PR in the Philippines

SEOUL, South Korea — South Korean authorities announced Monday that they will inspect all Boeing 737-800 planes operated domestically, following a crash that claimed 179 lives the previous day. Sunday's aviation accident, the nation's worst in decades, prompted widespread grief and concern about the government's response, especially given the recent impeachments of the President and Prime Minister and the political instability following the President's brief declaration of martial law earlier this month. Acting President Choi Sang-mok chaired a task force meeting on Monday, ordering an urgent review of national aviation systems. Choi, also the deputy prime minister and finance minister, stated that a comprehensive overhaul of aviation safety protocols is crucial to prevent future tragedies and enhance the safety of the Republic of South Korea. The Boeing 737-800, operated by Jeju Air, initially aborted its landing attempt for unclear reasons. During the second attempt, ground control issued a bird strike warning before the pilot reported an emergency. The plane landed without its front landing gear, veered off the runway, struck a concrete barrier, and caught fire. Alan Price, a former Delta Air Lines chief pilot and consultant, described the Boeing 737-800 as a reliable aircraft, distinct from the models involved in fatal accidents in 2018 and 2019. However, South Korea's Transport Ministry announced plans to inspect all 101 Boeing 737-800 planes in the country and conduct a broader safety review of Jeju Air, which operates 39 of these aircraft. Senior ministry official Joo Jong-wan stated that representatives from the U.S. National Transportation Safety Board and Boeing were expected to arrive in South Korea on Monday to assist in the investigation. Ministry officials will also investigate whether the Muan airport's localizer, a concrete barrier with antennas guiding aircraft landings, should have been constructed from less-resistant materials. Joo confirmed that similar concrete structures exist at other airports domestically and internationally, including in Jeju Island, Yeosu, Pohang (South Korea), and airports in the United States, Spain, and South Africa. Video footage of the crash suggests that the pilots failed to deploy flaps or slats to slow the plane, possibly indicating a hydraulic failure, and did not manually lower the landing gear, suggesting a lack of time, according to John Cox, a retired airline pilot and CEO of Safety Operating Systems. Despite this, the aircraft remained under control and straight, and Cox stated that damage and injuries would have been minimized had the barrier not been so close to the runway. Other observers noted suspected engine trouble in the videos, but suggested the landing gear malfunction was the primary cause of the crash, unlikely linked to any engine problems. Earlier Monday, another Jeju Air Boeing 737-800 returned to Seoul's Gimpo International Airport after takeoff due to a reported landing gear issue. Jeju Air executive Song Kyung-hoon stated that the problem was resolved through communication with ground control, but the pilot returned to Gimpo as a precaution. Joo mentioned that authorities are investigating potential communication problems between air traffic controllers and the pilot, noting communication difficulties during the go-around process preceding the landing and crash. Ministry officials stated that the flight data and cockpit voice recorders have been moved to a Gimpo airport research center for analysis. The ministry previously indicated that the investigation could take months. The Muan crash is South Korea's deadliest aviation disaster since 1997, when a Korean Airlines plane crashed in Guam, killing 228. The crash shocked and saddened South Koreans, prompting a seven-day national mourning period through January 4th. Concerns have been raised about potential safety or regulatory issues in relation to the crash, referencing a 2022 incident in Seoul (160 fatalities) and a 2014 incident (304 fatalities). The Transport Ministry reported the identification of 146 bodies, with DNA and fingerprint collection underway for the remaining 33. Park Han Shin, representing the bereaved families, stated that the extensive damage to the bodies requires additional time before their return to families, urging the government to expedite the process. “I demand that the government mobilize more personnel to return our brothers and family members as intact as possible more swiftly,” he said, choking down tears. The crash adds to the challenges facing South Koreans already grappling with a political crisis stemming from Yoon's martial law declaration, which deployed troops to Seoul streets and evoked memories of past military rule. The political turmoil led to the impeachment of Yoon and Han by the opposition-controlled National Assembly. The safety minister resigned, and the police chief was arrested for their roles in the event. The absence of key disaster management officials has raised concerns. “We are deeply worried whether the Central Disaster and Safety Countermeasures Headquarters really can handle the disaster,” the mass-circulation JoongAng Ilbo newspaper said in an editorial Monday.

As the year ends, you might be considering your New Year's resolutions. And if you're single, some may involve dating. Whether you aim to re-enter the dating scene, refine your approach, or take a break, resolutions—or goals—can help maintain focus. They also help establish boundaries for how you wish to date and how you expect potential partners to interact with you. It's wise to set achievable dating goals. Overly ambitious resolutions, such as finding a partner, getting engaged, or completely transforming your sex life within a year, can be overwhelming. Your dating resolutions should guide and support you without adding undue pressure. The goal is to challenge old patterns, explore new possibilities, and meet new people. The outcome is secondary. Three impactful resolutions for your dating life next year are: prioritizing your love life, prioritizing your emotional well-being, and dating outside your usual type. These resolutions allow for gradual change throughout the year. You'll likely experience both success and setbacks without losing heart. For example, if you start seeing someone who matches your typical preferences, it's not a failure. By then, you might have gained insights into *why* you're drawn to that type, leading to more intentional choices. Prioritize your love life Many clients seek my help to prioritize their love lives. They often postponed dating due to career, education, or family commitments and now feel ready to focus on this area. Making a relationship or intimacy a priority can seem daunting, but it's important to take the leap. Prioritizing your love life means not constantly relegating dating to the bottom of your to-do list. This might involve working with a dating coach, attending speed dating events, or creating an online dating profile. Let your resolution guide you toward making the best effort possible this year. Put your emotional needs first Another helpful resolution is prioritizing your emotional well-being in dating. This involves recognizing when dating feels energizing versus draining—and acting accordingly. I often see daters become overwhelmed because they push their limits. They overcommit, scheduling numerous first dates (or multiple dates in one day). They maintain the same dating effort even when facing personal challenges or fail to allow sufficient time for processing rejection. I encourage daters to tailor their dating experiences to their needs, rather than forcing themselves through the process out of fear of missing out (FOMO). Your dating prospects improve when you're emotionally well-equipped. If you find yourself rolling your eyes at dating app matches or dragging yourself to lackluster dates, it's time to check in with your feelings and allow yourself to step back when the energy is off. Prioritizing emotional needs also means leaving a date if you feel uncomfortable, regardless of how long you've been there, or communicating discomfort with someone's communication style or the pace of the relationship. These boundaries protect your time and energy while informing others of your preferences and expectations. Date against your type Everyone approaches dating with preconceived notions. We form ideas about compatible partners based on superficial factors like education or job. But relationships are built on deeper qualities, so it’s important to give different types of people a chance, even if they don't perfectly fit your mold. We develop unhelpful dating patterns, and resolutions can help break these. I often advise clients to date outside their usual type, as their natural preferences might not align with long-term compatibility. How often do you hear someone say, "They're the opposite of who I expected to be with"? You might miss out on your match if you don't try dating different people. Having witnessed many daters set and achieve dating goals, I understand the power of New Year's resolutions. I've seen people date new types of people they enjoy, establish better boundaries regarding their time and dating, and say "no" when they might have previously said "yes" to please others. I've seen LGBTQIA+ clients find supportive communities, expanding their potential match networks. Some clients even resolved to focus on self-dating! When setting your dating resolutions, remember dating is a journey of growth and change. Your resolutions should reflect your personal growth aspirations—not just the final destination. ```

Donald Trump's pledge to implement the largest deportation effort in U.S. history faces significant hurdles. Realizing this plan necessitates substantial funding for new federal employees and detention facilities. A major challenge, however, lies in addressing the extensive backlog of immigration court cases. Federal law mandates a final order of removal from an immigration court before deportation. Years of underfunding and understaffing have created lengthy processing times in these courts. Currently, a record-high 3.6 million cases are pending before immigration judges—a 44% surge from the previous year's 2.5 million. This backlog continues to grow as more individuals enter deportation proceedings. Even groups supporting reduced immigration advocate for increased immigration court resources. Eric Ruark of NumbersUSA stresses the need for Congressional funding to expand the immigration courts, expedite removal orders, and provide adequate resources for Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). The immigration courts, under the Department of Justice's Executive Office for Immigration Review, are chronically underfunded. This office oversees approximately 700 immigration judges and has faced consistent underfunding due to Congressional gridlock on immigration reform. John Sandweg, former acting ICE director, emphasizes the need for additional judges and support staff to accelerate deportations. The lengthy process allows individuals to become further integrated into society, making deportation more complex, he notes. A bipartisan immigration bill, drafted earlier this year, included $440 million for hiring immigration judges to tackle the backlog. This measure was part of a broader agreement before Trump's opposition emerged. Trump's incoming administration inherits a system already operating at a decade-high deportation rate. In the final fiscal year of the Biden administration, 271,484 immigrants were deported, the highest since 2014. Trump's team plans to further increase deportations. With Republican control of Congress, they aim for swift action to expand border and immigration enforcement personnel. Stephen Miller, incoming White House deputy chief of staff, indicated plans for increased funding for ICE officers and border agents, improved compensation, expanded detention capacity, and potentially, increased military involvement. Detained individuals' cases are processed faster through a "detained docket." This motivates Trump's advisors to expand arrests and detentions. ICE currently has funding for 40,000 detention beds. Tom Homan, Trump's border czar nominee, requests funding for at least 100,000 beds and additional ICE agents to maximize deportations. While the Biden administration prioritized deporting individuals posing national security or public safety risks (about 32% with criminal histories), Homan intends to broaden this approach, initiating removal proceedings for a wider range of individuals.

The benefits of reading are widely acknowledged – improved mental well-being, enhanced empathy, stress reduction, memory improvement, increased learning, and greater adaptability. Studies even suggest a link between reading and longevity. However, the enjoyment derived from reading, rather than its health benefits, is the primary motivation for many. For some, reading surpasses almost all other leisure activities, akin to the pleasure found in music or hiking. The author describes personal experiences demonstrating their passion for reading: taking time off work to finish a novel, sharing books with friends, rereading favorite books multiple times, and eagerly consuming an author's entire body of work. Binge-reading is presented as a favorite pastime. So how can we make reading a consistent habit? An annual challenge is proposed: "Read 25 in '25," aiming for at least 25 minutes of daily reading throughout 2025 (audiobooks included). This approach leverages the effectiveness of concrete, measurable goals and the power of daily consistency in habit formation. Daily actions are more readily maintained than intermittent ones. The satisfaction of a continuous "streak" reinforces the habit. This daily commitment eliminates the internal debate of "today or tomorrow?" The "Read 25 in '25" challenge is specific, measurable, and achievable. In a year, 9,125 minutes translate to over 152 hours of reading time. Here are some helpful tips for consistent reading: Abandon boring books. Always have a book on hand. Utilize the library. Browse bookstores for new reading material. Read during downtime (waiting rooms, queues). Read what you enjoy, not what you feel obligated to read. Replace social media time with reading. Tasks easily postponed are often never done. Daily reading in 2025 aims to establish a consistent habit. It allows us to reap numerous benefits while indulging in a cherished activity. Gretchen Rubin is an author, speaker, blogger, and podcaster who has partnered with Time to promote the "Read 25 in '25" challenge.

For Jimmy Carter, morality was a deeply held personal conviction that translated into a national commitment. A devoutly religious man, he dedicated much of his adult life to teaching Sunday school, a practice he continued until 2020. This moral leadership characterized his political career, from his early days to the presidency. He understood his role as promoting values of decency, morality, and human rights in a Cold War world desperately needing hope. This often-overlooked aspect forms the cornerstone of Carter's legacy. He took America's moral leadership seriously and strove to use it to improve both the nation and the world. Following the Realpolitik relativism of the Vietnam and Nixon eras, Carter prioritized diplomacy, adhered to international norms, and elevated human rights in American foreign policy. This vision of America's global role remains a source of hope, particularly relevant today amid cynicism and political posturing. Moral leadership, far from being outdated, is essential. Carter's unwavering conviction was both his most impressive and frustrating trait. His steadfast commitment to doing what he believed was right often led him to persevere long after others would have given up. The negotiations for the Camp David Accords, the landmark agreement resulting in the first Israeli-Arab peace treaty, exemplify this. He persistently engaged with Egypt's Anwar Sadat and Israel's Menachem Begin, refusing to let them walk away until a deal was reached. He readily engaged in challenging domestic political battles for his beliefs. He described the debate over transferring the Panama Canal to Panamanian control as his toughest political fight. He viewed continued U.S. control as an injustice that diminished America's standing globally. He later stated that this issue served as a crucial test of how the U.S., as a superpower, treated smaller nations. He ultimately secured Senate approval of the new U.S.-Panama treaties with a bipartisan supermajority. Carter is rightly praised for his post-presidency work—from conflict resolution and eradicating guinea worm disease in Africa to his involvement with Habitat for Humanity. However, his commitment to global morality stemmed from his character. I witnessed this firsthand: he supported the careers of many who worked for him, including my own. For my first congressional campaign, he sent a personal check with a note expressing his support. This note now hangs in my office. This dedication to values is evident in a vision he articulated in his inaugural address: “a policy based on constant decency in its values and on optimism in our historical vision.” Carter's call for moral clarity emerged from a post-Vietnam crisis of confidence exacerbated by the pessimism of some leaders. He urged Americans to trust in the nation's core values, particularly as democracy flourished in countries like India, Portugal, Spain, and Greece. This vision extended beyond Carter's presidency, becoming a central theme for his successors. Reagan, for example, made freedom a cornerstone of his foreign policy, famously urging Gorbachev to "tear down this wall" at the Brandenburg Gate. Sadly, Carter's passing coincides with another crisis of confidence, as progress made since his presidency seems to be unraveling. Freedom House has reported a global decline in freedom for 18 consecutive years. A Russia exhibiting Soviet-era nostalgia is engaged in a violent land grab in Europe; the Israel-Hamas conflict persists without a negotiated solution, resulting in immense human suffering. Carter's example reminds us that such times demand courage and the unwavering pursuit of freedom and peace. Let us remember Carter's words: “it is a new world—but America should not fear it. It is a new world — and we should help to shape it.” This requires vision and resolute determination. Jane Harman was Deputy Cabinet Secretary in the Carter administration. She later served nine terms in Congress from California and is co-chair of Freedom House.

To the Thai government, Moo Deng is more than just an individual; she represents a cultural ambassador and embodies the nation's initiative to enhance its "soft power." American political scientist Joseph Nye coined the term soft power during the Cold War, defining it as a nation's ability to influence others to desire what it wants without resorting to force, unlike the coercive "hard power" of demanding compliance. However, since the Pheu Thai party assumed power in August 2023, Thailand has redefined soft power as encouraging others to want what it possesses, focusing on its cultural prominence to attract tourism and foreign investment. Moo Deng is not alone. Lisa, the Thai singer and member of the K-pop group Blackpink, has also been recognized for her contributions to Thailand’s “soft power.”  While Thailand's cultural influence has been growing for years, and previous governments promoted "soft power," the current administration significantly intensified the effort when Prime Minister Srettha Thavisin, shortly after his election, established the National Soft Power Strategy Committee (NSPSC). This committee outlined 11 key areas: food, gaming, festivals, music, film, literature, arts, design, sports, fashion, and tourism. Since then, Thailand has actively supported and promoted Thai-made films and television shows (including its own productions and international collaborations such as the upcoming season of and the next installment of the franchise), among other initiatives—all aimed at boosting its “soft power.” 2024 proved to be a year of significant progress in enhancing Thailand’s global image through "soft power," and this strategy shows no signs of slowing down. When Srettha was removed from office by the Constitutional Court in August 2024, his successor, Paetongtarn Shinawatra, who was the NSPSC's deputy chair, continued the soft-power push. It was a core element of her inaugural address in September, and in October, she highlighted soft power as one of the country’s key priorities for the next decade. Although the private sector has embraced and participated in these initiatives, some academics and observers have voiced criticism regarding its scope. “The government’s strong focus on soft power initiatives that primarily benefit tourism, trade, and investment is too limited,” stated Assistant Professor Peera Charoenvattananukul from Thammasat University’s political science faculty, in a recent article in the Singapore-based . “Promoting local and cultural assets alone is insufficient to gain significant influence and credibility on the geopolitical stage,” added Prof Peera, who specializes in foreign policy.” Despite its self-proclaimed achievements, Thailand's position on the 2024 Brand Finance Nation Brands ranking remained modest at 40th out of 193 U.N. member states. However, it received high scores in “business and trade” and “culture and heritage” subcategories. Kitti Prasirtsuk, a professor of international relations at Thammasat, advocates for a more "holistic approach to soft power," extending beyond culture and tourism and acknowledging the time required for such shifts. “A nation’s image hinges on its overall reputation in politics, economy, foreign policy, values, and domestic systems and institutions,” Kitti told TIME. In his work, Nye, the originator of the term, stated: “Seduction is always more effective than coercion, and many values like democracy, human rights, and individual opportunities are deeply seductive.” In these areas, Thailand, while recovering from its years of political turmoil, still faces challenges. However, Prime Minister Paetongtarn appears less concerned with the precise definition of “soft power” than with its potential economic benefits. “The definition isn't crucial; the government aims to achieve broader goals by promoting industries, boosting soft power, and strengthening the economy,” she stated. This economic boost is certainly needed: Thailand’s GDP growth lags behind that of neighboring Indonesia, the Philippines, and Vietnam, and the tourism-dependent economy is still recovering from the impact of COVID-19. Ultimately, Thammasat’s Peera told TIME, the success of Thailand’s pursuit of cultural influence will be determined by its impact on the Thai people’s economic well-being: “The government’s understanding of soft power may differ from Joseph Nye’s definition,” he noted, “but … if it improves the economy, who cares?” ```

Former President Jimmy Carter passed away on December 29th, following over a year of hospice care at his Georgia home. He will be remembered for his devout Baptist faith, his dedication to peace and human rights, and his tireless service, including his work with Habitat for Humanity. His faith was integral to his life. Less widely known, but especially pertinent to contemporary American politics, is President Carter's unwavering commitment to the Baptist principle of religious liberty. The most religiously observant recent U.S. president was also the strongest advocate for the separation of church and state. “Prayer should be a private matter between a person and God,” President Carter stated regarding Supreme Court decisions against mandatory, government-sponsored prayer in public schools (1962 and 1963). “The Government should stay out of the prayer business; it should be between a person and God, not part of a school program under any constraints, direct or indirect.” He affirmed his agreement with the rulings “as a Baptist.” Carter himself described his commitment in his 2010 autobiography, A Full Life: Reflections at Ninety: “My religious faith became a minor campaign issue [in 1976] when I answered ‘yes’ to a reporter’s question, ‘Are you a born-again Christian?’ Some reporters suggested I was having visions or receiving divine instructions. My traditional Baptist belief was in strict separation between church and state. I ended the practice of inviting prominent pastors to White House services; our family worshipped normally at our chosen church.” As a former member of the Carters' church, The First Baptist Church of Washington, D.C., and current leader of [Organization Name], I advocate for religious freedom for all, mirroring Carter's approach. The organization awarded Carter its J.M. Dawson Religious Liberty Award in 1996. We strive for a nation where individuals like Carter, with strong theological convictions, can fully participate in public life without imposing their beliefs or using government to promote religion. “I view death as not a threat,” Carter said in [Source] 1976. “It’s inevitable; I have an assurance of eternal life.” As we mourn his passing, we are also concerned about threats to the separation of church and state—an ideal Carter championed. Sadly, those favoring theocracy—including many involved in the January 6, 2021, Capitol attack—continue to gain political power. The conservative Supreme Court majority is increasingly blurring the lines between government and religion. Carter also noted the growing alliance between right-wing politics and conservative Christianity. “The Christian right has allied with conservative elements of the Republican Party,” he said in [Source] a 1997 interview with the San Francisco Chronicle. “Their goals are merging, impacting the separation of church and state.” Beyond the Carter Center, Carter remained active in Baptist life. While he distanced himself from the Southern Baptist Convention after its fundamentalist takeover, he served as a deacon and taught Sunday school at Maranatha Baptist Church in Plains, Georgia, well into his 90s. In 2007, he united Baptist leaders from various racial and theological backgrounds, culminating in [Event Name]. Amidst growing religious polarization, fueled by politicians and misguided Supreme Court rulings, and declining church attendance, let us reflect on Carter's life and consider how different the relationship between religion and government could be if our leaders emulated him. Our nation's commitment to religious freedom for all—including those who reject religion—would be strengthened, and Christianity might flourish. Baptists believe faith should be freely chosen, not government-imposed. “We believe in separation of church and state, that there should be no unwarranted influence on the church or religion by the state, and vice versa,” Carter stated in 1977. We don't need theocracy to revitalize American Christianity; we need people to act like Jesus. Thank you, my dear brother in Christ, for embodying faithful Christian leadership in American public life. May your life inspire us during these challenging times for our nation and faith.

In the spring of 1980, I cast my first vote in a heated Democratic primary between President Jimmy Carter and Senator Ted Kennedy. At 18, I viewed Carter as ineffective and voted for Kennedy. Despite winning the nomination, Carter lost the 1980 election to Ronald Reagan, ending his presidency after one term. His departure from the White House marked, in essence, a significant decline in public perception. Today's perspective on Carter is vastly different. He's now seen as a highly respected figure, a reputation he lacked during his presidency. His life demonstrates remarkable resilience, offering valuable lessons, especially for those in trust-building professions. Four key takeaways emerge from Carter's rehabilitated image: First, truth often prevails over time. Carter's inability to secure the release of American hostages in Iran severely damaged his approval ratings. Recent revelations suggest that this was manipulated; a Reagan ally allegedly ensured the hostages remained captive until after the election, impacting the outcome. Second, embracing new endeavors is crucial. Following their White House years, the Carters actively pursued new ventures, including writing, teaching, and founding The Carter Center, a humanitarian organization. Their post-presidential work showcases a commitment to impactful projects. Third, hands-on involvement strengthens connections. The Carters' annual Habitat for Humanity home-building projects exemplify their dedication to affordable housing and community engagement. Finally, optimism and embracing new opportunities are vital. Carter's assertion that his "best years" were his post-presidency highlights the potential for fulfillment beyond peak power. President Carter's life exemplifies resilience, demonstrating that our most fulfilling years may not coincide with our most powerful ones, and that new opportunities always emerge. His journey teaches us that with the right mindset, the present can be our best time yet. While I didn't vote for him in 1980, Carter's life has earned my respect and admiration. His legacy provides valuable lessons for all.

President Jimmy Carter, who passed away on December 29th at 100, will be remembered for various aspects of his life: his agricultural background, his swift political ascent and subsequent single term, and his handling (or mishandling) of the energy crisis and Iran hostage situation. Another significant, though perhaps less recognized, accomplishment from his early career warrants acknowledgment. The mid-1970s, when Carter rose to national prominence, marked a period of transition following the progress and setbacks of the previous decade, particularly concerning civil rights. Carter, a multi-generational Georgian, whose family's history is deeply rooted in the South, readily demonstrated his Southern heritage. However, his views on integration and racial matters differed from many of his contemporaries. As TIME reported about the then-candidate, his mother, "Miss Lillian," significantly influenced her children, fostering compassion for all, irrespective of race—despite societal prejudices. In 1966, Carter lost the Georgia gubernatorial primary to a segregationist. Four years later, he secured the support of some prominent segregationists by compromising: promising to allow George Wallace to speak at the state house if elected. However, after winning, Carter demonstrated his commitment to his principles, as documented by TIME in a 1976 article: “Elected by a landslide, Carter seemed transformed in office—leading to accusations of misleading voters. His inaugural address declared: “The time for racial discrimination is over. No poor rural white or black person should ever have to bear the additional burden of being deprived of the opportunity of an education, a job or simple justice.” [Segregationist former Governor Lester] Maddox protested vehemently and continually criticized Carter. He even confronted Carter in New Hampshire, denouncing him as “the McGovern of ‘76” and “the Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde of ‘76.”Unlike [former governor Carl] Sanders, Carter appointed blacks to all levels of state government. (Sanders later admitted: “Carter is far more liberal than I ever was.”) He established a biracial “disorder unit” to mediate racial conflicts. Since Georgia lacked federal officials to enforce the Voting Rights Act of 1965, Carter appointed all high school principals as registrars to register voters. He reformed state prisons and mental hospitals, which had a disproportionate number of black inmates. He also created drug treatment and daycare centers.Carter further appealed to black voters through symbolic actions. When black legislators invited him to a gathering, he attended, and word spread quickly about the Governor sharing a meal with the community. In the state capitol in 1974, Carter displayed a portrait of Martin Luther King Jr. alongside other Georgia dignitaries, as an integrated audience sang We Shall Overcome. Many blacks who initially did not support Carter changed their minds. His presidential campaign gained endorsements from figures as diverse as Martin Luther King Sr. and Henry Aaron.“ Indeed, during the presidential primaries, Carter consistently won the African American vote. As TIME observed, “The phenomenon of blacks backing a Southern white reared in the Georgia backwoods is one of the most intriguing aspects of the campaign to date.” While his conciliatory approach, often expressed in spiritual terms, fueled this support, George Wallace's candidacy as a major opponent also played a role. This support helped voters overlook instances where Carter's civil rights record was questionable, such as his fluctuating stance on school busing. During the presidential campaign, Carter also had to clarify what he termed a “careless” remark defending his opposition to legislating neighborhood integration. (His reference to community “purity” evoked historical prejudices for many.) But, as TIME noted when naming him 1976’s Man of the Year, his success “destroyed forever the hopes of Alabama’s George Wallace of rising to national power —a possibility already dimmed by the bullet of a would-be assassin. By showing that a nonracist Southerner could win a major party nomination, Carter gave new pride to his region and went far to heal ancient wounds.” After his presidency, following a period of relative seclusion, he returned to public life, continuing his commitment to global betterment. In 1989, TIME suggested that he “may be the best former President America has ever had”; in 2002, he received the Nobel Peace Prize. This shouldn't surprise those who followed his career. Asked by TIME, shortly before his inauguration, whether the challenges ahead were overwhelming, Jimmy Carter demonstrated the humble dedication that characterized his later decades: “Yes,” he said, “but not so much that I would want someone else to do it.” Read an interview with Jimmy Carter on the eve of his inauguration: Read Jimmy Carter’s “Man of the Year” cover story from 1977:

The human body is not designed for space. Space travel can cause bone decalcification, muscle atrophy, fluctuating blood pressure, irregular heart rate, and fluid buildup in the head, resulting in pain, congestion, vision problems, and even kidney stones. While exercise and hydration help mitigate some issues, long space missions (six to twelve months) take a significant toll, particularly on the brain. The effects of long-duration spaceflight on cognitive function are less understood but equally concerning. A new study published in Frontiers in Physiology offers reassuring findings. While space travel can impact the brain, astronauts generally maintain their cognitive and behavioral abilities, adapting effectively, albeit sometimes slowly, to the space environment. Led by neuropsychologist Sheena Dev of NASA's behavioral health and performance laboratory, this extensive research involved 25 astronauts who underwent ten cognitive tests before, during, and after six-month stays on the International Space Station. Baseline tests were conducted 90 days pre-flight, followed by tests during the first and last months in space, and ten and thirty days post-flight. Several factors were considered as potential contributors to cognitive decline, including isolation, confinement, distance from home, overwork, disrupted circadian rhythms, and sleep deprivation. “Even on Earth, processing speed, working memory, and attention can temporarily decline under stress,” Dev stated. “A busy day with little sleep can impair attention and task completion.” Microgravity and cosmic radiation were also considered potential contributors, though the study didn't speculate on the mechanisms, acknowledging the possibility of brain and central nervous system damage. Before each cognitive test, astronauts reported their sleep hours and alertness level (0-10). This helped determine if performance deficits stemmed from immediate factors or longer-term stressors. Each test assessed a specific cognitive skill. One test, the Visual Object Learning Task, involved memorizing and identifying 3D shapes. The Emotion Recognition Task required identifying emotions in photographs. The Matrix Reasoning Task tested pattern recognition, and the Balloon Analog Risk Task measured risk tolerance in a simulated game. Encouragingly, astronaut cognitive abilities didn't significantly decline across the pre-flight, in-orbit, and post-flight periods. “Astronaut performance was stable throughout the flight,” Dev reported, “with no evidence of significant impairment or neurodegenerative decline.” However, space travel did impact performance. Processing speed, working memory, and attention were slower in space but accuracy remained consistent. Recovery varied; attention returned to normal earlier than processing speed. Performance on the emotion recognition task improved during the mission. Risk tolerance decreased, possibly reflecting cautiousness in a hazardous environment. Matrix Reasoning performance improved steadily. “Even with observed declines, astronauts compensated and effectively completed tasks,” Dev noted. While six months is a fraction of future mission durations (a Mars trip alone is at least eight months), the findings suggest humans possess the cognitive and emotional resilience for extended space travel. As Dev concluded, “Living and working in space wasn't associated with widespread cognitive impairment suggestive of significant brain damage.”