In lawsuit filing, Pentagon says transgender troops can’t serve unless they meet a warfighting need

posted in: All news | 0

By TARA COPP, Associated Press

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Pentagon revealed the specifics of its new transgender troop policy in a court filing Wednesday that says any service member or recruit who has been diagnosed with or treated for gender dysphoria is disqualified from serving — unless they can prove they meet a specific warfighting need and adhere to severe restrictions on their day-to-day behavior.

The policy memo was included in the latest court filing in a lawsuit challenging President Donald Trump’s executive order against transgender military service, one of many hot-button issues the president made a priority to address on his first days in office.

Like the executive order, the policy filed Wednesday suggests that the lethality and integrity of the military “is inconsistent” with what transgender personnel go through as they transition to the gender they identify with, and issues an edict that gender is “immutable, unchanging during a person’s life.”

Related Articles

National Politics |


Bret Stephens: America’s most shameful vote at the U.N.

National Politics |


Allison Schrager: Trump risks making the same economic mistakes as Biden

National Politics |


Supreme Court, for now, blocks order for Trump administration to release billions in US foreign aid

National Politics |


Despite warning, Minnesota’s GOP congressional delegation votes for Trump-backed budget

National Politics |


What’s next for Trump agenda after House GOP approves tax breaks and slashed spending in budget

The policy provides two exceptions — if transgender personnel who seek to enlist can prove on a case-by-case basis that they directly support warfighting activities, or if an existing service member, who was diagnosed with gender dysphoria, can prove they support a specific warfighting need and never transitioned to the gender they identify with and proves over 36 months they are stable in their biological sex “without clinically significant distress.”

If a waiver is issued in either case, the applicant would still face a situation where only their biological sex was recognized for bathroom facilities, sleeping quarters and even in official recognition, such as being called “Sir” or “Ma’am.”

Gender dysphoria occurs when a person’s biological sex does not match up with their gender identity.

While the number of transgender troops serving is small compared to the size of the total force, it’s taken up a large amount of time and attention both at the White House and within the Pentagon. The military services due to medical privacy laws do not provide an exact count of transgender troops, but a 2018 independent study by the Palm Center, which researched LGBTQ issues, assessed there were an estimated 14,000 transgender troops among the more than 2 million troops serving.

It was a policy Trump tried to overturn in his first term in office but the issue ended up mired in lawsuits until former President Joe Biden was elected and he overturned the ban.

At 62, Alton Brown seeks fresh, creative recipes in life

posted in: All news | 0

ATLANTA — Alton Brown is in his sun-filled Atlanta kitchen on a Monday morning, prepping biscuits inspired by his grandmother, and asks Siri to set the timer for 20 minutes.

“I’ve set the timer for 10 minutes,” Siri replies in a male British accent.

Brown grimaces. “Twenty minutes! Shut up!” Brown yells, exasperated. “Cancel!” He tries again and this time, Siri complies.

“The British accent makes yelling at it so much more civil and satisfying,” he says with characteristic dry wit.

Brown, 62, has embraced his professorial look with a preference for button-down vests, tweed suits and silk neckerchiefs. He has carefully crafted his public mad scientist persona over the past quarter century while imparting culinary knowledge to the masses. He created the groundbreaking edutainment show “Good Eats,” added tasty commentary on “Iron Chef America” and then hosted his sadistically sardonic sabotage-packed game show “Cutthroat Kitchen” where he said he played a “Darth Vader” version of himself.

But since the Food Network ended his revived “Good Eats Reloaded” in 2021, and a reboot of “Iron Chef America” on Netflix in 2022 failed to get a second season, Brown has been focusing on non-TV pursuits.

“I got the last swallow of cable television,” said Brown, referencing cable’s heyday in the 2000s and early 2010s before streaming consumed its essence. “The model for what we know as content has changed. Netflix and Amazon have these algorithms. They’re fine. I just don’t think it’s very organic. I haven’t really enjoyed working within these venues. It’s not natural for me.”

On tour

Brown has released his first book of essays, “Food for Thought” (Gallery Books), and is launching his fourth and final incarnation of his live culinary variety show, “Last Bite.”

For the uninitiated, the 60-plus city tour features a goulash of wild scientific experiments, cooking demonstrations, food-themed music, audience participation and Brown’s trenchant observations and anecdotes.

On previous tours over the last 12 years, this Renaissance man with a University of Georgia drama degree made chocolate ice cream in 10 seconds using a CO2 fire extinguisher, built a mega Easy Bake Oven with 54 high-powered theater lights to make pizza and dressed as a “Food God” in a sparkly toga, golden spoon crown and oversized whisk scepter to declare the abolition of children menus at restaurants and Sriracha use without a permit. Guitar in hand, he sang facetious songs with titles like “TV Chef” and “Pork Chop Blues.” And for the high-minded, he once displayed flatulent sock puppets.

Brown’s inspirations included a wacky live tour by the “Mythbusters” crew and warm memories of cheesy 1970s variety shows such as “The Sonny & Cher Comedy Hour,” “The Carol Burnett Show” and “The Donny & Marie Show.”

“It allows me utter creative freedom,” Brown said. “Nobody gives me notes. I do what I want.”

The spontaneity of audience members on stage provides Brown a particular thrill. “I remember one show, a grandmom type had been hitting the bar pretty hard and she absolutely wouldn’t keep her hand off my backside like, through the entire demo,” he said. “Once, I accidentally chose two volunteers from different sections of the theater who turned out to be each other’s exes.” (For better or worse, no “Springer”-like fight ensued.)

Lee Marshall, CEO of MagicSpace Entertainment, oversees Brown’s tours and has worked with legendary magician David Copperfield, Michael Flatley of “Lord of the Dance” fame and astrophysicist Neil deGrasse Tyson. He said he normally gets deeply involved with tour production but, in the case of Brown, “I just let Alton be Alton … I take no credit for his insanity. He has an intuition on how to entertain people. He could just sit on a stool for 90 minutes and tell stories and people would be enthralled. He’s a thespian at heart.”

The new tour will be packed with fresh technology including a moving LED screen and an over-the-top contraption he won’t reveal until showtime but that will involve steam and thermodynamics.

Not that Brown is a man full of boastful confidence. He admits to “constant, unrelenting self-doubt.” He never feels fully satisfied by anything he does. “Only the process gives me any satisfaction,” he said. “The second that it’s over, the results are meaningless outside of financial gain.”

His restless insecurity, many have observed, is what fuels him.

Marshall is often on the receiving end of Brown’s said insecurity. “I’m his chief psychologist and trusted adviser,” he said. “He’s on the ledge all the time. It’s what makes him brilliant. He has never not delivered on what he says he does. He’s a man of his word.”

Brown said he is indeed assiduously organized for work projects but his daily life can be a mess. “I typically spend at least an hour a day looking for my keys,” he said. And, yes, he said, “I’m not a great cook. I only learned to cook, really, so that I could tell stories.” At best, he will acknowledge, “I’m an OK cook.”

A new chapter

Brown, who has an adult daughter from his first marriage who is now attending law school, said his life has become immeasurably better following a painful divorce in 2016. That year, he became so impressed with award-winning interior designer Elizabeth Ingram’s work at Atlanta Westside steakhouse Marcel, he hired her to design his post-divorce loft in a converted Marietta textile mill.

That relationship quickly evolved, and they married in 2018. “I duped her into staying with me forever,” he said.

Ingram became entranced by the way Brown’s mind works: “He will devour books on thermodynamics to learn how to cook a hot dog better. And he can regurgitate it to me so I can understand it. It’s an amazing thing to witness. His left and right brains are really well connected.”

She also marvels over his broad appeal when he runs into fans, especially in Manhattan where they have a small apartment. “I have been literally brought to tears by the reverence some people have,” Ingram said. “It could be a woman from behind the counter at MoMA from Lagos, Nigeria, or a hipster with a lip ring in the East Village. People tell him he’s the reason they went to film school.”

Brown, in turn, said Ingram has been a positive influence on his life because “I tend to bring grenades to fistfights.”

“I’ve learned to shut up and listen and to, above all, strive for kindness,” he said. “ I don’t know if that’s extended outward but maybe.”

Brown splits time between his Marietta abode and Ingram’s century-old home in Atlanta, which was her parents’ place for 30 years and is now amid a complete renovation. They plan to move in town permanently once it’s finished. He already shops regularly at Candler Park Market, a “giant bodega” that contrasts sharply with grocery stores, which he abhors. (“I get weepy seeing what people buy.”)

“I’m a loner yet I feel a need for community,” he said. “Candler Park Market is where I can feel that connectivity, that sense of belonging.”

Alton Brown, 62, cuts chanterelle mushrooms to add to scrambled eggs at his newly renovated kitchen in Atlanta that includes a beloved induction range. (Arvin Temkar/The Atlanta Journal-Constitution/TNS)

His in-town home kitchen was fully functional by December, giving Brown the chance to cook breakfast for this reporter. Besides biscuits, which the ever-perfectionist Brown found a tad overcooked, he offered scrambled eggs with local golden chanterelle mushrooms.

“When raw,” he said in his astutely observed style, “they smell a little like apricots.” He also noted that “eggs and mushrooms form one of the great culinary gestalts. And what a lot of people don’t realize is that mushrooms are damn near impossible to overcook … unlike biscuits.”

39 essays

After writing numerous cookbooks, Brown was finally convinced to try his hand at essay writing. Eric Simonoff, his longtime book agent, said they would meet up in New York City and not even talk about food or business. “We’d often talk about poetry or movies or cigars,” he said. “He is a man of multitudes.”

That is very much reflected in his 39 essays. There are stories about his childhood love of Cap’n Crunch, a comical moment involving yeasty bread dough in a hot dumpster, his favorite movie scenes involving food (think metaphors and “Apocalypse Now”), an ode to the kitchen table, the search for the perfect way to create a Thanksgiving turkey, dumb kitchen tools, the magic of chopsticks, terrible ChatGPT recipes and what he learned doing his improvised YouTube cooking show “Quarantine Quitchen” with his wife during the pandemic.

The essays vary in tone and structure, some purely comical, some dead serious. “You have to drop your pants. You have to be willing to expose yourself. That’s not something I had ever done,” he said, adding, “I wrote this essay about being a fat kid, about body image and food. I read it to Elizabeth and I was sobbing. I was wrecked!”

Tom Straw, a friend of Brown’s and author of the spy novel “The Accidental Joe: The Top-Secret Life of a Celebrity Chef,” got an early read of Brown’s book and was impressed by his depth as a writer. He also was surprised by Brown’s essay in which he described how difficult it was in the early going to get the hang of hosting “Iron Chef America” more than two decades ago.

“He made it look easy,” Straw said. “Who knew?”

In the book, Brown drew his own doodles and wrote the entire first draft on a 60-year-old Hermes 3000 manual typewriter because he enjoys the clickety-clack feel of being in a “Mad Men” episode.

“My parents bought a radio station in Cleveland, [Georgia],” he said. “My mom would type up the radio logs on paper… That sound was huge for me. And you can see the physicality of the strikes on the paper. You know where you were when you did it. Did you type with gusto? Did you back up and x something out? My penmanship is terrible, but I can type like a beast!”

If readers like this book, Brown is open to writing more essays. “As I bitch and moan as I get closer to the grave, I can finally look at certain aspects of my life I didn’t understand previously and put them in context,” he said. “I’ll know how to dig deeper holes the next time around.”

A deep lover of cocktails (especially martinis), Brown has also taken a self proclaimed “sabbatical” from drinking alcohol: “I don’t plan on doing the whole ‘sober’ thing, but I’m at a point of life where focus and clarity are key, and that’s not something alcohol helps me with.”

Next?

Once the “Last Bite” tour is finished, he is unsure what his next step will be. While a YouTube show would give him creative independence, he said the pressures to pump out content constantly is unappealing. “It’s like a rock skipping across the pond,” he said. “You can never get immersed.”

Regardless of his next professional move, Brown said he has other priorities: “I care most of all about being a good husband and a decent father to my daughter. If those improvements end up extending out into the rest of the world, fantastic.”

Related Articles

Restaurants, Food and Drink |


Award worthy: Visiting St. Paul’s three James Beard semifinalist restaurants

Restaurants, Food and Drink |


It’s fish fry time! Here’s your 2025 list of restaurants and organizations with Lenten specials

Restaurants, Food and Drink |


Recipe: Comedian Stephen Colbert suggests this method for cooking swordfish

Restaurants, Food and Drink |


Five weeknight dishes: Recipes that are speedy to make, spectacular to eat

Restaurants, Food and Drink |


Harissa brings complex chili heat to this meaty Libyan soup during Ramadan

Bret Stephens: America’s most shameful vote at the U.N.

posted in: All news | 0

In the spring of 2007, I interviewed Václav Havel on a bench in the garden of Prague’s Czernin Palace. The playwright and former Czech president discussed his shifting views on the war in Iraq, the role of art in unfree states, the dangers of political obsession and indifference — and his yearning, 11 years after he had quit smoking, for a cigarette.

We also spoke about the importance of truth, particularly in matters of international diplomacy. “I think we can talk to every ruler but first of all it is necessary to tell the truth,” Havel said. Turning to Vladimir Putin — or “Ras-Putin,” as he called him — he added: “With me, he gets more and more suspicious. We have to tell him plainly what we think of his behavior.”

Havel’s comment — which followed the murders of journalist Anna Politkovskaya and prominent critic Alexander Litvinenko but preceded Russia’s invasion of Georgia, its seizure of Crimea, the downing of Malaysia Airlines Flight 17, the poisoning, imprisoning and death of the opposition leader Alexei Navalny, the massacre at Bucha and the obliteration of Mariupol — comes to mind after the single most shameful vote ever cast by the United States at the United Nations.

On Monday, for the third anniversary of Russia’s brutal lunge toward Kyiv, the Ukrainian government put forward a resolution in the General Assembly demanding Russia’s withdrawal of its forces and accountability for its war crimes as the basis of a “comprehensive, lasting and just peace.” Ninety-three countries supported the resolution; 65 abstained, including China. Among the 18 who opposed it were Russia, North Korea, Nicaragua, Belarus, Equatorial Guinea and, vomitously, Israel and the United States.

Later, the United States won a wan 10-0 approval for a Security Council resolution (with five abstentions, including from Britain and France) that called for an end to the war without mentioning who started it. This is supposed to be a mark of realism, on the view that scolding Moscow for its sins will do nothing to advance a diplomatic end to the war.

On a broader level, it’s also meant as one in a series of moves to woo Putin back toward the West and away from his partnership (as the junior member) with China’s Xi Jinping — what foreign-policy pundits are calling a “Reverse Nixon,” in contrast to the 37th president’s efforts to detach China from the Soviet orbit.

But the effort is bound to fail, and not just because Moscow, with its no-limits friendship with China and a pliant administration in the United States, finds itself today in a very different strategic position than the one Beijing was in the early 1970s, when it had blown up its society in the Cultural Revolution while coming close to full-scale war with Russia.

Havel would have understood the deeper reasons.

In his 1978 essay “The Power of the Powerless,” Havel explained the ways in which communist regimes like the one in Czechoslovakia maintained control. It wasn’t simply, or even primarily, through the threat of force. Rather, it happened through the construction of a “panorama” of mutually reinforcing slogans that most people found relatively easy to go along with, even if, at some level, they knew they were based on outrageous distortions and obvious lies.

Putin spent the first part of his career as a low-level enforcer of that system. He’s spent 25 years in power perfecting it from the top, creating a world in which his dictatorship is “sovereign democracy,” political opposition is “terrorism,” the Jewish president of Ukraine is “a neo-Nazi” and the biggest war in Europe in 80 years is just a “special military operation,” undertaken as a defensive measure against an aggressive NATO.

At nearly every turn, he’s been able to get away with it, often with the reluctant acquiescence of Western leaders, from George W. Bush to Angela Merkel, who looked away from his misdeeds for the sake of diplomatic comity. But he’s never had a bigger accomplice in deceit than Donald Trump.

By participating in the moral and factual inversions that Putin has deployed for his invasion of Ukraine, the Trump administration isn’t setting itself up as some sort of evenhanded broker to end the war. It is turning the United States into an accessory to Russia’s crimes — or at least to the lies on which the crimes are predicated. Unlike Nixon, who moved China toward our corner, at least for 30 years, Trump is moving America toward Russia’s corner, while betraying an ally and breaking the Atlantic alliance.

At this point, Tucker Carlson, Putin’s preferred poodle, may as well be secretary of state.

In his essay, Havel movingly described the ways in which tyrannies are brought down: when a handful of brave souls decide to “live within the truth,” which gives their “freedom a concrete significance.” Their early acts of truth-telling — like refusing to participate in sham elections or other regime fictions — will exact an initial price as the government amps up its means of repression. But over time the regime’s panorama of lies will gradually, then suddenly, fall apart. It’s exactly what happened just 11 years after Havel foresaw it, with the fall of communism and the Berlin Wall.

This administration, like its predecessor, had the opportunity, through an easy U.N. vote, to live within the truth when it came to Russia and its malevolence. Instead of working to deconstruct Putin’s panorama of lies, it opted to keep it in place, to reinforce it, to build on it. It’s a choice that will haunt, and shame, America for years.

Bret Stephens writes a column for the New York Times.

Related Articles

Opinion |


Allison Schrager: Trump risks making the same economic mistakes as Biden

Opinion |


F.D. Flam: You might have plastic in your brain. Don’t panic — yet

Opinion |


Noah Feldman: Some of DOGE’s influence can’t be undone

Opinion |


Kathryn Anne Edwards: House Republicans’ budget plan gets poverty all wrong

Opinion |


Michelle Goldberg: Trump’s new deputy FBI director has it out for ‘scumbag commie libs’

Allison Schrager: Trump risks making the same economic mistakes as Biden

posted in: All news | 0

There is one surefire way to know when someone is trying to pull one over on you: If they’re promising something for nothing — whether it’s a tax cut that pays for itself or an investment strategy that offers a higher return and lower risk — then you need to be on your guard.

Jason Furman, who chaired the White House Council of Economic Advisers under Barack Obama and now teaches at Harvard, recently published a thoughtful critique of former President Joe Biden’s economic policy. He identifies many policy errors, as well as a few things that went right. But his main point is a basic principle of economic policymaking: All choices come with tradeoffs.

The Biden administration believed it could spend trillions of dollars without overheating the economy, and it got inflation. It tried to revive the semiconductor industry with huge subsidies, then required any recipients to provide child care, adhere to crippling regulations and hire only unionized labor. It bought into the promise that the US could build a green economy to save the planet without anyone having to pay more or make do with less. In the end, the economy recovered after the pandemic, but real wages barely improved, inflation risk returned, and the US is deeper in debt.

President Donald Trump’s administration is already making some of the same mistakes. It says tariffs won’t cost consumers or domestic producers — in the long run. It argues that if the government reduced regulations and operated more efficiently, there would be enough economic growth to pay for tax cuts and reduce worries about the debt.

None of this is likely. Yes, the government needs to cut waste and excessive regulations, and some tax cuts will boost growth. But even in the best-case scenario, the added growth wouldn’t be enough to make them pay for themselves, let alone cover the unfunded entitlements coming due it the next decade.

Of course, politicians promising something for nothing is hardly a novel phenomenon. And it is not just in politics; almost every financial scam or bubble is rooted in the myth that higher returns can be achieved with less risk. But the belief in a free lunch has become more common lately.

Two pieces of conventional wisdom that emerged after 2008 fed this mass delusion, both of them are wrong. One is that it is better to provide too much economic stimulus rather than too little. The other is that worries about inflation and higher interest rates were things of the past.

The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, signed in 2009, cost more than $800 billion, but some economists argued at the time (and still believe) that it should have been bigger, saying it helped make the recovery from the 2008 recession needlessly slow. Meanwhile, the Federal Reserve went into full-on stimulus mode for years after the crisis, continuing to expand its balance sheet. With both the added debt and the expansionary monetary policy, higher inflation and rates were expected — but they never came about.

What policymakers took away from this experience was that no amount of spending or expansionary monetary policy would increase interest rates or inflation. Ergo, they could stimulate as much as they wanted, in just about any way they wanted, without cost. As long as interest rates are near zero, this is kind of true; after all, it is nearly costless to run up debt, and it appears to pay off so long as it produces some positive growth.

Alas, no financial condition lasts forever, and this includes near-zero interest rates. Debt, however, does tend to be forever.

Low rates enabled this delusion. But it runs deeper: The last decade saw a backlash from the left and the right against neoliberalism, the belief that more market-based policies and freer trade would bring about better economic growth. As my colleague Clive Crook has pointed out, a rejection of neoliberalism is essentially a rejection of the principle that any policy poses tradeoffs. Neoliberalism does not promise constant growth or eliminate the possibility of job loss. On balance, however, it creates more winners and growth than the alternative.

The alternative — that if countries traded less, did all they could to boost demand and allowed the government to direct commerce — made for a much more seductive pitch. The result, so we were told, would be more certainty, more growth, more wealth and even more wealth equality. The failure of Bidenomics demonstrated just how deluded that view is. In economies as in financial markets, there is no growth without risk, and the bill eventually comes due. Every policy choice comes with winners and losers, cost and benefits.

Tradeoffs, in other words. If anyone is telling you otherwise, they are trying to sell you something.

Allison Schrager is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist covering economics. A senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute, she is author of “An Economist Walks Into a Brothel: And Other Unexpected Places to Understand Risk.”

Related Articles

Opinion |


Bret Stephens: America’s most shameful vote at the U.N.

Opinion |


F.D. Flam: You might have plastic in your brain. Don’t panic — yet

Opinion |


Noah Feldman: Some of DOGE’s influence can’t be undone

Opinion |


Kathryn Anne Edwards: House Republicans’ budget plan gets poverty all wrong

Opinion |


Michelle Goldberg: Trump’s new deputy FBI director has it out for ‘scumbag commie libs’