This past Wednesday, World Net Daily published a story on the internet, saying a man who was a grad assistant at Western Kentucky University last semester, claims President Barack Obama was not born in Hawaii. That man is Tim Adams who was the Senior Elections Clerk for the city and county of Honolulu during the 2008 presidential election.
But Adams says even though Obama may not have been born in Hawaii, he is still a U.S. citizen.
The Obama campaign has refused to release his college transcript, despite an academic career that led him to Harvard Law School and, later, to a lecturing position at the University of Chicago. The shroud surrounding his experience at Columbia contrasts with that of other major party nominees since 2000, all whom have eventually released information about their college performance or seen it leaked to the public. In contrast with the rest of Mr. Obama’s life story, little is known about his college experience. He attended Occidental College in Los Angeles for two years before transferring to Columbia in 1981. The move receives only a mention in Mr. Obama’s 1995 memoir, “Dreams from My Father,” which instead devotes that chapter to his impressions of race and class struggles in New York.
An article in a Columbia University publication, Columbia College Today, reported that Mr. Obama has portrayed Columbia as a period of buckling down following a troubled adolescence. He did not socialize much, he has said, instead spending a lot of time in the library, “like a monk.” He has also stated that he was involved to some extent with the Black Students Organization.
Federal law limits the information that Columbia can release about Mr. Obama’s time there. A spokesman for the university, Brian Connolly, confirmed that Mr. Obama spent two years at Columbia College and graduated in 1983 with a major in political science. He did not receive honors, Mr. Connolly said, though specific information on his grades is sealed. A program from the 1983 graduation ceremony lists him as a graduate.
Duration : 0:9:20
Read the rest of this entry »
Lecture by Lew Rockwell presented at the Ludwig von Mises Institute’s “The Bankruptcy of American Politics” summit held in Newport Beach, California; January 24-25, 1997. http://mises.org
Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr., widely known as Lew Rockwell, is an American libertarian political commentator, activist, proponent of the Austrian School of economics, and chairman of the Ludwig von Mises Institute. Rockwell founded the Mises Institute in Auburn, Alabama in 1985 and was its president until the summer of 2009, when he transitioned to the position of Chairman of the Board. He also is Vice President of the Center for Libertarian Studies in Burlingame, California and publisher of the political weblog LewRockwell.com.
He is the author of Speaking of Liberty, an anthology of editorials which were originally published on his web site along with transcripts from some of his speaking engagements. Rockwell and the Ludwig von Mises Institute together publish the Journal of Libertarian Studies.
He was closely associated with his teacher and colleague Murray Rothbard until Rothbard’s death in 1995. Rockwell’s political ideology, like Rothbard’s in his later years, combines a form of anarcho-capitalism with cultural conservatism and the Austrian School of economics. He also advocates federalist concepts as a means of promoting freedom from central government, and also advocates secession for the same political decentralist reasons. (Source: Wikipedia)
Related links:
http://www.lewrockwell.com/rockwell/rockwell-arch.html
http://mises.org/articles.aspx?AuthorId=275
DISCLAIMER: The producer of this audio presentation, the Ludwig von Mises Institute, has given permission under the Creative Commons license to publicly repost as long as credit is given to the Mises Institute and respective guidelines are followed. More info at: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/us/
This YouTube channel, LibertyInOurTime, is in no way endorsed by or affiliated with the Ludwig von Mises Institute, any of its lecturers or staff members.
Duration : 0:49:38
Read the rest of this entry »
More at http://therealnews.com/c.php?c=070926YT
Gravel: All three leading Democrats are politics as usual
Tuesday January 8th, 2008
Duration : 0:7:34
Read the rest of this entry »
“Real Time w/ Bill Maher”
4/18/08
Duration : 0:4:57
Read the rest of this entry »
The Democrats caused this crisis by forcing the banks to make affirmative action loans. “Liberalism is a mental disorder.”
Duration : 0:8:29
Read the rest of this entry »
From Flirting with Power
www.flirtingwithpower.com
Duration : 0:0:53
Read the rest of this entry »
http://www.myspace.com/ridethecrestmusic
Obama vs Clinton Los Angeles Democratic Debate 3.
questions and answers?
barack hillary obama clinton supporter derrick ashong soulfege dna derrick ashong speaks politics yes we can questions answers analysis grassroots los angeles debate news banned
Duration : 0:5:52
Read the rest of this entry »
At the recent 5-day Integral Institute seminar on Integral Business Leadership,
Ken Wilber was asked, by a senior Zen teacher, “What do you think of the Republican convention?”
Ken responded by giving an overview of what a truly integral politics might look like, and used that to compare and contrast with the Democratic and Republican conventions, both of which are less-than-integral. We think that this twenty-minute summary is brilliant, insightful, deadly serious, and wickedly funny, all at once. But by all accounts it is an extraordinary account of why all politics today are considerably less-than-integral, along with certain features that almost certainly would have to be included in the future in any truly integral politics.
In this synopsis, Ken focuses on three items that all political theories have attempted to address but none have managed to fully integrate. These are the tension between (1) the individual and the collective; (2) the source of the cause of human suffering: is the individual primarily to blame or is the society primarily to blame?; and (3) the different levels of development that the different political parties tend to represent: any truly integral politics would include and represent all of them, and yet how on earth do you do that?
Due to time considerations, Ken did not discuss two other equally important ingredients in any integral politics. One. In representational democracies, people have a right to be at whatever stage of development they are at, and generally speaking, within free speech, a right to express the values of whatever stage they are at. Traditional-fundamentalist (blue) has a right to be traditional, modernist (orange) has a right to be modernist, postmodernist (green) has a right to be postmodernist, and so on. This is generally modified in practice, to the extent that the center of gravity of a culture will tend to impose its values on others, especially if they are first-tier (or less-than-integral) values. Nonetheless, in democratic societies, there’s a general background understanding that people have a right to be, and a right to express, whatever stage they are or whatever belief system they possess.
Two. They do not, however, have a right to act on those beliefs. This is generally handled in representative democracies by a separation of public and private, and by a similar if more specific principle of the separation of church and state. This means that, for example, in the privacy of my blue-meme mind, I am free to believe that Jesus Christ is my personal savior and that nobody achieves salvation without a belief in Jesus. In public behavior, however, I am not allowed to burn at the stake somebody who disagrees with me. In terms of integral psychology, this means in the interior of an individual (i.e., the upper left), the person can believe whatever they like; but in their public behavior (i.e., the upper right), they must behave according to laws drawn from a worldcentric or higher level of development (lower left), or else they are charged with civil or criminal behavior and removed from society if necessary (lower right).
This separation of church and state, or more generally what Max Weber called the differentiation of the values spheres, is one of the great and enduring contributions of the Western enlightenment, a contribution almost entirely misunderstood by extreme postmodernists, who in fact are operating under its protection while bitterly condemning it.
(The most common version of this is the aggressive attempt to reduce “I” and “It” to “We,’ or the attempt to reduce art and science to a social construction, which can therefore be deconstructed. As it turns out, this reductionism presumes precisely what it denies, but then, deconstructive postmodernism has been little without its performative contradictions.)
A truly integral politics exists nowhere on the planet at this time, principally because not enough individuals have emerged at the integral levels of consciousness, and hence no governments anywhere have integral representatives as members (except rarely and by accident). Its principal challenge is to create some form of governance that allows each stage to be itself within the constraints of not harming others (i.e., to let red be red, and blue be blue, and orange be orange, and green be green, etc—precisely because, as we saw, this is a right in virtually all free societies), and yet to govern from the highest, widest, deepest, and most encompassing levels of development emerged to date (starting at yellow). Most representative democracies do this anyway, except their center of gravity is not yet fully integral, and they do it implicitly, not explicitly.
Duration : 0:17:45
Read the rest of this entry »
This is from a children’s Anime airing in Japan right now called Yatterman. Sorry for the lack of subs, I wish I knew what they were saying too
Duration : 0:1:51
Read the rest of this entry »
CREDITS
10. THIS LAND – http://JibJab.com
9. BUSH IN 30 – http://Bushin30Seconds.org / www.MoveOn.org
8. STEWART/COLBERT – http://CrooksandLiars.com and http://video.google.com
7 & 6. PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES – http://youtube.com/members?s=po&t=w&g=-1
5. SOCIAL INSECURITY – http://JulianMulvey.com & http://Democrats.org
4. “THE KISS” – http://YouTube.com (various)
3. SADDAM GALLOWS – http://YouTube.com (various)
2. WHITE HOUSE WEST – Julie Bergman Sender/ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EkqrI3IibYI
1. MACACA – Webb Campaign/S.R. Siddarth, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9G7gq7GQ71c
PTV TOP 10 is produced by http://PoliticsTV.com. PRODUCER/CREATOR: Dan Manatt
PRODUCERS: Brett DiResta, David Grossman, Bruno Hoffman
HOSTS: Raquel Riley, Clinton Yates, Nicole Grether
Duration : 0:6:42
Read the rest of this entry »