Hi, my name is Joe. Welcome to another Cointelegraph interview. I'm here today with Ava, the Vice President of the European Parliament. Ava, how are you doing? Good. Thank you for having me. I follow your work and I'm happy to meet you. That's very kind of you. And I hear that you're a bit coiner from as early back as 2015. Is that right? Yeah, 2015. It was for me an opportunity to explore solutions for the failures we had in the banking system. I'm coming from Greece. So the old system didn't work very well. We had the huge austerity and the banks took over basically our savings. You saw what happened with Cyprus. So then I explore new possibilities. I saw blockchain as an opportunity. Okay, excellent. So is it safe to say that there is a bit coiner in the European Parliament? Well, I would say I talk about more the technology. So I prefer to talk about the amazing possibilities that you can have. And then the use case is a different thing. You can like some you don't have to like everything. But technology is not good or bad. So I like the technology and hopefully we can get the best out of it. Okay. Also with Bitcoin depends how you use it. Okay. How you use it? What do you mean by that? I mean, when you see cases of people trying to manipulate the market or like trading, these are things that they're not for me. I think the best potential of blockchain is when you actually create value, you can have like real projects and you can basically give more opportunities to citizens. Bitcoin I liked because it offered this. I think it's the most decentralized project on blockchain. And I like the philosophy around that. So to give more options to citizens of how they want the financial system basically to be. So it was a great example for that. Very good. Okay. And so I'm going to quote you here. But I think the last year in a magazine piece for Cointelegraph, you mentioned that blockchain in general, everybody is positive. When it comes to currencies, everybody is skeptical. Would you be able to provide us with an update on this, perhaps shed some more light on whether currencies people are still skeptical? Yeah, they are because so trying to regulate now with the crypto assets file, we talk about the imane or asset tokens, we try to regulate that. But DeFi is something that we cannot get into and ensure that customers, users will be protected. So this is what I mean. And then you have this like Terra Luna thing and then you say, okay, so I need to have some safeguards to ensure that also the financial system will function accordingly to the expectations of the citizens. So this is my work, it's not that. I like how you just sort of scarce around the Terra Luna thing, you know, 50 billion wiped out in a couple of days. But I mean, this is not under the scope of what we're regulating now. So that's why I say like citizens need to be able to have these options. So we tell them like, this is safe because it's regulated and this is in the unregulated era of blockchain. So this is at least something we need to try to do. But we also I have called to explore some possibilities of also deciding exactly to define what DeFi and also see how we can put some safeguards there. So at least market manipulation will not be possible because failure you will have offline and online always. OK, could we what's DeFi in your words? What's your idea of what DeFi is? Well, I would say it's like completely decentralized. This means that nobody can control or like really manipulate a blockchain. It's not easy to happen because most of them they're like saying they are but they are not. So we need to have like safeguards to understand who is the developer, who controls that, what are the keys? If somebody can can change the code or not, where is the jurisdiction? We have to make sure we understand how it works. And this is not something like it's not an easy exercise. But I mean, this is what disruption is. It's it's out of the box challenges that we need to see what are the benefits. OK. And then sure we we work to around that with smart regulation. OK, smart regulation. So that's when the European Parliament or the EU steps in and maybe gives a stamp of approval or perhaps rejects these projects. Yeah, but again, it's not about the technologies, about the applications. OK. So how you use that? Because if you use it like for a voting system, maybe it's amazing. OK. But if somebody prepared that and it has like vulnerabilities, you have crashes of the systems. OK. And so is that something that we might see in the next sort of two to five years of blockchain voting system within the European Parliament? Yeah, I'm trying to test some possibilities. Yes. OK, tell us more. So I'm trying to test how we can use a system to make sure that it's trustworthy, because it's I mean, it's really important to ensure that our democracy would not have failures of technological systems and in the infrastructure. So this is like an effort that we take time. But once we have that, we can start like using it because we all went through this lockdown and the pandemic accelerated. They need to use these technologies to to vote, to discuss, to meet online, to be educated online, like to have workshops. So I think we have to get there sooner rather than later. Absolutely. OK. And I mean, here we are at the Weff in Lovely Davos, where it's a little bit windy, how do you admit? Nice. But we're talking about blockchain. We're talking about decentralization. We're talking about distributed ledger technologies. And here you are talking about voting on a blockchain within a European parliament. How have you seen this sort of sea change towards crypto or warming up towards blockchain technologies? How have you seen that develop in the recent years? Well, before the pandemic, we were all excited about the potential of the technology. OK. What we are seeing now is the technology that's more mature. We can understand the skill ability. We can understand where interoperability problems secure privacy issues. So we can understand a bit better about technology. We still don't have like super successful applications. But everybody's like ready to again test the technology into real applications and to realize some of the promises. I think the problem with blockchain was that we over promised everything like all solutions about all the problems. So we were looking for problems and I think we have to look for solutions. Yeah, absolutely. That's a very important thing you just said there. That you know, blockchain does sometimes over stretch itself. Yeah, maybe a bit. And what about currencies? I know we touched on a little bit of the start of this discussion. But you know, there's a lot of discussion about a central bank digital currency, a CBDC, maybe even the digitization of a euro. And what are you seeing from your viewpoint? Well, I have called for a digital euro as an alternative as an option. It can remove a lot of costs and intermediation. It could allow control of your savings of your money. So I think the central bank, the European one is already testing it. They are trying to develop one that can be really useful. But again, it needs in its time it accelerated when the Libra came out. So everybody said like, OK, we need to compete. We need to be there. We need to have an option of a digital euro. But I think that we still need time. I'm not ready to say that we're going to experience it any time soon. But for sure it's there. So when you see how the financial system is adopting it, then you will see the government, they will be ready for it with a better understanding than some years ago when they were just monitoring it. OK, OK. And in light of the rapid growth in stable coins in terms of market cap and obviously the most of them are back to the dollar. Is there a risk there that the dollar sort of eats up a lot of the market share of the money in the system currently? Not sure I'm quite fair. He's like question the way I want it to. But is there a risk that the euro in say a five, 10 or 20 year time scale is a much smaller sort of global weighting against the dollar? Well, I'm not sure because we already use dollar for most of the transactions in global trade. But I would definitely say that Europe cannot be left behind. We need to do more. We need to develop the digital euro. We need to be there ready to provide options. And I think this would be the safest way to go to give options to citizens and not to have one global currency because of the different also geopolitical vulnerabilities, I would say. So we need to ensure that we have that. But then if something is better, I cannot predict now what's going to happen next. What I can tell you is we're going to be there to see innovation happening and to make sure that it's good for citizens in the end. This is this is my role. OK, OK. And of course, you come from a real position of passion here. I can feel the enthusiasm towards blockchain and obviously being Greek. You've seen how mistrust in the banks can lead to consequences, let's say. What are you most excited about about the blockchain or the crypto space becoming more mainstream? For me already, the target is achieved. So the moment we start talking about the centralized solutions and blockchain, we saw a reduction of the hidden fees in its transaction. We saw immediately easier cross-border payments and cheaper. We've seen more online banking happening and we've seen banks using blockchain for their own activities. So I see that it's happening. It's changing already things because it's there as in a technology. So emerging technologies, they they managed to basically to disrupt in a positive manner, hopefully. Hopefully. Yeah, hopefully. A lovely note to finish on. Thank you so much, Eva. Thank you for having me.


Hi! This is Megan with Oxmore Toyota. I just want to send this quick video greeting just to personally introduce myself. It has come to my attention that you're interested in one of our new 2016 Toyota Highlanders. I want to let you know that the e-price is in the body of this email. When you can, go ahead and give me a call. You can reach me at<PHONE_NUMBER> and I look forward to hearing from you soon. Bye!


Hello, I'm Ruby Jones. And I'm Mike Proctor. Welcome to Spotlight. This programme uses a special English method of broadcasting. It is easier for people to understand no matter where in the world they live. Everyone learning a new language will know the value of a good dictionary. This word book is helpful in understanding the meaning of words. Dictionaries can show people how and when to use words properly. Often, language students will carry a small dictionary with them all the time. Or they will keep a larger copy at home to help them with their studies. But imagine having a dictionary made up of 20 separate books and weighing 62 kilograms. That is the size and weight of the Oxford English Dictionary, or OED. Experts consider the OED to be the highest authority on the meaning and pronunciation of the English language. In an earlier Spotlight programme, we told the story of Amon Shea. Shea is a man from New York. He spent a whole year reading the OED from beginning to end. Our programme also described how the dictionary project began in 1879. James Murray was the man responsible for gathering information for the first version of the dictionary. He planned to include the history and meanings of a huge number of words. That is, all the words in the English language from the 12th century to the modern day. This was a very slow job. So Murray gathered a large team of helpers. Their aim was to finish the dictionary within 10 years. However, after five years, the team was still working on the letter A. Murray then understood that he needed more helpers. And so he published a public notice. It said, An appeal to the English speaking and English reading public. To read books and make copies for the new English dictionary. We want a thousand readers and we are sure that we will get them. They will help towards completing the work within the next three years. They will help us gather all the information we need to prepare the dictionary. So how exactly did these readers help? First, each reader chose particular words to research. The readers then read, both ancient and modern books. As they read, they searched. They searched for useful quotations. Each quotation was a sentence that used one of their chosen words. The quotation showed how the book's writer used that particular word. For each word, the readers wrote the name of the book and the quotation on a piece of paper. The readers then sent these pieces of paper to the research team. The researchers received about a million of these quotations. And they developed a method of organising them all. They placed them in alphabetical order, depending on the word they explained. This meant that Murray and his team could see how the people's use of a word changed over time. James Murray noticed that one man in particular was very helpful. Over some years, this man sent thousands of quotes to the dictionary team. His name was William Miner. He became involved in the dictionary research in an unusual way. Marina Santy tells us his story. Dr. William Miner was from the United States. He had served as a military doctor in the American Civil War. He saw terrible events during that time.  His family sent him to London to recover, far from the memories of war. But Dr. Miner still continued to suffer from periods of great mental confusion. He did not know what was real and what was imaginary. During one of these times, Miner shot and killed a man. So the authorities put him in a prison for insane criminals. While he was in prison, Miner read about Murray's appeal for help. So he began to put together a long list of quotations. He sent this list to Murray and many more lists after that. Miner did not tell Murray that he was writing from prison. And it was not until many years later that Murray discovered the truth about his faithful helper. Murray went to visit Miner in prison and the two men became friends. In 1910, the British government permitted Miner to return to his family in America. And Murray gave Miner a present to take with him. The first six completed books of the new dictionary. People can still see the results of Miner's work printed on the pages of the OED today. The complete OED was first published in 1928. Since then, the English language has continued to develop. So the publishers have continued to make changes to the OED. They planned to publish a complete second version by 1989. They wanted to offer not only a printed book but a version for computers too. A huge group of workers gathered together. Project leaders, word experts, computer engineers, 120 people entered all the existing written information into computers. They also had to include 5,000 new words and meanings. 50 readers searched every computer file for mistakes. The chief dictionary editor is John Simpson. He organized a team of word experts. They examined the computer version of the OED word by word. And thanks to an army of workers and modern technology, the second edition appeared on time. The Oxford English Dictionary marked its 80th year in 2008. It exists as a 20-part book. But you can also buy a CD version. And you can visit the OED website online. All through the dictionary's history, the OED editors have known that people have been their main resource. That is still true today. John Simpson says, There is no longer one English. There are many Englishes. Words are flooding into the language from all corners of the world. Only a dictionary the size of the OED can really capture the true richness of the English language. We now have an online edition. And I would be very happy to have many new readers helping us to map the past, the present and the future of English. Today the OED has a web page that invites people to send in new English words that they have found or new meanings for old words. You can find a link to that page on the Spotlight website www.radioenglish.net Look for the script page of this program. It is called Words More Words. The writer and producer of today's program was Ruby Jones. The voices you heard were from the United Kingdom. All quotes were adapted and voiced by Spotlight. You are always welcome to email Spotlight at radio at radioenglish.net. Thank you for listening today. Goodbye!


So even though the force to vote era and effort is over, you know I still believe that it's a good idea to get a floor vote on Medicare for all I know that some folks disagree with that strategy and that's fine But I want to see like a concerted effort by progressive Democrats in Congress to continue pushing when it comes to Medicare for all I don't want them to just basically like accept defeat and You know accept that we're not gonna get Medicare for all during the Biden era. So we might as well not even fight I want them to continue to advance the goal Fighting for Medicare for all. And so what I want from them is a signal that they do actually have a plan and In an interview with the American prospect the newest members of the squad Marie Newman specifically she did assures that she does have a plan and she was also asked about a force to vote and She said something that was really really interesting and I feel a little bit reassured based on what she says But then immediately we'll go to something that Mondair Jones says and I don't like what he says And I don't feel reassured based on what he says But first Marie Newman was asked there's this debate now about where to go strategy wise the force to vote calls come to mind in Particular where do you think we go strategy wise as progressives? She responded by saying I like strategies that work I know there's noise out there and I don't understand that strategy. It's articulated by folks who have never spent a day in Congress I love the spirit and the passion. I'm with them on spirit and passion and desire for that legislation It's not like we're sitting on our hands. We do have a plan to bring a Medicare for all bill to the floor We're working on it. We're not going to let our cards be seen yet But are we going to work really hard on Medicare for all? 100% are we going to get it to the floor? 100% we have to bring Medicare for all to the floor in a responsible and powerful way that has good strategy That's the one I'm backing. I'm not backing a super risky throw the dice crapshoot model So I like most of what she's saying although I reject the implication that you know your input is invalid if you haven't been in Congress I mean, she was just sworn in I Think that strategic advice is important from outsiders because we don't have like that Insider bias. I mean we have the outsider bias, but I think that our input should still be valuable So I reject that but but putting that aside when it comes to a floor vote on Medicare for all she says We're 100% going to get it to the floor That's what I want to hear. I don't want to hear. Oh, well, you know what? It's not it's not the time It's not going to come up currently. We need to continuously push to advance Medicare for all and To hear her say that to signal to us that there's a sign Of life Friendly some members of the squad and they're going to keep fighting for this That's really important because look I will admit that it's it's a it's a difficult time To be a progressive member of congress because there are so many crises that our country faces I don't know where to begin like for me if I were a member of congress and I just got elected I wouldn't know where to start. There's there's too many issues to fix But what I do want to know is that Medicare for all is an issue that is at the forefront Of their priorities and this assures to me at least that It is Now we go to the part where marder jones is going to say something that kind of contradicts What mary newman says? I'm just going to read it to you. I'll tell you why I have an issue with it So he claims that the democratic party has in fact shifted to the left overall, which I actually disagree with But then he was asked about Medicare for all He was asked one place where that leftward drift doesn't seem or seems less obvious is the health care question There's a block that backs Medicare for all Joe Biden has supported the public option and house leadership has focused just on expanding the aca How do you think progressives should intervene here? He responded by saying imagine debating the merits of a public option versus Medicare for all When there is a six three conservative majority on the supreme court that will strike down the affordable care act So I push back on the idea that that's going to be the nature of the fight So, um, this ain't it. This is a really really bad take and I hope that more members of the squad don't agree with this I hope that they actually unequivocally reject this line of thinking because if you're waiting to fight for Medicare for all Until the conditions are right so that way it's not going to be attacked Well, you're never ever going to find the time to get Medicare for all It's never going to be the right time because we live in a capitalist system So even if there was an eight one liberal majority on the supreme court if you got it passed guess what Capitalist forces will attack that system once we actually get Medicare for all past It is going to be a constant battle forever that will never ever end To keep the progress that we've made in every single country that has either a single payer or a national healthcare system There's always the threat of privatization That's always going to be the case. We're going to constantly have to fight to expand benefits To fight, you know the forces of the private health insurance industry if they're not fully abolished with whatever You know a conception of Medicare for all passes if that's the case It's just this is a cop out to me and I don't like it and monday ron's Needs to reevaluate like what you fight for because if you are waiting to pass something at the safest moment You're not going to get anything accomplished. So to say oh, well, we can't pass Medicare for all When there's a 6 3 conservative majority on the supreme court Well, what can we get done? They can basically strike down anything I mean, there are things that lawmakers can do To protect their legislation from a constitutional challenge and there will be constitutional challenge challenges that pop up by conservative organizations and whatnot But I mean like This is the nature of politics You're not going to find yourself in the perfect situation where you pass something and it stands as it is We just need to get Medicare for all because once people have it, it'll be more difficult to take it away from them Right and you don't necessarily know for a fact that it will face a challenge I think it's very likely but this was the case even if bernie sanders were to become president We all anticipated Medicare for all to be held up to the highest scrutiny imaginable But you don't not fight for it willingly So yes, uh, I absolutely disagree with monday rjones That the nature of the fight will be Medicare for all versus a public option versus expanding the affordable care act And this is not to say that monday rjones is a sellout and doesn't support Medicare for all I believe that he does support Medicare for all. This is what he ran on And so far he hasn't given me any indication that he's backing away from that But I think that when it comes to strategy he has A lot to learn because this tells me that he either doesn't understand capitalism or has a flawed strategy of change So I hope that you know This thinking doesn't rub off on other members of the squad But I I am a lot more confident in aoc in quarry bush and marie newman now that she's reassured us And I just wanted to know that this issue isn't going to get put on the sidelines that they're going to continue To fight uh because look you've got to strike while the iron is hot during a pandemic We need health care more than ever 15 million americans lost their employer-based health insurance in 2020 So if we don't continue to push the envelope push this issue That's a failure on us. So I want to know that our allies in congress have our backs And I want them to know that we have their backs and when push comes to shove When they need us to make phone calls when they push a full floor vote on medicare for all Coordinate with us coordinate with left media. We will help you We will assist you because we want the same thing you want We want medicare for all because it is absolutely outrageous that people in this country continue to die And even during a pandemic the same folks who never supported medicare for all aren't even considering Re-evaluating their positions. So, um, you know, this is interesting. I'll link you to the full interview They also had cori bush on here as well and jamal bowman, but um Yeah, that's a really interesting questions asked by the american prospect Hopefully you will check out the full interviews with the newest members of the squad


How long have you had a gnome in your backyard?  There's six of them? There's six. Do you ever put one of them on your stove? Why would I put them on my stove? Gnome. No-mum. The range. Thank you.   I'm Rich. It's the Clown. Today, this is called VJ Satapathi Acting Philosophy. I gossed it. I gossed it. I gossed it. I gossed it. Right. So, essay. Done by a movie buff on VJ Satapathi's style of acting and how he remains fresh and accepted in the eyes of the audience. I found it interesting, so thought we'd share it with you. Cool. Thanks. Appreciate it. Ah, VJ. Satapathi. Ooh, we like a lot. Very, very much. Everything we've seen him in, we've liked so far from his performance in Super Deluxe to 96. Yeah. To, I don't know if that's the only two I've seen. There's one more. I think there's one more, but I don't remember what it was. There's a younger one, I think we saw. Is it a younger performance of his? I thought so. Probably. Anyway. But I forget. So, it's like a video essay. Cool. Somebody made about his acting style. Here we go. Let us see. He's an actor. Hi, my name is Kishore and this is Movie Images. Cool. Since making his splash. Looks great with a beard. I've seen movies as a lead, VJ Satapathi has embodied a very particular kind of acting that comes across as coolly distant and a bit ironic. In a very few years, Satapathi has transcended from a promising lead to that of a star and one of the busiest actors in the business today. But releasing back-to-back movies and still remaining fresh and distinct is truly a challenge and in Satapathi's case, a constant criticism on his alleged lack of differentiation among the characters he plays. Lack of differentiation? Maybe it's coffee the ones that we've even seen. Today, we are exploring the acting philosophy of VJ Satapathi where we try to understand how he approaches each role and what the audience never seemed to get enough of him. Is that him? Apparently so. That's good prosthetics. Have you ever noticed how in many VJ Satapathi's movies, he doesn't seem to be taking the plot seriously? He stands slightly at a distance from what is happening around him to maintain a dry and sarcastic country. This was very apparent in Nadolakonju Pakatha Kaanam where the whole plot revolved around Satapathi being removed from his reality. Or especially when he played Das in Sudhukum. Das lives in a world of his own that is detached from the plot. VJ is attached to his characters but is also detached from the plot that he can deflate an otherwise serious scene. In most characters VJ's plays, he seems to acknowledge the absurdity of the plot the character is put in. He deflates the climax in Vikram Beda by being nonchalant about enemies shooting him. His character has lost everyone he loved and hence he finds it absurd that he has to live on. This approach to each of his roles follow the philosophy of absurdism. In philosophy the absurd refers to the conflict between the human tendency to seek inherent value and meaning in life and the human inability to find any in a purposeless, meaningless universe. As a philosophy absurdism furthermore explores how individuals once becoming conscious of the absurd should respond to it. The absurdist philosopher Albert Camus stated that individuals should embrace the absurd condition of human existence while also defiantly continuing to explore and search for meaning. The characters VJ said the very place in each film acknowledges the absurdity of their roles and yet the name tries to prove better than I say. This by itself is something of a subplot that VJ has created. It doesn't even sound like what I say. Not only does the film revolve around the main story but we get to see how his characters deal with the story. This is why VJS is one of those rare actors who is such a trait to observe both on and off screen. His ironic acting is unique. Ironic acting? I don't know what that means that the characters work on the audience. So far we're not talking about his philosophy of acting, it's his philosophy of role selection and script analysis. His ironic performances are such that the characters realize the meaning of his words or actions but the audience know that VJ Siddhwati knows.  His character's reaction to one of the brother's war cryers. VJS sees his character as almost Godlike who knows how the story is going to end. He uses his knowledge of the entire plot and how the movie is going to end to play Rasool. So the motivations and aspirations of each brother just comes across as a joke and absurd to him since he knows he's going to kill them all at the end. Rasool doesn't know how the film is going to end but we know that VJ Siddhwati knows. Hence it is a fun watch to see VJS play his wisecracking nonchalant self in an otherwise serious movie. The undistinguishable nature between VJS and the characters he plays have actually paid away for his audience to identify with those characters. They understand without much explanation why his character reacts this certain way as they have come to realize that this is how VJS would react. The actions and motivations of the constrictors VJS portrays are determined by the writers but how his character reacts is entirely VJSiddhwati. Until next time this is Kishore signing off saying I'd consider that more like you said more about his role selection than his actual acting philosophy. Absolutely. Maybe we just have different thoughts on what an acting philosophy is. That, I mean I guess when you take into consideration like his character's mind. When you take into consideration the choices of a role and the way you analyze a script that does all come into the broad spectrum of your philosophy. But what I was anticipating when you say an actor's philosophy what we're talking about is technique and approach to the way you portray people. Maybe I was just looking at it. Yeah that's what I was anticipating. I was coming into it thinking like that. Like him talking about his philosophy of acting. The way he goes about doing what he does in terms of his process. Not that his characters just know they're ironic. Which I guess is part of what you would come into play if you knew a character. Because obviously films do know that. Like that could be a part of what a character is. But I don't know that I would consider an acting philosophy. No unless he's already predetermined that irrespective of whatever script has been written or what the director wants to do. He said all of my characters are going to be ironic whether the writer or the director wants them to be or not. Because that's what I'm going to do with my characters. It doesn't seem like he's that guy to me. No me neither. And that's not really a philosophy. That's a dictatorial stance. The two that I know that I know from specifically are not like that for sure. 96 and Super Deluxe for sure aren't like that. No, neither one of them are. The one of his character in Super Deluxe was pretty subdued. There was no absurdity. But obviously in fact he was the one thing in Super Deluxe that I found to be the most grounded that I enjoyed and didn't see either the absurdist nature of it or the disconnect from the plot. You know what I mean? Now there may be a common theme that are being picked up by other people and that is their philosophy of his work. Maybe. But I don't know if this is his philosophy of his work. But also we've only seen like what two of his films as well. So it's not like we're experts on VJ whatever he said. No at all. I say Sarapathy but that didn't sound like what he was saying. No. But his is probably correct. I'm sure it was. But you know, whatever. I was just expecting a little different of more about his actual acting technique, philosophy. Process. Than what the video gave me. But I will watch more VJ Sarapathy films. Let us know what should be the next of his films that we should watch down below.


One of the people who was taped recently referred to Lady Bird as Lyndon Johnson's North Star. Would you comment on that? Yeah. Well, that is a lovely comment and she was an anchor for it as well as something to follow. And I did recently run across some notes that she had done in Shorthand when she had been listening to, I guess she had been listening to a Johnson Press conference from the East Room and she had been watching it on television and she had made these notes about how he should look into the camera and how his pauses were good, but how his pauses could be improved and words to emphasize and she was, she was, they were not critical comments, they were things that she thought would improve his presentation and she, when, I didn't know Mrs. Johnson, when she was, when people talked about her as being this shy little butterfly, fragile person, I knew her after she had been in speech classes with Hester Bell Provenson and would, and she knew how to mark her speech cards and she knew how to emphasize certain sections and how to look at an audience and sometimes you would just walk into her room, you were coming, I was coming over to work with her on perhaps a guest list or a White House entertainment and I'd walk into her bedroom where her desk was and she would stand up and start talking to me and it would be kind of a shock, momentary shock because before I realized that what she was doing, she was using me as the audience to practice her, to practice her speech cards but Mrs. Johnson is a person who I don't think in her whole life was ever born because she had this deep curiosity about everything and everybody, whether it was learning about a new plant and what would make it grow or whether it was a new person or whether she was seeing you for, and she hadn't seen you a while, she was interested in what you were doing, what you were interested in and she just viewed life as a rich experience and I sometimes thought of that line in the play Annie Mame where Annie Mame says that life is a banquet and most poor fools are just starving to death. Well Mrs. Johnson was never starving to death and when you were around her you were never starving to death either because she brought you into the excitement of what she was interested in and what she was doing and knew things that she was exploring and that's one of the reasons that the Wildflower Center first called the what the National Wildflower Research Center and then became over Mrs. Johnson's initial protest because she did not want it named after her but after it had been in business for I guess about 18 years it was renamed the Lady Bird Johnson Wildflower Center but she always had a joy in life and a joy in discovery, a joy in doing something new and exploring something new. I was with her in the Virgin Island, she had gone down to give the graduation address at the University of the Virgin Islands and after the ceremonial activities at the university we went over to the island of St. John for two days of R&R rest and relaxation and I had brought along my mask and flippers and snorkel to go out and see this the wonderful things in that clear water of the Caribbean and she she wanted to go too so we got a mask and flippers and snorkel for her and I had been with other people when that was the first time they had put a mask on their face and breathing through a tube through the water and there's a certain time getting used to it and a little bit of discomfort but for Mrs. Johnson as soon as she put that mask on and put her face in the water and realized that she was like her very own glass bottom boat and she could see what was on this the floor of the Caribbean and she could see all these beautiful fish and the coral and so forth she just never wanted to take her head out of the water we had this ranger naturalist with us a man named Noble Samuels who knew all the flora and fauna whether it was above above the earth or below the water and at one point she was swimming along with Noble and she took her head out of the water and she said noble what is that silvery fish with the long mouth and instead of answering her directly he pointed to another quite wonderful colorful fish and told her about that fish and what it did and what its name was and what it ate and sometime later when we got back in the boat Mrs. Johnson said to Noble that long silver fish with the long mouth that was a barracuda wasn't it and he said well yes Mrs. Johnson but it wasn't going to bother you so she had it was a great day of discovery of things in the things in the water and what they did and what they ate and she was back in the water the next day and has enjoyed snorkeling since then I think she was about 55 then and to show that she's always doing and always doing new things I think it was about two years later I think she was 57 when she learned a waterski. Soon after the Johnsons came to the White House Mrs. Johnson was interviewed by a reporter who wanted to know her theories on entertaining and what sort of menus they would be serving and what sort of flowers and how they how the tables would be decorated and after listening to this very long question Mrs. Johnson just said oh my goodness I've had to worry about those things for more than 20 years and now I'm in this beautiful house and we have this wonderful staff all these people that worry about those things I don't have to worry about those things anymore I can concentrate on the guests and that's what she did both who to invite and once they were invited how to make that experience of being in the White House a rich and wonderful time for them and she would before before a large large or small occasion she would study the guest list and go over who was who was going to be there and think about introducing various people to each other but also making that brief experience of guests when they go through a receiving line of making that a meaningful moment having something to say to that guest whether it was an author about his book and one of the things that she did with with authors was that she would have them autograph their books that were to be placed in the White House library which made the book more wonderful for the White House library and also it was a wonderful flattering thing to do for the for the author but she would and people going through their receiving line she would say now I want you to meet so-and-so or she would tell them that she wanted them to see some object that was in the White House that might have come from their state or that they might have some special tie with when Mr. Johnson was vice president the the ambassador of Iran used to send over to the vice president's house about every six or seven weeks a big box of pistachio nuts from Iran and also a wonderful generous tin of that fabulous Iranian caviar from the Caspian Sea and the Johnson's just delighted in that enjoyed the pistachio nuts and reveled in the enjoying this fabulous caviar from Iran and after they had been in the White House for several months Mrs. Johnson called me and she said I keep signing these letters to the ambassador of Iran thanking him for the pistachio nuts and thanking him for the caviar where are the pistachio nuts and where is the caviar and I said well I have no idea I thought that it would be going to you but upon a little investigation I found that the Secret Service just destroyed any foodstuffs that were sent to the president or his family so I relayed this to Mrs. Johnson and said that the Secret Service said that they were sorry but any foodstuff that came to the president or his family had to be destroyed and there was a long pause in this conversation with Mrs. Johnson and she said well you call the Secret Service and tell them to send me the pistachio nuts and send me the caviar and I will take care of destroying it personally. One time I was in Texas with Mrs. Johnson and this was before the days of plastic of credit cards and ATM bank cards where you could just plug a card in and assuming you weren't overdrawn at the bank you could get some cash well this was before those days and I had stayed down in Texas longer than I had anticipated and I had run out of cash so I'd asked Mrs. Johnson if she would cash a check for me she said yes indeed so we drove to the bank and I wrote her a check and she was going to take it into the bank and cash and she looked at it and she said my goodness you and Tyler have a joint checking account and I said well yes ma'am and she said my goodness I wouldn't have a joint checking account with the angel Gabriel I do have always seen Mrs. Johnson as somebody who was looking forward and a positiveness about life and I do believe that she believes the best in the best in us and the best that if you if you think about goodness in people that they will respond but in one of her one of the things that she has enjoyed and that business I think of as looking forward is the children of her friends and at a time in her life when politics personally for herself and for President Johnson was passed she enjoyed um thinking about and knowing about the sons and daughters of friends of theirs and sons and daughters of people who had been in the Johnson administration going into politics and running for office and it was just another link with the future and well that's not very interesting one Saturday I had come in to work with Mrs. Johnson on some guest lists and some entertainment and it was a lovely summer day and we were sitting out on the Truman balcony and she looked at me and she said you just look very tired and very haggard what is happening that that you just seem so exhausted and I said oh Mrs. Johnson we moved into this new house and I just don't think that that I'll ever get finished she said well of course not dear you never get finished with the house you never get finished until you move out and that is so true when it's something I've reminded myself often and also reminded friends of mine when they get in that same shape that well of course not you'll never be finished with your house not till the day you move out well that is all I have to say unless you can think of something else that's very good it's um it's a great picture of her talk a little bit about how the Johnson's treated the staff as family because I don't think that's ever been done before more sense well I don't don't um this yet one of one of the things that I remember um as if I can put it together is how the um I don't I don't like comparisons but when I at one point called somebody in my office who had worked in in Mrs. Kennedy's um social office and I asked them to bring something up to the second floor of the White House they were they they wanted to really be sure that that they had heard what I said and then afterwards said that it was the first time that they had been on the the second floor of the um of the White House that's um but that that's not that's not it it's um well they brought us in as guests they brought us in we were part of their part of their life part of their part of their family it was a great thing to be a part of um really did um adopt you I you're not running this are you are you running this oh shoot what yeah stop for a minute um and that's the way titer grew up so for us it wasn't unusual but I have crossed it with um with my daughter-in-law who my friend Ann Wood who has the office back there and it has used that space in the house for a long time as an office Deborah just took real she said what is this um most of us who worked for President and Mrs. Johnson became a part of their part of their family they were they were interested in us they were interested in our children they were interested in um uh what we were doing and we were just um a part of their life and vice versa um I think everybody that that worked for them in the Senate the vice presidential the White House years really felt um a part of their family and they made us part of the family they included they included us in special events they would invite staff members to um sometimes come to state dinners sometimes for um a reception toward the end of the Johnson administration the President Mrs. Johnson wanted to be sure that everybody who worked for them was invited to something or another and we began having more and more people come in after dinner for for dancing at um at events in fact one um one evening one of the last state dinners the president was dancing with various people and he was dancing with one woman who made Betty Tilson who worked in uh Mrs. Johnson's correspondence office and he came over to me afterwards and said now what does Betty Tilson do and I told him that she wrote absolutely the very best letters drafted the very best letters for Mrs. Johnson and he said oh well then he went over and um asked Betty Tilson to come to Texas with him and by Ollie Betty and her husband Don moved to Austin Texas and Don got a job down there I think maybe he worked for the government anyway and he got a transfer to a job in in Austin Texas and Betty and Don became a member of the of the Johnson extended family but they included us in Christmas they they were a part of people's weddings a part of their joys a part of their sadnesses and we were part of theirs another thing is that the um the family quarters of the White House were open to staff because we had that that area of the White House in past administrations had basically there was a line across there and you didn't go up that elevator to the second floor but the um with the Johnson's there were meetings up there there were luncheons dinners it was just a part of the house that we knew as well as the state floor is that that that party they had that was the last night they were in the White House and they had it for the staff right which is the other touching here the the the last night that the Johnson's were in the White House they had um well the second to last night they were there they had a party for the members of the president's cabinet and their wives and the last night they were in the White House they had a party for their staff and where we took pictures and shared memories and it's a very special memory looking back at that the dinner in the family dining room upstairs and cocktails before and coffee afterwards in the yellow oval room with that lovely view out the window across the south lawn to the Washington Monument and the Jefferson Memorial beyond the prettiest view in the White House I like particularly what you said about you shared their happiness and shared their sadness they shared yours right that's nice that's a nice touch and then before I did tell that great story about Mrs. Johnson saying that um she was um oh when she when we asked her if she was going to miss the White House should I do that again toward the very end of the Johnson administration I was driving out of the White House grounds with Mrs. Johnson we were going off to some embassy reception and it was a lovely evening the sun was setting and it was just the sky was beautiful that the you could see the inaugural platform going up there on Pennsylvania Avenue as we were going out the North Gate and I said to Mrs. Johnson so we were leaving this beautiful house said are you going to miss all this when you're back in Texas and she said oh yes I'm just going to miss it I'm going to miss it like a front tooth but you know there's just absolutely nothing in the world that would make me willing to pay the price for another ticket of admission


Being six foot ten has provided me with a lot of opportunities. Got me playing footy for a bit and uh dominating. Being able to see everything at festivals. Here's me after one. I caught three drumsticks that day. And now with wedding photography nobody gets in my way.


We're going to talk about how to throw the discus and we're going to go step by step, but you got to learn this first. Check it out. Everybody it's Eric Johnson. And in today's video, we are going to be setting up for a four part training series on how to throw the discus step by step. Now, one of the things we always talk about is the discus happens extremely fast. And one of the challenges that we talked about in our recent video was you got to see the throw, you got to understand the throw. And then you have to be able to identify what makes it difficult. So that's going to be, can you see it? Do you actually understand it? Did you learn it right? Do you have strength problems and what combination of those things are limiting your ability to throw? Right now I'm going to take you through a quick clip on one of our terminology videos. As we go into this four part series today being part one next video, being part two, setting up the chain reaction and setting up maximum power in your throw. So it's going to be really important to understand our core terminology in learning and throw. So if this is your first time here, be sure to hit that subscribe button, check out the long list of videos that we've designed for coaches and throwers to help you understand and learn a little bit more about the throwing chain reaction system or six pillar system for being able to see, understand and learn the throw for fast improvement and big throws. Let's check out the terminology. First thing that we like to talk about is we're going to be communicating direction. 12 o'clock is the beginning of the throw. Six o'clock is directly the dead center of the sector. Therefore this is three o'clock and this is nine o'clock. So the clock is going to be real simple. So when you hear me refer to 12, six, nine, three, eight, whatever, that's the clock we're referring to. Simply separation refers to the shoulder and the hips separating. Notice my hips are going to stay forward here at six o'clock and my shoulders right now are trying to turn over here to nine o'clock without my hips moving. And then in the discus, so if I was in the shot, I'd be separated in the discus. We have two types of separation, shoulders, hips, arm, shoulders. You're going to notice how my arm kind of disappears and stretch, the reflex is when I separate and you see my body kind of sling back. So basically what that means is it's the longest point of when a muscle stretches and it reflexively contracts and that's a very fast motion. The radius refers to the length of the implement or especially in the discus, how far is your arm, right? The big radius. You got to have a big radius. Want the arm as far away from possible. So the distance from my hand to my thigh is shorter. The distance from my hand to my thigh is longer. The longer the radius, the further you throw. So that's going to be important. Now the radius ties into what we refer to as the orbit and the orbit is where the path of the discus is moving. You see how it's kind of moving across. So this is what we would refer to the high point as we would come around the throw, the discus would kind of come down. And then as we turn, it hits, this is the high point of the throw, but notice the orbit. So we're going to have high, low, high, and then out around and delivery. We have a high point in the discus as I just mentioned, and that's the high point here. This is really critical. So as we hit to the power position, we're going to be able to come around this way. OK, people talk about this, right? They want to turn the foot like this and a lot of people turn to teach, turn the foot. Now you're going to notice that my hips are still facing a little bit this way and they turn. So when I pivot, my hips do turn, but a lot of times people pivot and kind of hit their hips and notice where my hips kind of stop. Now notice when I push my heel up and I'm going to push the knee and then turn, notice how I've turned my hips a lot more and I have a lot more ground contact. And so when we rotate in the rotational throws, the axis is from the hip to the foot. OK, and you're going to notice when I'm here and that's what's going to make me rotate this way. And then we have another axis in the center and it's going to be really important to be lined up on the axis. So we're going to be able to come through. Opening is always going to refer to as going in towards the direction of the throw. Staying closed is going to be staying back. And in the throwing chain reaction, we refer to the power position as pillars five and six. We want to lock down maximum power and we want to then work into delivery so we can hit the big finish. Power position is when you're over the delivery leg, which is another term. And then we're going to be setting up our block leg. So the center of mass is going to be this rectangle from my hips to my shoulders, this rectangle. We can't have the rectangle moving around. So now we're going to talk about the sweep and the sweep is is usually going to refer to the right leg, which deters into the delivery leg. So at this phase of throw, pillar one, two, three, the sweep leg comes out wide in a nice rotational path. Then we will transition to the middle, which is going to be our pillar four. And then as I come in, that sweep leg becomes the delivery leg. Now, the next thing is we talked earlier about sprinting. This is the entry leg, sprint leg, balance arm. OK, so entry arm. We refer to it as so the sprint leg balance entry arm is at this phase, which is pillar one, two, three. As we go to four, that sprint leg becomes the block leg. And now the arm turns into the block arm. So now the last thing we're going to talk about is the reverse. I drive my delivery side all the way through the block and I come through my feet switch. So some people call it a switch, we call it the reverse. And then we have what we call as the non-reverse. Those are throw specific terms, like I made the example before. It's like football. What's a sideline? What's a yard? What's a touchdown? What's a goal line? These are basic things. This is your basic terminology for throwing. OK, guys, so welcome back. We want to be able to understand a throw. Sometimes people have different terminology. Most of that is just kind of core throws terminology. It's throws one-on-one. But when we've done camps, virtually live, we'll get half of the people in attendance raising their hand, saying they don't understand some of those basic terms. So that's why it's going to be really important. So now what we're going to do is I'm going to just show you real quick what we're going to look at here. So we're going to see our athletes setting up. And again, you're going to notice Sandra Perkovich. We've got separation. She's got, you know, here's the hips are facing this way. Shoulders are facing that way. Discus is way back. You're going to notice our, you know, younger throwers here that are learning system. Great separation on the younger athlete here. Here's a high school athlete that was, you know, learning to put everything together. And so we have where's our high point? Notice Perkovich is discus up here. So we've got the high point there. Again, notice our younger throwers got the high point a little too low. So where's our entry arm and where's our orbit, right? So now we've got the discus dropping into the low point, low point, low point. We've got, do we have the longest radius where we have that arm back and we've got a long radius here? We're looking at our entry side. So now you're going to start to see how all that terminology plays into your throw. It seems like a basic video, but it's not. It's really critical so that way you can continue to move forward. Remember, one of the big keys to being able to throw farther faster is to be able to understand these basic things. Therefore, it's easier to start getting into the complex stuff that we're going to actually make a lot easier. The throw really is simple. There's a lot of complexity to it. And I know that sounds like a contradiction, but the point is you want to simplify the complexity and that's what we're trying to do. So once we're clear on those basic terms, we're going to be able to really dive in. So in our next video, what we're going to focus on, like I said, is setting up the chain reaction and setting up maximum power. We're going to look at pillars one and two. We're going to look at beginners, top U.S. rank throwers, and we're going to look at the best throwers in the world. And we're going to kind of look at how everybody is approaching that pillar one, two, and you'll see the difference that what takes a throw from a beginner at two seconds to what takes it to a second and a half by the best throwers in the world. And that's what we're going to cover in the next video. So if you guys would like more information in the meantime, be sure to check the link in the description on the Throwing Chain Reaction System. We've got tons of information in there for those of you that really want to dive in. So do that now. Don't forget to like and subscribe and we will see you on the next video.


I'd now like to request the two honourable prime ministers to do the lack of order. And that will be around this magnificent stadium in front of a huge crowd because cricket today is a religion that binds the people of all nations. The border Gavaskar Trophy has been one of the highest in fact and dominant duels in the world of cricket. But today we are here to celebrate something even more special as the two honourable prime ministers do the lap of honour. And what special is it's 75 years of friendship through cricket. Years, there have been so many instances where a compelling one-on-one exchange between the players has not changed. The complexion of an India-Australia match. It also kept the viewers at the edge of their seats. It's the test cricket that's been played between the two nations over the last five or six decades. That has got this India-Australia series top billing. Not just in their respective countries, but around the globe. That both sides bring to the cricket field. Make it a fascinating mix of players and is always enjoyable to watch for a cricket lover. The test cricket between India and Australia started way back in 1948 and is rich in the country. To the lap of honour, the biggest stadium in world cricket. Fabulous crowd as early as this. Something historical, something fabulous. It's a tribute to the players, both the teams. To the lap of honour, request the honourable prime minister of India. An honourable prime minister of Australia. It's been a pleasure to be here today. It's been a pleasure to be here today.