SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Liberalism: Do You Agree We've Had Enough of It? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (50242)10/5/2008 7:14:43 PM
From: lorne2 Recommendations  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 224729
 
Here you go ken....see if reading this begins to make the picture clearer for you....hussein obama...nancy pelosi...>

Hard to tell who is the bigger and more dangerous fool...pelosi or hussein obama.

To Veil or Not To Veil: The Pelosi Question
By YOUSSEF IBRAHIM
May 14, 2007
nysun.com

The new minister of education for Kuwait is a brave woman now famous across the Islamic world for a landmark moment: The day she walked up to the podium of Parliament, despite the catcalls from Islamist lawmakers, and took her oath of office without wearing a veil to cover her hair or face.

Her April 2 act of defiance placed Dr. Nouriya Al-Subeeh on the front line of the growing ranks of Muslim women leaders who are denouncing the veil as a symbol of female oppression. But on the following day, April 3, America's Speaker of the House, Rep. Nancy Pelosi, the very first woman to hold that position, meekly donned a veil during a visit to a popular market in downtown Damascus, sending the exact opposite message to tens of millions of Arab women.

After her precedent-setting episode, Dr. Subeeh explained her stand in an interview with the Egyptian weekly Rose El Yousuf: "A woman who wears the veil out of belief, which must be respected — just as the belief of a woman who does not want to wear a veil must be respected. The essence of democracy," she said, "is to respect and accept the opinions of others."

Ms. Pelosi made a similar choice — but in the opposite direction. Anxious to curry favor with the male rulers of the Middle East, she failed to comprehend that as an American woman, a symbol of Western democracy and secularism as well as a guardian of women's rights, her agenda should have rested elsewhere.

I have no doubt Ms. Pelosi, a liberal San Francisco Democrat, is a progressive feminist. But her decision to visit Damascus has proved counterproductive on many levels. Aside from giving the appearance of legitimacy to a rogue regime, photos of the unveiled and defiant Dr. Subeeh juxtaposed with a visibly diffident, veiled Ms. Pelosi are circling the Internet, an image that is taking a toll at a time when jihadist Islamists rely on the imposition of the veil as a weapon in their cultural war to the same degree as they utilize suicide bombers in their terrorist campaigns.

In putting on a veil when it was not required, Ms. Pelosi has done a huge disservice both to modernization and to her brave but beleaguered Muslim sisters trying to decouple the veil from Islam. The issue is not about a bit of fabric but about Arab and Muslim women fighting to emerge from under its symbolism of male domination, as Dr. Subeeh did, to speak up and be counted.

The next time America's highest ranking female office holder, Ms. Pelosi, wants to make a splash, she should opt for championing Muslim women in the line of fire.

Among those she might want to invite to appear before Congress is a brave Somali immigrant to the Netherlands, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, who came to the attention of the world in 2004 when a Muslim fanatic killed director Theo van Gogh for making a film based on her accounts of the oppression of women under Islam. After fleeing her adopted nation under threats of death, the 37-year-old politician and activist's best-selling 2006 memoir "Infidel" has finally been published to great success in America — it contains plenty of useful information about the veil to enlighten Ms. Pelosi.

The House speaker could also honor an amazing Syrian-American psychiatrist who resides in Los Angeles, Dr. Wafa Sultan, who also receives constant death threats since denouncing Islamists on Al Jazeera and CNN, and scolding Muslims for persecuting non-Muslims and treating their women as "cattle" and "indentured servants."

Another possibility might be an Egyptian sociologist, medical doctor, and militant writer on the problems of Arab women, Dr. Nawal El Saadawi, who is now a refugee forced to shuttle between Belgium and the Netherlands in order to escape the death warrant placed on her by several sheiks of the Saudifunded Al Azhar School of Theology in Egypt.

The author of more than 30 books, Dr. Saadawi is the most widely translated contemporary Egyptian writer. Her works include an important novel, "Woman at Point Zero," that deals with the plight of Muslim women, and a groundbreaking nonfiction book, "The Hidden Face of Eve: Women in the Arab World."

None of these women wear veils.



To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (50242)10/5/2008 8:29:58 PM
From: Brumar893 Recommendations  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 224729
 
Why Obama is mum about Harvard

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: September 11, 2008
1:00 am Eastern

© 2008

On the surface, at least, Barack Obama's single most impressive accomplishment has been his 1990 election to the presidency of the Harvard Law Review.

This position also provided Obama his only real executive experience as he supervised the law review's staff of 80 editors.

One has to wonder, then, why neither he nor wife Michelle emphasized this singular honor during the up-by-the-bootstraps biographical sections of their respective speeches in Denver.

In fact, neither of them so much as mentioned Obama's time at Harvard, this despite his vulnerability on the executive experience charge.

Their silence likely derives from one verifiable fact: Obama's record at Harvard was no more authentic than John Kerry's record in Vietnam.

Kerry was justifiably swift-boated because he fraudulently positioned himself as a war hero. Obama seems to have learned from Kerry.

In the age of the Internet, the less said about a dubious credential the better, and Obama's law presidency credential is dubious on any number of levels.

For starters, Obama did not do nearly well enough at his previous stop, Columbia University, to justify admission to Harvard Law.

According to the New York Sun, university spokesman Brian Connolly confirmed that Obama graduated in 1983 with a major in political science but without honors.

In the age of affirmative action and grade inflation, a minority in a relatively easy major like political science had to under-perform dramatically to avoid minimal honors. Obama apparently did just that.


The specifics we may never know. As the New York Times concedes, Obama "declined repeated requests to talk about his New York years, release his Columbia transcript or identify even a single fellow student, co-worker, roommate or friend from those years."

Would that Bristol Palin could get off so easily!

There are any number of possible reasons for Obama's reticence about Columbia: his grades, the courses he took, his writing samples and, of course, his associations.

At that time, for instance, both Bill Ayers and Obama fell within the orbit of left-wing Columbia superstar Edward Said. Just recently out of hiding, Ayers was attending the Bank Street College of Education, which adjoins the Columbia campus.

Five years after leaving Columbia, Obama decided on law school. His lack of resources did not deter him from thinking big. Nor did his B-minus effort at his Hawaii prep school or his equally indifferent grades at Columbia.

As Obama relates in "Dreams From My Father," he limited his choices to only three law schools – "Harvard, Yale, Stanford." (It must be nice to be Obama.) He does not mention his connections.

Harvard Law School is notoriously difficult to get into. Annually, some 7,000 applications apply for some 500 seats. Applicant LSAT scores generally chart in the 98 to 99 percentile range, and GPAs average between 3.80 and 3.95.

If Obama's LSAT scores merited admission, we would know about them. We don't. The Obama camp guards those scores, like his SAT scores, more tightly that Iran does its nuclear secrets.

We know enough about Obama's Columbia grades to know how far they fall below the Harvard norm, likely even below the affirmative action-adjusted black norm at Harvard.


As far back as 1988, however, Obama had serious pull. He would need it. As previously reported, Khalid al-Mansour, principle adviser to Saudi Prince Al-Waleed bin Talal, lobbied friends like Manhattan Borough President Percy Sutton to intervene at Harvard on Obama's behalf.

An orthodox Muslim, al-Mansour has not met the crackpot anti-Semitic theory he could not embrace. As for bin Talal, in October 2001, New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani sent his $10 million relief check back un-cashed after the Saudi billionaire blamed 9/11 on America.

For an insight into the Khalid al-Mansour connection, see see this video.

These are not connections that Obama would like to see broadcast, which further explains his shyness about the Harvard experience.

There is more. Obama did not make the Harvard Law Review (HLR) the old-fashioned way, the way HLR's first black editor, Charles Houston, did 70 years prior.

To Obama's good fortune, the HLR had replaced a meritocracy in which editors were elected based on grades – the president being the student with the highest academic rank – with one in which half the editors were chosen through a writing competition.

This competition, the New York Times reported in 1990, was "meant to help insure that minority students became editors of The Law Review."

It did just that. At the end of his first year, Obama was named, along with 40 or so of his classmates, an editor of the HLR.

Unlike most editors, and likely all its presidents, Obama was not a writer. During his tenure at Harvard, he wrote only one heavily edited, unsigned note.

In this note for the third volume of the 1990 HLR, he argued against any limits on abortion, citing the government's interest in "preventing increasing numbers of children from being born in to lives of pain and despair."


Obama's timing, however, was better than his writing. In the same spring 1990 term that he would stand for the presidency of the HLR, the Harvard Law School found itself embroiled in an explosive racial brouhaha.

Black firebrand law professor Derrick Bell was demanding that the Harvard Law School appoint a black woman to the law faculty.

This protest would culminate in vigils and protests by the racially sensitive student body, in the course of which Obama would compare the increasingly absurd Bell to Rosa Parks.

Feeling the pressure, HLR editors wanted to elect their first African-American president. Obama had an advantage. Spared the legacy of slavery and segregation, and having grown up in a white household, he lacked the hard edge of many of his black colleagues.

"Obama cast himself as an eager listener," the New York Times reported, "sometimes giving warring classmates the impression that he agreed with all of them at once."

In February 1990, after an ideologically charged all-day affair, Obama's fellow editors elected him president from among 19 candidates. As it happened, Obama prevailed only after the HLR's small conservative faction threw him its support.

Curiously, once elected, Obama contributed not one signed word to the HLR or any other law journal. As Matthew Franck has pointed out in National Review Online, "A search of the HeinOnline database of law journals turns up exactly nothing credited to Obama in any law review anywhere at any time."

One more thing: The 1990 Times article about Obama's election notes that the president of the HLR usually goes on to serve as a clerk for a Supreme Court justice.

Not the Mansourian Candidate.
Here, oddly, his ambition deserted him. He told the Times that he planned "to spend two or three years in private law practice and then return to Chicago to re-enter community work, either in politics or in local organizing."

In this unlikely surrender to Chicago politics, the realist sees insecurity at best and, at worst, the quid for al-Mansour's quo.
worldnetdaily.com



To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (50242)10/6/2008 1:17:40 AM
From: MJ1 Recommendation  Respond to of 224729
 
Let the wealthy movie stars pay for California's debt-----they have the money.