Category Archives: History

With your permission, the new Microsoft Edgecan remember information for you, making it easier to return to a favorite site or fill in forms. Microsoft Edge stores your browsing data, such as your passwords, info you've entered in forms, sites you've visited, and other information. Other browsing modes such as InPrivate browsing and Guest mode function differently and store less data than normal browsing.

Your browsing data is stored on your device. If you've turned on sync, those data types can also be stored in the Microsoft cloud to be synced across your signed in versions of Microsoft Edge.

You can see and clear your browsing history by selecting Settings and more > History > Manage history. You may choose to clear your browsing history at any time.

To clear browsing data on your computer, make sure sync is turned off. Items that are synced will be cleared across all synced devices.

Here's how to clear your browsing data in Microsoft Edge:

Select Settings and more >Settings> Privacy, search, and services .

Under Clear browsing data, select Choose what to clear.

Choose a time range from the Time range drop-down menu.

Choose the types of data you want to clear (see the table below for descriptions). For example, you may want to remove browsing history and cookies but keep passwords and form fill data.

Select Clear now.

To manage and delete data saved in the Microsoft cloud, see the privacy dashboard. On the privacy dashboard you can view or delete your data. Data that you delete on the privacy dashboard wont be deleted from your device.

To learn more about how to stop sharing your data with Microsoft, see Microsoft Edge browsing data and privacy.

Types of info

What gets deleted

Where it's stored

Browsing history

The URLs of sites you've visited, and the dates and times of each visit.

On your device (or if sync is turned on, across your synced devices)

Download history

The list of files you've downloaded from the web. This only deletes the list, not the actual files that you've downloaded.

On your device

Cookies and other site data

Info that sites store on your device to remember your preferences, such as sign-in info or your location and media licenses.

On your device

Cached images and files

Copies of pages, images, and other media content stored on your device. The browser uses these copies to load content faster the next time you visit those sites.

On your device

Passwords

Site passwords that you've saved.

On your device (or if sync is turned on, across your synced devices)

Autofill form data (includes forms and cards)

Info that you've entered into forms, such as your email, credit card, or a shipping address.

On your device (or if sync is turned on, across your synced devices)

Site permissions

Go to Settings and more> Settings > Site permissions to see a list for each website, including location, cookies, pop-ups, and media autoplay.

On your device

Hosted app data

Info web apps store on your device. This includes data from the Microsoft Store. To see the apps saved to Microsoft Edge, go to Settings and more> Apps > Manage apps.

On your device

Using Microsoft Edge, you can clear all browsing data from Internet Explorer. Clearing Internet Explorer browsing data wont affect your browsing data in another browser.

Note:This is only available if your organization has turned on Internet Explorer mode.

In Microsoft Edge, select Settings and more > Settings > Privacy, search, and services .

Under Clear browsing data for Internet Explorer, select Choose what to clear.

Choose the types of data you want to clear.

Select Delete.

Block pop-ups in Microsoft Edge

Microsoft Edge, browsing data, and privacy

Recover your Microsoft account

Read more here:

View and delete browser history in Microsoft Edge

The new browser recommended by Microsoft is here

Get speed, security, and privacy with the new Microsoft Edge.

Try it now

Your browsing history is the info that InternetExplorer stores on a PC asyousurf the web. To help improve your experience, this includes info you'veentered into forms, passwords, and sites you've visited. However, if you're using a shared or public PC, youmay not want InternetExplorer tosave your history.

By viewing your browsing history, you can choose to delete specific sites, or return to a webpage that you've already visited.

In InternetExplorer, select the Favorites button.

Select the History tab, and choose how you want to view your history by selecting a filter from the menu. To delete specific sites, right-clicka site from any of these lists and then select Delete. Or, return to a page by selecting any site in the list.

Regularly deleting your browsing history helps protect your privacy, especially if you're using a shared or public PC.

In InternetExplorer, select the Tools button, point to Safety, and then select Delete browsing history.

Choosethe types of data or files you want to remove from your PC, and then select Delete.

Types of info

What gets deleted

InternetExplorer version

Browsing history

The list of sites you've visited.

All

Cached images temporary Internet files

Copies of pages, images, and other media content stored on your PC. The browser uses these copies to load content faster the next time you visit those sites.

All

Cookies

Info that sites store on your PC to remember your preferences, such as your sign-in or your location.

All

Download history

The list of files you've downloaded from the web. This only deletes the list, not the actual files you've downloaded.

Only InternetExplorer 11 and InternetExplorer 10

Form data

Info that you've enteredinto forms, such as your email or a shipping address.

All

Passwords

Passwords that you've saved for sites.

All

Tracking Protection, ActiveX Filtering, and Do Not Track data

Websites you've excluded from ActiveX Filtering, and data that the browser uses to detect tracking activity.

All

Favorites

The list of sites that you've saved as favorites. Don't delete favorites if you only want to remove individual sitesthis will delete all of your saved sites.

All

InPrivate filtering data

Saved data used by InPrivate Filtering to detect where sites might be automatically sharing details about your visit.

Only for InternetExplorer 9 and InternetExplorer 8

More:

View and delete your browsing history in Internet Explorer

"On several occasions, Trump has suggested that he expects to take his place on the list of former presidents aside Abraham Lincoln, presumably knocking George Washington, Thomas Jefferson and all the others in the top rank down a tick," wrote presidential historian Joseph Ellis in a op-ed for the Los Angeles Times this week. "To put it politely, he needs to adjust his expectations."

Added Ellis: "Donald Trump is quite likely to assume the title as the worst president in American history."

Deciding how presidents rank is, admittedly, a very subjective matter. And it's usually done by people like Ellis, academics and authors who have devoted their professional lives to the study of the presidency, which may not be a group naturally inclined to like Trump's decided anti-intellectual approach to, well, everything.

But those are the people who tend to rank the presidents. So, let's look at a few of the more recent rankings -- and where Trump stands.

On "luck," Trump ranked tenth. On "willingness to take risks," he was 25th. (Remember that this came out in early 2019, long before the world had ever heard of "Covid-19." The arrival of the pandemic is very likely to drop Trump's "luck" score in future surveys.)

Trump ranked dead last in this survey, trailing Buchanan, William Henry Harrison, Franklin Pierce and Johnson, respectively. Broken out by the relative ideology of the panel, Trump fared little better. Among self-identified conservatives, Trump was ranked as the 40th best president. (Buchanan was conservatives' choice as worst president.) Among moderates and liberals in the survey, Trump was ranked dead last.

"He said, 'Kristi, come on over here. Shake my hand,'" Noem told the Sioux Falls Argus-Leader about a meeting with Trump in the Oval Office. "I shook his hand, and I said, 'Mr. President, you should come to South Dakota sometime. We have Mount Rushmore.' And he goes, 'Do you know it's my dream to have my face on Mount Rushmore?'. "I started laughing. He wasn't laughing, so he was totally serious."

Now, making historical judgments about a president in the middle of his term -- or even immediately after his term ends -- is a dicey business. Ulysses S. Grant was widely seen to be a failure in the immediate aftermath of his presidency but has fared far better in the light of history. (Grant is ranked 24th by Siena and 21st in the "Presidential Greatness Survey.") Ditto George H.W. Bush (21st in Siena, 17th in the "Presidential Greatness Survey.")

"I suspect the tour guides at Buchanan's National Historic Landmark homeplace, Wheatland, in Pennsylvania, are already celebrating," concluded Ellis in his op-ed. "Their man, they must fondly hope, will never be last again."

View original post here:

Will Donald Trump go down as the worst president in history? - CNN

The rapid decline of American newspapers is robbing us of, among many other things, classic headlines. It took the Times of Indiain what remains the worlds great newspaper nationto really capture the events at the U.S. Capitol last week: Coup Klux Klan, it blazed across its front page, communicating the sense of giddy white entitlement, like a picnic at a lynching, that gave the event its distinctive and disgusting tone.

Maybe its just easier to see reality from a distance. Were so used to the background noise of racism in this country that erecting a gallows with a noose on the West Front of the Capitol or carrying a Confederate battle flag through the halls of Congress doesnt register as alarming as it should. Revulsion at the Capitol siege should be, in large measure, revulsion at the bigotry that underlies itit was, after all, carried out in the service of absurd claims about election fraud, most of which depend on disenfranchising huge blocs of Black voters. And its possible that this could be one of those moments that helps us come to terms with that past: the shock of people storming Congress, killing one police officer and wounding several others as they hunted for elected officials, might be a catalyst for really dealing with the ugliness that defines too much of American history.

Or it might slide slowly into joining that history. Im thinking of India again. In a few years, that country will mark the seventy-fifth anniversary of the assassination of Mahatma Gandhi, arguably the most important political leader of the twentieth century. He not only led the subcontinent to freedom against the most powerful empire that the world has ever known; he helped awaken Indians to the evils of caste and developed a theory and practice of nonviolent civil disobedience that has since become one of the worlds most precious possessions. His funeral, the day after his death, was attended by an estimated two million people. Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru used the occasion, which came in the wake of the horrific violence of Partition, to call for an end to sectarianism. At the ceremony for the immersion of Gandhis ashes in the Ganges, Nehru said, Our country gave birth to a mighty one, and he shone like a beacon not only for India but for the whole world. And yet he was done to death by one of our own brothers and compatriots. How did this happen? You might think that it was an act of madness, but that does not explain this tragedy. It could only occur because the seed for it was sown in the poison of hatred and enmity that spread throughout the country and affected so many of our people. Out of that seed grew this poisonous plant. It is the duty of all of us to fight this poison of hatred and ill will.

Over time, however, that resolve dissipated. One of the right-wing Hindu-nationalist groups to which Gandhis assassin, Nathuram Godse, had belonged, the R.S.S., was banned for only a year before its leadersthe Josh Hawleys and Ted Cruzes of their daymanaged to have the moratorium overturned. The current Prime Minister, Narendra Modi, is a graduate of the group, and his Bharatiya Janata Party has governed as bigots, partaking of the same anti-Islam hatred that animated Gandhis killer. Muslims have faced the loss of citizenship; those suspected of eating beef have been murdered; Godse is being steadily rehabilitated. In 2017, the B.J.P. named Yogi Adityanath, an extremist Hindu monk, to run the giant state of Uttar Pradesh, in what one political observer called a final rejection of Nehru. Adityanath has called for building a temple to the Hindu god Ram on top of a mosque destroyed by a mob, and has proposed renaming one of Uttar Pradeshs cities in Godses memory.

All of which is to say that impeaching Trump will not be enough, nor will prosecuting his followers who invaded the Capitol. Joe Biden has endorsed unity, but meaningful change is going to require that the whole nation do what its never really done before: grapple definitively with its past. The reaction to George Floyds murdera wave of support for Black Lives Matterand the increasing shock and revulsion over the events that Trump has provoked are both signs that we might possibly be ready for something akin to a truth and reconciliation process that puts solutions like reparations on the table, where they belong. That conversation will be hard, and, obviously, it will provide a chance for demagogues to regroup. But, if it doesnt happen, we will be back here, eventually. And it will only happen if we take our precarious situation with the utmost seriousness. The ugly infection that has always sapped Americas strength burst to the surface last week. Simply bandaging it will be a mistakehistory doesnt offer many moments when a more thorough cure might be possible.

See more here:

Gandhi, History, and the Lessons of the Events at the Capitol - The New Yorker

Las Vegas

The Lecomte Stakes has forever been a blush of springtime hope in the middle of winter. It is always looked at as being loaded with so much potential that it is impossible not to stop and smell the promise of roses.

Here we go again with Saturdays $200,000 Grade 3 points prep for the Kentucky Derby. Mandaloun brings in a 2-for-2 record for presumptive trainer of the year Brad Cox. Midnight Bourbon, Red N Wild and Arabian Prince finished in the money in their previous Derby preps. Game Day Play is already a stakes winner.

It is the annual ritual. Look at the full field racing at the Fair Grounds in New Orleans. Tout it as being deep in talent. Then sit back this spring and watch as others from around the country pass these horses and collect the big prizes.

Nothing like a dose of history to throw cold water on a hot-looking horse race.

In all its runnings since it was restricted to 3-year-olds starting in 1962, the Lecomte has produced exactly one Kentucky Derby winner War Emblem in 2002.

There have been close calls since. Hard Spun in 2007 and Golden Soul in 2013 came through the Bayou on the way to second-place finishes in the Derby. War Of Will notably won both the Lecomte and Preakness two years ago just as Oxbow had in 2013. Otherwise, the January test in Louisiana has been a proving ground for regional talent more than it has been a bellwether for the classics.

Yet there is a lesson to be learned from most of the successful exceptions. Think about what War Emblem, Hard Spun, War of Will and Oxbow had in common. They were either pacesetters or stalkers, a style that is more suited to the classics than it is to a wintertime race on a track with a seemingly unending 1,346-foot homestretch.

Since 2000, there have been 22 horses that started in both the Lecomte and the Derby. Of those, 15 did not show their speed until the second halves of their races. Last years winner Enforceable was a microcosm, a deep closer that overcame a pedestrian pace to power home at the Fair Grounds by 1 lengths. Nearly eight months later that style did not translate at Churchill Downs, where he finished seventh.

At least one Derby starter has come out of 12 of the last 14 runnings of the Lecomte, but the style for most of those 18 horses did not fit well against faster competitors from across the country.

A stark fact about the Fair Grounds is that its current points preps the Lecomte, Risen Star and Louisiana Derby have produced only four Kentucky Derby winners Black Gold in 1924, Grindstone in 1996, War Emblem in 2002 and the controversially promoted Country House in 2019. Current preps at Gulfstream Park, Keeneland and Oaklawn Park, the other big tracks in that quadrant of the nation, have produced a combined 82.

That does not mean the Lecomte will be a bad betting race. Not with 11 horses entered, including five coming off now-forbidden Lasix and three that have experience going the 8 furlongs that the Lecomte became with its lengthening last year.

Bet down to 40-1 at Circa Sports and 35-1 at William Hill Nevada in Kentucky Derby futures, Mandaloun (3-1 morning line) must use his mid-pack style negotiate two turns for the first time and overcome post 10, which Enforceable did last year. It is also his first time in stakes company. Strong speed ratings from his November allowance win at Churchill Downs are an asset, and so are his connections. Cox was 13-for-55 coming into this week at the current Fair Grounds meet, and Florent Gerouxs win percentage of 28.6 was the best among jockeys with more than a handful of rides.

Trainer Mike Stidham entered the Godolphin colt Proxy (6-1), a pacesetting 2-for-2 at the Fair Grounds, and Manor House (8-1), a 12-length debut winner last month at Laurel Park that was cross-entered into an allowance race on Saturdays undercard.

After his father, Mark, won the Lecomte the last two years, trainer Norman Casse carries the family name with Beep Beep (12-1), a winning favorite in his only start Nov. 29 at Churchill Downs. This Tapizar colt owned by Marylou Whitneys estate and ridden by Joe Talamo could challenge Proxy for the early lead.

Game Day Play (20-1) is a gelding that was a seven-furlong stakes winner in October at Remington Park, but trainer Bret Calhoun has had him idle from races since. Arabian Prince (6-1) might not have the style that suits the Derby, but he was able to close into a noteworthy third-place finish Thanksgiving weekend in the Grade 2 Kentucky Jockey Club at Churchill Downs. Drawing the rail, Midnight Bourbon (7-2) tries to prove he merits Derby consideration after he finished 14 lengths in third behind Jackies Warrior and Reinvestment Risk in the Grade 1 Champagne three months ago at Belmont Park. Santa Cruiser (6-1) may be only a maiden winner, but he carries a strong speed rating from that mile victory two months ago at Churchill Downs.

My ticket will be keyed to Game Day Play, presuming his new jockey Gabriel Sez has him positioned to get a decisive first run on the leaders turning for home. In spite of his poor draw Mandaloun should be there at the end, too. And it is hard to leave off Arabian Prince, the quintessential, deep-closing Lecomte runner.

If a horse that is forwardly placed should win the Lecomte, that ought to carry a lot more weight in Derby futures than a run-of-the-mill closer accomplishing the same thing. Whether bettors take heed is another matter. What is the old line about not learning from history?

Racing notes and opinions

From the oh, no, not again folder: Barring an unforeseen end to 15 months of stubbornness, Oaklawn Park will not be on offer to horseplayers through Nevada racebooks. A track spokeswoman confirmed to VSiN that no deal is in place for the meet that starts next Friday. It goes back to the wearisome impasse between the Nevada Pari-Mutuel Association and Churchill Downs Inc. Although the Cella family has owned Oaklawn Park for four generations, CDI acquired the rights to negotiate the tracks interstate pari-mutuel contracts. I can confirm that CDI negotiates our signal, and (we) are currently not in Vegas, Oaklawn spokeswoman Jennifer Hoyt wrote in an email. The one ray of hope is that the refusal of the two sides to speak to one another is apparently over. One of two Las Vegas sources who spoke to VSiN said, We are communicating at least. Since the CDI standoff began in October 2019, Churchill Downs, the Fair Grounds, Turfway Park and Arlington Park have all been rendered legally unavailable to Nevada bettors. So, too, have smaller tracks, some of which are paying CDI to be their negotiating agent. The only exception came in September, when casinos booked the Kentucky Derby and Oaks on their own, honoring track mutuels at their risk but putting strict limits on the options and potential winnings available to bettors.

With thoughts about the relationship with Churchill Downs and response to criticism that the odds are too conservative, William Hill US CEO Joe Asher provides insight into the making of Kentucky Derby futures in a rare interview for the new episode of the Ron Flatter Racing Pod. The conversation was also detailed in a story for Horse Racing Nation.

The death Tuesday of Prince Khalid Abdullah, 85, not only evoked tributes, but it raised questions. He built Juddmonte Farms into one of the biggest forces in racing and in breeding, producing champions like Arrogate, Frankel, Empire Maker, Enable and Dancing Brave. His lieutenants, notably Garrett ORourke in America and Lord Teddy Grimthorpe in Europe, are two of the most charismatic executives running any stable. Yet there has been no public outlining of Juddmontes future. Since His Highness passed away only this week, it would be untoward to expect answers right away, even if the questions came naturally. James Delahooke, a big name in bloodstock circles who worked for Prince Khalid in the 70s and 80s, told Racing Post, As long as its run by horsemen and not by accountants, Juddmonte will continue to thrive and prosper.

Add Prince Khalid: Juddmonte Farms bred and owns Mandaloun, offering a sentimental angle for the Lecomte and, who knows, maybe for the Derby trail.

Ron Flatters racing column is available every Friday morning at VSiN.com and more frequently during coverage of big races. You may also hear the Ron Flatter Racing Pod at VSiN.com/podcasts. William Hill US CEO Joe Asher talks about the making of Kentucky Derby futures, trainer Michael Stidham discusses Manor House and Proxy on Saturdays Lecomte Stakes card, and DraftKings Sportsbooks Johnny Avello handicaps weekend races. The RFRP is available for download and free subscription at Apple, Google, iHeart, Spotify and Stitcher. It is sponsored by 1/ST BET.

See the original post:

Derby history is not kind to the Lecomte - VSiN

LOS ANGELES, Jan. 15, 2021 /PRNewswire/ --History was made in 2007, as the History Channel premiered their first ever full-length documentary, diving into the hidden secrets of Naples via Naples Underground (Napoli Sotterranea) founded and run by lead Speleologist Enzo Albertini. The program, titled "The Secret Cities'' begins at a depth of 6 metres, in the excavations of San Lorenzo, traveling all the way into the Decumani area, situated below the Spanish Quarters.

The program aired on Sky channel 406, quite the momentous occasion as it was the first time the History Channel shot a documentary on Naples. In the past, they had only broadcast an in-depth study on the Napoli Liberation, a program which was made up of local footage and computer reconstructions of the Pompeii eruption, but no real footage was shot at the time.

This time, the History Channel documentary was filmed by a cohort of American television producers led by Executive Producer Dolores Gavin, accompanied by Producers Sarah Wetherbee and Emre Sahin who worked with Vincenzo Albertini to explore the underground city in a way which also tells the stories of a world long ago and their rich history. Their relationship and conversations with Mr. Albertini over the course of their many days and excursions there, allowed for an in-depth level of conversation into which aspects of Italy's great history accounts for the current geological marvels that exist within Naples Underground (Napoli Sotterranea). It was especially in these moments of conversation, that we see a National hero and honorary Tourism Ambassador Vincenzo Albertini shining through in his depth of knowledge and ability to paint such an inviting sense of adventure and intrigue over the city of Naples.

This dynamic troupe of storytellers, begin their journey by visiting the Pompeii excavations and showing the entire world how Naples was saved from the eruption of 79AC. They then make their way into the entrance of the Anticaglia house, from a trap door which descends into the stalls of the Roman theater, the remains of the Teatro di Nero.

The tour then continues under the Basilica of San Lorenzo in Naples where the Seat of San Lorenzo was born and where the remains of the columns of the ancient Court can still be seen today. At each of these great points in the unique landscape, Vincenzo Albertini continues to supply extensive insight into exactly which geological features we are seeing at the moment in time and also giving us the historical context, seamlessly merging story, lore and geology, bringing it into the Naples Underground (Napoli Sotterranea) of today.

After exploring the secrets hidden in the underground, the History Channel cameras arrive in the hypogeum of Naples and for the first time they show the city. This momentous broadcast of Naples to the world was celebrated by Italians everywhere and a special salute was given to Vincenzo Albertini and his team.

Instagram @napoisotterraanea

Contact:Lizzie Maria+44 (0) 7570 82 0089[emailprotected]

SOURCE Napoli Sotterranea

See the rest here:

Naples Underground Featured on the History Channel - PRNewswire

In his 2017 book,Guerrillas of Desire: Notes on Everyday Resistance and Organizing to Make a Revolution Possible, Kevin Van Meter explores how a broad working class has been claiming autonomy through a wide variety of refusal of work: Theft of time and materials, feigned illness, sabotage, arson, murder, exodus, and the myriad of other forms this refusal takesas well as the process of creating counter-communitiescan be found in everyday life.

We see glimpses of these acts in pop culture all the time, probably because work is often a backdrop to plot, not the driver of it. While maybe not the most revolutionary critique of corporate culture, The Office consists of office workers trying to find moments of joy during worknot through it but in spite of it. Given that their shenanigans occur on the clock, they technically constitute theft of time.

Homer Simpson constantly sleeps at the power plant; Barry Berkman takes acting classes, avoiding his job of killing people; and Jake Peralta spends as much time formulating Title of Your Sex Tape jokes as he does perpetrating state violence as a member of the NYPD. Work is never the point in these shows. Its the thing in the way of the point. Much of our pop culture treats work, particularly white-collar corporate work, the way it deserves: as something between a glorified chore and an impediment to fulfillment. (This could be because artists and culturemakers have experienced the tiresome and frustrating necessity of working solely to support their art themselves.) Dolly Partons iconic 9 to 5, and the film of the same name, wasnt about loving your job, after all. Pop culture has always reminded us that work sucks. Weve known.

Before my first job, before I truly understood the necessity of working or the strange oscillation between fulfillment and the utter despair that comes with having a career, I knew that work was not fun. I may have even assumed that adulthood was largely defined by a disciplined tolerance for work. After all, countless kids shows dedicated at least one episode to teaching children who wished they could either be adults or be rid of themfrom Rugrats having adult versions of Tommy and Chuckie literally push paper around with brooms before getting fired to Fairly Oddparents Timmy Turner wishing that the kids were in charge, inadvertently transforming the world into a boring dystopiathat the freedom of adulthood is not actually freedom. It is toil.

Read the original post:

A Brief Cultural History of Work Sucking - The New Republic

If the tense beginning of 2021 has you worried history is repeating itself, youre not alone.

Experts on political history say an apt parallel to the Jan. 6 insurrection at the U.S. Capitol can be found 160 years ago, when seven southern states seceded from the United States between December 1860 and February 1861.

The walk-up to Lincolns first inauguration was also dramatic, and some aspects of what was going on in the country back then will sound familiar to Americans today. In fact, a month after Lincoln took the oath of office on Mar. 4, 1861, shots fired at the Unions Fort Sumter marked the beginning of the Civil War, Americas deadliest war.

I think 1860-1861 is probably the best analogue for [2021], says Robert Lieberman, a political scientist and author of Four Threats: The Recurring Crises of American Democracy. The 2021 attack on the U.S. Capitol is the closest weve come to 1861, the one instance of a real failure of what you would call a smooth peaceful transfer of power. The big difference Lieberman finds between then and now is that the 2021 insurrection came from inside the government, referring to the members of Congress and President Trump who riled up the insurrectionists.

This is an insurrection incited by the President of the United States, Lieberman says. Thats completely without precedent. Thats whats so jaw-dropping to me.

Unlike in 2020, politicians werent peddling false charges of election fraud and there was no disagreement about the outcome of the 1860 presidential election. However, it leads to greatest failure of American democracy in history, as Lieberman puts it.

Southern Democrats in 1860 all agreed Lincoln had won. But the similarity might be, in both cases, theres a rejection of the democratic process, Rachel Shelden, Director of Penn State Universitys George and Ann Richards Civil War Era Center, says. [Today,] were seeing pushback against that idea that a majority voted for Joe Biden, and in 1860 although these folks did say yes Lincoln won the election, that, to them, meant that they needed to leave the Union, which was in and of itself, a rejection of democracy. Theyre both rejections of the democratic process, just in different ways.

Historian Ted Widmer has pointed out for the New York Times, a mob did attempt to break into the U.S. Capitol on Feb. 13, 1861, to disrupt the counting of the states certified electoral votes. U.S. Capitol security did not let them in because they did not have the proper credentials. Instead, they stood outside hurled insults at the head of the Capitols security detail General Winfield Scott, saying such things as Free state pimp! Old dotard! and Traitor to the state of his birth! Observers of the scene back then described the crowd as a caldron of inflammable material with revolution on their minds.

Later that month, Lincoln faced a threat to his life en route to his inauguration. When he was traveling by train to Washington D.C., a forefather of the U.S. Secret Service Allan Pinkerton and some of his operatives uncovered a plot, that had originated in Baltimore, to assassinate the incoming President.

Pinkerton went into Baltimore with a team of agents and they impersonated Lincoln haters and got all of the information about the plot, then told Lincoln and his entourage, Widmer, author of a book about the plot Lincoln on the Verge: Thirteen Days to Washington explains to TIME. It was very well-fundedWe dont entirely know if the new Confederate government was behind it; there are interesting trails but theyre not conclusive.

In the middle of the night on the last night of Lincolns trip, detectives escorted him to a secure transfer station so he could continue to journey to D.C., and he arrived safely, enabling a peaceful swearing-in on March 4, 1861. Looking back on that close call in 1861, less than a week after the mob attack on the U.S. Capitol, Widmer says It does feel alarmingly similar [to Jan. 6, 2021].

As in 1861, you do have a feeling of a country pulling apart, back then it was really a region pulling away from the rest of the country and seven states had seceded before Lincoln even got to Washington, he says. Now its almost family by family, within every state in the country, there are people who are alienated from one version of America or the other. But it does feel similar in that there are two competing ideas about what America should stand for.

Lincolns First Inaugural Address is one of the most famous speeches for politicians calling for unity. Among the most famous lines: We are not enemies, but friends. We must not be enemies. Though passion may have strained it must not break our bonds of affection. The mystic chords of memory, stretching from every battlefield and patriot grave to every living heart and hearthstone all over this broad land, will yet swell the chorus of the Union, when again touched, as surely they will be, by the better angels of our nature.

Shelden argues one similarity between the aftermath of the 1860 presidential election and the 2020 presidential election is, political leaders were implicitly (and in some cases explicitly) rejecting the legitimacy of a party for reasons related to white supremacy.

Thats a real similarity to today, she says. People in Congress are whipping up conspiracy theories, and that definitely existed in 1860 and the 1850s more generally. The slave states thought that Lincoln was out to eliminate slavery, the basis of their livelihood in their states, but, in fact, he ran for President in 1860 on a platform of eliminating it in the federal territories, not in the places where slavery already existed.

In addition to fear of losing control over slavery, southerners back then feared losing political control. They dominated federal politics for about the first half of the 19th century, and losing the presidency in 1860 threatened that dominance.

The South controlled everything in Washington for a long time, says Widmer, pointing out that therefore its ironic that part of the Lost Cause narrative reframes them as victims of big government after the Civil War. They were just mad they lost control of what they had always controlled.

Shelden says that the argument that FOX News presenter Brian Kilmeade and various GOP lawmakers made that Democrats shouldnt pursue impeachment because of threats of mass violence sounds a lot like what was going on in 1860 when the southern states repeatedly urged compromise or threatened to leave.

There had been increasing expansion of slavery westward, and northerners repeatedly compromised with white southerners on that issue, and it was to no avail, Shelden says. The biggest lesson is that compromise is not always effective. It doesnt necessarily prevent this kind of rejection of democracy.

Then, as now, America was at a crossroads, but back then, Shelden argues there was less confidence that America would survive the conflict because of the countrys young age. The Jan. 6 insurrection attempt, she argues, showed many Americans how much they take their democracy for granted.

Whats really important about the 19th century to understand is that people who lived in the 19th century, including the time of the Civil War, had a real sense of the fragility of democracy, she says. No democracy had survived in the world before, and so the U.S. was meant to be, to these folks, a beacon of hope. Lincoln famously called the U.S. the last best hope of Earth in his second [annual] message to Congress. [Americans] were much more worried about democracy dying in the 19th century than we might be today. Today, Im not sure we have that sense. We have an implicit trust that democracy will survive.

For your security, we've sent a confirmation email to the address you entered. Click the link to confirm your subscription and begin receiving our newsletters. If you don't get the confirmation within 10 minutes, please check your spam folder.

Write to Olivia B. Waxman at olivia.waxman@time.com.

See the article here:

'Alarmingly Similar.' What the Chaos Around Lincoln's First Inauguration Can Tell Us About Today, According to Historians - TIME

Photo-Illustration: Stevie Remsberg, Photos: Getty Images

Sigmund Freud developed a theory that human psychology is shaped disproportionately by the longings and shame experienced by young children during toilet training. And while that theory has fallen out of favor, it explains a great deal about the outgoing Trump administration.

Indeed, when we look back at this era, we may conclude that the Trump administration was the story of a group of people fixated with control over their toilets.

From the very beginning, the First Couple experienced the White House primarily as a place with dissatisfactory facilities for depositing their bodily waste. Melania delayed her move into the residence, former senior adviser Stephanie Winston Wolkoff revealed, because she didnt want to move to the White House right away in part because she didnt want to have to use the same shower and toilet as former first lady Michelle Obama.

The president soon began to take pride in the elegant appearance of the White House lavatories. Trump has an odd affinity for showing off bathrooms, including one he renovated near the Oval Office, reported the Times in 2017.

And yet this pride was mixed with dissatisfaction. He repeatedly complained that some people were being forced to flush their toilets extraordinarily often in a single sitting. We have a situation where were looking very strongly at sinks and showers, and other elements of bathrooms, Trump told reporters. People are flushing toilets 10 times, 15 times, as opposed to once.

This was not the sort of issue Americans were used to hearing their president focus on. But Trump seemed to be fixated.

Toilets provide a kind of motif of Trumps idiosyncratic approach to handling personnel. He informed Rex Tillerson he was being fired when the secretary of State was on the toilet. And he briefly hired as attorney general Matthew Whitaker, whose career had included a stint marketing a special toilet for men whose genitals were too large to fit comfortably into standard-size ones. This was an unconventional qualification for the nations highest law-enforcement officer, but perhaps the perfect training for Trumps.

Now the Washington Post reports that Jared Kushner and Ivanka Trump forbade the Secret Service agents protecting them from using any of the six bathrooms in their Washington home. The members of the protective detail had to resort to a number of methods, ranging from using the nearby Obama home or local restaurants to temporarily bringing in a porta-potty. Ultimately the Secret Service rented a nearby apartment where the agents could relieve themselves.

The Kushner-Trump couples fear of allowing Secret Service members to share their commode may seem fussy, or snobbish. But their behavior can be seen more sympathetically as the residue of a childhood disorder Ivanka acquired through her toilet-obsessed father.

The whole significance of the anal zone is mirrored in the fact that there are but few neurotics who have not their special scatological customs, ceremonies, etc., which they retain with cautious secrecy, wrote Freud. To open that space to outsiders would be mortifying.

When this strange and troubled family finally departs the scene, the nation will puzzle over what brought them here and what motivated their curious practices. Maybe they just wanted perfect toilets.

Analysis and commentary on the latest political news from New York columnist Jonathan Chait.

View original post here:

A History of the Trump Era Through Stories About Toilets - New York Magazine

Tom Brady and the Buccaneers could make NFL history this year if they can somehow find a way to win their next two games. If that happens, the Buccaneers would become the first team ever to play a Super Bowl in their home stadium.

The Super Bowl has existed for 54 years and in that time, no team has ever gotten to play the game in their home stadium. The fact that the Buccaneers are even in the divisional round is something that almost never happens. You can call it a Super Bowl hosting jinx or just bad luck, but teams almost never make the playoffs in a season where they're hosting the Super Bowl. Including the Buccaneers, there have only been nine instances in NFL history where a team made the playoffs in a season where their stadium was hosting the Super Bowl.

Of the host teams that made the postseason -- the Dolphins (1970, '78, '94, '98), Buccaneers (2000), Cardinals (2014), Texans (2016), and Vikings (2017) -- only one of them has even made it past the divisional round and that's the Vikings, who beat the Saints to advance to the NFC title game in 2017, where they would lose to the Eagles. The Saints are the same team the Buccaneers will be playing on Sunday.

Including the Vikings, the other Super Bowl hosts went a combined 1-4 in the divisional round and 3-8 overall in the playoffs during the season where the big game was being held at their stadium.

If the Buccaneers are going to end the jinx, not only are they going to have to beat the Saints, but they're also going to have to win an NFC title game against either the Packers or the Rams. The Bucs actually played both teams during the season: They beat the Packers 38-10 back in Week 6 and lost to the Rams 27-24 in Week 11.

If the Rams beat the Packers, then the NFC title game will be played in Tampa next week, which might put throw a wrench in the NFL's plans and that's because the league has already laid down the sod for Super Bowl LV.

Although no team has ever played a Super Bowl in their home stadium, two teams did get to play the Super Bowl in their home market. After spending the season at Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum, the Rams made it to Super Bowl XIV, which was played at the nearby Rose Bowl. Being close to home didn't actually help the Rams though, as they lost 31-19 to the Steelers.

The only other team that got to play close to home was the 1984 San Francisco 49ers. In Super Bowl XIX, the 49ers beat the Dolphins 38-16 in a game that was played at Stanford Stadium, which was less than 30 miles away from their old home at Candlestick Park.

Go here to see the original:

Here's how Tom Brady and the Buccaneers could make NFL history if they win their next two playoff games - CBS Sports