings over tweets that the OSC said broke the rules.
    Scavino got his warning in June after calling for a primary challenge to Republican Rep. Justin Amash of Michigan, and Haley got hers in October for retweeting Trump's endorsement of a Republican from her home state of South Carolina. The OSC's warning for Haley noted the Hatch Act does not apply to the president or vice president.
    Complaints have cropped up in several other instances, including for Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach, who was appointed to the now-defunct presidential commission on voter fraud, and Senate Democrats on Tuesday called on the OSC to review Federal Communications Commission member Michael O'Rielly for a potential violation of the Hatch Act after he appeared at the Conservative Political Action Conference last month.
    Likewise, two Obama administration Cabinet heads faced Hatch Act reprimands. The OSC citedHealth and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius for political comments in 2012, and Sebelius said afterward that she regretted her comments but took issue with the degree of the OSC's response.
    Obama-era Housing and Urban Development Secretary Julian Castro tried to avoid violating the law during a 2016 interview by saying he was taking off his "HUD hat for a second and just speaking individually," before boosting Clinton.
    That didn't work. In its statement announcing Castro had violated the Hatch Act, the OSC noted he was there in his official capacity and had the department seal behind him.
    •  

    Warriors vs. Nyets: Two teams that like to run
















    Only 18 games remain in the regular season, and the Golden State Warriors are hoping to finish strong, maybe even perfect - if they can manage it.
    Up tonight: the lowly Brooklyn Nyets, a team woefully mismanaged since new owner Mikhail Prokhorov bought the team in 2010.
    After nearly a decade of floundering, the team was showing some signs of life before ex-Warrior Jeremy Lin went down with a season-ending knee injury. But this team likes to run, can force turnovers, and... ok, that’s really all I got. The Warriors should blow these guys out of the water tonight...The Nets rank 25th in offensive efficiency, and 23rd in defensive rating.
    Final injury updates
    Good news first: Rookie Jordan Bell was experiencing some lower back tightness after playing for the Santa Cruz G-League team over the weekend, but he will be available tonight.
    In matchups so far this season, Kerr has favored Bell against faster, more athletic centers. While the Nets don’t necessarily have anyone who is any sort of athletic threat at center, they do run a lot (6th fastest pace in the NBA), so I’d expect either Kevon Looney or Jordan Bell to see plenty of action tonight.
    Unfortunately, David West will be out tonight with a right arm cyst.

    Gary Cohn Says He Will Resign as Trump’s Top Economic Adviser



    Gary D. Cohn, President Trump’s top economic adviser, said on Tuesday that he would resign, becoming the latest in a series of high-profile departures from the Trump administration.
    White House officials insisted that there was no single factor behind the departure of Mr. Cohn, who heads the National Economic Council. But his decision to leave came as he seemed poised to lose an internal struggle over Mr. Trump’s plan to impose large tariffs on steel and aluminum imports. Mr. Cohn had warned last week that he might resign if Mr. Trump followed through with the tariffs, which Mr. Cohn had lobbied against internally.
    “Gary has been my chief economic adviser and did a superb job in driving our agenda, helping to deliver historic tax cuts and reforms and unleashing the American economy once again,” Mr. Trump said in a statement to The New York Times. “He is a rare talent, and I thank him for his dedicated service to the American people.”
    Mr. Cohn is expected to leave in the coming weeks. He will join a string of recent departures by senior White House officials, including Mr. Trump’s communications director and a powerful staff secretary.
    Yet the departure of Mr. Cohn, a free-trade-oriented Democrat who fended off a number of nationalist-minded policies during his year in the Trump administration, could have a ripple effect on the president’s economic decisions and on the financial industry.
    It leaves Mr. Trump surrounded primarily by advisers with strong protectionist views who advocate the types of aggressive trade measures, like tariffs, that Mr. Trump campaigned on but that Mr. Cohn fought inside the White House. Mr. Cohn was viewed by Republican lawmakers as the steady hand who could prevent Mr. Trump from engaging in activities that could trigger a trade war.
    Even the mere threat, last August, that Mr. Cohn might leave sent the financial markets tumbling. On Tuesday, Mr. Cohn’s announcement rattled markets, and trading in futures pointed to a decline in the United States stock market when it opened on Wednesday.
    In a statement, Mr. Cohn said he had been pleased to work on “pro-growth economic policies to benefit the American people, in particular the passage of historic tax reform.” White House officials said that Mr. Cohn was leaving on cordial terms with the president and that they planned to discuss policy even after his departure.
    Mr. Cohn’s departure comes as the White House has been buffeted by turnover, uncertainty and internal divisions and as the president lashes out at the special counsel investigation that seems to be bearing down on his team.
    Mr. Cohn’s departure comes as the White House has been buffeted by turnover, uncertainty and internal divisions and as the president lashes out at the special counsel investigation that seems to be bearing down on his team.
    A host of top aides have been streaming out the White House door or are considering a departure. Rob Porter, the White House staff secretary and a member of the inner circle, resigned after spousal abuse allegations. Hope Hicks, the president’s communications director and confidante, announced that she would leave soon. In recent days, the president has lost a speechwriter, an associate attorney general and the North Korea negotiator.
    Others are perpetually seen as on the way out. John F. Kelly, the chief of staff, at one point broached resigning over the handling of Mr. Porter’s case. Lt. Gen. H. R. McMaster, the national security adviser, has been reported to be preparing to leave. And many officials wonder if Jared Kushner, the president’s son-in-law and senior adviser, will stay now that he has lost his top-secret security clearance; the departure of Mr. Cohn further shrinks the number of allies Mr. Kushner and his wife, Ivanka Trump, have in the White House.
    More than one in three top White House officials left by the end of Mr. Trump’s first year and fewer than half of the 12 positions closest to the president are still occupied by the same people as when he came into office, according to a Brookings Institution study.
    Mr. Cohn’s departure will bring the turnover number to 43 percent, according to updated figures compiled by Kathryn Dunn Tenpas of the Brookings Institution.
    For all the swings of the West Wing revolving door over the last year, Mr. Cohn’s decision to leave struck a different chord for people. He is among the most senior officials to resign to date.
    Mr. Trump’s announcement last week that he would levy tariffs on aluminum and steel imports was the most immediate catalyst for Mr. Cohn’s departure, according to people familiar with his thinking. A longtime proponent of free trade, Mr. Cohn believed the decision could jeopardize economic growth. The president, urged to consider the risks of losing Mr. Cohn by several advisers, appeared unconcerned, insisting that he could live without his economic adviser as he makes a more aggressive return to the nationalist policies that helped sweep him into office as the 2018 midterm elections approach.
    Mr. Cohn was familiar with Mr. Trump’s nationalist stance on trade, and the president repeatedly asked aides, “Where are my steel tariffs?” over the last eight months. Since last summer, a process for debate and information flow to the president had been in place as he made decisions. But that process has been in tatters since Mr. Porter left the White House, several aides said on Tuesday.
    What’s more, people close to the president said, Mr. Cohn had harmed his own ability to negotiate by telling Mr. Kelly last week that if the tariffs went forward, he might have to resign. The president was told by Cohn critics that Mr. Cohn had made the issue about himself, as opposed to Mr. Trump’s policies. That led to Mr. Trump souring on Mr. Cohn by the time his resignation was submitted on Tuesday. But the president was still infuriated by Mr. Cohn’s decision, according to multiple people who discussed it with the president after it was announced. In several conversations that Mr. Trump had with people on Tuesday, he denounced Mr. Cohn as a “globalist.”
    The resignation followed conversations Mr. Cohn held with the president in recent weeks about the possibility of replacing Mr. Kelly as chief of staff, said people who were briefed on the matter. The president never formally offered Mr. Cohn the job, those people insisted, but Mr. Trump had discussions with him about whether he would be interested.
    On Tuesday, before Mr. Cohn’s announcement, Mr. Trump dismissed talk of chaos in his White House while acknowledging that he deliberately fostered a fractious atmosphere. “I like conflict,” he said at a news conference with the visiting prime minister of Sweden. “I like having two people with different points of view. And I certainly have that. And then I make a decision. But I like watching it. I like seeing it. And I think it’s the best way to go.”
    But he insisted that he had no trouble recruiting or retaining people to work for him, despite widespread reluctance among Republicans to join his staff.
    “Believe me, everybody wants to work in the White House,” he said. “They all want a piece of the Oval Office. They want a piece of the West Wing.”
    People close to Mr. Cohn said that he had planned to stay for roughly a year, and that he had accomplished a number of things he cared about, including the $1.5 trillion tax cut.
    A onetime silver trader who eventually became the president of Goldman Sachs, Mr. Cohn was an unlikely addition to the administration. A lifelong Democrat known for having progressive social views, he had no political expertise and barely knew Mr. Trump. But during an unconventional job interview, Mr. Trump was impressed with Mr. Cohn’s knowledge of economics and the markets, say people who were briefed on the discussion.
    As his chief economic adviser, Mr. Cohn quickly ingratiated himself to the president. He gave blunt, practical advice, say people familiar with their interactions, and built a team of experts on issues like infrastructure and taxes. At one point, he was part of a moderate-minded coalition of staff members — including Mr. Kushner and Ms. Trump, also an adviser — who pushed for the preservation of workplace rights for gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people. He also pushed Mr. Trump to remain in the Paris climate accord, a battle he ultimately lost.
    He argued frequently over Mr. Trump’s “America First” approach to trade, jousting most recently with the White House aide Peter Navarro and Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross over the harm he believed nationalist economic policies would generate.
    Shortly after his inauguration, Mr. Trump withdrew the United States from the Trans-Pacific Partnership, an Obama-era trade agreement with a number of Asian nations. Then, on at least three occasions last year, Mr. Cohn rebuffed Mr. Navarro’s attempts to withdraw from the North American Free Trade Agreement. Mr. Cohn was also part of a group of White House aides who effectively blocked the metal tariffs on several occasions.
    Some of Mr. Cohn’s struggles on the job were painfully public. During an interview with CNBC, he once described working for Mr. Trump as a “dream come true.” Yet as the top economic adviser to a president who is often contradictory on matters of policy, he sometimes had to finesse Mr. Trump’s errors, a role that critics regarded as damaging to Mr. Cohn’s reputation.
    Mr. Cohn’s rapport with Mr. Trump has been tenuous at times.
    In August, after violent nationalist protests in Charlottesville, Va., that led to a woman’s death, Mr. Cohn was so troubled by the president’s response that he wrote a resignation letter, according to people briefed on the document. That time, Mr. Trump persuaded him to stay. But, loath to hide his feelings on the matter, he publicly criticized his boss, saying in a Financial Times interview that the administration “can and must do better”to condemn hate groups.
    Late last year, Mr. Navarro was placed under Mr. Cohn’s supervision and asked to copy him on emails, effectively neutering his effect on policy for a time. But a tumultuous period in the White House in February resulted in Mr. Navarro’s re-ascendance, and with that, his protectionist policy agenda.

    Mr. Cohn, who officials said has not set a firm departure date, will probably take a month or so to regroup after leaving, according to someone familiar with his thinking. Possibilities he has considered for a next step, said this person, include opening up his own investment firm or, according to two people familiar with his thinking, a more senior job in the Trump administration.

    Megan Barry, Nashville Mayor, Pleads Guilty to Theft and Agrees to Resign
























    NASHVILLE — It was an abrupt and disappointing end to a mayoralty for which many in Nashville had once harbored great hopes.
    On Tuesday, Mayor Megan Barry brought her two-and-a-half year run as the city’s first female chief executive to a dramatic close, pleading guilty to a felony charge of theft of property and announcing her resignation. The move capped a turbulent five weeks in which she acknowledged having an affair with the head of her security detail, and faced persistent questions about whether she misspent taxpayer money.
    Ms. Barry, 54, had wowed Nashville’s large contingent of liberal voters during a 2015 election with her support for gay rights and a promise to bring a world-class transit system to a city where rapid growth and a burgeoning reputation as a hub for young creatives have generated both excitement and anxiety.
    But Ms. Barry’s wonkish policy goals were eclipsed by details of her affair with former Sgt. Robert Forrest Jr. of the Metro Nashville Police Department, who led the mayoral security detail before retiring in January. Mr. Forrest also pleaded guilty on Tuesday to the same charge as Ms. Barry’s.
    A contrite but forthright Ms. Barry admitted the affair on Jan. 31. But questions lingered about the city business trips that the pair took, often alone, at taxpayer expense. More recently, reports surfaced of their numerous early-morning meetings in an S.U.V. in a city graveyard. And a special agent for the Tennessee Bureau of Investigation disclosed in court documents that the bureau had discovered nude photos of a woman on Mr. Forrest’s city email account. In the documents, the agent indicated a suspicion that the photos were of the mayor.
    Nashvilleans have obsessed over the story in recent days. In a #MeToo era in which power dynamics and questions of workplace relationships have also been subject to fresh scrutiny and debate, some have puzzled over the ramifications of a married woman in a position of authority engaging in a consensual relationship with a subordinate.
    For others, the news was also distressingly personal, coming months after the city rallied to help Ms. Barry mourn her 22-year-old son, who died of a drug overdose in July.
    On Tuesday morning, a visibly shaken Ms. Barry read a prepared statement at City Hall, in a room packed with reporters. She spoke of an optimistic city that would continue its positive trajectory.
    “It is a continued climb that I will watch, but I will watch as a private citizen,” she said. “And I will be tremendously proud nonetheless.”
    Moments earlier, in a courtroom across the street, Ms. Barry had agreed to serve three years of probation and pay restitution to the city after pleading guilty to the theft charge.
    In a court document, the Bureau of Investigation indicated that it was looking closely at the 26 out-of-town trips Ms. Barry had taken with Mr. Forrest since April 2016, which was roughly when the affair began. Ms. Barry and Mr. Forrest, who was also married at the time of the affair, were the sole travelers for 10 of the trips, according to the document.
    As part of her probation, Ms. Barry was ordered to reimburse the local government $11,000 in “unlawful expenditures” used to pay Mr. Forrest’s travel expenses. She paid the restitution on Tuesday, prosecutors said.
    Separately, Mr. Forrest also received three years of probation on Tuesday. According to prosecutors, Mr. Forrest must give back $45,000 that he was paid improperly “during times when he was not performing his duties.”
    After the guilty pleas, Glenn Funk, the local prosecutor, met with agents from the bureau and told them they could close their investigation. If Ms. Barry and Mr. Forrest complete probation successfully, they can petition the court to have their criminal records expunged.
    Vice Mayor David Briley was sworn in as mayor on Tuesday afternoon, providing what will likely be ideological continuity at City Hall. Like Ms. Barry, Mr. Briley is a Democrat and a known quantity in city politics, having served eight years on the consolidated city-county council.
    Mr. Briley, the grandson of Beverly Briley, who served as mayor from 1963 to 1975, supports the multibillion-dollar public transit plan that might had been Ms. Barry’s signature achievement. Voters will consider the plan in a May referendum.
    A Vanderbilt University poll last year showed that Ms. Barry enjoyed a 72 percent overall approval rate. A similar poll taken by Vanderbilt after her admission of the affair put her approval at 61 percent.
    Many residents seemed willing to initially overlook the drama in her personal life, but there remained a lingering concern that the complications extended beyond questions of romance and into matters of public funds.
    The editorial board of The Tennessean, the major local newspaper, called on her to resign in a Feb. 28 column, arguing that Ms. Barry, a former corporate ethics and compliance officer, had “arguably violated” an anti-corruption executive order she had signed in 2016. The Tennessee Tribune, a publication that focuses on African-American issues, called for her resignation on March 1.
    The City Council voted last month to create a special committee to investigate the trips. On Tuesday, Councilman John Cooper, a frequent critic of Ms. Barry’s policies, said the committee would probably continue its inquiry, focusing on the way city expenses are handled.
    “I do think that, as much of a complicated tragedy as this is as a personal story, Nashville will survive this,” Mr. Cooper said.
    At the Hotel Indigo, a short walk from City Hall, news of Ms. Barry’s fate traveled fast. Casey Rauscher, 30, a valet parking attendant, said that he thought Ms. Barry had done good work as mayor, making sure the city’s growth was “positive growth.”

    But he also said she was right to step down. “I don’t think you should be able to steal in political office and get away with it,” he said.

    P.S.G. Tumbles Out of Champions League, Left Again to Face the Bill Without the Prize























    PARIS — The excuses are there, the mitigating circumstances and the shallow solaces, for those determined to find them.

    Maybe it would all have been different had Neymar been here, and not in Brazil, resting and recovering from surgery on his foot. Maybe he would have been able to inspire Paris Saint-Germain to victory against Real Madrid on home turf, even if he proved unable to do so three weeks ago in hostile territory.

    Maybe if Marco Verratti had been able to control his temper, rather than charging at the German referee Felix Brych, his face bright with fury, simply because he had not been afforded a free kick, P.S.G. might have been able to mount a stirring comeback. A few minutes after Verratti was sent off, after all, Edinson Cavani scored, offering his team a scintilla of hope. With 10 men, that was all it could be; with 11, P.S.G. would have been a more imposing proposition.
    But it is worth considering the teams that have stymied P.S.G.’s ambitions along the way. It has been eliminated in the quarterfinals four times in the last six seasons, twice by Barcelona, and once each (narrowly) by Chelsea and Manchester City. The last two years, it has fallen in the round of 16 against Barcelona and Real Madrid. It is hardly being brought to its knees by minnows.








    Indeed, in December, when the pairings for the last 16 of this tournament were confirmed, P.S.G. might have drawn Basel, or F.C. Porto, or Sevilla; had it done so, it would surely be in the quarterfinals today. Instead, it was forced to play the team that has won three of the last four Champions League titles, that seems to excel in this competition by sheer force of personality alone. Fortune, once again, was not on P.S.G.’s side.

    But none of that should disguise quite how callow, how dismal, P.S.G.’s elimination was. This is a team that has been constructed, at almost unimaginable cost, to win the Champions League. As its coach, Unai Emery, said Tuesday, losing to Real Madrid is no embarrassment. “It is a team of champions,” he said.
    He did not say that losing like this is, or should be. P.S.G., a team that cost half a billion dollars, did not rage against its fate. It did not hurl all it had at Real’s defense, ending the game breathless and broken, fighting for pride, if nothing else. It simply accepted — as soon as Cristiano Ronaldo scored, as he always does in the Champions League — that, once again, it was going to fall short.Photo

    Emery’s players slowed almost to walking pace. Their passing, hardly sharp at any point in the evening, grew increasingly lazy, wayward. They were careless. They were aimless. They wandered around, as if in a daze. It is one thing not to be able to execute a plan. It is quite another not to seem to care what the plan is, or was.

    They were waiting for what they had decided was inevitable, for the blissful release of Brych’s whistle, for the chance to return to what they do best: beating French teams with a fraction of their budget by six- and seven-goal margins. That is where this team really comes into its own.

    This defeat — just like all those defeats in the last six years — does, at least, provide some answers. We now know, for example, that Emery, whose contract would have automatically renewed if he had guided his team to the semifinals, will not be its manager next year.
    He was forgiven one failure last year — “we must not allow emotion to dictate our actions,” the club’s chairman, Nasser al-Khelaifi, said in the aftermath of that humiliating loss to Barcelona — but he will not survive a second, and he most likely would not expect to. It is open to debate quite how satisfying he has found his work here, anyway, trying to pick his way through a forest of delicate egos, political necessities and sporting realities.
    Mainly, though, the latest elimination brought questions, ones that are growing ever more pressing. What now? How does P.S.G. respond not just to this defeat, but to this pattern of defeats? Does Khelaifi do what he has always done and bankroll yet another market-contorting spending spree, even if it means running yet more risks with UEFA’s rules on Financial Fair Play?
    If money has not brought a solution thus far — P.S.G. already possesses Neymar, the world’s most expensive player, and will make Kylian MbappĂ© No. 2 when he completes a permanent move from Monaco this summer — is it rational to assume that it will at some point? Has Paris Saint-Germain, the club that has blown all of its rivals, with only two teams in Manchester as exceptions, out of the water with its checkbook, simply not spent enough?
    Or is it time to look at the problem from another angle, to assume that perhaps success in soccer does not simply come from accumulating as much talent as possible and seeing what happens?

    What stood out on this most chastising of evenings was not some technical deficiency. Real Madrid did not win because it had better players. It won because of its character, its strength of mind, what its coach, Zinedine Zidane, described as a “trust in what we are doing.”

    P.S.G. does not have that, and it showed. In the moments after Ronaldo’s goal just after halftime, when all seemed lost, it had nothing to fall back on, and so it fell apart instead.

    P.S.G. can make excuses. It can hope for its luck to turn. It can spend more money; it can always spend more money. Maybe that will work, this time. But maybe it will not, and we will all be back here next year, too, asking the same questions, and getting the same empty answers.












    Tuesday, 6 March 2018

    Today is Gabriel García Márquez's 91st Birthday. What to Know About the Master of Magical Realism

    On what would have been his 91st birthday, Google Doodle is celebrating Gabriel GarcĂ­a Márquez, or “Gabo,” as the man once called “the greatest Colombian who ever lived” was affectionately known.
    In GarcĂ­a Márquez’s novels angels fall to Earth and become carnival attractions, magic carpets fly and priests levitate. The Colombian author defined the genre of magical realism, in which the mundane and the fantastic occur with equal plausibility. He said he was inspired by the unbelievability of Latin American history — an illusory Eldorado plagued by conquistadors, despots and revolutions.
    “We have had to ask but little of imagination, for our crucial problem has been a lack of conventional means to render our lives believable,” he said in his acceptance speech for the Nobel Prize in Literature, which he won in 1982.
    Born in Aracataca, Colombia On March 6, 1927, he was raised by his maternal grandparents. He attributed his gift for storytelling to his grandfather, a hero of the Thousand Days War, when Liberal generals revolted against the ruling Conservatives. GarcĂ­a Márquez attributed his fascination with the supernatural to his grandmother’s belief in ghosts, omen and portents.
    He showed a passion for writing early on, and studied journalism, as well as law to please his father, at the Universidad Nacional de Colombia in Bogota. After bloody riots and the assassination of a popular presidential candidate led to the closure of his university in 1948, GarcĂ­a Márquez quit school to become a journalist.
    “I’ve always been convinced that my true profession is that of a journalist. What I didn’t like about journalism before were the working conditions,” he told the Paris Review in 1981.
    After more than a decade as a reporter, columnist, foreign correspondent and editor, during which he covered, and by some accounts assisted, in the coup in Venezuela in 1958, García Márquez moved his family to Mexico City and launched into his career as a novelist. In 1967, he published One Hundred Years of Solitude, which catapulted his literary career to an international stage. The book became a touchstone for magical realism, and a defining moment for literature in the 20th century. García Márquez went on to pen more than 25 books, including short-story collections, non-fiction works and screenplays.

    Throughout his life, GarcĂ­a Márquez, a committed Leftist, remained politically active, considering himself a writer of the revolution. He kindled a close, storied friendship with Cuban leader Fidel Castro, and vocally opposed right-wing leaders like Chile’s General Augusto Pinochet.

    GarcĂ­a Márquez became a Nobel laureate even before he wrote some of his other prominent works, including Love in the Time of Cholera and Of Love and Other Demons.

    Tuesday’s Google Doodle depicts the colorful Amazonian jungle and the magical city of Macondo, brought to live in A Hundred Years of Solitude. Entwined in the Doodle are aspects from GarcĂ­a Márquez’s book, such as the city of mirrors, mysterious gypsies and fish made of pure gold.





    García Márquez died in his home in Mexico in 2014. He was 87.