54share
Editor's notes: This is the first in a series of articles being posted on this Review, detailing H Obama's background as to his personal education and related academic accomplishments. I will attempt to answer questions relating to his hidden transcripts, answer the question: "Why no scholarly papers," and travel to Occidental (in Southern California) to see if there is anything of significance, there, upon which I can report. Rather than "rag" on H Obama, I intend to simply publish papers and articles written by the Establishment, Left leaning folks, and let my readership decide for themselves ~ editor.
Prefatory note: Obama attended high school in Hawaii, then two years at the very small school of Occidental College (very early 1980's), on to Columbia and, finally, Harvard. We will discuss his schooling as a child, before Hawaii, his white privileged up-bringing, and, any educational advantages he received. All information will come from accepted Left Leaning sources and will be comprehensive in its scope.
Salute to free speech.
Obama at Oxy
Sometimes where you start out is more important than where you end up.
The two years President Barack Obama spent at Oxy from 1979 to 1981 played a major role in determining his future.
“In the development of the person he was to become, Oxy was significant,” David Maraniss writes in Barack Obama: The Story. “It was a school with a subset of intellectual professors and sophisticated students one and two years ahead of him who steered his interests toward politics and writing…And it was where, in anticipation of that still uncharted journey, he felt the first stirrings of destiny, a sense, he told friends, that he was brought into this world for a purpose.”"Diverse and inspiring"
“It’s a wonderful, small liberal arts college,” President Obama says of Oxy. “The professors were diverse and inspiring. I ended up making some lifelong friendships there, and those first two years really helped me grow up.” As a freshman from Honolulu, he lived in Room A103 in the Haines Hall annex – a triple he shared with Paul Carpenter ’83, a poli sci major from Claremont, and Imad Husain ’83, an econ major from Dubai. “We had a really good hallway; there were a lot of interesting folks,” says Carpenter.
As an Oxy student, by all accounts, Obama was obviously talented but never in danger of working too hard. Years later, when asked about his favorite college course, Obama unhesitatingly named the politics classes he took with professor Roger Boesche. Yet the sting of B Boesche gave him on a midterm, together with a message that he needed to work harder, still lingers. When his old teacher visited the White House in 2009, Obama “announced to the room that ‘Professor Boesche taught me all I know about politics,’” Boesche recalled. “And then he said, laughing, ‘But he gave me a B on a paper!’”
Basketball and politics
A high school basketball player, Obama also was a regular at the lunchtime pick-up games played by students and faculty in Rush Gym. Eric Newhall ’67, professor of English and comparative literary studies, also played in those informal but fiercely competitive “noonball” games. “I think Occidental’s greatest contribution to American politics lies in persuading Barack Obama that his future did not lie in basketball,” Newhall says.
Oxy was the place where the future president made his first political speech on Feb. 18, 1981 as part of a movement to persuade the Occidental Board of Trustees to divest the College of its investments in South Africa. “I found myself drawn into a larger role [in the divestment movement] … I noticed that people had begun to listen to my opinions,” Obama recalled. “When we started planning the rally for the trustees’ meeting, and somebody suggested that I open the thing, I quickly agreed. I figured I was ready.”
Obama’s speech was planned as a carefully rehearsed piece of street theater – two white students dressed in paramilitary uniforms dragged him off before he could finish to dramatize what often happened to South African activists. “They started yanking me off the stage, and I was supposed to act like I was trying to break free, except a part of me wasn’t acting, I really wanted to stay up there … I had so much left to say.”
Related
- Listen to Obama biographer David Maraniss speak about the president during his visit to Occidental
________________________________
Related:
This article is printed in its entirety and is the property of Occidental College. The source is : https://www.oxy.edu/our-story/oxy-people/obama-oxy
In a major victory for the Obama administration, the Supreme Court on Tuesday upheld the authority of the Environmental Protection Agency to regulate the smog from coal plants that drifts across state lines from 27 Midwestern and Appalachian states to the East Coast.
ReplyDeleteThe 6-to-2 ruling bolsters the centerpiece of President Obama’s environmental agenda: a series of new regulations aimed at cutting pollution from coal-fired power plants. Republicans and the coal industry have criticized the regulations, which use the Clean Air Act as their legal authority, as a “war on coal.” The industry has waged an aggressive legal battle to undo the rules.
So, now the Supreme Court is righteous? Keep in mind that Obama has lost 65% of the High Court challenges to his schemes - the worst record by any Administration, in American history. But, like they say, even a clock gets it right twice a day. Too bad for the poor folks in the Northeast. Guess they will just have to "huddle" to keep warm, or, skip a meal or two, or stop taking their medication.
ReplyDeleteYour guy. Factually inaccurate, knee jerk decision, out of touch with reality... embodiment of a conservative.
ReplyDeleteIt's not often that a Supreme Court justice makes a factual blunder in a formal opinion.
Legal experts say Justice Antonin Scalia erred in his dissent in the 6-2 decision Tuesday to uphold the Environmental Protection Agency's authority to regulate coal pollution that moves across state lines.He argued that the majority's decision was inconsistent with a unanimous 2001 ruling which he mistakenly said shot down EPA efforts to consider costs when setting regulations.
"This is not the first time EPA has sought to convert the Clean Air Act into a mandate for cost-effective regulation. Whitman v. American Trucking Assns., Inc., 531 U. S. 457 (2001), confronted EPA's contention that it could consider costs in setting [National Ambient Air Quality Standards]," Scalia wrote in his dissent, which was joined by Justice Clarence Thomas.
The problem: the EPA's position in the 2001 case was exactly the opposite. The agency was defending its refusal to consider cost as a counter-weight to health benefits when setting certain air quality standards. It was the trucking industry that wanted the EPA to factor in cost. The 9-0 ruling sided with the EPA. The author of the ruling that Scalia mischaracterized? Scalia himself.
"Scalia’s dissent also contains a hugely embarrassing mistake. He refers to the Court’s earlier decision in American Trucking as involving an effort by EPA to smuggle cost considerations into the statute. But that’s exactly backwards: it was industry that argued for cost considerations and EPA that resisted. This gaffe is doubly embarrassing because Scalia wrote the opinion in the case, so he should surely remember which side won!" -
University of California law professor Dan Farber
"It is a mind-blowing misstatement of a basic fact of the American Trucking Association ruling which Justice Scalia himself wrote. And it's not just a stray passage -- it's the basis for an entire section of the dissent. It is very unusual to see a passage that so clearly misstates the fundamental facts of a prior ruling, especially one written by the justice himself."
Absolutely incompetent. Ignorant. divisive. and just plain wrong.
The decision went in your favor. You can now legally rape everyone on the east coast as they scramble to pay for their heating bills next year. I am going to ride into the hills, this afternoon, and I will pay $4.85 a gallon for fuel, exactly $3.00 per gallon more than under Bush. You can rag on Scalia all you want. Smoke and mirrors. ITS THE ECONOMY, stupid. And none of this has anything to do with the actual article in this particular post.
ReplyDeleteMay I suggest that you go back to sleep. When you wake up, you will still be able to blame Bush.