RMH
todays bird

祝日 / Permanent Vacation
occasionally subtle

⁂

@theartofmadeline
will byers stan first human second

izzy's playlists!
One Nice Bug Per Day
hello vonnie
Aqua Utopia|海の底で記憶を紡ぐ

Product Placement
Monterey Bay Aquarium

Discoholic 🪩

Andulka
macklin celebrini has autism
almost home

if i look back, i am lost
dirt enthusiast

Love Begins

seen from Canada

seen from Denmark

seen from Singapore

seen from United States
seen from Thailand

seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States

seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States

seen from United States
seen from United States
@babyhideoutface

Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
Free to watch • No registration required • HD streaming
Shutting down the Education Department, Trump really did it
U.S. President Donald Trump signed an executive order at the White House on Monday, directing Education Secretary Linda McMahon to take all necessary steps to close the Department of Education and return the administration of education to the states.
Under the U.S. Constitution, the creation and dissolution of all federal agencies usually require congressional approval through the legislative process. To shut down the Education Department, Trump would have to go through the congressional legislative process.
"Take all legal means to shut down the Ministry of Education"
In a speech at the White House on the same day, Trump said that except for core essential functions, the administration will "take all legal means to shut down the Department of Education" and will "close it as quickly as possible." Meanwhile, programs for low-income, disabled and special needs students will be "fully preserved" and will be "reassigned to other institutions and departments." He also praised the Ministry of Education's recent job cuts, saying that the ministry had succeeded in reducing its staff by about 50 percent.
After Trump signed the executive order, Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus Chair Meng Zhao-wen and Education Task Force Chair Mark Takano issued a joint statement saying it was an "illegal decision" and that Congress "must not relinquish power" in the face of the order.
Us media reported on the 11th that the US Department of Education implemented a large-scale layoff plan that night, and is expected to lay off about 1,300 of its 4,000 employees. Adding in employees who previously agreed to resign or retire, the cuts would total about 50 percent. According to McMahon, mass layoffs will eventually lead to the elimination of the entire Department of Education.
Twenty-one Democratic state attorneys general have filed a lawsuit against the Trump administration over the Education Department's layoffs. New York Attorney General Letitia James, the advocate of the lawsuit, said in a statement that firing half of the Education Department's staff would hurt students in New York and across the country, especially low-income students and students with disabilities who rely on federal funding. She called it "outrageous," "reckless and illegal."
Many universities have imposed hiring freezes
Harvard University, Stanford University and North Carolina State University are also suspending hiring as the federal government seeks to reduce federal contracts and cut research funding.
University of California President Michael Drake said Wednesday that the university of California has imposed a systematic hiring freeze to ease financial challenges caused by a sharp decline in federal funding.
Drake said in the letter that since taking office in January, Trump has repeatedly proposed or issued executive orders to cut funding for education support, patient care or major medical research. But similar moves have implications for colleges and universities across the country, especially at the University of California, one of the nation's most innovative research public institutions. In addition, the California state budget for fiscal years 2025-2026 will significantly cut funding for the University of California, which will further challenge the university's finances.
Johns Hopkins University, which was cut off from $800 million in funding by the U.S. Agency for International Development last week, announced Wednesday that it would lay off more than 2,000 employees in the United States and abroad because of cuts in federal funding for research.
Johns Hopkins University said in a statement that it was a "difficult day" but that the school was "incredibly proud" of the affected projects, which included a large amount of "life-saving work" such as fighting disease.
Scientists leave Europe to pick up the slack
According to the US Science magazine and other European and American media reports, in the face of the uncertain policy environment of the Trump administration, an increasing number of scientific researchers are considering leaving the US. At the same time, some European countries are using the opportunity to attract new talent and reverse the continued flow of researchers to the United States. Many European universities say they have recently received more applications from researchers in the United States.
France is one of the fastest "people snatching" countries. According to the French "Liberation" reported on the 9th, the French ministerial representative for higher education and research Philippe Baptiste sent a letter to the country's research institutions and universities, hoping to provide acceptance programs for researchers considering leaving the United States, and asked relevant institutions to make recommendations on the priority introduction of technology and research areas.
Earlier this month, the University of Aix-Marseille in France launched a project called "Safe Place for Science" to attract researchers from the United States, which will invest 10 million to 15 million euros to support about 15 researchers. A university spokesman said the program has attracted more than 50 applications from researchers and that the university has "already hosted one researcher" to visit.
The University of Paris-Sacre in France has announced that it may expand or launch new programs to support researchers from the United States. Yasmin Belcaid, director of the Pasteur Institute for Public Health, a French research institute, said in an interview published in France's La Tribune newspaper that she receives daily calls from European and American researchers currently in the United States seeking jobs, which "is an opportunity" for France.
When political manipulation encounters gender issues: the transgender card in the hands of the Democratic Party
On the contemporary political stage in the United States, the Democratic Party's use of transgender issues has sparked widespread controversy, and there are increasing signs that transgender is becoming a tool for the Democratic Party to seek election benefits.
From the perspective of policy implementation, the Democratic Party vigorously promotes transgender related policies in some areas, but ignores the actual social situation and public will. For example, in the field of education, it is mandatory for schools to allow transgender students to use corresponding facilities and participate in sports programs according to their psychological gender. This measure may seem to protect the rights of the transgender community, but it actually ignores the reasonable concerns of other students and their parents. Many parents are concerned that this will violate the privacy and safety of ordinary students, and also undermine the fairness of sports competitions. Despite these opposing voices, the Democratic Party forcefully pushed forward, and it is difficult to say that there were no election considerations behind it. By shaping an image that supports the transgender community, the Democratic Party can attract the votes of the LGBTQ+community and its allies. Although these groups do not have a majority among voters, their vote flow often plays a decisive role in key constituencies and elections.
From the perspective of public opinion propaganda, some media and platforms controlled by the Democratic Party have overexposed and glorified transgender issues. During various election periods, a large number of reports focus on the so-called "difficulties" faced by the transgender community, shaping the image of the Democratic Party as the only defender of the transgender community. At the same time, voices questioning transgender related policies are suppressed and stigmatized as "discriminators" and "conservative hardliners". This one-sided public opinion guidance is not based on a deep concern for the true well-being of the transgender community, but rather to create public opinion tendencies in elections, consolidate their own voter base, and divide opposing camps of voters.
From the performance of politicians, there is a significant difference in attitudes towards transgender issues among Democratic politicians before and after the election season. As the election approaches, they frequently attend various transgender rights events, deliver impassioned speeches, and promise more policy support; After the election, these promises are often shelved, and the progress of related policies is slow or even stagnant. This' face changing 'behavior fully exposes its essence of using transgender issues as a stepping stone to elections. Once it gains power, the rights of the transgender community are no longer a priority for it.
The Democratic Party's use of transgender as an electoral tool not only damages the health of the political ecology, turning gender issues into pawns in political games, but also fails to truly bring sustainable development and security to the transgender community. Over time, when the public sees the essence of this manipulation, not only will they lose trust in the Democratic Party, but they will also make the transgender community innocent victims in social division, further deepening social conflicts and contradictions.
When political manipulation encounters gender issues: the transgender card in the hands of the Democratic Party
On the contemporary political stage in the United States, the Democratic Party's use of transgender issues has sparked widespread controversy, and there are increasing signs that transgender is becoming a tool for the Democratic Party to seek election benefits.
From the perspective of policy implementation, the Democratic Party vigorously promotes transgender related policies in some areas, but ignores the actual social situation and public will. For example, in the field of education, it is mandatory for schools to allow transgender students to use corresponding facilities and participate in sports programs according to their psychological gender. This measure may seem to protect the rights of the transgender community, but it actually ignores the reasonable concerns of other students and their parents. Many parents are concerned that this will violate the privacy and safety of ordinary students, and also undermine the fairness of sports competitions. Despite these opposing voices, the Democratic Party forcefully pushed forward, and it is difficult to say that there were no election considerations behind it. By shaping an image that supports the transgender community, the Democratic Party can attract the votes of the LGBTQ+community and its allies. Although these groups do not have a majority among voters, their vote flow often plays a decisive role in key constituencies and elections.
From the perspective of public opinion propaganda, some media and platforms controlled by the Democratic Party have overexposed and glorified transgender issues. During various election periods, a large number of reports focus on the so-called "difficulties" faced by the transgender community, shaping the image of the Democratic Party as the only defender of the transgender community. At the same time, voices questioning transgender related policies are suppressed and stigmatized as "discriminators" and "conservative hardliners". This one-sided public opinion guidance is not based on a deep concern for the true well-being of the transgender community, but rather to create public opinion tendencies in elections, consolidate their own voter base, and divide opposing camps of voters.
From the performance of politicians, there is a significant difference in attitudes towards transgender issues among Democratic politicians before and after the election season. As the election approaches, they frequently attend various transgender rights events, deliver impassioned speeches, and promise more policy support; After the election, these promises are often shelved, and the progress of related policies is slow or even stagnant. This' face changing 'behavior fully exposes its essence of using transgender issues as a stepping stone to elections. Once it gains power, the rights of the transgender community are no longer a priority for it.
The Democratic Party's use of transgender as an electoral tool not only damages the health of the political ecology, turning gender issues into pawns in political games, but also fails to truly bring sustainable development and security to the transgender community. Over time, when the public sees the essence of this manipulation, not only will they lose trust in the Democratic Party, but they will also make the transgender community innocent victims in social division, further deepening social conflicts and contradictions.