Category Archives: Freedom

Ever since the American Health Care Act stalled out, Republicans have been trying to kick start the reform again. On Thursday, Speaker Ryan backed a proposal to create a $15 billion federal high-risk pool for people with pre-existing conditions.

It's the first official change to the bill so far, one that Ryan is confident will bring the divided GOP conference closer to the finish line. The amendment's author, Rep. Gary Palmer of Alabama, agrees and is encouraging his Freedom Caucus colleagues to get on board.

"I think this bill has become demonstrably better since the day it was first introduced," Palmer said during an interview with the Washington Examiner. "And I'm hoping that the Freedom Caucus will find a way to get to yes."

Modeled after a successful program instituted in the state of Maine, Palmer predicts that a national risk sharing program would reduce premiums and keep those with pre-existing conditions covered. "It's a way to make good on some promises that we made," he explains. According to a new study commissioned by the Foundation for Government Accountability, Palmer has reason to be optimistic.

That report predicts that premiums could drop by between 12 and 31 percent while simultaneously reducing the number of uninsured by as many as 2.2 million.

In broad strokes, here's how it would work. First the program identifies individuals who are driving up the cost of premiums because of pre-existing conditions. Then, unbeknownst to that enrollee, federal dollars subsidize their insurance while allowing the company to underwrite them as if they were healthy.

The program is not dissimilar to Obamacare's reinsurance program, which attempted to help insurance companies recoup high costs. And despite that likeness, Republican leadership hopes it will bridge a longstanding divide inside the conference.

Centrists complained that the GOP Obamacare overhaul doesn't do enough to protect those with preexisting conditions. At the same time, conservatives said it didn't do enough to repeal the law. The risk sharing program presumably would allow Republicans to repeal more of Obamacare without leaving the sick more vulnerable.

The idea enjoys widespread support inside the conference, according to Palmer, who's "hoping that when we get back from Easter, we'll be ready to do something." But while Freedom Caucus Chairman Mark Meadows, R-N.C., welcomed the change, he insisted more changes were in order.

Also from the Washington Examiner

"It was planned as a one-strike mission," Sen. Ben Cardin, of Maryland.

04/07/17 8:39 PM

Splitting with Meadows, Palmer plans to vote for the bill. "For those not there yet, I say keep working," he explained. "But at some point everyone's going to have to put their card in the slot and make decision. I'd be comfortable telling someone to push the yes button."

Philip Wegmann is a commentary writer for the Washington Examiner.

Read the rest here:

Rep. Gary Palmer hopes risk-sharing program can help Freedom Caucus 'push the yes button' - Washington Examiner

Nearly 30 prominent New Zealanders have signed an open letter saying New Zealand's freedom of speech is under attack at universities.

Don Brash and Dame Tariana Turia are among those who have signed the letter, penned by history professor Dr Paul Moon.

It follows the ban of Auckland University's European Students' Association, the cancellation of a visiting speaker after threats against her, and the Human Rights Commissioner's calls for a review of the hate speech law.

The letter warns of "the forceful silencing of unpopular views" on university campuses.

"It's rather like looking at an avalanche," Dr Moon told Newshub.

"We can see in Australia, the United States, the UK, there are some very severe restrictions on freedom of speech at universities and we are very concerned that that might happen here too. Really it's trying to prevent those sorts of trends emerging here.

"These threats being made by Dame Susan Devoy to introduce some sort of hate speech legislation is exactly that. It's a means to intimidate people, a means to shut them down because they are scared to be involved in hate speech."

Prominent anti-Islam speaker Ayaan Hirsi Ali was due to speak in Auckland on Sunday but has been forced to cancel due to fears for her safety. The appearances in Melbourne, Brisbane and Sydney were also shut down.

Ms Ali has spoken out on what she calls the "lethal ideology" of Islamism, after having left the religion herself.

It's now prompted violent threats - but Kiwis say she shouldn't be afraid to speak here.

"[She] is simply saying things that other people find uncomfortable," ACT Party leader David Seymour told Newshub.

"We have to have controversial debate. Without it, the democracy will die."

Muslim community worker Anne Degia-Pala told Newshub while Ms Ali's talk may be interesting, it won't be representative of everyone's experience.

"Her experiences are her own and based on a culture, not the religion of Islam," she said.

But while she may disagree with Ms Ali's views, she agrees the threats go too far.

"At the end of the day New Zealand is an open country and we have rights with freedom of speech, and we would have expected her to speak with some responsibility," Ms Degia-Pala said.

"Why would we, as women of New Zealand, deny her the opportunity to say what she has to say?"

Fellow Muslim woman Dr Amira Hassouna said the problem may stem from Ms Ali coming to speak only her side of the argument, rather than bringing a fellow Muslim scholar in and turning it into a debate.

"Her personal experiences are not enough to validate her argument against Islam and more than a billion Muslims," Dr Hassouna told Newshub.

"There is another perspective to the issue, showing many Muslims who lead peaceful lives simply following the teachings of Islam."

Dr Moon says New Zealand has got to the stage where people in some cases cannot give speeches because they are fearful of the pressure that is put on them.

"What we want is a society where everyone is free to express their ideas no matter how absurd some of them may be simply because that is the best way to deal with absurd ideas. Have them expressed, debated and debunked."

Mr Seymour said he had a ticket to see Ms Ali's show and says the fact she's afraid to come to our country is embarrassing on an international scale.

"I want to live in a country where the power and right of free speech is greater than the power of violence," he said.

"She has a view - I'm not sure it's necessarily the right view, but I think we should be allowed to hear it."

Newshub.

See more here:

Freedom of speech 'under attack' at NZ universities - Newshub

Negotiations over a Republican health care plan to replace Obamacare appear to have reignited with great fervor this week, with the White House and the conservative House Freedom Caucus in talks about a new health care plan.

The Washington Examiner gives a good sense of where the negotiations are and, if its right, suggests Republicans are on track to push a bill less popular than their first effort, the American Health Care Act:

Freedom Caucus members, whom Trump has blamed for the implosion of his first healthcare deal, want to see Obamacare's Title I insurance regulations dismantled in the GOP legislation. The Freedom Caucus source said White House officials "could get 216 for the [American Health Care Act] today if they included language to strip out the Title 1 insurance regs."

Title 1 is the heart of Obamacares coverage expansion. It runs 374 pages. It includes the requirement that insurers offer coverage to all Americans. It bars insurers from charging higher rates to people who are sicker or to women, a standard practice in the pre-Obamacare market. It outlaws lifetime limits on how much an insurer will pay before the Affordable Care Act, 55 percent of employer-sponsored plans had a cap on benefits, usually around $1 million or $2 million. It is also the part of the law that requires insurers to cover young adults up to age 26.

Title 1 includes the requirement that insurers cover 10 essential health benefits including maternity care and mental health services, and a mandate that all insurers cover preventive care without any cost to the patient. Title 1 also says that insurers have to provide consumers with easy-to-understand summaries of what their health plan actually covers.

The Freedom Caucus has indicated it wants to target two of these provisions specifically: essential health benefits and community rating, which is the requirement that insurers charge sick people the same prices as healthy people.

Getting rid of essential health benefits and community rating would almost certainly create a bill that is less popular and covers fewer people than the Republicans first proposal, which would have caused 24 million people to lose coverage. The change would allow insurers to once again charge sick people higher premiums than the healthy meaning premiums would often be too expensive for low-income Americans with preexisting conditions to afford.

This would also mean that insurers could stop covering services that tend to attract patients who use more medical care, like maternity coverage and mental health services. Before the essential health benefits requirement, just 12 percent of individual market plans covered maternity benefits, for example. Twenty-two states had mandates requiring the coverage of mental health treatment before Obamacare which meant 28 states didnt.

Republicans have argued that these essential health benefits drive up premiums, and they are right. Whenever insurers have to pay for more medical care, the cost of the health plan goes up. Obamacares defenders say these are the basic health benefits everyone should have access to, and it is worth spreading their costs across all people buying coverage.

Whether the Freedom Caucus keeps its aim on these two provisions or goes wider targeting lifetime limits, for example the winners and losers are already clear. People who are healthy would have something to gain with less insurance regulation. They would be able to buy skimpier plans that charge lower premiums but also offer fewer benefits.

But people who are sick and poor have a lot to lose. Their premiums would go up because of the return of individual rating, and their benefit packages would shrink because of the end of essential health benefits.

A bill that ends community rating and essential health benefits would almost certainly drive up the number of people who lose health coverage. Many Republican legislators were not okay with the coverage loss under the last bill, and certainly would not get on board with an increase.

About 17 percent of Americans supported the last Republican bill, the American Health Care Act. The ban on charging for preexisting conditions is one of Obamacares most popular provisions. By toying with eliminating it, Republicans are also toying with drafting an incredibly unpopular new plan.

Read more:

Freedom Caucus on track to write a health bill less popular than GOP's last - Vox

Inside the rotunda of the Iowa State Capitol hundreds of Iowans peacefully gathered for the Freedom to Believe Rally. After hate-filled letters and anti-semitic voicemails were left at Islamic Centers and an Iowa synagogue, Iowans made sure those with different beliefs feel welcomed in Iowa. Wochit

A portion of the crowd inside the Capitol Rotunda Sunday. Over 200 Iowans from across the state attended the Freedom to Believe Rally.(Photo: Joey Aguirre)

Hundreds of Iowansfought back peacefully Sunday afternoonagainst those leavinghate-filled lettersat Islamic centers and anti-Semitic phone messages on voicemails at an Iowa synagogue.

Inside the rotunda of the Iowa State Capitol dozens of speakers took their turn in front of the microphone inresponse to actions of hate against the Muslim community in Des Moines and other religious communities across Iowa. The rally was hosted by the Interfaith Alliance of Iowa in response to actions of hate against religious communities across Iowa.

Two local high school seniorsmade their voices heard throughslam poetry performances.

"I'll keep my fist up and my heart open," Jalesha Johnson said.

Johnson, a senior at East High School, was an organizer of the student walkout in November after the election resultsand delivered the first of twopoetry readings. She is part of the group "Movement 515."

"We've gotten some really positive feedback and I feel like we've made a positive impact," Johnson, 18, said after her performance. "We just want people to find people who love them back and if you are angry, talk or write about it. Don't bottle that up because you'll end up channeling that into a negative outcome."

Fellow senior Marcos Flores attends Valley High School and is part of the group,"Hip-Hope." Hesaid it's tough being a minority for his generation.

"It's hectic," Flores, 17, said. "The thing my generation does not like to do is get active. The moment we decide that we need to be active and decide what our fate and our future is going to be like, everything will come into place. I still have hope, I always do."

Hundreds of Iowans gathered in the Capitol Rotunda Sunday afternoon for a Freedom to Believe Rally. The rally was to celebrate diversity.(Photo: Joey Aguirre)

For John Fruetel, he's concerned with how the Trump administration is singling out the Muslim religion.

"It's immoral and illegal," Fruetel, 53, said. "We want to showthat there are people who support people from other countries. Most Americans disagree with what is going on."

Fruetel said when he heard about the anti-Islam note left at the Islamic Center of Des Moines, he believed the Trump administration was partially to blame.

"They've always been around but now they feel brave enough to do it," Fruetel said. "I'm not the type of guy who is going to let that go. I'll push back."

Rev. David Sickelka and Kathy Marean hold their rainbow flag inside the Capitol Rotunda Sunday. Sickelka and Marean said they wanted to show support.(Photo: Joey Aguirre/The Register)

Rev. David Sickelka and Kathy Marean of the Urbandale United Church of Christ broughta large rainbow flag inside the Capitol Rotunda in support of all people from various religious backgrounds.

"I just want to show support," Marean said. "They are safe with me."

Sickelka said he hopes these ralliesshowsolidarity.

"We can't claim freedoms for ourselves that we aren't willing to defend for the lives of others," Sickelka said. "We will stand with them."

Read or Share this story: http://dmreg.co/2oqQVVd

Read the rest here:

'Freedom to Believe' rally attracts hundreds to Capitol - DesMoinesRegister.com

Local News

LUBBOCK, TX (NEWS RELEASE) -

WHAT: Participating in the Collings Foundations WINGS OF FREEDOM TOUR, B-17 Flying Fortress Nine O Nine," B-24 Liberator Witchcraft, B-25 Mitchell "Tondelayo" bombers and P-51 Mustang "Toulouse Nuts" fighter, will fly into Lubbock Preston Smith International Airport for a visit from April 3rd to 5th. This is a rare opportunity to visit, explore, and learn more about these unique and rare treasures of WWII aviation history. The B-17 is one of only 8 in flying condition in the United States. The B-24J Liberator is the sole remaining example of its type flying in the World. The B-25 is best known for being used in the daring Doolittle raid and the P-51 "Toulouse Nuts" fighter recently received the 2016 Oshkosh Grand Champion Award for restoration. Visitors are invited to explore the aircraft inside and out - $15 for adults and $5 for children under 12 is requested for access to up-close viewing and tours through the inside of the aircraft. Discounted rates for school groups. Visitors may also experience the once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to actually take a 30-minute flight aboard these rare aircraft. Flights on either the B-17 or B-24 are $450 per person. Get some stick time in the worlds greatest fighter! P-51 flight training is $2,200 for a half hour and $3,200 for a full hour. B-25 flights are $400 per person. For reservations and information on flight experiences call 800-568-8924.

WHERE: The WINGS OF FREEDOM TOUR will be on display at Lubbock Preston Smith International Airport, located at Lubbock Aero, 6304 N Cedar Ave.

WHEN: The WINGS OF FREEDOM TOUR will arrive at the Lubbock Preston Smith International Airport at 12:00 PM on Monday, April 3rd and will be on display until the aircraft departs after 12:00 PM operations Wednesday, April 5th. Hours of ground tours and display are: 1:00 PM to 5:00 PM, Monday, April 3rd, 9:00 AM to 5:00 PM on Tuesday, April 4th and 9:00 AM to 12:00 PM, Wednesday, April 5th. The 30-minute flight experiences are normally scheduled before and after the ground tour times above.

WHO: The Collings Foundation is a 501c3 non-profit educational foundation devoted to organizing living history events that allows people to learn more about their heritage and history through direct participation. The Nationwide WINGS OF FREEDOM TOUR is celebrating its 28th year and visits an average of 110 cities in over 35 states annually. Since its start, tens of millions of people have seen the B-17, B-24, B-25 & P-51 display at locations everywhere. The WINGS OF FREEDOM tour is one of the most extraordinary and unique interactive traveling historical displays of its kind.

WHY: The WINGS OF FREEDOM TOUR travels the nation as a flying tribute to the flight crews who flew them, the ground crews who maintained them, the workers who built them, the soldiers, sailors and airmen they helped protect; and the citizens and families that share the freedom that they helped preserve. The B-17, B-25 & B-24 were the backbone of the American effort during the war from 1942 to 1945 and were famous for their ability to sustain damage and still accomplish the mission. Despite the risks of anti-aircraft fire, attacking enemy fighters, and the harrowing environment of sub-zero temperatures, many B-17s, B-25s and B-24s safely brought their crews home. The P-51 Mustang was affectionately known as the bombers Little Friend - saving countless crews from attacking axis fighters. After the war, many aircraft were scrapped for their raw aluminum to rebuild a nation in post-war prosperity and therefore very few were spared. The rarity of the B-17, B-25, B-24 & P-51 - and their importance to telling the story of WWII is why the Collings Foundation continues to fly and display the aircraft nationwide. At each location we encourage local veterans and their families to visit and share their experiences and stories with the public. For aviation enthusiasts, the tour provides opportunity for the museum to come to the visitor and not the other way around! Visitors can find out more by visiting our website at http://www.collingsfoundation.org.

(News release from Collings Foundation)

Continue reading here:

National WWII Wings of Freedom Tour Lands in Lubbock April 3-5 - EverythingLubbock.com

Share This Story!

Let friends in your social network know what you are reading about

The late-night comics take a look at the state's controversial bathroom bill. Take a look at our favorite jokes, then vote for yours at opinion.usatoday.com.

Try Another

Audio CAPTCHA

Image CAPTCHA

Help

CancelSend

A link has been sent to your friend's email address.

A link has been posted to your Facebook feed.

The late-night comics take a look at the state's controversial bathroom bill. Take a look at our favorite jokes, then vote for yours at opinion.usatoday.com. USA TODAY Opinion_Eileen Rivers

Seth Meyers(Photo: Jerod Harris, Getty Images for Hulu)

It took basketball to prompt lawmakers in North Carolina to repeal the state'scontroversial bathroom bill, and late-night comic Trevor Noah is surprised at the power of the NCAA sport. Lawmakers passed a repeal compromise that rolls back a previous law stating that people had to use the public bathroom that corresponded to the gender on their birth certificate. Noah explains why that power impressed him in Punchlines, above.

And Seth Meyers compares North Carolina's law to one in New York. Find out which is more restrictive.

After you watch our favorite jokes, vote for yours in the quick poll to the right. Watching from your smartphone or tablet? Then visit opinion.usatoday.com to cast your ballot.

Follow Eileen Rivers @msdc14.

Punchlines audio!

Want to listen to your laughs instead? Click or download to get the latest on North Carolina's bathroom bill.

Read or Share this story: http://usat.ly/2n4gNGy

0) { %>

0) { %>

The rest is here:

Punchlines: Basketball brings bathroom freedom - USA TODAY

Sen. Rand Paul and several members of the conservative House Freedom Caucus met Monday to try to create a new path on repealing Obamacare, but the Kentucky Republican conceded that a major sticking point that doomed the GOP's prior effort remains.

The short summit Monday in Paul's Senate office comes as the White House is trying to rev up talks with the Freedom Caucus and the moderate Tuesday Group to end a major impasse on how to repeal Obamacare.

Paul, who golfed with President Trump last weekend, told reporters after the meeting that the House Freedom Caucus is still open to discussions. But he acknowledged that a major sticking point is what to do about Obamacare's insurance regulations, including those that ended limits on how much an insurer had to pay a patient over his lifetime.

"We want to make sure that the death spiral of Obamacare is fixed," said Paul, who opposed the American Health Care Act, the House leadership's bill to partiall repeal and replace Obamcare that was pulled nearly two weeks ago because of insufficient support.

Paul said he discussed Obamacare repeal with Trump during their golf outing.

He advocated scrapping the American Health Care Act entirely.

"I think where they are is still trying to make it work with what they have and accept what they have with small tweaks to the existing bill," Paul said, referring to the White House.

During negotiations two weeks ago on the American Health Care Act, the Freedom Caucus wanted the White House to include cutting most of Obamacare's regulations on insurers. However, the White House agreed only to cut the regulation that insurers cover 10 essential health benefits, worried that adding more could cost support from moderate Republicans.

Several members of the Freedom Caucus and the moderate Tuesday Group, concerned about an estimate that 24 million people could lose insurance over the next decade, defied House leadership and the White House and opposed the bill, which was pulled on March 24.

Also from the Washington Examiner

States would decide whether to cover some or all of the essential health benefits that insurers must cover.

04/03/17 7:48 PM

Now the Freedom Caucus and the Tuesday Group are separately meeting with the White House to try to create a path forward.

Paul told reporters before meeting with the caucus that he also met with Rep. Charlie Dent, R-Pa., the leader of the Tuesday Group.

But what that path is remains to be seen, and Congress is expected to leave for a two-week recess on Friday.

Paul also floated a compromise on tax credits, another sticking point as conservatives favor a tax deduction rather than credits. He said that a new bill could leave tax credits in place, but with less funding.

Meanwhile, Trump was scheduled to meet with members of the Tuesday Group on Monday. Talks between the Tuesday Group and the Freedom Caucus broke down last week.

Also from the Washington Examiner

The New Jersey minor had planned to shoot the pope during his U.S. visit in 2015.

04/03/17 7:25 PM

See the original post:

Rand Paul meets with Freedom Caucus on Obamacare repeal - Washington Examiner

Forbes

GOP Centrists, Not Freedom Caucus, Are Blocking Deal To Replace Obamacare Forbes The conventional wisdomrepeated by President Trumpis that the right-wing House Freedom Caucus is singlehandedly blocking Republican attempts to repeal and replace Obamacare. In fact, Freedom Caucus members have been reaching out to the ... Trump aide urges defeat of Freedom Caucus memberHonolulu Star-Advertiser Trump aide keeps up Twitter attacks on Freedom Caucus' AmashCNN Why The Freedom Caucus Shouldn't Worry About Primary Threats From President TrumpNPR Fox News -CNNMoney -Townhall all 2,523 news articles »

Read more from the original source:

GOP Centrists, Not Freedom Caucus, Are Blocking Deal To Replace Obamacare - Forbes

Trump targeted conservative House members within his own party in a tweet Thursday morning that told his supporters "we must fight" the House Freedom Caucus as well as Democrats next year.

Later Thursday, the President called out individual Freedom Caucus members in several tweets.

The tweets represented a bold strike against the most conservative members of the House GOP coalition, who often come from safe districts and are frequently impervious to pressure from party leaders.

It comes at the same time Ryan, who has had multiple conversations with Trump since the failure of the health care bill on how to move their joint agenda forward, has attempted to instill fear in his members through a more gentle, but no less subtle threat: if members stand in Trump's way, he'll ditch them -- and conservative principles entirely -- and go looking for Democratic help.

"It is very understandable that the president is frustrated that we haven't gotten to where we need to go because this is something we all said we would do," Ryan told CNN Thursday when asked about Trump's tweet.

Trump's message wasn't subtle -- nor was it random.

It came shortly after Ryan made clear in an interview on "CBS This Morning" that if his party can't unify, Trump will likely turn toward Democrats for future legislative deals.

Speaking to reporters later Thursday, Ryan amplified Trump's comments.

"I understand the frustration," Ryan said. "I share (the) frustration."

Ryan repeated that "90%" of his caucus is for the health care measure, but would not commit to a timeline on holding another vote.

In tandem, the messages form a dual-pronged campaign to try and emphasize -- and raise the stakes -- of the risks of remaining a divided party, according to sources familiar with the effort.

As the health care debate reached its final days, and in the wake of its failure, Trump and Ryan have taken pains to preserve and improve their relationship, speaking by telephone multiple times a day, in an apparent acknowledgment that their hopes for a substantive common agenda rest on remaining united.

The dynamics of the House GOP conference -- and how to try and bring it together -- have been a repeated topic of conversation, sources tell CNN.

The idea that Trump could turn away from his own party at this stage is, to a degree, theater designed to spook the far-right of the party into line. It was a message echoed by Trump administration officials the weekend after the health care failure and repeated Thursday by Ryan, multiple people involved say.

Trump's tweets, showing an increasingly aggressive and hard-edged view of the Freedom Caucus, represent his own unfiltered take on a group that is viewed inside the White House as threatening ambitious agenda.

The President tagged on Twitter caucus chairman Mark Meadows, and members Raul Labrador and Jim Jordan.

For the moment, there's limited evidence that real work towards wrangling Democrats for Trump's agenda is taking place and even less evidence enough Democrats exist to make any effort along those lines worthwhile.

But, sources say, it's a threat that could eventually ring true if the Freedom Caucus doesn't change its tune. After all, the President is not particularly tied into conservative orthodoxy. So while the most recent comments fit into a loosely designed deliberate campaign of sorts now, there's no question it could become very real if Trump decides it's the only way to strike any kind of deal.

Ryan enforced that message in the CBS interview, suggesting that Trump's patience was not infinite and he could be tempted to work with the other side if Republicans refuse to implement his agenda.

"What I am worried about is ... that if we don't do this then he will just go work with Democrats to try and change Obamacare -- that's hardly a conservative thing," Ryan said.

"I'm going to let the tweet for itself," White House spokesman Sean Spicer told reporters.

Freedom Caucus member Rep. Justin Amash said Trump has surrendered to the Washington swamp he promised to fight.

"It didn't take long for the swamp to drain @realDonaldTrump. No shame, Mr. President. Almost everyone succumbs to the D.C. Establishment," the Michigan Republican, tweeted.

Meadows, uncharacteristically declined to weigh in on Trump's tweet.

"I don't have anything to say at this point. No comment," he told CNN. "No comment. I try to always be accessible, but no comment."

Rep. Dave Brat, a Freedom Caucus member from Virginia, told reporters that he's not going to weigh into drama.

"I don't get involved in any of that drama business," he said.

He maintains members had and "artificial time line" of three weeks to digest a major part of the economy, and he's still committed to repealing more regulations than the House bill did.

Rep. Scott DesJarlais, a Tennessee Republican, was an early supporter of Trump and he said he still has a good relationship with the White House and that getting him out of office might only be worse for Republicans trying to move legislation through.

"In my district, we're very conservative so If he gets me out of office, he's going to get someone more conservative than me," DesJarlais said.

"I think what happened needed to happen," he added. "We were pressured under what looked to be a bad deal, we walked away, and now cooler heads are prevailing. We're discussing this the way we should without a deadline, and we'll bring it back when its right."

DesJarlais said he's not worried about Trump's Twitter account.

"I know what my relationship with the White House is with Tom Price is, Mick Mulvaney, Mike Pence and Donald Trump so I am not gonna get all hung up about a tweet," he said.

CNN's Stephen Collinson contributed to this report.

See the original post:

Trump calls out Freedom Caucus members in tweetstorm - CNN

The Critics, a painting by Henry Scott Tuke, included in the exhibition Queer British Art 1861-1967 at Tate Britain. Photograph: Warwick District Council (Leamington Spa, UK)

It is not just the beauty of art, it turns out, that lies in the eye of the beholder, but also its queerness. Tate Britain is preparing its first show dedicated to queer art, a term long understood by art historians but which still has the power to bring the museum-going public up short. Does queer art, some ask, refer to a specific school of protest? Is it designed for a particular audience? And do paintings that might be described in this way really have a different perspective to offer? On the evidence of the work coming together for this landmark show, the answer is yes, all of this and more.

When the doors opento Queer British Art 1861-1967, almost 50 years since the decriminalisation of male homosexual acts in England and Wales, the curator of the exhibition, Clare Barlow, believes these difficult questions will all be tackled. Perhaps surprisingly, Barlows choices even include some works that originally had no clear position on gender or on sexuality, but simply came to be celebrated as gems of gay subculture.

We have works which demonstrate lots of different attitudes, from anxiety to celebration, Barlow told the Observer, adding that other items came to acquire notoriety by accident. Walter Cranes languorous 1877 painting, The Renaissance of Venus, is a good example. Cranes wife did not want him viewing or drawing nude women, so instead he used a well-known young male model, Alessandro di Marco, to stand in for the goddess of love, said Barlow. But the ruse fell apart when fellow painter Frederick Leighton saw the work at the Grosvenor Gallerys first exhibition that year and called out But my dear fellow, that is not Aphrodite, that is Alessandro!, supposedly adding that, in the Italian sunlight, the boy did pass for Venus. So the painting gained its salacious reputation due to the very primness of an era that had frowned on women posing for male artists.

Whats more, Barlow argues, the audience for new paintings often did at least half the work for the queer artist. A bronze statue like Leightons own The Sluggard, which simply shows a nude man stretching, is not overtly sexual, but for some was pure erotica. People saw different things, said Barlow, who worked on the show with assistant curator Amy Concannon. And there was frequently anxiety about how much was being implied. With Henry Scott Tukes painting The Critics, with its young men sitting on the waters edge, some just could not see it. For others, homosexuality was there and they loved it.

All the same, the queer theme has been tricky for the mainstream Tate because the word is now seen, including by many gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people, as having derogatory connotations. Even among those who have come across the broad strand of cultural study known as queer theory, it can be contentious. When Tate announced the show last year some questioned the need for an exhibition under this banner. Our obsession with sexuality dims our ability to simply respond to and enjoy great art for what it is, wrote Janet Street-Porter in the Independent.

Yet Tate Britains title has a precise historical meaning: it focuses on a moment of rapid social change and creative awakening; a time when the term queer was in increasing, if covert, use. The art is drawn from the period between 1861, when sodomy in England and Wales was no longer punishable by death, and 1967, when private sex between two consenting men over 21 stopped being a crime.

This period is so crucial because until this point gender and sexuality remained almost undefined socially, or at least without label, said Barlow. And then, through the first world war, new names and labels arrive, although of course, it is often still causing anguish. But it becomes a core facet of identity. This flowering identity was either claimed and explored with relish, as in the case of the Pre-Raphaelite painter Simeon Solomon, or was the subject of vexed doubt, as it was for the self-taught artist Keith Vaughan, who Barlow explains was constantly fearful that his work gave away too much of his desires.

Occasionally such non-conformist artistic experiments provoked condemnation. In 1913 Laura Knights sensuous Self Portrait with Nude, showing her painting a nude model, was widely seen as dangerous, or even repellent. It was certainly deliberately subversive, prompted as it was by the artists experience of being banned from life drawing classes at Nottingham School of Art. The Bloomsbury Groups Duncan Grant was also accused of being a corrupting force. His murals Bathing and Football, designed for the walls of Borough Polytechnic, were suspected of having a degenerative effect on the students.

Sometimes these views reflected rumours about the lifestyle of the artist, said Barlow, pointing out an underlying suspicion of any kind of aestheticism, let alone of homosexual art. But it was never made quite clear what exactly corruption meant. It is just alluded to. Is it perhaps going to distract young men from the kind of muscular civic activity that was required from them?

The exhibition also incudes a full-length portrait of Oscar Wilde by Robert Goodloe Harper Pennington, given to the writer as a wedding present by the artist and now exhibited in Britain for the first time. Wilde had been forced to sell his work when he was declared bankrupt and needed cash for his legal fees while he awaited trial for gross indecency in 1895. With real showmanship, the portrait will be displayed alongside the prison cell door behind which Wilde was later locked up in Reading Gaol.

The Tate is not the first cultural institution to mark the coming 50th anniversary of decriminalisation. Last week saw the end of the annual BFI Flare:London LGBT Film Festival, which opened with the world premiere of Against the Law, a film starring Daniel Mays and Mark Gatiss that tells the story of Peter Wildeblood, who in 1953 had a scandalous liaison with two servicemen. The subsequent court case led to his imprisonment and eventually influenced the 1967 Sexual Offences Act. The festival, in its 31st year, is confident about its own presentation of queer cinematic art. We try to be quite open in our interpretation, said Michael Blyth, who has helped programme BFI Flare for 10 years. It can be queer film-makers, queer content or sometimes a queer aesthetic. There is something you instinctively know if a film has something to say, either to the rest of our programme, or to the audience.

For Blyth the effort to present a different cultural voice is as relevant now as it was for the visual artists the Tate is about to celebrate: We are a long way off being mainstream yet. People do ask why we need a queer festival. Well, we try to show films that might not have another immediate, obvious platform, and that is the point.

As Tate Britain unpacks the crates for its own attempt to let marginalised work from the past speak out, Barlow is adamant that the story of queer art is not all about creativity inspired by isolation or covert urges. It is true covertness was there and people were oppressed, but it was not always part of the artistic impulse because a shared sexuality in those times allowed communities to flourish and support each other. I hope we will demonstrate this in a gallery we have called Arcadia in Soho. A lot of these artists knew each other and spent time with each other.

Of equal interest are those who worked away, seemingly unnoticed, within conventional society. Hannah Gluckstein, who painted striking still lives of flowers as Gluck, was accepted by the establishment, including members of the royal family, although she was living with Constance Spry, the influential flower arranger to the aristocracy. Some artists were very good at picking their way through the art world without questions being raised, said Barlow.

To the doubters who see no need for this show, the Tate is about to try to prove that queer is a theme, just like more orthodox studies of geography, era or nationality, that lets a new light flood in on great art.

Queer British Art 1861-1967 is at Tate Britain, London SW1P, from 5 April to 1 October 2017. tate.org.uk.

Gluck (1895-1978) full name Hannah Gluckstein is known for her emotive, humanistic paintings. She was born into a wealthy British Jewish family but rebelled against her roots, becoming an artist with a string of high-profile female lovers.

Dora Carrington (1893-1932) was a British painter active between the wars. She was associated with members of the Bloomsbury Group, especially the gay writer Lytton Strachey, and had an affair with US socialite Henrietta Bingham.

John Singer Sargent (1856-1925) was a portraitist whose career peaked in the 1890s, when he painted the distinguished members of society. He never married.

Duncan Grant (1885-1978) was a painter, textile and theatre designer and a central member of the Bloomsbury Group.

David Hockney (born 1937) is considered one of the most influential British artists of the 20th century. His work broke new ground by documenting gay love and lust.

Excerpt from:

Tate Britain celebrates 50 years of gay freedom - The Guardian