What got cut from the stimulus bill

February 7, 2009

http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/02/07/stimulus.cuts/index.html

(CNN) — A coalition of Democrats and some Republicans reached a compromise that trimmed billions in spending from an earlier version of the Senate economic stimulus bill.
Senators worked late into the night to trim billions from the original stimulus bill

Senators worked late into the night to trim billions from the original stimulus bill

CNN obtained, from a Democratic leadership aide, a list of some programs that have been cut — either entirely or partially:

Partially cut:

• $3.5 billion for energy-efficient federal buildings (original bill $7 billion)

• $75 million from Smithsonian (original bill $150 million)

• $200 million from Environmental Protection Agency Superfund (original bill $800 million)

• $100 million from National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (original bill $427 million)

• $100 million from law enforcement wireless (original bill $200 million)

• $300 million from federal fleet of hybrid vehicles (original bill $600 million)

• $100 million from FBI construction (original bill $400 million)

Fully eliminated

• $55 million for historic preservation

• $122 million for new Coast Guard polar icebreaker/cutters

• $100 million for Farm Service Agency modernization

• $50 million for CSERES research

• $65 million for watershed rehabilitation

• $30 million for SD salaries

• $100 million for distance learning

• $98 million for school nutrition

• $50 million for aquaculture

• $2 billion for broadband

• $100 million for NIST

• $50 million for detention trustee

• $25 million for Marshalls Construction

• $300 million for federal prisons

• $300 million for BYRNE Formula

• $140 million for BYRNE Competitive

• $10 million state and local law enforcement

• $50 million for NASA

• $50 million for aeronautics

• $50 million for exploration

• $50 million for Cross Agency Support

• $200 million for National Science Foundation

• $100 million for science

• $1 billion for Energy Loan Guarantees

• $4.5 billion for GSA

• $89 million GSA operations

• $50 million from DHS

• $200 million TSA

• $122 million for Coast Guard Cutters, modifies use

• $25 million for Fish and Wildlife

• $55 million for historic preservation

• $20 million for working capital fund

• $165 million for Forest Service capital improvement

• $90 million for State and Private Wildlife Fire Management

• $1 billion for Head Start/Early Start

• $5.8 billion for Health Prevention Activity

• $2 billion for HIT Grants

• $600 million for Title I (NCLB)

• $16 billion for school construction

• $3.5 billion for higher education construction

• $1.25 billion for project based rental

• $2.25 billion for Neighborhood Stabilization
advertisement

• $1.2 billion for retrofitting Project 8 housing

• $40 billion for state fiscal stabilization (includes $7.5 billion of state incentive grants)


Copyright law: artists vs. the press

February 5, 2009

I am writing this post in response to the new found legal troubles that street artist Shepard Fairey finds himself in with the AP. Shepard Fairey became a household name after creating his marvelous HOPE and Progress art pieces that went viral and played such a major role in this past election. Now they might cost him in court.

I should start by saying that I am not a lawyer. However, I have read up a little on copyright law (most notably from the book “Electronic Highway Robbery” by Mary E. Carter) and I have been in contact with lawyers about copyright, patents and trademarks. So with that background and what I consider to be common sense, I have reached the following conclusion.

News organizations such as Reuters and the AP (the press) should not be fully covered by US copyright law, at least when it comes to art.

Why? Well first, let’s examine the copyright law.

To quote Electronic Highway Robbery by Mary E. Carter:

What can be Protected by Copyright?

Section 102(a) of the Copyright Act states:

Copyright protection subsists…in original works of authorship fixed in any tangible medium of expression, now known or later developed, from which they can be perceived, reproduced, or otherwise communicated, either directly or with the aid of a machine or device.

The basic requirements that a work of art must meet to qualify for copyright protection are that:

- It must be original. The artwork must be an original.
- It must be creative. The artwork must show at least a minimum amount of creativity.
- It must be fixed in a tangible medium.

My argument hinges on the part of the law that says “mediums of expression“, which Ms. Carter refers to as “creative”.

Press photographers should be excluded from this category. They given special access to the President of the United States, not for “creative” purposes or a means to “express” themselves, but to inform the public.
In other words, the press acts as our eyes and ears receive information from the President because our real eyes and ears cannot legally be in attendance. Not every Joe blow with a camera has the privilege of gaining such close access to the President. In fact, it is my understanding that the press even accompanies the President on Air Force one.

The only reason that press photographers have the privilege of being so close to our politicians so that they can snap those close up shots, is because they are licensed for the purposes of serving and informing the American public. If that was not the case, then I and half the rest of the country could (and would) grab the Nikon or Canon, head to Washington, and take a front row seat at the next Obama press conference. In that context, I honestly could take “creative” pictures or use my photos as “expressions”. After all, they are my photos, my camera, so I can do with them as I please and I have no obligation to our nation at large.

But what’s not fair is to say only special licensed photographers can gain close up access to the President, and then turn around and treat their photos as art. These photographers are not there to make art. Again, if they are, then I should also be given access. I should have been there when the man shoes were thrown at Bush, so I can “express” how I saw it with my photos. I should have been there when Obama was meeting with all of the governors for the first time, so I could snap shots of Palin’s first facial expressions when meeting the President who “pals around with terrorists” and isn’t from “real America”.

I could take much more artsy photos than what comes out of the AP, guaranteed.

So do not tell me that the same copyright laws that protect Mickey Mouse (a true creative work), such that I cannot just draw up my own Mickey cartoons and sell them on DVD, also protects an AP photographer’s photos when they are only licensed to serve & inform the American public.


3D Obama images and animations

February 4, 2009

277479_1232374375_large

obama07

1

http://obama-cartoons.blogspot.com/

obama_fromweb

3d-obama1

http://uspresident44.com/

obama0333e7cde7-9ab4-4b57-a918-6282799de25flarge


Why is Barack Obama Black? (video)

January 27, 2009

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hUSgRQCvopc

Tiger Woods should see this video. I like Tiger, but…he should still research the one drop rule. Yes America has progressed. Yes we are happy that race relations are improving. However, we cannot simply dismiss history as if it has no relevancy to us today. We cannot create this meaningless category called “mixed” in efforts to be more “accurate” and right past wrongs.

Why is “mixed” meaningless? Because someone with a Latino father and an Asian mother is “mixed”. Someone with a white father and a Native American mother is “mixed”. Someone with an Indian father (from the country of India) and a black mother is “mixed”. Someone with an Arab father and a Cuban mother is “mixed”. As the video states, 80% of African Americans come from “mixed” backgrounds. Take a look at Rosa Parks, doesn’t she look “mixed” with something? Malcolm X was also “mixed”, but how do we refer to him? How was he seen and treated in America?

I am happy that America is progressing and I am excited about us perfecting our union. I am encouraged by this past election and hopeful about our future. Will we ever reach a point where we can simply refer to ourselves as “Americans”. Yes, I think so, and in some ways we can do that accurately right now.

However, history does matter. It is important to know who your ancestors are, and how you got to where you are in order to fully appreciate where you are and make sure we don’t repeat past mistakes. One could argue that Barack Obama’s father is from Kenya, but Obama was not raised in Kenya. He was raised as an American, His 4 years in Indonesia gave him unique experiences, but his grounding is in America. After reading “Dreams from my Father”, it is clear that Obama understands what it’s like to be a black American, even growing up in a white household. In some ways, black kids adopted into white families might be able to relate closely to Obama’s upbringing. Yes, Obama is half white. Yes, his white family members loved and raised him. Yes, that is a wonderful thing, and yes it should be acknowledged. But outside of the home, walking down the street with an afro and a basketball, America saw Obama as black. America treated Obama as black. And as Obama said in a 60 minutes interview, in America, if you look black, then that is how you are treated.

Again, great video. Please watch it and feel free to comment.


Take Pride as an American, take pride!

January 22, 2009

America is a young country, yet again and again we surprise ourselves and the world with the living power of our ideals and our values, and the core decency and generosity of our people. On Tuesday, Americans of all backgrounds gathered together in celebration of ushering in our new President, Barack Obama. Just the warmth and civility between the outgoing President and his administration and the in coming President and his administration speaks volumes about the true greatness of America!

Tuesday was not merely Obama’s victory, nor was it merely black people’s victory. No, Tuesday was America’s victory! Citizens and politicians with completely opposing political views to our new President were able to celebrate as Americans, just as much as Obama’s most fervent supporters.

Many people, black and white (and every race in between), fought hard (bled and some died) for what happened on Tuesday. However, their deaths were not in vain. Many nations around the world face fighting and conflicts within their borders, some of which has lasted for generations and generations with no end in sight. But here in America, this young nation has proved, through the power of our ideals and the strength of our Democracy, that we can overcome even our greatest odds and tribulations. As Obama put it “America can change. That is the true genius of America”. And genius it is!

Yes, if you are an American, take pride! Whether you voted for Obama or against him, or even if you didn’t vote at all, take pride as an American! We truly are a great great nation.


Obama, a class act

January 8, 2009

g-cvr-090706-presidents2-10agrid-4x3

He was not bluffing when he spoke of bringing this country together. After appointing his “team of rivals” cabinet, sitting down with Sen. John McCain and reaching out to Democratic and Republican governors, President-elect Barack Obama’s idea to meet with all 4 living (former) Presidents was like icing on the cake. Obama is clearly setting the tone he had promised during the campaign, of moving past our differences and lifting this country up together. Bringing hope to America. Bringing change to America. Bringing unity and respect back to America. Yes we are! (Yes he is!)


Awesome face Obama designs

January 2, 2009


NEW Obama products!

December 22, 2008

newproducts

For these items and more visit http://www.zazzle.com/onthehanger


“Is Barack Obama black?” – A response to an AP article on this topic.

December 14, 2008

who-is-barack-obama
Is Barack Obama black?

Anytime you hear a question like this, one thing is absolutely certain:  the person they are talking about must be (or have been) a great success.  In this case, the subject of the question happens to be the next President of the United States of America.  President elect Barack Obama came literally out of no where to defeat Hillary Clinton and the Clinton machine, as well as those “mean old Republicans”, to win the 2008 presidential election in a landslide.

But what if Obama had not won?  What if news had come out that Obama had a secret white mistress who accused him of rape and abuse?  Would white America jump to say he wasn’t black then?  Would Americans from mixed backgrounds leap to say he’s one of them, or he’s raceless?  Would news periodicals and the AP run stories claiming “Many insisting that Obama is not black”?  Or would they run front cover images of him darkening his features?

I wonder what the reaction would be if these same people, who now claim “Barack Obama is not black”, were to have only known the Barack Obama of the 1970s?  What would they have said about him when he had an afro, played high school basketball,  drank, experimented with drugs, and was “casual” about his education and future? (as his mother put it in Dreams from my father)

barackobamahs

He still had a white mother from Kansas, and he was still raised mainly by his white grandparents.  However, something tells me that those same white people and “mixed” people would not be as enthusiastic about claiming him as one of their own.  I can just hear them referring to him as that BLACK burden to an otherwise “good family”.  To some, he might serve as  evidence as to why white women should never ever sleep with black men (because they produce such awful offspring).


No America, President elect Barack Obama is black.  He is an African American, and thankfully he is smart enough and has enough integrity to recognize that.  Black people come in every single shade you can think of, but we are still black.  The KKK has no problem recognizing that.  Nor did most white people when passing on their inheritance.  It would be laughable to believe that the black offspring from rapes/relations between white slave owners/segregationists and black women would gain the same recognition and treatment (when it comes to passing on inheritance) as the white offspring of those men.  Undoubtedly, there are many white people in America who are related to black people and they don’t even know it.  Consider this, it was Barack Obama who brought up his relationship to Dick Cheney, not the other way around.  At the height of his power as Vice President and his dealings with Halliburton, do you think Dick Cheney ever recognized Barack Obama as part of his family?  Ha!

Sadly, there is still a subtle belief in America that being black is a bad thing.  That explains why whenever an African American becomes incredibly successful (like Oprah or Michael Jordan), people are quick to say “they transcend race”.  It is almost as if they are saying “you are so good at what you do, that we will forgive you for being black.  I hardly even notice that (negative) part about you.”

When have you ever heard this type of comment said about a successful white American?  Nobody says Michael Phelps “transcends race”.  Nobody says that about Steve Jobs or Bill Gates, George Clooney or Brad Pitt, Celine Dion or Barbra Streisand, etc.  For them, and many non blacks in general, race is not something to apologize for, nor is it something that is even addressed.

But whether we are talking about Halle Berry or Colin Powell, Tiger Woods or Barack Obama, successful African Americans with mixed backgrounds always seem to draw comments seeking to dilute, belittle, or ignore their black/African roots.  Even for black Americans with two black parents, like Beyonce, efforts seem to be made to diminsh their blackness once they reach a certain success level.

black-white-beyonce_787558c

I recognize that people with this mentality often consider themselves as being “helpful”.  They may also claim they are being “accurate” and “honest” in their assessments.  (that is, when it comes to recognizing the diversity in the ethnic backgrounds of successful African Americans).   But what they are really doing is perpetuating the lie that black people and people of black African descent are inferior.  They are saying that being black is a bad thing, and thus any successes from blacks (especially in terms of intelligence or beauty), comes about because the person is not really black, or the person is unusually gifted enough to overcome their blackness.

In order to truly “perfect our union”, Americans must redefine what it means to be black.  That is, we must change our attitudes towards the word “black”, when speaking about ethnicity.  “Black” can no longer harbor within its definition the lies of inferiority, danger, cultural weakness, criminal intentions, ignorance, foolish and rebellious behaviors, loudness and bad grammar, or any other negative or stereotypical  attributes.  Black must describe one’s ethnic background, physical attributes, and that’s about it.

I am even slow to suggest that culture be added to the definition of “black”, because culture is mainly tied to environment, upbringing, and social structures.  Thus, a “black” person from the suburbs of Minnesota is still “black”, even if he or she does not share all of the cultural preferences or practices of a “black” person from Atlanta.  Too often, African Americans who break from the black stereotypes pedaled by the entertainment industry and the media are subsequently labeled “not black” or “acting white”.  Too often those blacks that dare to speak proper English are accused of “talking white”, despite the fact that some of the greatest orators in our nation’s history (MLK, Federick Douglass, even Malcolm X) were black.  History shows that African Americans built their own towns and universities, even during the brutal years of Jim Crow and segregation, yet the popular stereotype only emphasizes the ghetto, and the projects, and lazy uneducated blacks seeking handouts.

carsonYes, whites and blacks and all Americans must look carefully at their own definitions of the word “black”  if we are ever to truly unite as a country.  Just as whites should not be labeled racist simply for being white, blacks should not be seen as a stereotype simply for being black.  And those blacks that do reach high levels of success are still black.  If they marry outside of their race, they are still black.  Even if they came from mixed marriages, in America, they are still black.

Black is not confined to the jail cells, the hip hop videos, the basketball courts, the stripper poles,  the ghettos and stereotypical images in the media.  Black exists in corporate board rooms, in the upper ranks of the military, in ivy league schools, in high fashion magazines, in law offices, in doctors offices and scientific laboratories, in NASA space programs and architectural/engineering firms, in the police forces and congressional offices, and yes…now…black exists in the White House!

obama-familyx-large


Barack Obama HOPE and CHANGE t-shirts & products

October 17, 2008


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.