Barack Obama’s impressive speech in Cairo

Obama gave a terrific speech (here's the video). In the first ten minutes, he detailed the many connections between Islam and the United States (yes, Rep. Keith Ellison did take his oath of office using a Koran once owned by Thomas Jefferson). The first condition for progress of any type is to plainly state where we are, and Obama's speech did a great job of this. Yes, our many misunderstandings, driven by irresponsible media frenzy, occlude plain facts, several of them highly embarrassing to the U.S. For instance,

For many years, Iran has defined itself in part by its opposition to my country, and there is in fact a tumultuous history between us. In the middle of the Cold War, the United States played a role in the overthrow of a democratically elected Iranian government.

That, then, is how we can repair the damage: by establishing trust by stating the facts. Only after speaking frankly can tone matter. Obama's tone was impressive, based on the many applause interruptions. But good tone is nothing without admitting undeniable facts. Only then can we move forward. By traveling to Cairo to make his speech, Obama has made a dramatic statement that America is no longer framing its diplomatic strategies through the use of crude stereotypes. I don't know whether the audience entirely trusts America, but this was a huge step in the right direction.

Continue ReadingBarack Obama’s impressive speech in Cairo

Two ways to get into public college

At the University of Illinois at Champaign-Urbana, there are two ways to get admitted. You can be a qualified student or, if you have the right connections, you can get in even though you are not well qualified. The linked article raises a good point. Private colleges can admit or deny admission to anyone, subject to civil rights laws. But what is a public university doing with a shadow admission list? And in how many other public colleges is this sort of thing going on?

Continue ReadingTwo ways to get into public college

Does Gingrich think racism is evolving?

I loved this op-ed piece over at Huffpo by John Ridley - "Note to Newt . . . " - regarding Supreme Court nominee Sotomayor's supposedly racist comment about the perspective of a Latina woman in a 2001 speech. Ridley is right on target with his comparisons of "old racism" and "new racism" - as if a comparison can even be made. Mostly, Newt and his ilk just seem annoyed that "they" just don't know their places these days. Not women, not minorities, not gays . . . life just isn't as simple when everyone goes off and thinks they're just as good as the good ol' white guys. Sotomayor's point was essentially that anyone who has seen the system from the bottom up has a deeper experiential perspective from which to draw when discussing said system. That doesn't make her every thought on it correct or best, but overall, her perspective has more to draw on than that of a privileged white male who never had to fight for his place at any table, let alone on any bench. I don't discount white males, by any means, and neither did she. Lots of them, present company included, are wonderful, open-minded, intelligent and fair people. By calling her comment "racist," Gingrich has merely shown he has precious little understanding of what racism is really all about.

Continue ReadingDoes Gingrich think racism is evolving?

Another intolerant candidate

Farouk Hosny is Egypt's candidate to lead UNESCO (the UN's cultural arm). He once pledged to burn Israeli books that were part of Egyptian libraries, but that was way back in May of 2008. Now that he wants to head UNESCO, he is publicly apologizing for his anti-Israeli remarks. How convenient. See the full story at BBC News.

Continue ReadingAnother intolerant candidate