Podcasti zgodovine

Tretje leto 89 Obamova administracija 18. april 2011 - zgodovina

Tretje leto 89 Obamova administracija 18. april 2011 - zgodovina


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.

9.30 PREDSEDNIK in POTPREDSEDNIK prejmeta ovalno pisarno predsedniškega dnevnega sestanka

11:45 PREDSEDNIK se sestane z višjimi svetovalci Ovalna pisarna

13:45 PREDSEDNIK podeli trofejo vrhovnega poveljnika nogometni ekipi Akademije letalskih sil Rose Garden

15:05 O PREDSEDNIKU govorijo KCNC Denver, WRAL Raleigh, WFAA Dallas in WTHR Indianapolis Map Map

16.30 PREDSEDNIK in POTPREDSEDNIK se sestaneta z državno sekretarko Clinton

Zvečer je predsednik v Beli hiši gostil velikonočni seder.


Poročilo IG potrjuje, da je Obama lagal o e -poštnih sporočilih Hillary

WaTimes – En vidik poročila generalnih inšpektorjev o FBI -jevi obravnavi e -poštne preiskave Hillary Clinton so mediji nekoliko zasenčili. Dejstvo, da je predsednik Barack Obama lagal ameriškim ljudem, ko je trdil, da je šele, ko je bila državna sekretarka Hillary Clinton uporabila nepooblaščen, nezavarovani, nevladni e-poštni strežnik, izvedela.

Marca 2015, ko je prvič izbruhnil Clintonov škandal po e -pošti, je dopisnik Bele hiše CBS Bill Plante vprašal Obamo o njegovem poznavanju zadeve:

Plante: Gospod predsednik, kdaj ste prvič izvedeli, da je Hillary Clinton uporabljala e -poštni sistem zunaj ameriške vlade za uradne posle, medtem ko je bila državna sekretarka?

Obama: Hkrati pa so se vsi drugi naučili iz poročil.

Sean Davis iz The Federalist je videl opombe, ki prikazujejo Obamovo vpletenost. "Analitiki FBI in tožilec 2 so nam povedali, da je bil nekdanji predsednik Barack Obama eden od 13 posameznikov, s katerimi je Clintonova imela neposreden stik z uporabo svojega računa Clintonemail.com," poročilo piše v opombi na strani 89. "Obama, tako kot drugi visoki ravni vladni uradniki so uporabili psevdonim za svoje uporabniško ime na svojem uradnem vladnem e -poštnem računu. " več tukaj

20 komentarjev na poročilo IG potrjuje, da je Obama lagal o e -poštnih sporočilih Hillary

Obama lagal? Jaz in#8217m šokiran ti povem!

Niti drobca korupcije!

Zdi se, da je vsa Obamina administracija –, vključno s Comeyjem#8211, uporabljala gmailove račune, da bi se izognila vladnim ZOPI in zakonom o hrambi dokumentov.

Vseprisotna korupcija Obame in Clintonovih še ni popolnoma razkrita.

No La dee dah in super velik mega DUH! Vsaka beseda, ki je kdaj prišla iz Barryjeve luknje za pite, je bila laž. Zapeto na melodijo ME, ME, ME, … Vse ’ je vse o MENI!

Torej res ni šlo toliko za kritje Clintonove, kot za pokrivanje Mesije iz okrožja Cook. Zdaj je še bolj smiselno.

Zaslonsko ime Barryja#8217 je bilo “Carlos Donger ”

Czar, I ’d love for Rex to right.

Ali je o Obamerju povedano kaj resnice? Tudi stari pregovor, da “lažem vsakič, ko odprem usta, ” ne opisuje v celoti resnice laži.

Ali si bo zgodovina, če si izposodim filmsko temo, zapisala Obamo in njegove sošolce kot prave DECEPTICONS? Transformatorji ne potrebujejo dodatnega zaklepanja. (Upam, da bo beseda “con ” postala pravi glagol za OBamer (v slammerju)).

Tako ali drugače mislim, da bi Barryju ime moralo biti Cain, ker bi ubil vse dostojne ljudi, ker se niso strinjali z njim, če bi mu to uspelo. In s posmehljivim nasmehom bi rekel Bogu: "Nisem varuh domačih."

Če se kdaj ugotovi, da je Obola govorila resnico, bi to bila novica!

Vsak bo samo skomignil z rameni in izjavil, da lažnivci lažejo, da to počnejo.

Imam njegov Trump vzdevek:
‘Lyin ’ Baraba Obama ’

Če pogledate nekdanjega diktatorja Obamo in se prisilijo, da poslušate govorca tega izdajalca komičnih punkov, se takoj zavedete, da ima ta mutant dva kretena, enega na običajnem mestu, drugega pa pod nosom. Iz obeh lukenj ne pride nič drugega kot sranje.

Res mi je težko obdržati vzdevek Øbamboozler ’s na manj kot 200 pridevnikih, zato ga bom pustil označiti kot častnika dezerterja, pomirjujočega ISIS-a, financiranja Irana, džihadskega coddlinga, maladroita, Komunistična republika iz plastičnih banan, Mandžurska kljuka, socialistični marksist Muzlim Mallard in ležeč negotov Kenijski izdajalec Kreempuff!

“Če vam je všeč vaš nezakonit e -poštni strežnik, lahko obdržite svoj nezakonit e -poštni strežnik ”
Nekdanja predsednica 0bama. Zdaj znan kot zapornik 696969

Tu je ideja#8217s: prenesite vsak zakon, ki ga je vlada sprejela — vsakega izmed njih —, ki obravnava pregon KOTAR koli vladnega uslužbenca, in jih nadomestite z desetimi zapovedmi. Črno -belo, brez “nuance ”, no “interpretation ”, no “intent ”. Če lažete, greste v zapor. Če kradete, tudi vi. Jemljete povratne kazni? Škoda zate. In tako naprej.

@Junius
@Podgana Fink
Govorite kot pravi rasistični, fantomski, črno-sovražni klansmanski kunt, vi pa ste pravi rasistični, fantomski, črno-sovražni klanc.

Tako kot Klansman Trump in njegovi tipično retardirani beli zagovorniki. Zmedeni so v glavo. Preveč zaposlen brat ali sestra, ki se pretira v prikolici. Pojasni, zakaj nimate ničesar o deželnih zakonih in njihovem delovanju.

Verjetno vidimo, kaj se zgodi, ko črnci vstopijo v Belo hišo. rasisti in fanati, kot ste vi, pridejo v polni moči. Trumpovi podporniki so neumni, neizobraženi, zablodeli idioti, ki si prizadevajo za spremembe, ne glede na to, kakšna katastrofa bi lahko pomenila. Vi ste živi dokaz za to.

Njegovi podčloveški poraženci, kot ste vi, podporniki Klansmana Trumpa, kar dokazuje, da so belci najbolj zaostala neinteligentna rasistična govna na svetu. In ti si živi dokaz.

Obama ni storil nobenega zločina! ne, on ni izdajalec, ti prekleti zaostali

Nimate zakonitih virov, ki bi navajali, da je Obama lagal, ker če bi obstajali takšni dokazi, bi Jeff Sessions preganjal in to veste. Tako so ti dokazi, da ste prepričani, da ste ga v mislih obsodili, popolna neumnost, jaz vam rečem, da se vrnete v resničnost in se spet pridružite razumnosti, toda ko gre za razbijanje prvega črnega predsednika, ste rasistični pizde bodo verjele VČEMU, zaradi česar je videti slabo

Vsakdo, ki ima kakšno spodobnost in bere vašo objavo, vam lahko reče, da ste lažnivec, fanatiziran rasistični bombaž brez zaupanja. Vi rasistične pičke preprosto ne morete zdržati, da črnec ne more biti le POTUS, ampak eden najuspešnejših v zgodovini naroda.

Res? Ali ste resnično tako zaslepljeni zaradi rasnega sovraštva, da je vsak, ki kritizira Chicago Jesus, fanatičen inbred Klansman? Ti si norec in še huje, tisti, ki misli, da govori “resnico o moči ”.
Pojdi stran, človek, samo dražiš druge ljudi.

Žal me je rasist tako razjezil, da sem na komentar pozabil napisati svoje ime.


Tretje leto 89 Obamova administracija 18. april 2011 - zgodovina

Skupina, znana kot Ameriška načela v akciji, v Nevadi prikazuje oglas, namenjen latinskoameriškim volivcem, ki skuša oslabiti njihovo podporo predsedniku Baracku Obami.

"Naj vas besede predsednika Obame ne zavedejo," pravi pripovedovalec. "Ne zavezuje se priseljencem. Želi si le našega glasu. Z volitvami na vrsti ponuja naši mladini brez dokumentov začasno rešitev, ki jim goljufa pravni status. Zakaj ni izpolnil obljube, da bo pospešil reformo priseljevanja? Namesto tega Obama je deportiral več ljudi kot kateri koli drug predsednik v zgodovini te države. S takšnimi prijatelji, kdo potrebuje sovražnike? "

Skupina, ki stoji za oglasom American Principles in Action, je podružnica projekta American Principles Project, skupine, ki jo je ustanovil konzervativni učenjak Robert George z univerze Princeton. Zaposleni v skupini, odgovoren za latino vprašanja, je Alfonso Aguilar, nekdanji šef ameriškega urada za državljanstvo pod predsednikom Georgeom W. Bushom.

Čeprav je skupina neodvisna od kampanje, sporočilo oglasa pomaga Romneyju.

Nevada je ključna bojna država, ki jo je Obama osvojil leta 2008 in ki si jo želi znova. Latinoamerikanci so tam pomemben volilni blok in v drugih državah, ki jih je Obama zmagal leta 2008, na primer v Koloradu in Novi Mehiki. Letošnje ankete so pokazale, da Latinoamerikanci močno podpirajo Obamo zaradi Mitta Romneyja, deloma zato, ker se je Romney med volilnimi volitvami GOP -a strogo zavzemal proti nezakonitemu priseljevanju.

Tako bi Obamovi kritiki želeli zmanjšati njegovo vodstvo med latinoameriškimi volivci, zlasti v ključnih državah, bodisi tako, da jih pripeljejo na Romneyjevo stran ali pa jih vsaj naredijo manj navdušenega nad Obamo.

Oglas najprej zavrne Obamin predlog junija, da se začasno ustavi deportacija mladih, češ da jih "vara v pravnem statusu". Nato piše, da je Obama "deportiral več ljudi kot kateri koli drug predsednik v zgodovini te države".

Glede na retoriko, ki Obamo včasih kritizira, da je šibek pri nezakonitem priseljevanju, smo se vprašali, ali je to res. Ugotovili smo, da je večinoma.

Po trenutnih podatkih zvezne agencije za deportacije, pristojne za priseljevanje in carino, je Obama v svojih dosedanjih 42 mesecih na položaju odstranil 1,4 milijona ljudi. Tehnično je to manj kot v času Georgea W. Busha, katerega skupni znesek je bil 2 milijona. Toda Bushovo število zajema osem polnih let, kar ne dopušča primerjave jabolk z jabolki.

Če namesto tega primerjate mesečna povprečja obeh predsednikov, to pomeni 32,886 za Obamo in 20,964 za Busha, s čimer je Obama očitno vodilni. Bill Clinton daleč zaostaja z 869.676 skupaj in 9.059 na mesec. Vsi prejšnji stanovalci Bele hiše, ki segajo v leto 1892, niso dosegli ravni treh zadnjih predsednikov.

Spraševali smo se, ali je morda prišlo do porasta priseljencev brez dokumentov, ki je pojasnil povečanje, vendar tega ni bilo. Latinskoameriški center Pew je v prvih dveh letih Obamovega mandata ocenil število nezakonitih priseljencev po vsej državi na 11,2 milijona v primerjavi s povprečjem v osemletnem Bushovem mandatu, ki je znašal 10,6 milijona. In nezakonito priseljevanje je pravzaprav doseglo vrhunec pozno v drugem Bushevem mandatu, ko je recesija udarila in število se je pod Obamo zmanjšalo. Takšni vzorci ne pojasnjujejo 57 -odstotnega povečanja mesečnih deportacij, ki smo jih našli pri Obami.

Upoštevati je treba tudi, da bo Obama, če ne bo dobil drugega mandata, skoraj zagotovo končal svoj mandat za Georgeom W. Bushom v deportacijah, zaradi česar bi bila netočna trditev, da je Obama "deportiral več ljudi kot kateri koli drug predsednik te države". zgodovino. "

Kljub temu ima oglas pomemben pomen pri deportacijah pod Obamo. Vprašali smo pet strokovnjakov za priseljevanje - zgodovinarko z univerze Columbia Mae M. Ngai, zgodovinarko z univerze v Albanyju Carla Bon Tempa, izvršnega direktorja Centra za študije imigracije Marka Krikoriana, dekana pravne fakultete Univerze v Kaliforniji (Davis) Kevina R. Johnsona in univerze v San Franciscu profesor prava Bill Hing - ali so menili, da je numerična trditev oglasa v osnovi točna, in so se vsi strinjali.

Bon Tempo je opozoril, da nekatere spremembe v kakovosti podatkov nekoliko otežujejo dolgoročne primerjave. Kljub temu je dodal, da "se zdi, da je deportacij v porastu, in to izrazito."

Povečevanje števila deportacij v zadnjih letih je program, ki sega v Busheva leta in je namenjen "ubežnim" tujcem, pa tudi program, znan kot Secure Communities, v okviru katerega zvezni organi za priseljevanje redno obveščajo o ljudeh, ki imajo na državi prstne odtise in lokalna raven. Hing, kritik programa, pravi, da je "šel predaleč, pometal številne žrtve kaznivih dejanj, priče, aretirance, katerih obtožbe so kasneje opuščene, in manjše storilce kaznivih dejanj".

Ameriška zveza za državljanske svoboščine je šla še dlje, zakonodajna svetovalka Joanne Lin pa je dejala, da je Obamova politika uveljavljanja na splošno pustila "sled opustošenja v latinskoameriških skupnostih po vsej državi", v skladu s Los Angeles Times.

Obama se ni sramežljivo predstavil svojih poverilnic za uveljavljanje priseljencev, čeprav je ponavadi previden, da daje prednost virom tako, da se osredotoča na deportacijo kriminalcev in ne na ljudi, ki spoštujejo zakone.

Obama je na primer med govorom, v katerem je ponudil predlog za nedeportacijo mladih, dejal: "Ker ni bilo nobenega ukrepa priseljevanja s strani Kongresa, da bi popravili naš pokvarjen sistem priseljevanja, smo poskušali osredotočiti svoja sredstva za uveljavljanje priseljencev. na pravih mestih.… Osredotočili smo se in uporabili diskrecijsko pravico glede tega, koga preganjati, pri čemer smo se osredotočili na kriminalce, ki ogrožajo naše skupnosti, in ne na študente, ki zaslužijo svoje izobraževanje. In danes se je deportacija kriminalcev povečala za 80 odstotkov. To diskrecijo smo izboljšali previdno in premišljeno. "

Ngai, zgodovinar iz Kolumbije, Obamovo ostro politiko uveljavljanja dojema kot taktično potezo.

"Moja razlaga je, da se je Obamova administracija odločila, da bo stroga do" kriminalnih "tujcev, da bi dobila podporo za legalizacijo priseljencev brez dokumentov, ki nimajo kazenskega zapisa," je dejal Ngai.

Seveda velja, da se Romney zavzema za nezakonito priseljevanje težje kot Obama. Glede na izjavo njegove spletne strani o politiki priseljevanja Romney nasprotuje tako "amnestiji" kot "vsem" magnetom ", ki vabijo nezakonite priseljence, da pridejo v našo državo. Kot guverner je vložil veto na državne šolnine za nezakonite priseljence in nasprotoval vozniškim dovoljenjem za nezakonite priseljence. priseljencev. "

Tehnično oglas ne drži, češ da je Barack Obama "deportiral več ljudi kot kateri koli drug predsednik v zgodovini te države", odkar je George W. Bush kumulativno deportiral več v svojem celotnem osemletnem mandatu-in ker bi Bush ostal pred Obamo, če bo novembra novembra na predsedniškem mestu zmagal Mitt Romney.


Načrt karierne izobrazbe Obamine administracije verjetno ne bo obrodel sadja eno leto ali več

Ameriški sekretar za izobraževanje Arne Duncan je odpotoval na skupnostno šolo sredi Iowe, da bi v četrtek objavil, kar je imenoval "preobrazba" poklicnega izobraževanja.

"Program Perkins je treba preoblikovati, če želimo uresničiti svoj potencial, da vsako mladost in odraslo osebo pripravimo na sodelovanje na svetovnem trgu znanja, ki temelji na znanju 21. stoletja," je Duncan povedal občinstvu na območni šoli v Des Moines.

Predlog uprave je načrt za ponovno odobritev Perkinsovega zakona, ki javnim šolam plačuje poklicno izobraževanje (znano kot "karierne akademije"). Najbolj drastične spremembe novega predloga bi povečale količino Perkinsovih štipendij in postale konkurenčne, podobno kot je Duncan spremenil druge dele izobraževalnega spektra. Uprava je predlagala nov konkurenčni sklad v višini 1 milijarde dolarjev za povečanje števila kariernih akademij za 3.000 - skok, ki bi lahko služil 500.000 študentom.

Ker pa v prihodnje ni možnosti za kongresna zaslišanja o predlogu - res brez takšnega predloga zakona v nobeni od kongresnih dvoran - in s potekom Perkinsa čez eno leto, se zainteresirane strani sprašujejo, v kolikšni meri so ti načrti bolj politična kot "preobrazbena".

"Sprašujemo se glede časa," je dejala Kimberly Green, direktorica Nacionalnega združenja državnih direktorjev kariernega tehničnega izobraževalnega konzorcija, skupine, ki lobira v imenu programov kariere in tehničnega izobraževanja (CTE). "Ker bodo delovna mesta velik del predsedniške strategije, želijo opozoriti, kako predlagajo povezavo izobraževalnega programa s potrebami gospodarstva."

Časovni razpored bi bil lahko še posebej koristen med volilnim letom, ko predsednik Barack Obama potrebuje vse priložnosti, ki jih ima, da bi okrepil svojo podobo pri ustvarjanju delovnih mest. Programi CTE študentom ponujajo trgovske veščine, kot so vodovodna ali električna dela - nekateri pa trdijo, da takšni programi niso prejeli dovolj vladne podpore, zato so za študente, katerih interesi so manj akademski, zaprli nadomestno pot v srednji razred.

"To je del strategije kampanje za poudarjanje zaposlovanja," je dejal Jack Jennings, nekdanji dolgoletni uslužbenec demokratičnega kongresa za izobraževanje. "To je Obamina šibka točka."

Obamo so kritizirali tudi zato, ker je preveč poudarjal na dokončanju fakultete, pri čemer je trdil, da bo Amerika postala svetovni vodja pri doseganju stopnje izobrazbe. (Ta cilj je pripeljal do tega, da je Rick Santorum predsednika slavno označil za "snoba".)

"To je dobro izravnavo za upravo, ker so jih obtožili, da se preveč osredotočajo na fakulteto," je dejal Jennings.

V ta namen so uradniki uprave v četrtek zagotovili, da je Obama že namenil 2 milijardi dolarjev nepovratnih sredstev, katerih namen je okrepiti učne načrte skupnosti z "učenjem poslovnih potreb v resničnem svetu", in predlog, da se 8 milijard dolarjev porabi za "skupnostno šolo" v poklicni sklad, "čeprav bi lahko takšni programi delodajalcem koristili bolj kot pripravnikom.

Kljub temu strokovnjaki za delovno silo pravijo, da je potrebna nekakšna reforma CTE: izidi po sekundarnem izobraževanju so se osredotočili na nacionalne razprave o reformi izobraževanja. Kot je zapisano v gradivu za tisk uprave, je 60 odstotkov lani dodanih delovnih mest šlo za prejemnike diplome.

"Vsak dan me zmeša to, da imamo vsaj 2 milijona visoko kvalificiranih delovnih mest z visokimi plačami, ki jih ne moremo zapolniti," je ob pogovoru z novinarji dejal Duncan. "Nimamo krize zaposlovanja. Imamo krizo veščin."

Obamina revizija Perkinsovega zakona bi državam omogočila, da izpostavijo "visoko rastoča" delovna mesta in ciljajo na vrsto programov CTE, ki se financirajo iz programa. Namesto da bi šolskim okrožjem in višješolskim ustanovam dodeljevali ločena sredstva, bi program financiral konzorcije podjetij, okrožij in šol. Najbolj drastično bi revidiran Perkinsov zakon financiral programe na konkurenčni ravni v državah in razvil "skupne opredelitve", s katerimi bi lahko programe odgovarjali.

Green's CTE lobistična skupina se že zavzema proti spremembam. "Podrobnosti nas skrbijo," je dejala. "Konkurenčni pristop ima potencialni učinek res prikrajšanih podeželskih območij, ki imajo manjše osebje in nimajo piscev nepovratnih sredstev za polni delovni čas."

Predlagane spremembe so spodbudile Anthonyja Carnevalea, ki vodi Center za izobraževanje in delovno silo univerze Georgetown ter trdi, da akademska nagnjenost ameriškega izobraževanja mnoge otroke odvrača od šolanja. "Vsako leto izgubimo 30 odstotkov srednješolcev. Z vzgojo otrok v Algebri II si prisilimo osip in neuspeh," pravi. "Uporabno učenje deluje najbolje, vendar naš sistem spodbuja akademsko učenje, saj je nastavljen za vse, da gredo na Harvard."

Kmalu po tem, ko je Duncan predstavil svoja govorila, so kongresni demokrati izrazili svojo podporo. Senatorka Patty Murray (D-Wash.) Je v izjavi dejala, da "podpira prizadevanja uprave, da gradi na uspehih programov CTE", vendar ima "pomisleke glede predlaganih mehanizmov financiranja".

Senator Tom Harkin (D-Iowa), ki vodi senatski odbor za izobraževanje, je izdal izjavo, v kateri je dejal, da želi "pohvaliti sekretarja Duncana, ker je opozoril na potrebo po večji usklajenosti, sodelovanju, odgovornosti in inovativnosti".

Kljub temu noben kongresnik ni navedel, da bi sponzoriral predlog zakona o reformi CTE v skladu z Obamovim predlogom. (Zeleni in več pomočnikov Demokratičnih hribov so dejali, da se ne zavedajo nobenih načrtovanih zaslišanj.) Uprava sama ni napisala zakona, morda zato, ker še vedno sklicuje skupine menedžerjev CTE v državah, da bi določila skupne meritve odgovornosti. Predstavnik predstavnika John Kline (R-Minn.), Ki vodi odbor za izobraževanje v Parlamentu, se je na poizvedbo o načrtu Obame odzval tako, da je opozoril na pobudo za usposabljanje za delo, razvito v Klinejevem odboru, ki vsebuje veliko racionalizacije in konsolidacije usposabljanja za delo. programi.

Na vprašanje o političnih možnostih načrta CTE je bil Duncan optimističen. "Ne poznam nobenega izvoljenega uradnika na kateri koli ravni. Ki ne želi, da bi se njihova stopnja zaposlenosti dvignila," je dejal, "ne glede na politiko ali ideologijo."


Tretje leto 89 Obamova administracija 18. april 2011 - zgodovina

Država California je osvobodila Sara Jane Olson, nekdanjo članico SLA (Symbionese Liberation Army). Ta "radikalka iz sedemdesetih let postala gospodinja" je bila delno odgovorna za umor ženske po imenu Myrna Opsahl, mati štirih otrok, ki je imela nesrečo biti v Crocker National Bank v Carmichaelu v Kaliforniji (zunaj Sacramenta), ko jo je SLA oropala. 21. april 1975. Olson (prej znan kot Kathleen Ann Soliah) je bil odgovoren tudi za postavitev bomb pod vozila LAPD štiri mesece pozneje.

23 let je ubežala pred pravosodjem, dokler je niso odkrili po predvajanju epizode Američani najbolj iskani maja 1999. Oktobra 2001 je Olson priznal krivdo za postavljanje bomb, vendar je vztrajal, da je nedolžen. Rekla je, da ji vzdušje po 11. septembru ne bi omogočilo poštenega sojenja. Če bi bil Olson resnično nedolžen, se ne bi izrekla tako. Priznala je krivdo, vendar ni mogla sprejeti odgovornosti za svoja dejanja. Olson je bil obsojen na dve zaporedni kazni po 10 let dosmrtne kazni, vendar se je kazen na koncu znižala na 14 let.

Kar se tiče Myrne Opsahl, se je Olson, potem ko se je sprva izjasnil, da ni kriv, priznal, da je kriv za umor Opsahla, in bil obsojen na šest let, ki jo je treba prestati hkrati s 14-letno obsodbo. Za vse namene in namene Olson nikoli ni preživel dneva v zaporu zaradi Opsahlovega umora. Kje je pravičnost za Myrno Opsahl?

Konec koncev Sara Jane Olson skoraj četrt stoletja ni odgovarjala za svoje zločine. Morala je potovati in si ustvariti družino. Danes bo kljub nasprotovanjem guvernerja Minnesote Tima Pawlentyja in državnega kazenskega pregona dobila pogojno izpustitev v svoji matični državi Minnesota.

Myrni Opsahl ni nikoli uspelo potovati, še manj pa še naprej vzgajati svoje otroke. Sumim pa, da če bi Opsahlova družina povzročila večji šum, bo morda Olson še vedno za rešetkami. Vendar se zdi, da sta njen vdovec in eden od sinov zadovoljna. Seveda nisem v njihovih čevljih in upam, da je to položaj, v katerega nikoli ne bom postavljen. Toda če bi bila Myrna Opsahl še živa, bi bila stara 76 let. Zastaralnega roka za umor ni z razlogom. Myrna Opsahl je bila prevarana med najboljšimi leti svojega življenja, medtem ko Sara Jane Olson uživa v njenem.


Informativni list | Časovni okvir napredka v podnebnem akcijskem načrtu predsednika Obame

25. junija 2013 je predsednik Obama med govorom na univerzi Georgetown objavil svoj podnebni akcijski načrt (SKP). Ta celovit načrt je prvi te vrste in ga je uprava razvila za strateško doseganje treh splošnih ciljev: zmanjšanje domačega onesnaževanja z ogljikom, pripravo Združenih držav na vplive podnebnih sprememb in vodenje mednarodnih prizadevanj za reševanje globalnih podnebnih sprememb.

Prvi cilj, ki zmanjšuje onesnaževanje z ogljikom v ZDA, je v skladu z zavezo predsednika Obame & rsquos, da do leta 2025 zmanjša emisije toplogrednih plinov (26-28 odstotkov pod ravni iz leta 2005). Strategije za dosego tega cilja vključujejo zmanjšanje emisij toplogrednih plinov iz energetskega sektorja in spodbujanje energetske učinkovitosti in projekti čiste energije po vsej državi. Načrt uprave & rsquos za zmanjšanje emisij iz lahkih tovornih vozil do leta 2025, ki je bil uveden pred SKP med prvim mandatom Obame & rsquos, je pomemben sestavni del za dosego cilja emisij do leta 2025. Drugi cilj, priprava na podnebne spremembe, naj bi zveznim agencijam in ameriškim skupnostim zagotovil sredstva, ki jih potrebujejo za izboljšanje njihove odpornosti proti dvigu morske gladine, ekstremnim vremenskim dogodkom, suši in drugim vse bolj škodljivim vplivom podnebnih sprememb. Tretji cilj, ki vodi mednarodna prizadevanja za obravnavo globalnih podnebnih sprememb, je namenjen vzpostavitvi Združenih držav kot vodilne v svetu na področju podnebnih ukrepov. Združene države pozivajo k mednarodnim dvostranskim in večstranskim sporazumom za pospešitev svetovnega prehoda stran od fosilnih goriv in povečanje mednarodnih naložb v tehnologije čiste energije. To vključuje pozicioniranje Združenih držav kot ključnega igralca v mednarodnih podnebnih pogajanjih, zlasti na bližajoči se podnebni konferenci Združenih narodov (ZN) v Parizu.

V dveh letih od objave podnebnega akcijskega načrta je Obamina administracija bila zaposlena pri postavljanju temeljev za dosego svojih ambicioznih ciljev. To vključuje izvršilne ukrepe, predlagane in dokončane uredbe agencij, naložbene strategije, proračunske zahteve in napovedane mednarodne dvostranske sporazume. Ti veliki dogodki, ki so se v veliki meri zgodili, ko je planet doživel svoje najbolj vroče leto (2014), so ZDA na poti k zmanjšanju prispevkov in ranljivosti za podnebje. Da bi se izognili vplivom podnebnih sprememb v prihodnosti, pa bo potrebno veliko več ukrepov. Ta informativni list bo izpostavil nekatere ključne ukrepe, povezane s SKP, ki jih je uprava doslej sprejela, čeprav se v bližnji prihodnosti pričakuje še veliko več.

Časovnica napredka

Agencija za varstvo okolja (EPA) je objavila končno pravilo za načrt čiste energije, ki si prizadeva do leta 2030 zmanjšati emisije ogljika iz obstoječih elektrarn za 32 odstotkov pod ravnijo iz leta 2005.

20. julij 2015

Bela hiša odlikuje 12 verskih voditeljev za njihovo delo na področju podnebnih ukrepov. Zastopane so evangeličanske, frančiškanske, luteranske, islamske, judovske, hindujske, božje cerkve in baptistične vere.

9. julij 2015

Bela hiša je objavila poročilo o napredku, Poudarjanje zveznih dejanj, ki obravnavajo priporočila državne, lokalne in plemenske vodje delovne skupine za podnebno pripravljenost in odpornostin napoveduje vrsto novih ukrepov, usmerjenih v odpornost na podnebne spremembe, vključno z več kot 25 milijoni dolarjev zasebnih in javnih naložb.

2. julij 2015

EPA dokonča svoje pravilo za zmanjšanje emisij ogljikovodikovodikov (HFC), močnih toplogrednih plinov, ki jih proizvaja človek. Pravilo naj bi do leta 2025 zmanjšalo emisije HFC za 54 do 64 milijonov ton ekvivalenta ogljikovega dioksida.

30. junij 2015

Bela hiša napoveduje nov dvostranski sporazum o podnebju z Brazilijo, v katerem se vsaka država zaveže, da bo do leta 2020 povečala proizvodnjo energije iz obnovljivih virov na 20 odstotkov svojega energetskega portfelja.

23. junij 2015

Bela hiša gosti prvo srečanje na vrhu o podnebnih spremembah in zdravju. Predsednik Obama napoveduje številne ukrepe za zaščito skupnosti pred vplivi podnebnih sprememb na zdravje.

19. junij 2015

EPA in Ministrstvo za promet (DOT) skupaj predlagata nov krog standardov za emisije in učinkovitost porabe goriva za srednja in težka vozila do leta 2025, ki bodo zmanjšali emisije toplogrednih plinov za eno milijardo ton.

8. junij 2015

Bela hiša začenja javno-zasebno partnerstvo, Podnebne storitve za odporen razvoj, ki državam v razvoju pomaga pri krepitvi odpornosti proti vplivom podnebnih sprememb. V ta namen je državam v razvoju namenjenih začetnih 34 milijonov dolarjev.

20. maj 2015

Bela hiša je objavila poročilo, ki podrobno opisuje posledice podnebnih sprememb za nacionalno varnost.

23. april 2015

Ministrstvo za kmetijstvo ZDA (USDA) napoveduje novo pobudo Gradniki blokov za podnebno pametno kmetijstvo in gozdarstvo, ki bo kmetom, rančarjem in lastnikom gozdnih zemljišč pomagala pri odzivanju na podnebne spremembe. USDA poroča, da bo ta pobuda do leta 2025 zmanjšala emisije toplogrednih plinov in povečala sekvestracijo ogljika za več kot 120 milijonov ton na leto.

21. april 2015

Predsednik Obama razkriva dve izvršilni akciji za podporo odpornosti energetske infrastrukture: USDA napoveduje 72 milijonov dolarjev za podporo projektom električne infrastrukture na podeželju z velikimi naložbami za spodbujanje sončne energije, ameriško ministrstvo za energijo (DOE) pa napoveduje partnerstvo za podnebno odpornost v energetskem sektorju, ki se bo izboljšalo Odpornost ameriške energetske infrastrukture na ekstremne vremenske vplive in vplive podnebnih sprememb.

21. april 2015

DOE objavlja prvi del svojega prvega štiriletnega energetskega pregleda.

14. april 2015

EPA objavlja 20. letno evidenco toplogrednih plinov, ki prikazuje devetodstotno zmanjšanje emisij toplogrednih plinov v letu 2013 glede na raven iz leta 2005.

7. april 2015

Bela hiša napoveduje niz ukrepov za zaščito skupnosti pred vplivi podnebja na zdravje, vključno s sprostitvijo Ocena podnebja in zdravja iz ameriškega programa za globalne raziskave sprememb, objavo študije centrov za nadzor bolezni, ki je opredelila največje vplive na zdravje in možne strategije ublažitve, povezane s podnebnimi spremembami, in prvi vrh o podnebju in zdravju v Beli hiši (ki je potekal 23. junija) , 2015).

31. marec 2015

Združene države predložijo svoj predvideni nacionalno določeni prispevek (INDC) Okvirni konvenciji Združenih narodov o podnebnih spremembah (UNFCCC) v pripravah na 21. letno konferenco pogodbenic. V svojem INDC -ju Združene države ponovno potrjujejo svoj cilj, da do leta 2025 zmanjšajo emisije toplogrednih plinov za 26 do 28 odstotkov od ravni iz leta 2005.

19. marec 2015

Predsednik Obama podpiše izvršni ukaz, ki zveznim agencijam nalaga, naj do leta 2025 zmanjšajo svoje emisije toplogrednih plinov za najmanj 40 odstotkov glede na raven iz leta 2008 in povečajo proizvodnjo električne energije iz obnovljivih virov energije na 30 odstotkov celotne proizvodnje.

17. februar 2015

Ministrstvo za notranje zadeve (DOI) napoveduje, da bo namenilo 8 milijonov dolarjev za financiranje projektov za spodbujanje plemenskih projektov prilagajanja in načrtovanja podnebnih sprememb.

10. februar 2015

Bela hiša napoveduje pobudo za inovacije na področju čiste energije, ki bo spodbudila 2 milijardi dolarjev naložb zasebnega sektorja v rešitve za podnebne spremembe.

Bela hiša je objavila proračunsko zahtevo za proračunsko leto 2016 z močnim poudarkom na blaženju podnebnih sprememb in prilagajanju nanje. Pomembne zahteve vključujejo dodelitev 7,4 milijarde dolarjev za tehnološke programe čiste energije, razveljavitev 4 milijard dolarjev davčnih subvencij za proizvajalce fosilnih goriv in 2,7 milijarde dolarjev za ameriški program za raziskave globalnih sprememb za programe podnebnih sprememb.

30. januar 2015

Predsednik Obama podpiše izvršni ukaz o vzpostavitvi zveznega standarda za obvladovanje poplavnih tveganj za izboljšanje odpornosti skupnosti proti vplivom povečanih prihodnjih poplav.

25. januar 2015

Združene države in Indija napovedujejo nov podnebni sporazum, ki vključuje določbe za razširitev uspešnega partnerstva na napredne raziskave čiste energije (PACE-R). Partnerstvo bo imelo koristi od povečanega financiranja raziskav na področju sončne energije, učinkovitosti gradnje, naprednih biogoriv ter tehnologije pametnega omrežja in shranjevanja.

14. januar 2015

Bela hiša napoveduje načrt za zmanjšanje emisij metana iz naftnega in plinskega sektorja za 40 & ndash45 odstotkov od ravni iz leta 2012 do leta 2025. Predlagano pravilo bo predvidoma objavljeno pozneje leta 2015.

24. december 2014

Svet Bele hiše za kakovost okolja (CEQ) objavlja predlog, naj vse zvezne agencije pri oceni vseh predlaganih zveznih ukrepov upoštevajo učinke emisij toplogrednih plinov in podnebnih sprememb.

21. november 2014

Združene države pomagajo pri pogajanjih o dogovoru pogodbenic Montrealskega protokola o dopolnitvi večstranskega sklada s 507,5 milijona dolarjev za pomoč pri postopni odpravi ogljikovodikov (HFC).

17. november 2014

Državna, lokalna in plemenska vodja predsednikove delovne skupine za podnebno pripravljenost in odpornost objavlja svoja priporočila.

Nov. 15, 2014

The United States and Japan announce pledges of $3 billion and $1.5 billion, respectively, to the Green Climate Fund to support global GHG reductions and climate resiliency.

Nov. 11, 2014

The United States and China announce a bilateral climate deal in which the United States commits to reducing its carbon emissions 26-28 percent below 2005 levels by 2025, and China undertakes to peak its carbon emissions by 2030 or earlier.

The White House announces its Climate and Natural Resources Priority Agenda, which identifies a series of government actions that can enhance the climate resiliency of domestic natural resources and promote carbon sequestration.

The EPA announces proposed rulemaking to prohibit certain hydrofluorocarbons due to their potency as greenhouse gases.

The USDA, EPA and DOE release their Biogas Opportunities Roadmap, a voluntary strategy for the agricultural sector to reduce methane emissions.

July 9, 2014

The EPA announces its proposed rulemaking to approve new climate-friendly alternatives to HFCs.

June 25, 2014

The White House releases the one-year progress report on the Climate Action Plan.

June 18, 2014

The EPA publishes its proposed rule for the Clean Power Plan.

June 10, 2014

The Department of the Navy announces plans to purchase 37 million gallons of drop-in biofuels as part of its next fuel purchase.

The White House announces that $2 billion will be spent on energy efficiency upgrades to federal buildings over the next three years through energy savings performance contracts. This is in addition to the $2 billion investment announced in 2011.

DOE confirms the building industry&rsquos latest commercial building energy codes should cut energy waste by up to 30 percent more than current building energy codes.

The Obama administration releases the Third U.S. National Climate Assessment, the most comprehensive source of scientific information on domestic climate change impacts.

March 19, 2014

The White House releases its Strategy to Reduce Methane Emissions, outlining approaches to reduce this potent GHG across multiple sectors while also improving emission measurements.

March 19, 2014

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) launch the Climate Data Initiative, which brings together public and private sector data to help U.S. communities develop resiliency plans and resources.

March 4, 2014

The White House releases its FY15 budget request, which includes the creation of a $1 billion Climate Fund to help local communities adapt to and recover from extreme weather, a 26 percent increase to the DOT to help fund more energy-efficient transportation, a call for the elimination of $4 billion in fossil fuel subsidies, and the creation of a $954 million emergency disaster fund aimed at suppressing wildfires.

Feb. 18, 2014

President Obama directs the EPA and DOT to develop and finalize new fuel efficiency and GHG standards for medium- and heavy-duty vehicles by March 2016.

USDA announces the creation of the Regional Agricultural Hubs for Risk Adaptation and Mitigation to Climate Change. The seven locations around the country will be dedicated to studying the effects of climate change on agricultural production.

The DOT announces $55 million for public transit agencies to acquire zero-emission buses and the space to support them, via the new Low or No Emission Vehicle Deployment Program.

President Obama signs a Presidential Memorandum directing the federal government to conduct the first-ever Quadrennial Energy Review.

President Obama signs a Presidential Memorandum on Federal Leadership on Energy Management, directing the federal government to purchase at least 20 percent of its electricity from renewable sources by 2020.

The Administration expands the Better Buildings Challenge, a $2 billion program to finance energy efficiency upgrades in commercial buildings, to multifamily housing units as well. Additionally, the Administration announces the creation of the Better Buildings Accelerator which will support state and local government-led efforts to cut energy waste and to promote greater efficiency.

Nov. 15, 2013

The White House announces a cross-agency National Drought Resilience Partnership to help communities prepare for future droughts and reduce the impact of these events.

President Obama signs an executive order directing federal agencies to support community climate resiliency efforts. This includes the creation of the State, Local, and Tribal Leaders Task Force on Climate Preparedness and Resilience, with 26 officials from 23 states and territories.

Aug. 19, 2013

The Hurricane Sandy Rebuilding Task Force releases its rebuilding strategy to help provide a model for communities that face risks associated with climate change and extreme weather events.

June 25, 2013

President Obama announces his Climate Action Plan.

Climate Action Plan Spotlights


This section provides details on a major action taken to further each of the three overarching goals of the CAP.


Goal 1&mdashCut Carbon Pollution in the United States: The Clean Power Plan

Power generation produces nearly 40 percent of all GHG emissions in the United States. Reducing power sector emissions is, therefore, a key strategy outlined in the CAP. On June 2, 2014, the EPA announced a proposed rule, the Clean Power Plan (CPP), to reduce power sector carbon emissions. Authorized under section 111(d) of the Clean Air Act, the CPP mandates specific power sector emission reductions in each state, while giving states autonomy over how to achieve those reductions. The Administration released the final rule on August 3, 2015, calling for a 32 percent cut from 2005 levels by 2030, a small increase over the target in the proposed rule.

The Clean Power Plan provides each state with individualized emission reduction targets, specific to its needs and circumstances. Each state&rsquos target was derived by assessing its capacity to make use of the three &ldquobuildings blocks&rdquo EPA has identified as pathways to emission reductions: making fossil fuel power plants more efficient, using more low-emitting power sources, and using more zero-emitting power sources. States can decide which strategies to incorporate into their implementation plans, which must be submitted to the EPA by September 2018.

The Clean Power Plan is controversial. Opponents claim it will reduce grid reliability, raise electricity costs, and negatively impact low income and elderly citizens. Supporters argue that it will greatly reduce domestic carbon emissions, improve public health conditions, and benefit the economy by expanding the growing industries of renewable energy and energy efficiency.


Goal 2&mdashPrepare the U.S. for Climate Change Impacts: The President's State, Local, and Tribal Leaders Task Force on Climate Preparedness and Resilience

Adaptation strategies in the Climate Action Plan emphasize the importance of enabling and empowering local leaders to improve the climate resilience of their communities. To further this goal, President Obama signed an executive order on November 1, 2013, establishing the State, Local, and Tribal Leaders Task Force on Climate Preparedness and Resilience. The Task Force was directed to provide recommendations on how the federal government could most effectively assist communities in developing climate resilience.

The Task Force, which consisted of 26 U.S. governors, mayors, county officials and tribal leaders, spent a year researching and consulting with a diverse group of stakeholders. Their work culminated on November 17, 2014, with the release of a 45-page document outlining 35 key recommendations. Overall, the Task Force&rsquos recommendations emphasized the need for federal agencies to consider climate-related risks in all their decision-making processes, to maximize opportunities for actions that both reduce emissions and increase resilience, to increase coordination across federal agencies, to provide actionable data on climate impacts so as to inform local decision making, and to consult and cooperate with indigenous communities on all resilience efforts.

The Obama administration has been quick to take action on the Task Force's recommendations, even before they were finalized. On July 16, 2014, President Obama announced a $1 billion National Disaster Resilience Competition, $10 million in funding for tribal communities to improve climate resilience, and $236.3 million in grants to improve rural electric infrastructure. On November 17, 2014, the day the final recommendations were published, the White House released the Climate Resilience Toolkit, a comprehensive guide to assist local communities in improving climate resilience. On July 9, 2015, the Administration released a report highlighting the progress made on the Task Force&rsquos recommendations and announced new climate resilience efforts. The new efforts included additional funding for tribal communities and the National Disaster Resilience Competition, $10 million for climate resilience in low-income communities, and a new AmeriCorps program dedicated to assisting communities improve their capacity to address climate change.


Goal 3&mdashLead International Efforts to Address Global Climate Change: Bilateral Climate Agreements.

One point that is continually emphasized in the U.S. climate debate is that domestic mitigation efforts will be ineffective if the emissions of developing countries continue to rise unabated. For that reason, the Climate Action Plan stressed the importance of international bilateral agreements on climate. In the two years since the Climate Action Plan was announced, President Obama has reached historic agreements with China, India, and Brazil, three of the world&rsquos top ten greenhouse gas emitting nations.

On November 11, 2014, the United States and China announced a deal in which the United States agreed to reduce its emissions 26-28 percent by 2025, and China, for the first time ever, agreed to cap its emissions by 2030. Additionally, each country committed to further cooperate on clean energy research and to promote alternatives to hydrofluorocarbons. On January 25, 2015, President Obama and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi announced a new five-year memorandum of understanding on energy security, clean energy and climate change. Among other initiatives, it renewed their jointly funded $125 million Partnership to Advance Clean Energy Research. On June 30, 2015, the United States and Brazil reached a deal to expand each country&rsquos renewable energy generation to 20 percent of their energy portfolio by 2030. Furthermore, Brazil agreed to restore 12 million hectares of rainforest by 2030.

These agreements are part of President Obama&rsquos goal to achieve a binding international climate treaty at the United Nations' Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) 21st annual Conference of the Parties (COP21) this December in Paris. Additionally, the United States has submitted an aggressive Intended Nationally Determined Contribution (INDC) to the UNFCCC, reaffirming its goal of reducing domestic carbon emissions by 26 to 28 percent from 2005 levels by 2025.

Zaključek


The strategies and goals outlined in the Climate Action Plan demonstrate an understanding of both the existing climate change impacts in the United States, and of the actions necessary to prevent increased future impacts. By prescribing direct work with community and local leaders on climate resilience, the CAP exhibits an understanding of who is most greatly impacted by climate change and a commitment to protect citizens from harm. By outlining efforts for aggressive domestic mitigation efforts, while also committing to help developing nations reduce their emissions, the CAP recognizes that effective climate action must take place at both the local and global scales.

After two years of implementation, and despite a continued battle with Congress, the Administration has made visible progress towards achieving its climate goals. A number of the Climate Action Plan&rsquos short term targets have already been met, such as issuing regulations to limit power sector carbon emissions, developing a Climate Resiliency Toolkit, and working to mitigate methane and hydrofluorocarbon emissions. Additionally, steps have been taken towards achieving the longer term and more aggressive goals outlined in the CAP, such as achieving an international climate treaty. Moreover, the steady pace of new executive actions, regulations, and international partnerships since the CAP's announcement indicates that addressing climate change will likely remain a top priority for the remainder of President Obama&rsquos second term. In the run-up to the release of the Clean Power Plan's final rule, White House Chief of Staff Denis McDonough underlined this by stating that &ldquothere&rsquos not a more important and pressing issue on the President&rsquos agenda than climate.&rdquo


Obama Has Declared Record-Breaking 89 Disasters So Far in 2011

Od Hurricane Irene , which soaked the entire East Coast in August, to the Midwest tornadoes , which wrought havoc from Wisconsin to Texas, 2011 has seen more billion-dollar natural disasters than any year on record, according to the National Climatic Data Center.

And as America’s hurricanes, floods, tornadoes and wildfires set records this year, so too has President Obama in his response to them.

During the first 10 months of this year President Obama declared 89 major disasters, more than the record 81 declarations that he made in all of 2010.

And Obama has declared more disasters — 229 — in the first three years of his presidency than almost any other president signed in their full four-year terms. Only President George W. Bush declared more, having signed 238 disaster declarations in his second term, from 2005 to 2009.

But while the sheer number of bad weather events played a big role in the uptick in presidential disaster declarations, Obama’s record-setting year may have something to do with politics as well.

“There’s no question about it that the increase in the number of disaster declarations is outstripping what we would expect to see, given what we observe in terms of weather,” said Robert Hartwig, the president and economist at the Insurance Information Institute. “There’s a lot of political pressure on the president and Congress to show they are responsive to these sorts of disasters that occur.”

While the president aimed to authorize swift and sweeping aid to disaster victims, Congress was entrenched in partisan battles over how to foot the bill . When Republicans demanded that additional appropriations for a cash-strapped FEMA be offset by spending cuts, the government was almost shut down over disaster relief funding.

Such budget showdowns have become commonplace in Congress, but a similarly slow response to natural disasters by the president has been met with far more pointed and politically damaging criticism. Former President Bush learned that the hard way after what was seen as a botched initial response to Hurricane Katrina in 2005.

“Ever since that time we’ve seen FEMA try to act more responsively and we’ve seen presidents more engaged in the issues going on with respect to disasters,” Hartwig said.

Mark Merritt, who served as deputy chief of staff at FEMA during the Clinton Administration, said Obama’s record-breaking number of declarations has less to do with politics and more to do with demographics.

People are moving to high-risk areas like beaches and flood plains, more bad weather events are occurring and the country’s infrastructure is “crumbling,” he said.

“It’s not being used any more as a political tool today than it has over the past 18 years,” said Merritt, who is now the president of the crisis management consulting firm Witt Associates. “Everybody can say there’s a little bit of politics involved, and I won’t deny that, but I don’t think it’s a political tool that politicians use to win reelections.”

Politics aside, Obama’s higher-than-ever number of disaster declarations may also have a lot to do with the broad scale of this year’s disasters, which led to more declarations of catastrophes because each state affected by the disaster gets its own declaration.

For example, Hurricane Andrew, which hit Florida in 1992, cost upwards of $40 billion in damage, but resulted in only one disaster declaration because the damage was almost entirely confined to one state.

Hurricane Irene, on the other hand, pummeled much of the East Coast this summer, causing the president to make 9 disaster declarations, one for each state affected. Although there were 8 more declarations for Irene than for Andrew, the Irene caused about $7 billion in damage, a fraction of the damage caused by Andrew (up to $42 billion in today’s dollars).

Each presidential disaster declaration makes the federal government — specifically FEMA — responsible for at least 75 percent of the recovery costs, relieving cash-strapped state and local governments of the billions in damages caused by this year’s hurricanes, floods and tornadoes.

Richard Salkowe, a Ph.D. candidate at the University of South Florida who studies federal disaster declarations and denials, argued that the trend toward more declarations stems from local governments becoming more aware of the availability of federal funds.

“The local governments and state governments have become more aware of the process and more efficient in using it,” Salkowe said. “I’d say yeah, there are more states that have overwhelming needs, and that may have lead to the Obama administration declaring more disaster areas.”


Obama to deport illegals by 'priority'

Bowing to pressure from immigrant rights activists, the Obama administration said Thursday that it will halt deportation proceedings on a case-by-case basis against illegal immigrants who meet certain criteria, such as attending school, having family in the military or having primary responsible for other family members’ care.

The move marks a major step for President Obama, who for months has said he does not have broad categorical authority to halt deportations and said he must follow the laws as Congress has written them.

But in letters to Congress on Thursday, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano said she does have discretion to focus on “priorities” and that her department and the Justice Department will review all ongoing cases to see who meets the new criteria.

“This case-by-case approach will enhance public safety,” she said. “Immigration judges will be able to more swiftly adjudicate high-priority cases, such as those involving convicted felons.”

The move won immediate praise from Hispanic activists and Democrats who had strenuously argued with the administration that it did have authority to take these actions, and said as long as Congress is deadlocked on the issue, it was up to Mr. Obama to act.

“Today’s announcement shows that this president is willing to put muscle behind his words and to use his power to intervene when the lives of good people are being ruined by bad laws,” said Rep. Luis V. Gutierrez, Illinois Democrat, who has taken a leadership role on the issue since the death of Sen. Edward M. Kennedy in 2009.

The new rules apply to those who have been apprehended and are in deportation proceedings, but have not been officially ordered out of the country by a judge.

Ms. Napolitano said a working group will try to come up with “guidance on how to provide for appropriate discretionary consideration” for “compelling cases” in instances where someone already has been ordered deported.

Administration officials made the announcement just before Mr. Obama left for a long vacation out of Washington, and as members of Congress are back in their home districts.

The top House Republican on the Judiciary Committee said the move is part of a White House plan “to grant backdoor amnesty to illegal immigrants.”

“The Obama administration should enforce immigration laws, not look for ways to ignore them,” said Rep. Lamar Smith, Texas Republican. “The Obama administration should not pick and choose which laws to enforce. Administration officials should remember the oath of office they took to uphold the Constitution and the laws of the land.”

Immigration legislation has been stalled in Congress for years as the two parties have sparred over what to include.

Republicans generally favor stricter enforcement and a temporary program that would allow workers in the country for some time, but eventually return to their home countries. Democrats want the legislation to include legalization of the estimated 11 million illegal immigrants now in the country, and want the future guest-worker program to also include a path to citizenship so those workers can stay permanently.

Since 2007, when the issue stalled in the Senate, more than 1 million illegal immigrants have been deported.

Democrats said those deportations are breaking up families and that it’s an unfair punishment for a broken system.

Hispanic voters are a key voter bloc as Mr. Obama seeks re-election next year, but many of them felt he broke his promise to them to work on legislation once he took office. Thursday’s move already was paying dividends as Hispanic advocacy groups praised the steps.

“After more than two years of struggle, demonstrations, direct actions and other activities, the administration has signaled that they are capable of delivering direct relief for immigrant families,” said Casa de Maryland, a pro-immigrant group. “We eagerly await confirmation from community members that their families can now expect to remain together.”

Two years ago, some staffers at U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services had prepared a draft memo arguing that the administration retained broad powers that could serve “as a non-legislative version of ‘amnesty.’ “

But agency leaders and others in the administration had argued that the memo was inaccurate.

It was unclear Thursday how many people might be affected by the new rules. Pressure groups said up to 300,000 people could be eligible. In fiscal year 2010 alone, the government deported nearly 200,000 illegal immigrants who it said did not have criminal records.

Given the case-by-case basis of Thursday’s announcement, though, the groups said the actual number of people allowed to stay could be far lower.

In June, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, the agency that handles interior immigration law enforcement, issued guidance expanding authority to decline to prosecute illegal immigrants. The goal, ICE leaders said, was to focus on catching illegal immigrants who have committed other crimes or are part of gangs.

The chief beneficiaries of the guidance are likely to be immigrant students who would have been eligible for legal status under the Dream Act, which stalled in Congress last year.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, Nevada Democrat, who asked Homeland Security this year to exempt illegal-immigrant students from deportation, said the move will free up immigration courts to handle cases involving serious criminals.


Obama Wins The Gold For Worst Economic Recovery Ever

If mismanaging an economic recovery were an Olympic event, President Obama would be standing on the middle platform right now, accepting the gold medal.

Deep recessions are supposed to be followed by strong recoveries, but, under Obama, the worst recession since the 1930s has been followed by the slowest economic recovery in the history of the republic. In a very real sense, there has been no recovery at all—things are still getting worse.

To win the gold for economic mismanagement, Obama had to beat out some very tough competitors, including the previous Olympic record holder, George W. Bush. Let’s look at how Obama pulled it off.

For those not familiar with the sport, the Olympic “Worst First Three Years of Economic Recovery” event is a pentathlon—it’s composed of five individual trials.

The trials making up this pentathlon are as follows: 1) total employment growth 2) unemployment rate reduction 3) per capita GDP growth 4) change in the Real Dow and 5) change in real produced assets.

Because the goal is economic mismanagement, in the total employment growth event, the lowest number wins.

Obama was victorious in this trial by producing an increase in jobs during the first 36 months of his economic recovery of only 1.72%. This handily beat out Bush 43, who turned in a jobs gain of 2.93% during his recovery, and the team of Bush 41 and Bill Clinton, who delivered 3.64% more jobs during theirs. And, Obama absolutely creamed Ronald Reagan, who produced an increase in total jobs of 8.97% during the first three years of the economic recovery that he oversaw.

Obama struggled in the “reducing the unemployment rate” event. It was easy for Obama to do worse than Reagan, who had reduced the “headline” (U-3) unemployment rate by a massive 3.8 percentage points during the first three years of his recovery. However, in terms of turning in a bad unemployment performance, both the Bush 41 – Clinton team and Bush 43 had started with an unfair advantage.

Obama’s recovery came out of the blocks with an unemployment rate of 9.5%, which was far higher than where either the Bush 41 – Clinton team started (6.8%) or where Bush 43 began (5.5%). Accordingly, it was much harder for Obama to do worse than those two, because he would have to produce a smaller reduction in the unemployment rate than they did.

When the scores were first totaled, Obama (at 1.3 percentage points of reduction in the unemployment rate) was far behind both the Bush 41 – Clinton team (at 0.3 percentage points), and Bush 43 (at 0.1 percentage points).

However, Obama appealed to the judges, pointing out that, when measured by the more comprehensive “SGS Alternate Unemployment Rate” published by Shadow Government Statistics, he had actually managed to porast unemployment by 2.0 percentage points during his economic recovery. Meanwhile, the other three competitors had reduced their jobless rates, no matter how you measured them. The judges agreed, and they awarded first place in this event to Obama.

The officials then studied the replay tapes, and gave Obama extra credit for managing to push the U.S. 2.5 million jobs farther away from full employment during his economic recovery. The other three contestants could not match that.

Next up was the “real per capita GDP growth” event. Obama won this one decisively.

The total increase in real GDP per capita during the first three years of Obama’s recovery was only 4.34%. This was worse than Bush 43 (5.98%) and the Bush 41 – Clinton team (5.61%). Once again, Ronald Reagan brought up the rear in this important area of economic mismanagement. He produced a stunning 15.36% gain in real per capita GDP during the first three years of his economic recovery.

The last two trials in the Olympic “Worst First Three Years of Economic Recovery” pentathlon relate to building a prosperous future for the U.S. economy.

The Real Dow is the Dow Jones Industrial Average divided by the price of gold. It is a proxy for the driving force to invest in economic growth, rather than to park capital in “safe” investments like gold and government bonds.

In the Real Dow event, Obama had to settle for second place. Bush 43 beat him soundly by managing to depress the Real Dow by a massive 35.6% during the first three years of the economic recovery that he oversaw. However, in terms of economic destruction, Obama turned in a creditable performance, pushing the Real Dow down by 11.6% during his first three years of economic recovery.

In this event, the Bush 41 – Clinton team did not seem to be clear on the concept. The Real Dow rose by 13.5% during their watch. And, once again, Ronald Reagan came in dead last, producing a massive 89.9% increase in the Real Dow during the first three years of his powerful economic recovery.

Obama finished strong by blowing away the competition in the “change in real produced assets” trial. Produced assets comprise the physical infrastructure of our economy, and economic progress depends upon building up our stock of produced assets.

During the first full year of Obama’s economic recovery (2010), real produced assets actually fell by 1.41%. This is the biggest drop during the 60 years for which data is available. It is also the only decline ever observed during an economic recovery.

Ronald Reagan finished second in this trial with a 0.16% increase in fixed assets during 1983. The Bush 41 – Clinton team and Bush 43 tied in this event. They both produced a 3.42% gain in real produced assets, in 1992 and 2002, respectively.

We should all be proud that Barack Obama has won the Olympic gold medal in the “Worst First Three Years of Economic Recovery” event, and reward him accordingly in November.


The Obama administration intervened in court to ensure that BP’s Gulf drilling operations would go forward, even in the absence of serious environmental and safety studies, a World Socialist Web Site analysis of 2009 legal documents reveals.

The administration’s efforts applied not only to deep sea drilling operations in the Gulf of Mexico, but specifically to the site that would be used by BP’s Deepwater Horizon drill rig, which on April 20 exploded, killing 11 workers and generating an oil slick that is inflicting an unprecedented environmental and economic disaster on the Gulf Coast.

A May 11, 2009 legal brief written on behalf of Obama’s secretary of the interior, Ken Salazar, requested that the Washington, DC federal court of appeals overturn or amend an earlier decision blocking new drilling in the Gulf of Mexico’s outer continental shelf. The petition referred specifically in several instances to site “206”—the same area where the Deepwater Horizon would explode in a blowout less than one year later.

In July of last year, the court of appeals partially approved Salazar’s petition, under the condition that the administration would produce an environmental impact study for Gulf of Mexico drilling operations. The study has not yet been completed.

The court of appeals had earlier ruled that expanded deep sea drilling related to the Bush administration’s “Outer Continental Shelf Oil and Gas Leasing Program, 2007-2012” violated the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (OCSLA) because it failed to adequately analyze the “relative environmental sensitivity” of impacted areas.

That decision came on April 17, 2009, only 11 days after the Obama administration granted BP a “categorical exemption” from producing a legally required environmental impact study and approving its exploration plan for site 206, the future location of Deepwater Horizon.

In appealing this ruling, the Department of the Interior argued that the Center for Biological Diversity, which had brought the suit, had “‘not identified any injury arising from the mere existence of these [drilling] leases, nor from further exploration and development activity on the Gulf of Mexico leases.”

Referring to “leases 204-207,” the Obama administration argued that exploration had already begun, and that “attempting to restore the status quo ante would therefore be extraordinarily difficult.” It went on to note the substantial amounts of money that oil firms had already wagered on the exploitation of the deposits.

“Salazar approved BP’s exploration plan without any environmental analysis on April 6, 2009, knowing that the lease could get struck down by an active lawsuit,” said Kieran Suckling of the Center for Biological Diversity. “When it was struck down 11 days later, he went back to court to get the BP exploration drilling (and other areas) removed from the vacature. His success in this legal maneuver allowed BP’s exploration drilling to take place, resulting in the April 20, 2010 catastrophic disaster.”

The Department of the Interior did not return calls for comment on the story. The lawyer for the Department of Justice who litigated the case, Sambhav Sankar, said he could not discuss the matter. A call to his superior in the Justice Department, Andrew Ames, was not returned at the time of writing.

The Obama administration’s legal intervention to continue deep sea Gulf drilling shows that it not merely shares with the Bush administration indirect responsibility for the disaster through its failure to adequately regulate the industry. It actively intervened to release BP from legally required environmental assessments for the very drill site that would produce the Deepwater Horizon disaster.

Even since the explosion on the rig, the Obama administration has continued to grant “categorical exemptions” for deep sea oil drilling—27 in all, according to the Center for Biological Diversity. On March 31, Obama issued his own “Five-Year Program” for offshore and deep sea drilling, The plan surpasses even that of the Bush administration, calling for opening up areas for drilling stretching from Delaware to Florida on the Atlantic Coast as well as along Florida’s Gulf Coast.

The media has largely ignored the growing evidence that implicates the Obama administration in the disaster. Coverage of the oil spill, already one of the worst ecological catastrophes in history, has been eclipsed for more than a week by media focus on the failed Times Square bombing attempt.

Where the media has addressed the Obama administration’s role in the disaster, it has attempted to fashion a “new narrative” for the explosion, in which the administration’s early indifference is replaced by supposedly quick action.

Over the weekend, an Associated Press news analysis attempted, with limited success, to portray an energetic response to the crisis. The story simply overlooked all the evidence to the contrary, including the multiple press briefings given by press secretary Robert Gibbs beginning the day after the explosion. Quotes from Gibbs, in which he at first expressed only dim awareness of the disaster and later used it as a chance to play up Obama’s call for increased drilling, are freely available on the White House web site. (See “Obama seeks to contain anger over BP oil spill”)

Obama’s allies in the liberal and “left” media, meanwhile, have sought to pin blame for the spill entirely on the Bush administration, disregarding the fact that Obama has carried on the same policies unchanged.

This is the thrust of a Monday column in the New York Times by liberal columnist Paul Krugman, “Sex & Lies & the Spill,” which attributes the disaster to “the collapse in government competence and effectiveness that took place during the Bush years.” Krugman notes that under Bush federal regulators “minimized the environmental risks of drilling,” “failed to require a backup shutdown system that is standard in much of the rest of the world,” “exempted many offshore drillers from the requirement that they file plans to deal with major oil spills,” and “specifically allowed BP to drill Deepwater Horizon without a detailed environmental analysis.”

While the Bush administration is certainly culpable for the disaster, all of the regulatory inaction cited by Krugman in fact continued under Obama. This includes, as Krugman is forced to acknowledge, the exemption given for the Deepwater Horizon site. But Krugman exculpates Obama by lamely noting that “the administration hadn’t yet had time to put its stamp on” the Minerals Management Service (MMS).

Krugman concludes by arguing that the spill shows the need for a new “attitude toward government,” citing as good examples of this attitude a recent speech by Obama and “the Clinton years.” Similarly, the Nation magazine declares the spill “an opportunity” that could be used “to put all politicians, including President Obama, on the spot and to demand that we move in a fundamentally new direction.”

If the spill shows anything, it is that there is no means of challenging the stranglehold of the corporate oligarchy through supporting the Democratic Party. Since the Carter administration, Democratic presidents have advanced deregulation every bit as much as their Republican counterparts. Indeed, in explaining their lack of regulatory enforcement on oil rigs, MMS officials have cited a law passed during the Clinton years that required all federal agencies to adopt industry standards.

BP employees handed over $71,000 to Barack Obama in the 2008 elections—more than to any other candidate—and the corporation has spent tens of millions in lobbying over the past three years, in the process purchasing the support of such powerful politicians as former Democratic Party lobbyists John and Tony Podesta, former Democratic Senator Tom Daschle, former Republican Senator Alan Simpson, former Bush Environmental Protection Agency head Christine Todd Whitman, and Leon Panetta, until he was installed as Obama’s CIA director.

A Monday report from the Los Angeles Times points out that two members of the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, which will investigate the explosion and spill, received the third and fourth most campaign funding from BP in 2008: Republican Senator John McCain ($37,700) and Democrat Marry Landrieu of Louisiana ($16,000). BP gave about 40 percent of all campaign contributions to Democrats in the last election cycle, and 60 percent to Republicans.

Behind the political decisions that created the conditions for the Deepwater Horizon disaster are enormous financial interests. BP, the world’s fourth largest corporation, was part of a large-scale oil industry push out into the deeper waters of the Gulf of Mexico. Until the last decade, oil industry workers referred to the Gulf as “the dead sea,” owing to the stagnation in its output. But the sharp increase in oil prices in recent years whetted the appetite of the industry for fields once considered unprofitable—including those one mile beneath the sea.

When the lease sale opened for site 206 in a New Orleans auction conducted by the MMS, “bidders went on the mother of all shopping sprees,” industry journal Upstream Review wrote in March of 2008, “doling out a record $3.67 billion in . bids on oil and gas exploration tracts.” The bidding, so high that it “left jaws hanging in The Big Easy,” was driven by “insatiable appetites for the emerging Lower Tertiary oil play in deeper waters of the Gulf and ‘ultra-deep’ natural gas plays beneath shallower waters of the Gulf’s Outer Continental Shelf.”

“It’s the price of oil and gas right now that’s providing a lot of money and a lot of interest in the Gulf of Mexico,” said Lars Herbst, regional director for the MMS, who continues to hold the same position under Obama.


Poglej si posnetek: Afghanistan - TALIBAN IN SHOCK! Islamic State TARGETING Taliban Leaders (Julij 2022).


Komentarji:

  1. Vok

    Tukaj je palica za božično drevo

  2. Cynfarch

    Po dolgem potepu po poplavljenih forumih,

  3. Pepillo

    V njem je nekaj tudi zame, zdi se, da je zelo dobra ideja. Popolnoma se strinjam s tabo.

  4. Hide

    Nima smisla.

  5. Lidmann

    Menim, da storite napako. Lahko zagovarjam položaj. Pišite mi v PM, govorili se bomo.

  6. Joran

    Tema je zanimiva, sodeloval bom v razpravi. Skupaj lahko pridemo do pravega odgovora. sem prepričan.



Napišite sporočilo