JSOTF-P Assists in Rescue Efforts During Manila Flooding
By Lt.j.g. Theresa Donnelly, Joint Special Operations Task Force-Philippines
MANILA, Philippines (NNS) — Members of Joint Special Operations Task Force- Philippines (LSOTF-P) assisted the Armed Forces of the Philippines(AFP) with the rescue of 52 people affected by massive flooding during Tropical Storm Ondoy, (known as internationally as Ketsana) in Cainta, Metro Manila Sept. 27-28.
Members of Navy SEAL teams and Naval Special Boat Teams 12 and 20, and U.S. medical personnel attached to JSOTF-P took part. They worked directly with AFP and the Philippines National Disaster Coordinating Council, rescuing people from rooftops, delivering food, and giving out medical supplies.
Rescue teams from JSOTF-P launched two F470 Zodiac boats in the flood waters of Cainta and worked through the night transporting people to schools, churches, and evacuation shelters. Teams also assisted with the rescue of a pregnant Filipino woman in labor, stranded in a flooded-out house.
“These people lost their houses, cars and might still be looking for family members. I wanted to do anything and everything I could do to help the Filipino people. I was glad I could be a part of the rescue efforts,” said Hospital Corpsman 2nd Class (FMF) Jonathan Porter. Porter was a JSOTF-P medic on scene to provide direct medical care.
According to Philippines Disaster Management Services, the floods displaced hundreds of thousands of people and the most recent reports indicate that nearly 100,000 people have been relocated.
“The work the U.S. military did was terrific,” said Roman Romulo, Pasig City congressman. “I was very thankful for U.S. support. Your teams were able to successfully go to Santa Lucia High School to help deliver food. It was a big boost that your people were helping us.”
On Sept. 26, JSOTF-P teams delivered 500 pounds of food to Santa Lucia high school. Additionally the following day, a civilian helicopter contracted by JSOTF-P unloaded and distributed an additional 4,200 pounds of food and water in Cainta, northeast of Pasig city.
The response to Ondoy was a collaborative effort among Philippine civilian governmental agencies, the AFP, the people affected and assistance from Joint Special Operations Task Force Philippines.
“I don’t think we could have done anything without the help of the Filipinos. They were just great in helping us. They had translators, guides, ” said Porter.
“They were able to tell us where to go. When we were looking for a house, the police and local citizens would help us and the rescue was a collaborative effort among governmental agencies and the people affected,” he said.
The chief prosecutor of the International Criminal Court, Luis Moreno-Ocampo, is considering an investigation of IDF for war crimes in Gaza. His first target i Lieutenant Colonel David Benjamin.
Public prosecutor Luis Moreno-Ocampo puts pressure on officers in the IDF.
Benjamin served for many years as legal adviser to the GOC Southern Command, and later headed the Military Advocate General’s department on international law.
In August, he visited South Africa to attend a conference organized by the local Jewish community on international law during wartime, with special reference to the Gaza war. Benjamin later described the trip as a «personal hasbara [public diplomacy] trip».
The pro-Palestinian organizations promptly asked South African state prosecutors to open an investigation into suspicions that Benjamin had committed war crimes in Gaza. To avoid a potential confrontation with local authorities, Benjamin left South Africa several days earlier than he had planned.
Israel did not sign the treaty that created the ICC and thus is outside its jurisdiction, but the prosecutor believes he has the authority he needs to launch an inquiry: Benjamin holds dual citizenship in both Israel and South Africa, which has signed the ICC’s charter, bringing Benjamin into the court’s orbit.
Benjamin said he was out of the country during most of the Gaza operation and had no role in its planning.
Source: Newsweek and the Israeli Daily Ha’aretz
My comment:
To target a sub-officer in the IDF for war crimes is an cowardly act. Because the top IDF bosses are available. So is the Israeli Prime Ministers, both past and present. And President Shimon Peres.
The state of Israel have a legal system that will take care of complaint against officers in the IDF. On quit a few occasions they under investigation, and are suspended. Some of them have even been arrested and jailed.
The US and United Kingdom will next week hold a huge NATO exercise in the Mediterranean ocean. This will be a joint military drill with the IDF.
Would the US and NATO have done this with the War criminals from Serbia and Croatia? Would they have done drill with he Sudanese Government, that has committed genocide in Darfur? What about Idi Amin`s regime in Uganda?
The IDF is the most ethical army in the World. To entertain Arab Palestinian terrorist organizations call for War crimes trials against the IDF, is no longer to believe in a bad joke. The International society have again forced the Jews to be on the run, just like under Nazi-Germany. Colonel David Benjamin had to run back home to Israel ahed of his schedule.
Read more about a British officers views on the IDF operation Cast Lead in Gaza: Click here
Inside Obama’s Acorn by Stanley Kurtz on National Review Online
SAN BERNARDINO
Obama and Bill Ayers Worked to Get ACORN Teaching Schoolchildren …
SAN DIEGO
Why Does NYC Fund 3 ACORN Schools?
NEW YORK CITY
Obama Paid $800,000.00 To Acorn Get Out To Vote
BALTIMORE
UNICEF – Child protection from violence, exploitation and abuse …
Because Barack Obama voted “present” on the health care bill by refusing to submit his own bill, Americans have been left with a number of different bills in Congress to evaluate. This has been made more difficult by the fact that the Democrats, including Barack Obama — scratch that — ESPECIALLY Barack Obama, have been lying about what’s in the bills winding their way through Congress. Meanwhile, the mainstream media has stopped asking any tough questions and has simply taken on the role of a love struck cheerleader waving pom poms for her dashing boyfriend, the quarterback of the health care plan.
So, let’s talk about the basic questions YOU should have answered to your satisfaction before you consider supporting any health care bill that comes out of Congress. As you read these questions, keep in mind that every one has been inspired by bills that are moving through Congress as we speak.
1) Medicare and Social Security are driving this country into bankruptcy. Can we afford another gargantuan government entitlement program when we know we can’t pay for the programs we already have?
More: Hawkins- 20 Question You Should Ask About ObamaCare
[The] evangelical subculture has rotted the brain of the United States of America and we have a big slice of our population waiting for Jesus to come back. They look forward to Armageddon. Frank Schaeffer
Bigots? Anti-Christian zealots? Hate mongers? No, just your average lame-stream media personality and a church-going Christian who happens to be the son of Francis Schaeffer. Although this type of statement would never be tolerated if they were to replace “Christian” with “Muslim,” it’s perfectly acceptable for anyone to bash Christian beliefs. Just another fine example of the “tolerant” Left.
Here’s some links about Obamacare that have popped up over the past several weeks.Patients with terminal illnesses die earlier under the British System.
This is a great indicator of how well Obamacare will work: Obama slashes billions from Medicare heart and cancer treatment.
Terrorists left in their own filth: War crime! Patients left in their own filth: Progressive Healthcare!
If you refuse to pay for Obamacare, you face up to a year in prison.
The AARP may be set for kickbacks from Obamacare.
John Stossel’s Healthcare expose.
The primary enforcer and implementor of healthcare will be the IRS.
The Healthcare industry is strongly against Obamacare.
Old Spin vs. New Spin.
Obama: Legalize Illegals to get them Healthcare.
Obama tries to claim that Healthcare won’t increase taxes – of course he then went on to argue what the definition of the word tax was. Here’s some more research on the healthcare plan. And the savings were just a theory, anyways.
How do we balance our freedom with our need to look after one another?
A defense of the free market: it is NOT another form of rationing.
With all of this, is it any wonder Obama can’t drum up any support for his takeover?
Ahhh, the genius of the still photo for capturing a “moment”.
Obama’s off the hook in this one that has captured a couple of Eurotrash Heads of State eyeing up a staffer like a couple of stalking lions.
Berlusconi looks particularly predatory, maybe because he senses that he may not have to pay for it for a change.
Sarkozy is probably wondering if Carla might go for a little three-way.
Also, its looking like a dead heat in the race between the two for the smallest politician, but check out Sarko’s shoes — are those elevator heels he’s packing?
She's about the right height for you boys!
For a more detailed look at their twisted expressions, click here for a much larger picture.
Graphic Content: If you do not want to see these photos, please close browser now.
Obama’s Healthcare Plan leaves a trigger in place for Planned Parenthood to slide through and get funding for abortions through our mandated “future” healthcare system here in the United States. With our suggested premiums for this insurance which, by the way, is far more than I am paying now, these abortions will be paid for by some of the very people who are Pro-Life. Case in point, me.
Once Planned Parenthood gets into the schools through Obama’s Healthcare Plan, the “children” going to this organization won’t see what actually will be happening to their bodies if they choose to have an abortion.
…and it’s not a pretty sight. They will tell these children that it doesn’t hurt. It will be over with soon. That the “fetus” doesn’t suffer. Etc., etc., etc. But those are lies. Take a look at these pictures. I don’t mean to make anyone who has had an abortion feel badly about themselves, however, I bet a lot of you already do. Children do not need to be subjected to an organization that prefers that parents not know what their children are about to do or what they are being told. Instead girls, who can’t even make up their mind on what to wear to school that day, are being given advise and allowed to make a major decision that will probably affect them the rest of their lives.
The statistics shown for suicides just month after an abortion in the teenage to young women age group is alarming; but you won’t hear about these studies because they do not shed a very favorable light toward a woman’s right to choice. According to a study done by the National Institutes of Health suicides among women having abortions have tripled within the last 25 years.
“Some mental health experts attribute the increased rate of suicide among girls and young women to broken relationships and promiscuity. Elliot Institute director Dr. David Reardon said that evidence shows that abortion is also contributing to the increase in suicides. An Elliot Institute study published in Aug. 2003 in the Southern Medical Journal found that women who had abortions were seven times more likely to commit suicide than women who gave birth.” – Physiciansforlife.org
In light of the vast majority of the population, especially teenagers and younger adults who grew up in the computer age with mountains of information at their fingertips, these young women are privey to photos like these on my blog today. Do these look like painless deaths to these “fetuses”? I don’t think so. These small “babies” are sucked out of the woman and their little body parts are torn off of them.
Doesn’t this look like a baby sleeping peacefully? Well, it’s a picture of an aborted child who looks like he/she is trying to cling desparately onto the life that is being sucked out of it.
To those of you who have had abortions and don’t care, then these photos won’t mean a thing to you. However, to those of you who have had abortions, and I have met many, and you are affected by these because you weren’t well informed prior, there is peace afterward. And with the help of Jesus you can find forgiveness.
These small babies need the help of every person out there to come and save “their” right to liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Obama’s healthcare plan need to be voted down. Our children mental well being and their future children are worth fighting for.
Obama says Iran breaking rules on nuclear programs CNN US, UK, France accuse Iran of covert nuclear plant Reuters Iran ‘concealed nuclear facility’ BBC News Iran discloses new enrichment plant Aljazeera.net ANALYSIS: how close is Iran to a nuclear weapon? Times Online Obama to accuse Iran of building secret nuclear plant AFP US, UK, French heads demand Iran nuke site opened AP US, UK and France tell Iran to open nuke site AP Iran nuclear plant: the expert view guardian.co.uk Iran’s second uranium enrichment facility ‘changes every equation’ Christian Science Monitor Iran admits secret underground nuclear plant guardian.co.uk Obama to demand international inspection of Iran plant Reuter Brown: Iran must open nuclear plant to inspectors AP Sarkozy gives Iran December deadline AP Obama to Say Iran Developing Nuclear Fuel, Aide Says Bloomberg Obama: Iran’s secret nuke facility ‘inconsistent with a peaceful … USA Today Obama Expected To Accuse Iran Of Secret Nuclear Site AHN Obama, World Leaders To Call Out Iran On Covert Nuclear Plant AHN Iran tells IAEA it is building 2nd uranium enrichment plant RIA Novosti Russia can sway Iran’s nuclear ambitions guardian.co.uk – Adrian Pabst Obama to charge Iran with secret facility Washington Times
Link to us:
News around the world: United States | United Kingdom | Russia | China | India | Australia | Mexico | Germany | Italy | France | Spain | Nigeria
U.S. Military Leaders Discuss Troop Needs for Afghanistan
By Ann Scott Tyson
Washington Post Staff Writer
Saturday, September 26, 2009
Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal, the top U.S. and NATO commander in Afghanistan, held an unannounced meeting with senior U.S. military leaders on Friday to lay out his needs for additional troops for the war, as the Obama administration engages in intense deliberations over the strategy there, according to a defense official.
Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, called for the meeting, held in Germany, “to get a better understanding for himself of McChrystal’s troop requirements,” the official said. Given growing public concern over the mission in Afghanistan, Mullen wanted to sound out McChrystal face to face on the troop request in preparation for upcoming discussions in Washington, said the official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak publicly.
via U.S. Military Leaders Discuss Troop Needs in Afghanistan – washingtonpost.com.
Now in America school children are being taught to sing the praises of Obama, literally.
Heres the lyrics:
Mmm, mmm, mm!
Barack Hussein Obama
He said that all must lend a hand [?]
To make this country strong again
Mmm, mmm, mm!
Barack Hussein Obama
He said we must be clear today
Equal work means equal pay
Mmm, mmm, mm!
Barack Hussein Obama
He said that we must take a stand
To make sure everyone gets a chance
Mmm, mmm, mm!
Barack Hussein Obama
He said Red, Yellow, Black or White
All are equal in his sight
Mmm, mmm, mm!
Barack Hussein Obama
Yes
Mmm, mmm, mm!
Barack Hussein Obama
Hello, Mr. President we honor you today!
For all your great accomplishments, we all [do? doth??] say “hooray!”
Hooray Mr. President! You’re number one!
The first Black American to lead this great na-TION!
Hooray, Mr. President something-something-some
A-something-something-something-some economy is number one again!
Hooray Mr. President, we’re really proud of you!
And the same for all Americans [in?] the great Red White and Blue!
So something Mr. President we all just something-some,
So here’s a hearty hip-hooray a-something-something-some!
Hip, hip hooray! (3x)
Please don’t give Gordon ideas, we would be singing “The Ode of the one eyed Scotsman”
President Barack Obama has quietly decided to bypass Congress and allow the indefinite detention of terrorist suspects without charges.
The move, which was controversial when the idea was first floated in The Washington Post in May, has sparked serious concern among civil liberties advocates. Such a decision allows the president to unilaterally hold “combatants” without habeas corpus — a legal term literally meaning “you shall have the body” — which forces prosecutors to charge a suspect with a crime to justify the suspect’s detention.
Obama’s decision was buried on page A 23 of The New York Times’ New York edition on Thursday. It didn’t appear on that page in the national edition. (Meanwhile, the front page was graced with the story, “Richest Russian’s Newest Toy: An N.B.A. Team.”)
Rather than seek approval from Congress to hold some 50 Guantanamo detainees indefinitely, the administration has decided that it has the authority to hold the prisoners under broad-ranging legislation passed in the wake of Sept. 11, 2001. Former President George W. Bush frequently invoked this legislation as the justification for controversial legal actions — including the NSA’s warrantless wiretapping program.
“The administration will continue to hold the detainees without bringing them to trial based on the power it says it has under the Congressional resolution passed after the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, authorizing the president to use force against forces of Al Qaeda and the Taliban,” the Times‘ Peter Baker writes. “In concluding that it does not need specific permission from Congress to hold detainees without charges, the Obama administration is adopting one of the arguments advanced by the Bush administration in years of debates about detention policies.”
A d v e r t i s e m e n t
Constitutional scholar and Salon.com columnist Glenn Greenwald discussed the policy in a column in May. He warned that the ability for a president to “preventively” detain suspects could mushroom into broader, potentially abusive activity.
“It does not merely allow the U.S. Government to imprison people alleged to have committed Terrorist acts yet who are unable to be convicted in a civilian court proceeding,” Greenwald wrote. “That class is merely a subset, perhaps a small subset, of who the Government can detain. Far more significant, ‘preventive detention’ allows indefinite imprisonment not based on proven crimes or past violations of law, but of those deemed generally ‘dangerous’ by the Government for various reasons (such as, as Obama put it yesterday, they ‘expressed their allegiance to Osama bin Laden’ or ‘otherwise made it clear that they want to kill Americans’). That’s what ‘preventive’ means: imprisoning people because the Government claims they are likely to engage in violent acts in the future because they are alleged to be ‘combatants.’”
“Once known, the details of the proposal could — and likely will — make this even more extreme by extending the ‘preventive detention’ power beyond a handful of Guantanamo detainees to anyone, anywhere in the world, alleged to be a ‘combatant,’” Greenwald continues. “After all, once you accept the rationale on which this proposal is based — namely, that the U.S. Government must, in order to keep us safe, preventively detain “dangerous” people even when they can’t prove they violated any laws — there’s no coherent reason whatsoever to limit that power to people already at Guantanamo, as opposed to indefinitely imprisoning with no trials all allegedly ‘dangerous’ combatants, whether located in Pakistan, Thailand, Indonesia, Western countries and even the U.S.”
The Obama Administration appears to have embraced “preventive detention” in part because of problems with how Guantanamo prisoners’ cases — and incarceration — were handled under President Bush. Military prosecutors have said that numerous cases could not be brought successfully in civilian courts because evidence was obtained in ways that wouldn’t be admissible on US soil. The Bush Administration originally sought to try numerous detainees in military tribunals, but the Supreme Court ruled that at least some have the rights to challenge their detention in US courts.
Baker notes that Obama’s decision to hold suspects without charges doesn’t propose as broad an executive authority claimed by President Bush.
“Obama’s advisers are not embracing the more disputed Bush contention that the president has inherent power under the Constitution to detain terrorism suspects indefinitely regardless of Congress,” Baker writes.
In a statement to Baker, the Justice Department said, “The administration would rely on authority already provided by Congress [and] is not currently seeking additional authorization.”
“The position conveyed by the Justice Department in the meeting last week broke no new ground and was entirely consistent with information previously provided by the Justice Department to the Senate Armed Services Committee,” the statement added.
Roughly 50 detainees of the more than 200 still held at the US prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba are thought to be affected by the decision.
URL to article: http://www.infowars.com/obama-will-bypass-congress-to-detain-suspects-indefinitely/
CHICAGO – Jika anda punya uang banyak, Anda bisa memiliki kesempatan menjadi tetangga Presiden Amerika Serikat Barack Obama di Chicago. Pasalnya, rumah di samping kediaman Obama dijual oleh sebuah agen property.
Pihak agen tidak menyebut berapa harga pasti rumah dengan 17 kamar itu. Namun harga rumah di daerah tersebut berkisar antara USD1 juta hingga USD2,5 juta (sekira Rp9,9 miliar hingga R024,7 miliar). Demikian seperti diberitakan Associated Press, Sabtu (12/9/2009).
“Kami mencari orang yang ingin yang ingin dekat dengan presiden dan mereka harus membayar lebih untuk itu,” kata Matt Garrison, seorang agen penjual rumah tersebut.
Pemilik terakhir membeli rumah seluas 557 meter persegi saat itu dengan delapan kamar dan 3,5 kamar mandi. Ia membeli rumah tersebut dengan harga USD35.000 pada 1973.
Tinggal dekat dengan presiden butuh perjuangan. Pasalnya, meski Barack Obama tidak berada di kediamannya, Secret Service sebagai otoritas yang bertanggung jawab dalam pengamanan presiden, tetap menjaga ketat jalan masuk ke rumahnya. Kondisi ini tentu akan mempersempit kebebasan orang yang tinggal di sekelilingnya.
Selain itu, menurut Garrison, pembeli juga harus menjalani pemeriksaan Secret Service. Namun ia tak bisa menjelaskan pemeriksaan seperti apa yang dilakukan.
Namun meski pembeli mungkin akan jarang melihat langsung Obama, setidaknya mereka akan sering melihat istrinya Michelle dan anak-anaknya.
Obama pindah dari Chicago sejak awal Januari ke Gedung Putih. Namun ia dan keluarganya kerap pulang untuk berlibur, seperti pada perayaan Valentine, Februari dan Juli lalu.
Left-wing activist group ACORN has filed suit against the makers of a video that showed members of its Baltimore chapter advising a fake pimp and hooker on how to cheat the tax system.
ACORN contends the audio portion of the video was illegally obtained as Baltimore requires two-party consent for sound recordings.
Tonja Thompson and Shera Williams, the two ACORN employees shown in the video, were fired after the footage was broadcast and have suffered “extreme emotional distress,” according to the lawsuit.
The US Senate voted to defund ACORN after the videos were aired.
James O’Keefe and Hanna Giles, who played the pimp and prostitute in the video, and Andrew Brietbart, who first published the videos on his website, were named in the multi-million dollar lawsuit.
The disappointment with Barack Obama is tangible – on climate change and financial reform Europe leads while the US lags behind.
by Steven Hill
Much hope has been invested in Barack Obama’s ability to strike a new course for the US following eight years of Bush administration unpopularity. Yet many in the US and abroad are impatient with the pace of progress under the Obama administration. The president made the rounds on five news talkshows on Sunday as he pressed his policies and vision, preparing for what is likely to be a difficult week.
Besides the ongoing battle over healthcare, this week sees two showdowns between Europe and the US that will reveal further slippage in American global leadership. The first showdown comes today at a UN special session on climate change in New York City; the second will come at the end of the week at the G20 meeting in Pittsburgh, where America and Europe will butt heads over financial system reforms designed to ensure that the AIGs of the world can never again cause an economic collapse.
Europe has been increasingly critical of America’s failures to live up to its global responsibilities. The US is not only the world’s largest emitter of greenhouse gases but is by far the largest per capita emitter of carbon and other pollutants. China comes close to the US in terms of total carbon emissions, but it has four times more people, who each belch far less individually. Europe, while having much the same high living standard, has an “ecological footprint” that is only half of America’s, since Europe has taken leadership in implementing renewable technologies and conservation practices.
On the campaign trail, Barack Obama promised to reverse the Bush administration’s terrible ecological record. Yet so far the world has seen more symbolic gestures from the Obama administration than accomplishments. Its biggest achievement so far has been a disappointment. President Obama signed an executive order to increase US motor vehicle mileage standards – but only to a level that will push fuel efficiency by 2020 to a level that European and Japanese cars reached several years ago, and even China has already achieved.
Europe has announced donations of $2bn to $15bn a year for the next decade to help developing nations cope with climate warming, yet the Obama administration has not offered anything close to that amount. Europe also wants binding, near-term targets for developed nations, proposing a 20% reduction from 1990 levels by 2020, or 30% if everyone agrees. The Bush administration of course rejected such targets – but now it looks like the Obama administration is not willing to go much further. It has said such targets should be voluntary but verifiable.
With the US Senate bogged down in the fight over reforming healthcare, American leaders have said that the senators might not move on climate legislation until 2010, well after the global climate change conference in Copenhagen in December. That drew a sharp response from John Bruton, head of the European Union delegation: “The United States is just one of the 190 countries coming to this conference,” Bruton said, “but the United States emits 25% of all the greenhouse gases that the conference is trying to reduce. I submit that asking an international conference to sit around looking out the window for months, while one chamber of the legislature of one country deals with its other business, is simply not a realistic political position.”
Even Europe’s conservative politicians, such as Connie Hedegaard, Denmark’s minister of climate and energy, are expressing impatience: “It’s rather crucial that the US can show a credible pathway,” Hedegaard said, pointing out that the US emits twice as much carbon dioxide per capita as Denmark, without gaining anything in improving its quality of life.
That’s the start of President Obama’s week. At the end of it, President Obama will appear at a meeting in Pittsburgh of the G20, a bloc of both developed and developing nations, representing 85% of the world’s economic output and most of its population. On the table will be reforms designed to avoid a repetition of the financial panic and global economic collapse perceived as having originated on Wall Street. Despite immense, taxpayer-financed rescue packages needed to overcome the crisis, the financial sector in the US is rapidly returning to business as usual. Indeed, three US banks – Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley and JP Morgan – which received some $45bn of bailout aid, each paid billions of dollars more in bonuses in 2009 than they earned in 2008.
Here again, Europe is leading, while the Obama administration is dragging its feet. Europe has proposed far-reaching reforms designed to impose new rules on executive pay and bonuses, requiring that banks link pay to long-term rather than short-term performance, and that they “claw back” any bonuses received in the face of losses. Europe wants a financial police force that has powers to slash payments where investments prove to have failed, and to force boardrooms to control levels of speculation. Europe also wants to block the exercising of stock options for set periods and expose top bank directors to penalties, following huge payouts to failed bank chiefs.
The Obama administration’s approach has been much more tepid, to say the least. The US financial industry, as expected, is fighting these reforms, but what do we make of a recent quote by President Obama questioning the need for supporting Europe’s proposals. “Why is it,” he asked during a recent interview, “that we’re going to cap executive compensation for Wall Street bankers but not Silicon Valley entrepreneurs or [American] football players?”
Besides the fact that President Obama was wrong – the National Football League does have salary restrictions – Silicon Valley businesses and NFL quarterbacks don’t cause an economic collapse when they screw up. It’s very sobering that, if David Letterman read that quote on his TV show and asked his audience: “Who made this clueless statement, former President Bush or President Obama?” we know what the response would be. Or would have been.
In response to American foot-dragging, European leader Jean-Claude Juncker said Europe should act on the bonus issue “whether the Americans are with us or not.” He said that a Europe-only charge “will take on such force over time that the Americans will not be able to sit on the sidelines.”
Many leaders and supporters are beginning to wonder what is causing this growing gap between the Barack Obama that many people saw on the campaign trail, and the Obama they see in the White House? Beyond Obama’s oratorical skills, which excited not only American voters but people all over the world, he is mostly untested as a politician. His previous experience was only a few years in the US Senate and a few years more as a state senator. A sinking feeling is arising among many that President Obama may not be up to the task, that he may not possess the artful skills needed to accomplish even his own goals.
But it must be recognised that it’s not just Obama’s shortcomings that are causing the problem. The very structure of the American political system is at the heart of these failures. For example, thwarting Obama on a regular basis is an unrepresentative senate where “minority rule” prevails and undermines what a majority of the country may want. With two senators elected per state, regardless of population, California with more than 35 million people has the same number of senators as Wyoming with just half a million residents. This constitutional arrangement greatly favours low population states, many of which tend to be conservative, producing what one political analyst has called “a weighted vote for small-town whites in pickup trucks with gun racks.”
In addition, the senate’s use of that arcane rule known as the “filibuster” means you need 60 out of 100 votes to stop unlimited debate on a bill and move to a vote. A mere 41 senators, representing as little as 20% of the nation’s population, can stymie the other 80%. Given a vastly unrepresentative senate wielding its anti-majoritarian filibuster, it is hardly surprising that minority rule in the senate consistently undermines majority rule, whether on healthcare, financial industry reform, environmental legislation and many other policies.
Pile on to that an uncompetitive, winner-take-all electoral system, marinated in money and special interest influence, and the sclerotic US political scene is deeply troubling. None of these anti-democratic structural features are going away any time soon. Unless Barack Obama is able to demonstrate a better level of political skill than he has shown so far, everyone needs to fasten their seatbelts. The world is about to enter a challenging phase where the US – the undisputed leader of the free world for the past 60 years – is going to rapidly cede its place at the head of the line.
It appears that the wheels may be coming off the world’s post-war leader, and not even Barack Obama can stop it happening.
With health care reform coming into full force in Congress this fall, it is unavoidable to not turn on the television and notice the media focus. This, I think, is a good thing; Finally the Nation is focused on something other than the next American Idol winner or some other bogus realty show. I’ve been paying attention. I’ve been trying to stay up-to-date and follow legislation status and I’ve found myself pouring over reports and documents just to get facts and understand the issue more clearly.
The only thing that bothers me at this moment, doesn’t even deal with actual health reform legislation. It doesn’t involve the fact that there are so many sources on the issue out there for individuals, that information could be pouring out their ears. It involves individuals, let me re-phrase, simple-minded and ignorant individuals who are somehow able to compare Obama’s domestic policy initiative for a proper health care system to the Nazi Regime.
To those individuals: I understand Your First Amendment right and freedom of speech. I can understand being passionate about an issue and wanting Your voice to be heard. I understand that there is political discourse and opportunities to get involved on the issue. What I don’t understand, is how You can easily label this important issue of health care and compare it to a movement of Nazi Regime ideology…We do not live in a Totalitarian State. Let’s just review for a second, back to civics class, where You may remember that a bill CANNOT be passed as law without a congressional passage (by yes, Congressmen and Congresswomen) who You voted for.
By comparing Obama to Hitler and going to town hall meetings and rallies with posters of him with a Hitler-esque moustache, You are not only disrespecting the generation and culture that lived through World War II, but undermining what history has taught us.
Maybe this is the one thing that I’d like the media to focus less on. On the other hand, if it wasn’t for these tid bits, we wouldn’t see how ignorant some people really are.
Trade Wars and Protectionism are not Free Trade
Posted by Ron Paul (09-21-2009, 02:21 PM) filed under Foreign Policy
Two weeks ago, both the administration and the Fed announced with straight faces that the recession was over and the signs of economic recovery were clear. Then last week, the president made a stunning decision that signals the administration’s determination to repeat the mistakes of the Great Depression. Much like the Smoot-Hawley Tariffs that set off a global trade war and effectively doomed us to ten more years of economic misery, Obama’s decision to enact steep tariffs on Chinese imported tires could spark a trade war with the single most important trading partner we have. Not only does China manufacture a whole host of products that end up on American store shelves, they are also still buying our Treasury debt.
One has to wonder why this course of action is being undertaken if the administration really believes its own statements about economic recovery. Why are they still trying to fix something they have supposedly already fixed? The most troubling thing is the rhetoric about free trade given to justify this. The administration claims it is merely enforcing trade policies and that this is necessary for free trade. This sort of double speak demonstrates a gross misunderstanding of free trade, economics and world history. Yet these are the same people the country trusts to solve our problems. This sort of thing should remove all doubt about the credibility of the decision makers in Washington.
The truth is this will hurt American consumers by driving up prices of tires and cars. This will also complicate matters for our already crippled manufacturing and agricultural industries, if and when China retaliates against US made products. Whatever jobs might be saved in the tire and steel industries here as a result of this protectionist measure will likely be lost in other American industries. It is even doubtful that those jobs will be saved, as cheap tires can be obtained from other places like Mexico instead. It is difficult to see any real winners among all the losers where trade wars are concerned. If Unions think this is beneficial to them, they are being penny-wise and pound foolish.
Free trade with all and entangling alliances with none has always been the best policy in dealing with other countries on the world stage. This is the policy of friendship, freedom and non-interventionism and yet people wrongly attack this philosophy as isolationist. Nothing could be further from the truth. Isolationism is putting up protectionist trade barriers, starting trade wars imposing provocative sanctions and one day finding out we have no one left to buy our products. Isolationism is arming both sides of a conflict, only to discover that you’ve made two enemies instead of keeping two friends. Isolationism is trying to police the world but creating more resentment than gratitude. Isolationism is not understanding economics, or other cultures, but clumsily intervening anyway and creating major disasters out of minor problems.
The government should not be in the business of giving out favors to special interests or picking winners and losers in the market, yet this has been most of what has consumed politicians’ attention in Washington. It has reached a fevered pitch lately and it needs to end if we are ever to regain a functional and prosperous economy.
by Ron Paul Originally posted on Sept 21, 2009
TWO WEEKS AGO, BOTH THE ADMINISTRATION and the Fed announced with straight faces that the recession was over and the signs of economic recovery were clear. Then last week, the president made a stunning decision that signals the administration’s determination to repeat the mistakes of the Great Depression.
Much like the Smoot-Hawley Tariffs that set off a global trade war and effectively doomed us to ten more years of economic misery, Obama’s decision to enact steep tariffs on Chinese imported tires could spark a trade war with the single most important trading partner we have. Not only does China manufacture a whole host of products that end up on American store shelves, they are also still buying our Treasury debt.
One has to wonder why this course of action is being undertaken if the administration really believes its own statements about economic recovery. Why are they still trying to fix something they have supposedly already fixed? The most troubling thing is the rhetoric about free trade given to justify this. The administration claims it is merely enforcing trade policies and that this is necessary for free trade. This sort of double speak demonstrates a gross misunderstanding of free trade, economics and world history. Yet these are the same people the country trusts to solve our problems. This sort of thing should remove all doubt about the credibility of the decision makers in Washington.
The truth is this will hurt American consumers by driving up prices of tires and cars. This will also complicate matters for our already crippled manufacturing and agricultural industries, if and when China retaliates against US made products. Whatever jobs might be saved in the tire and steel industries here as a result of this protectionist measure will likely be lost in other American industries. It is even doubtful that those jobs will be saved, as cheap tires can be obtained from other places like Mexico instead. It is difficult to see any real winners among all the losers where trade wars are concerned. If Unions think this is beneficial to them, they are being penny-wise and pound foolish.
Free trade with all and entangling alliances with none has always been the best policy in dealing with other countries on the world stage. This is the policy of friendship, freedom and non-interventionism and yet people wrongly attack this philosophy as isolationist. Nothing could be further from the truth. Isolationism is putting up protectionist trade barriers, starting trade wars imposing provocative sanctions and one day finding out we have no one left to buy our products. Isolationism is arming both sides of a conflict, only to discover that you’ve made two enemies instead of keeping two friends. Isolationism is trying to police the world but creating more resentment than gratitude. Isolationism is not understanding economics, or other cultures, but clumsily intervening anyway and creating major disasters out of minor problems.
The government should not be in the business of giving out favors to special interests or picking winners and losers in the market, yet this has been most of what has consumed politicians’ attention in Washington. It has reached a fevered pitch lately and it needs to end if we are ever to regain a functional and prosperous economy.
I may have figured this out. The adoration of Obama may be directly related to children’s books. In both “The Cat in the Hat” and “The Cat in the Hat Comes Back”, the titular “Cat” is able to do all kinds of entertaining shenanigans yet somehow -some how – able at the end to restore and remedy his own doings and, in the case of “The Cat in the Hat Comes Back”, the walkway actually ends up snow shoveled and tidy.
Perhaps my fellow adoring Americans feel that Obama is the Cat.
It would explain the unquestioning acceptance of his seemingly endless and inexplicable supply of various czars. Remember cats A-Z in “… Comes Back”? They all just came popping out, one after the other, a supposed remedy for the “pink spot” problem.
What is Obama’s equivalent of the Cat’s big, red clean up machine? Besides the obvious and daunting parallel of “communism” and a big, red clean up machine, which of Obama’s amazing bureaucracies does he see as his magical solution? Most importantly, what do my fellow Americans see as the big solution?
Finally, what is Obama’s “Voom”, and when do we get to see Cat Z? If you’ll remember with me the last quote regarding “Voom”, you may also see a bit of the parallels to Dr. Seuss’ crazy pimp of fun and our Commander in Chief:
“Now, don’t ask me what Voom is. I never will now. But, boy! Let me tell you It DOES clean up snow!”
For those of us who believe we are being snowed by our magical and ubiquitously appearing President, I’m eager to find out what his end game – er, I mean – his “voom” really is.
Like the Cat in the Hat, I don’t know what Obama’s real purpose is. He certainly seems to believe -and his mindless sycophant supporters seem to agree – that he is, unto himself some kind of Deus Ex Machina in Chief.
I hope that whatever this Cat unleashes, there’s a big, red box with hook that we can put all his “things” back inside. Sadly, I don’t think he will clean up his mess like the Chapeu’ed Cat did.
Missile Shield? We don’t need no stinking Missile Shield!Showing the military resolve that’s made him the envy of France, Barack Obama is now throwing entire nations under the bus. Poland and the Czech Republic now join Israel and Honduras in a rapidly-growing group of abandoned one-time American allies.
In CNN’s political coverage, Obama said “the change of gears was based on an “updated intelligence assessment” about Iran’s ability to hit Europe with missiles.”
He did not state during this interview when the United States would begin providing Iran with higher quality missiles, but one can only assume that it will happen soon.
Russian President Dmitry Medvedev welcomed Obama’s move with a televised statement of his own from Moscow. “We appreciate the responsible approach of the U.S. president,” Medvedev said.”
As we look at whom Obama surrounds himself with, another problematic individual comes to light as our Regulatory Czar – Cass Sunstein. Sunstein has a very radical stance with a broad series of issues from taxes to animal rights. Is it probable for a man who perhaps has the second most influential position in government intelligent enough to seize our liberties with a stroke of a pen?
Currently, Sunstein has made the assertion that his thinking would not obstruct with his job as Regulatory Czar. However, scores of his observations transpired less than 5 years ago. It is hard to phantom that he can just put his recent ideologies behind while he fine-tune laws pending.
“Although obscure,” reported the Wall Street Journal, “the post [Regulatory Czar] wields outsize power. It oversees regulations throughout the government, from the Environmental Protection Agency to the Occupational Safety and Health Administration. Obama aides have said the job will be crucial as the new administration overhauls financial-services regulations, attempts to pass universal health care and tries to forge a new approach to controlling emissions of greenhouse gases.”
Let’s take a glance at some of his progressive principles and let you decide.
TAXES
We are all familiar with the need to pay taxes to keep government going. What government should be doing is finding ways to reduce the burden of paying these taxes. How Sunstein believed that there is no liberty without dependency is beyond my cognitive way of thinking. And to say we should have a good time in paying taxes is right down ludicrous:
“Without taxes there would be no liberty. Without taxes there would be no property. Without taxes, few of us would have any assets worth defending. [It is] a dim fiction that some people enjoy and exercise their rights without any burden whatsoever on public fisc . . . There is no liberty without dependency. That is why we should celebrate Tax Day.”
INTERNET CONTROL
In Sunstein’s latest book, On Rumors: How Falsehoods Spread, Why We Believe Them, What Can Be Done (2009), Sunstein does not hide any pessimistic attitudes toward bloggers. He has called upon legislators in Washington to execute a “notice and taken down” law where bloggers and service providers are required to “take down falsehoods upon notice.” This is of course an infringement of our First Amendment. If passed, the government will enforce control over all facets of the Internet, dictating what is acceptable to THEIR preference. Bottom line – its censorship, plain and simple:
“We hardly need to imagine a world, however, in which people and institutions are being harmed by the rapid spread of damaging falsehoods via the Internet. We live in that world. What might be done to reduce the harm?”
GUN CONTROL AND HUNTING
Sunstein is a huge supporter of gun control. In 2005, Sunstein published a book titled, Radicals in Robes: Why Extreme Right-Wing Courts are Wrong for America. In this book, Sunstein writes about how fundamentalists should not be overwhelmed with confidence that the Constitution gives them the right to possess a gun:
“Almost all gun control legislation is constitutionally fine. . . [O]n the Constitution’s text, fundamentalists [that is, gun rights supporters] should not be so confident in their enthusiasm for invalidating gun control legislation.”
Although Sunstein professed at his confirmation hearing that he was all for the Second Amendment, but he tells a much different tale during a 2007 lecture at the University of Chicago:
“My coming view is that the individual right to bear arms reflects the success of an extremely aggressive and resourceful social movement and has much less to do with good standard legal arguments than [it] appears.”
ANIMAL RIGHTS
This is Sunstein’s most prevalent quest. Sunstein has a PETA frame of mind when it comes to animal rights. His extreme views believe that animals should have a legal right to file lawsuits. This is not a tall story according to his book, Animal Rights: Current Debates and New Directions (2004):
“. . . animals should be permitted to bring suit, with human beings as their representatives, to prevent violations of current law . . . Any animals that are entitled to bring suit would be represented by (human) counsel, who would owe guardian like obligations and make decisions, subject to those obligations, on their clients’ behalf.”
He supports the above assertion by saying that before animals can come into the court system, laws must be passed that ALL animals are not considered as possessions:
“. . . representatives of animals should be able to bring private suits to ensure that anticruelty and related laws are actually enforced. Of course, any animals would be represented by human beings, just like any other litigant who lacks ordinary (human) competence; for example, the interests of children are protected by prosecutors, and also by trustees and guardians in private litigation brought on children’s behalf. … If getting rid of the idea that animals are property is helpful in reducing suffering, then we should get rid of the idea that animals are property.” (Animal Rights: Current Debates and New Directions, 2004)
Sunstein also believes that killing animals for food is merciless. This ideology includes farm animals. Envision his position as Regulatory Czar. He decides to place stringent regulatory guidelines on farmers and meat processors. Imagine when you go to your local grocery store to buy a steak that once cost you $10 but now is $25 because of these regulatory restrictions. In his paper, The Rights of Animals: A Very Short Primer, there is a section titled, “Increased Regulation of Hunting, Science, Farming, and More” where he talks about endorsing tougher guidelines:
“We should focus attention not only on the ‘enforcement gap,’ but on the areas where current law offers little or no protection. In short, the law should impose further regulation on hunting, scientific experiments, entertainment, and (above all) farming to ensure against unnecessary animal suffering.
. . .
If farms are regulated, the price of meat will increase, and people will be able to eat less meat. Hence it is necessary to weigh the gain to animal welfare against the harms to human beings.”
He also insinuates that federal law should be enacted since the customs of processing farm animals for food are unfettered at the state level:
“The cruel and abusive practices generally involved in contemporary farming are largely unregulated at the state level.”
Another point of view by Sunstein is the guilt people would feel if they knew how an animal died. Since people would have this regrettable feeling, and it is inevitable that animals suffer terribly, these people should not eat meat:
“Of course the largest issue involves eating meat . . . animals used for food are almost inevitably going to endure terrible suffering, then there is a good argument that people should not eat meat to the extent that a refusal to eat meat will reduce that suffering.” (Animal Rights: Current Debates and New Directions, 2004)
Sunstein also expands by suggesting that abolishing the eating of meat may be wise for the American people. During a 2007 speech at Harvard University, Sunstein makes that perfectly clear:
“. . . eliminating current practices such as … meat eating.”
At the same lecture, Sunstein added:
“We ought to ban hunting, I suggest, if there isn’t a purpose other than sport and fun. That should be against the law. It’s time now.”
America is on the threshold of Constitutional collapse. And now that we have this wacko running side-by-side with the other czars and circling themselves around the President of the United States, our independence are at stake. Sunstein’s values are far too current for him to come out and say that it will not impede with his job as Regulatory Czar.
Gun purchases have skyrocketed soon after Obama’s appointment to the presidency. Its no secret what Obama and Sunstein will endeavor to do in our upcoming years. Bear in mind Obama’s comments during a clandestine recording in San Francisco when he indicated that rural America wanting to “cling to their guns and their religion.”
So Sunstein is unquestionably a left-wing extremist. Yet our government is far too busy keeping a close eye on him when they continuously bicker with each other. What should we do? How do we save our republic from the grips of tyranny?
Democrat and Republican, liberal or conservative, it doesn’t matter. We must stand united if we are to keep our liberties. As a group, we can differ on many issues. But also as a group, we can be of the same mind when it comes to keeping our liberties. One person should never run a collective. And it appears that is what Washington wants – to control our every day lives.
Fight back! Let your representatives and senators know that you are keeping them under a microscope. Let them know that they are on a fine line of losing a vote.
Don’t know who to write? Well, here is a starting point:
Write to Congress https://writerep.house.gov/writerep/welcome.shtml
Write to the Senate: http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm
Sunstein was confrimed by the Senate on September 10, 2009. Here is the list of senators who voted and how they voted for Sunstein’s confirmation as Regulatory czar. Remember these elected officials when elections come around:
The Frankfurt School, Natural Right And The White Male
by
R.E. Prindle
I believe there is a ‘natural right’ of resistance for oppressed and overpowered minorites to use extra legal means if the legal ones have proved to be inadequate. Law and order are always and everywhere the law and order which protect the established hierarchy; it is nonsensical to invoke the absolute authority of the this law and this order against those who suffer from it.
Herbert Marcuse
Quoted by Rolf Wiggershaus, The Frankfurt School, p. 612
We may assume that Bill Ayers and Barry Obama believed in and acted on the above opinion of Herbert Marcuse one of the critical theorists of The Frankfurt School.
Now, just so we understand the natural order of things there will always be an oppressed minority needing to take the law into its own hands. Today the oppressed minority is the White male. Laws have been passed disenfranchising him while enfranchising the rest of the entire female and male population against his interests.
The law is now in the hands of the very people who used extra legal and criminal means to resist what they considered oppression. By their own code it is now the ‘natural right’ of the oppressed White male to use extra legal means as the legal ones have proved inadequate. As Marcuse accurately states: Law and order are always and everywhere the law and order which protect the established hierarchy. To continue to repress the White male in the hierarchy’s own words is ‘nonsensical.’
I think the expression is ‘What goes around, comes around.’
Let oppressors everywhere beware of just retribution. The Retributionists are stirring.
So, I’m going to be gone over the next week or so on business, which means I probably won’t be able to post as much during that time. To keep the tradition going, here are the usual suspects for the week. Enjoy!
New protests in Iran as Ahmadinejad denies the Holocaust again.
“When a radical fringe element of demonstrators and others begin to attack the president of the United States as an animal or as a reincarnation of Adolf Hitler or when they wave signs in the air that said we should have buried Obama with Kennedy, those kinds of things are beyond the bounds,” the Democrat who served from 1977-1981 told students at Emory University.
“I think people who are guilty of that kind of personal attack against Obama have been influenced to a major degree by a belief that he should not be president because he happens to be African American.
“It’s a racist attitude, and my hope is and my expectation is that in the future both Democratic leaders and Republican leaders will take the initiative in condemning that kind of unprecedented attack on the president of the United States,” Carter said. [...]
“I think an overwhelming portion of the intensely demonstrated animosity toward President Barack Obama is based on the fact that he is a black man, that he’s African-American,” Carter told “NBC Nightly News.”
(Emphasis mine.)
Note: did President Carter say ANYTHING about those who oppose President Obama’s policies?
Others have noted this tendency. Here is what Paul Krugman has to say:
There was a telling incident at a town hall held by Representative Gene Green, D-Tex. An activist turned to his fellow attendees and asked if they “oppose any form of socialized or government-run health care.” Nearly all did. Then Representative Green asked how many of those present were on Medicare. Almost half raised their hands.
Now, people who don’t know that Medicare is a government program probably aren’t reacting to what President Obama is actually proposing. They may believe some of the disinformation opponents of health care reform are spreading, like the claim that the Obama plan will lead to euthanasia for the elderly. (That particular claim is coming straight from House Republican leaders.) But they’re probably reacting less to what Mr. Obama is doing, or even to what they’ve heard about what he’s doing, than to who he is.
That is, the driving force behind the town hall mobs is probably the same cultural and racial anxiety that’s behind the “birther” movement, which denies Mr. Obama’s citizenship. Senator Dick Durbin has suggested that the birthers and the health care protesters are one and the same; we don’t know how many of the protesters are birthers, but it wouldn’t be surprising if it’s a substantial fraction.
So Dr. Krugman has a good reason to suggest that it isn’t policy that these protesters are protesting.
Of course, some people got their feelings hurt and have responded; here is one such response:
@Left-wing Nutjobs: Disagreeing with the President does NOT make me a racist
by Jason Fischer
An extremely disturbing trend has started to develop in the U.S. political landscape, which needs to be addressed sooner rather than later. It seems that the the left would like to start playing the “race card” every time someone disagrees with President Obama. Not only is this behavior irresponsible and childish, it only serves to breathe new life into the real race hatred that we would all hopefully like to see eliminated in this country.
Like most political rhetoric, this started out at the fringes of the left, but in recent weeks, it has made its way into popular media.
Mr. Fischer goes on to berate Paul Krugman. Just a note: Krugman is a world famous Nobel Laureate in economics; I am unaware of Mr. Fischer’s “accomplishments”. But never mind that; it appears that the loudest, most noxious wingnuts have the thinnest skins. Then again, no one howls more pathetically than a former bully that is getting the crap kicked out of him. But I digress….
In any event, it appears that many of these critics of those of us who are calling out the racism that we see are either dense or deliberately missing the point: no one is calling criticism of the President’s policy “racist”. Mr. Leonard Pitts puts it well:
When you call them on that behavior, Barack Obama’s detractors love to accuse you of equating dissent with racism. It is a specious argument. I disagree with the president’s use of signing statements to avoid complying with laws he doesn’t like, but it would never occur to me to carry a sign vowing death to him, his wife and their “two stupid kids” as a protester in Maryland did, or to pray that Obama dies of brain cancer as a “minister” in Arizona does, or to heckle him during a joint session of Congress as Rep. Joe Wilson infamously did.
That’s not dissent. It is the howl of the unhinged and the entitled. The same folks who were complacent as President Bush spent surplus into deficit, wasted $600 billion and 4,000 American lives on the wrong war and watched a major American city drown are morally outraged because the new guy wants to reform healthcare?
So, just what are President Carter Dr. Krugman and Mr. Pitts talking about?
In case you haven’t seen, here are just some examples:
Tea Bagger signs
Obama Monkey
The Obama Witch Doctor Photo
The photo shopped racist Air Force One photo
Racist Photo of 44 Presidents
Watermelon Patch on the White House Lawn
Rush Limbaugh: blames President Obama for white kids being beat up by black kids.
So racism is certainly there and it is certainly being directed against the President. Of course, liberals readily admit this and so do some Republicans.
But many resist accepting it. Why? Sure, some may be simple denial. But there may be a different reason.
Let’s look at what the statistics tell us. Let’s start with the 2008 election map and note that President Obama won by roughly 69.5 million to 60 million.
So it is obvious that there are many Americans who thought that President Obama WAS qualified to lead the country. (duh).
Now let’s look at another map: let’s compare President Obama’s performance with that of Senator Kerry in 2004:
(click the images for a larger image)
The maps are from the New York Times.
Note: aside from one specific region, Obama out performed Kerry in most of the country, including in the regions that he lost!
So many people living in those regions probably don’t see too much different; they see conservatives not liking more liberal policies. Of course, there is nothing wrong with that.
I admit that I attended a rally for Senator McCain. I saw nothing remotely racist there; if anything, I thought that the crowd was well behaved. I said so at the time, though I remember the wacky invocation (which amused me more than anything else; the preacher said that their deity was being tested and that people who worship other deities would gain confidence if “their” candidate won! Some were offended but I was amused; to me it is the equivalent of someone beseeching Zeus to fight Thor).
One also notes that the current Republican Party is approved of in the South but disapproved of just about everywhere else. Note also that President Obama’s “favorable” ratings in the West, Midwest, Northeast and the South are 59, 62, 82 and 27 percent respectively. Overall white favorable/unfavorable ratings are 46/47 percent (roughly 50-50).
So we see that one region stands out.
So my guess is that unless you live in certain regions, you don’t see anything out of the ordinary policy split that comes with having a two party system.
Most people simply haven’t been to the more angry tea-bagger rallies.
The most violent country in human history spits in our face once again.
”Obama has also said he will not lift the embargo until Cuba undertakes democratic and economic reforms”
Could the U.S. say anything more hypocritical and offensive than that?
Obama continues “The decision was “in the national interest of the United States”"
Really – and what interests are those?
Is Cuba a threat?
No – the threat that Cuba offers is ‘another way’ and any other ‘way’ that goes against capitalism is against US interests.
And don’t fall for the manipulative line that capitalism equals democracy – capitalism is a form of fascism with the illusion of a fake prettied up slut that they call democracy. Capitalism is in fact TV.
So when an extremist violent religious country tells another country to ‘behave’ – that’s when you should get so angry as to turn away from that country and impose a people driven boycott - which, if we had any guts – is something that the world should’ve done a long long time ago.
But – we won’t – because gee don’t they make cool movies!
When are we going to start getting angry about US interventionism in Latin America? - I hate to break it to you, but it’s been 500 fucking years of violent abuse!
So when will we do this?
My guess – never. I’m not being a cynic here – I just know Australians (and most people). And if given the choice between a large screen plasma or ceasing aggresive policies throughout the world?
Well, we all know the answere to that. Because we live in the result of that answere.
Let’s not forget – ‘So You think You Can Dance’ looks amazing on a huge fuck off screen – the rest of the world just looks too damn small.
Critics’ attacks of President Obama are scarier than bias
House Passes Sweeping Student Loan Market Overhaul
Unions today are corrupt and yet at the same time are vital. I’m not the only person who has noticed this. The question now is “what can we do to fix them?”
Bill O’Reilly backs public option. Whaa?!
New song from the upcoming Converge album. It sounds pretty awesome.
Finally, I’ve been following along with this pastor’s blog. Recently he’s had a couple amazing entries. The first one is interesting because of this quote:
By signing this document they are officially sealed in the eyes of the government and before God. I love this moment because the bride writes her new name for the first official time.
Wow. Making the connection between God and government and saying that signing the document is what seals them in the eyes of God…that’s pretty interesting. I’ve never heard a pastor say that before. Not to mention how he writes that a woman writes her “new” name. Evidently he hasn’t been around many situations where the woman keeps her name.
The whole second linked entry is fascinating as it deals with the idea of masculinity within Christianity. What constitutes being a “man” and why is it important? What kind of images is the video showing by which it seeks to show what constitutes manhood? It reminded me of something you might see at Mars Hill Church, but not as “hip.”
Und Obama scheint ja mit seiner Gesundheitsreform auf Widerstand zu stoßen…
Gefunden bei tagesschau.de:
Tauschringe im US-Gesundheitswesen
“Biete Gartenarbeit für neue Brille”
In den USA werden bizarre Tauschhandel immer beliebter: medizinische Behandlungen gegen Dienstleistungen aller Art. Hinter diesen Deals verbergen sich oft tragische Schicksale. Sie sind für viele schlecht oder gar nicht krankenversicherte US-Amerikaner die einzige Chance.
Von Sabine Müller, HR-Hörfunkstudio Washington
Ganz egal, welche der etwa 400 registrierten Internet-Tauschbörsen in den USA man zurzeit anklickt, Anfragen zur Ware Gesundheit sind ganz klar auf dem Vormarsch: “Suche Zahnbehandlung, biete Teppichlegen / Tausche Chiropraktiker-Service gegen Abendessen / Heilmassagen gegen Geigenunterricht / Biete Gartenarbeit für neue Brille.”
Es sind die vielen unversicherten und unterversicherten US-Amerikaner, die auf diesem Weg versuchen, ihre Gesundheitsversorgung zu organisieren. Und es sind Menschen, bei denen wegen der Wirtschaftskrise das Geld knapp ist und die ihre Arztrechnungen auf andere Weise zahlen wollen. Gehandelt wird per direktem Tausch oder in einem professionell organisierten Tauschring mit eigener Währung.
Menschliche Dramen zwischen den Zeilen
Steve White ist Geschäftsführer der Firma ITEX, einer Tauschbörse, in der 24.000 Unternehmen bargeldlos handeln. White sagt, der medizinische Bereich sei zuletzt um fast 50 Prozent gewachsen: “Wir haben hier um die 500 Anbieter und der Handel beläuft sich monatlich auf den Gegenwert von etwa einer Million Dollar. Meist geht es um Zahnbehandlungen.”
In den USA ist es generell erlaubt, mit medizinischen Leistungen Tauschhandel zu betreiben. Aber alle Tauschgeschäfte, bei denen es um Behandlungen im Wert von mehr als 600 Dollar geht, müssen dem Finanzamt gemeldet werden.
Hinter vielen Such-Anzeigen verbergen sich menschliche Dramen. Crist aus Texas etwa sucht eine Hebamme. Niemand will seine schwangere Verlobte versichern, weil sie Vorerkrankungen hat. Als Gegenleistung bietet Crist sein Können als Schreiner und Zimmermann an. Oder Dee aus Atlanta, die nach drei Kindern dringend eine Bauchstraffung möchte, um für ihren Mann wieder attraktiv zu sein. Sie würde als Empfangsdame arbeiten.
Job im Krankenhaus – für eine OP
Mittlerweile gibt es ganze Krankenhäuser, die einen Tauschservice anbieten. “More than Money” – Mehr als Geld – heißt es im Gesundheitszentrum in der Kleinstadt Goshen in Indiana. Bedürftige Patienten können hier kleine Jobs erledigen und werden im Gegenzug medizinisch behandelt. Die schwangere 15-jährige Stephanie etwa macht Büroarbeit, um für die Vorsorge-Untersuchungen zu zahlen.
James Gingerich, der Gründer des Gesundheitszentrums, sagt: Wir geben den Leuten die Chance, ohne Schamgefühl zum Arzt zu gehen, sie müssen keine Almosen annehmen. Mancher Arzt wird für seine Bereitschaft zum Tauschhandel mit neuen Patienten belohnt. Zum Beispiel Augenarzt Dr. Joe Mejia aus der Nähe von Chicago, der Mitglied in einem professionellen Tauschring ist: “Der Tauschhandel bringt eine neue Klientel in die Praxis. Ich habe Patienten, die von ziemlich weit her kommen, um den ‘Tausch-Doktor’ zu sehen. Das sind Menschen, die normalerweise nicht zu mir gekommen wären.”
Der Trend zum Tausch mit der Ware Gesundheit dürfte so schnell nicht abflauen. Denn selbst wenn es eine Gesundheitsreform gibt, zeichnet sich doch ab, dass auch danach noch Millionen Amerikaner ohne Krankenversicherung sein werden.
Outbursts in congress have happened before, but because the media’s darling Barack Obama is now president, what Joe Wilson said is an outrage, an abomination, and even racist, according to Maureen Dowd. Will liberals ever get past race? What more do they want? A black man is President of the United States of America, the highest office in the land! Do liberals want everyone to send him a dollar in appreciation?
Where was this outrage when there were yells of “No!” at one of Bush’s more prescient statements?
WASHINGTON — The Obama administration supports extending three key provisions of the Patriot Act that are due to expire at the end of the year, the Justice Department told Congress in a letter made public Tuesday.
Lawmakers and civil rights groups had been pressing the Democratic administration to say whether it wants to preserve the post-Sept. 11 law’s authority to access business records, as well as monitor so-called “lone wolf” terrorists and conduct roving wiretaps.
The provision on business records was long criticized by rights groups as giving the government access to citizens’ library records, and a coalition of liberal and conservative groups complained that the Patriot Act gives the government too much authority to snoop into Americans’ private lives.
As a presidential candidate, Barack Obama said he would take a close look at the law, based on his past expertise in constitutional law. Back in May, President Obama said legal institutions must be updated to deal with the threat of terrorism, but in a way that preserves the rule of law and accountability.
In a letter to lawmakers, Justice Department officials said the administration supports extending the three expiring provisions of the law, although they are willing to consider additional privacy protections as long as they don’t weaken the effectiveness of the law.
Assistant Attorney General Ronald Weich wrote Sen. Patrick Leahy, the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, that the administration is willing to consider stronger civil rights protections in the new law “provided that they do not undermine the effectiveness of these important (provisions).”
Leahy responded with a statement saying it is important for the administration and Congress to “work together to ensure that we protect both our national security and our civil liberties.”
The committee has scheduled a hearing next week on the Patriot Act.
From 2004 to 2007, the business records provision was used 220 times, officials said. Most often, the business records were requested in combination with requests for phone records.
The lone wolf provision was created to conduct surveillance on suspects with no known link to foreign governments or terrorist groups. It has never been used, but the administration says it should still be available for future investigations.
The roving wiretaps provision was designed to allow investigators to quickly monitor the communications of a suspects who change their cell phone or communication device, without investigators having to go back to court for a new court authorization. That provision has been used an average of 22 times a year, officials said.
Michelle Richardson of the American Civil Liberties Union called the administration’s position “a mixed bag,” and said that the group hopes the next version of the Patriot Act will have important safeguards on other issues, particularly the collecting of international communications, and a specific bar on surveillance of protected First Amendment activities like peaceful protests or religious assembly.
“We’re heartened they’re saying they’re willing to work with Congress,” Richardson said, adding that is “definitely a sea change from what we’ve seen in the past.”
Secretary Clinton will be taking part in several upcoming events, so mark your calendars:
She will be giving a speech at the Brookings Institution this upcoming Friday:
Event to be on September 18, 2009 at 10:30 a.m. at the Brookings Institution in Washington, D.C.
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton will deliver a speech previewing the United States’ agenda for the United Nations General Assembly on Friday, September 18 at 10:30 a.m. at the Brookings Institution in Washington, DC.
The Secretary will outline America’s goals for the meetings, including addressing the conflict in the Middle East, nuclear proliferation and Iran, climate change, development, and food security.
Then, next week, the UN General Assembly meets in NY:
Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton to Travel to New York For the United Nations 64th General Assembly
U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton will be in New York City starting on Monday, September 21, 2009 to attend the United Nations 64th General Assembly. While in New York, Secretary Clinton will attend various events and conduct a number of bilateral and multilateral meetings with her counterparts…
Next, there is the conference on the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty in NY on September 24th-25th (via ABC News):
Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton will lead a delegation and deliver the U.S. statement at a conference on the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty to be held Sept. 24 and 25 in New York City.
The White House made the announcement Tuesday.
Press secretary Robert Gibbs says the conference has been held every other year since 1999, when the U.S. made its only appearance.
Gibbs says Clinton will reaffirm the Obama administration’s commitment to support the test ban treaty and to work with other countries to map out a strategy for getting it in force. So far, only 35 of 44 states that must adopt the treaty have done so.
The United States is among the group of holdouts.
In October, Secretary Clinton will be traveling to Russia. While the State Dept. has confirmed this trip is taking place in October, I don’t believe the exact dates have been formally announced. I have also heard rumors that she will also be traveling to Ireland and Israel, possibly in October or November- there’s been no confirmation of those trips at all that I know of.
One of our commenters asked the following questions concerning the now (in)famous Wednesday Congressional Speech in which lawmaker Joe Wilson(R) shouted out, “You lie!” at the POTUS…
Is it true that the Democrats and Obama supporters at that same meeting interrupted the president’s speech 102 times with applause/wild cheering and/or standing ovations?
If so, am I to understand that being disrespectful and interrupting the president once because you “disagree” is rude, but being disrespectful and interrupting the president 102 times because you agree is okie-dokie?
To answer the first question: According to the Huffington Post, the President was indeed interrupted 102 times (65 times for applause, and 37 standing o’s). However, some of those interruptions also came from conservatives when President Obama touched on subjects they liked.
As for the second question, I think I’d rather be interrupted by praise rather than being interrupted by, “You lie!” But it raises an interesting question: Speaking as a guy who’s spent way too much time in front of a classroom, interruptions (good or bad) can be extremely annoying when you’re trying to make a point or explain something. It breaks your concentration, possibly derails your train of logic, and throws off your rhythm as a speaker.
But I think our commenter also hit upon a much larger idea. People (like the folks who attended the Tea Parties) are yelling at government because they don’t feel like government is listening to them. Congressman Wilson was just a microcosm of that frustration when he yelled at the President, because quite frankly the administration isn’t listening to the GOP.
It’s interesting to note that as Fox News interviewed various participants at the Tea Party, an all-too-common explanation for attendance was, “My government isn’t listening to me.”
Maybe this is why the Tea Parties struck such a nerve… No wonder we’re all yelling, including Mr. Wilson.
Reflecting on the nuttiness of the Teabaggers (such a rich, ironic nickname, it’s almost delightful to use) and their hideous signs, the importance of the origins of these themes that Blumenthal spoke of become even more fascinating.
Stretching the memory back to the early 90’s, I can remember watching Hillary Clinton profess the existence of “a vast right wing conspiracy.” Soon thereafter, her own paranoia of a “non-existent” body of enemies out to get her became the stuff of late-night TV fodder, SNL skits, and GOP snickers. Is it any wonder that battling the fringe GOP nuttiness every day of her life made her a bit paranoid. I’m sure some of it was justified.
Yesterday, 1mil people marched on Washington with ideas originating from these tiny minorities. The worst thing we can do as a nation is continue to publicize their insanity. I was so angered by the hate, ignorance, and hysteria on display. They are looking for attention, and they’re getting it.
Only 8 years ago, we stood together so harmonically. Oklahoma sent support to New York City. Today, it feels as the two cultures are in a war of attrition against right -wing fringe ideas gone mainstream.
It has become perfectly clear that the right-wing push against Health Care Reform and the President in general has devolved from conservative disagreement with policy into sheer insanity and hatred.
The direct statements that Obama is Hitler and Stalin and Mao, the shouts of “Socialism!” and “Marxist!”, the waving of signs with blatantly racism imagery and text threatening to overthrow the government – treason at the very least. It boggles the mind.
One interesting occurrence today was that as the 30,000 or so teabaggers descended on Washington, another event was taking place on the mall: the Black Family Reunion Celebration. There was visible tension as the teabaggers streamed past the BFRC attendees, as it was hard to miss that the vast, vast majority of teabaggers were white (I can’t see a single non-caucasian protester in the hundreds of photos of this event through which I’ve searched). Seattle newspaper The Stranger had a man on the ground in Washington:
“There is someone on the Capitol lawn who I can’t see and they’re mainly shouting bad puns like ‘It’s time for Pelosi to Go-si.’ The crowd’s signs are all over the right-wing map, but there are some recurrent themes: Obama is a socialist—like Hitler and Stalin. The Government is terrible and can’t do anything right but America is the greatest country in the world. We have the best health care in the world already. Pray to Jesus. The crowd marching up from Metro Center also had the oh so clever shout, ‘Throw him out, yes we can!’ Hahaha! I get it! (I heard a guy refer to three black cops who rode through the crowd as Gestapo. Nice to see their respect for those charged to serve and protect.) I used to think the left’s anti-Bush messages were a little too rancorous at times. After seeing the Tea-baggers out today, the Bush-haters seem really mild in comparison.”
The same teabagging protesters who are now in a hate-spewing uproar about personal freedoms were completely silent when the Bush administration perpetrated some of the most flagrant violations of our civil liberties, including the Patriot Act, warrantless wiretapping, torture, extreme rendition, political persecutions and firings, and a general disregard for legality and the concept of checks and balances.
The Stranger but it best in a quote from a BFRC atendee : “That’s how you know it’s not about politics, it’s about race.’”
Hey protester – the majority of Socialized countries are wealthy and in Europe. Did these people even go to school?!?!
I think the “we don’t trust you” sign is particularly poignant. The protesters seriously can’t handle having a black President. And the signs thanking Glenn Beck and Fox News – two of literally dozens on the Flicker Feed – just puts the nail in the coffin of the already well-sealed idea that Fox News is a real instigator of these protests. Produce a protest/conflict, cover it, generate a wider audience, repeat.
Enough is Enough, people. Seriously. How can we allow such blatant racism and treason to go unchallenged?
Here’s a CNN story detailing plans by the Democratic House of Representatives majority to publicly reprimand Rep. Joe Wilson (R – SC) for heckling President Obama during his address to Congress last Wednesday. Wilson is now famous for calling the President a liar when Obama said no illegal aliens would have access to public health care. After the address, Wilson was dragged-out by the Republican leadership and forced to apologize (sort-of) publicly.
Well, it’s now three days later, and the signals have finally gone from the Democrat’s ears to their brains, and out to their mouths. House Democratic Whip Jim Clybur (D – SC) issued a statement saying Wilson violated House rules with his outburst, and is subject to reprimand. Clybur apparently wants his fellow South Carolinian to apologize on the House floor.
If the Democrats had come out with this about ten minutes after the President’s speech it might carry some moral weight. As it is the Republicans have put them in the position of reacting by taking the initiative and widening the “apology gap”. Pretending civility pays in this case, as Wilson’s re-election campaign has been taking in money hand-over-fist since Wednesday. Which is a good indication that civility has taken yet another major blow in the arena of American politics. Of course Republicans will claim this influx of cash is a sign that Americans agree with Wilson, whereas it’s more a case of soliciting tithes from the choir.
It’s also interesting that no Democrat in the House wants to take the Wilson situation on directly. Clybur issued his statement through an assistant. Speaker Nancy Pelosi mouthed a form if reasonableness by saying it is time “to talk about health care and not Mr. Wilson”, which just seems like another way of trying burn a little of the hay Republicans have managed to make of this thing. If the Democrats don’t manage to get the debate back onto health care reform they endanger their agenda, as well as risk making Wilson’s form of childish argument a paying strategy for the opposition.
On their side, the Republicans risk looking like a bunch of churlish amateurs if they don’t get back on message, which is not calling the President names but undermining his health care package. Right now both parties risk the “Vietnamization” of the health care debate; after a while they’ll just be fighting for its own sake, with no clue how the thing got started or what the goal was. Meanwhile the American people look on and shake their heads, and wonder when these clowns in Washington are going to actually do something. And as usual, we will probably be willing to settle for half-baked, intrinsically flawed legislation just because we don’t want to hear the noise anymore.
Prepared Remarks of President Barack Obama
Back to School Event
Arlington, Virginia
September 8, 2009
The President: Hello everyone – how’s everybody doing today? I’m here with students at Wakefield High School in Arlington, Virginia. And we’ve got students tuning in from all across America, kindergarten through twelfth grade. I’m glad you all could join us today.
I know that for many of you, today is the first day of school. And for those of you in kindergarten, or starting middle or high school, it’s your first day in a new school, so it’s understandable if you’re a little nervous. I imagine there are some seniors out there who are feeling pretty good right now, with just one more year to go. And no matter what grade you’re in, some of you are probably wishing it were still summer, and you could’ve stayed in bed just a little longer this morning.
I know that feeling. When I was young, my family lived in Indonesia for a few years, and my mother didn’t have the money to send me where all the American kids went to school. So she decided to teach me extra lessons herself, Monday through Friday – at 4:30 in the morning.
Now I wasn’t too happy about getting up that early. A lot of times, I’d fall asleep right there at the kitchen table. But whenever I’d complain, my mother would just give me one of those looks and say, “This is no picnic for me either, buster.”
So I know some of you are still adjusting to being back at school. But I’m here today because I have something important to discuss with you. I’m here because I want to talk with you about your education and what’s expected of all of you in this new school year.
Now I’ve given a lot of speeches about education. And I’ve talked a lot about responsibility.
I’ve talked about your teachers’ responsibility for inspiring you, and pushing you to learn.
I’ve talked about your parents’ responsibility for making sure you stay on track, and get your homework done, and don’t spend every waking hour in front of the TV or with that Xbox.
I’ve talked a lot about your government’s responsibility for setting high standards, supporting teachers and principals, and turning around schools that aren’t working where students aren’t getting the opportunities they deserve.
But at the end of the day, we can have the most dedicated teachers, the most supportive parents, and the best schools in the world – and none of it will matter unless all of you fulfill your responsibilities. Unless you show up to those schools; pay attention to those teachers; listen to your parents, grandparents and other adults; and put in the hard work it takes to succeed.
And that’s what I want to focus on today: the responsibility each of you has for your education. I want to start with the responsibility you have to yourself.
Every single one of you has something you’re good at. Every single one of you has something to offer. And you have a responsibility to yourself to discover what that is. That’s the opportunity an education can provide.
Maybe you could be a good writer – maybe even good enough to write a book or articles in a newspaper – but you might not know it until you write a paper for your English class. Maybe you could be an innovator or an inventor – maybe even good enough to come up with the next iPhone or a new medicine or vaccine – but you might not know it until you do a project for your science class. Maybe you could be a mayor or a Senator or a Supreme Court Justice, but you might not know that until you join student government or the debate team.
And no matter what you want to do with your life – I guarantee that you’ll need an education to do it. You want to be a doctor, or a teacher, or a police officer? You want to be a nurse or an architect, a lawyer or a member of our military? You’re going to need a good education for every single one of those careers. You can’t drop out of school and just drop into a good job. You’ve got to work for it and train for it and learn for it.
And this isn’t just important for your own life and your own future. What you make of your education will decide nothing less than the future of this country. What you’re learning in school today will determine whether we as a nation can meet our greatest challenges in the future.
You’ll need the knowledge and problem-solving skills you learn in science and math to cure diseases like cancer and AIDS, and to develop new energy technologies and protect our environment. You’ll need the insights and critical thinking skills you gain in history and social studies to fight poverty and homelessness, crime and discrimination, and make our nation more fair and more free. You’ll need the creativity and ingenuity you develop in all your classes to build new companies that will create new jobs and boost our economy.
We need every single one of you to develop your talents, skills and intellect so you can help solve our most difficult problems. If you don’t do that – if you quit on school – you’re not just quitting on yourself, you’re quitting on your country.
Now I know it’s not always easy to do well in school. I know a lot of you have challenges in your lives right now that can make it hard to focus on your schoolwork.
I get it. I know what that’s like. My father left my family when I was two years old, and I was raised by a single mother who struggled at times to pay the bills and wasn’t always able to give us things the other kids had. There were times when I missed having a father in my life. There were times when I was lonely and felt like I didn’t fit in.
So I wasn’t always as focused as I should have been. I did some things I’m not proud of, and got in more trouble than I should have. And my life could have easily taken a turn for the worse.
But I was fortunate. I got a lot of second chances and had the opportunity to go to college, and law school, and follow my dreams. My wife, our First Lady Michelle Obama, has a similar story. Neither of her parents had gone to college, and they didn’t have much. But they worked hard, and she worked hard, so that she could go to the best schools in this country.
Some of you might not have those advantages. Maybe you don’t have adults in your life who give you the support that you need. Maybe someone in your family has lost their job, and there’s not enough money to go around. Maybe you live in a neighborhood where you don’t feel safe, or have friends who are pressuring you to do things you know aren’t right.
But at the end of the day, the circumstances of your life – what you look like, where you come from, how much money you have, what you’ve got going on at home – that’s no excuse for neglecting your homework or having a bad attitude. That’s no excuse for talking back to your teacher, or cutting class, or dropping out of school. That’s no excuse for not trying.
Where you are right now doesn’t have to determine where you’ll end up. No one’s written your destiny for you. Here in America, you write your own destiny. You make your own future.
That’s what young people like you are doing every day, all across America.
Young people like Jazmin Perez, from Roma, Texas. Jazmin didn’t speak English when she first started school. Hardly anyone in her hometown went to college, and neither of her parents had gone either. But she worked hard, earned good grades, got a scholarship to Brown University, and is now in graduate school, studying public health, on her way to being Dr. Jazmin Perez.
I’m thinking about Andoni Schultz, from Los Altos, California, who’s fought brain cancer since he was three. He’s endured all sorts of treatments and surgeries, one of which affected his memory, so it took him much longer – hundreds of extra hours – to do his schoolwork. But he never fell behind, and he’s headed to college this fall.
And then there’s Shantell Steve, from my hometown of Chicago, Illinois. Even when bouncing from foster home to foster home in the toughest neighborhoods, she managed to get a job at a local health center; start a program to keep young people out of gangs; and she’s on track to graduate high school with honors and go on to college.
Jazmin, Andoni and Shantell aren’t any different from any of you. They faced challenges in their lives just like you do. But they refused to give up. They chose to take responsibility for their education and set goals for themselves. And I expect all of you to do the same.
That’s why today, I’m calling on each of you to set your own goals for your education – and to do everything you can to meet them. Your goal can be something as simple as doing all your homework, paying attention in class, or spending time each day reading a book. Maybe you’ll decide to get involved in an extracurricular activity, or volunteer in your community. Maybe you’ll decide to stand up for kids who are being teased or bullied because of who they are or how they look, because you believe, like I do, that all kids deserve a safe environment to study and learn. Maybe you’ll decide to take better care of yourself so you can be more ready to learn. And along those lines, I hope you’ll all wash your hands a lot, and stay home from school when you don’t feel well, so we can keep people from getting the flu this fall and winter.
Whatever you resolve to do, I want you to commit to it. I want you to really work at it.
I know that sometimes, you get the sense from TV that you can be rich and successful without any hard work — that your ticket to success is through rapping or basketball or being a reality TV star, when chances are, you’re not going to be any of those things.
But the truth is, being successful is hard. You won’t love every subject you study. You won’t click with every teacher. Not every homework assignment will seem completely relevant to your life right this minute. And you won’t necessarily succeed at everything the first time you try.
That’s OK. Some of the most successful people in the world are the ones who’ve had the most failures. JK Rowling’s first Harry Potter book was rejected twelve times before it was finally published. Michael Jordan was cut from his high school basketball team, and he lost hundreds of games and missed thousands of shots during his career. But he once said, “I have failed over and over and over again in my life. And that is why I succeed.”
These people succeeded because they understand that you can’t let your failures define you – you have to let them teach you. You have to let them show you what to do differently next time. If you get in trouble, that doesn’t mean you’re a troublemaker, it means you need to try harder to behave. If you get a bad grade, that doesn’t mean you’re stupid, it just means you need to spend more time studying.
No one’s born being good at things, you become good at things through hard work. You’re not a varsity athlete the first time you play a new sport. You don’t hit every note the first time you sing a song. You’ve got to practice. It’s the same with your schoolwork. You might have to do a math problem a few times before you get it right, or read something a few times before you understand it, or do a few drafts of a paper before it’s good enough to hand in.
Don’t be afraid to ask questions. Don’t be afraid to ask for help when you need it. I do that every day. Asking for help isn’t a sign of weakness, it’s a sign of strength. It shows you have the courage to admit when you don’t know something, and to learn something new. So find an adult you trust – a parent, grandparent or teacher; a coach or counselor – and ask them to help you stay on track to meet your goals.
And even when you’re struggling, even when you’re discouraged, and you feel like other people have given up on you – don’t ever give up on yourself. Because when you give up on yourself, you give up on your country.
The story of America isn’t about people who quit when things got tough. It’s about people who kept going, who tried harder, who loved their country too much to do anything less than their best.
It’s the story of students who sat where you sit 250 years ago, and went on to wage a revolution and found this nation. Students who sat where you sit 75 years ago who overcame a Depression and won a world war; who fought for civil rights and put a man on the moon. Students who sat where you sit 20 years ago who founded Google, Twitter and Facebook and changed the way we communicate with each other.
So today, I want to ask you, what’s your contribution going to be? What problems are you going to solve? What discoveries will you make? What will a president who comes here in twenty or fifty or one hundred years say about what all of you did for this country?
Your families, your teachers, and I are doing everything we can to make sure you have the education you need to answer these questions. I’m working hard to fix up your classrooms and get you the books, equipment and computers you need to learn. But you’ve got to do your part too. So I expect you to get serious this year. I expect you to put your best effort into everything you do. I expect great things from each of you. So don’t let us down – don’t let your family or your country or yourself down. Make us all proud. I know you can do it.
Thank you, God bless you, and God bless America.
