A new Morning Consult survey, conducted for The Hollywood Reporter from November 6 to 7, questioned 2,202 people to find out who were the most and least trusted news anchors among Americans.
The takeaway: Broadcast networks are trusted while cable networks aren't, most likely because they are considered partisan. Six of the top 10 most trusted are network anchors from NBC or ABC, and the top 10 least trusted are a mix of anchors from Fox News, MSNBC, and CNN.
When broken down between Republicans and Democrats, the survey found that the top 13 most loved personalities among Republicans were Fox News hosts. Tucker Carlson was the most adored among the Fox News hosts, with 31 percentage points.
Democrats' tastes were more diverse, with ABC's Robin Roberts, NBC's Lester Holt, and CNN's Anderson Cooper being the top news anchors among them.
Below are the most and least trusted news anchors in the US (the percentages indicate the amount of people who said they trusted the anchor "a lot" and "not at all"):
***
And from 2011:
As the 2012 election heats up, it seems like news commentators from both sides are becoming more provocative, leading Whispers to ask Washington's two prominent news watchdogs who they think are the most unfair in the business. The conservative Media Research Center and progressive Media Matters for America played along, giving us the top five on their bias hit list.
keywords: biased news
Monday, March 30, 2020
biased news
[3/31/20] A Gallup/Knight Foundation survey found that Americans think most of the news they consume is inaccurate and biased.
Republicans said they thought only Fox News and The Wall Street Journal were unbiased, while Democrats felt that way about most mainstream outlets.
Overall, survey respondents said PBS News and The Associated Press were the least biased outlets.
[4/21/20] The Media Bias chart
[4/29/20] Media Bias Chart (AllSides)
Republicans said they thought only Fox News and The Wall Street Journal were unbiased, while Democrats felt that way about most mainstream outlets.
Overall, survey respondents said PBS News and The Associated Press were the least biased outlets.
[4/21/20] The Media Bias chart
[4/29/20] Media Bias Chart (AllSides)
Wednesday, March 18, 2020
A day-by-day review of the spread of an unfamiliar virus
NEW YORK (AP) — In the weeks before President Donald Trump spoke from the Oval Office to announce restrictions on travelers from more than two dozen countries in Europe, thousands of people from the region already had stepped off planes at U.S. airports, and an untold number of them carried the coronavirus.
The same can be said of flights from China in the weeks before the U.S. clamped down on those. Thousands who visited the country where the illness began had entered the United States without any kind of health review.
Such sobering realities highlight just one element of the federal government’s shortcomings in getting ahead of the virus and halting its spread from overseas travelers.
A day-by-day review of the spread of an unfamiliar virus from its earliest days shows U.S. officials have often been slow to respond or steps behind, with critical gaps in containment measures such as travel restrictions and airport screenings that allowed the crisis to grow to more than 2,100 infections and 51 deaths.
“There have been gaps in the way the U.S. has approached its response, which has not been comprehensive enough to contain the virus at the early stages of the epidemic,” said Josh Michaud, associate director of global health policy with the Kaiser Family Foundation in Washington.
That was evident from the very beginning of the coronavirus outbreak in the U.S. On Jan. 15, a 35-year-old man returned home to Washington state through the Seattle airport after traveling to Wuhan, China, where the virus was already spreading. He would become the nation’s first known case. Shortly before, on Jan. 13, a woman in her 60s arrived home through the Chicago airport after traveling to Wuhan. She would be Chicago’s first known case.
Both of those travelers came to U.S. days before the federal government began screenings for passengers who traveled through Wuhan at three U.S. international airports, New York’s Kennedy, San Francisco and Los Angeles. That list was expanded on Jan. 21 to include hubs in Chicago and Atlanta. Seattle-Tacoma wouldn’t be added to the list until Jan. 28.
Also, there’s no guarantee those screenings — which involved passengers filling out health forms and having their temperatures taken — would have caught those early patients, who didn’t report symptoms until later. U.S. researchers say screenings may miss half of COVID-19 infected people, since they may not develop symptoms for several days.
By Jan. 24, both the Chicago woman and Washington state man had sought medical care after feeling sick, and tests confirmed they had the virus. Learning of the two early cases, public health workers scrambled to reach hundreds of people who may have been exposed to them on flights and on the ground, knowing they wouldn’t be able to find them all with certainty.
With infections in Wuhan multiplying at an alarming rate, the White House announced on Jan. 31 that non-residents who had recently been to mainland China would no longer be allowed entry.
Americans returning from the Wuhan region would be subject to a mandatory two-week quarantine. In Boston, a man who would become the city’s first case had returned after traveling to Wuhan just days earlier.
By mid-February, cases in China had pushed past 44,000. But the threat still seemed low in the U.S. and the Dow Jones Industrial Average closed at its highest point ever amid investor optimism the trade wars initiated by Trump were being resolved.
Then on Feb. 24, a teenager at Jackson High School in Mill Creek, Washington, stayed home with fever, body aches and a headache. He was tested for flu at a clinic that week, but the test came back negative. Feeling better, he went to school on Feb. 28. Arriving on campus, he got a call to come home immediately. It was COVID-19.
The next day, Trevor Bedford, a Seattle scientist, tweeted about the “enormous implications” of finding genetic fingerprint similarities between the teenager’s virus and the Washington man who became the first known U.S. case. “This strongly suggests that there has been cryptic transmission in Washington State for the past 6 weeks,” he wrote on Twitter.
To some, containment still seemed like a possibility in the United States, which as recently as about two weeks ago had no deaths and just 60 known cases, mostly people who were under federal quarantine after being evacuated from China or a cruise ship in Japan.
“It may get a little bigger; it may not get bigger at all,” Trump said in a national TV address at the time.
With cases rising above 1,000 in Italy and 3,000 in South Korea, the White House announced on March 1 that U.S.-bound passengers would undergo screenings before leaving those countries. But travelers from Italy who would eventually test positive were already on their way.
On March 4, California health officials announced that three of its six new cases were people who had visited northern Italy. A day later, Illinois announced its fifth confirmed case — a man who had recently returned from Italy. A day after that, Oklahoma announced its first case — a man who had returned from Italy about two weeks earlier. And a few days later, the state announced its second case had also traveled to Italy.
By the time Trump announced the European travel ban Thursday, cases in the region including Italy, Spain and France had mushroomed to more than 17,000. When a similar ban was announced on people traveling from China, that country had around 11,000 cases. Iran had about 600 confirmed cases when the U.S. banned travelers who had recently been there.
“The European Union failed to take the same precautions and restrict travel from China and other hotspots,” Trump said. “As a result, a large number of new clusters in the United States were seeded by travelers from Europe.”
Saturday, Trump closed some glaring exceptions to his European travel ban, adding the United Kingdom and Ireland to the list and considering imposing travel restrictions within the U.S. as well. His decision came as deaths in Britain doubled from the day before to 21, and infections rose from 800 to over 1,100.
Some experts question the effectiveness of any kind of travel restrictions given the heavy volume of global travel. Last year, for example, 4.2 million passengers arrived in the U.S. on flights from China and 2.2 million from Italy.
Holes in the containment net may sound alarming to the general public, but experts in controlling outbreaks assume the net will let some slip through. The point is to slow down or “flatten” rates of infection to keep the number of severely sick patients from overwhelming hospitals, which aren’t big enough to accommodate a surge.
“We are essentially spreading this spread over a longer period of time to allow health systems time to adapt and respond,” said Dr. Sandro Galea an epidemiologist at Boston University.
The benefit of stopping a portion of new infections from entering also depends on how aggressively officials are simultaneously controlling infections already within their borders, said Benjamin Cowling, an epidemiologist at the University of Hong Kong.
But nearly two months after the first U.S. case was confirmed, the persisting lack of testing capacity has left experts uncertain about how many more infected people aren’t being identified. Some researchers say the true count of infections in the U.S. may be upwards of 14,000..
“It is a failing, let’s admit it,” said Dr. Anthony Fauci of the National Institutes of Health on Thursday of the testing limitations.
Most people who get infected with the virus experience moderate symptoms. and the vast majority of people recover. Others, including older adults and people with existing health issues, can become severely sick.
Patricia Herrick, the daughter of an 89-year-old woman who died last week in the Seattle-area nursing home that has become ground zero of the U.S. outbreak with at least 25 deaths linked to it, said testing should have started much earlier so the sick could be separated from the well.
“We let this thing advance so far. We didn’t take this seriously enough,” said Herrick, whose mother was never tested for COVID-19. “I don’t know that she would still be living. ... It’s tragic.”
Kaiser’s Michaud acknowledged government health officials may have been “flying blind at first” but the inability to test and identify cases has put them behind.
“We’re trying to catch up. But we can’t catch up at this point.”
By CANDICE CHOI, BERNARD CONDON and CARLA K. JOHNSON -- March 14, 2020
The same can be said of flights from China in the weeks before the U.S. clamped down on those. Thousands who visited the country where the illness began had entered the United States without any kind of health review.
Such sobering realities highlight just one element of the federal government’s shortcomings in getting ahead of the virus and halting its spread from overseas travelers.
A day-by-day review of the spread of an unfamiliar virus from its earliest days shows U.S. officials have often been slow to respond or steps behind, with critical gaps in containment measures such as travel restrictions and airport screenings that allowed the crisis to grow to more than 2,100 infections and 51 deaths.
“There have been gaps in the way the U.S. has approached its response, which has not been comprehensive enough to contain the virus at the early stages of the epidemic,” said Josh Michaud, associate director of global health policy with the Kaiser Family Foundation in Washington.
That was evident from the very beginning of the coronavirus outbreak in the U.S. On Jan. 15, a 35-year-old man returned home to Washington state through the Seattle airport after traveling to Wuhan, China, where the virus was already spreading. He would become the nation’s first known case. Shortly before, on Jan. 13, a woman in her 60s arrived home through the Chicago airport after traveling to Wuhan. She would be Chicago’s first known case.
Both of those travelers came to U.S. days before the federal government began screenings for passengers who traveled through Wuhan at three U.S. international airports, New York’s Kennedy, San Francisco and Los Angeles. That list was expanded on Jan. 21 to include hubs in Chicago and Atlanta. Seattle-Tacoma wouldn’t be added to the list until Jan. 28.
Also, there’s no guarantee those screenings — which involved passengers filling out health forms and having their temperatures taken — would have caught those early patients, who didn’t report symptoms until later. U.S. researchers say screenings may miss half of COVID-19 infected people, since they may not develop symptoms for several days.
By Jan. 24, both the Chicago woman and Washington state man had sought medical care after feeling sick, and tests confirmed they had the virus. Learning of the two early cases, public health workers scrambled to reach hundreds of people who may have been exposed to them on flights and on the ground, knowing they wouldn’t be able to find them all with certainty.
With infections in Wuhan multiplying at an alarming rate, the White House announced on Jan. 31 that non-residents who had recently been to mainland China would no longer be allowed entry.
Americans returning from the Wuhan region would be subject to a mandatory two-week quarantine. In Boston, a man who would become the city’s first case had returned after traveling to Wuhan just days earlier.
By mid-February, cases in China had pushed past 44,000. But the threat still seemed low in the U.S. and the Dow Jones Industrial Average closed at its highest point ever amid investor optimism the trade wars initiated by Trump were being resolved.
Then on Feb. 24, a teenager at Jackson High School in Mill Creek, Washington, stayed home with fever, body aches and a headache. He was tested for flu at a clinic that week, but the test came back negative. Feeling better, he went to school on Feb. 28. Arriving on campus, he got a call to come home immediately. It was COVID-19.
The next day, Trevor Bedford, a Seattle scientist, tweeted about the “enormous implications” of finding genetic fingerprint similarities between the teenager’s virus and the Washington man who became the first known U.S. case. “This strongly suggests that there has been cryptic transmission in Washington State for the past 6 weeks,” he wrote on Twitter.
To some, containment still seemed like a possibility in the United States, which as recently as about two weeks ago had no deaths and just 60 known cases, mostly people who were under federal quarantine after being evacuated from China or a cruise ship in Japan.
“It may get a little bigger; it may not get bigger at all,” Trump said in a national TV address at the time.
With cases rising above 1,000 in Italy and 3,000 in South Korea, the White House announced on March 1 that U.S.-bound passengers would undergo screenings before leaving those countries. But travelers from Italy who would eventually test positive were already on their way.
On March 4, California health officials announced that three of its six new cases were people who had visited northern Italy. A day later, Illinois announced its fifth confirmed case — a man who had recently returned from Italy. A day after that, Oklahoma announced its first case — a man who had returned from Italy about two weeks earlier. And a few days later, the state announced its second case had also traveled to Italy.
By the time Trump announced the European travel ban Thursday, cases in the region including Italy, Spain and France had mushroomed to more than 17,000. When a similar ban was announced on people traveling from China, that country had around 11,000 cases. Iran had about 600 confirmed cases when the U.S. banned travelers who had recently been there.
“The European Union failed to take the same precautions and restrict travel from China and other hotspots,” Trump said. “As a result, a large number of new clusters in the United States were seeded by travelers from Europe.”
Saturday, Trump closed some glaring exceptions to his European travel ban, adding the United Kingdom and Ireland to the list and considering imposing travel restrictions within the U.S. as well. His decision came as deaths in Britain doubled from the day before to 21, and infections rose from 800 to over 1,100.
Some experts question the effectiveness of any kind of travel restrictions given the heavy volume of global travel. Last year, for example, 4.2 million passengers arrived in the U.S. on flights from China and 2.2 million from Italy.
Holes in the containment net may sound alarming to the general public, but experts in controlling outbreaks assume the net will let some slip through. The point is to slow down or “flatten” rates of infection to keep the number of severely sick patients from overwhelming hospitals, which aren’t big enough to accommodate a surge.
“We are essentially spreading this spread over a longer period of time to allow health systems time to adapt and respond,” said Dr. Sandro Galea an epidemiologist at Boston University.
The benefit of stopping a portion of new infections from entering also depends on how aggressively officials are simultaneously controlling infections already within their borders, said Benjamin Cowling, an epidemiologist at the University of Hong Kong.
But nearly two months after the first U.S. case was confirmed, the persisting lack of testing capacity has left experts uncertain about how many more infected people aren’t being identified. Some researchers say the true count of infections in the U.S. may be upwards of 14,000..
“It is a failing, let’s admit it,” said Dr. Anthony Fauci of the National Institutes of Health on Thursday of the testing limitations.
Most people who get infected with the virus experience moderate symptoms. and the vast majority of people recover. Others, including older adults and people with existing health issues, can become severely sick.
Patricia Herrick, the daughter of an 89-year-old woman who died last week in the Seattle-area nursing home that has become ground zero of the U.S. outbreak with at least 25 deaths linked to it, said testing should have started much earlier so the sick could be separated from the well.
“We let this thing advance so far. We didn’t take this seriously enough,” said Herrick, whose mother was never tested for COVID-19. “I don’t know that she would still be living. ... It’s tragic.”
Kaiser’s Michaud acknowledged government health officials may have been “flying blind at first” but the inability to test and identify cases has put them behind.
“We’re trying to catch up. But we can’t catch up at this point.”
By CANDICE CHOI, BERNARD CONDON and CARLA K. JOHNSON -- March 14, 2020
Sunday, March 08, 2020
Virginia passes background checks
The Virginia state legislature voted Saturday to mandate criminal background checks on all gun purchases in the chamber’s latest effort to tackle gun control.
The measure passed both the Senate and the General Assembly and is poised to be reviewed by Gov. Ralph Northam (D) for signature. The legislature also passed a measure Saturday limiting anyone who does not have a concealed carry permit to one handgun purchase a month.
The state House passed the background check legislation by a 51-45 vote Thursday. The bill passed the state Senate by a 23-16 vote Saturday.
The two bills are part of a larger package Northam has backed. Of the eight measures, seven were passed by the state Senate, which killed a ban on the sale of assault weapons and ownership of high-capacity magazines.
The measure passed both the Senate and the General Assembly and is poised to be reviewed by Gov. Ralph Northam (D) for signature. The legislature also passed a measure Saturday limiting anyone who does not have a concealed carry permit to one handgun purchase a month.
The state House passed the background check legislation by a 51-45 vote Thursday. The bill passed the state Senate by a 23-16 vote Saturday.
The two bills are part of a larger package Northam has backed. Of the eight measures, seven were passed by the state Senate, which killed a ban on the sale of assault weapons and ownership of high-capacity magazines.
Wednesday, March 04, 2020
U.S. and Taliban peace deal
[3/4/20] U.S. forces conducted an airstrike against Taliban fighters in Helmand, Afghanistan, Wednesday, the first such strike since the two sides signed a historic peace deal.
The airstrike was conducted as a "defensive" measure as Taliban fighters were "actively attacking" an Afghan government checkpoint, Colonel Sonny Legget, the spokesman for American forces in Afghanistan, said.
Taliban forces carried out 43 attacks on Afghan government checkpoints on March 3, despite their promises to the international community to reduce levels of violence, the spokesman said.
MORE: In historic call, Trump speaks to Taliban leader amid concerns about deal with US
"Taliban leadership promised the int’l community they would reduce violence and not increase attacks," Leggett posted on Twitter. We call on the Taliban to stop needless attacks and uphold their commitments. As we have demonstrated, we will defend our partners when required."
The airstrike came just a day after President Trump spoke to Abdul Ghani Baradar, the co-founder and a senior leader in the Taliban, by phone, in the first known conversation between a U.S. president and the militant group.
After the phone call, Trump told reporters that his relationship with Baradar was "very good" and that the Taliban "want to cease the violence." According to the Taliban, Trump told Baradar that "the withdrawal of foreign forces from Afghanistan now is in the interest of everyone."
Despite the assertion that the Taliban were looking to reduce levels of violence, the group released a statement Monday saying they would resume attacks on Afghan government forces.
On Saturday, U.S. negotiators led by Zalmay Khalilzad concluded a year-and-a-half long process by signing a bilateral agreement with the Taliban which lays out a full U.S. withdrawal from the country. The withdrawal is conditional on the militant group engaging in a peace process with the Afghan government and preventing the country from being a safe haven for terror groups.
MORE: US signs historic deal with Taliban
Doubts about the Taliban's commitment to peace have surrounded the agreement. Wednesday's airstrike is the first on Taliban forces since the signing last weekend, and the first in 11 days.
[2/29/20] DOHA, QATAR >> The United States signed a peace agreement with Taliban militants today aimed at bringing an end to 18 years of bloodshed in Afghanistan that began after 9/11 and allowing U.S. troops to return home from America’s longest war.
This historic deal, signed by chief negotiators from the two sides and witnessed by Secretary of State Mike Pompeo in the Qatari capital of Doha, could see the withdrawal of all American and allied forces in the next 14 months and allow President Donald Trump to fulfill a key campaign pledge to extract the U.S. from “endless wars.” It sets the stage for intra-Afghan peace talks to begin by March 10 during which a permanent ceasefire will be negotiated and the Taliban agree to meet with all factions.
Under the agreement, the U.S. would draw its forces down to 8,600 from 13,000 in the next 3-4 months, with the remaining U.S. forces withdrawing in 14 months. The complete pullout would depend on the Taliban meeting their commitments to prevent terrorism, including specific obligations to renounce al-Qaida and prevent that group and others from using Afghan soil to plot attacks on the U.S. or its allies. The deal does not, however, tie the U.S. withdrawal to any specific outcome from the all Afghan talks, according to U.S. officials.
“We will closely watch the Taliban’s compliance with their commitments, and calibrate the pace of our withdrawal to their actions. This is how we will ensure that Afghanistan never again serves as a base for international terrorists,” said Pompeo. He acknowledged that the road ahead would be difficult but said the deal represented “the best opportunity for peace in a generation.”
At a parallel ceremony in Kabul, U.S. Defense Secretary Mark Esper and Afghan President Ashraf Ghani signed a joint statement committing the Afghan government to support the U.S.-Taliban deal, which is viewed skeptically by many war-weary Afghans, particularly women who fear a comeback of repression under the ultra-conservative Taliban.
President George W. Bush ordered the U.S.-led invasion of Afghanistan in response to the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks. Some U.S. troops currently serving there had not yet been born when al-Qaida hijackers flew two airliners into the twin towers of the World Trade Center, crashed another into the Pentagon and took down a fourth in western Pennsylvania, killing almost 3,000 people.
It only took a few months to topple the Taliban and send Osama bin Laden and top al-Qaida militants scrambling across the border into Pakistan, but the war dragged on for years as the U.S. tried establish a stable, functioning state in one of the least developed countries in the world. The Taliban regrouped, and currently hold sway over half the country.
The U.S. spent more than $750 billion, and on all sides the war cost tens of thousands of lives lost, permanently scarred and indelibly interrupted. But the conflict was also frequently ignored by U.S. politicians and the American public as the memory of the attacks on that crisp, sunny morning faded despite having changed how many Americans see the world.
The airstrike was conducted as a "defensive" measure as Taliban fighters were "actively attacking" an Afghan government checkpoint, Colonel Sonny Legget, the spokesman for American forces in Afghanistan, said.
Taliban forces carried out 43 attacks on Afghan government checkpoints on March 3, despite their promises to the international community to reduce levels of violence, the spokesman said.
MORE: In historic call, Trump speaks to Taliban leader amid concerns about deal with US
"Taliban leadership promised the int’l community they would reduce violence and not increase attacks," Leggett posted on Twitter. We call on the Taliban to stop needless attacks and uphold their commitments. As we have demonstrated, we will defend our partners when required."
The airstrike came just a day after President Trump spoke to Abdul Ghani Baradar, the co-founder and a senior leader in the Taliban, by phone, in the first known conversation between a U.S. president and the militant group.
After the phone call, Trump told reporters that his relationship with Baradar was "very good" and that the Taliban "want to cease the violence." According to the Taliban, Trump told Baradar that "the withdrawal of foreign forces from Afghanistan now is in the interest of everyone."
Despite the assertion that the Taliban were looking to reduce levels of violence, the group released a statement Monday saying they would resume attacks on Afghan government forces.
On Saturday, U.S. negotiators led by Zalmay Khalilzad concluded a year-and-a-half long process by signing a bilateral agreement with the Taliban which lays out a full U.S. withdrawal from the country. The withdrawal is conditional on the militant group engaging in a peace process with the Afghan government and preventing the country from being a safe haven for terror groups.
MORE: US signs historic deal with Taliban
Doubts about the Taliban's commitment to peace have surrounded the agreement. Wednesday's airstrike is the first on Taliban forces since the signing last weekend, and the first in 11 days.
[2/29/20] DOHA, QATAR >> The United States signed a peace agreement with Taliban militants today aimed at bringing an end to 18 years of bloodshed in Afghanistan that began after 9/11 and allowing U.S. troops to return home from America’s longest war.
This historic deal, signed by chief negotiators from the two sides and witnessed by Secretary of State Mike Pompeo in the Qatari capital of Doha, could see the withdrawal of all American and allied forces in the next 14 months and allow President Donald Trump to fulfill a key campaign pledge to extract the U.S. from “endless wars.” It sets the stage for intra-Afghan peace talks to begin by March 10 during which a permanent ceasefire will be negotiated and the Taliban agree to meet with all factions.
Under the agreement, the U.S. would draw its forces down to 8,600 from 13,000 in the next 3-4 months, with the remaining U.S. forces withdrawing in 14 months. The complete pullout would depend on the Taliban meeting their commitments to prevent terrorism, including specific obligations to renounce al-Qaida and prevent that group and others from using Afghan soil to plot attacks on the U.S. or its allies. The deal does not, however, tie the U.S. withdrawal to any specific outcome from the all Afghan talks, according to U.S. officials.
“We will closely watch the Taliban’s compliance with their commitments, and calibrate the pace of our withdrawal to their actions. This is how we will ensure that Afghanistan never again serves as a base for international terrorists,” said Pompeo. He acknowledged that the road ahead would be difficult but said the deal represented “the best opportunity for peace in a generation.”
At a parallel ceremony in Kabul, U.S. Defense Secretary Mark Esper and Afghan President Ashraf Ghani signed a joint statement committing the Afghan government to support the U.S.-Taliban deal, which is viewed skeptically by many war-weary Afghans, particularly women who fear a comeback of repression under the ultra-conservative Taliban.
President George W. Bush ordered the U.S.-led invasion of Afghanistan in response to the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks. Some U.S. troops currently serving there had not yet been born when al-Qaida hijackers flew two airliners into the twin towers of the World Trade Center, crashed another into the Pentagon and took down a fourth in western Pennsylvania, killing almost 3,000 people.
It only took a few months to topple the Taliban and send Osama bin Laden and top al-Qaida militants scrambling across the border into Pakistan, but the war dragged on for years as the U.S. tried establish a stable, functioning state in one of the least developed countries in the world. The Taliban regrouped, and currently hold sway over half the country.
The U.S. spent more than $750 billion, and on all sides the war cost tens of thousands of lives lost, permanently scarred and indelibly interrupted. But the conflict was also frequently ignored by U.S. politicians and the American public as the memory of the attacks on that crisp, sunny morning faded despite having changed how many Americans see the world.
Sunday, March 01, 2020
Hanabusa for mayor
Citing her long government experience, former U.S. Rep. Colleen Hanabusa on Saturday formally announced her candidacy for Honolulu mayor.
City Councilwoman Ann Kobayashi introduced Hanabusa at her newly minted campaign headquarters in Kalihi.
Hanabusa, 68, joins a formidable field that includes businessman Keith Amemiya, former television executive Rick Blangiardi, former state Sen. John Carroll, Realtor and activist Choon James and City Councilwoman Kym Pine.
None of those candidates, however, has Hanabusa’s resume.
She served in Congress on two separate occasions, from 2011 to 2015 and then from 2016 to 2019. She then made an unsuccessful attempt to unseat Gov. David Ige, a fellow Democrat.
Prior to that, Hanabusa served in the state Senate representing the Waianae Coast from 1999 to 2010. She was elected Senate president in 2009 and held that position until she left to go to Congress.
At the city level, Hanabusa was appointed by Mayor Kirk Caldwell in June 2015 to serve on the Honolulu Authority for Rapid Transportation. She was named chairwoman of the panel in April 2016 but resigned that October to run for Congress.
In an interview with the Honolulu Star-Advertiser after Saturday’s announcement, Hanabusa said addressing the lack of public confidence and trust in city officials is more important than any single issue facing City Hall today.
City Councilwoman Ann Kobayashi introduced Hanabusa at her newly minted campaign headquarters in Kalihi.
Hanabusa, 68, joins a formidable field that includes businessman Keith Amemiya, former television executive Rick Blangiardi, former state Sen. John Carroll, Realtor and activist Choon James and City Councilwoman Kym Pine.
None of those candidates, however, has Hanabusa’s resume.
She served in Congress on two separate occasions, from 2011 to 2015 and then from 2016 to 2019. She then made an unsuccessful attempt to unseat Gov. David Ige, a fellow Democrat.
Prior to that, Hanabusa served in the state Senate representing the Waianae Coast from 1999 to 2010. She was elected Senate president in 2009 and held that position until she left to go to Congress.
At the city level, Hanabusa was appointed by Mayor Kirk Caldwell in June 2015 to serve on the Honolulu Authority for Rapid Transportation. She was named chairwoman of the panel in April 2016 but resigned that October to run for Congress.
In an interview with the Honolulu Star-Advertiser after Saturday’s announcement, Hanabusa said addressing the lack of public confidence and trust in city officials is more important than any single issue facing City Hall today.
Coronavirus
[3/1/20] Second coronavirus patient dies in Washington
[2/29/20] A man has died in Washington state of COVID-19, state health officials said today, marking the first such reported death in the United States.
[2/29/20] A man has died in Washington state of COVID-19, state health officials said today, marking the first such reported death in the United States.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)