TAG SEARCH RESULTS FOR: ""

Unique exhibit features the work of Van Gogh in Council Bluffs

BY 

An immersive art exhibit is bringing its global tour to southwest Iowa, showcasing the work of Dutch post-Impressionist painter Vincent Van Gogh.

The high-tech display features 300 of Van Gogh’s works projected on 50-thousand square feet of walls, floors and ceilings at the Mid-America Center in Council Bluffs. Fanny Curtat, the exhibit’s curator, says visitors can “become one” with the masterpieces.

“Beyond Van Gogh is really about blending cutting-edge projection technology and the traditional art historical objects, which are Vincent’s paintings,” Curtat says. “Through this blend, this allows the audience to literally set foot into his work, to literally be immersed into those paintings.”

The works are projected in 3-D with more than four-trillion content pixels, for an incredibly detailed, high-resolution portrayal of Van Gogh’s work. “If you know a lot about Van Gogh, then it’s wonderful. You just get to live this fantasy of being in the work you know and love,” Curtat says. “But if you don’t know anything about him, it’s a wonderful introduction to his work. We have this first room as people get in, it’s called the Introduction Hall, where they get to learn more about his work, to be familiar with more of his life.”

Visitors will see gigantic representations of Van Gogh’s instantly-recognizable classics, including “The Starry Night” and “Sunflowers,” as well many revealing self-portraits. Curtat, an art historian, says some of us only know a few details about the life of this spectacularly-talented painter, and “Beyond Van Gogh” is an opportunity to learn much more.

“People tend to remember only the darkness of his life, the ear-cutting incident, the poverty, the struggles with madness, and this is true only to a certain extent,” Curtat says. “This first room allowed us to connect with him differently to see how relevant his work still is.”

The tour has been underway for months and already more than two-and-a-half-million people across the planet have seen it. Visitors -are- welcome to take photographs and selfies inside the exhibit, which Curtat calls “Instagram-friendly.”

“Whether or not you’re into art, it’s great for people who are, but it’s also wonderful for people who aren’t,” Curtat says. “My secret wish is that people who might be intimidated by museums or might feel that it’s not for them, through this experience they might have an incline to have this connection with Van Gogh, and next time they get a chance to see an original Van Gogh on a museum wall, maybe they’ll be curious about experiencing that, too.”

The exhibition opened in Council Bluffs on Thursday and will be there through August 14th. Four entry times are available each hour. Tickets are sold online only at www.vangoghomaha.com. The tour will be returning to Iowa for a stay in the Quad Cities at a still-unspecified date.

Hinson, Miller-Meeks, Feenstra vote no on bipartisan gun bill

BY 

Democratic Congresswoman Cindy Axne of West Des Moines and Republican Senator Joni Ernst voted for the bipartisan gun bill President Biden signed into law this morning. The rest of Iowa’s congressional delegation opposed it.

Republican Congresswomen Ashley Hinson of Marion and Mariannette Miller-Meeks of Ottumwa as well as Congressman Randy Feenstra of Hull voted no on the bill, as did Senator Chuck Grassley. All expressed concern it does not provide adequate due process rights when it comes to confiscating guns from people considered a threat to themselves or others. Miller-Meeks specifically criticized including access to mental health records during background checks for gun buyers under the age of 21.

Republican Senator Joni Ernst says the law does not place new restrictions on law-abiding gun owners. Congresswoman Axne, a Democrat from West Des Moines, says the bill will make schools safer, but doesn’t go far enough. Axne supports restoring the ban on assault weapons.

Iowa’s river cruise season brings stops in Davenport, other Iowa towns

BY 

Iowa may not be at the top of the list of cruise ship destinations — but hundreds of people will be visiting on Mississippi River cruises this year.

Steve Ahrens is the executive officer of the Riverfront Improvement Commission in Davenport, which greets the passengers during stops. “They are all over I have so much fun interacting with them,” he says, “here they are having sort of that Mark Twain esque kind of experience plus right — and a little bit of that whole that Midwest, nice kind of hospitality that goes with it.”

The American Cruise Line has been traveling the Mississippi for 15 years, and its American Melody boat made its first stop along Davenport’s riverfront Sunday. The Viking Cruise Line is starting its first North American trips on the Mississippi River later this year. Ahrens says the cruises bring a wide variety of people to Iowa.

“They are from all over this country, and many times international guests are aboard as well,” according to Ahrens. “And we’re told especially that will be the case with Viking when they start up in early August.” Ahrens says the stops are not long — but there are many things for the passengers to do — including specially crafted exhibits and stops such as the museum or art center.

“They want unique experiences, that we sometimes that the folks that live here take for granted, many others enjoy these immensely. They also enjoy something else we take for granted. And that is the majestic views of the Mississippi River,” he says.

He says the size of the cruises varies — but the companies say they have great interest. “We go from like 170, I think, to 300. You know, as far as a number of passengers, and we’re told that they’re both in both cases, they’re already booking, you know, into through 2023 into 2024,” Ahrens says. Aherns says the cruises start from different ports of call, including Dubuque, Hannibal, and St. Louis, and can go up to St. Paul.

Maddie & Tae Drop New Song: ‘Every Night Every Morning’

Maddie & Tae are back with a new single. The duo just released the new tune “Every Night Every Morning,” which they wrote with Jonathan Singleton and Brock Berryhill.

The track is the first song off the duo’s upcoming project, “Through The Madness Vol. 2,” which is expected out later this year. It is the follow up to “Through The Madness Vol. 1,” which was released in January.

Maddie & Tae are currently playing festivals this summer, and will hit the road in September on their “CMT Next Women of Country Tour Presents: All Song No Static Tour.” Check out “Every Night Every Morning” below.

Source: Maddie & Tae

This day in Country Music History

  • Today in 1949, a classic version of “Rudolph, the Red-Nosed Reindeer,” was recorded by Gene Autry, who didn’t like when he first heard it. As it turned out though, America couldn’t get enough of his rendition of the tune. The Christmas classic remains treasure to this day.
  • Today in 1993, a third Garth Brooks concert was added in Dallas after the first two shows sold out. Tickets to that show also sold out, in less than two hours.
  • Today in 1993, Hollywood and Nashville combined as it was revealed that Julia Roberts had married Lyle Lovett in a hush-hush ceremony two days earlier. The fairytale was not destined for a happy ending though, the couple divorced less than two years later.
  • Today in 1995, Lorrie Morgan’s “Greatest Hits” album was released.
  • Today in 1996, as the Olympic flame made its way to Atlanta for the Summer Games, it was carried through Nashville by Billy Ray Cyrus.
  • Today in 1998, tickets for the first of a series of six Garth Brooks shows in Seattle went on sale. The show sold out in 11 minutes.
  • Today in 2000, it was announced that Lonestar’s Dean Sams and his wife, Kim, were expecting their second child. On December 17th, the Sams family welcomed their newest addition, Bryson Dean Sams.
  • Today in 2001, Tracy Lawrence and his wife, Becca, welcomed their first child, Skylar JoAnn Lawrence.
  • Today in 2005, Ralph Stanley underwent a triple bypass operation in Virginia.
  • Today in 2011, Jake Owen’s “Barefoot Blue Jean Night” video debuted on CMT.
  • Today in 2012, Miranda Lambert shot the video for “Fastest Girl In Town” in Dickson County, Tennessee, with NASCAR driver Danica Patrick.
  • Today in 2015, Brantley Gilbert and Lynyrd Skynyrd shared the stage as a new edition of “CMT Crossroads” premieres. Performances included “Kick It In The Sticks,” “Bottoms Up,” “One Hell Of An Amen” and “Sweet Home Alabama.”
  • Today in 2016, Lauren Alaina’s single, “Road Less Traveled,” hit the airwaves.
  • Today in 2017, Mark Chesnutt Hot Sauce was officially announced.
  • Today in 2019, Blake Shelton received a gold single from the RIAA for “God’s Country.”

AAA Iowa predicts lots of people traveling for 4th of July

BY 

Travel industry experts predict the upcoming Fourth of July holiday will be the busiest-ever for travel by car, truck, SUV and van in Iowa and nationwide, despite record or near-record gasoline prices.

Meredith Mitts, spokeswoman for AAA-Iowa, says the forecast predicts nearly 48-million people will travel at least 50 miles from home over the holiday, and 42-million will travel by motor vehicle.

“The entire year up to this point, we have seen this strong resurgence for travel as people really want to be able to get out and go and do all of these things that they haven’t been able to do the last few years,” Mitts says, “and there’s also the budget from a couple of years worth of canceled vacations that are now available to be used.”

The average price for gas in Iowa is now $4.68 a gallon, down from the all-time record set last Wednesday of $4.76. The national average is $4.94. A year ago, gas in Iowa was averaging $2.89. Based on past holiday history, Mitts says pump prices will likely bounce again before the Fourth of July arrives.

“Gas prices usually do increase around the holidays because there is that demand for travel and so many people are taking to the roads,” Mitts says. “Unfortunately, we cannot predict how high they will go. It will come down to largely how many people are traveling, how far away they’re going, and then what that oil price is at close-out per barrel.”

The demand for travel started rising earlier this year, she says, and it’s not tapering off. People are ready for a break, Mitts says, and despite higher prices, they’re still finding ways to take that much-needed vacation.

“Our top destinations this year are: Orlando, Florida; Seattle, Washington; New York, New York; Anaheim, California and Anchorage, Alaska,” Mitts says. “Unless, of course, you’re going internationally which is finally opening back up again, in which case we have: Vancouver, Canada, we have Paris, France; London, England; Rome, Italy and Amsterdam, Netherlands.”

While air travel is forecast to be slightly stronger than last year, domestic air travel volumes are expected to remain well below pre-pandemic levels. She blames recent issues with air travel and ongoing concerns of cancelations and delays due to pilot shortages.

States brace for fight over gun laws after high court ruling

By JENNIFER McDERMOTT

PROVIDENCE, R.I. (AP) — The Supreme Court’s decision overturning a gun-permitting law in New York has states with robust firearms restrictions scrambling to respond on two fronts — to figure out what concealed-carry measures they might be allowed to impose while also preparing to defend a wide range of other gun control policies.

The language in the court’s majority opinion heightened concern that other state laws, from setting an age limit on gun purchases to banning high-capacity ammunition magazines, may now be in jeopardy.

“The court has basically invited open season on our gun laws, and so I expect litigation across the board,” said New Jersey acting Attorney General Matt Platkin, a Democrat. “We’re going to defend our gun laws tooth-and-nail because these gun laws save lives.”

The court ruling issued Thursday specifically overturned a New York law that had been in place since 1913 and required that people applying for a concealed carry permit demonstrate a specific need to have a gun in public, such as showing an imminent threat to their safety. The court’s conservative majority said that violated the Second Amendment, which they interpreted as protecting people’s right to carry a gun for self-defense outside the home.

While the ruling does not address any other laws, the majority opinion opens the door for gun rights advocates to challenge them in the future, said Alex McCourt, the director of legal research for the Johns Hopkins Center for Gun Violence Solutions.

Pro-firearms groups in several states said they plan to do just that.

Attorney Chuck Michel, president of the California Rifle and Pistol Association, said the group is preparing to expand its legal challenges based on the high court changing the legal standard used to assess whether gun control laws are constitutional.

Courts must now consider only whether a gun control regulation is consistent with the Second Amendment’s actual text and its historical understanding, according to Thursday’s ruling. Before that, judges also could consider a state’s social justification for passing a gun control law.

Michel said the standard will affect three prominent California laws. Legal challenges to the state’s limits on assault weapons, its requirement for background checks for buying ammunition and its ban on online ammunition sales are pending before a federal appellate court.

“All of these laws should be struck down under this new Supreme Court standard,” he said.

The Supreme Court also is considering whether to take up California’s law banning ammunition magazines that hold more than 10 bullets, as well as a similar law in New Jersey. He expects the court may consider those laws under the new standard.

The new restrictive landscape for gun laws outlined in Thursday’s majority opinion is not without escape routes for states, especially those that may want to impose some limits on concealed carry permits.

Justice Brett Kavanaugh, joined by Chief Justice John Roberts, said states still can require people to get a license to carry a gun and condition that on such things as background checks and mental health records. They also can limit where guns are allowed, suggesting that states can prohibit firearms in “sensitive places” such as schools, courthouses or polling places.

That leaves an opening for governors and state lawmakers in New York and the six other states with similar concealed carry laws: California, Hawaii, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey and Rhode Island.

In California, lawmakers are amending legislation to expand the qualifications people must have to obtain a concealed carry permit and to define the places where guns would be off-limits. The revised bill will get its first hearing Tuesday, and lawmakers hope to send it quickly to Gov. Gavin Newsom, who called Thursday’s Supreme Court decision shameful.

Other Democratic governors, lawmakers and state attorneys general also vowed to defend or amend their gun laws.

Most state legislatures are finishing their sessions or have already ended for the year, so any response would likely have to wait until next year. Rhode Island Democratic state Rep. Robert Craven, an attorney, said he would study the opinion in the New York case to determine whether or not it creates a concern that Rhode Island’s requirements could be challenged, and whether that can be remedied by legislation.

He questioned whether the high court will now employ a strict interpretation of the Second Amendment — that the right to bear arms is absolute — and apply it to other laws, such as those banning military-style weapons.

“I see the court headed in that direction,” Craven said.

In Hawaii, Democratic state Sen. Chris Lee said lawmakers will try to determine how else they can ensure public safety and will look at screening, training requirements and ways to keep guns out of certain public spaces — provisions the justices said would be permitted.

“Bottom line is Hawaii is about to become a more dangerous place,” said state Sen. Karl Rhoads, a Democrat. “Hawaii will go from a place where the right to carry in public is the exception to a place where not having the right to carry on the street is an exception. I see no restriction on the type of firearm.”

Gun rights groups in Hawaii and elsewhere applauded the ruling. In Maryland, Mark Pennak, president of a gun rights group challenging that state’s concealed carry law, said he’s “absolutely ecstatic” about the high court’s decision because there’s “simply no way” the law can be defended any longer.

The Democratic leaders of the Maryland General Assembly said that if necessary, they will pass legislation that complies with the new precedent but still protects residents.

New Jersey Gov. Phil Murphy, a Democrat, criticized the court’s opinion for limiting how states can address the proliferation of firearms in public, but vowed to protect the state’s gun control measures. He said his administration believes the state can still regulate who can carry concealed weapons and where they can take them.

He vowed that his administration “will do everything in our power to protect our residents.”

___

Associated Press writers Bobby Caina Calvan in New York; Mike Catalini in Trenton, New Jersey; Jennifer Kelleher in Honolulu; Alanna Durkin Richer in Boston; Don Thompson in Sacramento, California; Marina Villeneuve in Albany, New York; and Brian Witte in Annapolis, Maryland, contributed to this report.

Declaration of Independence to be read in Oskaloosa

You can hear a reading of the Declaration of Independence this coming Tuesday (6/28) in downtown Oskaloosa.  Teri Rogers with the Mahaska County Republican Party Central Committee says the event starts at 7 at the Oskaloosa town square.

“We’re just asking people to join as a community for this special time where we’ll celebrate the founding of our nation and enjoy some patriotic music.”

Rogers says they’ll be serving ice cream, brownies and bars.  This free event starts at 7 on Tuesday, June 28 at the Oskaloosa town square.

Supreme Court overturns Roe v. Wade; states can ban abortion

By MARK SHERMAN

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court has ended constitutional protections for abortion that had been in place nearly 50 years in a decision by its conservative majority to overturn Roe v. Wade. Friday’s outcome is expected to lead to abortion bans in roughly half the states.

The decision, unthinkable just a few years ago, was the culmination of decades of efforts by abortion opponents, made possible by an emboldened right side of the court that has been fortified by three appointees of former President Donald Trump.

The ruling came more than a month after the stunning leak of a draft opinion by Justice Samuel Alito indicating the court was prepared to take this momentous step.

It puts the court at odds with a majority of Americans who favored preserving Roe, according to opinion polls.

Alito, in the final opinion issued Friday, wrote that Roe and Planned Parenthood v. Casey, the 1992 decision that reaffirmed the right to abortion, were wrong the day they were decided and must be overturned.

“We hold that Roe and Casey must be overruled. The Constitution makes no reference to abortion, and no such right is implicitly protected by any constitutional provision,” Alito wrote.

Authority to regulate abortion rests with the political branches, not the courts, Alito wrote.

Joining Alito were Justices Clarence Thomas, Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett. The latter three justices are Trump appointees. Thomas first voted to overrule Roe 30 years ago.

Chief Justice John Roberts would have stopped short of ending the abortion right, noting that he would have upheld the Mississippi law at the heart of the case, a ban on abortion after 15 weeks, and said no more.

Justices Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan — the diminished liberal wing of the court — were in dissent.

“With sorrow—for this Court, but more, for the many millions of American women who have today lost a fundamental constitutional protection—we dissent,” they wrote.

The ruling is expected to disproportionately affect minority women who already face limited access to health care, according to statistics analyzed by The Associated Press.

Thirteen states, mainly in the South and Midwest, already have laws on the books that ban abortion in the event Roe is overturned. Another half-dozen states have near-total bans or prohibitions after 6 weeks of pregnancy, before many women know they are pregnant.

In roughly a half-dozen other states, the fight will be over dormant abortion bans that were enacted before Roe was decided in 1973 or new proposals to sharply limit when abortions can be performed, according to the Guttmacher Institute, a research group that supports abortion rights.

More than 90% of abortions take place in the first 13 weeks of pregnancy, and more than half are now done with pills, not surgery, according to data compiled by Guttmacher.

The decision came against a backdrop of public opinion surveys that find a majority of Americans oppose overturning Roe and handing the question of whether to permit abortion entirely to the states. Polls conducted by The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research and others also have consistently shown about 1 in 10 Americans want abortion to be illegal in all cases. A majority are in favor of abortion being legal in all or most circumstances, but polls indicate many also support restrictions especially later in pregnancy.

The Biden administration and other defenders of abortion rights have warned that a decision overturning Roe also would threaten other high court decisions in favor of gay rights and even potentially, contraception.

The liberal justices made the same point in their joint dissent: The majority “eliminates a 50-year-old constitutional right that safeguards women’s freedom and equal station. It breaches a core rule-of-law principle, designed to promote constancy in the law. In doing all of that, it places in jeopardy other rights, from contraception to same-sex intimacy and marriage. And finally, it undermines the Court’s legitimacy.”

But Alito contended that his analysis addresses abortion only. “Nothing in this opinion should be understood to cast doubt on precedents that do not concern abortion,” he wrote.

Whatever the intentions of the person who leaked Alito’s draft opinion, the conservatives held firm in overturning Roe and Casey.

In his draft, Alito dismissed the arguments in favor of retaining the two decisions, including that multiple generations of American women have partly relied on the right to abortion to gain economic and political power.

Changing the composition of the court has been central to the anti-abortion side’s strategy. Mississippi and its allies made increasingly aggressive arguments as the case developed, and two high-court defenders of abortion rights retired or died. The state initially argued that its law could be upheld without overruling the court’s abortion precedents.

Then-Gov. Phil Bryant signed the 15-week measure into law in March 2018, when Justices Anthony Kennedy and Ruth Bader Ginsburg were still members of a five-justice majority that was mainly protective of abortion rights.

By early summer, Kennedy had retired and was replaced by Justice Brett Kavanaugh a few months later. The Mississippi law was blocked in lower federal courts.

But the state always was headed to the nation’s highest court. It did not even ask for a hearing before a three-judge panel of the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which ultimately held the law invalid in December 2019.

By early September 2020, the Supreme Court was ready to consider the state’s appeal.

The court scheduled the case for consideration at the justices’ private conference on Sept. 29. But in the intervening weeks, Ginsburg died and Barrett was quickly nominated and confirmed without a single Democratic vote.

The stage now was set, although it took the court another half year to agree to hear the case.

By the time Mississippi filed its main written argument with the court in the summer, the thrust of its argument had changed and it was now calling for the wholesale overruling of Roe and Casey.

The first sign that the court might be receptive to wiping away the constitutional right to abortion came in late summer, when the justices divided 5-4 in allowing Texas to enforce a ban on the procedure at roughly six weeks, before some women even know they are pregnant. That dispute turned on the unique structure of the law, including its enforcement by private citizens rather than by state officials, and how it can be challenged in court.

But Justice Sonia Sotomayor noted in a searing dissent for the three liberal justices that their conservative colleagues refused to block “a flagrantly unconstitutional law” that “flouts nearly 50 years of federal precedents.” Roberts was also among the dissenters.

Then in December, after hearing additional arguments over whether to block the Texas law known as S.B. 8, the court again declined to do so, also by a 5-4 vote. “The clear purpose and actual effect of S. B. 8 has been to nullify this Court’s rulings,” Roberts wrote, in a partial dissent.

In their Senate hearings, Trump’s three high-court picks carefully skirted questions about how they would vote in any cases, including about abortion.

But even as Democrats and abortion rights supporters predicted Kavanaugh and Gorsuch would vote to upend abortion rights if confirmed, the two left at least one Republican senator with a different impression. Sen. Susan Collins of Maine predicted Gorsuch and Kavanaugh wouldn’t support overturning the abortion cases, based on private conversations she had with them when they were nominees to the Supreme Court.

Barrett was perhaps the most vocal opponent of abortion in her time as a law professor, before becoming a federal judge in 2017. She was a member of anti-abortion groups at Notre Dame University, where she taught law, and she signed a newspaper ad opposing “abortion on demand” and defending “the right to life from fertilization to natural death.” She promised to set aside her personal views when judging cases.

Trump, meanwhile, had predicted as a candidate that whoever he named to the court would “automatically” vote to overrule Roe.

Tim McGraw Reflects On The Message Of ‘Humble And Kind’

Tim McGraw’s song “Humble and Kind” hit number one six years ago this week, and Tim says the message of the tune never gets old.

“’Humble and Kind,’ to me, the message of that song and the scope of that song grows exponentially every day in the world that we live in now,” he shares. “We certainly had a sense of that when we recorded the song, of what it said.”

He says while the song initially is “a microscope into your life,” and the things “you want to teach your kids,” he notes, “it turned into this sort of worldview of how the world needs to look at each other, and how people in general need to look at each other differently than they look at each other now.”

Finally, Tim shares, “I think that that song’s taken on more and more meaning, and I think it’s got a bigger megaphone. And I don’t think that I’m the megaphone. I think the song is.”

Source: Tim McGraw

NEWSLETTER

Stay updated, sign up for our newsletter.