Ny

År Three Day 58 Obama Administration 18. marts 2011 - Historie

År Three Day 58 Obama Administration 18. marts 2011 - Historie


We are searching data for your request:

Forums and discussions:
Manuals and reference books:
Data from registers:
Wait the end of the search in all databases.
Upon completion, a link will appear to access the found materials.

10:00 PRÆSIDENTEN modtager præsidentens daglige briefings ovale kontor

12:30 PRÆSIDENTEN rådfører sig med en todelt gruppe af kongresledere om Libyen Situationsrummet

14.00 præsidenten afgiver en erklæring om situationen i Libya East Room



14:55 PRÆSIDENTEN interviewes af WSOC Charlotte, WSVN Miami og WPVI Philadelphia for at se en forhåndsvisning af hans rejse til Latinamerika og fremhæve de økonomiske fordele ved vores forhold til regionen Map Room

22:15 FØRSTE FAMILIE forlader Det Hvide Hus undervejs Andrews Air Force Base South Lawn Open Press (Saml tid 21:55 - North Doors of the Palm Room)

22:35 FØRSTE FAMILIE afgår fra Andrews Air Force Base på vej til Brasilia, Brasilien


Under Obama er gasprisen sprunget 83 procent, oksekød 24 procent, bacon 22 procent

(CNSNews.com) - Indtil videre, under formandskabet for Barack Obama, er prisen på en gallon benzin sprunget 83 procent, ifølge data fra Bureau of Labor Statistics.

I samme periode er prisen på hakket oksekød steget 24 procent, og prisen på bacon er steget 22 procent.

Da Obama kom ind i Det Hvide Hus i januar 2009, var byens gennemsnitlige pris for en gallon almindelig blyfri benzin $ 1,79, ifølge BLS. (Tallene er i nominelle dollars: ikke justeret for inflation.) Fem måneder senere i juni var blyfri benzin 2,26 dollar pr. Gallon, en stigning på 26 procent. I december 2011 var prisen på almindelig blyfri gas pr. Gallon 3,28 dollar, en stigning på 83 procent fra januar 2009.

Prisen på blyfri benzin nåede aldrig det 10-årige højde på $ 4,09 tilbage i juli 2008 under George W. Bushs administration, men det kom tæt på.

I maj 2011 ramte gaspriserne højt under Obama -administrationen på $ 3,93, cirka fire procentpoint væk fra højden i juli 2008.

Den amerikanske bys gennemsnitlige detailpris for et pund på 100 procent hakket oksekød var $ 2,36 i januar 2009. I december 2011 var denne pris steget til $ 2,92 - en stigning på 23,7 procent og en ny top. (Priserne for hakket oksekød er steget hver måned siden november 2009 - 26 måneders prisstigninger.)

Hele hvede brød priser fra januar 2009 til december 2011 steg omkring fem procent (5,02 procent) fra $ 1,97 til $ 2,07. (Inflationsraten i december 2011 var 3,0 procent.)

Blandt de første 36 måneder af Obamas formandskab viste de sidste fire (september, oktober, november, december) gennemsnitsprisen på et pund fuldkornsbrød, der svæver lidt over to dollars.

Andre kølevarer som is og bacon er steget betydeligt.

Ispriserne for en halv gallon var $ 4,44 i januar 2009 og $ 5,25 i december 2011, en stigning på 19,1 procent.

Et pund skiver bacon i januar 2009 var 3,73 dollar, og i december 2011 var det steget 4,55 dollar, en stigning på 22 procent. Prisen ramte et højdepunkt i september 2011 på $ 4,82 pr. Pund.

Hele mælkepriser var i gennemsnit over tre dollars 33 ud af de 36 måneder siden Obama tiltrådte. I januar 2009 var prisen for en gallon sødmælk $ 3,58, men i december 2011 var mælkepriserne lidt faldet mindre end en procent (0,28 procent) til $ 3,57 pr. Gallon.

Den gennemsnitlige detailpris for klasse A -æg pr. Dusin fra januar 2009 til december 2011 steg med mindre end to procent (1,30 procent) fra 1,85 dollar til 1,87 dollar.


Her er en liste over de 31 nationale nødsituationer, der har været gældende i årevis

Her er en liste over de præsidenter, der erklærede stadig igangværende nationale nødsituationer.

Trump besøger grænsen og siger, at han sandsynligvis vil erklære nødsituation, hvis der ikke er en aftale på væggen

Ifølge føderalt register er 58 nationale nødsituationer blevet erklæret, siden National Emergency Act fra 1976 blev underskrevet i lov af præsident Gerald Ford.

Og 31 er blevet årligt fornyet og er i øjeblikket stadig i kraft, som anført i Forbundsregisteret.

Her er en liste over de præsidenter, der erklærede stadig igangværende nationale nødsituationer.

Præsident Jimmy Carter

14. november 1979: Den nationale nødsituation med respekt for Iran som reaktion på Iran -gidselkrisen.

Præsident Bill Clinton

14. november 1994: Den nationale nødsituation med hensyn til spredning af masseødelæggelsesvåben, der kombinerede to tidligere nationale nødsituationer med fokus på masseødelæggelsesvåben.

2. januar 1995: Den nationale nødsituation med hensyn til forbud mod transaktioner med terrorister, der truer med at forstyrre fredsprocessen i Mellemøsten, satte økonomiske sanktioner som reaktion på bombningen i Jerusalem.

15. marts 1995: Den nationale nødsituation med hensyn til at forbyde visse transaktioner med hensyn til udviklingen af ​​iranske petroleumsressourcer var et forsøg på at forhindre potentielle aftaler mellem olieselskaber.

21. oktober 1995: Den nationale nødsituation med hensyn til blokering af aktiver og forbud mod transaktioner med betydelige narkotikahandel, der er centreret i Colombia, blev erklæret efter øgede rapporter om narkotikakarteller, der hvidvask penge gennem amerikanske virksomheder.

1. marts 1996: Den nationale nødsituation med hensyn til forskrifter for forankring og bevægelse af fartøjer med hensyn til Cuba var efter, at civile fly blev skudt ned i nærheden af ​​Cuba

3. november 1997: Den nationale nødsituation med hensyn til blokering af sudanesisk statslig ejendom og forbud mod transaktioner med Sudan gennemførte økonomiske og handelsmæssige sanktioner.

Præsident George W. Bush

26. juni 2001: Den nationale nødsituation med hensyn til blokering af ejendom for personer, der truer med international stabiliseringsindsats på det vestlige Balkan, pålagde sanktioner mod dem, der hjælper albanske oprørere i Makedonien

17. august 2001: Den nationale nødsituation med hensyn til eksportkontrolforordninger fornyede præsidentens magt til at kontrollere eksporten i en national nødsituation, siden loven om eksportadministration fra 1979 bortfaldt.

14. september 2001: Den nationale nødsituation med respekt for visse terrorangreb var et svar på terrorangrebene den 11. september og den fortsatte og umiddelbare trussel om yderligere angreb på USA.

23. september 2001: Den nationale nødsituation med respekt for personer, der begår, truer med at begå eller støtter terrorisme, var et svar på terrorangrebene den 11. september.

6. marts 2003: Den nationale nødsituation med hensyn til at blokere ejendom for personer, der undergraver demokratiske processer eller institutioner i Zimbabwe, var et forsøg på at straffe medarbejdere til Robert Mugabe.

22. maj 2003: Den nationale nødsituation med hensyn til beskyttelse af udviklingsfonden for Irak og visse andre ejendomme, som Irak har interesse i, blev udstedt efter den amerikanske invasion af Irak.

11. maj 2004: Den nationale nødsituation med hensyn til blokering af visse menneskers ejendom og forbud mod eksport af visse varer til Syrien var et svar på, at Syrien støttede terroraktivitet i Irak.

16. juni 2006: Den nationale nødsituation med hensyn til at blokere ejendom for visse personer, der undergraver demokratiske processer eller institutioner i Hviderusland, var som svar på anklager om bedrageri i Belarus præsidentvalg.

27. oktober 2006: Den nationale nødsituation med hensyn til at blokere ejendom for visse personer, der bidrog til konflikten i Den Demokratiske Republik Congo, var som reaktion på vold omkring Congoleses præsidentvalgs afstrømning.

1. august 2007: Den nationale nødsituation med hensyn til blokering af ejendom for personer, der undergraver Libanons suverænitet, var et svar på en sammenbrud af retsstaten i Libanon.

26. juni 2008: Den nationale nødsituation med hensyn til fortsatte visse begrænsninger med hensyn til Nordkorea angav risikoen for spredning af våbenbrugbart fissilt materiale. Præsident Trump fornyede denne 22. juni 2018 med henvisning til "eksistensen og risikoen for spredning af våbenbrugbart fissilt materiale på den koreanske halvø, og Nordkoreas regering og handlinger og politikker udgør fortsat en usædvanlig og ekstraordinær trussel."

Præsident Barack Obama

12. april 2010: Den nationale nødsituation med hensyn til at blokere ejendom for visse personer, der bidrog til konflikten i Somalia, var i forhold til trusler fra somaliske pirater.

25. februar 2011: Den nationale nødsituation med hensyn til blokering af ejendom og forbud mod visse transaktioner relateret til Libyen frøs aktiverne til den libyske leder Muammar Gaddafi.

25. juli 2011: Den nationale nødsituation med hensyn til blokering af transnationale kriminelles ejendom var et svar på stigningen i kriminalitet fra bestemte organisationer: Los Zetas (Mexico), The Brothers 'Circle (tidligere Sovjetunionslande), Yakuza (Japan) og Camorra ( Italien).

16. maj 2012: Den nationale nødsituation med hensyn til at blokere ejendom for personer, der truede fred, sikkerhed eller stabilitet i Yemen, adresserede politisk uro i Yemen -regeringen.

16. marts 2014: Den nationale nødsituation med hensyn til at blokere ejendom for visse personer, der bidrog til situationen i Ukraine, var et svar på den russiske invasion af Krim.

3. april 2014: Den nationale nødsituation med hensyn til at blokere ejendom for visse personer med hensyn til Sydsudan var et svar på den igangværende borgerkrig.

12. maj 2014: Den nationale nødsituation med hensyn til blokering af ejendom for visse personer, der bidrog til konflikten i Den Centralafrikanske Republik, var et svar på vold mod humanitære hjælpearbejdere.

8. marts 2015: Den nationale nødsituation med hensyn til at blokere ejendom og suspendere indrejse af visse personer, der bidrog til situationen i Venezuela, var en reaktion på krænkelser af menneskerettighederne.

1. april 2015: Den nationale nødsituation med hensyn til at blokere ejendom for visse personer, der deltager i betydelige ondsindede cyberaktiverede aktiviteter, var et svar på kinesiske cyberangreb på USA

23. november 2015: Den nationale nødsituation med hensyn til blokering af ejendom for visse personer, der bidrog til situationen i Burundi, blev erklæret efter et mislykket kup.


America-Wake-Up

3. november 2012: WWW.SHOEBAT.COM

Walid Shoebat, en tidligere PLO -terrorist og tidligere medlem af Det Muslimske Broderskab, er nu en lidenskabelig fortaler for FRED i Mellemøsten, har opnået adskillige klassificerede dokumenter, som han siger vil: “BRING DOWN THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION ”

Shoebat skulle overdrage disse dokumenter til National Center for Intelligence and Counter-Terrorism efter Romney blev valgt. Nu hvor Obama blev genvalgt, hvem giver Walid Shoebat disse dokumenter til nu. Jeg foreslår Bill Gertz.

I dag er Libyen i en tilstand af fuldstændigt anarki. Der er ingen lov og orden militser og bander af terrorister kontrollerer byerne. Libyens regering, installeret af Obama, er al-Qaeda. Gerningsmændene ved angrebene 9/11/2001 og 9/11 2012 har nu kontrol over den største olieproducerende nation i Afrika, og Obama overrakte den til dem. al-Qaeda boede i 2 lande før Obama blev præsident og er nu bosat i 30 lande og ejer nu et, blandt de rigeste af alle – LIBYA.

Ifølge hr. Shoebat og hans kilder underskrev præsident Obama i marts 2011 en hemmelig ordre, der tillod enorme mængder sofistikeret våben at blive leveret til Libyens oprørere for at vælte Libyas præsident, Qaddafi, og at disse anti-Qaddafi-oprørere i det væsentlige nu er, forbundet med al-Qaeda.

Ifølge Shoebat viser de klassificerede dokumenter:

  • at lederen af ​​denne al-Qaeda jihad-gruppe i Libyen er Abdul Hakim Belhaj,
  • at Belhaj tidligere var i amerikansk varetægt i Guantanamo, og blev løsladt af Obama.
  • At Belhaj kontrollerer det meste af den libyske regering

Kort sagt:

  • Obama rejser rundt i verden og lyver i sin kampagnetale, at han er ansvarlig for al den demokratiske og humanitære succes i Libyen
  • mens Obama -administrationen leverede en enorm mængde sofistikerede våben til oprørere for at styrte Qadaffi,
  • derefter flyttede de samme oprørere tilbage til deres al-Qaeda-terrorrødder og myrdede vores Benghazi-ambassadør og 3 andre amerikanere,
  • mens de samme (tidligere) oprørere var ansvarlige for at beskytte de samme amerikanere,
  • så påtog de samme (tidligere) oprørere sig ansvaret for mordene.

Her er den lange version:

Klik på www.shoebat.com og rul ned til opslaget 3. november 2102 kaldet:

Libya lækager: Flere hemmelige dokumenter afslører Obamas fejl i Libyen. ”


58-årige Obama/Clinton-rådgiver Selvmordsforbløffelser

Alan Krueger tog sit eget liv i weekenden.

TILMELD dig for konservative daglige advarsler efter nyheder

I en tilsyneladende tragedie uden svar begik en tidligere Barack Obama og Clinton -rådgiver selvmord i weekenden.

Alan Krueger var 58-årig, var ved at udgive en ny bog og var et aktivt fakultetsmedlem ved Princeton University.

Han havde to voksne børn og boede hjemme hos sin kone Lisa.

Familien bekræftede, at han dræbte sig selv i en erklæring, der blev frigivet mandag, men der er ikke fremkommet yderligere detaljer omkring hans død.

Begivenheden er både mærkelig og bliver næppe dækket af de almindelige medier.

Krueger, der fungerede som toprådgiver for både Obama og Clinton, afsluttede for nylig sin sjette bog, Rockonomics.

Bogen, der udkommer i juni, ‘ bruger musikindustrien, fra superstjerneartister til musikchefer, fra ledere til promotorer, som en måde at forklare centrale principper for økonomi og de kræfter, der former vores økonomiske liv. &# 8217

Han var en ivrig tweeter, der brugte sociale medier næsten dagligt indtil slutningen af ​​januar, da han pludselig stoppede. Valuta, hans udgiver, har ikke kommenteret hans død.

Efter at have fungeret som Labour Department -økonom under Bill Clinton, arbejdede Krueger for præsident Barack Obama som en øverste finansminister og derefter som formand for Council of Economic Advisers fra 2011 til 2013.

I en erklæring krediterede Obama Krueger for at hjælpe med at genoplive den amerikanske økonomi efter den ødelæggende finanskrise i 2008.

Han brugte de første to år af min administration på at hjælpe med at konstruere vores reaktion på den værste finanskrise i 80 år og med succes forhindre kaoset i at udvikle sig til en anden stor depression, ’ sagde Obama.

Clinton tweeted: ‘Alan Krueger var en strålende økonom for offentlighedens interesse – fra sin forskning, der viste, at forhøjelse af mindsteløn ikke øger arbejdsløsheden, til hans seneste arbejde, der viser, at USA's opioidepidemi har øget den.

Mine tanker er hos hans familie. Vi mistede ham for tidligt. ’

Mange eksperter var uenige i Krueger's ideer og teorier.

Cal Thomas advarede Amerika i 2011 om det praktiske ved Krueger ’s ideer.

Alan Krueger er den seneste i en lang række professorer og akademikere, der befolker denne administration. Få, hvis nogen, har haft rigtige job i den private sektor. De er for det meste teoretikere, hvis teorier ofte bevises forkerte, men i akademia såvel som i regeringen diskvalificerer en sjældent en fra en lederpost. Intentioner er alt, hvad der betyder noget.

Krueger, der skrev til The New York Times blog i 2009, foreslog som et genstand for diskussion, at indføre et forbrug på 5 procent eller merværdiafgift (moms) oven på indkomstskatten, som han sagde ville øge cirka $ 500 mia. om året og fylder betydeligt i budgetudsigterne. ” Han erkendte dog, at en forbrugsafgift ville “ reducere økonomisk aktivitet ” og være en “ større byrde for de fattige, der bruger en relativt høj andel af deres indkomst. ”

Krueger går ind for et nationalt cap-and-trade-program, som han siger ville producere grønne job. Han har hævdet, at stimulansen på 825 milliarder dollars voksede økonomien, hvilket ikke kan tages seriøst i betragtning af stigningen i arbejdsløshedsprocenten fra 8,2 procent, da stimuleringen blev bestået, til de nuværende 9,1 procent. Tidligere økonomiske rådgivere Christina Romer og Jared Bernstein forudsagde, at arbejdsløsheden efter stimulansen ikke ville stige over 8 procent.

Som The Washington Post fact checker, Glenn Kessler, bemærkede i sidste uge, “ Medmindre økonomien vender om i de næste 18 måneder, er Obama på vej til at have den værste jobrekord for enhver præsident i den moderne æra. ”

Faktisk vendte arbejdsløsheden under Obama (som var Bush ’s skyld) omvendt umiddelbart efter Donald Trump blev valgt.

Døden er dog en reel tragedie for familien og vennerne, der kendte Krueger.

Med få oplysninger om selvmordet til rådighed, synes her bare at være flere spørgsmål end svar.


Obama annoncerer 3 kabinetnomineringer

WASHINGTON - Præsident Obama lavede mandag tre kabinetsnomineringer - for budget-, energi- og miljøpolitik - timer før sit første kabinetsmøde i sin anden periode.

Obama introducerede Sylvia Mathews Burwell, præsidenten for Walmart Foundation i Arkansas og en kendt skikkelse i den demokratiske administration fra hendes tjeneste i Clinton -administrationen, som direktør for Det Hvide Hus Kontor for Management og Budget.

Ernest J. Moniz, direktør for Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s Energy Initiative, er præsidentens valg om at tage over for Steven Chu i energiafdelingen. Og Gina McCarthy, den assisterende administrator med ansvar for luft og stråling hos Environmental Protection Agency, vælger at erstatte den afgående administrator, Lisa P. Jackson. Alle tre holdninger er underlagt senatbekræftelse.

Fru McCarthy står sandsynligvis over for den største kontrol i betragtning af republikanernes modstand mod Obamas miljø- og klimapolitik.

"Jeg håber, at senatet vil bekræfte dem hurtigst muligt," sagde hr. Obama, da han præsenterede de tre nominerede og takkede de nuværende indehavere af kabinetsposterne i East Room, som var fyldt med familie, venner og administrationsmedarbejdere.

Mr. Obama beskrev Dr. Moniz som "en anden strålende videnskabsmand" for at efterfølge Dr. Chu, en nobelprisvindende fysiker, ved energiafdelingen. Og for E.P.A. sagde præsidenten, at McCarthy var velegnet med hendes erfaring som statsmiljøembedsmand i både Massachusetts - for tidligere guvernør Mitt Romney - og Connecticut. Hun har "et ry som en straight-shooter", der "glæder sig over forskellige synspunkter," tilføjede han.

Sammen vil fru McCarthy og Dr. Moniz sørge for, at vi investerer i amerikansk energi, at vi gør alt, hvad vi kan for at bekæmpe truslen om klimaændringer, som vi vil skabe job og økonomiske muligheder i første omgang, ”sagde Obama og implicit behandlede kritikken, især fra republikanerne, om at miljøpolitikker hæmmer økonomien.

Bifaldet, der hilste fru Burwell som budgetkandidat, afspejlede, hvor velkendt hun er, efter at have tjent præsident Bill Clinton på budgetkontoret, hvor hun var vicedirektør, såvel som finansministeriet og i Det Hvide Hus. På det tidspunkt arbejdede hun tæt sammen med Jacob J. Lew, nu hr. Obamas finansminister, der anbefalede Burwell til budgetdirektørens job, som han havde for både hr. Clinton og hr. Obama. Siden da har fru Burwell boet langt fra Washington, først i staten Washington i løbet af sin tid som ledende globale udviklingsprogrammer for Gates Foundation og derefter i Bentonville, Ark., Walmarts hovedkvarter.

Obama brugte sin meddelelse om Burwals nominering til endnu en gang at tage fat på de overordnede nedskæringer til militære og indenlandske udgifter, kendt som sekvestrering, der trådte i kraft fredag, efter at han og kongresrepublikanerne ikke var enige om en mere bevidst sæt tiltag til reduktion af underskud.

Hun og den fungerende budgetdirektør, Jeffrey D. Zients, "vil gøre alt, hvad der står i deres magt for at dæmpe virkningerne af disse nedskæringer på virksomheder og middelklassefamilier," sagde præsidenten. »Men i sidste ende vil mange mennesker føle lidt smerte. Derfor er vi nødt til at blive ved med at arbejde på at reducere vores underskud på en afbalanceret måde. ”

Hr. Obama antydede også, at han ville finde en anden post i sin administration for Zients, en tidligere forretningsdirektør, som er godt respekteret i Det Hvide Hus. Han er blevet nævnt som en mulig kandidat til at være hr. Obamas handelsrepræsentant eller handelssekretær-to af de sidste kabinetsposter, som hr. Obama skal besætte for at fuldføre sit andet valgperiode.

"Jeg forventer, at han vil fortsætte med at tjene os godt i fremtiden," sagde Obama.

Valget af fru McCarthy vil sandsynligvis skabe betydelig modstand, fordi hun er identificeret med flere af Obama -administrationens mest ambitiøse regler for ren luft, herunder foreslåede drivhusgasregler for nye kraftværker. Obama har lovet at tage fat på klimaforandringer i sin anden periode, og han forventes at bruge den myndighed, der er givet E.P.A. i henhold til loven om ren luft for at reducere klimaforandrende emissioner fra kraftværker og andre store kilder.

Ved valget af Dr. Moniz har hr. Obama igen valgt en atomfysiker, selvom en med mere politisk erfaring Dr. Moniz var undersekretær for energi i præsident Bill Clintons anden periode.

Dr. Moniz er ligesom sin forgænger, Dr. Chu, meget fokuseret på, hvordan man kan imødekomme et voldsomt globalt behov for energi, samtidig med at det reducerer negative virkninger på miljøet, og ligesom Dr. Chu har han fokuseret på behovet for teknologiinnovation.

Billede

Han deler også med Dr. Chu en videnskabsmands opfattelse af politik. I et notat, der blev lagt ud på hans programs websted i november 2012, sagde han, at M.I.T. Energy Initiative fortsatte med at levere teknisk forskning "for at give en vis grad af rationalitet i den igangværende politiske diskussion."

Ms McCarthy, 58, er indfødt i Massachusetts og var en af ​​de øverste miljøembedsmænd der og i Connecticut og tjente under demokratiske og republikanske guvernører, herunder for en tid, Mitt Romney, den republikanske nominerede til præsident i 2012.

Hun har et ry som en stump-talende, selvsikker stemme for stærke miljøpolitikker, især sundhedsrelaterede politikker for ren luft. Som senior E.P.A. embedsmand i hr. Obamas første periode, hjalp hun med at udvikle hårde nye emissionsstandarder for biler og lette lastbiler, skærpede standarder for kviksølv og andre skadelige forurenende stoffer i luften og udsendte de første foreslåede regler for kuldioxid og andre drivhusgasforurenende stoffer til ny kraft planter. Disse nye regler ville gøre det praktisk talt umuligt at bygge nye kulkraftværker i USA.

Kul- og forsyningsvirksomheder beskyldte hende og andre E.P.A. embedsmænd for at føre en "krig mod kul", og det spørgsmål vil sandsynligvis komme op i hendes konfirmationshøringer.

Jeffrey Holmstead, der ledede E.P.A. 's luft- og strålingskontor i George W. Bush -administrationen, forudsagde, at fru McCarthy ville vinde bekræftelse, selvom høringerne kan give nogle gnister.

“Jeg går ud fra, at mange mennesker på G.O.P. side vil gerne bruge bekræftelseshøringer til at udtrykke bekymringer, ”sagde hr. Holmstead. ”Men der er en fornemmelse blandt branchefolk, at Gina tog sig tid til at lytte til og forstå deres bekymringer. Hun er bestemt ikke pro-industri, men hun forsøger at forstå et problem og løse det. ”

Miljøforkæmpere bifaldte generelt valget af fru McCarthy, som har cirkuleret i Washington i flere uger.

Hver amerikaner ånder eller vil snart indånde renere luft på grund af Gina McCarthy, ”sagde Frank O’Donnell, direktøren for Clean Air Watch, en fortalergruppe. "Hun har stået i spidsen for vitale forbedringer af folkesundheden, herunder oprydning af kviksølv og andre toksiner fra kulbrændende kraftværker, en mere beskyttende sundhedsstandard for fintpartikelsod og skelsættende drivhusgasstandarder for motorkøretøjer."

"Men der er stadig store udfordringer," tilføjede han, "herunder behovet for smogbekæmpende lavere svovlbenzin, en hårdere national smogstandard og drivhusgasgrænser for både nye og eksisterende kraftværker."

På MIT har Dr. , af naturgas, af atombrændstofcyklussen og af atomkraft. (Han sprang den over på elnettet.) Alle fire viste en ingeniørs realisme, undersøgelsen af ​​kul for eksempel sagde, at større brug ville være et miljømæssigt slag, men at det var uundgåeligt i betragtning af verdens energibehov og den udbredte spredning af ressourcen.

Og undersøgelserne i løbet af de sidste 10 år var ikke altid rigtige. 2003 -undersøgelsen om atomkraft undervurderede for eksempel prisen på at bygge en ny reaktor med mindst halvdelen.

Ligesom mange akademiske ledere har han stærke bånd til industrien, nogle af dem vil helt sikkert tage ild nu. Energiinitiativet meddelte for nylig, at ENI, det italienske olieselskab, havde fornyet sin deltagelse som et stiftende medlem og ville bidrage på et niveau, der "væsentligt overstiger det stiftende medlems støtteniveau på $ 5 millioner om året." De øvrige stiftende medlemmer er BP, Shell og Saudi Aramco. Andre sponsorer omfatter Chevron og flere forsyningsselskaber, herunder moderselskabet i det sydlige Californien Edison, Entergy, Duke Energy og Électricité de France, alle atomreaktoroperatører.

Dr. Moniz tiltrak en vis modstand, allerede før præsidenten meddelte, at han havde til hensigt at nominere ham. Hos Food and Water Watch, en organisation, der er imod hydraulisk frakturering, ringede direktøren Wenonah Hauter til ham en kendt cheerleader & quot for fracking.

“Hans udnævnelse til D.O.E. kunne sætte udvikling af vedvarende energi tilbage i år, ”sagde hun. "Olie- og gasindustrien vil trives, mens ægte energieffektivitet og vedvarende løsninger svinder."

Hans tidligere støtte til at udvide atomkraft som en måde at imødekomme energibehov og samtidig begrænse klimaforandringerne vil sandsynligvis også gøre ham til en magnet for modstandere.

Før han fungerede som energi under sekretær fra 1997 til 2001, var Dr. Moniz, 68, associeret direktør for Office of Science and Technology Policy i Clinton White House. På energidepartementet ledede han en større indsats for at bestemme, hvordan nationen ville opretholde sit lager af atomvåben uden testeksplosioner, han var også afdelingens forhandler om disponering af russiske atomvåbenmaterialer.


Costons klage

Obama og hans tøffe administration har flyttet deres kriminalitetsoperation til staten Texas. Planned Parenthood er en kendt hvidvaskmand for Det Demokratiske Parti, og befolkningen i den enlige stjernestat er træt af den korruption, der er iboende inden for denne organisation. Denne abortudbyder er blevet forbudt fra Medicaid -finansiering. Obamakraterne har erklæret krig mod staten Texas.

Obama-administrationen gjorde det officielt fredag ​​ved at følge op på sin trussel om at ophøre med at yde finansiering til et kvindesundhedsprogram i Texas, der betjener kvinder med lav indkomst, fordi staten vedtog en lov om, at programmet ikke kan finansiere abortvirksomheder.

Staten forbød Planned Parenthood at deltage i programmet sammen med andre agenturer, der foretager aborter. Som svar rejste sundheds- og humanitærsekretær Kathleen Sebelius til Houston for at annoncere, at Obama -administrationen ville reducere finansieringen af ​​programmet og ikke længere ville fortsætte den dispensation, som Texas tidligere havde fået til at fortsætte finansieringen af ​​programmet midlertidigt.

Obama -administrationen hævder at forbyde Planned Parenthood overtræder reglerne for Medicaid, mens Texas Gov.Rick Perry og Texas embedsmænd er uenige og opretholder regler for Medicaid giver stater ret til at bestemme de kvalifikationer, der er nødvendige for de agenturer, der har lov til at deltage i programmet, der tjener cirka 130.000 lavindkomstkvinder i Texas og leverer kræftscreeninger, familieplanlægning og andre sundhedsydelser til kvinder.

Stater har ret til at bestemme, hvem der modtager Medicaid -finansiering. Men denne tøffe administration ved, hvem der smører deres brød og vil ofre fattige kvinder for at sikre, at Obama får sit snit i føderale dollars via kampagnedonationer. Præsidenten for Family Research Council udtalte det bedst:

I en erklæring til LifeNews udtrykte Family Research Council Action forargelse over præsident Obamas beslutning.

“Præsident Obama afgav et løfte, da han stillede op til præsidenten, at han ville stå ved abortgiganten Planned Parenthood – og at han har gjort gang på gang, ” sagde FRC's præsident Tony Perkins. Han har pebret sin administration med radikale embedsmænd mod abort, og bare sidste år truede han med at lukke hele regeringen, hvis en dollar føderale penge blev standset for milliardorganisationen. Nu er han villig til at risikere sundhed for 130.000 lavindkomstkvinder, medmindre dødens varsler om Planned Parenthood får deres andel. ”

Denne administration skal stoppe med at bruge kvinder og de ufødte som bonde til at finansiere præsident Obamas radikale allierede. Nogle til venstre har sagt, at der er en ‘krig om kvinder ’ – de har ret, og dens hovedgeneral er præsident Barack Obama, ” tilføjede han.

Og det er sandheden. Den virkelige krig mod kvinder bliver foreviget af Obamas bøller, og Texas er et perfekt eksempel på det.


Costons klage

Barack Obama presser igen på for en anden føderal regerings boondoggle. Ingen gæld er for skræmmende for denne præsident. Senatet vedtog en transportregning, der er designet til at løse de infrastrukturproblemer, vores nation står over for. Lovforslaget bliver holdt i huset. Jeg kunne have svoret, at Stimulus Bill på $ 800 milliarder i 2009 skulle løse det problem. Men jeg afviger.

Jeg vil fortælle dig, hvad der smuldrer – den amerikanske drøm. Demokraterne i Senatets havn ’t vedtog et budget på tre år! De nægter at opfylde deres forfatningsmæssigt forpligtede forpligtelse. I mellemtiden har Obama og hans statistiske tjenere samlet en rekordstor mængde gæld og udvidet regeringens bureaukrati med 23%. Og de er stadig ikke tilfredse.

Demokraterne hævder, at denne transportregning vil give tusindvis af job inden for byggeri, fremstilling og tilhørende brancher. Men til hvilken pris for skatteyderne? Er det i landets bedste interesse at blive ved med at fodre denne leviathan? Hvor mange penge fortærer dette parasitære bureaukrati i procent i dollars?

Det Journal of Libertarian Studies offentliggjorde denne rapport i 2004:

UDGIFTERNE TIL OFFENTLIG INDKOMSTFORDELING
OG PRIVAT KÆRLIGHED

Robert L. Woodson (1989, s. 63) beregnede, at i gennemsnit 70 cent af hver dollar, der er budgetteret til statsstøtte, ikke går til de fattige, men til medlemmerne af velfærdsbureaukratiet og andre, der tjener de fattige. Michael Tanner (1996, s. 136 n. 18) citerer regionale undersøgelser, der understøtter denne 70/30 split.

I modsætning hertil absorberer administrative og andre driftsomkostninger i private velgørende organisationer i gennemsnit kun en tredjedel eller mindre af hver doneret dollar, så de andre to tredjedele (eller mere) skal leveres til modtagerne. Charity Navigator (www.charitynavigator.org), the newest of several private sector organizations that rate charities by various criteria and supply that information to the public on their web sites, found that, as of 2004, 70 percent of charities they rated spent at least 75 percent of their budgets on the programs and services they exist to provide, and 90 percent spent at least 65 percent. The median administrative expense among all charities in their sample was only 10.3 percent.

The study further states:

One implication of the high cost of government income redistribution comes into focus when costs are understood correctly as alternative opportunities forgone. If a government agency delivers only one-third of each dollar budgeted to it as subsidy to its target population, then it must be budgeted three dollars for each dollar so delivered. Assuming that the cost of collecting the tax revenues to be budgeted to redistributive agencies is zero, then for each dollar delivered to a subsidy recipient, whether in the form of rent subsidy, food stamps, welfare, prescription medicine, or whatever, the taxpayers who had earned that money productively in the market must be deprived of three dollars worth of the things they want.

This model is about redistribution of wealth through the welfare bureaucracy. I believe the same can be applied to other federal agencies and the teat squawkers who depend on taxpayer largess. If the 70/30 split is accurate, than I believe we can find more efficient means to provide our transportation needs.


His journey to become a leader of consequence

When Barack Obama worked as a community organizer amid the bleak industrial decay of Chicago’s far South Side during the 1980s, he tried to follow a mantra of that profession: Dream of the world as you wish it to be, but deal with the world as it is.

The notion of an Obama presidency was beyond imagining in the world as it was then. But, three decades later, it has happened, and a variation of that saying seems appropriate to the moment: Stop comparing Obama with the president you thought he might be, and deal with the one he has been.

Seven-plus years into his White House tenure, Obama is working through the final months before his presidency slips from present to past, from daily headlines to history books. That will happen at noontime on the 20th of January next year, but the talk of his legacy began much earlier and has intensified as he rounds the final corner of his improbable political career.


President Obama makes a campaign stop during a three-day bus tour in Boone, Iowa, in August 2012. (Nikki Kahn/The Washington Post)

Of the many ways of looking at Obama’s presidency, the first is to place it in the continuum of his life. The past is prologue for all presidents to one degree or another, even as the job tests them in ways that nothing before could. For Obama, the line connecting his life’s story with the reality of what he has been as the 44th president is consistently evident.

The first connection involves Obama’s particular form of ambition. His political design arrived relatively late. He was no grade school or high school or college leader. Unlike Bill Clinton, he did not have a mother telling everyone that her first-grader would grow up to be president. When Obama was a toddler in Honolulu, his white grandfather boasted that his grandson was a Hawaiian prince, but that was more to explain his skin color than to promote family aspirations.

But once ambition took hold of Obama, it was with an intense sense of mission, sometimes tempered by self-doubt but more often self-assured and sometimes bordering messianic. At the end of his sophomore year at Occidental College, he started to talk about wanting to change the world. At the end of his time as a community organizer in Chicago, he started to talk about how the only way to change the world was through electoral power. When he was defeated for the one and only time in his career in a race for Congress in 2000, he questioned whether he indeed had been chosen for greatness, as he had thought he was, but soon concluded that he needed another test and began preparing to run for the Senate seat from Illinois that he won in 2004.

That is the sensibility he took into the White House. It was not a careless slip when he said during the 2008 campaign that he wanted to emulate Ronald Reagan and change “the trajectory of America” in ways that recent presidents, including Clinton, had been unable to do. Obama did not just want to be president. His mission was to leave a legacy as a president of consequence, the liberal counter to Reagan. To gauge himself against the highest-ranked presidents, and to learn from their legacies, Obama held private White House sessions with an elite group of American historians.


Obama meets with former presidents Bill Clinton and George W. Bush in January 2010 to discuss the recovery and rebuilding efforts in Haiti after a devastating earthquake. (Marvin Joseph/The Washington Post)

It is now becoming increasingly possible to argue that he has neared his goal. His decisions were ineffective in stemming the human wave of disaster in Syria, and he has thus far failed to close the detention camp at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and to make anything more than marginal changes on two domestic issues of importance to him, immigration and gun control. But from the Affordable Care Act to the legalization of same-sex marriage and the nuclear deal with Iran, from the stimulus package that started the slow recovery from the 2008 recession to the Detroit auto industry bailout, from global warming and renewable energy initiatives to the veto of the Keystone pipeline, from the withdrawal of combat troops from Iraq and Afghanistan and the killing of Osama bin Laden to the opening of relations with Cuba, the liberal achievements have added up, however one judges the policies.

This was done at the same time that he faced criticism from various quarters for seeming aloof, if not arrogant, for not being more effective in his dealings with members of Congress of either party, for not being angry enough when some thought he should be, or for not being an alpha male leader.

His accomplishments were bracketed by two acts of negation by opponents seeking to minimize his authority: first a vow by Republican leaders to do what it took to render him a one-term president and then, with 11 months left in his second term, a pledge to deny him the appointment of a nominee for the crucial Supreme Court seat vacated by the death of Antonin Scalia, a conservative icon. Obama’s White House years also saw an effort to delegitimize him personally by shrouding his story in fallacious myth — questioning whether he was a foreigner in our midst, secretly born in Kenya, despite records to the contrary, and insinuating that he was a closet Muslim, again defying established fact. Add to that a raucous new techno-political world of unending instant judgments and a decades-long erosion of economic stability for the working class and middle class that was making an increasingly large segment of the population, of various ideologies, feel left behind, uncertain, angry and divided, and the totality was a national condition that was anything but conducive to the promise of unity that brought Obama into the White House.


Barack Obama Sr. poses with his son in this undated photograph. (Family photo via Bloomberg News)

To the extent that his campaign rhetoric raised expectations that he could bridge the nation’s growing political divide, Obama owns responsibility for the way his presidency was perceived. His political rise, starting in 2004, when his keynote convention speech propelled him into the national consciousness, was based on his singular ability to tie his personal story as the son of a father from Kenya and mother from small-town Kansas to some transcendent common national purpose. Unity out of diversity, the ideal of the American mosaic that was constantly being tested, generation after generation, part reality, part myth. Even though Obama romanticized his parents’ relationship, which was brief and dysfunctional, his story of commonality was more than a campaign construct it was deeply rooted in his sense of self.

As a young man, Obama at times felt apart from his high school and college friends of various races and perspectives as he watched them settle into defined niches in culture, outlook and occupation. He told one friend that he felt “large dollops of envy for them” but believed that because of his own life’s story, his mixed-race heritage, his experiences in multicultural Hawaii and exotic Indonesia, his childhood without 𠇊 structure or tradition to support me,” he had no choice but to seek the largest possible embrace of the world. “The only way to assuage my feelings of isolation are to absorb all the traditions [and all the] classes, make them mine, me theirs,” he wrote. He carried that notion with him through his political career in Illinois and all the way to the White House, where it was challenged in ways he had never confronted before.

With most politicians, their strengths are their weaknesses, and their weaknesses are their strengths.

With Obama, one way that was apparent was in his coolness. At various times in his presidency, there were calls from all sides for him to be hotter. He was criticized by liberals for not expressing more anger at Republicans who were stifling his agenda, or at Wall Street financiers and mortgage lenders whose wheeler-dealing helped drag the country into recession. He was criticized by conservatives for not being more vociferous in denouncing Islamic terrorists, or belligerent in standing up to Russian President Vladimir Putin.


A young Obama with his mother, Ann Dunham, in the 1960s. (Family photo via Associated Press)

His coolness as president can best be understood by the sociological forces that shaped him before he reached the White House. There is a saying among native Hawaiians that goes: Cool head, main thing. This was the culture in which Obama reached adolescence on the island of Oahu, and before that during the four years he lived with his mother in Jakarta. Never show too much. Never rush into things. Maintain a personal reserve and live by your own sense of time. This sensibility was heightened when he developed an affection for jazz, the coolest mode of music, as part of his self-tutorial on black society that he undertook while living with white grandparents in a place where there were very few African Americans. As he entered the political world, the predominantly white society made it clear to him the dangers of coming across as an angry black man. As a community organizer, he refined the skill of leading without being overt about it, making the dispossessed citizens he was organizing feel their own sense of empowerment. As a constitutional law professor at the University of Chicago, he developed an affinity for rational thought.

All of this created a president who was comfortable coolly working in his own way at his own speed, waiting for events to turn his way.

Was he too cool in his dealings with other politicians? One way to consider that question is by comparing him with Clinton. Both came out of geographic isolation, Hawaii and southwest Arkansas, far from the center of power, in states that had never before offered up presidents. Both came out of troubled families defined by fatherlessness and alcoholism. Both at various times felt a sense of abandonment. Obama had the additional quandary of trying to figure out his racial identity. And the two dealt with their largely similar situations in diametrically different ways.

Rather than deal with the problems and contradictions of his life head-on, Clinton became skilled at moving around and past them. He had an insatiable need to be around people for affirmation. As a teenager, he would ask a friend to come over to the house just to watch him do a crossword puzzle. His life became all about survival and reading the room. He kept shoeboxes full of file cards of the names and phone numbers of people who might help him someday. His nature was to always move forward. He would wake up each day and forgive himself and keep going. His motto became “What’s next?” He refined these skills to become a political force of nature, a master of transactional politics. This got him to the White House, and into trouble in the White House, and out of trouble again, in acycle of loss and recovery.

Obama spent much of his young adulthood, from when he left Hawaii for the mainland and college in 1979 to the time he left Chicago for Harvard Law School nearly a decade later, trying to figure himself out, examining the racial, cultural, personal, sociological and political contradictions that life threw at him. He internalized everything, first withdrawing from the world during a period in New York City and then slowly reentering it as he was finding his identity as a community organizer in Chicago.

Rather than plow forward relentlessly, like Clinton, Obama slowed down. He woke up each day and wrote in his journal, analyzing the world and his place in it. He emerged from that process with a sense of self that helped him rise in politics all the way to the White House, then led him into difficulties in the White House, or at least criticism for the way he operated. His sensibility was that if he could resolve the contradictions of his own life, why couldn’t the rest of the country resolve the larger contradictions of American life? Why couldn’t Congress? The answer from Republicans was that his actions were different from his words, and that while he talked the language of compromise, he did not often act on it. He had built an impressive organization to get elected, but it relied more on the idea of Obama than on a long history of personal contacts. He did not have a figurative equivalent of Clinton’s shoebox full of allies, and he did not share his Democratic predecessor’s profound need to be around people. He was not as interested in the personal side of politics that was so second nature to presidents such as Clinton and Lyndon Johnson.

Politicians of both parties complained that Obama seemed distant. He was not calling them often enough. When he could be schmoozing with members of Congress, cajoling them and making them feel important, he was often back in the residence having dinner with his wife, Michelle, and their two daughters, or out golfing with the same tight group of high school chums and White House subordinates.


Obama is sworn in as the 44th president by Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. on Jan. 20, 2009. (Jonathan Newton/The Washington Post)

Here again, some history provided context. Much of Obama’s early life had been a long search for home, which he finally found with Michelle and their girls, Malia and Sasha. There were times when Obama was an Illinois state senator and living for a few months at a time in a hotel room in Springfield, when Michelle made clear her unhappiness with his political obsession, and the sense of home that he had strived so hard to find was jeopardized. Once he reached the White House, with all the demands on his time, if there was a choice, he was more inclined to be with his family than hang out with politicians. A weakness in one sense, a strength in another, enriching the image of the first-ever black first family.

The fact that Obama was the first black president, and that his family was the first African American first family, provides him with an uncontested hold on history. Not long into his presidency, even to mention that seemed beside the point, if not tedious, but it was a prejudice-shattering event when he was elected in 2008, and its magnitude is not likely to diminish. Even as some of the political rhetoric this year longs for a past America, the odds are greater that as the century progresses, no matter what happens in the 2016 election, Obama will be seen as the pioneer who broke an archaic and distant 220-year period of white male dominance.

But what kind of black president has he been?

His life illuminates the complexity of that question. His white mother, who conscientiously taught him black history at an early age but died nearly a decade before her son reached the White House, would have been proud that he broke the racial barrier. But she also inculcated him in the humanist idea of the universality of humankind, a philosophy that her life exemplified as she married a Kenyan and later an Indonesian and worked to help empower women in many of the poorest countries in the world. Obama eventually found his own comfort as a black man with a black family, but his public persona, and his political persona, was more like his mother’s.

At various times during his career, Obama faced criticism from some African Americans that, because Obama did not grow up in a minority community and received an Ivy League education, he was not 𠇋lack enough.” That argument was one of the reasons he lost that 2000 congressional race to Bobby L. Rush, a former Black Panther, but fortunes shift and attitudes along with them there was no more poignant and revealing scene at Obama’s final State of the Union address to Congress than Rep. Rush waiting anxiously at the edge of the aisle and reaching out in the hope of recognition from the passing president.

As president, Obama rarely broke character to show what was inside. He was reluctant to bring race into the political discussion, and never publicly stated what many of his supporters believed: that some of the antagonism toward his presidency was rooted in racism. He wished to be judged by the content of his presidency rather than the color of his skin. One exception came after February 2012, when Trayvon Martin, an unarmed black teenager, was shot and killed in Florida by a gun-toting neighborhood zealot. In July 2013, commenting on the verdict in the case, Obama talked about the common experience of African American men being followed when shopping in a department store, or being passed up by a taxi on the street, or a car door lock clicking as they walked by — all of which he said had happened to him. He said Trayvon Martin could have been his son, and then added, 𠇊nother way of saying that is: Trayvon Martin could have been me 35 years ago.”


Obama’s crusade against a criminal justice system devoid of ‘second chances’

Criminal justice was always a priority issue for Barack Obama.“Since my first campaign, I’ve talked about how, in too many cases, our criminal justice system ends up being a pipeline from underfunded, inadequate schools to overcrowded jails,” he declared in the summer of 2015.

But over the course of his presidency, he became something of a crusader, prodded in part by a growing national movement dedicated to unmasking the discrimination and injustice that so often color and guide the interactions between law enforcement officials and people of color.

Over time, Obama became an increasingly forceful voice, pledging to address the epidemic of incarceration that disproportionately affects people of color, and speaking out against what he described as 𠇊 long history of inequity in the criminal justice system in America.”

In July 2015, six-and a half years into his presidency, Obama gave his first major criminal justice speech to a crowd of more than 3,000 at the NAACP convention in Philadelphia. He declared that the U.S. criminal justice system was not as “smart” as it needs to be: “It’s not keeping us as safe as it should be. It is not as fair as it should be. Mass incarceration makes our country worse off, and we need to do something about it.”

But Obama was speaking at a time of crisis. In the previous year a new activism had taken hold across the country after several unarmed black men and boys died in confrontations with police officers, many of them recorded with cell phone video and police body cameras. They seemed ubiquitous on the internet, and the president saw it as a moment of reckoning.

“In recent years the eyes of more Americans have been opened to this truth,” Obama said. “Partly because of cameras, partly because of tragedy, partly because the statistics cannot be ignored, we can’t close our eyes anymore.”


President Obama, with Charles Samuels, right, then-director of the Bureau of Prisons, and Ronald Warlick, a correctional officer, tours a cell block at the El Reno Federal Correctional Institution in El Reno, Okla., in July 2015. (Saul Loeb/Agence France-Presse via Getty Images)

The next day, Obama became the first sitting president to visit a federal prison when he went to the El Reno Federal Correctional Institution in Oklahoma. His purpose was clear: “I’m going to shine a spotlight on this issue, because while the people in our prisons have made some mistakes — and sometimes big mistakes — they are also Americans, and we have to make sure that as they do their time and pay back their debt to society that we are increasing the possibility that they can turn their lives around.”

The images of the president of the United States inside a federal lockup were striking enough: His suggestion that he could have ended up there as a prisoner was startling.

“When they describe their youth, these are young people who made mistakes that aren’t that different from the mistakes I made, and the mistakes that a lot of you guys made,” Obama said. “The difference is that they did not have the kind of support structures, the second chances, the resources that would allow them to survive those mistakes.”

Obama and former U.S. attorney general Eric H. Holder Jr. helped launch a national conversation about mass incarceration and put in place several new criminal justice reform measures.

As part of a 2013 plan called Smart on Crime, Holder directed his prosecutors nationwide to stop bringing charges that would impose harsh mandatory minimum sentences, except in the most egregious cases.

Holder said that criminal justice reform is a deeply personal issue for the president. He and Obama have had countless conversations over the years — since they met in 2004 — about how this country prosecutes and incarcerates its citizens, especially men and women of color.

Obama’s speech to the NAACP came three and a half years after Trayvon Martin, 17, was killed by George Zimmerman in Florida a year after Eric Garner, 43, died after a police officer put him in a chokehold on Staten Island 11 months after Michael Brown, 18, was shot and killed in Ferguson, Mo., by Officer Darren Wilson eight months after Tamir Rice, 12, was killed by a Cleveland police officer and three months before Walter Scott in South Carolina and Freddie Gray in Baltimore died after encounters with police officers.

The Michel Brown killing seemed to resonate especially widely and eventually gave birth to the Black Lives Matter movement. After Brown was killed, Obama was, initially, relatively quiet. As the protests and demonstrations spread, the administration dispatched Justice Department officials to Ferguson and closely monitored the demonstrations and riots that followed the shooting. But Obama deliberately avoided saying anything about the specifics of the case.

“I urge everyone in Ferguson, Missouri, and across the country, to remember this young man through reflection and understanding,” Obama said days after the shooting. “We should comfort each other and talk with one another in a way that heals, not in a way that wounds.”

Obama’s distance drew scorn from critics on the left, who thought he should be leading the conversation about police brutality. Detractors on the right portrayed the president and Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. as 𠇊nti-cop” crusaders. In November, after a grand jury declined to indict Wilson in the shooting, Obama went to the White House briefing room at 10 p.m. to urge calm. The address was carried live on cable news as a split screen showed police cars burning in Ferguson.

“We need to recognize that the situation in Ferguson speaks to broader challenges that we still face as a nation. The fact is, in too many parts of this country, a deep distrust exists between law enforcement and communities of color. Some of this is the result of the legacy of racial discrimination in this country. And this is tragic, because nobody needs good policing more than poor communities with higher crime rates.”

But in the months between Brown’s death and Wilson’s non-indictment, the frustration on the streets had begun to crystallize into a larger protest movement. It was a coalition made up of young black and brown activist groups that had formed after other racially charged incidents during the Obama years: the deaths of Jordan Davis and Oscar Grant, in addition to those of Martin and Garner. These groups took to the streets in dozens of cities to assert that 𠇋lack lives matter,” in what was soon being declared a new social justice movement.

On Dec. 1, 2014, Obama announced he would host several of the most active Ferguson protesters in the White House, a meeting which was the first of several coming signals that the White House stood behind the tenets of the protest movement. Obama would spend much of 2015 declaring criminal justice issues as among his primary priorities.

In addition to the policing question, Obama focused on disparities in sentencing, particularly in drug cases. Holder said Obama saw the racial disparity of the decades-long war on drugs close up when he was a community organizer on the South Side of Chicago.

During his second year in office, Obama signed the Fair Sentencing Act. The law reduced the disparity in the penalties for crack and powder cocaine, which civil rights leaders had said for years unfairly punished African Americans.

Under the old law a person convicted of possessing five grams of crack cocaine, which is cheaper and more available in poor black communities, received a mandatory five-year prison sentence. But someone who possessed powder cocaine, used by more affluent whites, had to be holding 100 times that amount to get the same mandatory sentence. The new law narrowed that ratio from 100 to 1 to about 18 to 1. Sentencing reform advocates would like him to close the gap further.


Se videoen: Прохождение The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim коммент от Ч. 9 (Januar 2023).

Video, Sitemap-Video, Sitemap-Videos