11 Real Wedding Photos From Couples Who Are Just So In Love

These sweet couples are oh-so in love and we have the photos to prove it. 

Below, see 11 romantic real wedding moments from HuffPost readers who tied the knot over the weekend: 

If you go to a wedding or get married yourself, hashtag your photos #HPrealweddings or e-mail one to us afterward and we may feature it on the site! Please include the couple’s names as well as the date and location of the wedding.

For more real wedding photos, check out the slideshow below:

– This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2017/02/20/real-wedding-photos-from-couples-who-are-just-so-in-love_n_14890304.html

feel

That is why students are normally encouraged to have creative and innovative minds before finishing schooling through competitions like unileverideatrophy. Such competitions encourages them to have fresh ideas which later on are converted into businesses for instance, This can later on reflect to less graduates crowded looking for jobs. They could also create job opportunities in .

Trump And Voting: From Bad To Worse

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-b-keegan/trump-and-voting-from-bad-to-worse_b_14775614.html

What could be worse than the U.S. president spreading lies and conspiracy theories about voting fraud to make himself feel better about losing the popular vote by millions? Unfortunately, that’s no longer a rhetorical question. After repeating the groundless claim that millions of people illegally voted for Hillary Clinton, Trump recently announced that his administration will launch an “investigation” designed to generate the “evidence” to support his belief. And this week White House policy adviser Stephen Miller made the rounds on Sunday talk shows spouting repeatedly debunked claims about massive voter fraud.

When pressed about the utter lack of proof for the White House’s assertions, Miller conveniently responded that “this morning, on this show, is not the venue for me to lay out all the evidence” but that “everybody” knows it.

At best, such an “investigation” by Team Trump will be a distraction from the real voting scandal of 2016: laws designed by Republicans to make it harder for targeted groups of people to vote. In reality, the so-called investigation will be used to justify even further voter suppression efforts of the kind that Republicans put in place after the Supreme Court’s conservatives gutted the Voting Rights Act in 2013. It’s worth noting that that decision was cheered by newly-confirmed attorney general Jeff Sessions.

Trump’s announcement-by-tweet and Miller’s remarks this weekend have made it clear that the White House is already stacking the deck by equating messy voter rolls—such as a person whose name remains on a list after they move or die—with actual fraudulent voting. Outdated lists are a continual administrative reality; fraudulent voting is a virtually nonexistent one.

In Texas, lawmakers took the Supreme Court’s decision to gut the Voting Rights Act as a green light to enforce a restrictive voter ID law that had been blocked under the now-dismantled provisions of the Voting Rights Act. The state argued it was necessary to prevent rampant fraud, but could produce only two cases of voter impersonation out of ten million votes. “On the other hand,” writes Emory University’s Carol Anderson, “it became clear that nearly 600,000 Texans, mainly poor, black, and Hispanic, didn’t have the newly required IDs and often faced financial and bureaucratic obstacles in obtaining them.”

A federal judge ruled in the fall of 2014 that the Texas law was discriminatory in intent as well as effect. After the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals granted Texas a stay of the decision, the U.S. Justice Department and civil rights activists asked the U.S. Supreme Court to intervene. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg argued that the Court should protect public confidence in elections by stopping Texas from implementing “a purposefully discriminatory law, one that likely imposes an unconstitutional poll tax and risks denying the right to vote to hundreds of thousands of eligible voters.” But the Court, led by the late Justice Antonin Scalia, kept the law in place, and courts are still wrestling with it.

Even after federal judges slammed some restrictive state voting laws—an appeals court judge wrote that North Carolina’s law targeted African Americans “with almost surgical precision”—Republican legislators sought new ways to impede minority voters by closing voting locations and limiting voting hours. Investigative reporter and author Ari Berman reported that 14 states “had new voting restrictions in place for the first time in 2016,” and on Election Day “there were 868 fewer polling places in states with a long history of voting discrimination, like Arizona, Texas, and North Carolina.” It’s no surprise that many of those states had seen record African American voter participation during Barack Obama’s candidacies, and many have witnessed significant growth in their Hispanic population.

During questioning at Sessions’ confirmation hearing, Sen. Al Franken noted that state election and law enforcement officials have found “virtually no credible reports of fraud among the nearly 138 million votes that were cast” in the 2016 election, adding, “What’s truly troubling about this, I believe, these bogus claims of voter fraud, is they’re routinely used to justify voter suppression.”

Indeed, some state officials have essentially admitted the laws’ partisan purposes—and in states that are particularly important politically. In 2012, Pennsylvania’s House Leader Mike Turzai said the state’s voter ID law was “gonna allow Governor Romney to win the state of Pennsylvania.” Last year, Rep. Glenn Grothman said that Wisconsin’s restrictive voter ID law would help Republicans carry the state. North Carolina’s Republican Party called a decline in African American early voting “encouraging.”

In 2014, Richard Posner, a conservative judge on the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals, called assertions about voter fraud “a mere fig leaf for efforts to disenfranchise voters.”  And noteworthy in an era in which the White House justifies its policies with “alternative facts,” Posner characterized Wisconsin officials’ justifications for voting restrictions as coming from within a “fact-free cocoon.”

The GOP is no newbie to this pernicious game, and neither is Trump. During his presidential campaign hepromoted plenty of bogus “voter fraud” conspiracy theories making the rounds in far-right circles. He has argued—without evidence, of course—that Barack Obama won his elections thanks to votes cast by non-citizens and “dead people.”

We cannot allow the Trump administration to use its “alternative facts” as another set up or excuse to further undermine our democracy by erecting more barriers to voting. It’s a lie that will be used as an excuse for even more voter suppression. If we want to preserve this democracy we, the people, must resist now.

Michael Keegan is the president of People For the American Way.

– This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

The Final Solution: Would Ivanka’s Line Sell in Pyongyang?

2017-02-13-1486994562-8732904-Laika_ac_Pyongyang_Department_Store_No._1_11975506264.jpg
Now that Nordstrom has gotten rid of Ivanka Trump’s line, she should seriously consider Pyongyang’s Department Store No. 1, which is one of North Korea’s leading retail outlets. If Putin likes Trump, one can only imagine how Kim Jong-un feels and there aren’t going to be any problems with the North Korean equivalent of Kellyanne Conway getting on television to “trumpet” Ivanka’s business. In North Korea there are none of the ethical scruples you have in Washington, particularly when the supreme leader is inclined to a particular fashion line. If by some turn of fate Mr. Jong-un’s wife, the fashionable Ri Sol Ju, who is looked at as the Jackie Onassis of North Korea, were to take a liking to Ivanka then her line would be a big drawer in Pyongyang Department Store No. 1, whether customers liked it or not. There have been some rumors that Steve Bannon will be producing his own brand of clothes, Under the Bannon Tree. However, rumors have it that exclusive rights to that label were picked up by TsUM, one of the most prestigious department stores in Moscow, as part of a deal negotiated by National Security Advisor General Michael Flynn, even before Mr. Trump was inaugurated. There are more liberal attitudes towards leaders using their positions of power to increase their wealth in Russia as there are in North Korea–something which flies in the face of the repressive policies limiting such aggrandizement in the States and which stop America from being great.

Pyongyang’s Department Store No. 1 (photo: Laika ac)

This was originally posted to The Screaming Pope, Francis Levy’s blog of rants and reactions to contemporary politics, art and culture

– This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

.http://www.huffingtonpost.com/francis-levy/the-final-solution-would_b_14720146.html
center>2017-02-13-1486994562-8732904-Laika_ac_Pyongyang_Department_Store_No._1_11975506264.jpgNow that Nordstrom has gotten rid of Ivanka Trump’s line, she should seriously consider Pyongyang’s Department Store No. 1, which is one of North Korea’s leading retail outlets. If Putin likes Trump, one can only imagine how Kim Jong-un feels and there aren’t going to be any problems with the North Korean equivalent of Kellyanne Conway getting on television to “trumpet” Ivanka’s business. In North Korea there are none of the ethical scruples you have in Washington, particularly when the supreme leader is inclined to a particular fashion line. If by some turn of fate Mr. Jong-un’s wife, the fashionable Ri Sol Ju, who is looked at as the Jackie Onassis of North Korea, were to take a liking to Ivanka then her line would be a big drawer in Pyongyang Department Store No. 1, whether customers liked it or not. There have been some rumors that Steve Bannon will be producing his own brand of clothes, Under the Bannon Tree. However, rumors have it that exclusive rights to that label were picked up by TsUM, one of the most prestigious department stores in Moscow, as part of a deal negotiated by National Security Advisor General Michael Flynn, even before Mr. Trump was inaugurated. There are more liberal attitudes towards leaders using their positions of power to increase their wealth in Russia as there are in North Korea–something which flies in the face of the repressive policies limiting such aggrandizement in the States and which stop America from being great.

Pyongyang’s Department Store No. 1 (photo: Laika ac)

This was originally posted to The Screaming Pope, Francis Levy’s blog of rants and reactions to contemporary politics, art and culture

– This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

How Betsy DeVos Ignored And Targeted Michigan Republicans To Advance Her Hardline Education Ideology

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/capital-main/how-betsy-devos-ignored-and-targeted-michigan-republicans_b_14606560.html

Originally published on www.capitalandmain.com

By Danny Feingold

With Senate confirmation of Donald Trump’s education secretary nominee Betsy DeVos now hanging by the thread of a likely tie-breaking vote from Vice President Mike Pence, one thing has become apparent: DeVos’ views on public education are well outside the mainstream of either party.

Perhaps less well known is that DeVos has demonstrated a willingness to override and even go after Republicans who fail to completely embrace her program of charter schools, vouchers and deregulation.

The defections this week of GOP Senators Susan Collins of Maine and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, who both announced that they would vote against DeVos, underscore a fact that Michigan Republicans have known for some time. DeVos is committed to an ideological stance on education that leaves little room for compromise. And as one of the state’s wealthiest and most powerful political donors — in the 2016 election year alone, she and her husband, Dick DeVos Jr., gave $2.7 million to Republican candidates — Betsy DeVos has the clout to enforce her will. (Since 1999, DeVos and her extended family has spent an estimated $82 million on political campaigns at the state and federal levels.)

Republican State Senator Goeff Hansen, who represents Michigan’s 34th District, learned a painful lesson last year about Devos’ hardline positions. Hansen became the unlikely champion of an extraordinary bipartisan effort, the Coalition for the Future of Detroit Schoolchildren, to rescue Detroit Public Schools (DPS) from years of financial insolvency and woeful academic performance. A central goal was to fix the destabilizing free-for-all system — likened by some to the Wild West — in which a dozen or more entities could open and close schools with virtually no oversight.

That campaign, which unfolded over several years, eventually encompassed an almost unheard of alliance of teachers unions, charter schools, business leaders, legislators from both parties, civil rights organizations and grassroots advocacy groups.

By the time Hansen introduced legislation in the Michigan State Senate, longtime adversaries had put aside their differences to embrace a package that few had thought possible when the process began. The proposed law passed by the Senate on March 2016, which also gained the support of Republican Governor Rick Snyder, would have created a commission charged with overseeing the opening and closing of schools, as well as authorizing $720 million to bring DPS out of near-bankruptcy and giving operating control back to the local district, which had been run by state for years.

The legislation was passed with the support of both Democrats and Republicans and sent to the Michigan House of Representatives. Dave Pagel was one of the Michigan House Republicans who supported the creation of the oversight commission. “I did support the Detroit Education Commission,” Pagel told Capital & Main. “We needed to have some control over where schools were popping up. Simple choice doesn’t solve any problems; we need to find a way to improve education regardless of the choices that are happening.”

DeVos and her allies, however, were unwilling to cede any ground in the war they had waged for years to ensure that charter schools in Michigan remain almost entirely unregulated. They worked to dismantle the bill, and by the time they were finished, the House had stripped the oversight commission from the legislation while adding draconian requirements for school closures.

With the specter of DeVos withholding campaign funds looming over Republicans who dared to defy her, the new version of the bill passed the House by one vote, was approved by the same margin in the Senate and signed by Governor Snyder. The turn of events infuriated proponents of the original bipartisan legislation and left Hansen on the verge of tears.

“This was a just and honest cause. Unfortunately, I’m unable to support this bill, and it pains me greatly to say that,” he said during a speech after the vote last June. “I keep being told that these compromise bills represents three-quarters of a loaf. Why should Detroit children accept less than what other children across the state are willing to accept?”

Hansen wasn’t the only Republican leader whose efforts to pass the bipartisan bill were pushed aside by DeVos. John Rakolta, Jr., a conservative businessman who last July signed on as one of Donald Trump’s Michigan finance chairs, had been one of five co-chairs of the Coalition for the Future of Detroit Schoolchildren. Among those joining Rakolta in the coalition’s unlikely stewardship was David Hecker, president of the American Federation of Teachers Michigan. In right-to-work Michigan, bringing together a staunch Republican fundraiser like Rakolta and a labor leader like Hecker was nothing short of miraculous. But the two men, along with dozens of others in the coalition, had reached a hard-won consensus about how best to improve Detroit’s embattled public schools.

But DeVos and others overrode the bipartisan coalition with a furious lobbying campaign. According to campaign finance documents, nearly $1.5 million was doled out by DeVos and members of her family to the state Republican Party and candidates in the aftermath of the legislation’s passage.

Paul Muxlow was not one of the recipients of DeVos’ largesse. A member of Michigan’s House of Representatives, Muxlow, a traditional Republican, found himself on the wrong side of DeVos’ education crusade back in 2011, when he voted against eliminating caps on the number of charter schools in the state. The following year, he was targeted by a pro-charter lobbying group founded, and primarily funded, by DeVos and her family. He almost lost his seat when the group spent close to $200,000 to defeat him.

“I’ve voted for almost everything the DeVoses wanted,” Muxlow told Bridge, a Michigan publication. “I’d walked a parade for Dick Devos when he ran for governor (in 2006). And then they ran the dirtiest campaign against me.”

The bottom line for Michigan Republicans — and perhaps for GOP representatives anywhere — is that you cross or ignore DeVos and her educational crusade for at your own peril.

– This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Donald Trump Is Pleased With The Jobs Report He Called Fake For Years

WASHINGTON ― During his campaign for president, Donald Trump frequently said the official U.S. unemployment statistics were “phony” and that the real jobless rate was many times higher than the government said.

On Friday, he touted the numbers in the first monthly jobs report released under his administration.

“Two-hundred twenty-seven thousand jobs,” Trump said at the White House. “Great spirit in the country right now, so we’re very happy about that. I think that it’s going to continue, big league. We’re bringing back jobs.”

Trump used to love complaining about the Labor Department’s monthly report, which tallies the number of jobs gained and the unemployment rate. The unemployment rate hovered around 5 percent for most of the presidential campaign, which economists consider a decently low number. 

“Don’t believe those phony numbers when you hear 4.9 and 5 percent unemployment,” Trump said last February. “The number’s probably 28, 29, as high as 35. In fact, I even heard recently 42 percent.”

“The five percent figure is one of the biggest hoaxes in modern politics,” he said in an August speech. 

In November, right before the election, Trump again called the unemployment rate number “phony.”

Trump could have pointed to other aspects of the government’s data that suggested the labor market hasn’t fully recovered from the Great Recession, but instead of going for a subtle argument, he preferred to attack the headline number as dishonest.

If the number were a hoax, it would necessitate a conspiracy involving hundreds of civil servants. No such conspiracy has ever been uncovered. 

Dean Baker, an economist with the liberal Center for Economic and Policy Research, closely analyzes the monthly jobs report data for trends among industries. His “Jobs Byte” column for Friday’s report said the results were mixed. The unemployment rate ticked up slightly to 4.8 percent. 

“The report is fine, but if anything, shows a less rapid pace of growth than the average for the last three years,” Baker said in an email, pointing out that the report covers the month of January, using data from the second week of the month as its reference point. 

“Next month will be the first report that will give us data on the performance of the economy under President Trump,” Baker said. 

If for some reason the economy falters and the jobless rate starts going up, look for Trump to bring back his “hoax” talking point. There is precedent for a president thinking the Labor Department’s Bureau of Labor Statistics is out to get him, after all. In the waning days of his presidency, a paranoid Richard Nixon fumed about a “Jewish cabal” at BLS undermining him with unfavorable jobs numbers. 

How will Trump’s first 100 days impact you?
Sign up for our weekly newsletter and get breaking
updates on Trump’s presidency by messaging us
here
.

– This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

.http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2017/02/03/donald-trump-jobs-numbers_n_14598316.html
div class=”embed-asset embed” data-type=”embed-asset” data-provider=”Embed” data-title=””>

WASHINGTON ― During his campaign for president, Donald Trump frequently said the official U.S. unemployment statistics were “phony” and that the real jobless rate was many times higher than the government said.

On Friday, he touted the numbers in the first monthly jobs report released under his administration.

“Two-hundred twenty-seven thousand jobs,” Trump said at the White House. “Great spirit in the country right now, so we’re very happy about that. I think that it’s going to continue, big league. We’re bringing back jobs.”

Trump used to love complaining about the Labor Department’s monthly report, which tallies the number of jobs gained and the unemployment rate. The unemployment rate hovered around 5 percent for most of the presidential campaign, which economists consider a decently low number. 

“Don’t believe those phony numbers when you hear 4.9 and 5 percent unemployment,” Trump said last February. “The number’s probably 28, 29, as high as 35. In fact, I even heard recently 42 percent.”

“The five percent figure is one of the biggest hoaxes in modern politics,” he said in an August speech. 

In November, right before the election, Trump again called the unemployment rate number “phony.”

Trump could have pointed to other aspects of the government’s data that suggested the labor market hasn’t fully recovered from the Great Recession, but instead of going for a subtle argument, he preferred to attack the headline number as dishonest.

If the number were a hoax, it would necessitate a conspiracy involving hundreds of civil servants. No such conspiracy has ever been uncovered. 

Dean Baker, an economist with the liberal Center for Economic and Policy Research, closely analyzes the monthly jobs report data for trends among industries. His “Jobs Byte” column for Friday’s report said the results were mixed. The unemployment rate ticked up slightly to 4.8 percent. 

“The report is fine, but if anything, shows a less rapid pace of growth than the average for the last three years,” Baker said in an email, pointing out that the report covers the month of January, using data from the second week of the month as its reference point. 

“Next month will be the first report that will give us data on the performance of the economy under President Trump,” Baker said. 

If for some reason the economy falters and the jobless rate starts going up, look for Trump to bring back his “hoax” talking point. There is precedent for a president thinking the Labor Department’s Bureau of Labor Statistics is out to get him, after all. In the waning days of his presidency, a paranoid Richard Nixon fumed about a “Jewish cabal” at BLS undermining him with unfavorable jobs numbers. 

How will Trump’s first 100 days impact you?
Sign up for our weekly newsletter and get breaking
updates on Trump’s presidency by messaging us
here
.

– This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.