Friday, October 9, 2009

Why is the U.S. still subsidizing corn?

It's all about the lobbies. Why aren't there Republicans calling for an end to what could be considered socialism - subsidizing corn. It is also about disproportionate representation of rural states within the Senate. Every State is treated equally. We need to amend the Constitution so that we have equal representation.

in reference to:

"Commentary: Why is the U.S. still subsidizing corn?"
- Commentary: Why is the U.S. still subsidizing corn? | McClatchy (view on Google Sidewiki)

Rupert Murdoch wants you to pay for Reading news online

If he succeeds this will prove that Murdoch is the most powerful force in media. Are you going to let it happen?

in reference to: Jimmy Leach: Murdoch will pay for the end of free news - Online, Media - The Independent (view on Google Sidewiki)

Trade Deficit Declines but Doesn't Disappear

What does it matter if we are not exporting goods? We continue to run trade deficits year after year after year. That means the loss of more American jobs. This President has nothing to say on the subject. Is it any wonder the value of the dollar continues to dive.

in reference to:

"US trade gap registers surprise drop"
- US trade gap registers surprise drop (view on Google Sidewiki)

The President abandons Fellow African-American Candidate

The President puts politics above everything else. Even if it means abandoning a fellow Democrat. He knows that Thompson has no chance. But it is still typical of the politician Obama promised not to be.

in reference to: NY mayoral challenger gets lukewarm Obama backing | U.S. | Reuters (view on Google Sidewiki)

GOP member shoots target with Fla. Dem's initials

More craziness from Republicans.

in reference to:

"GOP member shoots target with Fla. Dem's initials"
- GOP member shoots target with Fla. Dem's initials (view on Google Sidewiki)

Video: Special Needs Student Beaten by Police Officer. Was it Justified?


A Dolton, Illinois, police officer assigned to a school was placed on administrative leave and later resigned after a surveillance video surfaced of him allegedly assaulting a special-needs student, officials said.

Ed Manzke, an attorney who represents the student, Marshawn Pitts, 15, told CNN Wednesday the officer beat Pitts for not adhering to the school's dress code.

The incident occurred in May at the Academy for Learning, a Dolton high school for special-needs students. Pitts was admitted to the school in May after moving from Iowa, Manzke said. He suffered brain injuries as a child when he was hit by a car.

The police officer, who has not been identified, reprimanded Pitts for not tucking in his shirt as school dress code and policy requires.

A video, released to Pitts' parents by the school several weeks after the incident, showed Pitts talking to the officer and a faculty member grabbing Pitts' arm. Pitts pulls away and walks down the hall, with the officer and faculty member close behind. But the officer then slams him against the lockers and pins him on the floor -- breaking his nose, according to Manzke.

Pitts was treated by a school nurse after the incident, then taken to the Dolton Police Department, where his mother picked him up, Manzke said.

The officer was taken to a hospital and treated for an eye scratch, Manzke said. But, he said, the officer was never charged with anything and an explanation for the incident was never provided.

In a written statement, Guy Lindsay, internal information officer for Dolton police, said the department was made aware of the incident and the tape on May 20. After review of the tape, the officer was removed from the school and placed on administrative leave pending the outcome of the investigation, Lindsay said.

While on administrative leave, the police officer returned to the department and voluntarily resigned, Lindsay said. The investigation continues, he said.

In a statement obtained by CNN affiliate WGN, the Academy for Learning said it could not comment on an incident involving a specific student.

President Obama wins Nobel Peace Prize: Is he Deserving?

The Nobel Peace Prize should be given to a President for actually accomplishing something, not just good intentions and gestures.

AP White House Correspondent:

The prize seems to be more for Obama's promise than for his performance. Work on the president's ambitious agenda, both at home and abroad, is barely underway, much less finished. He has no standout moment of victory that would seem to warrant a verdict as sweeping as that issued by the Nobel committee.

And what about peace? Obama is running two wars in the Muslim world—in Iraq and Afghanistan—and can't get a climate change bill through his own Congress.

His scorecard for the year is largely an "incomplete," if he's being graded.

He banned torture and other extreme interrogation techniques for terrorists. But he also promised to close the U.S. military prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, a source of much distaste for the U.S. around the world, a difficult task that now seems headed to miss his own January 2010 deadline.

He said he would end the Iraq war. But he has been slow to bring the troops home and the real end of the U.S. military presence there won't come until at least 2012, and that's only if both the U.S. and Iraq stick to their current agreement about American troop withdrawals.

He has pushed for new efforts to make peace between the Israelis and Palestinians. But he's received little cooperation from the two sides.

He said he wants a nuclear-free world. But it's one thing to telegraph the desire, in a speech in Prague in April, and quite another to unite other nations and U.S. lawmakers behind the web of treaties and agreements needed to make that reality.

He has said that battling climate change is a priority. But the U.S. seems likely to head into crucial international negotiations set for Copenhagen in December with legislation still stalled in Congress.
Mr. Obama is only the third U.S. President to win the Nobel Peace Prize while still in office. Theodore Roosevelt won it in 1906 and Woodrow Wilson in 1919.

Former President Jimmy Carter also won the prize in 2002, adds Knoller, but that was more than two decades after he left office.

Defending their surprising decision, the committee chairman said they sought not just to reward the winner of the Nobel Peace Prize, but to "enhance" the recipient's actions - to promote peace.

"We do hope that this can contribute a little bit to enhance what he is trying to do."

"It is a clear statement to the world that we want to advocate and promote," the efforts undertaken by Mr. Obama.

"Only very rarely has a person to the same extent as Obama captured the world's attention and given its people hope for a better future," Thorbjoern Jagland, chairman of the Nobel Committee said. "In the past year Obama has been a key person for important initiatives in the U.N. for nuclear disarmament and to set a completely new agenda for the Muslim world and East-West relations."

He added that the committee endorsed "Obama's appeal that 'Now is the time for all of us to take our share of responsibility for a global response to global challenges."'

Mr. Obama's name had been mentioned in speculation before the award but many Nobel watchers believed it was too early to award the president.
The award of this year’s Nobel peace prize to President Obama will be met with widespread incredulity, consternation in many capitals and probably deep embarrassment by the President himself.

Rarely has an award had such an obvious political and partisan intent. It was clearly seen by the Norwegian Nobel committee as a way of expressing European gratitude for an end to the Bush Administration, approval for the election of America’s first black president and hope that Washington will honour its promise to re-engage with the world.

Instead, the prize risks looking preposterous in its claims, patronising in its intentions and demeaning in its attempt to build up a man who has barely begun his period in office, let alone achieved any tangible outcome for peace.

The pretext for the prize was Mr Obama’s decision to “strengthen international diplomacy and co-operation between peoples”. Many people will point out that, while the President has indeed promised to “reset” relations with Russia and offer a fresh start to relations with the Muslim world, there is little so far to show for his fine words.
- Discuss this topic. What do you think?