Let me borrow one of the most recognized phrase of the time from one of the most famous deaf man ever to be on the radio where he discussed about the policies of Obama that continues to hurt the people of the United States. Rush Limbaugh said these famous words, “I hope Obama fails,” over a year ago on his radio much to the delight of conservatives everywhere. And let's change that phrase to:
But what does that suppose to mean? Is it the personal journey concept of a deaf/hh person that he hopes it would fail? Or the fact that people have used the deafhood mantra as a weapon of choice? I think it’d be more like the latter, not that I care about the word which I find already divisive. And it's being used as a political tool among some Deaf people that has already alienated many deaf and hard of hearing people, not to mention parents of deaf/hh children.
So, in following Rush Limbaugh's step, I hope deafhood fails.
Rush Limbaugh is a part of the deaf and hard of hearing community whether you like it or not. He participates in his own community in his own way and make use of his time when necessary. His journey is his own and doesn’t need the word “deafhood” to define his journey for him, nor have any Deaf organizations define him for who he is or what he should or should not do or what he ought to become. It’s really none of the people's business. And it makes no sense to bash Rush and then ask him to donate money afterwards. All in all, Rush will certainly not make that kind of donation for reasons only known to him.
My advice to Rush about donating money? Makes sure the money goes to a more deserving organization like this one as seen in this news story. Just don't sweat the small stuff.
It always happen, a new president, a new Halloween president mask. Or rather several designs of it. Now, we have several scary Obama mask and some realistic ones while others look too dark and others too white.
Here's a scary zombie "Zobama" mask enough to frighten kiddies away...even adults.
And here's a new first, an Obama joker Halloween mask which appears to be only one mask available for sale.
Big teeth!! This one's a toothpaste maker marketing dream.
Whenever there is a commentary in a blog criticizing Obama by taking him to task over certain short-sightedness or policy approach that has nothing to do with his skin color or ethnicity. Nor is it a racist, of course. What it boils down to is the right to freely express an opinion about the President of the United States but Liberals have decided to play the race card to the hilt but it has proven to be disastorous so far, of course. We see people who are being subjected at every turn called a "racist" by liberals' knee-jerking response who the overly protective and zealous Obama adulators. This, I'm sure, has happened many times when Obama first came on the scene back in 2007 onward for the 2008 presidential race and to today which has gone completely overboard with Obama contributing to the race card meme by calling Officer Crowley for "acting stupidly."
This whole racist charge isn't a just hearing people phenomenom thing, either. You have deaf people accuse others for being racist for making critical comments against the president. The first one that I remembered to have lobbed that charge, in so many words, came earlier this year. It was an unfortunate but a laughable charge. Mishka Zena (an Obama adulator?) had the, ahem, audacity to charge (J'accuse!) Rob Underhill in the blog comment over his blog article about Obama's trash after the inauguration stating what he wrote was racist. Mishka Zena made the charge with the presumption that by treating Obama differently is a racist act. Racist? You gotta be joking! Would it be any different had the President been a white Democrat with a green agenda and still saw messy result at the Mall on inauguration day? Ironically, it is the Democrats who are treating Obama differently by holding him up as the "messiah."
Nothing worse than to jump gun and use the color excuse and make a serious but unsubstantiated charges of racism. No matter what you say about Obama when criticizing him you will more than likely hear charges of racism from the mouths of Obama adulators.
Obama's bailout package with one measure containing $4.2 billion dollars where ACORN (widely know for their fraudulent activities supporting Obama only and not a neutral organization) will be eligible for it...without question.
Well, the bit about MLK, first Marxist President and the cartoon at the top came from the National Black Republican Association website. So, you can't accuse me of being racist which would be mighty stupid of you to try and do so.
So, please. Stop with the constant knee-jerking whenever one criticizes Obama that has nothing to do with the color of his skin or ethnicity but rather by the content of Obama's character and not his skin.
This is absolutely an eye-opener, especially when he gives a non-answer to a bill calling for complete de-funding of any federal monies to ACORN when it was passed by both the House and Senate.
STEPHANOPOULOS: But have your — have some of your allies made it easier for — handed your opponents some ammunition, like ACORN, for example…
OBAMA: Well, look, the — you know, I think that — are there folks in the Democratic camp or on the left who haven’t — haven’t always operated in ways that I’d appreciate? Absolutely.
STEPHANOPOULOS: Congress said they should cut off all funding for ACORN.
OBAMA: Is — is — is…
STEPHANOPOULOS: … all funding for ACORN. Are you for that?
OBAMA: Is that true on the other side, as well? Of course that’s true.
STEPHANOPOULOS: How about the funding for ACORN?
OBAMA: You know, it’s — frankly, it’s not really something I’ve followed closely. I didn’t even know that ACORN was getting a whole lot of federal money.
STEPHANOPOULOS: Both the Senate and the House have voted to cut it off.
OBAMA: You know, what I know is, is that what I saw on that video was certainly inappropriate and deserves to be investigated.
STEPHANOPOULOS: So you’re not committing to — to cut off the federal funding?
OBAMA: George, this is not the biggest issue facing the country. It’s not something I’m paying a lot of attention to.
The last two comments is quite damning which clearly shows that Obama does NOT want to de-fund all monies for ACORN. He is beholden to ACORN for helping him win by being a partisan organization, which is against the law. Remember, ACORN is synomous with Obama, and vice versa. Obama is ACORN! Remember Anita MonCrief, former employee of ACORN who blew the whistle on ACORN's activity and got fired for it? And her revelation earlier this year in February warning Democrats that ACORN has become a liability for them? Now, that Democrats have thrown ACORN under several NOLA yellow buses, you think it'd be a wee bit late for Democrats to have responded in kind?
Look for the 2010 Congress election to be a disastorous year for Democrats. Obama has become a liability for them already. It is the Democrats who are walking on eggshells right now....very delicate eggshells that is.
If people feel that they have to tiptoe around him because he is black, then they must be racist themselves. Otherwise, why the need to walk on eggshells?
I wonder why is that? Is it because any criticisms lobbed in the president's direction would instantly be called a "Raaaaaaaaaaacist!!" every single time? I think it's the Democrats who are doing the tiptoe-ing which means they are racist, to0?
Here's a prime example of calling one a racist that had nothing to do with the president but for having an opinion. And this was in reference to a cartoon of a monkey that was shot which was in reference to an earlier news story of an actual chimp that went mad and killed a person forcing cops to kill the animal. Here's an example dialogue.
DM: Exactly. Other presidents have been portrayed as a certain animal in other assorted political cartoons, but Obama gets a pass because hes black? F**k that.
J: Spoken like a true, narrow minded racist.
DM: I dont understand how I could be racist when I wanted Obama to win the presidency. I just dont believe in special treatment to people because he's a certain skin color. So cry foul all you want.
J: That's the whole point. You don't understand. Covert racism is rarely recognized by those most guilty of it.
No matter what you do or say, anything remotely critical of the president (even if it's not even directed at him) means that racism lies covertly in your heart. Because you see, "you don't understand," according to Newsweek all whiteys are born racist. How convenient and intellectually vapid, and not to mention utterly boring as well.
Looking at it now I don't think what Obama said was an accident but a perfectly timed comment done on purpose "..all wee weed- up." Most likely as a way to somehow provoke a conversation on what he meant by "all wee weed-up." And so, I'm thinking weed as in marijuana. Why? Well, for one he did go down to Mexico in April to discuss the economic issue that has been vexing Mexico. Second thing I noticed in the news today is that Mexico has just now legalized marijuana (in small amount). And so I quickly went to the Library of Congress on pending bills and searched for anything that has to do with marijuana. Yup, sure enough. Here is it for 2009, it's called "Personal Use of Marijuana by Responsible Adults Act of 2009," H.R. 2493, sponsored by, who else, Barney Frank and introduced on June 18, 2009.
6/18/2009--Introduced. Personal Use of Marijuana by Responsible Adults Act of 2009 - Prohibits the imposition of any penalty under an Act of Congress for the possession of marijuana for personal use or for the not-for-profit transfer between adults of marijuana for personal use.
Deems the possession of 100 grams or less of marijuana as personal use (one ounce or less for a not-for-profit transfer between adults).
Allows the imposition of a civil penalty under the Controlled Substances Act for the public use of marijuana if such penalty does not exceed $100.
Mind you this is for small amount of marijuana possession for personal use only without penalty under Act of Congress. Which means this paves the way for states to pass similar bills so they can start the machination on getting those weeds into anxious and curious users. Not to mention a good way to bring in tax dollars, too. California is one state thinking about it as a way to generate cash for their cash strapped state back in February.
Assemblyman Tom Ammiano will announce legislation on Monday to legalize marijuana and earn perhaps $1 billion annually by taxing it.
But this isn't all an accident (note the sarcasm in irony use of the word "accident" and "all wee weed-up") I think this whole thing timed and it wouldn't hurt Obama's image since he smoked pot while in high school as seen in Hawaii Punahou's yearbook photo. Even Mexico's recent legalization of marijuana is for small amount for personal use, too, though quite small by a factor 20 when compared to theHR 2943 bill with the limit at 100 grams or 80 joints worth.
The maximum amount of marijuana for "personal use" under the new law is 5 grams—the equivalent of about four joints.
From the looks of things, I don't think Obama's "..all wee weed-up" blurb was not an accident but a perfectly timed one (or rather a subconscious play that bubbled to the surface) to hopefully generate discussions on marijuana use in the United States. It isn't the same as "misunderestimated" but with Obama high on weed-upping most anything nowadays how could it hurt him now with a passage to make marijuana for personal use legal across the United States?
Recently there's been a lot of finger pointing at Sarah's "Death Panels" comment calling her a hypocrite because while as Governor of Alaska she issued a proclamation for “Healthcare Decisions Day” to be recognized on April 16. Supporters of this current health care reform bill were breathlessly calling out Palin's proclamation as the same thing as the "death panels" she brought up earlier and proceeded to call her a hypocrite and accusing her of "flip flopping." One funny thing when they said that. Are they acknowledging that Section 1233 of HR 3200 health bill does contain provisions governing that "death panels" do exist?
That'd be a losing argument.
When people cannot even see the vast and simple differences between this health care reform bill to that of Palin's proclamination to generate greater awareness and personal responsibility to plan for end-of-life care. Indeed, iron doors shut tight and while their deaf mind rusts.
There is this fatal flaw in reasoning on calling out Palin's "death panels" comment while calling her a hypocrite. How so? Let me count the ways.
First of all in the health care bill there is a passage (there was one but now dropped) to offer financial incentitives for the push on end-of-life care at the behest of the doctors involved just to save money and for doctors to make money during the process as well. A slippery slope issue right there.
From NPR where :Mr. Jay Sekulow (Chief Counsel, American Center for Law & Justice) explains what and how this bill works.
The problem here is the financial incentive for the entire bill is to reduce cost. That will end up either being one of two things: rationing of services or life care, end-of-life-care decisions based on economic motive, where the doctor becomes basically the advocate for the determination as to life end, which should really be a decision that the doctor's involved in, obviously, but with consultation with the family.
A second problem with this bill.
And also the idea that the government itself, the bureaucrats, or the government, the doctors will be reporting back to the government these results. I mean, it almost sounds like a commission sales approach, which is not what doctors need to be in the position of doing. This idea you report back: Were you successful in getting A, B, C and D.
And these are decisions that have medical implications, ethical implications, implications for people that have religious faith, for those that do, moral concerns. All of those are the totality of what takes place here. And this idea that you just simply give this to a government commission, who's then in consultation with the doctor, I think, is dangerous.
Mr. Jay Sekulow explains further how consultation works in this bill.
The entire program, under the Health Reform Bill, is monitored by a government panel. Who do you think came up with, for instance, what would be included in the consultation? If a consultation's going to take place, and if in fact it is going to be a reimbursable expense under the Medicaid, which I have no problem with, who made the determination of what goes in that consultation? The government did. The panel did. The medical experts.
Hence, the worry over a "death panels" (note the quotation marks) scenario where there'd be financial incentives to reduce cost and quality of care. A classic case of what a slippery slope would look like.
This bill is vastly different by night and day to that of Palin's statewide awareness message which was sought to increase the public’s knowledge about creating living wills and establishing powers of attorney. Just a simple public awareness message to proclaim April 16 as "Health Care Decisions Day." Nothing insidous about the message and no where near the hypocrisy level either accusing her of promoting that same "death panels" for her own state.
Bowing to Republican pressure and an uneasy public, President Barack Obama's administration signaled Sunday it is ready to abandon the idea of giving Americans the option of government-run insurance as part of a new health care system.
Somebody's mad right now. But that doesn't mean we're out of the woods yet. The first obvious problem to this whole thing is that we don't have the money. We're already $11.5 trillion in debt. Where will the money come from to pay for this boondoggle nationalization attempt over health care? It's better to work at the root of the problem first such using tort reforms as a leverage and lower costs at the same time instead of ramming a nationalized and socialized health care down everybody's throat at the expense of our economy and national security.
And lastly, well maybe not, there is this problem of Democrats who will try and somehow sneak in a provision that was dropped earlier back into the bill or somehow find a way to get around. Why? This. And then of course we need to heed what the dear One said his goals were:
"Remember, we are going to rebuild every school, bridge and road in the country. We will fix healthcare. We will restore the constitution, end illegal wars [and] reduce emissions of greenhouse gasses."
I'll say it out loud here for all to see. Somebody is misunderstanding the whole thing in a post which got off topic when I broached a subject about mulatto in a thread I started but it is no longer there. Thank goodness for Google cache. How kind it was for moderators to delete the whole thread, quietly, shhhh, without ever informing me or AD members rather than just delete posts that have the "offending" word instead. Either there's been a misunderstanding on their part or we have some very, very sensitive people out therewho hide under the race mantle. I think it's more like the latter tho'.
But you cannot and shall not call a president a mulatto in that forum. EVER! *stomps foot like an upset little boy*
How politically expedient. How...hypocritical. How...convenient.
Let me count the ways.
Recognize the common theme that liberals go by on nowadays? Put a joker face of Obama and you're called a racist. Or put on a Hitler face and you're a racist. Do not support health careand you're a racist. But a white SEIU union thug beat up a black guy captured in a YouTube video and suddenly liberals look the other way saying it wasn't a racist attack and nothing to do with race with a straight face even after the Gates-gate incident between a white cop and professor Gates, and a president that acted stupidly in all that fracas.
*sigh*
All this is really getting old and it's being done for political expedency or agenda driven purposes rather than debate in a dialogue that's meaningful and not worry about being called a "racist" at every turn. It's highly ironic that people use the color of a person's skin as an excuse to level racist charges. And to discuss race in a subcontext fashion using the word mulatto would have you charged as a racist in the attempt to "disrespect other members" in a discussion forum.
This defies logic. And people need to seriously lighten up. Like, dude man.
Because using the very word "mulatto" in a context of a race discussion might actually offend very sensitive people who claim the race mantle even though they're white. Maybe they think they count because they happen to have a friend, extended family, or a spouse of ethnic diversity?
How convenient. How intellectually dishonest.
Wait! Before you get into temper tantrum let me give you an example.
The joker president. Putting a joker face on a president isn't about race nor is it racist. Look here in the Google image section to compare and contrast.
Exhibit one on joker faces - Bush. Exhibit two on joker faces - Obama.
And you're telling me people who use a joker face on a president is a racist?
How convenient. The hypocrisy is just...dripping here.
Another compare and contrast example.
Look to Deafreedom discussion forum on the topic "Obama is a mulatto" (I had a topic thread discussion I started yesterday in AD "Famous Mulatto People" but that got removed....rather quickly....about celebs and well known people who are mulatto. Even the Google cache wasn't quick enough to capture that thread). I know I won't be at risk for banishment from DF or have my "Obama is a mulatto" thread removed just for discussing the mulatto topic and saying that Obama is a mulatto. And if DF members get into a tizzy and complain over the topic "Obama is a mulatto" need to take a chill pill. It's a fact. Obama is a mulatto. Even Mulatto.org says it with great pride to see the first mulatto president by describing him as a mulatto. Yet, could it be that the liberal white lily skinned people are the ones who are doing the complaining and retching over the word...mulatto? What are the odds that people will soon level a charge against DF by calling it a racist forum just because of a thread "Obama is a mulatto" got started?
Yet all this reminds me of a description "hearing impaired" in reference to people whose hearing is impaired and by using that word you'd likely be called an "audist" by some of the Deaf elites. Problem is, some of these people read way, way too much into these things. Same with mulatto. Thin skinned people are no fun. They just run to their mommies instead demand censorship or feign a bit of fake outrage as a matter of political correctness.
Hmmm...
Funny thing is I have mixed blood as well. Recently my uncle who is a genealogist nut worked on for years to gather information about his side of the family and was able to trace back to one our ancestor who is the sister of Pocahontas. Whoa! Found out last week when my mother came over to visit. I'm gonna ask my uncle to supply me his CD on his genealogy work. But I'm not the only one with mixed blood. My wife's blood is a little more "thicker" with North American Indian blood in her (her grandfather is 1/2 Indian). So, in a sense my wife is a mulatto. So am I but it's not that obvious with my strong Irish features and caucasian skin color. Even Obama's blood is 3% Irish. Though you won't see him celebrating on St. Patricks Day. But looking back at the whole Pocahontas discovery was a strange revelation since my Mom whose brother is my uncle helped me say the word "Pocahontas" when I was a little boy. I remember vividly that one. Since I am of mixed blood, or "mulatto" in a sense, then I can't be racist for discussing the mulatto topic in deaf/hh forums then?
Now, I'm sure Obama as a person and human being is a cool guy. Something that you can sit down and maybe have beer with him, and chat or play a good game of basketball with him. The problem is that he lacks proper judgement and experience on the politics of things. It's the combined qualification, experience and political knowledge I look for in a president. Not skin color which is why many people voted Obama for his "blackness." Condoleeza Rice, Michael Steele, Bobby Jindal and even Colin Powell are much better choices to be president than Obama. And that's just looking at their background, not the skin color. Just because I disagree with Obama's policy and direction does not make me a racist person. The articles or comments I write are not by its nature racist. So, please do not use the color of Obama's skin to be used as YOUR excuse to set your poltical correctness agenda and tone that are politically and conveniently expedient for you. Leveling the racist charge is the worst form of demogaugery around. Doing so shows obvious intellectual dishonesty in this whole charade while hiding under the race mantle. You, too, AllDeaf mods and the few who got their sensibilities challenged when I said that Obama is a mulatto by accusing me of being a racist, implicitly so. You dudes need to seriously chill, man.
Meanwhile, enjoy a video of me playing a 1908 piano piece called "Black and White Rag" by George Botsford. A well known and famous ragtime piece in an era when Scott Joplin was (and still is) the King of Ragtime. The picture at the top of my blog is Scott Joplin, the most famous black Ragtime composer. Heck, with me playing ragtime pieces I'd probably be called a racist. Maybe an "audist," too. But do enjoy one of my many favorite ragtime pieces, Black and White Rag. And if you like hearing me play ragtime piano then visit my Ragtime Piano blog.
UPDATE III:
Another update and clarification for those lurkers, you know who.
I was never informed of the change on the wording from "mulatto" to "bi-racial" as I was just recently informed but the thread is no longer there. Oooh, how brave. How convenient, too. Nor was I ever contacted about it beforehand. They made NO effort to contact me just to hear my side of the story since there's no way to get in to check any PMs. You want to talk about intellectual dishonesty while claiming to be "neutral"? There you go. There's a case load right there. At least Deafreedom.com mods never went the route of political correctness just to appease a few limp-wristed complainers who think that having "friends, families or spouses of diversity" earn them the equivalent race mantle. It's simply an example of pc for the sake of expediency. They shout "Fire!" when it's just a flashlight I'm shinning on rather than play the guessing game.
UPDATE II:
Manufactured outrage. Tho' this baby really is crying.
Go figure. Mulatto. Mulatto. Mulatto. If it was such a racist word why the use, especially in Mulatto.org - a site where mulattoes come together to discuss their mixed heritage? I suppose "hapas" (mixed Asian race) will be considered as an offensive word, too? The first happas U.S. president? The first hapas pro-golfer? That would be Tiger Woods. Get a grip folks. But what's interesting is the increased constituitional resilency seen in people with mixed heritage.
And, turning racist ideas of "hybrid degeneracy" on their head, Psychology Today magazine earlier this year featured studies finding that Eurasians were regarded as more attractive than whites or Asians and healthier because of their genetic diversity, associated with a lower incidence of some diseases.
So, AD get their wet panties in a wad over the term "mulatto" thinking it's a racist term. I suppose if I say that Obama has a lot of "mulo" in him you'd think I'm making a racist slur on him? Get real. The meaning of mulo in Spanish according to the Real Academia Espagnola is "a person characterized by strength and vigour".
For once, folks, stop with these knee jerk reactions thinking everything has a racist connotation when there is none to be had.
If you don't know by now Obama is recognized as the most liberal Senator out there where he voted 97% of the time with Democrats in Congress and during his campaigning helped by his Chicago thugs (the Clintons brought up "thugs" first when Hillary was still in contention for the race) he made a promise once he get into the White House. He broke two promisesso far and that's even before he set foot inside the Oval Office.
The first broken promise was the one where the candidate of "change" was going to bring a new tone to Washington. This one has been broken by Obama's choice for Chief of Staff: Rahm Emanuel. Representative Emanuel (D- Illinois) is a hard core, far left, liberal as well as being an old Clinton hack. Not only that, but Emanuel is not a "new tone" kind of guy but is a Pit bull of epic proportions. The parallel would have been McCain claiming a new tone but picking Karl Rove as his Chief of Staff.
The second one was that Obama promised to not let lobbyists have a place in his new administration. He sure looks raring to go and give these lobbyists jobs like never before.
Despite campaign trail promises that special interests wouldn’t be a part of his administration, President-elect Barack Obama’s has sent signals to the lobbyists that they can get jobs with him.
...the overall message to the lobbying community appears to run counter to the Democratic senator’s campaign promise to keep special interest advocates at arms length.
With Obama's record of hardly ever reaching across the aisle, don't expect him do the same once he sets foot in the White House for the next four years. Just as don't expect the new Chief of Staff, Rahm Emanuel, to be that open minded when he prefered to use a steak knife to point out to Clinton's enemies on a piece of paper.
RUSH LIMBAUGH: He is [a] good old-fashioned Chicago thug, just like Obama is a good old-fashioned Chicago thug. On the night of the Clinton election, Rahm Emanuel was so angry at the president's enemies that he stood up at a celebratory dinner with colleagues from the campaign -- Rahm Emanuel grabbed a steak knife and he began rattling off a list of betrayers, and as he listed their names, he shouted, ‘Dead! Dead! Dead!’ And he plunged the steak knife into the table after every name. This is not a bunch of people that are going to [govern from the center] --
And Obama wants Rahm to be Chief of Staff?
Obama. A man who wears an empty suit and says empty promises but sure has a lotta strings on him right now who thinks government is the answer by extending more control over the people. But according to a Rassmussen poll last month most people agree with Reagan's sentiment in his first inaugural address that "Government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem."
This would be the most moronic suggestion of the day. Obama zealots are suggesting a new National holiday called "Obama Day" or something to that effect even before he has done anything in office. In fact, in North Korea there is a holiday to celebrate the current leader KimJong Il's birthday which is one of the country's most important holidays.
Thousands of people danced and brought flowers in North Korea's capital Friday to celebrate the 65th birthday of "dear leader" Kim Jong Il..
Besides, we already have a National holiday called "President Day" which falls on February 18. There is no need for an "Obama Day" holiday. It'd be one of the most idiotic suggestion of the century.
Just unreal how people celebrate the Obamesiah's win or their expectation from "The One" on how he could ease the sufferings of his supporters.
At least five people were arrested across the city after Barack Obama's rally in Grant Park, including a woman who slapped a Chicago police officer, saying police couldn't arrest her anymore, prosecutors said today.
Most of the others celebrated the historic occasion with gunfire.
Celita Hart, 19, stood silently in court today when she appeared for a bond hearing. Prosecutors said Hart, who is black, yelled " 'White [expletive], [expletive] McCain -you white police can't do nothing anymore.'" With that, she reached through the window of a squad car and slapped a white male officer in the face, according to Assistant State's Atty. Lorraine Scaduto.
Gunfire? In a populated area? Shooting in the sky I would surmise? You know gunfire in the air in the past have killed people when bullets came down killing a little girl or boy or somebody else. Anybody who do that sort of thing are morons.
Of course, people expect alot from the Obamesiah thinking he'll pay for their gas and pay off their mortgages, and who knows what else. Remember a bunch of angry Obama supportersdemanding that they get paid for their work with Obama after he won the White House? And that was only two days after he won the election! Imagine when they have to wait for the Obamesiah thinking he made a promise on forking them over some free government, tax-payer supported money. They'll be so mad and disillusion I'm sure they'll start firing their guns in the air in anger that they've been duped.
Perhaps the concept called "hard work" or "an honest day's work for an honest pay" may come off a bit foreign for some of these people expecting the Obamesiah to somehow levitate money from the U.S. Treasury and give it to them instead?
Only time will tell and we probably won't have to wait that long to find out.
Obama to set up a draft-like bill requiring 13 to 25 year olds to perform community service. Yes, REQUIRE.
The Obama Administration will call on Americans to serve in order to meet the nation’s challenges. President-Elect Obama will expand national service programs like AmeriCorps and Peace Corps and will create a new Classroom Corps to help teachers in underserved schools, as well as a new Health Corps, Clean Energy Corps, and Veterans Corps. Obama will call on citizens of all ages to serve America, by developing a plan to require 50 hours of community service in middle school and high school and 100 hours of community service in college every year. Obama will encourage retiring Americans to serve by improving programs available for individuals over age 55, while at the same time promoting youth programs such as Youth Build and Head Start.
So for each kid going through middle and high school will have to perform a total of 350 hours of community service over seven years (grades 6 - 12). Plus, if they decide to go to college they must perform an additional 400 hours of service for the four years they are in college. Or if you're a typical Gallaudet University student average length of stay would be 6 years which means Gallaudet University students MUST perform 600 hours of community service.
Now, let's look at the court system on how they punish offenders by sending them to do community work as a punishment.
Interesting. With an Obama administration he is going to force middle, high and college school kids to perform community service much like a judge who orders an offender many hours of community service. Also, where will the Obama administration get the money to run these programs which will rival that of our national defense budget that runs around $600 billion dollars a year. Where will the money come from? Why, from you guys. The middle class people who will see a tax increase when Obama promised there wouldn't be a tax increase on 95% of the working class.
You see, it's patriotric to pay higher taxes and it is also patriotic when the government basically drafts 13 to 25 year olds and force them to do required community service.
What will happen if one refuses to do community service as a requirement in school? Get punished by a judge and perform more community service?
Like I said and I will keep repeating this, this is just the beginning of what socialist and Marxist ideals are all about.
UPDATE: Obama also when he suggested this new youth program a few months back that he promised to boost the size of the military. With the new this program of Obama's where will he get the extra money? From you! The middle class people who will see a rise in taxes on their income.
UPDATE III: Obama forgot to remove "require" in one of his Change.gov website on service requirement,
Require 100 Hours of Service in College: Obama and Biden will establish a new American Opportunity Tax Credit that is worth $4,000 a year in exchange for 100 hours of public service a year.
Heck, I'd say that those that get their SSI do 100, 200 or even 500 hours of community service as an abled body person as part of the agreement in order to receive welfare help. Picking up trash might be a good start for some people.
UPDATE IV: Jeepers! Even my old high school, Berkley High, in a math tutoring forum did one person go off tangent and talked about how community requirement should be forced, er, required of students to do their community service as a "duty" and as part of their graduation requirement,
What I don't understand is why there isn't a general community service requirement for all students. All students, not just those in AP and Honors classes, need to learn that they can and should contribute to the community. They should be doing this community service, not just to get into college, but because it is their responsibility as a citizen in this society. This community service requirement ideally could be met even by helping to clean up and maintain vegetation on campus. I've been rather surprised that very few students currently participate in ongoing efforts to make the school a pleasant and attractive place. The students seem to be in an entitlement mode - it's someone else's job to provide for them. A community service requirement could help teach them that they have responsibilities to help themselves and the community.
No doubt by now that person is an Obama Koolaid drinker.
22. What happened to the community service requirement?
Under the new curriculum, this has been replaced with the service learning requirement. Community service is no longer required for graduation under the new curriculum. Students following catalog requirements prior to 2007-08 will continue to follow the community service requirements.
Ok, Jim Jones, you have the floor. What flavor will they drink now?
* Completion of the community service requirement. Every undergraduate student entering Gallaudet University will be required to contribute 80 hours of approved community service. The level of community service required will be adjusted for transfer and readmitted students. For transfer and readmitted Required community students entering with: service prior to graduation: Senior standing 20 hours Junior standing 40 hours Sophomore standing 60 hours Freshman standing 80 hours
Remember, it said "approved community service" and so it's like they didn't have much say on choosing. It's funny, you pay Gallaudet University the tuitions and fees and they say you must perform community service as a graduation requirement like picking up trash and do other unpaid work that a student actually had pay to get to learn about academics of their choice. I wonder why Gallaudet University dropped that requirement just last year?
Enrollment trends. Undergraduate enrollment at Gallaudet has generally declined over the past 17 years from a high of 1,825 in 1990. In the fall of 2007 (fiscal year 2008), the enrollment of degree-seeking undergraduates was 1,080, graduate enrollment was 414, and enrollment of non-degree seeking students was 139, the lowest levels in well over 20 years. The total enrollment of 1,633 includes 1,236 full time students and 397 part-time students. Maintaining or increasing undergraduate enrollment is difficult for Gallaudet because of the literacy and communications challenges facing many of its prospective students and the need to achieve an appropriate balance between providing access to as many students as possible and maintaining high standards. In addition, students who are deaf and hard of hearing have increasing access to programs at regular postsecondary institutions and the majority of students who are deaf and hard of hearing are attending these programs.
Enrollment data for fiscal year 2009 will not become available until October of 2008. However, enrollment is likely to continue to decline in fiscal year 2009. This is partly due to lingering effects of the negative publicity resulting from student protests in fiscal years 2006 and 2007, negative reviews from the Middle States Commission on Higher Education (MSCHE), increasing mainstream options for students who are deaf, and the new, more stringent admission standards being implemented at Gallaudet in fiscal year 2008.
Measure 1.1 of 11: The number of full-time and part-time, degree-seeking undergraduate students enrolled at Gallaudet University. (Desired direction: increase) 1365
Year....Target...Actual.........................Status 1998......1,339......Measure not in place 1999......1,250.......1,300.........................Target Exceeded 2000.....1,250......1,318..........................Target Exceeded 2001.....1,250.......1,321.........................Target Exceeded 2002.....1,250......1,243.........................Did Not Meet Target 2003.....1,250......1,243.........................Did Not Meet Target 2004.....1,250......1,236.........................Did Not Meet Target 2005.....1,250......1,207..........................Did Not Meet Target 2006.....1,250......1,274..........................Target Exceeded 2007.....1,250......1,206..........................Did Not Meet Target 2008.....1,250......1,018..........................Did Not Meet Target 2009.....1,250....(October 2008)......... Pending
The declininng enrollment was due to a lot of factors and that was mostly because of increasing communication accessibility at many universities and colleges for a deaf and hard of hearing person to choose from. But it is interesting that the report blame the Gallaudet Protest in helping stifle enrollment, of course. The falling enrollment didn't occur over the last 5 years like some Deaf bloggers insist but rather over the last 19 years because of improving communication technology and services offered in many universities and colleges for deaf and hard of hearing students.
But note the precipitous drop for 2008 enrollment figure from 2006. A drop of almost 260 undergrad students. Ironically, 2006 year showed an uptick of undergrad enrollment from 1207 to 1274 students that exceeded target expectation for that year in 2006. That was also the year when the Gallaudet University protest occurred. Prospective students along with their parents saw the whole protest situation from the news media that left a bad taste in their mouths about Gallaudet University and decided to send their kids to a different university or college that have excellent communication services. We won't know what the enrollment figure for the 2008-2009 school year until sometime this year. But the G.U. Fiscal Year 2009 report warned that they expect more enrollment decline for the 2008-2009 school year.
Also, from 2000 to 2008 the amount of money appropriated to Gallaudet University from Congress went from $85 million dollars to $133 million dollars. And for 2009 budget Gallaudet University is asking an additional $600,000 from Congress on top of the $133 million dollars (see page 8). And they justify the additional money while enrollement declines? I wonder what will the budget request be like for 2010 when a Democrat majority led Congess in an Obama adminstration will do to help with the budget cuts? Will Gallaudet University be one of those soon-to-be budget cut victims and see abudget cut of, oh say, $50 million dollars for 2010? Maybe Obama will use a scalpel approach, a term he used extensively throughout his campaigning, and slice some numbers off for universities and colleges that get their fundings from Congress?
For the first time budget request for 2008 and 2009 remain the same at $59.2 billion dollars (which represents almost 2% of the entire Federal budget). Perhaps the additional $600,000 request by Gallaudet University for 2009 will not be met?
I'd say that Gallaudet University have about 2 years before their future increase budget requests will not be met but see a slash instead from a Democrat-controlled Congress. Will we see the start of a real decline of Gallaudet University and go below the devastating 1000 undergrads enrollment mark? After all, for 2007 - 2008 school year, enrollment figure was at 1018 students. Will Gallaudet University slowly be transformed into a university of mostly hearing students as a way to survive? The Department of Education already approved, starting in 2006, that Gallaudet University can admit up to 5% of the newly enrolled undergraduate students be hearing undergraduate students (see page 13).
Will Gallaudet University thrive or wither under an Obama administration? I'm thinking the latter. But congrats to those who "successful" participated in the Gallaudet protest which helped manage to scare away 260 prospective students from enrolling at Gallaudet University. We'll see how 2008-2009 enrollment year will pan out, and especially the 2009-2010 year when MSCHE reaffirmed Gallaudet’s Accreditation in June, 2008 which could mean an increased enrollment for undergraduate students. But we'll see.
Let me borrow one of the most recognized phrase of the time from one of the most famous deaf man ever to be on the radio where he discussed about the policies of Obama that continues to hurt the people of the United States. Rush Limbaugh said these famous words, “I hope Obama fails,” over a year ago on his radio much to the delight of conservatives everywhere. And let's change that phrase to:
