Latest news with #Graham
Yahoo
37 minutes ago
- Entertainment
- Yahoo
Carnival Cruise Line testing new dining option passengers want
Carnival Cruise Line testing new dining option passengers want originally appeared on Come Cruise With Me. Cruise ship dining has evolved quite a bit over the years. In the classic days of cruising, dinner was almost always a formal affair, and meals were slow paced. Dinner was something that most passengers looked forward to, and no one was really in rush to get through formal nights are still a thing on some cruise lines today, dress codes are no longer strictly enforced. Main dining room menus have also changed as cruiser palates have evolved. Now, passengers who want something different than the main dining room experience have options, too. On Carnival Cruise Line ships, for example, the buffet is open for dinner, and most ships feature a variety of casual, quick-service dining options as well. Additionally, main dining room dinner seatings are a little more flexible now. On Carnival ships, passengers can choose from a traditional preset dining time with the same table assignment each night or a first-come, first-served 'Your Time' open seating dinner option. Still, despite the increased dining flexibility on most cruise ships, passengers often complain about one aspect of the main dining room experience that hasn't changed as much with the you choose the traditional set dining time or 'Your Time' Dining on a Carnival cruise, the main dining room experience typically lasts for about one hour and 30 minutes. For some passengers today, that's just too long. 'I don't know of anyone in real life who wants to spend one and a half hours in the dining room,' a passenger named Graham recently wrote to Carnival Cruise Line Brand Ambassador John Heald. Carnival's brand ambassador responds to hundreds of passenger questions and comments on his popular Facebook page every day, and he often receives messages like this one.'We had two nights in our cruise last week where we left at the one hour and 35-minute mark. I would say the average cruiser wants to be in and out of the dining room in under an hour at the very, very least. Most Carnival cruisers want this from the people I have seen and spoken to,' Graham insisted. Although Heald himself would love to hold on to the cruise tradition of lingering over dinner with family and friends, he understands that a speedier style of dining is something that passengers increasingly value response to passenger feedback about the main dining room experience, Carnival is now testing a new Express Dining option on one of its ships. 'Some people do want to be in and out, and that's why we're testing something on the Carnival Vista,' Heald noted in a recent video for his followers. 'This is what we are calling Express Dining.' Only available on Carnival Vista at this time, Express Dining is something passengers can choose to enjoy if they select 'Your Time' Dining. Carnival's Express Dining is intended to be a 45-minute dinner experience, and it features a smaller menu than the other main dining room options. More Carnival cruise news:An sample Express Dining menu that Heald shared included the following choices: Appetizers: Roasted duck rolls Shrimp cocktail Caesar salad Tomato soup Entrees: Szechuan shrimp Cornish game hen Braised short rib Sirloin steak Desserts: Cheesecake Navel orange cake Chocolate melting cake Heald noted that if Express Dining proves popular on Carnival Vista, it may roll out to other ships. 'We will see if it's popular, and if it is, we will take a look, and then we will let you know if we're trying this on other ships,' Heald explained. (The Arena Group will earn a commission if you book a cruise.) , or email Amy Post at or call or text her at 386-383-2472. This story was originally reported by Come Cruise With Me on Jun 10, 2025, where it first appeared.
Politico
12 hours ago
- Politics
- Politico
How Rand Paul got sidelined by fellow Republicans
As chair of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, Sen. Rand Paul technically has jurisdiction over a central plank of President Donald Trump's 'big, beautiful bill.' But the Kentucky Republican's desire to aggressively cut the administration's request for border security spending has sidelined him in negotiations. In an interview this week, Senate Budget Chair Lindsey Graham said that he has taken over as the lead negotiator in talks with bicameral leadership and the White House over how to deploy tens of billions of dollars to strengthen border security and reduce the flow of migrant encounters at the southern border into the United States. Graham, a South Carolina Republican who released his own border security funding plan shortly after Paul introduced his, said he offered himself up to the Trump administration as the point person on the border security provisions of the megabill. 'Senator Paul usually votes 'no' and blames everybody else for not being pure enough,' said Graham, who has a long history of clashing with Paul over federal spending and foreign policy. 'As chairman, you … don't have that luxury sometimes. You have to do things as chairman you wouldn't have to do as a rank-and-file member.' 'Senator Paul's reducing the amount [for border security] didn't withstand scrutiny,' Graham added. 'The analysis was shallow.' At the same time, the office of Senate GOP Conference Vice-Chair James Lankford of Oklahoma — also the chair of the Homeland Security Subcommittee on Border Management, Federal Workforce and Regulatory Affairs — is planning to work directly with Senate leadership staff on the government affairs provisions, said a Senate Republican aide granted anonymity to describe internal party dynamics. Paul has made clear repeatedly he isn't planning to vote for the party-line tax and spending bill anyway, giving leadership few reasons to try and play nice. Yet the decision by senior Senate Republicans to undermine a committee chair in such a way marks a dramatic departure from standard Senate procedure. It also reflects the extent to which Paul has become an ideological island, despite him holding a committee gavel thanks to the chamber's rules around seniority. And in another break with precedent, few of Paul's own members on the Homeland Security panel, if any, appeared supportive of the chair's approach or willing to back him up against leadership's attempts to undermine him. Sen. Josh Hawley, a Missouri Republican, said it was concerning that Paul would draft his own proposal 'without any consultation of the committee.' Hawley added he had 'never seen that happen before.' Sen. Bernie Moreno (R-Ohio), who sits on both the Homeland and Budget panels who described Paul as 'well-meaning' and 'principled,' said if Paul's goal was to change people's minds, the Kentuckian would have been better off working with fellow members of his conference. 'If your objective is just to have a point of view, that's one thing you can do; but if your objective is to rally support, then you have a different path,' Moreno said. Paul has even lost an ally in Sen. Ron Johnson, another steadfast fiscal hawk who leadership hopes will ultimately support the megabill. Johnson said last week he will support the administration's border security funding request after hearing directly from Stephen Miller, a top White House adviser and architect of the president's immigration platform. Graham said he and Senate Majority Leader John Thune requested that Miller brief Senate Republicans on the administration's border security needs to 'contest the analysis of Senator Paul.' Paul did not attend the briefing, nor has he spoken to Graham about their differences, according to Graham. In a statement, Abigail Jackson, a spokesperson for the White House, had no direct comment on Paul's exclusion from the process. 'The administration is profoundly grateful for Senator Graham and the Budget Committee's excellent work on the Homeland Security Text,' said Jackson, adding that it would aid Trump's actions to crack down on illegal border crossings by 'funding at least one million removals, adding new ICE and border personnel, expanding detention capacity, and giving bonuses to hardworking Border Patrol and ICE agents.' The framework put forward by Graham, which Senate GOP leadership is expected to draw from in the final package they hope to vote on next week, would mirror the House-passed funding levels by allocating about $46.5 billion for the border wall and surrounding infrastructure and $5 billion for Customs and Border Protection facilities and checkpoints. In contrast, Paul's proposal would allocate just $6.5 billion in border wall and related infrastructure funding, with only $2.5 billion for CBP facilities and checkpoints. When asked about concerns he was operating without consulting his fellow Republicans on the panel, Paul emphasized that no committee is holding a markup on their contributions for the megabill. 'There were no committee votes on what the product would be,' Paul said. 'All of the drafts were done by the chairman of each committee.' Paul also said he thought some of the provisions of his proposal unrelated to border security would end up in the final bill, and that he was involved in talks with the parliamentarian about what provisions would be germane under the strict rules governing the filibuster-skirting budget reconciliation process Republicans want to use to pass the megabill. A Paul spokesperson did not respond to a request for comment about whether he still expected to have a say in negotiations with the parliamentarian. Jordain Carney contributed to this report.
Yahoo
a day ago
- Automotive
- Yahoo
Busy Pierce County road will be single-lane this summer during construction
Part of state Route 161 between Graham and Eatonville will experience temporary changes this summer, according to a news release from the Washington State Department of Transportation. Starting on June 23, WSDOT will replace two culverts north of 280th Street East to make it easier for fish to travel through tributaries to South Creek, according to the news release. Construction is expected to be completed this fall. The replacement will be an 18-foot-long bridge. Crews will make improvements to the creek as well. Crews will remove vegetation to construct a single-lane road for the time being, to take drivers around the construction. A temporary traffic signal will direct alternating traffic, according to the department's website. Drivers should expect minor delays. The speed limit will go from 55 mph to 25 mph during construction, according to the news release.
Miami Herald
a day ago
- Health
- Miami Herald
Federal ruling adds heat to Georgia's transgender care debate
ATLANTA - The U.S. Supreme Court ruling that will allow Tennessee to continue to ban gender-affirming care to minors will likely affect a challenge to Georgia's law, advocates said. In a 6-3 decision issued Wednesday, the Supreme Court said banning minors from receiving certain treatments for gender dysphoria, the diagnosis given to most transgender people, is not discriminatory. Georgia passed a ban on most gender-affirming medical care for minors in 2023, blocking doctors from prescribing hormone replacement therapy or performing surgery on anyone under 18. The families of transgender children then sued the state saying the law takes away the rights of parents to make health care decisions for their children. Jeff Graham, executive director of LGBTQ+ rights organization Georgia Equality, said families he'd spoken with on Wednesday were "devastated." "Folks are feeling heartbroken," Graham said during a news conference after the ruling. "It's not a good day. I think we had all hoped that we would have a better decision - a different decision." Attorneys representing the state have defended Georgia's law, saying more studies should be done before claiming the benefits of allowing minors to receive hormone or surgical treatment outweigh any potential medical risks, such as blood clots, heart disease or infertility. When asked for comment, the Georgia attorney general's office pointed to a post on X by Attorney General Chris Carr addressing the Supreme Court ruling. "This is a commonsense measure and one we're proud to defend, just like we're doing with our own law here in Georgia," Carr wrote. "We'll always fight to protect our children." State Sen. Carden Summers, a Republican from Cordele who sponsored Georgia's law, said he felt validated by the Supreme Court's decision. "It pleases me to know theSupreme Court holds up the law (and) finds the law to be justified," he said. "That kind of validates what we went through to try to help young people." Georgia's law allows minors who were already receiving hormone therapy before the law took effect on July 1, 2023, to continue receiving the medicine. It also allows doctors to continue to prescribe puberty blockers to minors, which is often the first medical step taken by transgender people. Tennessee's law does not allow the prescription of any gender-affirming medications. A federal judge initially stopped enforcement of Georgia's law but allowed it to resume once it was clear the U.S. Supreme Court would be making its own determination in the similar case. Attorneys for the parents said it was still unclear what the Supreme Court decision would mean for Georgia, but stressed the ruling was limited to gender-affirming care for minors. "There are some windows of hope in the decision," said Cory Isaacson, legal director for the American Civil Liberties Union of Georgia. ACLU represents the Georgia families suing the state. "They felt that this Tennessee ban was not intentional discrimination against transgender people, but they very much left open the possibility that it's a challenge worth coming along that did involve what they felt like wasn't mutual discrimination, that very well may be something that the court would not sanction," Isaacson said. She said that means there will still be opportunities to challenge laws limiting the participation of transgender people in sports, regulating bathroom use or banning gender-affirming care for adults. Chief Justice John Roberts wrote in the Supreme Court order that Tennessee's law does not discriminate on the basis of sex, as attorneys challenging the law had argued, but instead blocked the care from people with a specific diagnosis. "We leave questions regarding its policy to the people, their elected representatives, and the democratic process," Roberts wrote. The court's three liberal justices dissented with Roberts' order. Justice Sonia Sotomayor read a summary of her dissent from the bench, saying it plainly discriminates. "By retreating from meaningful judicial review exactly where it matters most, the court abandons transgender children and their families to political whims," Sotomayor wrote. "In sadness, I dissent." Copyright (C) 2025, Tribune Content Agency, LLC. Portions copyrighted by the respective providers.
Yahoo
a day ago
- Politics
- Yahoo
Graham: ‘It's time to close the chapter on the ayatollah and his henchmen'
Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) urged President Trump on Thursday night to go 'all in' in support of Israel's war with Iran, telling Fox News host Sean Hannity, 'it's time to close the chapter on the Ayatollah and his henchmen.' Graham said the U.S. should be willing to fly bunker-busting bombing missions over Iran if that's what is needed to defeat the Islamic regime. 'Be all in, President Trump, in helping Israel eliminate the nuclear threat,' he said. 'If we need to provide bombs to Israel, provide bombs. If we need to fly planes with Israel, do joint operations.' 'But here's the bigger question: Wouldn't the world be better off if the ayatollahs went away and were replaced by something better? Wouldn't Iran be better off?' the GOP senator added. Graham later answered his own question. 'It's time to close the chapter on the ayatollah and his henchmen. Let's close it soon and start a new chapter in the Mideast: one of tolerance, hope, and peace,' he said. The South Carolina Republican is among the most reliable military hawks in the Republican party and has long advocated a heavy hand against Iran. Israel has shown a stunning capacity for targeted strikes over the past week of attacks on Iran, taking out dozens of military commanders and nuclear scientists. However, Israel's military does not have the massive bunker-busting bombs in the U.S. arsenal, which are capable of destroying Iran's heavily fortified underground nuclear facilities at Fordow. Trump is reportedly weighing whether to directly help Israel destroy the facilities, which would drastically set back Iran's nuclear timeline. 'Simply stated, IRAN CAN NOT HAVE A NUCLEAR WEAPON,' Trump wrote Monday on Truth Social. 'I said it over and over again! Everyone should immediately evacuate Tehran!' The White House is also talking with Iran about potentially returning to negotiations over its nuclear program — after Iran pulled out of the latest round of talks — according to Axios. Iranian officials asked Qatar, Saudi Arabia and Oman to press Trump to lean on Israel to strike a ceasefire, in exchange for Iranian flexibility in nuclear negotiations, Reuters reported Monday. After leaving the Group of Seven (G7) summit in Canada early, Trump told reporters on Air Force One on Tuesday morning that his special envoy to the Middle East, Steve Witkoff, and Vice President Vance may meet with Iranian officials. However, he added he was 'not too much in the mood to negotiate' with Iran and not interested in a temporary ceasefire. 'We're looking at better than a ceasefire. … An end, a real end. Not a ceasefire, a real end.' Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has shown no interest in ending its largest-ever aerial assault on Iran, predicting the attacks could continue for weeks. Netanyahu told ABC News on Monday that he would not rule out killing Iran's Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, a move Trump has reportedly opposed. He also dismissed Tehran's reported diplomatic outreach to the U.S. 'I'm not surprised. I mean, they want to continue to have these fake talks in which they lie, they cheat, they string the U.S. along. And, you know, we have very solid Intel on that,' the prime minister said. 'They want to keep on building their nuclear weapons and building their mass ballistic missile arsenal, which they're firing at our people,' Netanyahu added. 'They want to continue to create the two existential threats against Israel while they're talking. That's not going to happen.' Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
