Police chief in Trayvon Martin case steps down, racial bias persists

Amidst allegations of misconduct and racism, Bill Lee has temporarily stepped down as police chief of Sanford, FL, the city where Travyon Martin was killed. Lee's decision comes on the heels of much criticism of his choice to allow Martin's killer George Zimmerman to go free under the state's Stand Your Ground law.

To many, Martin's murder and its subsequent treatment by the Sanford police is anecdotal evidence of the persistence of racial bias everywhere from the front of a 7-Eleven to the highest reaches of the national government. As the story goes, Zimmerman became suspicious of Martin as he (Martin) was "just walking around looking about." Writer E. J. Graff coined the term "Walking While Black" to describe this sort of unfounded suspicion of minorities.

In an interesting op-ed by Sally Kohn, Kohn draws parallels between Trayvon Martin and President Obama. Just as Zimmerman was suspicious of Martin for Walking While Black, Obama's critics don't trust him because he is Governing While Black. The kind of implicit racial bias that Obama faces isn't exactly subtle. As Kohn points out:

"President Barack Obama is the first African-American president...(and) from day one, conservatives have attacked the president's religion, citizenship, and essential patriotism....Their rhetoric often evokes the same racial animus that Zimmerman seems to have expressed....Newt Gingrich has labeled President Obama 'the most dangerous president in history'....Rush Limbaugh said: 'Obama is an angry black guy.'"

This racial bias is even rooted in scientific studies; we're all familiar with the Black Doll/White Doll experiment, but a recent study concluded that subjects showed more support for the exact same healthcare reform proposals if they were credited to Bill Clinton rather than Barack Obama.

Despite the acknowledgement of this problem, though, it doesn't seem like much has really changed, especially in terms of suspicion of black men, whether they be 17-year-old boys or leaders of the free world. Racial bias may not be overt anymore, but it's deeply embedded in the fabric of the politics, justice system, and people of the United States, so much so that it can threaten the dignity of the presidency or kill a harmless boy.

Please share any thoughts you have on these issues in the comments section...

"The Obamas"

"Daily Show" host Jon Stewart commented on the very controversial book "The Obamas" by Jodi Kantor. There has been much controversy over the accuracy of the things mentioned in the book. Having no interviews with the Obamas' themselves, people are skeptical when reading the book.

Jon Stewart, having recently read the book, comments on his show saying that "I'm surprised at the controversy because the book seems to portray Michelle Obama as a complex yet human individual struggling with this unbelievable situation yet remaining the moral compass and center of an administration trying to find its footing."

Again, due to the convoluted ways of the media, they have, once again, twisted the book into an un-needed controversy about the relationship between husband and wife, as well as husband, wife, and aides.

My question to you is would you read this book? If so, would you find it credible in it's claims?

On to Mars: Obama declares, 'I expect to see it'

On Thursday, President Barack Obama predicted that his new plans for space exploration would lead American astronauts on history, almost fantastic journeys to an asteroid and then to Mars - and in his lifetime - relying on rockets and propulsion still to be imagined and built. "I expect to be around to see it... we want to leap into the future," Obama said. Sound familiar? President John F. Kennedy's declared in 1961, "I believe that this nation should commit itself to achieving the goal, before this decade is out, of landing a man on the Moon and returning him safely to Earth." That goal was fulfilled in 1969. President Obama has said that by 2025, the nation will have a new spacecraft "designed for long journeys to allow us to begin the first-ever crewed missions beyond the moon into deep space." "We'll start by sending astronauts to an asteroid for the first time in history," he said. "By the mid-2030s, I believe we can send humans to orbit Mars and return them safely to Earth. And a landing on Mars will follow. And I expect to be around to see it." The biggest criticisms of Obama's plans have been that they have lacked details and goals. Several Republicans, including Sen. David Vitter of Louisiana and Rep. Rob Bishop of Utah, assailed Obama's plan and speech, calling his plans "job-killing." White House science adviser John Holdren summed up Obama's program as "a faster pace in space, more missions to more destinations sooner at lower cost."

If NASA can do it, then why not? Another achievement for mankind sounds nice to me. I just hope that Obama is not biting off more than he can chew. If they can accomplish this then that's great. I just hope it's accomplished eventually in our lifetime.

Obama supports repeal of health insurance antitrust exemption

I thought this might be relevant to those of us in Econ, because it deals with antitrust laws. Basically, the health insurance industry is exempt from some of the antitrust regulations. This exemption has been in place since the end of World War II. It was instated in order to allow new competition in the health care industry and lower consumer costs.

The health care bill passed in the House would have repealed this, but the one in the Senate would not have.

Today, White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs said:

"At its core, health reform is all about ensuring that American families and businesses have more choices, benefit from more competition and have greater control over their own health care," Gibbs said.

"Repealing this exemption is an important part of that effort. Today, there are no rules outlawing bid rigging, price fixing and other insurance company practices that will drive up health care costs and often drive up their own profits as well."

Advocates of the repeal argue that the current exemption has allowed health care companies to divide the country into "local monopolies"

Opponents of the repeal, however, point to the state regulations still must follow. They believe that a complete repeal is unnecessary.

Obama's plan also calls for the secretary of Health and Human Services to work with a seven-member board made up of doctors, economists and consumer and insurance representatives to review the recent premium hikes.

I'm pretty undecided on this issue, and I don't have a lot of background information. Will this really make a huge difference in health care? I agree that insurers shouldn't be exempt from antitrust laws, but I don't really understand the difference this would make. Would premiums drastically go down? What do you think? Will this make a big difference on the insurance market? Is it just Obama's latest battle against privatized health care?

Really, another security breach?

link in title

For those of you that watched the Olympic opening ceremonies, I'm sure you recognized Joe Biden in attendance. The Vancouver police have just reported that there was a security breach that allowed an man with false credentials (i.e. a fake pass created from the internet) to be within a few yards of Vice President Joe Biden. Although the event resulted in no harm to Biden and the man was unarmed, it signals yet another failure of security. The man was able to get through several airport security-esque checkpoints with completely fabricated identification.

Considering the state dinner crashers and now this, is there something wrong with the way Obama and Biden are being protected? I mean, people are making it look pretty easy to get close to them. It certainly makes me wonder if there have been other breaches that have gone unnoticed. Does this happen with many administrations but it's just more publicized now? What are your thoughts?

Sarah Palin to become Fox News Commentator

Sarah Palin, former Vice Presidential Candidate, has signed a deal with Fox News. She will be appearing on Fox as a political commentator, joining other well known "Republican-turned-TV talking heads" like Mike Huckabee and Karl Rove.

This, according to political analysts, implies that she will not be running for the Presidency in 2012. Democrats seem to be rather sad about this, because they know that Obama would not lose to Palin.

I'm not really sure what to say about this one. Considering Palin's credibility among the intellectual communities, Fox may be hurting itself. Then again, this is a terrific example of Narrowcasting. It would certainly appeal to the rather large Fundamentalist portion of the country, but who knows? We'll just have to wait and see.

Killing wolves

After 8 years of Bush's poor environmental work and standards, most green activists hoped Obama would an "evironmental superhero"....but has he been? He's been better than Bush but not perfect so far. Obama has neglected to outlaw the horrible practice of wolf hunting in the west. Hunting any animal is horrible enough, but hunting predators is even worse. It completely throws off the eco system--(predator populations controll themselves) . Wolves have a very complex family social structure, so if you kill an alpha wolf the whole pack will suffer. Also wolves are very easy to hunt because they live in packs, so its not much of a sport/skill to shoot one--its just evil. And contrary to popular belief wolves do not kill humans "There has never been a confirmed case of a healthy, wild wolf killing a human being in North America.". go to http://www.livingwithwolves.org/index.html for for wolf info. To check out Obama's action regarding other environmental issues go to http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/11/04/one-year-later-obamas-mos_n_344511.html?slidenumber=FXh2daZW24o%3D#slide_image

How far will Obama stretch his power?

In class today, Commissar Silton commented on the expansion of executive power from the Bush presidency, and how Obama has kept many of the new toys Bush left for him.
Bush imposed signing statements, allowing him to interpret and decide how much he will or will not obey a congressional bill, therefore giving the executive powers of interpretation formerly held by the judicial branch.

The Obama administration has chosen to keep many of the Bush imposed novelties to the presidential sphere of influence, including the right to confine whoever they choose under the "unlawful enemy combatant" card, as seen when Obama did not detain Al Marri, a citizen of Qatar who was held captive for five years without charges but left the possibility that he could detain people in this manner in the future.

To clarify my position on this topic, i must explain my views about the role of the president. I believe that first and foremost, it is Obama's job to look out for the safety of the general population and to solve the nations greatest problem, which is the failing economy.

While Bush imposed powers stretch the executive influence beyond the comfort zones of many informed citizens, such as my family and myself, Obama has begun to revolutionize the scope of presidential power.

Firstly let me point out that the Obama presidency, more than most before it has become iconic to Americans in many ways. When Mishelle planted an organic garden, so did countless american families. The media has gone far with its support of Obama and has taken it to the point that millions of people practically worship the man. Whenever Obama says something interesting to the public, it is sure to make headline news and have more influence than could possibly be safe.

On monday of this week, President Obama was asked about his thoughts on rapper Kanye West's outburst during the VMA awards, after telling the reporter that Kanye's actions were "very inappropriate", Obama called West a "jackass"

While some may view this to be an honest mistake on the president/overlords part, i think that considering how influencial the comment was, it was highly inappropriate for him to even answer to the reporter. Obama is taking a sharp turn into meddling with peoples lives, and does so with power no one else has. His comment will permanently affect Kanye West's career more than any amount of celebrities siding with Swift ever could. In addition, the idea of the predident publicly taking sides in the multitudes of overinflated dramas in Hollywood startles, frightens, and even stops me in my tracks.
With Obama chiming in in Swifts defence, millions more people will have found out about this 'outburst' of Kanye West and will have inevitably sided with Swift having formed an image of West in their heads that was hand made and solidified by Obama. At this point i believe that if the president made a speech on why wearing pink crocks makes sense for everyone, nearly everyone would be wearing them sooner or later...
The real issue with this is that Obama is using his influence as president and his popularity to inflict his views upon the masses, while the Swift incident did not pose a particularly controvercial view, it did pose a fundamental question that all of us should be asking. WHATS NEXT?
Will our God Obama dictate his opinions on peoples lifestyles, life choices, or even their beliefs through his influence over them? I believe he is on his way... and it is just the another step for him to begin his control over the world of entertainment, a step that with his comment, he has effectively taken.