Archive for the ‘Obama’ Category

Is Obama to blame for Trump and the revival of white supremacist hate? – Washington Post

By Michael Eric Dyson By Michael Eric Dyson August 18 at 7:00 AM

After eight years of Obama, America was not ready to declare a cease-fire in the perpetual war over race, Peter Baker writes in Obama: The Call of History, his compelling and concise survey of the first black presidents two terms in office. If anything, it seemed to be escalating again.

Journalism may be historys first draft, but Bakers words might qualify as prophecys first blush. To be sure, it wasnt hard to see that Barack Obamas successor, Donald Trump, would plumb the depths of racial animus to paint his twisted vision of America. Hed offered us a foreboding sketch of his insidious views when he hatefully scorned Obama, arguing that he wasnt a true American, saying, with no proof, that Obama was a Kenyan citizen, a Muslim interloper who was not to be trusted.

But little prepared us for the full bore of Trumps belligerent bigotry, the stunning scope of which swept into full view this past week when he drew false equivalence between white supremacists in Charlottesville and their vigilant protesters. Baker argues that Obamas scorn for Trump grew more visceral in the final days of the [2016] campaign and that it was hard [for Obama] to picture a President Trump.

Yet, Obamas initial reluctance to address race, the outlines of which Baker briefly traces, left an interpretive void that was grievously, and gleefully, filled by his successor, who is all too eager to ply his poisonous perspective. Baker argues that Obama picked up the pace of race talk in his second term, but it may have been far too little, far too late. When it came to race, Obama, as he did in his foreign policy, led from behind.

Baker, the chief White House correspondent for the New York Times, spends the bulk of his book writing about Obamas accomplishments getting the economy on good footing after the greatest financial collapse since the Depression, bailing out the automobile industry, passing a health-care overhaul, killing Osama bin Laden and his virtues, above all a self-discipline that, for all the controversies, allowed him to emerge from eight years in office without a hint of personal scandal. The book is both a compelling biography and a coffee-table, large-format work with beautiful photography commemorating the Obama years.

Baker also tackles the former presidents idiosyncrasies, including a much-discussed antipathy to politics, symbolized in an aloofness that spoiled his chances of backroom glad-handing and arm-twisting. And Baker touches on Obamas flaws, not least his inviolable and unwarranted belief that his oratory could inspire people from opposite ends of the political spectrum to forge bipartisan agreement. That idea quickly dissolved into rancorous resistance from Republicans during his tenure.

Baker tries to be fair about the matter: He measures the racial hostility Obama faced, while noting that presidents including Bill Clinton and George W. Bush also had their share of hatemongers and conspiracy theorists.

But Obamas time in office evoked a unique hatred that undoubtedly rested in race, if not alone, then at least primarily. No amount of ideological dispute or partisan disagreement could account for the relentless assault on his being president and on his being as president there was an ontological raid on the idea that a body and brain like his should exist and have the nerve to darken the Oval Office. Obama tapped something deep and enduring in the American soul some positive valve of renewable hopefulness that was improbably pitched against the horizon of American cynicism. By the same token, he pushed racial levers and buttons that seemed to irrationally infuriate and unite masses of white folk in opposition to his cause. Despite the celebrated multiracial coalition he summoned, the bulk of white America never cast a vote for Obama.

As much as it acknowledged his genius, this nation also punished Obama for existing at all. It viciously took him to task for being cosmopolitan and having political couth. Sure, like most presidents, Obama may have been arrogant, as Baker notes, but it was, finally, in part at least, a redemptive self-confidence that hoisted a faltering nation atop his thin shoulders. Yet many white Americans resented him for saving them, resented him for holding our fragile union together until it was, alas, fractured into a million prejudiced pieces by an inept caricature of a leader who is allergic to gravitas.

No matter the warts and blemishes Baker explores Obamas continuation and expansion of Bushs use of drones and his massive deportation of immigrants suggest he didnt deserve a Nobel Peace Prize there is little denying that Obama remains a remarkable figure, a dignified embodiment of the decorum that ought to attend the presidency.

And yet, as much damage as Trump has wrought, as perilous and vexing as his bitterly ignorant views on race manage to be, Obama must be held to account for failing to sow as widely as he might have the seeds of racial justice. Thats in part because he truly believed he was the smartest man in the room when it came to race he was high on race-neutral policies that he thought would tame a skeptical public and raise black boats as the nations tide of prosperity rose. He kept his own counsel and refused to listen to challenging black voices that may have sanctioned his willfully oblivious or naive views.

But there were more sinister undertones to Obamas rhetoric, more flaws in his outlook, than Baker acknowledges. Obama often enough lashed black folk in public belittling Morehouse College graduates in a commencement speech, blaming black people for using poverty as an excuse to commit crime in his address at the 50th anniversary of the March on Washington, needling black members of Congress with the condescending exhortation to stop complaining, take off their bedroom slippers and put on their marching boots. Obama could identify what he thought of as black pathology in remorselessly granular detail. Yet he could hardly utter a discouraging word to white America, wouldnt dare take the same liberties with them as he did with his own.

That seems to make sense you can say to your kinfolk what you cant say to company except it doesnt, because Obama went out of his way to proclaim himself not black Americas president but everybodys president: everybody, it seemed, except black folk. The paradox is that he was our benighted symbol of progress, yet his greatest swagger may have flashed as he reprimanded rather than represented us.

Trump is a churlish, indecent man. He is a pitiful president who amplifies racist ignobility and echoes the harangues of the brutish bigots who declare their hate as a tarnished badge of courage. As Bakers eloquent account of Obamas sometimes majestic, always complicated presidency makes plain, Obama is a brilliant, decent and sometimes noble man who graced his office with intelligence and humanity, qualities that fled the scene when he left the White House.

It is a shame that he failed to engage race with the sensitivity, balance, candor, intricacy, insight and enormous comprehension of which he was capable. There were dire consequences when a man of superior talent failed to talk about race though, it must be admitted, his supporters did him no favor by saying he was hemmed in and couldnt speak about such things because it would upset white folk. That ignores how Obamas very being, his very breath, his very body, upset white folk.

Obamas refusal to admit that and therefore, to offer our fatally fractured country the tough wisdom he might have given us had he surrendered the fantasy of massive white support is a national tragedy. More tragic still is that his unwillingness for much of his term in office to talk about race left a derisive vacuum for a village idiot to slip right in and willingly spew vile unlearnedness. Baker may be right that Obama detested Trump as the 2016 campaign wore on, but the first black president must reckon with the fact that he helped put the greatest threat to his legacy in office.

Obama

The Call of History

By Peter Baker

New York Times/Callaway. 319 pp. $50

Read more:
Is Obama to blame for Trump and the revival of white supremacist hate? - Washington Post

Trump approves Obama-era plan for a more independent US Cyber Command – TechCrunch

President Trump has given the go-ahead for a plan dating from the Obama administration to elevate US Cyber Command to the level of Unified Combatant Command, giving it more operational independence from the National Security Agency. The statement also raised the possibility of splitting off CyberCom from the NSA entirely.

Both actions were recommended by former former Secretary of Defense Ashton Carter last year, as he told TechCrunch at the time.

At the moment, we have the NSA, which is part of the intelligence community, managed by the Department of Defense, and CyberCom, which is a combat group whose first job is to protect, Carter said during an interview at Disrupt SF. We had them both in the same location and able to work with one another. That has worked very well, but it is not necessarily the right approach.

Both organizations are currently led under a dual-hat system, where the director of the NSA currently Admiral Mike Rogers also leads Cyber Command. Last year the idea of splitting the two was met with resistance from the Committee on Armed Services, specifically Senator McCain, who resented the plans being made without their consultation. He wholeheartedly supports the plan now, though.

There are currently nine Unified Combatant Commands, organized both by region and responsibility. For instance, Pacific Command oversees that ocean, southeast Asia, and Australia, while Transportation Command is in charge of mobility assets worldwide. CyberCom, originally underneath Strategic Command, would join the ranks and get its own seat at the table.

If the split were to take place, an interesting consequence would be that the NSA could be led by a civilian. However, theres no indication now of how leadership will change, who will be in charge of what, or when. The green light is really just the start, and well know more soon.

Staffing the enhanced CyberCom might be a challenge, since the military would be vying with top recruiters from tech and security firms. It will help, though, that potential recruits will see that cybersecurity is no longer being treated as a lesser discipline and only tangentially related to warfare and defense at large.

Whatever happens, this concrete action to invest in the countrys cybersecurity infrastructure will likely be welcomed by many. There is a sense that we are being outplayed by cyber operatives in countries and organizations all over the world, from Russia to IS. And a rising tide, in this case increased attention and federal investment, would presumably raise all boats in the industry.

Go here to see the original:
Trump approves Obama-era plan for a more independent US Cyber Command - TechCrunch

Vic Mensa Criticizes Barack Obama’s White House Agenda – XXLMAG.COM

Jamie McCarthy/Pool, Getty Images (2)

Barack Obama ran on a campaign promising change throughout the U.S. before he was elected to President of the United States nine years ago, but its a promise that Vic Mensa feels he wasnt able to keep. Speaking with TV and radio host Larry King during an episode of Larry King Now, Mensa offers his take on Obamas impact while he was in the White Houseor lack thereof.

I dont really believe so, says The Autobiography rapper after being asked if he felt represented by the beloved former president. I live five, six blocks away from Barack Obamas home. So I watched my neighborhood not improve and my city not improve and my community not improve, maybe get worse in the time that Obama was in office. And I recognize that hes the president of the United States, but I dont think that Obamas agenda was very often to represent the people and do well by the people. I feel like he was often times very careful with what he said regarding race.

Just before asking Mensa about Obama, King asks the rapperif the ever-controversial President Trump is a disappointment. Mensas answer? Pretty much.

I think hes as expected, says Mensa, who also calls Trump a bold-faced liar.I would say that hes clearly in office for his personal gain and for his financial gain, and we dont know the full game yet, but theres a lot of nepotism going on.Mensa goes on to say hes resigned to the idea that people from his community wont be getting the win they hoped for on the big political stage.

Check out more of Mensas conversation with King in the video below. Beneath that, you can listen to him discussing Justin Bieber, saying he supports the singers sudden decision to cancel the rest of his Purpose world tour.

Subscribe to XXL on

Subscribe to XXL on

See New Music Releases for August 2017

Subscribe to XXL on

Follow this link:
Vic Mensa Criticizes Barack Obama's White House Agenda - XXLMAG.COM

DeVos throws lifeline to 800 college programs Obama found questionable – MarketWatch

U.S. Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos announced a change to an Obama-era rule Thursday that borrower advocates say will put students at risk of being preyed on by schools that are supposed to prepare students for careers.

If the Department of Education decides career-training programs dont adequately prepare their students for employment, those programs can now dispute the agencys findings with their own data with no baseline requirements as to the size of the sample as long as DeVos deems them to be reliable metrics. The announcement is the latest step taken by the Trump administration that slows implementation of the gainful employment rule, which aims to measure whether job training programs are delivering on promises to prepare students adequately for a career.

We really needed this rule to be able to say, At least theres something ensuring our taxpayer dollars are being spent at programs that actually help students, said Jennifer Wang, the director of the D.C. office for the Institute of College Access and Success, a nonprofit that promotes college access. We cant be wasting taxpayer dollars on overpriced ineffective programs that dont prepare students for employment if thats the purpose of the program, Wang added.

Under the rule, developed by the Obama administration, career-training programs, many of which are at for-profit colleges, would be required to prove that their graduates loan payments dont exceed 20% of their discretionary income or 8% of their total earnings. Programs that failed to meet these metrics for multiple years could lose access to federal financial aid a lifeblood for many colleges. The Obama-era Department of Education found earlier this year that more than 800 programs were failing to meet the rules requirements.

The for-profit college industry has come under fire in recent years after two large for-profit college chains collapsed amid accusations that they were misleading students. The gainful employment rule was one of several efforts by officials to crack down on the industry. Borrower advocates have expressed concern for months that DeVoss Department would challenge those rules.

How the Departments new requirements will work

Under the original rule, if schools wanted to use their own surveys of graduates, the surveys had to include at least 50% of the programs graduates. They could also use state data as long as it accounted for at least 30% of graduates.

Earlier this year, DeVoss Department also announced it would give colleges a one-year reprieve in complying with the rules requirements and that it plans to re-litigate the rule itself. On Thursday, the Department also announced it would give colleges an extra 50 days to indicate they intend to appeal the agencys findings about their programs. One of the regulations requirements: Failing programs must provide warnings to students. But if the programs appeal the findings they dont have to provide a warning until the appeal is resolved.

By drawing out the appeal process, the Department is putting more students at risk of signing up for programs with questionable outcomes, Wang said. It will lead to schools reinstating their worst programs and practices because now if youre a failing program you can enroll students without warning them.

Colleges and the Obama administration fought over the rule

The rule has been a battleground for consumer advocates and for-profit college executives since its inception. The Obama administration first began developing it in 2009 and faced multiple court challenges from the industry over its requirements, though the administration ultimately prevailed.

The Department cited the latest legal challenge to the rule from the American Association of Cosmetology Schools as justification for the latest delay in implementation in its announcement. A Department spokeswoman pointed to the discussion of the court order in the announcement when asked about the reasoning behind the change. A judge in that case told the Department it needed to give those schools more time to appeal the debt-to-earnings ratios calculated by the agency.

Borrower advocates say the Department is using that narrow ruling as an excuse to undermine the rule. The DeVos Department of Education is listening to the industry much more than they are students and their families, said Maggie Thompson, the executive director of Generation Progress, the youth advocacy arm of the Center for American Progress, a left-leaning think tank, said of the latest developments.

The details of the rule were developed through a process known as negotiated rulemaking, which gathers stakeholders to hammer out specifics. It was slated to be implemented on July 1 of this year. Instead, officials plan to convene a new negotiated rulemaking process. Advocates like Thompson have charged that these procedural hold ups are an extra-legal attack on a rule that was developed through the proper channels.

This is a simple rule that I think most people would agree with and thats why theyre trying to attack it in quiet and procedural way, Thompson said.

View original post here:
DeVos throws lifeline to 800 college programs Obama found questionable - MarketWatch

Obama holdovers on president’s arts council quit over Charlottesville – Fox News

Nearly all the members of the President's Committee on the Arts and the Humanities resigned Friday in protest of President Trumps reaction to last weekends white supremacist violence in Charlottesville.

Sixteen members of the commission signed a joint letter announcing their resignation. The only member not listed on the resignation letter is George C. Wolfe, a theater and film director.

A number are holdovers from the Obama administration, including actor Kal Penn, the Harold & Kumar Go to White Castle star who briefly worked in the Obama White House. Penn posted the resignation Friday on Twitter.

Effective immediately, please accept our resignation from the Presidents Committee on the Arts and the Humanities, the members wote.

Intentional or not, the first letter of each paragraph in the memo also happens to spell out "R-E-S-I-S-T," which has not gone unnoticed on Twitter.

The committee is the fourth such advisory board connected to the president to see resignations in the wake of Charlottesville. The arts board includes Democratic donors like Andrew Weinstein as well as Vicki Kennedy, widow of the late Sen. Ted Kennedy, and author Jhumpa Lahiri, whose novel "The Namesake" was adapted into a film starring Kal Penn.

The letter explicitly mentions Trumps Charlottesville response, which critics have panned because the president blamed both sides instead of just white nationalists. A 32-year-old counter-protestor was killed when authorities say a Nazi sympathizer drove his car into a crowd.

On Tuesday, Trump criticized the "alt-left" for their role in stoking the unrest. "You had a group on one side that was bad, and you had a group on the other side that was also very violent, and nobody wants to say that, he said.

In their resignation letter, the artists accuse Trump of supporting those who committed the violence, even though the president has referred to the driver of the car as a disgrace to himself, his family, and his country and has condemned neo-Nazis and like-minded hate groups.

Reproach and censure in the strongest possible terms are necessary following your support of the hate groups and terrorists who killed and injured fellow Americans in Charlottesville, the letter states.

FALLING APART: TRUMP AXES INFRASTRUCTURE ADVISORY COUNCIL

On Wednesday, Trump announced plans to shut down two jobs councils, including his Manufacturing Council and the Strategic and Policy Forum -- which were already coming apart because of resignations over his Charlottesville comments. The White House also said Thursday it would disband the President's Advisory Council on Infrastructure.

The arts and humanities committee was created in 1982 under then-President Ronald Reagan.

Fox News Kristin Brown contributed to this report.

Go here to see the original:
Obama holdovers on president's arts council quit over Charlottesville - Fox News