RSS
Menampilkan postingan yang diurutkan menurut tanggal untuk kueri trade union. Urutkan menurut relevansi Tampilkan semua postingan
Menampilkan postingan yang diurutkan menurut tanggal untuk kueri trade union. Urutkan menurut relevansi Tampilkan semua postingan

State of the Union Address 2012 Post: Notes and Comments from A Conservative Teacher

Here are my notes and thoughts as I watched President Barack Obama's 2012 State of the Union address:

  • All of the conversation on the channels prior to the address centered on how this address is going to be used as a way to launch the President's re-election bid and as a taxpayer financed campaign speech. I've been watching these things for years and although past incumbents running for re-election have used this speech to speak about all their accomplishments, President Obama appears to be the most brazenly partisan in using this speech as a campaign speech.
  • I found a list of past 'special guests' who have been invited by the President- Lenny Skutnik in 1982 (saved passanger from drowning plane), Sammy Sosa in 1999 (relief efforts in Dominican Republic and home run chase), Hamid Karzai in 2002 (Afghanistan President), Julie Aigner-Clark in 2007 (founder of Baby Einstein)... and now Warren Buffet's secretary in 2012 (prop to use to try to bring up point of taxing the rich more). Whereas once President's (both Republican and Democrats) celebrated people who had done things, President Obama celebrates someone who has called on other people to do more things (pay more money) and yet has no real accomplishments of her own (no offense- I'm sure she is a fine person).
  • It was amazing and wonderful to see Congresswomen Giffords there- she has made such a great recovery and I wish her the best on her future.
  • President Obama begins with his foreign policy accomplishments, which he can take credit for, although he should share this credit with George W. Bush, who put in place the foundations and background for many of these accomplishments (the pull-out in Iraq, the groundwork for catching Osama, drones and catching terrorists in the War on Terror, etc).
  • Obama next suggests that private citizens should be more like the military and act as soldiers for the state. Citizens should stop fighting one another, stop disagreeing about the direction of the nation, stop pushing for their individual rights and liberties, stop trying to keep their property and the fruits of their labor, and instead citizens should serve the state, citizens should put aside their differences and just follow orders, and people should give up their wealth and property to the state so that it can redistribute it to those people who it favors. This all sounds vaguely familiar and has strong echo's of fascism in it, although I could sugar-coat it if you'd like.
  • In 2008, the 'house of cards collapsed'- banks made loans they shouldn't have (which he pushed for a community activist), regulators didn't do their jobs (which they were not held accountable for), bonuses were paid to these banks and government agencies (to which they were never held accountable for)... he is on the wrong side of the ledger here- he was pushing for the collapse and after the collapse did not hold those people accountable.
  • "State of the Union is getting stronger"- as if the mounting US debt is to be ignored and we're all just to pretend that trillions of dollars in my children's spending is not damaging the foundations of our nation and creating a time-bomb that will destroy America.
  • President Obama says that he can't get anything done without control of every single aspect of our political system- he decries the 'obstructionism' of the GOP controlling one single house of Congress. No one- no one- should ever be elected President who says that he can't get anything done unless he has total power- that is bad for America and bad for democracy.
  • "What is happening in Detroit can happen in other industries"- what happened in Detroit was that the auto companies were bailed out, costing taxpayers $80 billion in loans, debts forgiven, pensions guaranteed, and other loans. GM made $6 billion last year in profits- taxpayers should get that back, plus the next $74 billion in profits, and then we'll claim success in saving a company at no cost. Imagine if he were to bail every unprofitable business out at massive losses to taxpayers- what would that sort of economy look like?
  • Proposes new tax on multi-national companies, to be redistributed to companies that 'hire here in America'- some sort of new loan to be administered by Obama officials based on conditions that he'd set. The increased taxes on MNC's will be sure to be passed on to consumers in the form of higher prices on goods and services, causing inflation and hitting the poor especially hard. Why does Obama hate poor people so much?
  • "We brought trade cases against China at over twice the rate as the previous administration"- but the Chinese just laughed at us because Obama bowed to the Chinese President and begged to borrow trillions more of their money so that he could blow it on his wasteful spending. It's nice that he's suing China though- I'm sure that's employing lots of lawyers.
  • President Obama is mystified on why employers don't hire workers- perhaps if he would have had some sort of a job at some point in business or in the private sector or in some sort of productive economic enterprise he'd know that increasing regulations, fees, requirements, red tape, and the such encourage employers not to hire.
  • Obama proposes starting a temp agency company... with taxpayer money. This government financed and supported company will compete with all of these Michigan companies.
  • Obama is right- good teachers like me matter, and also he's right that teachers like me are attacked all the time- I'm bashed by liberals and progressives who call me all sorts of names. The President's other education policies are pretty- they are nice words that mean nothing since the federal government isn't supposed to be involved in education in any way other than making sure that there is equality in education for different races and sexes (Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965).
  • It is almost as if the right answer to everything that Obama says is the opposite of what he says. He says that it is wrong for taxpayers to be giving illegal immigrants a paid education and then sending them home at the end- he suggests we should make these people here illegally citizens after investing all that money into them, while I kind of think that taxpayers shouldn't be investing money into people here illegally. Get a work or education visa or something to stay here or pay your own way.
  • President Obama attacks inequality in pay between mean and women in work- that's right Obama, tear this straw man up! That straw man can't fight back- I suggest he go after those who want children to work in coal mines next!
  • I followed this line... "need more bullet proof vests... computers chips... innovations... industries... energy..." what???
  • President Obama claims that our nation needs an "all out all of the above strategy"- it's double-speak though, because in his next line he clarifies that this strategy means less oil, less natural gas, less coal, and less drilling. His 'all of the above' strategy is going to include additional fees, regulations, and rules on companies that he doesn't like. So, in summary, he is pitching a "some of the below strategy".
  • On to exploding batteries discussion... Bryan (the guy Obama referenced) used to build luxury yachts, but when government policies that Obama supported (he wanted a higher tax on yachts) destroyed Bryan's company and industry, Obama was there to throw taxpayer dollars at him to get him restarted building taxpayer subsidized wind turbines, and now Obama is some sort of 'good guy.' He's the bad guy in the story, kiddies. Holland-based Energetx Composites LLC, you just got mentioned by Obama in his State of the Union address- that's the kiss of death.
  • Proposed more small fees and regulations and burdens on businesses... I missed what sort of scheme it was supposed to pay for in order to be 'budget neutral'.
  • I'm caught up now... "we need smart regulations"... "we need rules"... these rules and regulations "make the free market more free"- LOL. Did he just say "I've ordered thousands of federal agents to spend thousands of man-hours to search for useless regulations that waste taxpayer money"- I must have heard this wrong. He's moving on though to proposing new rules and regulations- I guess he was done with the part about getting rid of regulations and rules after he threw the joke out there. Listening to him talk, I feel like he's a joke of a President.
  • Someone add up how much all these regulations, agencies, bureau's, rules, and investments are going to cost America... I'll have to look at the transcript, but I'm pretty sure all he does is to propose these things without any sense of cost. A man (or woman) could spend a hundred years undoing all the damage that this guy is doing to our Republic.
  • "The recovery is still fragile"- but earlier he said the "State of the Union is getting stronger"- let's square this round issue, folks.
  • Did you know that President Obama has cut the deficit $2 trillion? And not raised it $5 trillion like what really happened? BIZARRO WORLD!
  • Let's not forget this people- President Obama hates people earning millions and wants to go after them and confiscate their income redistribute it to people making less. Those who are already wealthy can keep it, those who are on the bottom might like it, but there will be no more moving between classes in Obama's America. This guy wants to slap class systems on us and turn our nation into the rich- those who already made their wealth and who have connections with government- and the rest of us poor. "You can call this class warfare all you want" he says- it's class warfare. It's class warfare. It's class warfare. It's class warfare. It's class warfare...
  • The partisan divide is getting worse every year he says... especially over the past 3 years. It must be George Bush's fault or something, right? Or maybe it's because you President Obama are the most bitterly partisan figure in the history of our nation and is tearing our nation into serfs and masters. President Obama attacks running a 'perpetual campaign'- but yet he is the worst offender in this, running continually for office in a way that no President in history has ever done, running campaign commercials a year in advance of the general election, and even trotting out his wife to make frequent partisan attacks.
  • He just said-"With or without this Congress I will keep implementing laws and putting in place policies that I want, but if Congress went along with what I was already doing it would give me cover and get us all involved." This guy is a bully and a dictator. Maybe I heard him wrong though; I'll go back and re-read the transcript, maybe I got it wrong.
  • The speech must be coming to an end- after spending a couple minutes in the beginning to address our military and veterans, we're now going to end with a couple minutes at the end about the military and veterans- I though think that the military shouldn't just be props in Obama's game of 'we're all in this together' meme; maybe he should talk about military programs in the body of his speech that he wants to cut or increase, about what he's been doing as commander-in-chief, etc. The military is not simply there to make Obama look good. "No one thought about politics on that day" Obama says- but yet the photo of Obama in the war room was staged. Nice words Obama, but in your mouth, they are just words, merely words.
  • President Obama says that as long as we are all commoners, living like peasants on the land, serving our masters like serfs, than our nation will be strong. He said 'common' several times at the end- but private property, liberty, and protection of life wasn't mentioned.
This is not my first State of the Union address. In A Conservative Teacher's Take on the State of the Union Address in 2011, I wrote a bunch of notes down, and looking through those notes now I am struck by how much more moderate Obama was in 2011 (still a liberal, but no way was he the progressive class warfare leader he was in this speech). In many ways, it was closer to what I noted in my Best State of the Union Address Ever in 2010 post- that Obama was divisive and partisan.

Last thoughts on President Barack Obama- he is getting better. His speech was better delivered, he is getting better at not being as obvious with his attacks on straw men, he isn't as bitter or angry, and his vision of the future is a very narrow one. If he sticks to his game- that the Republicans are a bigger threat to our nation than even he is- and he is able to use his billion dollars to unload on Republicans who have negatives in their past, than he is going to win re-election. He's going to go defense, play small-ball, shrink back into his base, and attack savagely against flaws and faults in his opponents- and win power again, this time unrestrained by a second term. The GOP better be really careful who they nominate in the primaries- nominate the wrong person, and we get 4 more years of this kind of speech.

Governor Daniels gave the GOP reply. He talked about the role of the opposition in our nation (I hope he sends a memo to the President explaining this role, since obviously the President doesn't respect minority rights). Daniels argues that the nation has not gotten better under Obama's watch- this is hard to argue with, especially because Daniels points to facts, figures, and data. I wonder though- will facts and information be able to counter rhetoric and personal attacks in this new era of American politics? "Those punished most by the wrong turns of the past three years"- that's a good line. Also, I see Daniels has been reading my blog- see my recent post Unemployment Increases in Young People Under Obama: A New Lost Generation of Youth?.

"2012 is a year of true opportunity, maybe our last, to restore hope and prosperity"- that's a good line too from Governor Mitch Daniels. I'll be honest- the more this guy talks, the more I like him- why again did this guy not run for President? The first thing that Daniels tells a businessman in Indiana- "make money!"- that's great, and the opposite of what Obama would say to him- "let's see your site plan and evaluate it for possible environmental threats" Obama would say. Even Daniels though notices that America is declining- I guess it's now either explode in debt and inflation and collapse under Obama, or decline and manage under the Republicans- that choice sucks and I'm pissed at the generations ahead of me that messed things up for me and my children- you who left the world a lesser place with your voting and policies, you're parasites. I should pay low taxes and get great benefits, like you all got a chance to do, but not only that, I'm going to pay higher taxes and get less benefits, because you all lived beyond your means- I'm a little angry at that.

Opps, back to Daniels speech... Daniels ends strongly fighting for unity, solvency, financial stability, steady economic growth, and responsible reforms- this is a message that only smart, responsible, hard-working people care about, and may not sell anymore in Obama's America. Daniels still believes in us though- he thinks that we can still be great- I got to give it to him for still believing and having hope in the American people and our ability to be free, prosperous, happy, mature, and successful. Let's draft this guy to run for President or something- he's better than Mitt or Newt.

UPDATE I: Let me clarify something- after listening to his speech, I thought that Daniels was better than both Romney or Newt (the two frontrunner's), and for the matter he is better than Santorum or Paul. That being said, it was one speech and in retrospect I'd need to look at his entire body of work and watch him on the campaign trail before truly suggesting that he should be the nominee. After all, I heard Perry give a great speech and thought that he was the best of the bunch running- and then he went out and was unable to communicate the message and stay focused. Besides- almost all states have already finalized their ballots, so Daniels wouldn't even be able to get on the ballots to be the nominee.

It's Mitt or Newt or Santorum, and we'll have to live with those choices- the good news is that all of these people are better than Barry for America, the bad news of which is that none of them is the perfect candidate. I guess Daniels will still be out there in 2016 after Obama's second term, not that it will matter anymore at that point.

To bring it back full circle- what you heard in Obama's speech tonight was a long laundry list of additional spending, and if this wasn't the real world and money grew on trees, it might have been an okay list of things to spend money on. But the thing is our nation is in debt and structurally is going bankrupt. That's the thing. There is no other thing right now. President needed to deliver a speech that spoke to slashing programs and spending and putting in place structural reforms- the kind of real, hard, tough decisions that we all  have made in our private and business finances and that other nations are now being forced to make. But he didn't. President Obama can sing and dance and shoot rainbows and speak about how he has spent trillions saving industries, but all of that is just twisted and wrong, because he is spending my children and grandchildren's money in an irresponsible manner, and that's what matters in 2012. He needs to go, now, before he can do any more damage to the future of our great nation.

UPDATE II: So far, the best summary/review of the President's SOTU is from Nile Gardiner, writing from across the pond. From his editorial Barack Obama is still driving America towards decline:
Two words hardly mentioned in Barack Obama’s 65-minute State of the Union address to Congress: freedom and liberty. President Obama’s fourth and possibly last State of the Union speech was long on big government proposals, but short on the principles that have made America the world’s greatest power. His lecturing tone exuded arrogance, and he failed to present a coherent vision for getting the United States back on its feet after three years of economic decline. It was heavy on class-war rhetoric, punitive taxation, and frequent references to the Left-wing mantra of “fairness”, hardly likely to instil confidence in a battered business community that is the lifeblood of the American economy.

Above all, he remains in denial over the levels of federal debt that threaten the country's long-term prosperity. This was not a speech that was serious about the biggest budget deficits since World War Two. There was no sense at all that America is a superpower on a precipice, sinking in a sea of debt that threatens to undermine America’s power to project global leadership for generations to come. In fact, his interventionist proposals will only make matters worse.

From new federally funded infrastructure projects to increasing regulations on financial institutions, President Obama remains wedded to big government – an approach rejected by a clear majority of Americans, who view it as a millstone around their necks. As Gallup’s polling has found, nearly two thirds of Americans see big government as "the biggest threat" to their country.

This should have been a serious speech addressing the economic problems facing the United States. Instead it was a laundry list of half-baked proposals designed to appease the Left. The president should have been talking about reining in spending, lowering taxes, and fostering greater economic freedom, but he opted for policies that will speed America’s decline, not reverse it....
Read the whole thing- he nailed it.

UPDATE III: Thank you for linking to this article The Western Experience, The Bitter Americans, and others!

  • Digg
  • Del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • RSS

"Nigeria is about oil and nothing but oil"

Sokari Ekine writing in Pambazuka:
...I believe the majority of the country is behind not just the strikes but the Occupy Nigeria movement which seeks to seriously challenge the status quo and once and for all end the rule by kleptocracy. However there are other small but extremely powerful interest groups working for and against the government: Boko Haram and whoever is behind them; Jonathan and possibly some of the ex-Niger Delta militants; Senators and Governors who fear loss of their power and wealth; the trade union movement particularly the oil workers - how trustworthy are they? – the independent oil marketers or cabal. And of course there is the religious factor, the cozy relationship between an all-powerful state and a powerful highly influential set of religious institutions. Nigeria is about oil and nothing but oil...
more here

  • Digg
  • Del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • RSS

Daily Education and Technology News for Schools 12/30/2011

  • This is the catalog of books from Pedia press. While some editors are wikipedians, it is interesting to me how one of the top books is American Warplanes of WWII that has one editor. It looks like you can take it and pull from wikipedia and then edit. This is very interesting. While it is not new news about pediapress, when it first came out we didn't have such examples to review.

    tags: education news

  • Current application dates for Flat Classroom projects.
    I'll be running NetGenEd and co-planning Eracism with Julie as well as work with the book club starting in February.

    Flat Classroom Project - application deadline January 23, 2012 for FCP12-1
    Digiteen - application deadline February 1, 2012 for Digiteen 12-1
    'A Week in the Life...' - application deadline February 15, 2012 for AWL12-1
    Eracism - application deadline February 30, 2012 for Eracism 2012
    NetGenEd - application deadline February 1, 2012 for NetGenEd 2012


    APPLY NOW! to become a Flat Classroom® Certified Teacher. Courses will run starting in September and November 2011, as well as March 2012.
    Global Education Conference 2011

    tags: flatclass education globaled edu_news

  • Skitch for the Ipad is here. This whiteboard drawing, mind mapping ipad tool saves to evernote. If you love evernote, this is a must download tool.

    tags: eduapp education evernote skitch app edu_news

  • An online collaboration whiteboard. You can use it for free. Try using this for mindmapping and brainstorming between teams.

    tags: eduapp education collaboration edu_news

  • Dan Pink's predictions for 2012, bound to have some people talking.

    tags: education news 2012 prediction edu_news

  • Dan Pink predicted that next year's hot technology item is going to be the Lytro camera. It captures everything and lets you focus afterwards. It looks very cool but it is one of those things I need to see to understand. Anyone using one yet?

    tags: education technology edtech news photography

  • Great announcement about the winners of Microsoft's Global Educator Awards program. As a judge for the US competition, the coding guide is an amazing piece of research-based evaluation of teaching methods that should be shared. Unfortunately, this awards announcement has NO hyperlinks. It always makes me upset when teachers are recognized without Twitter handles, links to their efolios. If we want to disseminate best practice, it should be done using the web. Static press releases, especially for something like this, are a waste of space. now, I have to search for all of these things.

    tags: education news teachers

  • A new movie "the American teacher" is coming out and Microsoft is coordinating the community screening of this film based upon the New York Times Best Seller "Teachers Have it Easy: The Big Sacrifices and Small Salaries of America's Teachers" produced by Vanessa Roth and narrated by Matt Damon. This website lets you order the DVD or volunteer to host a screening. I cannot find a release date on the site.

    I hope it is balanced. Teachers aren't perfect but it is not ok how teachers are being treated. Unfortunately, very few people are talking about just teachers -- it seems to be focused on union vs. anti union at this point in politics with teachers caught in between.

    tags: education news teachers microsoft videos edu_news

  • This is the Microsoft Research so.cl website (pronounced social) that is being tested in a few universities. I find it incredibly interesting that students sign in using Facebook instead of Windows Live ID, the preferred sign in for other services.

    tags: education news socialmedia microsoft edu_news

  • For those comparing the FTC's stand against Facebook with Google Buzz, here is the Forbes article on the April 2011 Google Buzz settlement. We will have our Digiteen students looking at this material as they discuss privacy.

    tags: education news privacy digital_responsibilities digital_literacy

  • Facebook faces 20 years of privacy audits by the Federal Trade Commission. Similar to an agreement with Google Buzz,this shows the FTC's commitment to project consumer privacy. (Any wonder Google Buzz is going bye- bye.)

    tags: education facebook news privacy digital_safety digital_responsibilities

  • New Google+ service Find My Face lets you opt in to photo tagging. For information on this service and how Google is trying not to repeat some of the "mistakes" of Facebook. However, some would argue that mistakes of Facebook have also been what made it wildly popular.

    tags: education. socialmedia google news digital_communications

  • It seems harmless but sometimes just commenting on Facebook in the normal course of business causes problems. Now that every person on Facebook literally has a fan page (people can follow you without you having a fanpage) you are going to see this happen more often. If you really want to share with your friends, this certainly gives rise to websites like Path that only let you friend up to 150 people and keep things very private. Public officials may be left with no other option. Show me a person who doesn't say something politically incorrect and I'll show you someone in the graveyard. We all mess up.

    tags: education news socialmedia digital_responsibilities digital_communications

  • Free Google Apps training center. This will take you through the tools that are part of Google apps for education. Share this with your teachers and students.

    tags: education google eduapp traning edu_news

  • "The following age requirements apply for owners of a Google Account (with the exception of accounts in Apps for Education domains):

    Spain: 14 or older
    South Korea: 14 or older
    Netherlands: 16 or older
    All other countries (including the US): 13 or older

    Keep in mind that specific products may have additional age requirements. For instance, Google+ requires users to be 18 or older."

    tags: education news google

  • I'm seeing more information about children activating G+ accounts and putting in an age that is "too young" to have an account (under 18.) Here are the instructions for reactivating an account (which involve a credit card charge that is then removed.) As more kids move to G+ this will be a problem. I told my students to stay away from G+. Of course, having them on Google apps for domains helps you on this as the terms of service are between the school and Google and with parent permission, you are accepting the terms of behalf of the students.

    tags: education news google edu_news

  • Give up accuracy and go for convenience? Wish your birthday or Christmas was on the same way every year? Researchers at Johns Hopkins think we need a new calendar. What do you think?

    tags: education calendar news

  • Fascinating read from a professor about the response of his graduate students when they all received ipads. Some felt that by carrying them they came across as elitist. Perhaps it is because so many people want them and they are still very expensive. Very interesting read.

    tags: education news ipad

  • British government is studying how effectively private and alternative suppliers provide higher education services. As educators prime for the upheaval to learning that is already upon us, institutions of higher education are being eyed as places for potential cost savings and to determine if education can be delivered more effectively in other ways. They also looked at some US studies as they prepare this study.

    tags: education edreform edu_news

  • Microsoft not going for social networking but for educational networking. Before you roll your eyes, the fact is that overlaying educational networks on top of social networks is rife with problems. This is being tested at University of Washington, Syracuse University and New York University. There are many benefits to keeping work and personal separate and educational networks may be a great asset if done right, to the education space.

    tags: flatclass globaled elearning education edu_news

  • Volkskwagen agrees to turn of blackberries after hours as part of a union agreement. While I don't know a lot of teachers connected via blackberries,I do personally know the complexities of global collaboration in schools. We must learn to balance work and home and know when to disconnect but then again, a work environment can become so fast paced that everyone seems to expect the others that they should work 24/7. Yet another reason to advocate checking email 2-3 times a day - let everyone know when you will be available and stick to the schedule.

    tags: balance productivity news edu_news

  • New project started by 2 MIT students.Twine seeks to help you easily access your home remotely. The small bar-of-soap looking object monitors the temperature and movement of the device usinga simple app called spool. Increasingly computing is about intertwining with our lives.

    I'm going to draw another conclusion here that may bother some of you. As we increasingly use our smart phones to control our homes, let people in the door, monitor things,are we causing danger and/or damage by denying students the right to access their phone, say, for example, if the house says it is on fire and mom and dad are out of town.

    I think we're going to have to coexist with cellular and smart phone technologies. It is inevitable but it is also about behavior. A child wouldn't have 1,000 emergencies in a day ( a text message isn't an emergency) but may have one that becomes a big deal and a big liability.

    tags: education news technology

  • If you like controversies between leading thinkers, you'll want to read wired.com's overview of the verbal jousting between Clay Shirky and Malcom Gladwell over the importance of social media in social uprisings.  I think this author has a very neutral perspective that is valuable for evaluating this discussion between two very influential people.

    The thing I find odd is that Gladwell in his book Outliers talks about the importance of "mavens" and their influence. Surely, mavens online can have more influence than ever before. I'm not sure how he can forget his own work in Outliers as he puts down the importance of social media in politics.

    tags: education socialmedia news

  • T-shirt transistors. Wearable computing is very close. I doubt it will look like it does on the fantastic model in this post, but there are uses we cannot imagine as of yet. It would be fun to have students read this and invent the future of wearable computing. Or you could do this as a writing assignment and have them write about it.

    tags: education news technology

  • Big controversy running through Google plus. Because controversial photographer Brandon Campeaux had over a quarter of a million followers, they are connected to just about everyone. He left Google+ in a huff and deleted his account when he says Google refused to respond to death threats against him. Word is,some of the people he asked to help him "are on vacation." 

    On another note, once a Google+ post is reshared, you can no longer delete it. This is perhaps a very interesting case study for whether Google+ is ready to grow. By the way, Myspace still has more active users than Google+.

    tags: education news socialmedia digitalcitizenship

Posted from Diigo. The rest of my favorite links are here.

  • Digg
  • Del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • RSS

Elect a 'Clerk' For President in 2012 and Restore Founding Father's Vision of Executive Branch?

The President of the United States should be clerk, and nothing more. Conservatives and Tea Party people should not be looking for the President to be a 'king' who commands us to go forth and do his bidding, they should not be looking for the President to be the source of ideas about how government should run, and they should not be looking for the President to be an outsider who will shake up Washington.

The office, as designed by our Founding Fathers and illustrated in Article II of the Constitution, is an office that empowers the President of the United States to execute the laws passed by Congress in the most efficient manner, act as Commander-in-Chief of our military, act as the dignified ceremonial chief of state, handle foreign policy with other nations, and discharge effectively the various other duties of the office. A true conservative or someone who wants our nation to return to its Founding Principles should be pushing for the person who is best able to act as a clerk, a manager, and a CEO for America Inc.

You see, in reality the presidency is essentially a glorified clerk in our system, and is not actually a game-changing all-powerful King. The power of the President stems from his ability to use his office to trade favors or the promise of favors to accomplish the goal of efficiently managing the affairs of the state; his power does not (nor should it) from his ability to order others to do his bidding and his ability to issue executive orders and put in place policies. The legislative branch is better and more powerfully designed for those purposes, and so all decisions about the laws and policies of our nation should be generated from that branch, and then the President implements them in an efficient and able manner.

The President is able to implement these policies in an able and efficient manner because he has lots of little pieces of power spread through out nation's political system- he is able to send troops abroad, deliver the state of the union address, control various executive departments, play a vital role in the budgeting process, issues pardons and grant reprieves, etc, and he can also use his informal power and influence to invite policy leaders to the White House, go on national TV, lobby for legislation, etc. His power- both real and perceived- gets others to re-appraise what is in their best interest, and they are then persuaded that it is better to get along with the President and what he wants to do rather than fight against his able and methodical and efficient powers.

Look, I know this isn't exciting to you guys- you all want a President who will blow your socks off, light up the system, ride in on a horse of hope and change and remake the world. You want a king to rule you and control other people who you disagree with. You wish that someone who will go into the White House and then start just shutting down executive departments, slashing spending on programs, and ignoring the Judicial and Legislative Branches to bring you closer to our Founding Fathers. The problem is, that isn't how our Founding Fathers designed the office of the President and it is not how our Founding Fathers would have wanted the system to work, and once you go down the path to making our President a King, he can be a liberal King too in a short 4 to 8 years.

As I wrote in Calvin Coolidge, One of the Best Presidents?:

The best Presidents are those who did very little, ran the executive office smoothly and without problems or corruption, and conformed to the Constitution as closely as possible. Jefferson was President for two terms, and other then the Louisiana Purchase, his administration happily has little to note other than peace and prosperity. James Madison had to respond to the War of 1812, yes- but other than that, peace and prosperity. Calvin Coolidge was like this too- nothing to note during his time in office other than nothing to note- peoples lives were protected, the nation was prosperous, and property was well protected.
The President is a powerful person in our political system- but he has grown too powerful, and I don't want him to become even more powerful and active and arbitrary, even if for a while he would be doing so in a conservative or libertarian manner. Rather, our President should be good at working with the Congress to effect significant changes to our laws and policies, he should be good at closing doors and coming out of them with policy-leaders minds changed, he should know our political system inside and out and understand how to move various levers to get stuff done, and he should be able to judiciously use his public prestige to pressure leaders to voluntarily arrive at policy decisions that he supports. He should be a competent manager and efficient steward of taxpayer resources. At the end of his Presidency, we should not say that he brought hope and change to the American system, but rather we should say that when he left after eight quiet years as President, peoples lives had been protected from domestic and international threats, that the nation had remained prosperous and free of debts, and that private property had been well protected and preserved.

The description of a 'great' President that I have outlined above is most definitely not a description of our current President. President Barack Obama went into the White House without the skills needed to be an effective or even good President, and he has shown no desire to put in the hard work, the humility, and the intelligence to acquire these skills. Yes, I know that during his first two years much legislation was passed (which he now claims makes him the fourth best President ever)- but that was during a time period when one element of society- liberal Democrats- controlled almost all the national levers of policy-making (House, Senate, President, and bureaucracy)- and since that time, more elements of society are represented in our political system, and he has demonstrated that in these more pluralistic and typical circumstances that he is completely ineffective. You see, the earlier 'success' he had in driving the policy-agenda was really because it was being driven by Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, who pushed their legislation and priorities in spite of what Obama desired or wanted- those who have been part of this legislation have written several times that the White House was remarkably passive during that time period and just went along with whatever Congress wanted (which in itself is not a bad thing, but in the context of demonstrating leadership it is). But once Obama's party lost control of the House, we were able to see truly just how bad a President he is and how bad he as at filling this office.

President Obama is poor at working with Congress, bad at working with others of different opinions than his own, too quick to attack in public those who he disagrees with (probably because he is so awful at convincing them to change policies behind closed doors), he does not know how to use all the various levers in policy-making that he has, and overuses the prestige of his office such that it the prestige has been watered down (I'm imaging him promoting Monday Night Football right now). He is an incompetent manager and a poor steward of taxpayer resources (his family is spending millions in taxpayer money on a vacation to Hawaii as I write this). At the end of his Presidency (hopefully next year), we'll look back at the last four years as being some of the most chaotic and partisan and rough years, and look at his record as our President- a nation that is less prosperous, less free, burdened with debts, with horribly destroyed foundations (crumbling roads, bridges, schools, and Social Security, Medicare, and other programs that have been bankrupted and unreformed), and with private property under attack (Occupy Wall Street, Dodd-Frank, the bankruptcy of GM, etc). President Obama is a bad President.

Could any of the Republican candidates for President be a 'great' President? I don't know- I'll let you make your own decisions on that for now. But much of what I wrote here I pulled from an earlier post I wrote called Ron Paul- Drop Out of the Race where I considered Congressman Paul's candidacy in light of these ideas. But do Romney, Perry, Gingrich, Bachmann, or Santorum meet the qualifications I laid out above better than Obama? They likely do- for example, look at Romney's experience as Governor of at blue-state or saving the Salt Lake City Olympics, or Perry's able Governorship of successful Texas, or Gingrich's record of balancing the budget with a Democratic President, but I surely must  revisit this concept and evaluate the GOP candidates accordingly in a later post- be sure to check back often on my blog for this post.

Oh, and in reply to the liberals and progressives and fascists who are emailing me trying to personally attack me- I do have several degrees from good universities in public policy, I teach government for a living, and my argument is based in part on professor Richard Neustadt's book Presidential Power (purchase the book today- Presidential Power and the Modern Presidents: The Politics of Leadership from Roosevelt to Reagan). My arguments are sound and hopefully well-reasoned, and as always, I'd love to defend them in print or on the radio, and I would love it if you would email this post or link to it on your blog so that our Presidential election in 2012 is that much more informed.

  • Digg
  • Del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • RSS

Calvin Coolidge, One of the Best Presidents?

When putting together a list of the best Presidents in the history of our nation, that list would likely include Thomas Jefferson, Andrew Jackson, James Madison, Grover Cleveland, and Ronald Reagan. To that list I would like to also include Calvin Coolidge.

Most polls rank Coolidge somewhere in the middle, but this is because most people rank greatness by the number of actions that Presidents make and the number of policies that they as executives force on the nation that are usually contrary to our Constitution. For example, most lists put FDR at the top of the list, but he pushed through unconstitutional policies, dropped our nation into another Great Depression, didn't respond early enough to the rising fascism in the world, and then did the only thing I'll give him great credit for and won WWII. Oh, some great Presidents had to respond to crisis forced on them by others (like Lincoln), but most other so-called 'great' Presidents simply used the office of the President to jam policies on people that moved power and freedom away from them to the government and supervised a nation in crisis.

The best Presidents are those who did very little, ran the executive office smoothly and without problems or corruption, and conformed to the Constitution as closely as possible. Jefferson was President for two terms, and other then the Louisiana Purchase, his administration happily has little to note other than peace and prosperity. James Madison had to respond to the War of 1812, yes- but other than that, peace and prosperity. Calvin Coolidge was like this too- nothing to note during his time in office other than nothing to note- peoples lives were protected, the nation was prosperous, and property was well protected.

Here are some of the reasons that Calvin Coolidge should make the list of one of our greatest Presidents:

  1. Coolidge was (for the most part) an opponent of government regulations. “I am in favor of reducing, rather than expanding, government bureaus which seek to regulate and control the business activities of the people,” he explained in the same State of the Union address. During his time in office, he attempted to allow private development of Muscle Shoals, made conservative appointments to federal offices over the objections of liberal Democrats and Progressive Republicans, was opposed to a veterans' bonus, and blocked and to the proposed McNary-Haugen farm legislation.
  2. Coolidge criticized the left for its money-spending habits, stating, “Nothing is easier than spending the public money. It doesn’t appear to belong to anyone.” His policies led to a booming economy and increased tax revenues, but Coolidge knew that these additional 'revenues' wasn't the government's money- it was the peoples. So instead of bowing to progressives and liberals and using the surplus funds to create new programs, he put in place tax cuts. His tax cuts targeted largely the wealthy (he believed that the rich would invest their extra funds in ways that would increase production and therefore jobs and wealth at home, and also that American trade would expand abroad which would benefit the domestic economy and help stabilize the world economically and politically), but taxes were also cut on all taxpayers as well, the gift tax was repealed, and the death tax cut in half. These tax cuts led to increasing economic growth in America (and more tax revenues).
  3. Coolidge believed that the role of the government was to step out of the way and allow the market and business to prosper. “The business of America is business,” Coolidge famously declared. But unlike many Republicans and almost all liberals, he did not believe the business of government was to control and direct and subsidize business- he believed in the free market and that removing regulations would encourage business more so than subsidies and targeted tax code help.
Coolidge’s tax cuts and deregulations resulted in a budget surplus and the economically booming “Roaring Twenties,” which came to an end during the progressive regulatory administration of his successor President Herbert Hoover. Coolidge said after leaving the White House, "Perhaps one of the most important accomplishments of my administration has been minding my own business"- but this is the very thing that I love about Coolidge, that as President he minded his own business, operated the machinery of the White House with cool and competent handling, and minded his own business as President. No crisis, no television appearances, no major policy changes, no crazy plans, no wild new ideas- simply doing his job, doing it well, and leaving when he was done with the nation in a better place than it was before.

President Calvin Coolidge may be the first U.S. president appeared to also appear in a "talkie" -- a movie with sound.In this four-minute clip (viewable on YouTube), Coolidge says that he wants to
"cut down public expense. I want the people of America to be able to work less for the government and more for themselves. I want them to have the rewards of their own industry. This is the chief meaning of freedom. Until we can re-establish a condition under which the earnings of the people can be kept by the people, we are bound to suffer a very severe and distinct curtailment of our liberty."

Before we go to the polls in 2012 to pick nominees for political parties and for President, I just want everyone to re-examine Calvin Coolidge and his Presidency and decide for themselves what exactly makes a President great.

UPDATE: The Calvin Coolidge Memorial Foundation contacted and reminded me of another reason why Coolidge is possibly one of the better Presidents that we've ever had- his views on education. Coolidge believed strongly in education and he often commented on the subject throughout the course of his political career, believing in the importance of having an educated citizenry and impressing on young people the importance of lifelong learning. Here is one of his quotes from a newspaper column in 1930:
"While it is easy to waste money on education, it is the one thing which we cannot afford to curtail. The true ideal would seem to be a system that supplies those in the lower grades with certain basic information and those in the upper grades with the power to think… The school is not the end but only the beginning of an education. Yet its place cannot be filled in any other way. The best thing the millions of our youth can do to assure their future success is to work faithfully at their studies. That opportunity for improvement and discipline will never return.”
For your next vacation, take a trip to Plymouth Notch, VT to see the President Calvin Coolidge State Historic Site for yourself and experience the world in which President Coolidge was born and raised.

For good books about President Calvin Coolidge, check out Silent Cal's Almanack: The Homespun Wit and Wisdom of Vermont's Calvin Coolidge, The Forgotten Man: A New History of the Great Depression, or Autobiography of Calvin Coolidge, The.

  • Digg
  • Del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • RSS

The Real Children of Orwell are Occupying Wall Street Today

Originally I was going to put together a post about how the Occupy Wall Street movement has been endorsed by the American Nazi Party. It was news-worthy- the ANP said in a statement that

The fact that its these “lefties” as you call them, who are picking up the ball and running with it – only shows how much more in tune THEY are with the fed up masses of White Workers, than the fossilized, reactionary “right-wing”. WHO holds the WEALTH and POWER in this country – the JUDEO-CAPITALISTS. WHO is therefore the #1 ENEMY who makes all this filth happen – the JUDEO-CAPITALISTS. WHO therefore do WN need to FIGHT? My heart is right there with these people, perhaps someday the “movement” will SHOW the same COURAGE and DEDICATION that these people OUT THERE FIGHTING are SHOWING!
Yeah, so there is that out there, the fact that the fascists in the Nazi party clearly recognize that this movement fits into their goals and agenda. But really this isn't so much what I want to post about today, because when I was doing research for this post, I came across something more stunning, something that I had written about before after Obama's election as President and something that I think is relevant today.

In December 2008, I linked over to a piece at the American Thinker from Bruce Walker called Orwell's Children, and I think we should all take a minute to re-read it today, because it describes this Occupy Wall Street movement very well. Picture the people at these protests and rallies as you read the following (edited for brevity)...
It has been sixty years since George Orwell wrote his chilling dystopian classic, 1984....

...We are drifting into the sort of horrific future he described. Too many of us for comfort or solace have become just like the denizens of Jonestown: Orwell's children -- a new generation of creature enraged into constant militancy against eternal enemies, oblivious to the notion of a Blessed Creator, melded into the consciousness of the party hive, divorced from history, hypnotized by images, inoculated against reason, stripped of family, and existing only to serve the cause...

...There were specific elements necessary for nations with a heritage of freedom to slide into the most absolute and abject slavery. These elements existed in Nazi Germany, they existed in Soviet Russia, and they exist in our free democracies today. What are the characteristics of the Orwellian state?

Start with God. He must go.... A generation of Orwell's Children are growing up without thinking about God at all or thinking that God is a silly idea cherished by sillier old fogies.

Truth must go too. Nazis embraced the "Big Lie." Soviets denied that honesty, per se, mattered. In Orwell's Oceania, the Inner Party members learn to even lie to themselves and to hold utterly contradictory beliefs at the same time. Truth and honesty have little meaning to Orwell's Children in our world. All truth is relative, all honesty a sham.
Language must be brought to heel... Politically correct language is rampant.

Image and symbols replace words... We live in a word of symbols and images. Conservatives succeed in books and talk radio, media that deal in words- but Orwell's Children live in the realm of symbols and images...

..Immutable oppressors are the final nasty element in dystopia. Hitler blamed Jews for everything. Stalin blamed kulaks and his enemies in the party for everything. Subjects of Orwell's Oceania saw Emmanuel Goldstein as the eternal, immutable enemy of the party. Today there is a drearily predictable list of oppressors. Christians, men, white people, the "rich" (whatever that is supposed to mean), America, and Israel are oppressors and nothing can ever change that.

Orwell even told us, by name, the professionals who would lead us into the nightmare of 1984: "sociologists," "teachers," "bureaucrats," "journalists," "professional politicians," "scientists," "trade union organizers," "publicity experts," and "technicians." (The term "community organizer" was unknown to him.) Those who enslave were those who taught students, who created the news, who sat in the halls of government power, and who defined official "truth" (at least truth de jour.)

Orwell's Children live among us now, not in tiny numbers in weird Marxist cults like Jim Jones' People Temple, but as leaders of Congress, as the establishment of academia, as the producers of news and entertainment, as the administrators of public schools, as the "experts" in a thousand myriad and odd fields of putative "expertise." They infatuate our bored children with the only reality and the only diversion that many can find. They wait for the rest of us to grow older and to die....

Education, science, technological gadgetry, good medical care - all of this can not stop us from sliding into a massive Jonestown, a realized Oceania, a place marked by Dante's grim caution "Abandon hope, all you who enter here." We are all anchored in belief, but it is what we believe that matters. We can believe in the lies of Big Brother, which change each day with the needs of the party or we can believe in the truth of a living God. We can become the children of Orwell or the special creatures of God. Everything -- our nation, our world, our families, our communities -- flows from that choice.
Go back and look at the Occupy Wall Street movement with this lens- listen to the interviews from these people, look at the signs they hold up, and have conversations with them. They are inarticulate slogan-shouting, God-hating, lying children who endlessly talk about 'oppressors' that need to be overthrown by empowering an all powerful government to take property from those who they do not like, attack and kill those who they hate (like Jews), and control all of our choices through regulations and taxes. The people who go to these Occupy Wall Street rallies and support them and talk favorably of them are Orwell's Children, and are the enemies of the protection of life, liberty, and property, and deserve nothing but the full and complete opposition of all true patriots.

  • Digg
  • Del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • RSS

Lack of Investment Laid at the Doorstep of Democratic Policies?

Over and over liberals and progressives argue that the recovery of the US economy is being held back by the lack of investment by those in society with money- and they are right. There is a lot of money being sat on in our nation right now- record amounts which are just being held rather than invested, and this is a large reason why the US economy has not recovered.

Liberals and progressives believe that the reason why businesses and individuals are sitting on massive amounts of money range from racism to a desire for Obama to fail to greed to selfishness to a desire to just swim in their loot and not use it. When they talk about these rich people and profitable businesses sitting on their money they are angry, because they want to use the power and force of the government to make them invest the money. They don't understand what motivates these people and businesses, and it frustrates them, so they attribute their behaviors to irrational or evil motives.

But the truth of the matter is that the reason why individuals and businesses are sitting on cash rather than investing it is because of the policies, positions, rhetoric, beliefs, and desires of liberals and progressives. Progressives and liberals have created an environment of fear and uncertainty, and few are willing to invest in an environment such as that.

Under Obama and the modern-day Democratic Party, regulations and rules and barriers to profitability are being forced on businesses, costs of engaging in business is increasing with new mandates such as Obamacare, taxes are continually talked about increasing (even if they haven't really yet in reality) and every speech by every major politician in the Democratic Party promises to go after the very people who have money, profits are attacked and those who make profits are increasingly viewed as people to exploit and whose wealth the government should take, free trade is hurt by lack of free trade agreements and union kickbacks and increased tariffs and an overall hostile environment to free trade, and individuals are reluctant to engage in investing when the government is picking and choosing the leaders and has demonstrated contempt for well-established bankruptcy laws designed to protect investors (GM bailout).

It will not be until President Obama and the liberals and progressives who have achieved influence and positions of power in his administration are gone that the US economy will recover and businesses will begin to invest again. Even if the moderates and liberals who once were in control of the Democratic Party were in office, perhaps under a President Clinton, then our nation would be growing again and people would have jobs- but there is no moderate or Clinton on the ballot for the Democrats, only a progressive Obama at the top of the ticket who intends to double-down on his policies, especially when he will be a lame duck if he wins re-election and no longer have to worry about putting in place policies that get America back to work.

Do not forget either that Democrats in Congress supported President Obama's policies and put them into legislation and passed them, usually with no bipartisan support and a great many of which were strongly opposed by large numbers of Americans. They had an option to oppose the President, to moderate his policies, and to attempt to reach out for bipartisan consensus to create an environment more friendly to businesses and more encouraging to investors. But they didn't- in many cases, radicals like Pelosi and Reid led the charge to create more fear and uncertainty in doing business and investing in America, and for that they need to go.

Republicans should be the ones to benefit from the suicidal march of the Democratic Party in recent years, not because they necessarily are putting for brilliant ideas and are the best party in the world, but because under a Perry or Romney with a GOP House and Senate at least businesses will not be afraid any more, will feel like they can once again invest and make profits and provide jobs, and not be considered evil or wrong because of this success.

For more information, check out the post on Carpe Diem called We've Got a Sub-Par Recovery Because of Weak Investment Spending, Consumption Has Recovered.

  • Digg
  • Del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • RSS

Why Factory Asia beats Factory South Africa

Barry D Wood writing in Moneyweb:
“Among the non-western economic blocs, East Asia has the highest intraregional trade, comprising largely intermediate goods, underpinning the region’s global trade and competitiveness agenda, and attracting ample FDI. In other words, Factory Asia has worked well. Factory Southern Africa has not. Southern Africa remains the least integrated region in the world despite the presence of a customs union and a free trade area.”Report co-author Sandeep Mahajan says a successful Factory Southern Africa requires dynamic trade based on nimble networks of multi-national firms. Formal and informal trade barriers have to be removed. “South Africa,” he says, “needs to open up, as well as integrate its own rural and advanced regions.” Current policy, he says, “tends towards mercantilism, at the cost of much larger gains from trade based on the principles of comparative advantage."
More here
via Trade Africa

  • Digg
  • Del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • RSS

Democratic Policies Fight Auto Industry Rebound?

The domestic auto industry is on the rebound, leading to more jobs, greater protection of union jobs, rising salaries, and a better international balance of trade. But Democrats don't like the auto industry rebound and over the coming months are going to continue their attempts to punish this large and important segment of our economy.

The logic for this is quite clear- the auto industry rebound is being led by booming sales of SUV's and trucks and the rebound would have been stronger if it wasn't for the absurdly poor sales of 'green cars'. And yet Democrats in Congress and in the Presidency are continuing their attack on SUV's and trucks by pushing for higher CAFE standards and pushing for cap-and-tax, all the while promoting and subsidizing and pushing for 'green cars'.

Democrats are trying to hurt the profitable sectors of the auto companies, are trying to make people who work on SUV's and trucks to lose their jobs, and are trying to damage the salaries of everyone in these auto companies by attacking the most profitable operations of these companies. At the same time, they are trying to make auto companies build cars, at a massive net loss for everyone concerned, that people don't want, in a way that would make the communist Soviet Union proud, with the result being auto companies that are less profitable, provide less jobs, protect less union jobs, and provide lower salaries to all concerned.

SUV's and trucks are the future- they are safer, more powerful, have more utility, and look better, while 'green cars' that run on kitchen oil or batteries are the past- they are deadly, lack power, have little utility, and generally are uglier. SUV's and trucks are profitable and make money, 'green cars' don't. And yet, it is the Democrats who are pushing auto companies to build less SUV's and trucks (that are profitable) and build more 'green cars' (which are not profitable) with their regulations, taxes, and public relations stunts.

This is why auto union workers are ignorant for supporting the Democratic party- the very initiatives that are the most important to the modern day Democratic party are the very initiatives that will lead to a loss of jobs and salaries for union workers. It is rather the GOP that is best for auto workers- it is the GOP that looks to the jobs and livelihood of the auto workers and says 'I want you to build more of the stuff that sales better and less of the stuff that sales poorly and thereby make more money and have more jobs'. It is the GOP that is fighting a determined and dirty Democratic attempt to destroy the profits of the auto companies.

The numbers are clear- when the US economy did poorly, many lost their jobs, our income plummeted, and our nation lost ground on everything, it was 'green cars' that everyone talked about and focused on and that the government promoted. Now that the economy is rebounding (in spite of Obama and the Democrats efforts), now that jobs are being created, now that incomes are rising again a bit, it is SUV's and trucks that are selling again.

The lesson to me is quite clear- promote SUV's and trucks and stop promoting 'green cars', and jobs, income, and the United States will be better.

  • Digg
  • Del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • RSS

Building up the Informal Economies and the role of Remittances

Sanou Mbaye writing in Project Syndicate:

He speaks on the need to liberalize the remittance channels:

The effects of banks’ hijacking of national payment systems to service only the modern economy are compounded by the exclusive agreements that banks and money-transfer companies such as Western Union have signed with most African countries. These agreements lock out non-banking entities from the highly lucrative market for migrant remittances from the African diaspora, which remain a key engine of growth
Furthermore on how key it is to nourish the informal economies:
African states must now recognize that modernizing their informal sectors by integrating them into the modern economy can be a major development tool. Yet only a few countries have started moving in that direction. Nigeria has refrained from signing any exclusive agreements with Western Union and others, and its newly consolidated banking industry is making significant inroads across the region...
Arguing for the broader inclusion of more financial actors in national payment systems
Giving micro-finance institutions access to national and regional payments systems and electronic retail facilities will go a long way toward meeting the requirements of the retail and business sector in terms of banking facilities. It will also help facilitate access by the poorest to financial services, thus helping to reduce the high proportion of the un-banked population.

All of this will invariably spur development and integration of national financial systems and intra-regional trade. This will be a welcome development, because a large proportion of intra-regional trade is carried out by informal operators and small and medium enterprises that do not have access to the banking system. Moreover, economic integration and increased intra-regional trade are the best entry point into global markets for all countries.
More here
Enhanced by Zemanta

  • Digg
  • Del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • RSS

A Struggle against Tyranny

G. Pascal Zachary writes:

The legacy of colonial rule and the earlier ravages of slave trade forever changed the “trajectory” of African development. That is the biggest cliche of African studies, however axiomatic. What is less appreciated is how “independence” from colonial rule was constructed in order to promote personal rule of a sort that, however unique to the sub-Saharan, exhibited parallels with forms of personal rule elsewhere in the world, notably in China (under Mao) and the Soviet Union (under Stalin)...[continue reading]
Quoting a recent Chanda Chisala piece:
Let our history books be reset. The struggle for African independence was not always as hard (or perhaps even as urgent) as our old "freedom fighters" and their "historians" claimed. What has been really hard is the struggle against tyranny – after independence.
Enhanced by Zemanta

  • Digg
  • Del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • RSS

An Open Letter To WTU Members

Dear Washington Teachers' Union Members,

For years, we fought to make sure teacher voices were heard and due process rights were protected. Our actions were required when WTU “Holdover” President George Parker refused to act. Under his leadership, jobs were lost, unfair IMPACT evaluations were created and teachers suffered professional disrespect. Candi Peterson- a WTU Trustee board member and building representative - created blog-curhatanku.blogspot.com, a reputable DC education online voice for teachers and school personnel in 2008. She has been an intelligent teacher voice and foundation for numerous DC education stories. Nathan Saunders, WTU’s two term General Vice President- spoke expertly as the legitimate opposition voice on education reform efforts which hurt DC students, parents, and teachers. We accurately forecasted teacher/school personnel terminations, oppressive working conditions and performance based mutual consent. We provided facts, analysis, and solutions. We created rallies and demonstrations after Parker “sold out” WTU members. We worked alongside parents to challenge disproportionate school closings in Ward 5 and some of our poorer sections of the city. This current election, which is more than six months overdue, was forced by our court action e.g. Saunders et al. v. WTU. Visualize our mutual progress if you entrust your vote and WTU resources to us!

We do better because we know better. The WTU can be a voice for members and can negotiate a better contract and improve working conditions. Without a change in President, the current state of confusion, failure to hold union meetings, ineffective advocacy, and weakness will continue to endanger your job and positive working conditions that facilitate teaching and learning. With the current union president Parker - you have no voice.

Nathan is the only candidate for union President with world class training in how to be a successful teachers union President. He is a Harvard Law School- Harvard Trade Union Program graduate and earned a Masters degree in Law and Ethics from the National Labor College/University of Baltimore.

If you are wrongfully terminated, it will be too late. Elect a strong President with excellent credentials and experience supported by an effective executive board who support a participative union democracy. Remember, Nathan and Candi have been fighting for you all along! Vote Saunders Slate ! Check out our website @ www.votesaunders2010.com An X mark is all it takes. Place your ballots inside the secret ballot and then send it off in the mailer provided. If you still have not received a ballot call the American Arbitration today @ 800-273-0726.

  • Digg
  • Del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • RSS