More NY Times Op-Eds!

I had a few more pieces for the NY Times Op-Ed over the last several days. This piece was slotted to run last Friday, but ended up going into yesterday's Sunday paper, where I was able to give it some color. For a piece on the outrageous financial costs (the moral costs are a given) associated with Trump's plan for a border wall, detention centers, deportations, etc.

This piece ran last week, looking at Trump's pick for National Security Advisor, General McMaster, and advising Trump to defer to the General's expertise.

This one is out today, for an editorial explaining that the one proposal Trump made during the campaign that could get support across the political spectrum- his infrastructure plan- is indefinitely on hold, and might not get off the ground for years, if ever.

Always a blast working on these super-quick turnaround pieces! Thank you to my AD on these three, Sarah!

Shine a light

This piece is in today's New York Times, for an Op-Ed recommending that congress look into various issues involving the Trump campaign/administration, if the Justice Department is too conflicted to do so. Listed are the Flynn firing, and the alleged contact between Russian Intelligence and Trump campaign members. They also threw in the various intelligence agencies' assertions about Russia trying to undermine the election (and whether Trump colluded in that respect) for good measure.

The web version:

The article describes Russia as a nation that "has tried to thwart American foreign policy since the Cold War," and demands info clarifying whether our new Prez is in cahoots with "an enemy." I wasn't aware that Russia is officially an enemy now. If it's due to the supposed attempt (or desire) to influence our election, I guess we have a lot of enemies around the world. Not because they've meddled in our elections, but because we've "meddled" in theirs. Like maybe Guatemala, Iran, Chile, Indonesia, Vietnam, and others where we either directly overthrew their governments, or supported the people that did. That's coups, to say nothing of plain old meddling or interfering, which we've engaged in dozens and dozens of times. And maybe if some of our foreign policy since the Cold War had been thwarted, those catastrophes wouldn't have happened. Along with many other catastrophes, like Iraq and Libya. It goes without saying (though I still will) that illustrators need not agree with every word in the articles they illustrate for. Investigation? Sure, why not? But I could do without the demonization that sounds an awful lot like a gin up for more interventionism. Anyone up for another round of regime change? Síganme, los malos! Meanwhile, those who decried leaks when they exposed Clinton campaign/DNC unseemliness are cheering on the Flynn leaks, while the Trump supporters giddy about leaks and whistle-blowing during the election are now crying foul. Who knew intellectual consistency was so hard to come by?
Thank you to Nathan, my AD.

Balancing act

This piece ran today in The New York Times. For an Op-Ed detailing just how much hangs in the balance, with regard to foreign policy in the Middle East (specifically, in this editorial's case, Israel and Iran.) And it's all in Trump's hands now:

Thank you to Nathan, my AD on this!

Twisting the night away

With apologies to M.C. Escher and Sam Cooke. This piece appeared in the L.A. Times Envelope section last week. For an article profiling a crop of new films that are challenging audiences with their unorthodox storytelling. Films like Manchester by the Sea, Moonlight, and Nocturnal Animals are using twists, nonlinear narratives, and other unusual methods to tell a story.

Here's the page:

Read the article here. Thanks so much to Wes!

Four lives to live

I did this New York Times Book Review piece a couple weeks back, and it ran in yesterday's Sunday paper. For the new Paul Auster novel,
4 3 2 1:

The book follows the formative years of Archie Ferguson, through four, alternate, parallel lives. One of the few commonalities between all these lives: Amy Schneiderman. As Tom Perrotta's review remarks: "The multiple love stories of Ferguson and Amy- sometimes consummated, sometimes thwarted- form the heart of the novel and bring the strengths of Auster's peculiar narrative structure into sharp focus." Read the review here, or pick up a copy of the book. Thank you to Matt!