betfred contact details
Vanden boys basketball can't slow down St. Ignatius
— BIRTH NAME: James Earl Carter, Jr. — BORN: Oct. 1, 1924, at the Wise Clinic in Plains, Georgia, the first U.S. president born in a hospital. He would become the first president to live for an entire century . — EDUCATION: Plains High School, Plains, Georgia, 1939-1941; Georgia Southwestern College, Americus, Georgia, 1941-1942; Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, 1942-1943; U.S. Naval Academy, Annapolis, Maryland, 1943-1946 (class of 1947); Union College, Schenectady, New York, 1952-1953. — PRESIDENCY: Sworn-in as 39th president of the United States at the age of 52 years, 3 months and 20 days on Jan. 20, 1977, after defeating President Gerald R. Ford in the 1976 general election. Left office on Jan. 20, 1981, following 1980 general election loss to Ronald Reagan. — POST-PRESIDENCY: Launched The Carter Center in 1982. Began volunteering at Habitat for Humanity in 1984. Awarded Nobel Peace Prize in 2002. Taught for 37 years at Emory University, where he was granted tenure in 2019, at age 94. — OTHER ELECTED OFFICES: Georgia state senator, 1963-1967; Georgia governor, 1971-1975. — OTHER OCCUPATIONS: Served in U.S. Navy, achieved rank of lieutenant, 1946-53; Farmer, warehouseman, Plains, Georgia, 1953-77. — FAMILY: Wife, Rosalynn Smith Carter , married July 7, 1946 until her death Nov. 19, 2023. They had three sons, John William (Jack), James Earl III (Chip), Donnel Jeffrey (Jeff); a daughter, Amy Lynn; and 11 living grandchildren and 14 great-grandchildren. Source: Jimmy Carter Library & MuseumSOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, Calif., Dec. 02, 2024 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Vaxart, Inc. (Nasdaq: VXRT) today announced completion of enrollment of the sentinel cohort of a Phase 2b clinical trial evaluating Vaxart's oral pill COVID-19 vaccine candidate against an approved mRNA vaccine comparator. The sentinel cohort comprised of 400 participants, with 200 receiving Vaxart's COVID-19 vaccine candidate and 200 receiving an approved mRNA vaccine comparator. "We are pleased to complete the enrollment of the sentinel cohort, an important milestone that reflects the collaboration of our entire team, as well as the trust and commitment of the participants and investigators involved,” said Dr. James F. Cummings, Vaxart's Chief Medical Officer. "We look forward to DSMB and FDA review followed by the planned initiation of the Phase 2b trial's second portion. Our continued progress brings us closer to our goal of potentially demonstrating advantages of our mucosal technology against an approved mRNA vaccine.” An independent Data and Safety Monitoring Board (DSMB) and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) will review 30-day safety data from the sentinel cohort. Upon favorable review by the DSMB and FDA, the study will progress after Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA) approval to the second part of the trial by enrolling approximately 10,000 participants. The trial will strive to enroll participants in line with U.S. demographics, as well as including at least 25% over the age of 65. The Phase 2b trial is a double-blind, multi-center, randomized, comparator-controlled study to determine the relative efficacy, safety, and immunogenicity of Vaxart's oral pill COVID-19 vaccine candidate against an approved mRNA COVID-19 injectable vaccine in adults previously immunized against COVID-19 infection. The full Phase 2b trial will measure efficacy for symptomatic and asymptomatic disease, systemic and mucosal immune induction, and the incidence of adverse events. The primary endpoint is relative efficacy of Vaxart's COVID-19 vaccine candidate compared to an approved mRNA comparator for the prevention of symptomatic disease. Primary efficacy analysis will be performed when all participants have either discontinued or completed a study visit 12 months post-vaccination. Funding for this award was received under Project NextGen, a $5 billion initiative led by BARDA and the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) to accelerate and streamline the development of the next generation of innovative COVID-19 vaccines, therapeutics, and enablers. Vaxart's project award through the Rapid Response Partnership Vehicle (RRPV) is valued at up to $456 million. This project has been funded with federal funds from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS); Administration for Strategic Preparedness and Response (ASPR); BARDA, under Other Transaction (OT) number 75A50123D00005. As a pioneer of oral vaccines, Vaxart was the first U.S. company to complete a Phase 2 clinical trial of an oral vaccine for COVID-19. About Vaxart Vaxart is a clinical-stage biotechnology company developing a range of oral recombinant vaccines based on its proprietary delivery platform. Vaxart vaccines are designed to be administered using pills that can be stored and shipped without refrigeration and eliminate the risk of needle-stick injury. Vaxart believes that its proprietary pill vaccine delivery platform is suitable to deliver recombinant vaccines, positioning the company to develop oral versions of currently marketed vaccines and to design recombinant vaccines for new indications. Vaxart's development programs currently include pill vaccines designed to protect against coronavirus, norovirus and influenza, as well as a therapeutic vaccine for human papillomavirus (HPV), Vaxart's first immune-oncology indication. Vaxart has filed broad domestic and international patent applications covering its proprietary technology and creations for oral vaccination using adenovirus and TLR3 agonists. Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements This press release contains forward-looking statements that involve substantial risks and uncertainties. All statements, other than statements of historical facts, included in this press release regarding Vaxart's strategy, prospects, plans and objectives, results from preclinical and clinical trials and the timing of such results, commercialization agreements and licenses, and beliefs and expectations of management are forward-looking statements. These forward-looking statements may be accompanied by such words as "should," "believe," "could," "potential," "will," "expected," "anticipate,” "plan," and other words and terms of similar meaning. Examples of such statements include, but are not limited to, statements relating to Vaxart's ability to develop and commercialize its product candidates, including its vaccine booster products; Vaxart's expectations regarding clinical results and trial data, and the timing of receiving and reporting such clinical results and trial data; and Vaxart's expectations with respect to the effectiveness of its product candidates. Vaxart may not actually achieve the plans, carry out the intentions, or meet the expectations or projections disclosed in the forward-looking statements, and you should not place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements. Actual results or events could differ materially from the plans, intentions, expectations, and projections disclosed in the forward-looking statements. Various important factors could cause actual results or events to differ materially from the forward-looking statements that Vaxart makes, including uncertainties inherent in research and development, including the ability to meet anticipated clinical endpoints, commencement, and/or completion dates for clinical trials, regulatory submission dates, regulatory approval dates, and/or launch dates, as well as the possibility of unfavorable new clinical data and further analyses of existing clinical data; the risk that clinical trial data are subject to differing interpretations and assessments by regulatory authorities; whether regulatory authorities will be satisfied with the design of and results from the clinical studies; decisions by regulatory authorities impacting labeling, manufacturing processes, and safety that could affect the availability or commercial potential of any product candidate, including the possibility that Vaxart's product candidates may not be approved by the FDA or non-U.S. regulatory authorities; that, even if approved by the FDA or non-U.S. regulatory authorities, Vaxart's product candidates may not achieve broad market acceptance; that a Vaxart collaborator may not attain development and commercial milestones; that Vaxart or its partners may experience manufacturing issues and delays due to events within, or outside of, Vaxart's or its partners' control; difficulties in production, particularly in scaling up initial production, including difficulties with production costs and yields, quality control, including stability of the product candidate and quality assurance testing, shortages of qualified personnel or key raw materials, and compliance with strictly enforced federal, state, and foreign regulations; that Vaxart may not be able to obtain, maintain, and enforce necessary patent and other intellectual property protection; that Vaxart's capital resources may be inadequate; Vaxart's ability to resolve pending legal matters; Vaxart's ability to obtain sufficient capital to fund its operations on terms acceptable to Vaxart, if at all; the impact of government healthcare proposals and policies; competitive factors; and other risks described in the "Risk Factors" sections of Vaxart's Quarterly and Annual Reports filed with the SEC. Vaxart does not assume any obligation to update any forward-looking statements, except as required by law. Contact Vaxart Media and Investor Relations : Matt Steinberg FINN Partners [email protected] (646) 871-8481While You Were Sleeping: 5 stories you might have missed, Dec 8, 2024
RIMOUSKI, Québec, Dec. 24, 2024 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Puma Exploration Inc. (TSXV: PUMA, OTCQB: PUMXF) (the “Company” or “Puma”) announces that it has closed a non-brokered placement (the “FT Private Placement”) consisting of 6,685,000 flow-through units (the “FT Units”) at $0.10 per FT Unit for gross proceeds of C$668,500. Each FT Unit comprises one flow-through share and one common share purchase warrant (“Warrant”). Each Warrant is exercisable to purchase one common share of the Company at $0.15 per share valid for 24 months. The Warrants are subject to an acceleration clause that entitles the Company to provide notice (the "Acceleration Notice") to holders that they will expire 30 days from the date the Company delivers the Acceleration Notice. The Company can only provide the Acceleration Notice if the closing price of the Company's Common Shares on the TSXV is equal to or greater than $0.25 for 30 consecutive trading days. The Acceleration Notice can be provided at any time after the statutory hold period and before the expiry date of the warrants. All securities issued in connection with the Private Placement are subject to a hold period of four months and one day pursuant to applicable securities laws. The net proceeds of the FT units will be used to incur eligible Canadian exploration expenses and flow-through mining expenditures, as defined under the Income Tax Act (Canada), that will be renounced in favour of the purchasers, with an effective date of no later than Dec. 31, 2025. The funds will advance the exploration of the newly acquired McKenzie Gold Project and other company assets in northern New Brunswick. In connection with the closing of the private placement offerings, the company paid aggregate cash finder's fees of $39,445 and issued 394,450 non-transferable finder warrants. The finder warrants have the same terms than the warrants included in the units and exercisable at $0.15 per common share. Certain directors and other insiders of the Company participated in the Private Placement. They subscribed for 350,000 FT Units for an aggregate price of $35,000, an amount no more than the maximum amount permissible under applicable securities laws and regulatory rules. Participation by the directors and other insiders in the Private Placement is considered a "related party transaction" under Multilateral Instrument 61- 101 - Protection of Minority Security Holders in Special Transactions ("MI 61-101"). The Company is exempt from the requirements to obtain a formal valuation and minority shareholder approval in connection with the insiders' participation in the Private Placement in reliance on sections 5.5(a) and 5.7(1)(a) of MI 61-101 in that the fair market value (as determined under MI 61-101) of any securities issued under the Private Placement (and the consideration paid to the Company therefor) to interested parties (as defined under MI 61-101) did not exceed 25% of the Company's market capitalization (as determined under MI 61-101). Qualified Person The content of this press release was prepared by Marcel Robillard, President, who supervised the preparation of the information that forms part of this news release. About Puma’s Assets in New Brunswick Puma has accumulated an impressive portfolio of prospective gold landholdings strategically located close to roads and infrastructure in Northern New Brunswick - the Williams Brook Project and the new McKenzie Gold Project. Both are located near the Rocky Brook Millstream Fault (“RBMF”), a major regional structure formed during the Appalachian Orogeny and a significant control for gold deposition in the region. Puma’s work to date has focused on the Williams Brook property, but prospecting and surface exploration work on its other properties have confirmed their potential for significant gold mineralization. About Puma Exploration Puma Exploration is a Canadian mineral exploration company focused on finding and growing a pipeline of precious metals projects in New Brunswick, near Canada's Famous Bathurst Mining Camp. Puma has a long history in Northern New Brunswick, having worked on regional projects for over 15 years. Puma’s successful exploration methodology, which combines old prospecting methods with detailed trenching and up-to-date technology such as Artificial Intelligence, has been instrumental in facilitating an understanding of the region's geology and associated mineralized systems. Armed with geophysical surveys, geochemical data and consultants’ expertise, Puma has developed a perfect low-cost exploration tool to discover gold at shallow depths and maximize drilling results. The Company is committed to its DEAR business model of D iscovery, E xploration, A cquisition and R oyalties to generate maximum value for shareholders with low share dilution. Connect with us on Facebook / X / LinkedIn . Visit www.explorationpuma.com for more information or contact: Marcel Robillard , President and CEO. (418) 750-8510; president@explorationpuma.com Mia Boiridy , Head of Investor Relations and Corporate Development. (250) 575-3305; mboiridy@explorationpuma.com Neither the TSX Venture Exchange nor its Regulation Services Provider (as that term is defined in the policies of the TSX Venture Exchange) accepts responsibility for the adequacy or accuracy of this release. Forward-Looking Statements: This press release may contain forward-looking statements. Such forward-looking statements involve several known and unknown risks, uncertainties, and other factors that may cause the actual results, performance, or achievements of Puma to be materially different from actual future results and achievements expressed or implied by such forward-looking statements. Readers are cautioned not to place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements, which speak only as of the date the statements were made, except as required by law. Puma undertakes no obligation to publicly update or revise any forward-looking statements. The quarterly and annual reports and the documents submitted to the securities administration describe these risks and uncertainties.
Thanksgiving Weekend Sports Guide: Your roadmap to NFL matchups, other games, times, oddsThe long sports-filled Thanksgiving weekend is a time when many Americans enjoy gathering with friends and family for good food, good company and hopefully not too much political conversation. Also on the menu — all the NFL and college sports you can handle. Here's a roadmap to one of the biggest sports weekends of the year, with a look at marquee games over the holiday and how to watch. All times are in EST. All odds are by BetMGM Sportsbook. What to watch Thursday • NFL: There is a triple-header lined up for pro football fans. Chicago at Detroit, 12:30 p.m., CBS: Rookie quarterback Caleb Williams and the Bears go against the Lions, who are one of the favorites to reach the Super Bowl in February. Lions favored by 10. New York at Dallas, 4:30 p.m., Fox: The Giants and Cowboys are both suffering through miserable seasons and are now using backup quarterbacks for different reasons. But if Dallas can figure out a way to win, it will still be on the fringe of the playoff race. Cowboys favored by 3 1/2. People are also reading... Miami at Green Bay, 8:20 p.m., NBC/Peacock: The Packers stumbled slightly out of the gate but have won six of their past seven games. They'll need a win against Miami to try to keep pace in the NFC North. Packers favored by 3. • College Football: Memphis at No. 18 Tulane, 7:30 p.m., ESPN. If college football is your jam, this is a good warmup for a big weekend. The Tigers try to ruin the Green Wave’s perfect record in the American Athletic Conference. Tulane is favored by 14. What to watch Friday • NFL: A rare Friday showdown features the league-leading Chiefs. Las Vegas at Kansas City, 3 p.m. Prime Video: The Chiefs and quarterback Patrick Mahomes are 12-point favorites over the Raiders. • College Basketball: Some of the top programs meet in holiday tournaments around the country. Battle 4 Atlantis championship, 5:30 p.m., ESPN: One of the premier early season tournaments, the eight-team field includes No. 3 Gonzaga, No. 14 Indiana and No. 24 Arizona. Rady Children's Invitational, 6 p.m., Fox: It's the championship game for a four-team field that includes No. 13 Purdue and No. 23 Mississippi. • College Football: There is a full slate of college games to dig into. Oregon State at No. 11 Boise State, noon, Fox: The Broncos try to stay in the College Football Playoff hunt when they host the Beavers. Boise State favored by 19 1/2. Oklahoma State at No. 23 Colorado, noon, ABC: The Buffaloes and Coach Prime are still in the hunt for the Big 12 championship game when they host the Cowboys. Colorado favored by 16 1/2. Georgia Tech at No. 6 Georgia, 7:30 p.m., ABC: The Bulldogs are on pace for a spot in the CFP but host what could be a tricky game against rival Georgia Tech. Georgia favored by 19 1/2. • NBA. After taking Thanksgiving off, pro basketball returns. Oklahoma City at Los Angeles Lakers, 10 p.m., ESPN: The Thunder look like one of the best teams in the NBA's Western Conference. They'll host Anthony Davis, LeBron James and the Lakers. Listen now and subscribe: Apple Podcasts | Google Podcasts | Spotify | RSS Feed | SoundStack | All Of Our Podcasts Los Angeles Lakers forward LeBron James dunks during the first half of a Nov. 23 game against the Denver Nuggets in Los Angeles. Mark J. Terrill, Associated Press What to watch Saturday • College Football. There are more matchups with playoff implications. Michigan at No. 2 Ohio State, noon, Fox: The Wolverines are struggling one season after winning the national title. They could make their fan base a whole lot happier with an upset of the Buckeyes. Ohio State favored by 21. No. 7 Tennessee at Vanderbilt, noon, ABC: The Volunteers are a fairly big favorite and have dominated this series, but the Commodores have been a tough team this season and already have achieved a monumental upset over Alabama. Tennessee favored by 11. No. 16 South Carolina at No. 12 Clemson, noon, ESPN: The Palmetto State rivals are both hanging on the edge of the CFP playoff race. A win — particularly for Clemson — would go a long way toward clinching its spot in the field. Clemson favored by 2 1/2. No. 3 Texas at No. 20 Texas A&M, 7:30 p.m. ABC: The Aggies host their in-state rival for the first time since 2011 after the Longhorns joined the SEC. Texas favored by 5 1/2. Washington at No. 1 Oregon, 7:30 p.m., NBC: The top-ranked Ducks have been one of the nation’s best teams all season. They’ll face the Huskies, who would love a marquee win in coach Jedd Fisch’s first season. Oregon favored by 19 1/2. • NBA: A star-studded clash is part of the league's lineup. Golden State at Phoenix, 9 p.m., NBA TV: Steph Curry and the Warriors are set to face the Suns' Big Three of Kevin Durant, Devin Booker and Bradley Beal. What to watch Sunday • NFL: It's Sunday, that says it all. Pittsburgh at Cincinnati, 1 p.m., CBS: Joe Burrow is having a great season for the Bengals, who are struggling in other areas. They need a win to stay in the playoff race, hosting a Steelers team that's 8-3 and won five of their past six. Bengals favored by 3. Arizona at Minnesota, 1 p.m., Fox: The Cardinals are tied for the top of the NFC West while the Vikings are 9-2 and have been one of the biggest surprises of the season with journeyman Sam Darnold under center. Vikings favored by 3 1/2. Philadelphia at Baltimore, 4:25 p.m., CBS: Two of the league's most electric players will be on the field when Saquon Barkley and the Eagles travel to face Lamar Jackson and the Ravens. Ravens favored by 3. San Francisco at Buffalo, 8:20 p.m. NBC/Peacock: The 49ers try to get back to .500 against the Bills, who have won six straight. Bills favored by 7. • NBA. The best teams in the Eastern Conference meet in a statement game. Boston at Cleveland, 6 p.m., NBA TV: The defending champion Celtics travel to face the Cavs, who won their first 15 games to start the season. • Premier League: English soccer fans have a marquee matchup. Manchester City at Liverpool, 11 a.m., USA Network/Telemundo. The two top teams meet with Manchester City trying to shake off recent struggles. • Auto Racing: The F1 season nears its conclusion. F1 Qatar Grand Prix, 11 a.m., ESPN2 – It's the penultimate race of the season. Max Verstappen already has clinched his fourth consecutive season championship. Who rules the sidelines? A look at the 10 winningest NFL coaches Who rules the sidelines? A look at the 10 winningest NFL coaches Before the 2023 National Football League season started, it seemed inevitable that Bill Belichick would end his career as the winningest head coach in league history. He had won six Super Bowls with the New England Patriots and 298 regular-season games, plus 31 playoff games, across his career. Then the 2023 season happened. Belichick's Patriots finished 4-13, the franchise's worst record since 1992. At the end of the year, Belichick and New England owner Robert Kraft agreed to part ways. And now, during the 2024 season, Belichick is on the sideline. He's 26 wins from the #1 spot, a mark he'd reach in little more than two seasons if he maintained his .647 career winning percentage. Will he ascend the summit? It's hard to tell. Belichick would be 73 if he graced the sidelines next season—meaning he'd need to coach until at least 75 to break the all-time mark. Only one other NFL coach has ever helmed a team at age 73: Romeo Crennel in 2020 for the Houston Texans. With Belichick's pursuit of history stalled, it's worth glancing at the legends who have reached the pinnacle of coaching success. Who else stands among the 10 winningest coaches in NFL history? Stacker ranked the coaches with the most all-time regular-season wins using data from Pro Football Reference . These coaches have combined for 36 league championships, which represents 31.6% of all championships won throughout the history of pro football. To learn who made the list, keep reading. You may also like: Ranking the biggest NFL Draft busts of the last 30 years Bettmann/Contributor // Getty Images #10. Dan Reeves - Seasons coached: 23 - Years active: 1981-2003 - Record: 190-165-2 - Winning percentage: .535 - Championships: 0 Dan Reeves reached the Super Bowl four times—thrice with the Denver Broncos and once with the Atlanta Falcons—but never won the NFL's crown jewel. Still, he racked up nearly 200 wins across his 23-year career, including a stint in charge of the New York Giants, with whom he won Coach of the Year in 1993. In all his tenures, he quickly built contenders—the three clubs he coached were a combined 17-31 the year before Reeves joined and 28-20 in his first year. However, his career ended on a sour note as he was fired from a 3-10 Falcons team after Week 14 in 2003. Bettmann/Contributor // Getty Images #9. Chuck Noll - Seasons coached: 23 - Years active: 1969-91 - Record: 193-148-1 - Winning percentage: .566 - Championships: 4 Chuck Noll's Pittsburgh Steelers were synonymous with success in the 1970s. Behind his defense, known as the Steel Curtain, and offensive stars, including Terry Bradshaw, Franco Harris, and Lynn Swann, Noll led the squad to four Super Bowl victories from 1974 to 1979. Noll's Steelers remain the lone team to win four Super Bowls in six years, though Andy Reid and Kansas City could equal that mark if they win the Lombardi Trophy this season. Noll was elected to the Pro Football Hall of Fame in 1993, two years after retiring. His legacy of coaching success has carried on in Pittsburgh—the club has had only two coaches (Bill Cowher and Mike Tomlin) since Noll retired. Focus on Sport // Getty Images #8. Marty Schottenheimer - Seasons coached: 21 - Years active: 1984-98, 2001-06 - Record: 200-126-1 - Winning percentage: .613 - Championships: 0 As head coach of Cleveland, Kansas City, Washington, and San Diego, Marty Schottenheimer proved a successful leader during the regular season. Notably, he was named Coach of the Year after turning around his 4-12 Chargers team to a 12-4 record in 2004. His teams, however, struggled during the playoffs. Schottheimer went 5-13 in the postseason, and he never made it past the conference championship round. As such, the Pennsylvania-born skipper is the winningest NFL coach never to win a league championship. Focus on Sport // Getty Images #7. Paul Brown - Seasons coached: 25 - Years active: 1946-62, '68-75 - Record: 213-104-9 - Winning percentage: .672 - Championships: 7 The only coach on this list to pilot a college team, Paul Brown, reached the pro ranks after a three-year stint at Ohio State and two years with the Navy during World War II. He guided the Cleveland Browns—named after Brown, their first coach—to four straight titles in the fledgling All-America Football Conference. After the league folded, the ballclub moved to the NFL in 1950, and Cleveland continued its winning ways, with Brown leading the team to championships in '50, '54, and '55. He was fired in 1963 but returned in 1968 as the co-founder and coach of the Cincinnati Bengals. His other notable accomplishments include helping to invent the face mask and breaking pro football's color barrier . Bettmann/Contributor // Getty Images #6. Curly Lambeau - Seasons coached: 33 - Years active: 1921-53 - Record: 226-132-22 - Winning percentage: .631 - Championships: 6 An early stalwart of the NFL, Curly Lambeau spent 29 years helming the Green Bay Packers before wrapping up his coaching career with two-year stints with the Chicago Cardinals and Washington. His Packers won titles across three decades, including the league's first three-peat from 1929-31. Notably, he experienced only one losing season during his first 27 years with Green Bay, cementing his legacy of consistent success. Born in Green Bay, Lambeau co-founded the Packers and played halfback on the team from 1919-29. He was elected to the Hall of Fame as a coach and owner in 1963, two years before his death. You may also like: Countries with the most active NFL players Bettmann/Contributor // Getty Images #5. Tom Landry - Seasons coached: 29 - Years active: 1960-88 - Record: 250-162-6 - Winning percentage: .607 - Championships: 2 The first head coach of the Dallas Cowboys, Tom Landry held the position for his entire 29-year tenure as an NFL coach. The Cowboys were especially dominant in the 1970s when they made five Super Bowls and won the big game twice. Landry was known for coaching strong all-around squads and a unit that earned the nickname the "Doomsday Defense." Between 1966 and 1985, Landry and his Cowboys enjoyed 20 straight seasons with a winning record. He was elected to the Hall of Fame in 1990. Focus on Sport // Getty Images #3. Bill Belichick - Seasons coached: 29 - Years active: 1991-95, 2000-23 - Record: 302-165 - Winning percentage: .647 - Championships: 6 The most successful head coach of the 21st century, Bill Belichick first coached the Cleveland Browns before taking over the New England Patriots in 2000. With the Pats, Belichick combined with quarterback Tom Brady to win six Super Bowls in 18 years. Belichick and New England split after last season when the Patriots went 4-13—the worst record of Belichick's career. His name has swirled around potential coaching openings , but nothing has come of it. Belichick has remained in the media spotlight with his regular slot on the "Monday Night Football" ManningCast. Tom Pennington // Getty Images #2. George Halas - Seasons coached: 40 - Years active: 1920-29, '33-42, '46-55, '58-67 - Record: 318-148-31 - Winning percentage: .682 - Championships: 6 George Halas was the founder and longtime owner of the Chicago Bears and coached the team across four separate stints. Nicknamed "Papa Bear," he built the ballclub into one of the NFL's premier franchises behind players such as Bronko Nagurski and Sid Luckman. Halas also played for the team, competing as a player-coach in the 1920s. The first coach to study opponents via game film, he was once a baseball player and even made 12 appearances as a member of the New York Yankees in 1919. He was inducted into the Hall of Fame in 1963 as both a coach and owner. Bettmann/Contributor // Getty Images #1. Don Shula - Seasons coached: 33 - Years active: 1963-95 - Record: 328-156-6 - Winning percentage: .677 - Championships: 2 The winningest head coach in NFL history is Don Shula, who first coached the Baltimore Colts (losing Super Bowl III to Joe Namath and the New York Jets) for seven years before leading the Miami Dolphins for 26 seasons. With the Fins, Shula won back-to-back Super Bowls in 1972 and 1973, a run that included a 17-0 season—the only perfect campaign in NFL history. He also coached quarterback great Dan Marino in the 1980s and '90s, but the pair made it to a Super Bowl just once. Shula was inducted into the Hall of Fame in 1997. Story editing by Mike Taylor. Copy editing by Robert Wickwire. Photo selection by Lacy Kerrick. You may also like: The 5 biggest upsets of the 2023-24 NFL regular season Bettmann/Contributor // Getty Images Be the first to know
Syria's Interim FM Vows To Represent“All Sectors Of Society”Share this Story : Pembroke cyclist injured after being hit in head by object thrown from vehicle Copy Link Email X Reddit Pinterest LinkedIn Tumblr Breadcrumb Trail Links Local News Pembroke cyclist injured after being hit in head by object thrown from vehicle At about midnight on Dec. 1, the cyclist was on Pembroke Street East when they were assaulted, police said. Author of the article: Staff Reporter Published Dec 02, 2024 • Last updated 42 minutes ago • 1 minute read Join the conversation You can save this article by registering for free here . Or sign-in if you have an account. An Ontario Provincial Police cruiser. POSTMEDIA / FILE PHOTO Article content The OPP are investigating after a cyclist in Pembroke was taken to hospital after being hit in the head with an object thrown from a vehicle. Article content Article content At about midnight on Dec. 1, the cyclist was on Pembroke Street East between Drive-in Road and Old Mill Road when a dark-coloured vehicle with three or four people inside approached, police said in a news release. After being struck from something that was thrown from the vehicle, the cyclist required treatment at the hospital. Advertisement 2 Story continues below This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below. THIS CONTENT IS RESERVED FOR SUBSCRIBERS ONLY Subscribe now to read the latest news in your city and across Canada. Exclusive articles from Elizabeth Payne, David Pugliese, Andrew Duffy, Bruce Deachman and others. Plus, food reviews and event listings in the weekly newsletter, Ottawa, Out of Office. Unlimited online access to Ottawa Citizen and 15 news sites with one account. Ottawa Citizen ePaper, an electronic replica of the print edition to view on any device, share and comment on. Daily puzzles, including the New York Times Crossword. Support local journalism. SUBSCRIBE TO UNLOCK MORE ARTICLES Subscribe now to read the latest news in your city and across Canada. Exclusive articles from Elizabeth Payne, David Pugliese, Andrew Duffy, Bruce Deachman and others. Plus, food reviews and event listings in the weekly newsletter, Ottawa, Out of Office. Unlimited online access to Ottawa Citizen and 15 news sites with one account. Ottawa Citizen ePaper, an electronic replica of the print edition to view on any device, share and comment on. Daily puzzles, including the New York Times Crossword. Support local journalism. REGISTER / SIGN IN TO UNLOCK MORE ARTICLES Create an account or sign in to continue with your reading experience. Access articles from across Canada with one account. Share your thoughts and join the conversation in the comments. Enjoy additional articles per month. Get email updates from your favourite authors. THIS ARTICLE IS FREE TO READ REGISTER TO UNLOCK. Create an account or sign in to continue with your reading experience. Access articles from across Canada with one account Share your thoughts and join the conversation in the comments Enjoy additional articles per month Get email updates from your favourite authors Sign In or Create an Account Email Address Continue or View more offers If you are a Home delivery print subscriber, online access is included in your subscription. Activate your Online Access Now Article content The Upper Ottawa Valley OPP detachment asked anyone who was in the area and may have witnessed the incident or has any video/dash cam footage from that area between 11 p.m. on Nov. 30 and 12:30 a.m. Dec. 1 to contact it at 613-732-3332 or Pembroke/Renfrew County Crime Stoppers at 1-800-222-TIPS (8477) or at www.valleytips.ca . Our website is your destination for up-to-the-minute news, so make sure to bookmark our homepage and sign up for our newsletters so we can keep you informed. Recommended from Editorial Three charged after youth abducted, held for ransom in Orléans OPP East Region charges 23 drivers in RIDE program's first week Article content Share this article in your social network Share this Story : Pembroke cyclist injured after being hit in head by object thrown from vehicle Copy Link Email X Reddit Pinterest LinkedIn Tumblr Comments You must be logged in to join the discussion or read more comments. Create an Account Sign in Join the Conversation Postmedia is committed to maintaining a lively but civil forum for discussion. Please keep comments relevant and respectful. Comments may take up to an hour to appear on the site. You will receive an email if there is a reply to your comment, an update to a thread you follow or if a user you follow comments. Visit our Community Guidelines for more information. Trending Layoffs could be on the table for public servants. Here's everything you need to know Public Service Battle lines drawn between public servants, taxpayers over public service pension surplus Public Service City of Ottawa worker fired after audit uncovers kickback scheme with landlords Local News Is Ottawa ready for the return of former Senators winger Dany Heatley? Ottawa Senators How the Canada Post strike impacts Canadians News Read Next Latest National Stories Featured Local SavingsHouse Speaker Mike Johnson and U.S. Rep. Mariannette Miller-Meeks spoke to reporters following an event in Indianola Oct. 18, 2024. (Photo by Robin Opsahl/Iowa Capital Dispatch) U.S. Rep. Mariannette Miller-Meeks’ reelection win for Iowa’s 1st Congressional District was confirmed Wednesday as the recount requested by Democratic challenger Christina Bohannan concluded. The Associated Press called the race at 3:07 p.m. Wednesday, several weeks after the Nov. 5 general election. As of the latest updates from the AP, Miller-Meeks won with unofficial results showing her at 206,955 votes to Bohannan’s 206,157 — a 798-vote margin, slightly smaller than the 802-vote gap reported when Bohannan requested the recount earlier in November . The recount process was conducted in all 20 counties in the 1st Congressional District over the course of seven days, with the final two counties — Johnson and Keokuk counties — finishing their recounts Wednesday. There were no changes to the vote totals during the recount process in Keokuk County, according to the local county auditor’s office. In Johnson County, Miller-Meeks’ lead dropped by two votes and Bohannan’s dropped by six, according to county auditor staff. Bohannan conceded the race in a Wednesday statement, congratulating Miller-Meeks on her victory. She thanked election officials and volunteers for their efforts during the election and recount process — as well as thanking Iowans “for their patience” as the recount was conducted. “Although this is not the result we wanted, I am so proud of our campaign,” Bohannan said. “We exceeded all expectations and turned a district that many pundits thought was unwinnable into one of the very closest races in the country. ... I am honored by the roughly half of Iowans in this district – people of all political parties – who voted for me to be their next congresswoman. Although I won’t be able to represent them in Washington DC this January, I want them to know that I will continue our important work of putting Iowa first.” With the conclusion of the 1st Congressional District recount, all recount processes for 2024 elections in the state have concluded. Three legislative races were also brought to recount from the 2024 election with results showing two Democratic incumbents, Sen. Sarah Trone Garriott, D-Waukee, and Rep. Monica Kurth, D-Davenport, keeping their seats, as well as confirming the loss of incumbent Sen. Nate Boulton, D-Des Moines, to Republican Mike Pike. With these recounts over, Iowa’s federal delegation will continue to be all Republican. Republicans will also hold a trifecta of control at the Iowa Statehouse, with supermajorities in both the state House and Senate. Miller-Meeks gave her victory speech at her Election Night watch party and has criticized Bohannan for pursuing a recount. She, alongside the House GOP campaign arm, the National Republican Congressional Committee, have criticized Bohannan for not conceding the race earlier because of the cost to the state, claiming the process had cost $21,000 as of Tuesday. Mike Marinella, a NRCC spokesperson, released a statement congratulating Miller-Meeks on her reelection Wednesday. “Congratulations to Congresswoman Mariannette Miller-Meeks on her incredible victory,” Marinella said. “As a doctor, veteran, and Congresswoman, Congresswoman Miller-Meeks has always answered the call to service. Rep. Miller-Meeks’ record speaks for itself, and she will continue to deliver valuable results for veterans, farmers, small business owners and families across Southeast Iowa.”By ADRIANA GOMEZ LICON FORT LAUDERDALE, Fla. (AP) — President-elect Donald Trump promised on Tuesday to “vigorously pursue” capital punishment after President Joe Biden commuted the sentences of most people on federal death row partly to stop Trump from pushing forward their executions. Related Articles National Politics | Elon Musk’s preschool is the next step in his anti-woke education dreams National Politics | Trump’s picks for top health jobs not just team of rivals but ‘team of opponents’ National Politics | Biden will decide on US Steel acquisition after influential panel fails to reach consensus National Politics | Biden vetoes once-bipartisan effort to add 66 federal judgeships, citing ‘hurried’ House action National Politics | A history of the Panama Canal — and why Trump can’t take it back on his own Trump criticized Biden’s decision on Monday to change the sentences of 37 of the 40 condemned people to life in prison without parole, arguing that it was senseless and insulted the families of their victims. Biden said converting their punishments to life imprisonment was consistent with the moratorium imposed on federal executions in cases other than terrorism and hate-motivated mass murder. “Joe Biden just commuted the Death Sentence on 37 of the worst killers in our Country,” he wrote on his social media site. “When you hear the acts of each, you won’t believe that he did this. Makes no sense. Relatives and friends are further devastated. They can’t believe this is happening!” Presidents historically have no involvement in dictating or recommending the punishments that federal prosecutors seek for defendants in criminal cases, though Trump has long sought more direct control over the Justice Department’s operations. The president-elect wrote that he would direct the department to pursue the death penalty “as soon as I am inaugurated,” but was vague on what specific actions he may take and said they would be in cases of “violent rapists, murderers, and monsters.” He highlighted the cases of two men who were on federal death row for slaying a woman and a girl, had admitted to killing more and had their sentences commuted by Biden. On the campaign trail, Trump often called for expanding the federal death penalty — including for those who kill police officers, those convicted of drug and human trafficking, and migrants who kill U.S. citizens. “Trump has been fairly consistent in wanting to sort of say that he thinks the death penalty is an important tool and he wants to use it,” said Douglas Berman, an expert on sentencing at Ohio State University’s law school. “But whether practically any of that can happen, either under existing law or other laws, is a heavy lift.” Berman said Trump’s statement at this point seems to be just a response to Biden’s commutation. “I’m inclined to think it’s still in sort of more the rhetoric phase. Just, ‘don’t worry. The new sheriff is coming. I like the death penalty,’” he said. Most Americans have historically supported the death penalty for people convicted of murder, according to decades of annual polling by Gallup, but support has declined over the past few decades. About half of Americans were in favor in an October poll, while roughly 7 in 10 Americans backed capital punishment for murderers in 2007. Before Biden’s commutation, there were 40 federal death row inmates compared with more than 2,000 who have been sentenced to death by states. “The reality is all of these crimes are typically handled by the states,” Berman said. A question is whether the Trump administration would try to take over some state murder cases, such as those related to drug trafficking or smuggling. He could also attempt to take cases from states that have abolished the death penalty. Berman said Trump’s statement, along with some recent actions by states, may present an effort to get the Supreme Court to reconsider a precedent that considers the death penalty disproportionate punishment for rape. “That would literally take decades to unfold. It’s not something that is going to happen overnight,” Berman said. Before one of Trump’s rallies on Aug. 20, his prepared remarks released to the media said he would announce he would ask for the death penalty for child rapists and child traffickers. But Trump never delivered the line. One of the men Trump highlighted on Tuesday was ex-Marine Jorge Avila Torrez, who was sentenced to death for killing a sailor in Virginia and later pleaded guilty to the fatal stabbing of an 8-year-old and a 9-year-old girl in a suburban Chicago park several years before. The other man, Thomas Steven Sanders, was sentenced to death for the kidnapping and slaying of a 12-year-old girl in Louisiana, days after shooting the girl’s mother in a wildlife park in Arizona. Court records show he admitted to both killings. Some families of victims expressed anger with Biden’s decision, but the president had faced pressure from advocacy groups urging him to make it more difficult for Trump to increase the use of capital punishment for federal inmates. The ACLU and the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops were some of the groups that applauded the decision. Biden left three federal inmates to face execution. They are Dylann Roof, who carried out the 2015 racist slayings of nine Black members of Mother Emanuel AME Church in Charleston, South Carolina; 2013 Boston Marathon bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev ; and Robert Bowers, who fatally shot 11 congregants at Pittsburgh’s Tree of Life Synagogue in 2018 , the deadliest antisemitic attack in U.S history. Associated Press writers Jill Colvin, Michelle L. Price and Eric Tucker contributed to this report.
COLUMBIA, Mo. (AP) — A law requiring Missouri voters to show government-issued photo identification to cast regular ballots will stand after a lower-court judge found it constitutional Tuesday. Cole County Circuit Judge Jon Beetem’s decision upholds the law, which was made possible by a 2016 voter-approved constitutional amendment allowing lawmakers to enact photo ID requirements. “To maintain a secure system for voting, it only stands to reason that a photo ID should be essential,” Missouri Republican Secretary of State Jay Ashcroft said in a statement praising the ruling. Voter photo ID supporters such as Ashcroft say the practice prevents voter fraud and improves public confidence in election results. Voting rights advocates say getting the records needed to obtain proper photo identification can be challenging, especially for older voters and people with disabilities. The National Conference of State Legislatures reports 36 states request or require identification to vote, of which at least 21 ask for a photo ID. Under Missouri’s law, people without government-issued photo identification can cast provisional ballots to be counted if they return later that day with a photo ID or if election officials verify their signatures. The law also requires the state to provide a free photo identification card to those lacking one to vote. Missouri’s NAACP and League of Women Voters, along with two individual voters, sued to overturn the law in 2022. They argued that some voters faced substantial obstacles getting up-to-date and accurate government-issued photo IDs and worried that casting a provisional ballot could put them at higher risk of having their votes not counted. Beetem initially dismissed the lawsuit , finding neither of the two individual voters “alleged a specific, concrete, non-speculative injury or legally protectable interest in challenging the photo ID requirement.” The Missouri ACLU and Missouri Voter Protection Coalition, who sued on behalf of the plaintiffs, in response added another voter to the lawsuit and asked Beetem again to find the voter ID requirement unconstitutional. Beetem noted in his Tuesday ruling that all of the individual plaintiffs have successfully voted since the law took effect. “Their claim that their provisional ballots may be rejected is purely speculative,” Beetem wrote. “In addition, the evidence at trial confirms that rejection rates for provisional ballots are low, and the rates specifically for signature-mismatch are exceedingly low.” He concluded that the law’s rules on photo identification “protect the fundamental right to vote by deterring difficult to detect forms of voter fraud.” Lawyers for the plaintiffs said they will appeal Beetem’s ruling. “The League believes the state should be making it easier, not harder, for Missourians to exercise their fundamental right to vote,” Missouri League of Women Voters President Marilyn McLeod said in a statement. “There’s no evidence of voter impersonation in Missouri, so these restrictions don’t make our elections any safer or more secure.” Don't let this be the end of the free press. The free press is under attack — and America's future hangs in the balance. As other newsrooms bow to political pressure, HuffPost is not backing down. Would you help us keep our news free for all? We can't do it without you. Can't afford to contribute? Support HuffPost by creating a free account and log in while you read. You've supported HuffPost before, and we'll be honest — we could use your help again . We view our mission to provide free, fair news as critically important in this crucial moment, and we can't do it without you. Whether you give once or many more times, we appreciate your contribution to keeping our journalism free for all. You've supported HuffPost before, and we'll be honest — we could use your help again . We view our mission to provide free, fair news as critically important in this crucial moment, and we can't do it without you. Whether you give just one more time or sign up again to contribute regularly, we appreciate you playing a part in keeping our journalism free for all. Already contributed? Log in to hide these messages. The 2022 law also includes permits in-person voting for any reason two weeks before an election, a compromise negotiated by Senate Democrats . Related From Our PartnerMELBOURNE, Australia (AP) — The Australian Senate on Thursday began considering a ban on children younger than 16 years old from social media after the House of Representatives overwhelmingly supported the age restriction. The world-first bill that would make platforms including TikTok, Facebook, Snapchat, Reddit, X and Instagram liable for fines of up to 50 million Australian dollars ($33 million) for systemic failures to prevent young children from holding accounts is likely to be passed by the Senate on Thursday, the Parliament’s final session for the year and potentially the last before elections, which are due within months. The major parties’ support for the ban all but guarantees the legislation will become law. But many child welfare and mental health advocates are concerned about unintended consequences. Unaligned Sen. Jacqui Lambie complained about the limited amount of time the government gave the Senate to debate the age restriction, which she described as “undercooked.” “I thought this was a good idea. A lot of people out there thought it was a good idea until we looked at the detail and, let's be honest, there's no detail,” Lambie told the Senate. The House of Representatives on Wednesday overwhelmingly carried the bill 102 votes to 13. Once the legislation becomes law, the platforms would have one year to work out how they could implement the ban before penalties are enforced. The platforms complained that the law would be unworkable, and urged the Senate to delay the vote until at least June next year when a government-commissioned evaluation of age assurance technologies made its report on how young children could be excluded. Critics argue the government is attempting to convince parents it is protecting their children ahead of general elections due by May. The government hopes that voters will reward it for responding to parents' concerns about their children's addiction to social media. Some argue the legislation could cause more harm than it prevents. Criticisms include that the legislation was rushed through Parliament without adequate scrutiny, is ineffective, poses privacy risks for all users, and undermines parental authority to make decisions for their children. Opponents of the bill also argue the ban would isolate children, deprive them of the positive aspects of social media, drive them to the dark web, discourage children too young for social media to report harm and reduce incentives for platforms to improve online safety.
In this podcast, Motley Fool analyst Nick Sciple and host Ricky Mulvey discuss: Potential futures of and lingering questions about quantum computers . A restructuring at Warner Bros. Discovery that's pleasing its investors, and why the media conglomerate may be a falling knife. Then, Motley Fool contributor Lou Whiteman joins host Mary Long for a look at FedEx , and holiday shipping season. Visit our sponsor: Get $1,000 off Vanta at www.vanta.com/fool To catch full episodes of all The Motley Fool's free podcasts, check out our podcast center . To get started investing, check out our beginner's guide to investing in stocks . A full transcript follows the video. This video was recorded on Dec. 12, 2024. Ricky Mulvey: We're going to the quantum verse. You're listening to Motley Fool Money. I'm Ricky Mulvey be joined today by Nick Sciple. Nick, good to see you. Nick Sciple: Great to be here with you, Ricky. Ricky Mulvey: Let's get into this Google announcement, which is a little tough to parse through anytime you're talking about quantum processes, but Alphabet announced a new quantum computing chip called Willow. The stock has jumped about 12% over the past week as Wall Street analysts pretend to understand quantum science. Now the stock is at an all time high. Google reporting that, "Willow performed a standard benchmark computation in under five minutes that would take one of today's fastest supercomputers, 10 septillion, that is 10 to the 25 years." We're getting into some logarithmic math. Sounds like this thing can get all the Bitcoin at once, Nick, but what does Google want from this research? Nick Sciple: Sure, I think Google just wants to stay on the cutting edge of new computing technology. As you laid out here, these quantum computers have the promise if they reach commercialization to do calculations that today's existing computers couldn't do in the entire history of the universe, if you are going to stretch out the time there. Just trying to push forward the state of the art of science as Google has done with their AI investments in the past and other places. This is one of the big focuses that Google has outside of their core business to just invest in innovation. Ricky Mulvey: For those who are unfamiliar with this game, and none of us are going to pretend to be quantum experts here. I don't want to put words in your mouth, Nick, but what can a quantum computer do that's so much better than a regular computer? Why are the researchers so interested in this? Nick Sciple: Yeah, without getting too deep down into the weeds, my understanding is you essentially use the fundamental particles of the universe to do the computing for you. Use atleast qubits, which is electrons, that sort of thing, which can exist in a superposition state. We're getting down into a complex physics. They can be both zero and one, at the same time, unlike classical computers, they have to be either zero or one, at any given particular time, this unlocks significant potential to perform multiple calculations at once, faster and simulate problems in large data sets you couldn't do today. However, there's lots of instability in these qubits and we haven't been able to get them to be stable enough to build these computers in a functional way, but this breakthrough that Google announced really is a sign that we're getting closer. If we do reach commercialization, then this would be a breakthrough in computing and could change the world. Ricky Mulvey: This is a bleeding edge technology, and as you mentioned, getting these chips and computers stable is a monumental challenge in and of itself because you're not dealing with ones and zeros. You're dealing with particle uncertainty at an atomic level, which sounds a little above my pay grade, but there's a lot of promise and use cases to watch. What are you going to be watching as this technology plays out? Nick Sciple: You think about a breakthrough in computing technology could touch things, healthcare, code breaking, that sort of thing. For me, the place where I think you'd see quantum computing used first is in defense. If you think about past cutting edge technologies, they all seem to find the first application in defense rockets, the Internet, drones, GPS, nuclear technology, all these things started out as defense applications. Really makes sense. The DOD isn't worried about profits or commercialization, really worried about national defense, and we've agreed as a country there is not a price we want to put on that. I'd expect quantum computing to find its first applications in the defense field. You think about code breaking certainly has been one of the earliest applications of computers going back all the way to the beginning, so you could definitely tell a story about where that could be applied in the defense realm. If we do reach something where this applies, I think defense is going to be the place where you see it used first. Ricky Mulvey: One thing I'll be watching. You mentioned code breaking, and this could fundamentally change as this tech plays out. Cybersecurity companies as cyber threats change. There's a book quantum supremacy and lays out one example where there could be two Internets where if you're trying to send secure information, you might not be able to do that along the normal broadband infrastructure we have. If you're a company doing banking information, that kind of thing. You might need laser beams to send it because otherwise it could just be so easy for these quantum computers to break into. Let's talk about the stock side because remember, a few months ago, everyone was worried about Google and how it didn't understand artificial intelligence. Well, now investors are saying. Boy oh, boy, do you understand quantum computing, and we're excited about that. Wall Street Journal columnist Dan Gallagher has a column out today saying, "Google's quantum boost doesn't really compute pointing out that basically the $250 billion that was added to the company's market cap is looking speculative at best. This is because the advertising business generates about that money in a single year." Pessimism always sounds smart, Nick, and this is something I'm excited about. Quantum computing is cool. You tell me, is this smart analysis from Mr. Gallagher? Does this belong at the Player Haters' Ball? Nick Sciple: I would say you could say both in one way or the other. It's smart analysis in the sense that is this quantum computing technology commercially ready enough to be adding that type of market cap to Google, Alphabet's stock today? No, this is only the second milestone that Google has laid out toward their quantum computing commercialization road map. I think there's seven of those milestones. There's really no guarantee that it ever gets there. I mentioned defense really being at the cutting edge, the DARPA program manager that's in charge of quantum computing and said their basic position here is skepticism. They're skeptical that we'll ever reach a quantum computer with enough of these qubits that are stable enough for this to be built. It's really a question of whether we're actually reach commercialization, although it's a huge breakthrough for Google. That said, I think some of the movement in the stock is less about hey, we're about to have a quantum computing tomorrow. It's renewed confidence in Google their leadership and their technology position. You mentioned AI earlier this year, a lot of concerns that AI could disrupt that core Google advertising business and we've seen some really exciting announcements from Google Gemini, their AI tool in recent weeks that at least have given me some confidence in the AI business. While quantum computing is a long way off as far as these frontier technologies, I do want to mention one breakthrough technology that is actually finally gaining traction for Google, and that's self driving cars. This is another technology that started out as a defense program. Twenty years ago, DARPA, Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency had their 2004 grand challenge, which is really kicking off the quest for self driving cars. Now we're 20 years on, and Google is finally reaching commercialization of these, according to data from California's Public Utilities Commission, where it noted 312,000 rides per month in California in August. That's double what they'd done three months before and just in recent weeks Google has announced plans to expand rapidly across the US and Austin, Atlanta, and Miami in 2025, announced partnerships with Uber to expand that in those new cities. This is an area that you really don't hear mentioned that often as a real value driver for Google. Do I think quantum computing alone is enough to move Google stock? No, but do I think there's a good argument that we should be more optimistic about Google and that, the company has brighter days ahead of it and isn't under deep threat by some of this disruption folks were worried about earlier this year, I think that's true, and I think there's a good argument to be made that Google's fairly valued here. Ricky Mulvey: The one thing in Google at about 25 times earnings right now. One thing on the self driving stuff that I'm waiting for is someone out in Colorado, Nick. You mentioned the three cities, Austin, Atlanta, Miami, San Francisco, these cars are already cooking. None of those cities get snow or ice a lot. I'm very much looking forward to seeing these self driving cars artfully work in icy and winter conditions. I think that's going to be my transition point to saying, This is really going to roll out across the country, but I'm ready to get in self driving car. Nick Sciple: You left out LA there, Ricky, that's another. There's no accident. All those cities have favorable weather to the technology. Let's say that. We're not there where this is going to be commercial in every city, but we're getting there where this isn't a science project anymore. This is a real commercial business. Ricky Mulvey: Let's go to Warner Brothers . Warner Brothers Discovery, maybe taking a note from Comcast last week, announcing that it is separating its cable and streaming division. This is a week after Comcast announced that it was straight up spinning off most of its cable assets. Cynically you could say hey, it's telling private equity firms, you can easily cut here if you want to hive off this part of the company. For Warner Brothers Discovery, its global linear networks division will house its cable brands. Streaming and studios now will include Max and other streaming assets. You're seeing Warner Brothers Discovery investors get excited about this. Stock is popping more than 10% as I was looking this morning. Why are they so excited about a little restructuring, Nick? Nick Sciple: It's been a tough run for Warner Brothers Discovery down about 50% since the merger between Warner Brothers and Discovery back in 2022. I think, the market is excited about potentially a new strategy for the business. CEO David Zaslav has really been pounding the table on the need for more transactions, more consolidation in the media space, and perhaps with a change of administration, maybe those deals are a little bit more easy to do. You look at Warner Brothers Discovery today, just over $40 billion in debt. The past couple of years, the company has really had to focus on cutting costs, laying off workers to focus on cash flow. The main driver of the business continues to be cable networks. About half of the revenue close to 90% of the EBITDA comes from the cable networks, but these are really no growth businesses. Ad dollars continuing to leave traditional media streaming still on the ascendancy, just had to take a nine billion dollar write down on its cable assets. In August, if you look at the streaming business, there is some growth there, and that business has reached break even, although you have to take those numbers with a grain of salt, but still, HBO Max is a little bit of a mess, if you compare it to some of these other streaming companies, combining HBO's content with Discovery's reality TV, and that sort of thing has led them to be a little bit behind some of the folks in the market. I don't have any transaction. I guess this reorganization sets the company up to separate perhaps some of these bad linear assets from the studio and streaming assets, although they have problems, have a long term future. Zaslav on the press release said we continue to prioritize ensuring our global linear networks business is well positioned to drive free cash flow, while our streaming and studios businesses focus on driving growth by telling the world's most compelling stories, our new corporate structure better aligns organizations, and this is the big part. Enhances our flexibility with potential future strategic opportunities across an evolving media landscape. I think in April, we reached two years since that merger between Warner Brothers and Discovery, now that we're two years on from that, those transactions can take place. I think hiving off these two businesses sets that up. I think what you're likely to see is either spinning off these cable assets and attaching a lot of this debt to those assets. You can have a good co, bad co spin off or perhaps you see some consolidation with some of these other struggling cable businesses out there, whether that's the spin off from Comcast or Paramount is out there and is a under new leadership perhaps is going to be looking to sell off some pieces. Ricky Mulvey: A lot of these companies with these cable assets seem to be making moves in 2024 that maybe they know they should have been making in the mid 2010. I think Paramount is one example. We were chatting before the show where you wanted to talk about the BET Network, where the valuation falling from about 2-3 billion dollars, having bids for that to 1.6 now. I'm talking about a different company, but bringing this theme together, do you think these companies, Paramount, Warner Brothers, Discovery, have they really just missed the boat to sell these assets at a good price? Are these distressed sellers right now? Nick Sciple: I think they are distressed sellers. These companies are in a tough spot where you're heavily indebted and you need to be able to support that debt burden. However, your assets that are generating the cash flow to do that or in a difficult position, a shrinking business. As you mentioned, the valuation of these cable assets is moving down into the right. If you just look at BET, best case scenario, we're looking at 20% decline in valuation over just the course of a year. We could expect these assets to continue going down. They're no longer prestige properties that folks would be excited to buy and own, notwithstanding the Ellison family getting involved with Paramount earlier this year. I think now we're looking at vultures trying to bid up these assets and run them for cash flow. I think there's still quite a bit of cash to be squeezed out of these businesses, but the market has certainly come to the conclusion that the growth days are over. As you see things like sports abandoning cable for some of these streaming platforms, the things that were really holding the cable bundle together are finally leaving. Ricky Mulvey: If you're waiting for Netflix to come in, you had co-CEO Ted Sarandos at UBS media conference on Tuesday saying, "We're better builders than buyers." Implying we're not going to come in and take a lot of these distressed cable assets off your hands. In some cases, you're seeing these companies pick and choose how they do it. We were talking about Comcast , where they spun off pretty much every cable channel they had with the exception of the Bravo network, which has a lot of their reality programming that does quite well on Peacock. You wonder, what are they doing this for and who do they expect the buyers to be? Let's get into the valuation a little bit, because Warner Brothers Discovery right now trades at about six times free cash flow. The earnings are a little funky depending on how you add in the depreciation. We heard from Yasser El-Shimy on the show a couple of weeks back that he likes this as a value play. You have a lot of properties in there that are valuable. You have the HBO brand, which for at least me and my household, that's a must have, along with Netflix. You have a cyclical theater business that's a little bit down this year because they don't have a Barbie type movie on their hands, but maybe it can make a profit again, but when you look at this through your stock analyst lens, are you looking at a value play here or a falling knife? Nick Sciple: For me, I wouldn't call Warner Brothers Discovery a value play. I'd have to put it in the falling knife category, just in the sense that, the cable networks, as I mentioned earlier, heading to zero over time, there is cash flow to squeeze out of this business, but the long term trajectory of this business is going to be down. If you look at streaming, they've got a great library of assets. HBO Max is great, but they're far from the leader in this space. Netflix really forced everyone to follow them toward profitability a couple years ago, really set the terms of engagement in streaming. If you look at Amazon , they really seized the lead in advertising and streaming by pushing all their prime members to an ad support platform. You're behind the leading subscription video on Demand company. You're behind the leading advertising video on Demand company. You're also heavily indebted and backed into a corner with some of these better resourced, more diversified companies. For me is there a future for the Warner Brothers movie division? Of course. I think they're going to have a long term future. Does it need to be an independent company? No. Long term, I think these assets end up being held by a number of different larger companies as opposed to remaining an independent media business. Ricky Mulvey: Who wins from these content arms dealing games? Nick Sciple: We're talking about companies in the streaming race. If I had to pick a place to invest I mentioned the diversified players in a much better position than the pure plays on cable assets, so you think about the odd companies out here, Warner Bros and Paramount really I would say, distressed assets. Better companies on that layout, Comcast and Disney in a better position, given that they're more diversified, they have the Parks business to fall back on, Comcast, in their case, has the cable business. Those companies are really better position but if I'm going to invest in the media and the content space, as I've said before, I think the company that my favorite is, is TKO Group Holdings , Ticker is TKO. It's the parent company of WWE and the UFC and the reason I think they're in a good spot here is they're the arms dealer to these competing streaming platforms, they've had the ability to just to see the amount folks are paying for their content move up into the right, for a long time, WWE Raw has been the highest rated episodic cable program on TV, they've made that jump from cable to Netflix, so in January of this year will be the lead live element of Netflix's ad-supported business, you've got next year, their rights deal for the UFC is set to expire. Likely to see that be reupped with ESPN, they're looking at a 10-year deal. I think that's going to be significantly higher. This is a company that all these potential players in streaming are looking for access to the audience that TKO brings, you look at what's happening in sports where basically everybody wants a piece of this and they have the ability to sell into this market, so I think if you invest in a company like TKO or some of these other folks that are selling scarce content into these competing streaming businesses, I think those are the folks who are most best positioned to benefit from what's going on in streaming while all these other streaming competitors fight it out. Ricky Mulvey: Also, you got two top dogs in the WWE in professional wrestling in the UFC in mixed martial arts. The folks in those organizations, certainly people, I don't want to bet against or be against in any type of fight. Nick Sciple, appreciate you joining me here on Motley Fool Money. Thanks for breaking it down. Nick Sciple: Thanks, Ricky. Happy to do it again anytime? Ricky Mulvey: Holiday shipping season is upon us, and my colleague, Mary Long is taking a look at a few of the key players. She's starting off with FedEx with Motley Fool contributor Lou Whitman. Today's show is brought to you by Vanta. Whether you're starting or scaling a company, demonstrating top-notch security practices and establishing trust is more important than ever. Vanta automates compliance for SOC2, ISO27OO1 GDPR, and more, saving you time and money while helping you build customer trust plus, you can streamline security reviews by automating questionnaires and demonstrating your security posture with a customer-facing Trust Center, all powered by Vanta AI. Over 7,000 global companies like Atlassian , Flow Health, and CORA use Vanta to manage risk and proof security in real-time. My audience gets a special offer of $1,000 off Vanta at vanta.com/fool, that is V-A-N-T-A.com/fool for $1,000 off. Mary Long: Lou Whitman, it is shipping season. People are ordering gifts, most likely over the interwebs and those gifts have got to get from point A to point B, potentially with a few stops along the way, so today, we're going to shine the spotlight on a company that plays a big role in moving stuff around the world, we're talking FedEx. On the one hand, this company needs no introduction but on the other, I do think that Amazon and how speedy prime delivery is has warped our understanding of how packages move, so let's focus on that and set the table here. If the majority of packages arriving on your doorstep are from Amazon, it can be easy to forget that there are actually other movers and shakers that are playing a really massive part in this logistics puzzle. Break it down for us. FedEx splits its business into the Express segment and the freight segment. What's each of those do? Exactly. Lou Whitman: Yes so for years, they actually had broken down further between the a network for Express and a network for non-Express. As you said, this year, they combine that into one operation, which should make it more efficient but basically, there's the parcel service, which is packages and everything coming from retailers, and then to use their old slogan, the absolutely positively has to be the overnight stuff. Yes, they used to break that separate from the can wait a few days, but now they're trying to bring that together. Freight, on the other hand, that's just an LTL trucking business, less than truckload, those are the big stuff, those are the stuff you need a forklift instead of just dropped off at your door. Mary Long: Out of those two newly split segments, which is more interesting to you as an investor, where's the big story with this company? Consumers were probably more familiar with packages shipping back and forth to each other, but where's the money being made? Lou Whitman: The parcel business is 85% of total revenue, whether it's Express or can get there whenever, that's also where there is the higher potential for higher margins. Definitely, that is where your focus should be. Express actually still makes up more than half of parcel revenue, it isn't mostly just gifts from Grandma, there is still a big business shipping overnight business, that's the business where they really can and we can break down a little more just inside that business, but if they're going to generate plus margins going forward, it's probably going to be from that business and not the trucking business. Mary Long: Yes, so let's break that down a little bit more. Like, what levers can FedEx pull to grow here? If you look at average daily package volume, so the number of packages being sent, that's been pretty flat over the past year. Is increasing that number a big priority here or is it more about pricing power? Lou Whitman: Part of that is out of their control, part of it is just the economy. You can't force your customers to ship things, it is a demand-based business, and all across the board, the transports, we've seen volumes fall, it's just been a weak market. They can't really control that, what they can control, and what they are increasingly trying to do is get to those premium services and focus on that. Refrigeration is a big one, whether it's produce or medical, refrigerated shipping is a highly specialized thing, Amazon trucks don't have refrigerators in them, so you can't really compete there. There is specialized competitors, but the big guys, they're focused on things like this where they can drive higher margin, it's a lot better business for them than just getting the toys on time for the holidays or something like that. Mary Long: Between 2020 and 2022, FedEx saw some decent growth, and maybe this goes back to this stuff that's out of their control, more macro factors that you just mentioned. They had $69 billion in revenue in 2020, 83.5$billion in 2021, 93.5 billion in 2022, so decent movement but since then, revenue has been on a downward trajectory. Is it just the macro picture that caused that, or are there other things that are within FedEx's toolbox that they can use to address that? Lou Whitman: It's very much a macro story and specifically a pandemic story. We all started buying everything at home and getting it shipped, so the demand for shipping services went up, and that echoed through the system for a few years but we've seen just like I said, this broader transport slump. For one thing, e-commerce hasn't disappeared post-pandemic, but it has normalized, so you have seen just regression to the mean but as importantly, this macro idea, we've been talking for years now about hard landings, about recessions, about what's to come, that causes large corporate customers to scale back on inventory and scale back on just what they have in their warehouses, which means less demand for shipping. There has been some move around the edges. FedEx has new management, and they're trying to get rid of some of the more marginal business, so a little bit of it might be by choice but mostly, all across the board, you will see the stocks reflected this, this has just been a bad year, 18 months for these companies, FedEx included. Mary Long: FedEx got a new CEO a couple years ago, he'd been with the company for a long time, but more recently, in this new role, he's implemented some cost-cutting measures that initiative was called Drive, deliver results through innovation, value, and efficiency. What innovation, value, and efficiency are we seeing? What I think most recently this drive program led to $1.8 billion in cost savings over the 2024 fiscal year, what are we seeing cut, and what are we seeing come out on the other side as a result of those cuts? Lou Whitman: The overall goal is about four billion a year, so at 1.8 billion, you're right, they're about halfway there, which is on track. We talked at the top about consolidating business units, some of it is as simple as that, but part of it, too, is just as you consolidate these things, you can use your warehouses more efficiently. At some places, these networks had separate facilities, you can better use your jets and other big asset, things like that. A lot of this is just the slow and steady of making the network more efficient. It is a new management team, Raj Supermanian. You really have to give him some credit. He has been there forever, but he took over for Fred Smith. Fred Smith is the guy who founded the business. Smith has a reputation for being, shall we say, opinionated. He believes in himself, he is still the executive chairman of the board. It isn't easy for someone to come in following the founder and say, you know what? We need to change a lot of things here, and we need to cut a lot of things. Basically, tell your former boss, I know better. It's working, and it's to his great credit that they have come in and done this, I think it'll benefit him over time. Mary Long: What is Fred Smith's unwritten role within the company now? You mentioned he's still executive chairman, he's still involved, but is this like a Howard Schultz type of situation where he still got the era of management, what's the unwritten situation there? Lou Whitman: I can only guess. Fred has a lot of different interests, which probably helps Raj do his job, but I can only guess that Fred knew about a lot was coming before, good corporate governance as you should tell the board chairman, but I would think that they're not going to want to be surprising Fred at any meetings right now. Mary Long: We kicked off this segment by talking about Amazon. tough to talk, logistics, package delivery without mentioning Amazon. Once upon a time, FedEx was partnered up with Amazon. That relationship ended in 2019, FedEx initiated that breakup saying, hey, Amazon's developing its own delivery capabilities, and now they're a threat rather than somebody that we want to partner with. In January of this year, FedEx announced it was launching a data-driven commerce platform called FDX. Is that supposed to help FedEx better compete with Amazon in a different category? What's the state of play of that particular competition right now? Lou Whitman: The platform, if we're honest, is table stakes in 2024. You'd be shocked at how this business works and how much of logistics is still done by the office phone, with a whiteboard, with just getting things done that way but increasingly, consumers and especially these corporate customers are demanding a digital platform, so this is FedEx trying to join the century and get on board with the rest of us. As for Amazon and FedEx, in one sense, yes, it hurt FedEx because it was a huge shipping customer, and at the end of the day, you want full trucks. You make money when you have volume but it tended to be a lower margin volume, I don't know many people who have partnered with Amazon who are like, this is the high margin side of our business and most of Amazon's retail competitors aren't real keen to hand Amazon the customer data that comes with having them do their shipping form. There's plenty of business here. Yes, you lost a major customer, but they are coexisting, they went from being frenemies to just rivals but really, FedEx, there's plenty of business for FedEx and UPS and everyone else just to serve everyone, not name Amazon and it's really hard for Amazon to get that business from the retailers that they are competing with. Mary Long: Amazon also is not FedEx's only competitor, there's also UPS, which I'll be talking with Aunt Shavon about later next week. There's DHL. Within this whole logistics landscape, what grade does FedEx get? Where does it stand and stack up against its competitors? Lou Whitman: I'd say a solid B+, and the comparison with UPS is a great one, and Aunt will have great thoughts on that. UPS has a much better dividend, which I'm sure Anthony would love to talk about. It's a powerful competitor. Over time, there's plenty of room to both win. I'd note UPS is much more unionized, which gives less flexibility, they would argue it gives more predictability on cost, but costs are high. FedEx can hold its own as an investment as a more nimble company, even though it's a mature industry, they've been around for decades, but they still over the years, have done a good job getting out ahead of trends. I think they still have that entrepreneurial mindset, and I grade them pretty well on that. Mary Long: Before we wrap up, an increasingly important part of this business is reverse logistics. Apart from mere direction, how is that so different from just old regular everyday forward logistics? Lou Whitman: Yes, very literally it's returns, which returns is reverse logistics is a fancy way of saying returns, it's a huge pain for retailers, and you're dealing with the customer. The customer, you don't want to make them angry in this process, you have to deal with restocking. You have to deal with just the uncontrolled from your warehouse, shipping something, putting the label on it, very controlled environment. There's a lot more chaos when the consumer brings it back and how it's packaged and all that. The estimates I've seen indicate it can be 3-4 more times more profitable for these reverse logistics specialists than just sending out the original shipment, so it's a business you want to be good at. We talked a second ago about FedEx being more entrepreneurial. FedEx bought a company called Genco Distribution, a huge player in reverse logistics all the way back in 2015. It was a great deal then and it has made them a huge player in the space, if you as a consumer notice, lot of shipments did you get from UPS? If you have to return it, the label, they email you will say FedEx, they are a huge player into space, it's one of these areas where the business is less commoditized and you can make margin, and it's certainly the thing that they're looking to expand versus, say, just getting the package there in four or five days. Mary Long: With that Genco acquisition, has that made FedEx the key player in reverse logistics, or are there others that are maybe beating them at this game? Lou Whitman: There's a lot of them, some people do it. A company I love to talk about GXO Logistics , they do a lot of reverse for customers but of these big shipping companies, I think FedEx I probably get some nasty phone calls about this, but FedEx is the one that you're going to see getting a lot of that business among these third party working with lots of people. Mary Long: Lou Whitman, always a pleasure. Thanks so much for joining us today on Motley Fool Money. Lou Whitman: Thanks for having me. Ricky Mulvey: As always, people on the program may have interests in the stocks they talk about the Motley Fool may have formal recommendations for or against, so don't buy or sell stocks based solely on what you hear. All personal finance content follows Motley Fool editorial standards and are not approved by advertisers, the Motley Fool only picks products that it would personally recommend to friends like you. I'm Ricky Mulvey. Thanks for listening, we'll be back tomorrow. Thanks.PLAINS, Ga. (AP) — Newly married and sworn as a Naval officer, Jimmy Carter left his tiny hometown in 1946 hoping to climb the ranks and see the world. Less than a decade later, the death of his father and namesake, a merchant farmer and local politician who went by “Mr. Earl,” prompted the submariner and his wife, Rosalynn, to return to the rural life of Plains, Georgia, they thought they’d escaped. The lieutenant never would be an admiral. Instead, he became commander in chief. Years after his presidency ended in humbling defeat, he would add a Nobel Peace Prize, awarded not for his White House accomplishments but “for his decades of untiring effort to find peaceful solutions to international conflicts, to advance democracy and human rights, and to promote economic and social development.” The life of James Earl Carter Jr., the 39th and longest-lived U.S. president, ended Sunday at the age of 100 where it began: Plains, the town of 600 that fueled his political rise, welcomed him after his fall and sustained him during 40 years of service that redefined what it means to be a former president. With the stubborn confidence of an engineer and an optimism rooted in his Baptist faith, Carter described his motivations in politics and beyond in the same way: an almost missionary zeal to solve problems and improve lives. Carter was raised amid racism, abject poverty and hard rural living — realities that shaped both his deliberate politics and emphasis on human rights. “He always felt a responsibility to help people,” said Jill Stuckey, a longtime friend of Carter's in Plains. “And when he couldn’t make change wherever he was, he decided he had to go higher.” Carter's path, a mix of happenstance and calculation , pitted moral imperatives against political pragmatism; and it defied typical labels of American politics, especially caricatures of one-term presidents as failures. “We shouldn’t judge presidents by how popular they are in their day. That's a very narrow way of assessing them," Carter biographer Jonathan Alter told the Associated Press. “We should judge them by how they changed the country and the world for the better. On that score, Jimmy Carter is not in the first rank of American presidents, but he stands up quite well.” Later in life, Carter conceded that many Americans, even those too young to remember his tenure, judged him ineffective for failing to contain inflation or interest rates, end the energy crisis or quickly bring home American hostages in Iran. He gained admirers instead for his work at The Carter Center — advocating globally for public health, human rights and democracy since 1982 — and the decades he and Rosalynn wore hardhats and swung hammers with Habitat for Humanity. Yet the common view that he was better after the Oval Office than in it annoyed Carter, and his allies relished him living long enough to see historians reassess his presidency. “He doesn’t quite fit in today’s terms” of a left-right, red-blue scoreboard, said U.S. Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg, who visited the former president multiple times during his own White House bid. At various points in his political career, Carter labeled himself “progressive” or “conservative” — sometimes both at once. His most ambitious health care bill failed — perhaps one of his biggest legislative disappointments — because it didn’t go far enough to suit liberals. Republicans, especially after his 1980 defeat, cast him as a left-wing cartoon. It would be easiest to classify Carter as a centrist, Buttigieg said, “but there’s also something radical about the depth of his commitment to looking after those who are left out of society and out of the economy.” Indeed, Carter’s legacy is stitched with complexities, contradictions and evolutions — personal and political. The self-styled peacemaker was a war-trained Naval Academy graduate who promised Democratic challenger Ted Kennedy that he’d “kick his ass.” But he campaigned with a call to treat everyone with “respect and compassion and with love.” Carter vowed to restore America’s virtue after the shame of Vietnam and Watergate, and his technocratic, good-government approach didn't suit Republicans who tagged government itself as the problem. It also sometimes put Carter at odds with fellow Democrats. The result still was a notable legislative record, with wins on the environment, education, and mental health care. He dramatically expanded federally protected lands, began deregulating air travel, railroads and trucking, and he put human rights at the center of U.S. foreign policy. As a fiscal hawk, Carter added a relative pittance to the national debt, unlike successors from both parties. Carter nonetheless struggled to make his achievements resonate with the electorate he charmed in 1976. Quoting Bob Dylan and grinning enthusiastically, he had promised voters he would “never tell a lie.” Once in Washington, though, he led like a joyless engineer, insisting his ideas would become reality and he'd be rewarded politically if only he could convince enough people with facts and logic. This served him well at Camp David, where he brokered peace between Israel’s Menachem Begin and Epypt’s Anwar Sadat, an experience that later sparked the idea of The Carter Center in Atlanta. Carter's tenacity helped the center grow to a global force that monitored elections across five continents, enabled his freelance diplomacy and sent public health experts across the developing world. The center’s wins were personal for Carter, who hoped to outlive the last Guinea worm parasite, and nearly did. As president, though, the approach fell short when he urged consumers beleaguered by energy costs to turn down their thermostats. Or when he tried to be the nation’s cheerleader, beseeching Americans to overcome a collective “crisis of confidence.” Republican Ronald Reagan exploited Carter's lecturing tone with a belittling quip in their lone 1980 debate. “There you go again,” the former Hollywood actor said in response to a wonky answer from the sitting president. “The Great Communicator” outpaced Carter in all but six states. Carter later suggested he “tried to do too much, too soon” and mused that he was incompatible with Washington culture: media figures, lobbyists and Georgetown social elites who looked down on the Georgians and their inner circle as “country come to town.” Carter carefully navigated divides on race and class on his way to the Oval Office. Born Oct. 1, 1924 , Carter was raised in the mostly Black community of Archery, just outside Plains, by a progressive mother and white supremacist father. Their home had no running water or electricity but the future president still grew up with the relative advantages of a locally prominent, land-owning family in a system of Jim Crow segregation. He wrote of President Franklin Roosevelt’s towering presence and his family’s Democratic Party roots, but his father soured on FDR, and Jimmy Carter never campaigned or governed as a New Deal liberal. He offered himself as a small-town peanut farmer with an understated style, carrying his own luggage, bunking with supporters during his first presidential campaign and always using his nickname. And he began his political career in a whites-only Democratic Party. As private citizens, he and Rosalynn supported integration as early as the 1950s and believed it inevitable. Carter refused to join the White Citizens Council in Plains and spoke out in his Baptist church against denying Black people access to worship services. “This is not my house; this is not your house,” he said in a churchwide meeting, reminding fellow parishioners their sanctuary belonged to God. Yet as the appointed chairman of Sumter County schools he never pushed to desegregate, thinking it impractical after the Supreme Court’s 1954 Brown v. Board decision. And while presidential candidate Carter would hail the 1965 Voting Rights Act, signed by fellow Democrat Lyndon Johnson when Carter was a state senator, there is no record of Carter publicly supporting it at the time. Carter overcame a ballot-stuffing opponent to win his legislative seat, then lost the 1966 governor's race to an arch-segregationist. He won four years later by avoiding explicit mentions of race and campaigning to the right of his rival, who he mocked as “Cufflinks Carl” — the insult of an ascendant politician who never saw himself as part the establishment. Carter’s rural and small-town coalition in 1970 would match any victorious Republican electoral map in 2024. Once elected, though, Carter shocked his white conservative supporters — and landed on the cover of Time magazine — by declaring that “the time for racial discrimination is over.” Before making the jump to Washington, Carter befriended the family of slain civil rights leader Martin Luther King Jr., whom he’d never sought out as he eyed the governor’s office. Carter lamented his foot-dragging on school integration as a “mistake.” But he also met, conspicuously, with Alabama's segregationist Gov. George Wallace to accept his primary rival's endorsement ahead of the 1976 Democratic convention. “He very shrewdly took advantage of his own Southerness,” said Amber Roessner, a University of Tennessee professor and expert on Carter’s campaigns. A coalition of Black voters and white moderate Democrats ultimately made Carter the last Democratic presidential nominee to sweep the Deep South. Then, just as he did in Georgia, he used his power in office to appoint more non-whites than all his predecessors had, combined. He once acknowledged “the secret shame” of white Americans who didn’t fight segregation. But he also told Alter that doing more would have sacrificed his political viability – and thus everything he accomplished in office and after. King's daughter, Bernice King, described Carter as wisely “strategic” in winning higher offices to enact change. “He was a leader of conscience,” she said in an interview. Rosalynn Carter, who died on Nov. 19 at the age of 96, was identified by both husband and wife as the “more political” of the pair; she sat in on Cabinet meetings and urged him to postpone certain priorities, like pressing the Senate to relinquish control of the Panama Canal. “Let that go until the second term,” she would sometimes say. The president, recalled her former aide Kathy Cade, retorted that he was “going to do what’s right” even if “it might cut short the time I have.” Rosalynn held firm, Cade said: “She’d remind him you have to win to govern.” Carter also was the first president to appoint multiple women as Cabinet officers. Yet by his own telling, his career sprouted from chauvinism in the Carters' early marriage: He did not consult Rosalynn when deciding to move back to Plains in 1953 or before launching his state Senate bid a decade later. Many years later, he called it “inconceivable” that he didn’t confer with the woman he described as his “full partner,” at home, in government and at The Carter Center. “We developed a partnership when we were working in the farm supply business, and it continued when Jimmy got involved in politics,” Rosalynn Carter told AP in 2021. So deep was their trust that when Carter remained tethered to the White House in 1980 as 52 Americans were held hostage in Tehran, it was Rosalynn who campaigned on her husband’s behalf. “I just loved it,” she said, despite the bitterness of defeat. Fair or not, the label of a disastrous presidency had leading Democrats keep their distance, at least publicly, for many years, but Carter managed to remain relevant, writing books and weighing in on societal challenges. He lamented widening wealth gaps and the influence of money in politics. He voted for democratic socialist Bernie Sanders over Hillary Clinton in 2016, and later declared that America had devolved from fully functioning democracy to “oligarchy.” Yet looking ahead to 2020, with Sanders running again, Carter warned Democrats not to “move to a very liberal program,” lest they help re-elect President Donald Trump. Carter scolded the Republican for his serial lies and threats to democracy, and chided the U.S. establishment for misunderstanding Trump’s populist appeal. He delighted in yearly convocations with Emory University freshmen, often asking them to guess how much he’d raised in his two general election campaigns. “Zero,” he’d gesture with a smile, explaining the public financing system candidates now avoid so they can raise billions. Carter still remained quite practical in partnering with wealthy corporations and foundations to advance Carter Center programs. Carter recognized that economic woes and the Iran crisis doomed his presidency, but offered no apologies for appointing Paul Volcker as the Federal Reserve chairman whose interest rate hikes would not curb inflation until Reagan's presidency. He was proud of getting all the hostages home without starting a shooting war, even though Tehran would not free them until Reagan's Inauguration Day. “Carter didn’t look at it” as a failure, Alter emphasized. “He said, ‘They came home safely.’ And that’s what he wanted.” Well into their 90s, the Carters greeted visitors at Plains’ Maranatha Baptist Church, where he taught Sunday School and where he will have his last funeral before being buried on family property alongside Rosalynn . Carter, who made the congregation’s collection plates in his woodworking shop, still garnered headlines there, calling for women’s rights within religious institutions, many of which, he said, “subjugate” women in church and society. Carter was not one to dwell on regrets. “I am at peace with the accomplishments, regret the unrealized goals and utilize my former political position to enhance everything we do,” he wrote around his 90th birthday. The politician who had supposedly hated Washington politics also enjoyed hosting Democratic presidential contenders as public pilgrimages to Plains became advantageous again. Carter sat with Buttigieg for the final time March 1, 2020, hours before the Indiana mayor ended his campaign and endorsed eventual winner Joe Biden. “He asked me how I thought the campaign was going,” Buttigieg said, recalling that Carter flashed his signature grin and nodded along as the young candidate, born a year after Carter left office, “put the best face” on the walloping he endured the day before in South Carolina. Never breaking his smile, the 95-year-old host fired back, “I think you ought to drop out.” “So matter of fact,” Buttigieg said with a laugh. “It was somehow encouraging.” Carter had lived enough, won plenty and lost enough to take the long view. “He talked a lot about coming from nowhere,” Buttigieg said, not just to attain the presidency but to leverage “all of the instruments you have in life” and “make the world more peaceful.” In his farewell address as president, Carter said as much to the country that had embraced and rejected him. “The struggle for human rights overrides all differences of color, nation or language,” he declared. “Those who hunger for freedom, who thirst for human dignity and who suffer for the sake of justice — they are the patriots of this cause.” Carter pledged to remain engaged with and for them as he returned “home to the South where I was born and raised,” home to Plains, where that young lieutenant had indeed become “a fellow citizen of the world.” —- Bill Barrow, based in Atlanta, has covered national politics including multiple presidential campaigns for the AP since 2012.
Clintons urge voters agitated by today’s politics to remain involved in public serviceClintons urge voters agitated by today's politics to remain involved in public serviceTrump vows to pursue executions after Biden commutes most of federal death row
Jimmy Carter: Many evolutions for a centenarian ‘citizen of the world’
Brits will watch FIVE hours of telly a day over Christmas and ‘lie’ to loved ones to avoid socialising for a boxset
betfred championship results
COLUMBUS, Ohio (AP) — A fight broke out at midfield after Michigan stunned No. 2 Ohio State 13-10 on Saturday as Wolverines players attempted to plant their flag and were met by Buckeyes who confronted them. Police had to use pepper spray to break up the players, who threw punches and shoves in the melee that overshadowed the rivalry game. Ohio State police said in a statement “multiple officers representing Ohio and Michigan deployed pepper spray.” Ohio State police will investigate the fight, according to the statement. After the Ohio State players confronted their bitter rivals at midfield, defensive end Jack Sawyer grabbed the top of the Wolverines' flag and ripped it off the pole as the brawl moved toward the Michigan bench. Eventually, police officers rushed into the ugly scene. Ohio State coach Ryan Day said he understood the actions of his players. “There are some prideful guys on our team who weren't going to sit back and let that happen,” Day said. The two Ohio State players made available after the game brushed off questions about it. Michigan running back Kalel Mullings, who rushed for 116 yards and a touchdown, didn't like how the Buckeyes players involved themselves in the Wolverines' postgame celebration. He called it “classless.” “For such a great game, you hate to see stuff like that after the game," he said in an on-field interview with Fox Sports. “It’s just bad for the sport, bad for college football. But at the end of the day, you know some people got to — they got to learn how to lose, man. ... We had 60 minutes, we had four quarters, to do all that fighting.” Michigan coach Sherrone Moore said everybody needs to do better. “So much emotions on both sides," he said. "Rivalry games get heated, especially this one. It’s the biggest one in the country, so we got to handle that better.” Get poll alerts and updates on the AP Top 25 throughout the season. Sign up here . AP college football: https://apnews.com/hub/ap-top-25-college-football-poll and https://apnews.com/hub/college-football
betfred com