Friday, January 27, 2012

President Obama's singing genie is out

President Obama surprised the large gathering at a fundraiser on Thursday night at the Apollo Theatre when be broke out in an Al Green hit single "Let's stay together." The crowd cheered vigorously as the president uttered one one line of the song.
The President said he wanted to show his appreciation "the sandman did not come out"he said.
He is now a hit on YouTube, the video totally more than 30 thousand hits already.
check it out..
http://www.cp24.com/servlet/an/local/CTVNews/20120120/012012_obama_sings/20120120/?hub=CP24Home

Happy 19th Wedding Anniversary President Obama and Michelle Obama

President and Mrs. Obama celebrated their 19th wedding anniversary on October 3rd, 2011. At that time 31 year old Barack Obama future president worked as a lecturer at the University of Chicago Law School, and had worked on a voter registration drive throughout that election year.
The bride, Michelle Robinson a lawyer, had worked in Chicago city government as assistant to the Mayor. Long live the marriage in happiness and understanding.

Thursday, January 26, 2012

Let us Halt the Meme - Virus of the Mind

Posted December 2009 - It is election year in the USA 2012:


When Racism Masquerades as Something Else...

By Carlos Dews


Don't let the virulent hatred of Obama's presidency - veiled in "policy differences" - fool you.

Just ask someone raised around bigotry. Carlos Dews is an author, a professor of English literature, and chairman of the Department of English Language and Literature at John Cabot University in Rome‘'The nigger show."
I first heard this expression used to describe the Obama administration during a visit to my hometown in East Texas during the early summer of 2009. I understood what the epithet meant: Our minds are made up, the president lacks legitimacy, and there is nothing he can do that we will support. I was not surprised to hear such a phrase.

I grew up in the 1960s during the ragged end of the Jim Crow era, where many of the books in my school library were stamped Colored School, meaning they had been brought to the white school when the town was forced to integrate the public school system. I recall my parents had instructed me, before my first day of elementary school, not to sit in a chair where a black child had sat. And I remember my sister joked that her yearbook, when it appeared at the end of her first year of integrated high school, was in "black and white."

The outward signs of racism of my home state have now disappeared, but racial hatred remains. My father and his friends still use the word nigger to refer to all black people, and the people of my hometown don't hesitate to spout their racist rhetoric to my face, assuming I agree with them. I hold my tongue for the sake of having continued access to this kind of truth. I learned long ago how not to accept the hatred I was being taught and how to survive not having done so. More recently, I realized that I also learned another lesson: how to recognize racism when it masquerades as something else.
More than 40 years after my first experiences with racism, I am thousands of miles away in Rome, but surrounded by ghosts. Last year, I received a grant from the National Endowment for the Arts for a community program called the Big Read, which sponsors activities to encourage communities to come together to read and discuss a single book. I chose Harper Lee's To Kill a Mockingbird, in part because I thought that some of the most salient issues in the novel - racism, classism, xenophobia, the Jim Crow era - were perhaps relevant to an increasingly diverse, contemporary Italy.
That there is racism in Italy is obvious to anyone who pays attention to current affairs. In fact, during the first week of the Big Read Rome, a story in one of Italy's national newspapers detailed the experience of a Nigerian woman being called sporca nera (essentially, dirty nigger) by two women she asked to stop smoking on a Roman bus.
But I never imagined that consideration of the novel would prove so relevant to a country that had just elected its first black president. Ironically, until the election of Barack Obama, my discussions of racism in the United States seemed historical. I felt that with the passage of the civil rights legislation of the mid-1960s, the country had turned a corner, that the slow evaporation of overt racism was perhaps inevitable. Now, my personal experience of Southern racism feels current and all too familiar. A news story about the Big Read that appeared in La Repubblica on Sept. 20 (unaware that my grant was awarded during the Bush administration), presciently brought Rome, Obama, To Kill a Mockingbird, and racism together in its headline: "Obama brings antiracist book to Rome."
Jimmy Carter was lambasted for having recently explained that the vehemence with which many Americans resist Obama's presidency is an expression of racism. Carter was accused of fanning the flames of racial misunderstanding by labeling as "racist" what on the surface could be perceived as legitimate policy differences. Like Carter, as a white Southern man, I can see beyond the seemingly legitimate rhetoric to discern what is festering behind much of the opposition to Obama and to his administration's policy initiatives. I also have access, via the racist world from which I came, direct confirmation of the racial hatred toward Obama.
The veiled racism I sense in the United States today is couched, in public discourse at least, in terms that allow for plausible deniability of racist intent. And those who resist any policy initiative from the Obama administration engage in a scorched-earth policy that reminds me of the self-centered white flight, the abandonment of public schools, and the proliferation of private schools, that followed the 1954 Brown v. Board of Education decision to desegregate public schools. The very people, like my own rural, working-class family back in East Texas, who stand to gain from the efforts of the Obama administration and the Democratic Congress are, because of their racism, willing to oppose policies that would benefit them the most. Their racism outweighs their own self-interest.

Unfortunately, racists in the United States have learned one valuable lesson since the 1960s: They cannot express their racism directly. In public, they must veil their racial hatred behind policy differences. This obfuscation makes direct confrontation difficult. Anyone pointing out their racist motivations runs the risk of unfairly playing "the race card." But I know what members of my family mean when they say - as so many said during the town hall meetings in August - that they "want their country back." They want it back, safely, in the hands of someone like them, a white person. They feel that a black man has no right to be the president of their country.

During a phone conversation a few weeks after Obama's election, my father lamented that he and my mother might have to stop visiting the casinos in Shreveport, La.: Given Obama's election, "the niggers are already walking around like they own the place. They won't even give up their seats for white women anymore. I don't know what we're going to do with 'em."
My students often ask me how I managed to avoid accepting the lesson in racism offered by my family. From the time I was 4 or 5 years old - roughly the same age as Scout Finch, the narrator of To Kill a Mockingbird - I recall knowing that I didn't agree with racism. More important, my paternal grandmother provided me with the encouragement that I could ignore what I was being taught. She provided me with the courage to resist.
My grandmother hoped that my father and his father represented the last generations of the type of Southern man that had shaped her life - virulently racist, prone to violence, proud of their ignorance, and self-defeatingly stubborn. It was a type of Southern man that she hoped and prayed I could avoid becoming.
However, my father and his father were not the last of their kind; their racial hatred has been passed on. My grandmother, if she were alive, would recognize the same tendencies among many of the people who shout down politicians and bring guns to public rallies. She would also see how the only change they have made is to replace overt racist epithets with more euphemistic language.

Rather than seeing my home state and its racist attitudes, slowly, over time, pulled in the direction of more acceptance, the country as a whole has become more like the South, the racial or cultural equivalent of what is called the Walmartization of American retail.

It might be easy to see literature as impotent in the face of the persistence and adaptability of racism. But I continue to believe in the transformative potential of literature and its ability to provide an alternative view of the world. And for children who are not lucky enough to have grandmothers like mine, I believe that books like To Kill a Mockingbird can provide inoculation against the virus that is racism.
________________________________
This article originally appeared in the December 2009 issue of Aspenia, the Italian journal published by the Aspen Foundation Italy.

How enlightened has American's become since 2009. Articles like this makes me feel sorry for white folks who have been infected by the virus of the mind of this sort. It is such a debilitating disease, robs people of their natural joy of living and being in a world of difference. Oh how sad. If those racists of days gone by could have seen through the crystal lens and see the future would they have been different.  Now that we have seen the future of our foreparents let us make the future of our children a heck of a lot brighter, happier and free-er. Do not let then carry our burdens let us inject them with an antidote to take with them to the future and that antidote is LOVE

Wednesday, January 25, 2012

Response from the ScientifiCommunity to President Obama's speech


http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/budding-scientist/2012/01/25/science-education-experts-respond-to-obamas-speech/
In his State of the Union address last night, President Barack Obama spent less time than in years past discussing his ambitions to reform science education. He referred to his administration’s offer to let states opt out of No Child Left Behind (” … grant schools flexibility to teach with creativity and passion; to stop teaching to the test …”). And he brought up the Common Core State Standards in math and language arts which 45 states plus the District of Columbia have now adopted (“we’ve convinced nearly every state in the country to raise their standards for teaching and learning — the first time that’s happened in a generation”). (By the way, a state survey out today from the Center on Education Policy reports that most states believe the new standards will improve students’ skills in math, reading and writing but that many are struggling to pay for new curricula and teacher training).




I asked science education experts to weigh in on the president’s remarks. More will be sending in reactions throughout the day, so check back. And please leave your own comments below.







Jon D. Miller, Director, International Center for the Advancement of Scientific Literacy at the University of Michigan’s Institute for Social Research



President Obama understands both science and education more than any President in American history. His speech on Tuesday night included an important reminder of the importance of funding basic research. This year, he linked the need for expanded scientific and technical education with the revival of manufacturing employment in the U.S. This is an important linkage, but it is the first step in a longer process. The President argues that there are open jobs requiring technical skills and that community college programs can prepare students (younger and older) for these positions. This is a necessary short-term fix, but I expect that the President and Secretary Duncan know that an associate degree is not a ticket for long-term employment. The growth of science and technology will continue to demand higher levels of skill and education and associate degree programs designed in response to this initiative should be built as the first step toward a baccalaureate and post-graduate degrees. It is encouraging to have a President that understands and values both science and education and who welcomes the challenges of the 21st century.







Sharon Lynch, Professor, George Washington University Graduate School of Education and Human Development; President-Elect, National Association for Research in Science Teaching



The President’s 2012 State of the” Union Speech was more about the economy and jobs than new programs in education. How to see the American Dream fulfilled unless you are the lucky child of a venture capitalist or banker? Social mobility and personal prosperity is likely going to involve work in a high tech industry or one that moves the U.S. closer to energy independence—STEM-related jobs and careers. There are at least twice as many such jobs going unfilled due to a work force that is not sufficiently STEM literate or not located where the jobs are. Increasingly, states and municipalities understand that the New American Community is likely going to involve business-education partnerships, including “Big High Tech Businesses” that produce high value items using new technologies, and linked to local education systems flexible and innovative enough to teach both adults and children. While the President did not dwell on specifics of these partnerships, our work on inclusive STEM-focused high schools suggests three things may be needed. The first challenge is how to ramp up the E (engineering) in STEM education. If the US does not have enough engineers, then it certainly does not have enough K-12 teachers able to teach engineering. This leads to second challenge; provided that we finally adopt (voluntary) common core science standards and assessments, we are also going to need new integrated, coherent K-12 STEM curriculum materials. There hasn’t been a major curriculum reform in decades (excepting innovative mathematics curricula). New STEM curriculum tools won’t look like those tired textbooks of the past, and put in the hands of creative and innovative teachers, should allow teachers strong in STEM disciplines the freedom to avoid re-inventing the curriculum wheel each day. These new materials would also provide video examples of how to teach integrated STEM. They would use technologies that are commonplace to anyone under the age of 25, introducing students to the boundless world of STEM possibilities, either during the school day or anytime outside of it. It is not hard to imagine bilingual materials that could help English Language Learners access STEM concepts and activities, escaping the isolation of mono-English classrooms. Moreover, these new materials would boost the ability and confidence of elementary school teachers who do not have adequate STEM backgrounds to teach more than reading and math computation. That leads to the third challenge, issues of scale and implementation. Currently each state struggles to produce its own standards, frameworks, assessments and curricula. This is hugely expensive and demonstrably ineffective. Why not provide educators with the choice to use the best set of curriculum materials that the nation can develop, a huge economy of scale? The third challenge is to stimulate local communities to come together to develop innovative variations that match their settings and the needs of their children. Business and community partnerships, including the arts councils and museums, would provide the rigor, the relevance and the relationships that allow all children to have a shot at the American Dream.



Adam V. Maltese, Assistant Professor of Science Education, Indiana University



In his SoTU address President Obama declared “The State of our Union is getting stronger.” While he attempted to defend this statement throughout the rest of his speech, education – specifically STEM education – did not get nearly as much focus as it did last year. The President threw out some provocative – but not new – ideas for K-12 including suggestion of a requirement to keep all students in school until they graduate high school or turn 18. The President also said we should keep the good teachers and reward the best. Sure! I’m on board with this, but how do we do this fairly and effectively?



As usual, the speech left me with more questions than answers. The focus of much of the edu-speak within the address was on higher education and higher costs for earning degrees. This is also where one of the President’s points raised my greatest concern with relation to STEM issues. President Obama laid down an edict to colleges and universities to halt increases in tuition or risk the loss of funding from taxpayers. While it’s not within the purview of the federal government to determine budgets for public institutions of higher education, our state government in Indiana is a few steps ahead of the President and already cut higher ed funding for the last few years. My concern here is that continued reductions in funding will ultimately affect the availability of money to attract top science faculty and students, to build state of the art research facilities, and for educational outreach efforts. Additionally, this will likely impact the availability of internal seed money used to fund ideas and efforts that often lead to the large scale R&D projects the President and other politicians love to tout.



James Gentile, President and CEO of Research Corporation for Science Advancement



U.S. economic preeminence has depended for more than a century on scientific and technological innovation, and President Obama addressed key issues for sustaining our leadership in global innovation. In his “blueprint for an economy that’s built to last”, he reminded the nation that “innovation also demands basic research” and called on Congress to “support the same kind of research and innovation that led to the computer chip and the Internet.” He focused heavily on improving education and job readiness, setting a goal of training “two million Americans with skills that will lead directly to a job”, noting that “growing industries in science and technology have twice as many openings as we have workers who can do the job.” Citing the role that foreign students play in research labs, he called on Congress to “stop expelling responsible young people who want to staff our labs.” And he emphasized his commitment to clean energy, a field ripe for innovation, saying, “I will not cede the wind or solar or battery industry to China or Germany.” The foundation that I lead is in the forefront of supporting scientific innovation in solar energy conversion, and the President is right to advocate U.S. leadership in clean energy technologies. Innovation is the key to American jobs.



Francis Eberle, Executive Director, National Science Teachers Association



Last night in his SOTU address, President Obama called for more skilled workers in the science and technology industry and announced a national commitment to training 2 million Americans in these and other areas. He talked about new science and technology innovations needed to help companies grow jobs and about increasing basic research funding in the sciences. The Administration wants to support 600k new science jobs with new clean energy sources that will reduce our dependency on foreign oil. The president is also seeking support from Congress so that engineers can rebuild the roads and bridges that make up our nation’s infrastructure. Although science education wasn’t mentioned specifically, its pretty clear that the jobs of tomorrow and much of our future depends on STEM, and STEM education.

About the Author: Anna Kuchment edits the Advances news section for Scientific American and was previously a reporter, writer and editor with Newsweek magazine. Her first book, “The Forgotten Cure,” about bacteriophage viruses and their potential as weapons against antibiotic resistance, will be published in the fall of 2011 by Copernicus Books. Follow on Twitter @akuchment.

More »





A principled Obama stands his ground

If America wants a leader whose sole interest in making America work for all and not just the rich, then they will vote for America by voting for Obama. If they want a system where the rich continue getting obscenely rich and the poor eating the scraps off their table, then they will vote for the alternative.
   Remember the deep hole that the last Administration left America, do not be amnesiac now. President Obama is not Jesus Christ or Muhammad, he is a man who has done the impossible of dragging half dead America back to life. Give him credit for that and see him through the other term where he can really build upon his success. If you do not America will fall again and this time it will be beyond repair. America will have to take a back seat to China, India or Venezuela.

http://www.alternet.org/story/153880/obamas_state_of_the_union_plays_to_his_base__but_not_everything_was_worth_cheering


President Obama State of Union Address 2012

Saturday, January 14, 2012

President Obama wants to fix America if the Republicans will let him

WASHINGTON — President Obama on Friday announced an aggressive campaign to shrink the size of the federal government, a proposal less notable for its goal — the fight against bloat has been embraced by every modern-day president — than for the political challenge it poses to a hostile Congress.


Mr. Obama called on lawmakers to grant him broad new powers to propose mergers of agencies, which Congress would then have to approve or reject in an up-or-down vote. If granted the authority, he said, he would begin pruning by folding the Small Business Administration and five other trade and business agencies into a single agency that would replace the Commerce Department.





http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/14/us/politics/obama-to-ask-congress-for-power-to-merge-agencies.html?_r=1&nl=todaysheadlines&emc=tha2

Tuesday, January 10, 2012

People Win under the Obama Administration

WASHINGTON — The Obama administration says it is expanding the FBI's more than eight-decade-old definition of rape to reflect a better understanding of the crime and to broaden protections.


The new definition counts men as victims for the first time and drops the requirement that victims must have physically resisted their attackers.

Vice President Joe Biden, author of the Violence Against Women Act when he was in the Senate, said the new definition announced Friday is a victory for women and men "whose suffering has gone unaccounted for over 80 years." Calling rape a "devastating crime," the vice president said, "We can't solve it unless we know the full extent of it."

The change will increase the number of people counted as rape victims in FBI statistics but will not change federal or state laws or alter charges or prosecutions. It's an important shift because lawmakers and policymakers use crime statistics to allocate money and other resources for prevention and victim assistance.

The White House said the expanded definition has been long awaited as many states and research groups made similar changes in their definitions of rape over recent decades.

Since 1929, the FBI has defined rape as the carnal knowledge of a female, forcibly and against her will. The revised definition covers any gender of victim or attacker and includes instances in which the victim is incapable of giving consent because of the influence of drugs or alcohol or because of age. Physical resistance is not required. The Justice Department said the new definition mirrors the majority of state rape statutes now on the books.

Congress approved $592 million this year to address violence against women, including sexual assault, domestic violence, dating violence and stalking, under the Violence Against Women Act and Family Violence Prevention and Services Act. Of that amount, $23 million goes to a sexual assault services program and $39 million to a rape prevention and education program administered by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The Obama administration had sought $777 million to combat violence against women.

The change likely will result in big increases in the number of reported rapes, but it was not immediately clear how big. To take just one example of how the FBI totals will change, Chicago didn't report any rapes to the FBI for 2010 because its broad definition of the crime didn't match the FBI's narrow definition.

The change has been sought by women's groups for more than a decade.

The Women's Law Project, on behalf of more than 80 sexual assault coalitions and national organizations concerned about violence against women, wrote FBI Director Robert Mueller in 2001 that the narrow definition reflected gender-based stereotypes and requested it be changed.

Using the old definition, a total of 84,767 rapes were reported nationwide in 2010, according to the FBI's uniform crime report based on data from 18,000 law enforcement agencies.

Nearly 1 in 5 women and 1 in 71 men in the U.S. have been raped at some time in their lives, according to a 2010 survey by the National Center for Injury Prevention and Control of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, which used a broader definition.

The revised FBI definition says that rape is "the penetration, no matter how slight, of the vagina or anus with any body part or object," without the consent of the victim. Also constituting rape under the new definition is "oral penetration by a sex organ of another person" without consent.

Wednesday, January 4, 2012

A President must make hard choices

A president must lead in spite of opposition. It is what defines a USA President. The job is not for the faint hearted or those who are merely working to be re-elected. It is for those who wish to see good come out of their term in office, even if it is one term.
President Obama will be respected for leading in the most difficult times in America. When the President took over America was a basket case. It was barrelling down-hill but his skillful leadership style has gotten the country on a steady keel.
If people stop eating media mush and take the time to see what the President has accomplished in less than a term it is monumental. The man is nothing but a genius. America should be so proud of him but many allow race to blind their eyes from seeing the truth.
Here again  President Obama has used his wisdom and sense of right and wrong to name Cordray as Chief Consumer Watch dog in spite of GOP opposition. Good for you Mr. President.
http://www.alternet.org/newsandviews/article/758709/%22defiant%22_obama_will_name_cordray_chief_consumer_watchdog%2C_despite_gop_opposition%3A_ap/#paragraph5