Thứ Ba, 30 tháng 10, 2018

Waching daily Oct 30 2018

Vietnam's movie business is growing quickly.

New theaters are being built across the country.

Young filmmakers are entering the market.

In the past, movies about Vietnam centered on Hollywood's ideas about the Vietnam War.

They starred American actors with Vietnamese playing background parts.

But this is changing.

Ngo Thanh Van became an international movie star with her part in the latest version of

Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon.

Now she has turned to directing.

Her newest film is called The Tailor.

It will be Vietnam's official entry for next year's Academy Awards in the foreign

language category.

"Making movies in the Vietnamese market is a risky business, not just for me," Van

told the internet news site Zing.

"But it is because it is difficult that I want to put all my heart into doing it."

Increasing interest is coming from both Vietnamese filmmakers and Vietnamese movie-goers.

The theater group CGV reported a 30 percent increase in profits for 2017 compared to the

year before.

CGV is just one company that shows movies, but it controls nearly half the movie theaters

in the Southeast Asian country.

Critics call it a monopoly, but its market position shows the industry's growth.

Besides the South Korean-owned CGV, other movie theater companies in Vietnam include

BHD, Galaxy, Skyline, Cinestar, Cinebox and Lotte.

The theaters are trying to meet demand for movies in an economy

that is expanding at a rate of nearly 7 percent every year.

Vietnam's growth has caused companies like Netflix, and another streaming service, iflix,

to get into the Vietnamese market.

The investment advice company Investar wrote in an analysis of the film industry: "When

a country develops, the next developmental need will be entertainment, so it is important

to capture this demand."

It also said that money is being invested in the business.

The growth of Vietnamese movies comes as more Vietnamese and Vietnamese-American actors

appear in international films.

The Netflix movie To All the Boys I've Loved Before stars a Vietnamese-American born in

the Mekong Delta area.

In Downsizing, actor Matt Damon performs with Hong Chau, who uses a thick Vietnamese accent

but earned a Golden Globe nomination.

And people with Vietnamese ancestry are returning.

American actors, directors, producers and film editors have returned to Vietnam in recent

years, like Johnny Tri and Charlie Nguyen.

Filmmakers from France, a former colonial ruler of Vietnam, have also arrived, such

as two French-Vietnamese who set up an animation business in Ho Chi Minh City.

Performer Nguyen Cao Ky Duyen said on her Facebook page, "If you support Vietnamese

movies, the movies will be profitable, and investors will put in more money."

She added that Vietnam has plenty of beautiful areas to film movies.

Kong: Skull Island is a good example of a successful movie filmed in Vietnam.

It is the latest version of the famous King Kong movies.

It includes pictures of the green waters of Halong Bay, a UNESCO World Heritage place.

The film also signaled an important change in movies in Vietnam.

The film takes place during the Vietnam War.

But, it celebrates the performances of Samuel L. Jackson and Brie Larson and the natural

beauty of the country.

Vietnamese-language films are being watched around the world.

They include films like Cyclo and The White Silk Dress.

Local people hope those are just the start of a growing trend.

"We know that Vietnamese movies are not yet equal with neighboring countries, because

we are still in a period of opening up," said Ky Duyen.

"But that does not mean that we will not catch up."

India has Bollywood.

Nigeria has Nollywood.

Vietnam may soon develop its own version: Vollywood.

I'm Susan Shand

The man who has been named to be Iraq's Prime Minister Adel Abdul-Mahdi is trying

to find a way to reduce corruption in government.

To build his government, he opened a website where anyone can apply to run one of Iraq's

22 ministries.

These jobs have long been linked to patronage and other forms of corruption.

Local media reported that, within days, his office received more than 15,000 applications.

He will have meetings with 601 candidates.

It is unclear if Abdul-Mahdi can change how Iraq's government is run.

Many political parties have their own militias and threaten to create problems for Iraq if

they do not get their members in the ministries they desire.

Others are asking whether it is wise to give government jobs to those with little experience.

Hisham al-Dahabi is a social worker and philanthropist.

He said, "I'm fifty-fifty," meaning that he half supports the plan and half does

not.

He said he applied to be the minister of labor and social affairs.

That position organizes services and pensions for veterans and their families.

Al-Dahabi said he does not believe Iraq's political parties will give up their hold

on ministry jobs.

Recently, he spoke to reporters and hosted a delegation from a European embassy at the

orphanage he operates in Baghdad.

Children cried for his attention and called him "Baba," Arabic for "Dad."

He had not told them that he had applied to be a minister, and he thought he probably

would not get the job.

It was a campaign by friends and supporters, he said, that led him to apply.

One week later, al-Dahabi met the prime minister-designate.

He said only that they had discussed ways to improve the lives of Iraqi children.

Abdul-Mahdi has remained quiet about his cabinet appointments.

His office refused a request to speak to reporters.

By law, he has until November 2 to appoint his ministers.

Then, parliament must approve them before they are sworn in.

Iraq's official newspaper, Al-Sabah, said Monday that 15 appointments could come this

week.

The others, the newspaper said, would be named later.

Many people think it is unlikely Abdul-Mahdi will be able to make big changes at the ministries.

But the website may help his image as a political reformer.

Many Iraqis are angry with party politics.

In parliamentary elections in May, only 44 percent of those who could vote completed

ballots.

That is the lowest number since elections started.

Iraqis gave the most votes to a list of candidates chosen by cleric Muqtada al-Sadr.

Al-Sadr had promised to provide a "government of technocrats."

Abdul-Mahdi is an economist.

He has worked as oil minister, finance minister and vice president since returning from exile

in 2003.

Many Iraqis consider him a political independent.

He is Iraq's first prime minister in 12 years who is not from the Dawa Party.

The party is blamed for many of the country's problems, such as the growth of militias and

poor government services.

Alaa Khudair is a retired government worker.

Khudair said the website was a good way to take power away from the parties that have

failed to "speak for Iraqis."

But political activist Yahya al-Hafiz warned that, if any of the applicants are appointed

ministers, they will be put in a difficult political environment.

"The political parties are refusing to go along…This is a government that works on

favors and deals.

It's impossible to think they're going to give that up," he said.

But Al-Dahabi said he and other experts are not afraid.

"At least we have some experience," he said.

I'm Susan Shand.

An American law that blocks placement of Native American children with non-native American

families was ruled illegal earlier this month.

A federal judge in Texas announced the decision, surprising many native groups.

The judge said the Indian Child Welfare Act, or ICWA, of 1978, is unfair.

He said it gives Native Americans seeking to adopt children favorable treatment based

on race.

He said that violates the equal protection guarantee in the U.S. Constitution.

Most tribes see the ruling as a continuation of years of culturally destructive U.S. government

policies.

Children are responsible for continuing the cultures and traditions of their tribes.

So, they argue, native children need to remain in native homes.

Iva Johnson is a member of the Navajo Nation.

She was living in Arizona in 2015 when she had a heart attack at her home.

After waking up days later, two women she did not recognize were sitting nearby.

They explained that they were with the Department of Child Safety (DCS).

They said they were removing three of her four children from their home because there

was no one to care for them.

Johnson was too sick to speak.

She wanted to tell them that her oldest child is 21 years old and able to care for the three

children.

Before she could speak, the women forced her to sign a document that gave her three younger

children up for adoption.

It took three years of court action before Johnson was reunited with her children.

They had been separated from each other and spent time in different non-Native homes.

Congress passed ICWA forty years ago in order to prevent such events.

At that time, as many as one-third of all Native American children had been taken from

their families and placed in non-native homes.

Stephen Pevar is a lawyer for the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU).

He explains how ICWA works.

"Before you can place an Indian child in a non-Indian home, you have to first look

for another member of the immediate family, then another member of the tribe, then another

Indian family before you can place that child in a non-Indian home."

Johnson says that the DCS in Arizona failed to follow the law.

DCS officials did not answer VOA's request for comment.

Today, Johnson, like many Native Americans, worries that such court rulings could cause

many more native families to lose their children.

Social isolation, poverty and poor health care services on many Native American reservations

have added to the rise in rates of alcohol and drug abuse rates and crime related to

such problems.

A 2014 examination of child removal cases in Pennington County, South Dakota, showed

that alcohol abuse was involved in more than half of the removals.

Violence in the home was noted in 22 percent of cases.

Child abuse was given as a reason in nine percent of all cases.

Children who are removed from their homes and placed with strangers suffer higher rates

of mental health problems, including drug and alcohol dependency.

Parents who lose their children suffer loss, guilt and shame.

"And it's even worse when you place somebody in a different culture, which is usually what

happens to Indian children," said ACLU lawyer Pevar.

Jase Roe is 41 years old.

He agrees.

He was born on the Northern Cheyenne Reservation in Montana but taken from his mother when

he was a baby.

At first, he lived with a relative in Minnesota.

He was later sent to a non-native home.

"Everything was different there," he said.

"They didn't understand my culture or where I was coming from.

They didn't understand the humor that goes along with my culture or the way we interact

with each other."

One of the only minority students in school, Roe said he was always treated badly.

"I grew up ashamed of who I was, ashamed of being Native," he said.

"I wished I was white."

Roe became dependent on alcohol and other drugs at an early age.

It took him many years to break free of them.

"It took a lot of work," he said, "and I'm still in therapy…."

Roe said he believes placing native children in non-native homes does more harm than good.

"It doesn't give them a sense of who they are," he said.

The U.S. Department of the Interior is against ending ICWA.

They say groups that support children's rights consider it to be the best example

of children's interest policies.

Pevar said he is not worried about attacks on the law.

He said, "There have been challenges to ICWA from Day One."

Yet, he thinks the law will stay.

I'm Dorothy Gundy.

Water is a necessary resource for the health and survival of living things.

But the availability of fresh water is decreasing for much of the world's population.

The United Nations estimates that about 3.6 billion people currently live in areas that

face water shortages at least once a month.

Officials expect this number to keep rising with continued population growth, economic

development and climate change.

Many companies and non-profit organizations have attempted to find new ways to deal with

the crisis.

One of them is The Skysource/Skywater Alliance, an American business in Venice, California.

Experts there developed a machine that can make water from air.

The invention is seen as having great promise.

It won an international award for proposed solutions to ease the world's water crisis.

The system's creators were awarded the XPrize for Water Abundance.

The award – which includes a $1.5-million prize – sought ideas for "creating water

from thin air."

The husband and wife team of David Hertz and Laura Doss-Hertz won the award.

They are the co-founders of The Skysource/Skywater Alliance.

Hertz owns a business that specializes in creating environmentally friendly homes.

But he decided to begin water experiments when he learned that water can be made from

air under the right conditions.

Hertz and Doss-Hertz worked with another partner to build a small machine that was able to

produce about 570 liters of water a day.

Then, Hertz heard about the XPrize.

He and his team decided to create a larger water-making machine to compete for the award.

The competition had three main requirements.

Devices had to produce at least 2,000 liters of water per day from the atmosphere.

They had to operate at a cost of no more than 2 cents per liter.

And the devices had to use 100 percent renewable energy.

Hertz and his team settled on a design built from shipping containers.

The device heats up wood pieces to warm the air and produce humidity.

Water is then collected from the process.

Hertz told the Associated Press that his team chose shipping containers because they do

not cost a lot of money and are generally easy to move.

And there are a lot of them.

If wood is not available, Hertz says people can use other materials to produce heat.

These could include coconut pieces, rice, walnut shells, cut grass or many kinds of

waste material.

Matthew Stuber is a professor of chemical and biomolecular engineering at the University

of Connecticut.

He is also an expert on water systems.

He served as a judge for the XPrize.

He told the AP that the winning team's design can make the machine useful in many areas

of the world that have serious water issues.

"Certainly in regions where you have a lot of biomass this is going to be a very simple

technology to deploy," he said.

Stuber called the invention a "really cool" mix of simple technologies.

He said this makes it easier for the devices to be moved quickly to provide water to areas

hit by natural disasters or drought.

Hertz and Doss-Hertz told the AP that bringing machines to people is now one of their main

goals.

They plan on using their new prize winnings to help make it a reality.

"Laura and I have committed to using all (the money) for the development and deployment

of these machines," Hertz said.

"To get them to people who need the water most."

I'm Bryan Lynn.

Each year, millions of people visit the 4,570-meter-high Baishui Glacier in southern China.

Scientists say it is one of the world's fastest-melting glaciers.

The huge body of ice is in the southeastern edge of a Central Asian region called the

Third Pole.

It is about 4.5 million square kilometers in area and holds the world's third largest

collection of ice after Antarctica and Greenland.

Third Pole glaciers are critical to billions of people from Vietnam to Afghanistan.

Seasonal glacier melts feed Asia's 10 largest rivers, including the Yangtze, Yellow, Mekong,

and Ganges.

Ashley Johnson is an energy, trade and economics expert at the National Bureau of Asian Research,

based in the United States.

She says the Third Pole is one of the world's largest sources of fresh drinking water.

She says an increase in melting from climate change may put that at risk.

Johnson said, "Depending on how it melts, a lot of the freshwater will be leaving the

region for the ocean, which will have severe impacts on water and food security."

Earth is one degree Centigrade hotter than in pre-industrial times.

The United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change recently reported that that

rise is enough to melt 28 to 44 percent of glaciers worldwide.

And temperatures are expected to keep rising.

Baishui is about as close to the equator as Tampa, Florida.

And the effects from climate change are already extreme.

A report this year in the Journal of Geophysical Research showed that the glacier has lost

60 percent of its mass.

Since 1982, it has shrunk by 250 meters.

In 2015, scientists found that 82 percent of glaciers studied in China had decreased

in size.

They warned that the effects of glacier melting on water resources are becoming "increasingly

serious" for China.

Jonna Nyman is an energy security expert at the University of Sheffield in England.

She said, "China has always had a freshwater supply problem with 20 percent of the world's

population but only 7 percent of its freshwater.

"That's heightened by the impact of climate change," she added.

For years, scientists have observed global warming change Jade Dragon Snow Mountain in

the Chinese province of Yunnan.

One research team has recorded Baishui's decrease at about 27 meters per year over

the last 10 years.

Wang Shijin is a glacier expert and director of the Yulong Snow Mountain Glacial and Environmental

Observation Research Station.

The station is part of a group of stations run by the Chinese Academy of Sciences.

Wang notes that flowers have rooted and grow in the area once covered with ice.

The research station that houses Wang and his team is outside Lijiang, a city of about

1.2 million people.

The team uses special equipment to collect data on temperature, wind speed and rainfall.

Other devices measure water flow in streams fed by melted ice.

Cold temperatures, heavy rain, falling rocks, strong winds and glacier movement can damage

the equipment.

One recent morning the team had to replace a broken weather research station.

However, the difficult weather conditions will ensure Yunnan has plenty of freshwater.

In other areas, glacier loss creates serious risk of a dry period across the Third Pole,

Wang said.

The next day, the team had to wear special ice climbing footwear while repairing other

research devices on the glacier.

Wang spoke of how the area had changed.

He said, "Where we're at right now was back in 2008 all covered with ice.

From here to there at the side, the glacier shrank about 20 to 30 meters."

The team crossed streams and jumped across deep, narrow divides in the glacier.

They were looking for some measuring equipment they had placed in the ice earlier.

The equipment shows how much the glacier has moved and the amount it dropped in height

over the summer.

One team member launched a camera drone over the Third Pole.

The images it captured help tell a story of extreme loss: 25 percent of its ice and four

of its 19 glaciers have disappeared since 1957.

Wang said such changes to the Baishui glacier provide the chance to educate visitors about

global warming.

Last year, Yulong Snow Mountain park officials reported that 2.6 million visitors came to

the mountain.

On a recent windy day, hundreds of visitors climbed wooden stairs to take pictures in

front of the glacier.

One visitor named Hou Yugang said he was not too concerned about climate change and Baishui's

melting.

"I don't think about it now because it still has a long way to go," he said.

To protect the glacier, officials have limited the number of visitors to 10,000 a day and

have banned hiking on the ice.

China plans to create snow there and block streams to increase the amount of water in

the air, which slows melting.

Security guard Yang Shaofeng is a member of the local Naxi minority community.

It considers Jade Dragon Snow Mountain to be sacred.

Yang says he remembers being able to see the glacier's lowest edge from his home village.

But that time has passed.

"Only when we climb up can we see it," he said sadly.

I'm ­Ashley Thompson.

And I'm Caty Weaver.

United States health officials say an estimated 80,000 people died of influenza and problems

resulting from the flu last winter.

The director for the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) reported the

number to The Associated Press.

It represents the largest number of flu deaths nationwide in at least 40 years.

Health experts were expecting the winter of 2017-2018 to be a bad year for flu deaths,

but not that bad.

Doctor William Schaffner is an expert on vaccines.

He works at Vanderbilt University in Tennessee.

Schaffner noted that 80,000 deaths is nearly two times as much as what health officials

once considered a "bad year."

CDC officials say that between 12,000 and 56,000 Americans die every year from flu-related

causes.

While 80,000 deaths seems high, the exact number could be even higher.

CDC officials do not have an exact count of how many people die from the flu each year.

Influenza is a relatively common disease and not all flu cases are reported.

Also, flu is not always listed on death records as the official cause of death.

For that reason, the CDC must estimate the number of dead based on statistical models.

While last winter was a bad flu season in the U.S., it was not the worst.

The 1918 flu pandemic lasted nearly two years.

Historians estimate that the disease was to blame for between 500,000 to 700,000 deaths

during that period.

The exact number is still not known.

One thing that made the 2017-2018 flu season so bad was that the strain of the flu virus

was strong.

Usually the disease kills the very young, the very old or those who are already sick.

However, last winter, the flu killed many healthy Americans.

Another thing that made the flu season so deadly was that the flu vaccine was not as

effective as experts had predicted.

In a 2017 statement to the press, the World Health Organization said that every year up

to 650,000 deaths are connected with influenza or influenza-related illnesses.

This is a new estimate by the U.S. CDC, the WHO and global health partners.

This is more than the global estimate from ten years ago.

At that time, experts estimated that between 250,000 to 500,000 people died from influenza

or influenza-related illnesses.

Back in the U.S., health officials are predicting a weaker strain of flu virus this coming winter.

Drug makers have made changes to the vaccine.

Even though the vaccine did not work well last year, health experts still strongly suggest

getting vaccinated.

I'm Anna Matteo.

Americans learned last week of pipe bombs sent by mail to Democratic Party political

leaders and other critics of President Donald Trump.

The leaders included former President Barack Obama and his Vice President Joe Biden, former

Secretary of State and 2016 presidential candidate Hillary Clinton and several current lawmakers.

No bombs exploded and no one was hurt.

On Friday, U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions announced that Cesar Sayoc of Florida was

arrested and charged with the crimes.

He added that the suspect, a 56-year-old Republican Party member and Trump supporter, in Sessions'

words, "appears to be a partisan."

News of the arrest seemed to give the country a moment to breathe before the Nov. 6 mid-term

elections.

The voting could change the balance of power in Congress.

However, not even 24 hours later, a mass shooter killed 11 people in a Jewish religious center

in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.

The gunman, Robert Bowers, said "all Jews must die" as he surrendered to police.

"It's like our country is becoming 'The Hunger Games,'" Elisa Karem Parker, an

independent voter from Kentucky told the Associated Press.

The book and film series "The Hunger Games," is set in a future in which citizens watch

on television as young people hunt and kill one another in a survival competition.

The mail-bomb plot is the latest in a series of attacks against members of both political

parties.

In June 2017, a liberal activist attacked Republican Party lawmakers and supporters

on a ballfield near Washington.

The gunman shot and injured Congressman Steve Scalise of Louisiana and several other people.

A couple months later, a white supremacist killed a 32-year-old woman and wounded 19

other people in Charlottesville, Virginia.

The attacker drove his car into a crowd that had gathered to protest a white supremacist

demonstration.

More recently, officials accused a former Navy serviceman of mailing letters filled

with the poison ricin to President Trump, Defense Secretary Jim Mattis, and other members

of the administration.

"I just can't believe the kind of violence that we're experiencing in our country,"

Cindy Jennings of Pittsburgh told the AP at a ceremony to honor the victims of Saturday's

shooting.

"I feel like the leadership in our country right now is just encouraging violence, and

I wish that that would stop."

Robb Willer is a sociology professor at Stanford University.

He said, "That is the question of our time: Are we going to choose to continue the war,

or are we going to choose peace?"

Willer suggested that most Americans disliked the political divisions but feel trapped in

them.

He said, "It will get worse before it gets better."

A Pew Research Center study this month of Republican and Democratic voters shows just

how wide the political divisions in America have grown.

Democratic

voters say the most important issues facing the country

are mistreatment of minorities, climate change, the divide between rich and poor, gun violence

and racism.

In contrast, Republicans view illegal immigration, terrorism, crime, federal budget deficit and

drug dependence as the biggest problems for the U.S.

Seventy-nine percent of voters who support Republicans say they also support the National

Rifle Association, a gun rights group.

Only 12 percent of Democratic Party voters express support for the NRA.

Sixty percent of Democrats describe themselves as "feminist."

The percentage of Republicans who do so is 14.

A little more than 75 percent of Democratic voters call themselves "environmentalist,"

while only 44 percent of Republicans describe themselves as such.

Something both Democrats and Republicans agree about?

Having their own party in control of Congress after the elections "really matters."

I'm Caty Weaver.

Germany's Angela Merkel says she will not seek a fifth term as chancellor in 2021.

In an announcement on Monday, Merkel also said she would step down as leader of her

conservative Christian Democratic Union, or CDU party, in December.

Merkel, who is 64, has served as chancellor since 2005.

She has led the CDU since 2000.

Her decision to step down as party leader came after the CDU suffered setbacks in local

elections in recent weeks.

Merkel currently leads Germany as part of a "grand coalition" of the country's

biggest political parties.

These include the CDU and its partner in the southern state of Bavaria, the Christian Social

Union, or CSU.

The center-left Social Democratic Party, or SPD, is also part of the coalition.

Her current coalition began its leadership in March after six months of difficult political

negotiations.

Her party's latest election setback happened Sunday in the central state of Hesse.

Merkel's CDU party narrowly finished in first place, while suffering an 11-point drop

from the last election in 2013.

The SPD also suffered losses.

Sunday's voting followed a state election in Bavaria two weeks ago, in which the SPD

and CSU also suffered major setbacks.

The losses came as support has increased for Germany's Green Party as well as the anti-immigrant

Alternative for Germany, or AfD.

Merkel told reporters in Berlin that, after leading the CDU for 18 years, she felt "today

it is time to start a new chapter."

Merkel added that she would "not aim for any other political office."

Observers had widely expected that Merkel would not seek another term in office after

2021.

But her announcement marked the first public confirmation of it.

Merkel has said in the past that she believed the chancellor should also serve as party

leader.

But on Monday, she said she had decided that splitting the two jobs may help strengthen

the party.

She said she would not interfere in the choice for her successor.

Merkel also said she hoped her decision to step down would permit "the government to

concentrate its strength, finally, on governing well."

She added: "People rightly demand that."

Growing anti-immigrant feelings in Germany have fueled support for the AfD in recent

years.

In one of her most debated political decisions, Merkel approved the acceptance of more than

one million refugees during Europe's migrant crisis in 2015.

Many of the arrivals were fleeing fighting in Syria.

Her decision led to lasting tensions within the conservative movement.

Merkel later accepted more restrictive migration policies.

I'm Bryan Lynn.

For more infomation >> News October 30, 2018 (For English learners) - Duration: 53:40.

-------------------------------------------

Conway defends Trump's birthright citizenship plan - Duration: 6:50.

For more infomation >> Conway defends Trump's birthright citizenship plan - Duration: 6:50.

-------------------------------------------

Icelandic Lava Show Media Coverage (RÚV NEWS) - Duration: 2:04.

A young couple were so mesmerized by the eruption

at Fimmvörðuháls in 2010 that they risked everything

to found a volcano show where they replicate

how lava flows in nature.

Husband and wife, Ragnhildur and Júlíus

are the founders of Icelandic Lava Show in Vík, Iceland

The idea came during the volcano eruption at Fimmvörðuháls in 2010.

We were completely blown away

and when the eruption stopped

we started thinking if it would be possible

to recreate the situation.

They started from there and have worked

towards opening the show during the past few years.

We came in contact with two American professors

that had been melting lava as part of a science project

and we contacted them

and started a cooperation

and what we really do is that we melt lava

we melt basalt

up to 1100 degrees Celcius

and then we pour that into the showroom and over ice.

This has never been done anywhere else in the world

that is to make it possible for people to

experience, in a secure way,

real flowing lava

in such close proximity.

This is exactly how it happens in nature

just at a smaller scale.

There are seats for 50 people in the showroom

Ragnhildur says this is done on purpose as they wanted

to ensure that everyone would get the best experience possible.

What surprises people the most when they see the show

is how extremely hot the lava is.

It gets really really hot in the showroom.

The lava seethes and bubbles over the ice

and you can hear it sizzle

and you smell the melting minerals

and of course you feel the heat.

They then remelt the basalt again and again

When the lava has cooled down a bit

down to about 200 degrees Celcius

then we clean it up

and reuse it.

For more infomation >> Icelandic Lava Show Media Coverage (RÚV NEWS) - Duration: 2:04.

-------------------------------------------

News brief, 10/30/18, 6 p.m. update - Duration: 0:33.

For more infomation >> News brief, 10/30/18, 6 p.m. update - Duration: 0:33.

-------------------------------------------

LEX 18 News At 6: October 30, 2018 - Duration: 11:53.

For more infomation >> LEX 18 News At 6: October 30, 2018 - Duration: 11:53.

-------------------------------------------

Homeowners insurance Five O'clock News - Duration: 1:49.

For more infomation >> Homeowners insurance Five O'clock News - Duration: 1:49.

-------------------------------------------

Appetite for change divided Democrats prepare for midterm elections US news - Duration: 12:50.

Appetite for change divided Democrats prepare for midterm elections US news

Progressives and moderates tell the Guardian of competing visions for the future of the left. But they are united in one thing: resistance to Trump

Progressives and moderates tell the Guardian of competing visions for the future of the left. But they are united in one thing: resistance to Trump

On a sticky autumn evening, less than a month before the November midterm elections, more than 200 left-of-center New Yorkers packed an uptown auditorium for an Oxford-style debate on a central question animating Democratic politics: will progressive populism save the party?

For nearly two hours, Democrats from the progressive and moderate wings sharply defended competing visions for the future of their party as it clambers back from the political wilderness.

" have wrecked the party," said Jeff Weaver, a senior political adviser to Senator Bernie Sanders and his 2016 presidential campaign manager, jabbing a finger in the direction of the moderate panelists. " have destroyed the coalition that undergirded the Democratic party for decades and we can't let them have it back."

He clashed with Jonathan Cowan, president and co-founder of the centrist thinktank Third Way, who said the left's revolutionary policy aspirations "might look good on a bumper sticker" but are removed from political reality. If Democrats ran on a populist platform in 2020, he warned, Donald Trump would be re-elected.

As tensions flared, the moderator interjected playfully: "I have to keep reminding myself, you guys all belong to the same party."

On election day 2016, Democrats suffered one of the most stunning losses in modern presidential history. Twice in less than two decades, they won the popular vote but lost the presidency – this time to a historically unpopular candidate. The House and Senate remained in Republican control, as did a majority of state houses and governorships. In Washington and around the country, their grip on power had slipped to its weakest point in nearly a century. Democrats were left wondering: What now?

Since then, the party's center of gravity has shifted sharply away from Washington, toward an emboldened activist base, as its politics drift to the left. Across the country, a rising coalition of women, young people and minorities are crashing the gates of the Democratic party and demanding a seat at the table while liberal insurgents rattle the establishment in a forceful rejection of politics as usual. At the same time, a sprawling field of potential presidential candidates are rushing to plant their stakes in a shifting political landscape.

The debate, hosted by Intelligence Squared US, underscored the fierce contest of ideas taking place within the Democratic party two years into the Trump presidency – and on the eve of the November midterm elections.

"What happened in 2016 wasn't just a win for Donald Trump – it was also a moment of reckoning for Democrats," said Jahana Hayes, a first-time candidate who beat a veteran politician in the Democratic primary for Connecticut's fifth congressional district. "There's a strong appetite right now for change. People are looking for something different and they want candidates who are not afraid to articulate that change."

Interviews with more than two dozen elected officials, candidates, strategists and activists describe a party in the midst of extraordinary transformation – a composite of competing interests and priorities united by a resistance to the Trump administration.

Hayes is at the vanguard of that cultural upheaval.

The former social studies teacher, who was named national teacher of the year in 2016, never expected to enter politics. Hayes launched what was considered to be a long-shot bid for the Democratic nomination in May, running on progressive priorities such as single-payer healthcare, known as "Medicare for All", and stricter gun laws. She highlighted her life story: a childhood of poverty, a brief period of homelessness and a pregnancy – all before graduating high school. But she continued to pursue her education and eventually became a teacher in the community where she grew up.

In August, Democrats defied the party and nominated Hayes. Now she is poised to be elected Connecticut's first black congresswoman.

Her victory was one of a handful of primary-night surprises that ushered in a wave of fresh faces. The most dramatic of those upsets were in deep-blue districts, where liberal insurgents challenged the Democratic hierarchy and brought down long-serving incumbents.

This summer in New York, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, a young Democratic socialist and former bartender, wrested the nomination from congressman Joe Crowley, the fourth-ranking House Democrat and a potential contender for House speaker.

Months later, in Massachusetts, Ayanna Pressley, a Boston City council member, ousted the congressman Michael Capuano, a 10-term progressive who had the backing of many of the state's political leaders.

In all three primary contests, the candidates were propelled by a sense of urgency, encapsulated by Pressley's campaign slogan: "Change can't wait." They harnessed mounting frustration with the status quo and a strong desire for bottom-up regeneration.

"Let's expand what our party looks like," Hayes said. "Let's engage more people. Let's broaden our depth of understanding."

The spirited primary season ended last month in New York, with a decisive victory for Governor Andrew Cuomo over his leftwing challenger, Cynthia Nixon.

The next morning, at a press conference in his Manhattan office, Cuomo, the two-term Democratic incumbent, whose corporate ties and dynastic status epitomize everything the left despises about the party elite, gloated that the "wave" of progressive victories expected to sweep the Democratic party never materialized.

"Not even a ripple," he said, dismissing Ocasio-Cortez's win as a "fluke". Cuomo touted his progressive accomplishments as governor: raising the minimum wage, creating a paid family leave program and legalizing gay marriage.

"I'm not a socialist. I am not 25 years old. I'm not a newcomer," he said. "But I am a progressive, and I deliver progressive results."

For the centrists watching, Cuomo's victory lap was a welcome reality check on the narrative that the progressive left had taken over the Democratic party.

Unlike the Tea Party wave of 2010, when Republican voters replaced establishment favorites and moderate dealmakers with fire-breathing conservatives and ideological purists, no sitting Democratic senator lost a seat this cycle. Far from the rule, liberal dragon-slayers were the exception.

According to the Brookings Institution's Primaries Project, which has analyzed congressional primaries in every election cycle since 2014, non-incumbent establishment Democrats did marginally better than their progressive counterparts. Establishment Democrats won 140 primary races – or 35% of the contests – compared with 101 – or 27% – for progressive Democrats, many of whom are running in solidly Republican districts where the party doesn't expect to compete.

But in a possible sign of where the party is headed, the number of self-identified progressives running for office this year spiked dramatically compared with the previous two election cycles while the number of moderates declined slightly. In 2014, just 26% of Democratic House candidates referred to themselves as progressive; in 2018, the number rose to 44%.

"The progressive movement is energized," writes Elaine Kamarck, a senior Brookings fellow who led the project, "but there is not much evidence that it is taking over the Democratic party or pulling it far to the left."

The liberal insurgency that roared to life in the wake of the 2016 election shows no signs of abating anytime soon. Already, progressive activists have demonstrated their strength in confronting leadership and driving party's internal policy debate.

They count among their achievements the fact that more than half of House Democrats and one-third of Senate Democrats, including a handful of potential 2020 contenders, have co-signed Medicare for All legislation. This summer, the Democratic National Committee reformed its presidential nominating process to reduce the influence of party elites, which was a source of contention during the bitter 2016 primary campaign. There is an emerging consensus around a $15-an-hour federal minimum wage. And dozens of Democratic candidates – including more than half of the candidates in districts the party is targeting – are taking a page from Sanders and refusing donations from political action committees, or Pacs, that are sponsored by corporations or industry groups.

The revolution, they say, is just beginning.

How the Democrats fare on Election Day will set the stage for the next battle: how they should approach 2020.

In several competitive House districts where Republicans are defending their majority, Democratic voters have nominated left-of-center candidates who stopped short of embracing positions like Medicare for All and a federal minimum wage. If Democrats win the House on election night, moderates will point to these results as evidence that a moderate message, and not leftwing populism, is the best strategy to win voters beyond the liberal bastions where the party still holds power.

Progressives see the electoral map differently. They argue that the depth of Democrats' losses in 2016 proves that the only way to defeat Trump and Republicans is with a set of radical economic ideas that mobilize liberals and non-traditional voters.

"Our swing voter is not red-to-blue," Ocasio-Cortez told an audience of progressive activists at the Netroots Nation conference earlier this year. "It's non-voter to voter."

Yet as Democrats look ahead to 2020, new research argues that the party is not as riven by ideological conflict as it appeared to be during the 2016 primary campaign.

The difference between Bernie Sanders voters and Hillary Clinton voters on issues of taxes, trade and healthcare was a "matter of degree [rather] than kind" and it was "harder for Democratic primary voters to choose between them based solely on policy", write Lynn Vavreck, John Sides and Michael Tesler in their new book, Identity Crisis: The 2016 Presidential Campaign and the Battle for the Meaning of America.

The best predictors of whom a Democrat would support in the primary, they found, were race, age and whether the voter identified more strongly with the Democratic party or being liberal.

Aspects of identity could play an even bigger role in the next presidential election cycle. The prospective 2020 candidates will likely be diverse in terms of gender, race and age. Trump's potential rivals traverse the ideological spectrum of the left and have demonstrated different strategies for confronting the president.

Deep-seated differences do exist, however, over economic and foreign policy, and on issues of regulation, trade and how aggressively to challenge corporate power. There are also long-held philosophical disagreements over whether rising income inequality is "the defining issue of our time", as Barack Obama once said.

Robert Reich, secretary of labor under President Bill Clinton and a strident critic of Wall Street, credits Sanders with amplifying the issue of economic equality. But he recalled that Hillary Clinton launched her campaign with a video message in which she declared that the "deck is stacked in favor of those at the top".

"That was a shocking statement for an establishment candidate to make," he said.

On 19 October 2016, Bob Bland, then a fashion designer in New York City and nine months pregnant with her second child, was one of the nearly 72 million Americans who tuned in to watch the third and final presidential debate between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump. As Clinton expounded on her plan to fund social security, Trump leaned into his microphone. "Such a nasty woman," he sneered.

The phrase immediately struck a chord. Bland pulled open her laptop and started designing a T-shirt that said "Nasty Woman". The next morning, she put the shirt online for sale. By noon that day, she was receiving a new order every second, with the proceeds going to Planned Parenthood.

"It was my first foray into political activism," she said. "I suddenly had this group of nasty women who were constantly contacting me and asking me what they could do to help." They decided to share photos of themselves wearing the shirts at polling stations on election day. ("It was a voter mobilization effort – but I didn't know the term at the time," she said.)

The next morning, in the fog of despair, Bland proposed the idea of a march in Washington on Facebook. Within hours, her community of "nasty women" expanded into thousands. When she discovered another woman in Hawaii had a similar idea and had already collected 12,000 responses, she quickly made contact. They joined forces and the Women's March was born.

If the November midterm elections deliver a "blue wave" of Democratic victories in Congress and state legislatures, it will have been fueled in large part by an energized network of newly motivated liberal activists who, like Bland, have thrown themselves into political activism over the past two years.

One in five Americans have protested or participated in political rallies and demonstrations since 2016 – and the vast majority of those activists are hostile to Trump.

"The real Democratic party is the activists," said congressman Ruben Gallego, a Democrat from Arizona. "Our victories this year have not come from one central figurehead leading the charge and knocking down Trump policies. They come from the people themselves – regular people and Democratic activists who are hitting the streets, protesting at the Women's March or showing up at the ACA [Obamacare] town halls. That's the spirit we need to embrace."

What began with meetings in living rooms and public libraries grew into "the Resistance", a sprawling web of loosely knit national, local and hyper-local grassroots groups dedicated to thwarting Trump's agenda and electing Democrats. They are aided by national organizations such as Indivisible and Action Together, which formed after Trump's victory and help coordinate and support the work of the countless smaller groups that have sprung up around local campaigns and issues.

The movement's political ambitions have only expanded since the Women's March, as they clash with the Trump administration over its withdrawal from the Paris climate agreement, a decision to separate immigrant families at the border and the controversial confirmation of the supreme court justice Brett Kavanaugh.

The Resistance is led by mostly white, college-educated, suburban women from across the ideological spectrum of the left, according to Theda Skocpol, a sociologist at Harvard who is studying the anti-Trump resistance. Though united in opposition to the president, this movement is distinct from the progressive insurgency. Activists are far less concerned with the party's internal debate over ideology and strategy and much more focused on getting out the vote for Democrats in November, Skocpol found.

"This will not look like a far-left reinvention of Tea Partiers or a continuation of Bernie 2016," Skocpol and Lara Putnam write in the journal Democracy. "It will look like retired librarians rolling their eyes at the present state of affairs, and then taking charge." Or, as Bland put it: they are "soccer moms who suddenly sound like revolutionaries".

Their political resurgence has helped repopulate local and state Democratic parties, many in suburban and conservative stretches of the country, that had atrophied during the Obama years.

It has also been a source of candidate recruitment for the party. Two years ago, 27 House Republican candidates ran unopposed in their districts. This year, Democrats will contest all but three House districts, according to Ballotpedia.

That charge is being led by a historically diverse field of candidates. Democratic women shattered records for gubernatorial and congressional nominees this cycle. Three African American candidates are running for governor – two in the old Confederacy. Elsewhere, Native Americans, Muslims, Latinos, immigrants, and LGBT candidates will be on the ballot in November.

"It started on November 9, 2016, as a reaction based on anger – a feeling that I've got to make a change. I've got to fight Trump. I've got to fight everything that's going to happen," said Stephanie Schriock, president of Emily's List. "But then it became so much bigger."

During the 2016 presidential election cycle, her group – the largest national organization dedicated to electing women to office – heard from 920 women interested in running. Since Trump's election, the organization has been contacted by more than 42,000 women who want to run for office.

"This isn't about one election cycle," Schriock said. "What we're seeing is a sea change."

Earlier this month, Senator Elizabeth Warren, a Massachusetts liberal who is exploring a 2020 presidential run, traveled to Jonesboro, Georgia, to work the phones on behalf of the Democratic gubernatorial candidate Stacey Abrams.

If elected, Abrams would be the country's first black female governor. Her historic campaign has managed to excite both the progressive and moderate wings of the party. During the debate in New York earlier this month, the panelists argued over whether she was running as a "pragmatic leader" or an "ultra-progressive".

If Abrams can win in Georgia, a state with a tortured history of race relations and where Democrats hold no statewide offices, her victory could provide clues for how the party can unite voters across the geographic, demographic and ideological spectrum.

After placing a few calls to Georgia voters urging them to vote for Abrams, Warren addressed the volunteers at their cramped field office outside Atlanta. She acknowledged the depths from which Democrats would have to come to wrest power from the Republicans, but she urged them not to despair.

"They got the White House. They got the House of Representatives. They got the Senate," Warren said, holding her left fist in the air. "They got the statehouses all around the country. They got the money. They got the big, big, big donors. They got the coordination. But I'm gonna tell you this: I'd rather be us than them."

After two years of soul-searching, marching, protesting and organizing, the midterm elections on 6 November will test Warren's optimism in the future of her party.

If history is still a guide in 2018, election night should produce gains for the opposition party. Polling data favors Democrats to win control of the House and a handful of governor's mansions, including in states Trump won. That would be a start.

But some of the most critical challenges lie ahead. Democrats will soon choose a standard-bearer from what will almost certainly be a broad group of diverse candidates. That decision will involve complex questions of ideology and identity – distinguished by race, gender and age.

They will also have to make choices about strategy, tone and temperament. Does the party embrace leftwing populism or return to consensus-oriented pragmatism? Do they want someone who embodies change but doesn't fit into a strict ideological box? How forcefully do they confront Trump? Above all, the candidate – and it is as likely to be a she as a he – must have a vision with broad enough appeal to oust a president who has defied convention and rewritten the rules of engagement.

The stakes could not be higher for the party out of power. Democrats are either on the verge of a comeback – or teetering on collapse.<br>

Không có nhận xét nào:

Đăng nhận xét