Me? I kind of like the guy and what he has been doing so far. Luckily some intrepid souls were able to capture both Republican and Democrat reactions to this news. I have some of the footage linked below.

Republican Reaction

Meanwhile, most Democrats were feeling a bit more jovial about this.

Democrat Reactions

On a more serious note this is something that while expected has happened a lot sooner than anyone anticipated. Obama being in the position to appoint someone to the Court is I think a good thing. The fact we are losing Souter is a shame as he tended to vote with the more liberal side of the Court. Souter was always a disappointment to the Right though. Appointed by Bush I he was seen as something of a turncoat to the Republicans with how his views changed over time.

The speculation has begun as to who the president will nominate. I am certainly waiting. The SCOTUS is a powerful and far reaching body when it comes to not only the law but also the very fabric of our Society.

Technorati Tags: democrats, obama, Politics, republicans, scotus, video

If we start by looking at what the War on Drugs has done versus what the intentions were we can see how successful it has been. The War on Drugs can be traced back to the 70’s under President Richard Nixon. It was then that the DEA was formed under Executive Order in 1973. It, like the war, has since grown well beyond its initial creation. From the DEA website:

At its outset, the DEA had 1,470 Special Agents and a budget of less than $75 million. Furthermore, in 1974, the DEA had 43 foreign offices in 31 countries. Today, the DEA has 5,235 Special Agents, a budget of more than $2.3 billion and 87 foreign offices in 63 countries

This growth can really be attributed to President Reagan in the 1980’s. The sheer amount of money and manpower now devoted to this is mind-boggling.

From what I can gather the original idea was to deal with substance abuse using the criminal justice system to dismantle the supply side of the equation. Any intelligent person can see the immediate problem with this approach. When you take something that is fundamentally a health issue and criminalize it you run into all sorts of potential abuse. Things can easily become a self-feeding cycle of destruction that will just grow and grow if left unchecked. You are also trying to, in essence, legislate recreational behaviors a la Prohibition. We all know how well that worked out.

Let’s look at some of the current numbers regarding the War on Drugs and see whether it is actually working. First the criminal justice side. The US currently has 5% of the total world population. Our current prison population makes up 25% of the total world prison population though. That is a huge disparity for a country that is founded on the idea of personal freedom. If you look at when the number of incarcerated began to rise, you see how well it coincides with the War on Drugs being started. It’s very disturbing to see the spike as shown in the graph. If we go back to 1980 and look at how many drug offenders we are throwing in jail we see a huge spike beginning in 1980. How huge a spike? A 1200% jump. That is correct, a 1200% jump. That is not a normal progression given time. 74% of those convicted of drug offenses end up in prison. Going by federal numbers only 11% of those incarcerated are actually high-level dealers. Most are abusers.

It’s not just the prison statistics that are a problem though. If you look the rise in drug use over the last thirty years, it can be seen that this war is not working very well. “Say No To Drugs” was a joke. The drug of choice might change, but the number of those who are addicted has not changed much. It’s only gone up in aggregate over the last thirty years. And interesting side effect of this is it has actually helped to push “hard” drugs on the populace since drugs like pot which tend to get seized more easily are becoming less profitable.

What to do?

So how do we deal with this problem? It does not take a genius to see that we need to change what we are doing. What we do need is a group of leaders brave enough to push for the needed changes. I know what I would like to see change. This is just a quick list of four points that I think we need to look at. I think these could work though.

1. Re-classify drugs – This is not about “legalizing” in the standard sense I think. We should make these controlled substances more like the various legal drugs. Control them through the FDA or the ATF. Sell them as we do alcohol or tobacco products. Maybe we should look at having some being sold as prescribed pharmaceuticals and some as OTC drugs. Perhaps a combination of these? We have the mechanics in place to properly control them. Let’s use those.

2. Scrap the DEA – This is probably going to be the hardest part. The DEA is, I think, a big part of the problem. Their whole existence relies on an illegal drug trade. They are enforcing laws that we already have bodies that could handle this. The FBI and the ATF both are equipped to handle this. If they need help absorb the DEA into them. I don’t see why we need another government body to enforce laws.

3. Mandatory Sentencing is Bad – I am not the first to say this. We’ve seen the unintended effects of mandatory sentencing requirements. When you remove the ability for a Judge to sentence based on the situation you open up situations for all sorts of problems. If you incarcerate based on an arbitrary numbering system, you will have abuses and miscarriages of justice. The current stats place 11% of federal drug-related defendants as actual high level dealers. This means most of those hit by this are abusers or low level flunkies. This defeats the stated goals of mandatory minimums which were to take out the leaders. Don’t take my word for it though. The DoJ has agreed these have failed. Mandatory sentencing is unfair, racist and generally a bad idea. Let’s get rid of them.

4. Drugs Addicts Are Not Criminals – At least not in any normal sense. These are people with a serious problem. Jailing them, if they are nonviolent offenders, does nothing to help them or society as a whole. It just makes things worse in the long run. Let’s treat them, get them the help they need, watch them, and not treat them like the scum of the earth. If you put these people in jail with violent criminals, they will become violent criminals themselves to survive.

I know none of these ideas can happen overnight. I also know that in the US we are finally beginning to have a reasonable discussion about these things. It would take a fundamental change in how the US looks at both drugs and the criminal justice system to make these things happen. I do think the time has come to push this change.

Technorati Tags: jim webb, justice, Politics, war on drugs

I am not sure how many people realize, but there has never been a requirement that a Supreme Court Justice be a judge, or even a lawyer. It’s really only in the last twenty years or so that this has become something of the standard. Historically many have not been judges. Some of the most influential justices were not judges. Chief Justices Marshall and Warren are two examples of this. They may be the two most influential Chief Justices to date with Marshall defining what would become the modern court. Warren is noted for the number of Civil Rights decisions handed down during his tenure. Both were in fact politicians and public servants but neither was ever a judge. This points out that you don’t need to be a judge to be a good justice.

There is a deeper perspective here though in why a SCOTUS full of only judges would be a bad thing. While the law, and an understanding of how the law works is important the Supreme Court requires more than just pure expertise in the letter and workings of the law. The SCOTUS, at least to me, is much more than simply the highest level of appeals court. Decisions made by this court can, and will, have far reaching impact well beyond the case they are hearing. Decisions have been made which have, quite literally, change the course of the nation. Examples of this include Dred Scott vs. Sandford, Marbury vs. Madison, Brown vs. The Board of Education, Rove vs. Wade . Those are just some examples of cases which have had powerful political ramifications. It’s this reason why you need a court with a mix of those who understand public policy as well as law.

The Court has to be able to not only understand the letter of the law, they must also understand the spirit of the law. They have to see the currents of public opinion, they have to recognize the importance of “protecting the minority from the tyranny of the majority”, and most importantly they have to make their decisions based on a larger picture not just the microcosm of the law.

All this means a court of Justices that were only judges can be bad. Scientific studies bear this out as well. A new study that looks at this effect on the court points out that it may not be a good thing. Also when you have a group that makes decisions becoming more and more the same groupthink can develop which is never a good thing.

Those that argue for more judges on the court do so mainly because they don’t want to see laws invalidated by the Court. This reasoning is flawed in that it dilutes one of the major functions of the court. The Court needs to be independent and strongly principled. Neither of these things predicates being a federal judge. While that is not to say a federal judge would be a poor choice, only federal judges would be. Diversity of background on the Court can only be a good thing.

These reasons say to me “all federal judges” for the court would be a bad thing. I hope that Obama, when the time comes, makes his nominations based on the idea that only judges on the court would be bad. I hope he looks to the bigger picture in his nominations.

Technorati Tags: court, opinion, Politics, poltiics, scotus, us

It is, I think, important to reflect on what that means not only for us as individuals, or the political parties, but for the country as a whole. We are to borrow an overused term, – at a crossroads. When you look at where we are it could almost be a book or movie storyline. We have two wars we were led into. One of which was a clear case of being misled into it. We have an economic situation that is the worst since The Great Depression. We have a federal government that celebrates incompetence and cronyism. Plus we have climate change worries and the national infrastructure is crumbling. It sounds like a situation only a madman would want to willingly step into. Instead we have Barack Obama. I do not envy his task.

I am hopeful that the damage of the last eight years can be alleviated, repaired, undone. I am also confident that things will get worse before they get better. Our economy will worsen, we will learn things we did not want to know. And we will be angry, depressed, and hopeful. We will, as a nation, need to work hard to fix all these problems. We will need to be involved in our local communities. But that will not be enough. We will need to be involved at the state and federal level. For so many years apathy has been the rule for myself as well as others. Apathy is not the answer, that much is now obvious. We’ve seen something amazing happen. We’ve seen the people finally respond.

Now comes the hardest part. Not only for you, for me, or Obama, but for all of us equally. We’ve seen many bad things happen these past eight years. I want to see an accounting for all those things that were done. I want to see justice for those crimes that were committed. But I am also wary of my motivations for wanting this. I know that any accounting that is had must be in the interest of justice and not simple vengeance. We must be sure to right the wrongs and not simply extract our pound of flesh. I think that Obama realizes this. His behavior so far seems reinforce this. I wish others would realize this.

So come tomorrow I will give my new President the chance to act on his promises. To put his words into action. Only then will I hold him accountable. I will let him, and other elected officials know what I think. But I will give them the chance. I see many simple wanting to get revenge, or acting out in anger at the last eight years. That road is dangerous. So I say we fix what is broken before we look at punishing the guilty. If someone sets your house on fire you don’t go after them while the house is burning do you? No, you put out the fire than get them. Let’s not let the house burn down while we seek justice.

Technorati Tags: bush, obama, Politics

I read an article today regarding OSHA and the Bush Administration. What I read was very dismaying. It details some abuses and total capitulations by the agency responsible for protecting the well-being of workers in the workplace.   Maybe I should not be so surprised anymore but the sheer brazen nature of their attitude and their actions is just mind boggling. It shows such a contempt for not only the people they were sworn to protect but a contempt behind the very ideals that are the foundation of the U.S. Government. It really does say “I don’t give a shit about anyone but those who give me cash.” The mercenary attitude is very, very frightening.   

There are a few quotes from the article that really got me. My personal favorite is this one.

“The agency’s first director under Bush, John L. Henshaw, startled career officials by telling them in an early meeting that employers were OSHA’s real customers, not the nation’s workers. “Everybody was pretty amazed,” one of those present recalled. “Our purpose is to ensure employee safety and health. . . . He just looked at things differently.”

Let’s look at how wrong that is on so many levels. First, OSHA was created to protect worker’s rights regarding safety and health in the workplace. Their own mission statement says this. From their website - “To assure safe and healthful working conditions for men and women.” I don’t see anything in there about protecting employers. Maybe this is really Bizzaro OSHA, maybe Henshaw was having an “Opposites Day” at the office? I don’t know but really. It’s not even something that can be stretched to seem misconstrued or a misstatement. It’s pretty obvious there. It is also pretty ballsy to just say out loud. It shows how little regard he had for the worker.

Now let’s look at the new customer for OSHA – the employer. What we have here is a case of the police deciding their real customer was not the people but the criminals they were sworn to capture. Please note I am not saying that all employers are criminals. What I am saying is you would not expect the police department to put the needs of criminals over those they are sworn to serve and protect. I’d expect the same would be true of OSHA. They very nature of the relationship between OSHA and the employer is an adversarial one. You can’t get around the fact that OSHA is meant to police these companies to protect the employees. Might as well ask a dog to protect a pile of dog biscuits you just dumped on the floor. If you did that and the dog ate them all anyone would call you a fool for doing so.

The thing is I agree that you need to balance any regulation with the realities of enforceability and burden. You don’t want to regulate so heavily it strangulates you. You need to have some input from the employers in order to ensure fairness. But you also have to take anything they do and say with a grain of salt. After all regulation hits their bottom line. And most companies are extremely short sighted regarding that. This is why the priority needs to be the people you need to protect, not the ones you need to watch.

Now point two really makes my blood boil. My initial reaction was “What the hell?” when I read about the brazen nature of the attempts to influence reporting and regulations. Sadly it seems most of these attempts were successfully. Thankfully some did fail. There was a report about asbestos in car brake pad linings that the industry was trying to quash. It appears they were afraid of lawsuits against them. Well while Henshaw was there he worked hard to slow it down and kill it. After he left though it was published.

“Days after publication and seven months after Henshaw’s retirement from OSHA, he sent its science director an e-mail demanding that the warning be withdrawn and redone to express a “more balanced” view. Henshaw did not tell the career official that he had since been employed as a $350-an-hour courtroom witness on behalf of an asbestos-products firm and had testified for companies in two other asbestos lawsuits filed by auto mechanics.”

This man needs to go to jail. He basically used his time there to protect some people then when he was done tried to use lingering influence to earn himself a lot of money doing the same thing from the outside. What is even better is he pushed to have the writer of the report punished. He got his boss to recommend a 10 day suspension without pay. Luckily news of this was published by the Baltimore Sun. Sometimes the press does their job to good effect.

There are other troubling parts to the story but these two epitomize, in my mind, the real nature of what a Bush Presidency has meant. Namely the focus away from “For the People” and a move to “Greed above all else is the cause, the end, and the religion.” For the Bush Administration the People mattered only isofar as they could be used to maintain power. Our purpose became not to be a part of the government, to be served, protected and empowered. It became to be cajoled, manipulated and used to maintain their need for power and money. We existed to serve their needs and the needs of those they called “Master”.

Their lust for wealth, their craving for the trappings of power became that great. And it has nearly destroyed what this country was, is, and could be. It is also a great example of what happens when the Watchers refuse to watch. Our government was founded on the principle of Checks and Balances. It has never been more apparent that this system only works when at least two of the three branches actually agrees to do their job. It also shows the inherent wisdom of such a system. When the system functions properly it works great. I am hopeful though. The coming year brings with it a new president, a new congress, and a bit of light on the darkness we’ve seen the last eight years. I just hope in the next four years we can begin to undo the damage that has been done.

Technorati Tags: bush, corruption, government, osha, Politics, washington post, wtf

I Am Back

For those that take the time to read what I post after taking about a month off for various personal reasons. I’ve decided to start up again. I am also going to reserruect Technophilia and give it a serious go.

A Trial I Say!

Amazon sent me an offer for a 30-day trial of the Kindle so I decided to take them up on it. I’ve toyed with getting one but since I could not pick one up and use it I held off. This is a smart move by Amazon to do trials. It looks like they are only doing it for selected Prime customers though. I R SPESHUL. It came today so we’ll see how I like it. I plan on blagging about my thoughts on it in a few days.

On Games…

I played around with the Warhammer MMO for a bit but found it lacking. Looks like WoW is still king for me. With the expansion pre-patch coming tomorrow and the expansion one month away I feel my precious little free time slipping away.

The Familia

Mom is back home and doing ok. 2 months of hospital time and physical rehab are not fun. She was glad to be back home. She also complained because I don’t come see her enough. Good sign she is back in the swing of things. My Uncle though, I need to go see him. I may soon.

P.S.

Oh and I cut my hair but am letting the beard come back. Started talking to someone again that I really was kind of distant from for too long. Nice to have them back. I also think I need a vacation but am not sure where. I don’t want to go too far and I mostly want to chill and have some fun. Any ideas?

Some fun links:

Darth Vader on Twitter.

The animated Universal Declaration of Human Rights

Skitch

For those who like bling with their water

Technorati Tags: bling, Cool Stuff, darth vader, family, Politics, twitter, water

What The Numbers Say

If you look at the wiki page on religion in the United States, it shows the inherent conflict in the numbers as reported. You have numbers ranging from 75%, 85%, down to 60% believing in a god/deity of some kind. And when you get into practicing the numbers get even wilder. You have numbers from 41% to 26% to 21%. Why the disparity? It’s like when you ask a kid of they do drugs, most will lie so they don’t look bad. Societal pressures are a powerful thing, and we all want to look like good, upstanding citizens usually. If you are a person who believes in a god of some kind but is not such a good, outstanding member attendance-wise then lying about it in a poll may alleviate some guilt. You also have people who will lie to mess with the poll, and people who will exaggerate their actual behavior to look better. This is why these numbers are probably inflated.

Nothing to See Here Folks

Why do I say this? Well looking at the current state of affairs in the US today bears this out. If you look at the laws of the land and, the various court decisions that have been handed down you find something reassuring. They are overwhelmingly unbiased towards religions and heavily biased towards limiting their interaction with the government. They tend to reinforce the separation of church and state.

If you look at the benchmark issues it clearly shows this to be true. Abortion is still legal and widely available for those who choose to have them. Gay rights is still advancing, look at California and the recent same-sex marriage decision. Creationism is not widely taught as science, the attempts to do so have tended to have those choosing this to be tossed out by the public. There are also other, smaller signs of this to be found in daily life.

There is still no religious test to holding office from a legal standpoint. It is debatable if a declared atheist could win a large election, but that has nothing to do with the law itself. The so called Blue Laws, while prevalent in the south still are mostly being rolled back elsewhere. And if you look at the Pledge of Allegiance, the god line was added to be anti-communist, not pro religion. Now while all this is good; of course, it means we cannot just take it for granted, like any right this must be protected. In the case of the US, the largest protection is the supreme law of the land – the U.S. Constitution.

The Constitution itself has two provisions regarding religion.

From the First Amendment:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;

From Article VI:

The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the members of the several state legislatures, and all executive and judicial officers, both of the United States and of the several states, shall be bound by oath or affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.

These two parts clearly state that there can be no test and have done much to prevent any religious institution from taking over or from being taken over by the government.

This is why when looking at the state of affairs today I don’t have a great worry about the US turning into a theocracy. While we must remain vigilant there is no immediate threat of the religious right taking over really. Anyone saying this is either trying to drum up ratings in the media, delusional, or trying to whip up some supporters.

Technorati Tags: fundies, media, Politics, religion, usa

I myself have faced discrimination which I find rather ironic. Many people mistake my race based on whatever preconception they have. I’ve been called things, had service attempted to be refused, and had to deal with other random bullshit. I’ve also seen the flip side where people would confide in me the nastiest, most racist comments and notions. I can recall one manager where I worked in my early twenties making comments about “those jews.” Whenever I see this stuff, I am reminded of the poem by Langston Hughes – “Let America Be America Again” and I wonder about the ideal. I think about what we, as a society at large, strive to be versus what we really are. While we’ve come a long way there is still a long way to go. One of my largest hopes for Obama winning is the chance to move us all closer to the ideal. I’ve included the poem below.

Let America be America again.

Let it be the dream it used to be.
Let it be the pioneer on the plain
Seeking a home where he himself is free.

(America never was America to me.)

Let America be the dream the dreamers dreamed–
Let it be that great strong land of love
Where never kings connive nor tyrants scheme
That any man be crushed by one above.

(It never was America to me.)

O, let my land be a land where Liberty
Is crowned with no false patriotic wreath,
But opportunity is real, and life is free,
Equality is in the air we breathe.

(There’s never been equality for me,
Nor freedom in this “homeland of the free.”)

Say, who are you that mumbles in the dark?
And who are you that draws your veil across the stars?

I am the poor white, fooled and pushed apart,
I am the Negro bearing slavery’s scars.
I am the red man driven from the land,
I am the immigrant clutching the hope I seek–
And finding only the same old stupid plan
Of dog eat dog, of mighty crush the weak.

I am the young man, full of strength and hope,
Tangled in that ancient endless chain
Of profit, power, gain, of grab the land!
Of grab the gold! Of grab the ways of satisfying need!
Of work the men! Of take the pay!
Of owning everything for one’s own greed!

I am the farmer, bondsman to the soil.
I am the worker sold to the machine.
I am the Negro, servant to you all.
I am the people, humble, hungry, mean–
Hungry yet today despite the dream.
Beaten yet today–O, Pioneers!
I am the man who never got ahead,
The poorest worker bartered through the years.

Yet I’m the one who dreamt our basic dream
In the Old World while still a serf of kings,
Who dreamt a dream so strong, so brave, so true,
That even yet its mighty daring sings
In every brick and stone, in every furrow turned
That’s made America the land it has become.
O, I’m the man who sailed those early seas
In search of what I meant to be my home–
For I’m the one who left dark Ireland’s shore,
And Poland’s plain, and England’s grassy lea,
And torn from Black Africa’s strand I came
To build a “homeland of the free.”

The free?

Who said the free? Not me?
Surely not me? The millions on relief today?
The millions shot down when we strike?
The millions who have nothing for our pay?
For all the dreams we’ve dreamed
And all the songs we’ve sung
And all the hopes we’ve held
And all the flags we’ve hung,
The millions who have nothing for our pay–
Except the dream that’s almost dead today.

O, let America be America again–
The land that never has been yet–
And yet must be–the land where every man is free.
The land that’s mine–the poor man’s, Indian’s, Negro’s, ME–
Who made America,
Whose sweat and blood, whose faith and pain,
Whose hand at the foundry, whose plow in the rain,
Must bring back our mighty dream again.

Sure, call me any ugly name you choose–
The steel of freedom does not stain.
From those who live like leeches on the people’s lives,
We must take back our land again,
America!

O, yes,
I say it plain,
America never was America to me,
And yet I swear this oath–
America will be!

Out of the rack and ruin of our gangster death,
The rape and rot of graft, and stealth, and lies,
We, the people, must redeem
The land, the mines, the plants, the rivers.
The mountains and the endless plain–
All, all the stretch of these great green states–
And make America again!

Technorati Tags: barack, hughes, langston, let america be america again, obama, Politics, racism

Ever since Vietnam and Watergate Americans generally have been very cynical towards politics and politicians. We see these modern scandals and are unsurprised when a public figure falls. We expect to be disappointed and act accordingly. At some point, the process becomes self-fulfilling. We elect those we expect to fall so as to avoid the disappointment. I have found myself feeling that exact way about many of our elected officials.

Things began to change though in 2008. What caused it? A speech given on Martin Luther King, Jr. day. It was the speech given by Obama on that day that made me take notice. It has been building since that day really. It’s the general attitude that does it. When listening to Hillary it’s always about her. It is what I can do, what I mean, what I say. With Obama? It’s “Yes We Can.” That one word has such a powerful meaning that one has to stop and notice.

It goes back to the MLK speech. I know I cannot as a single person change the world. I know that if I can get just one person to go along with me it won’t change the world. I know I won’t do anything dramatic. But what if it were not just myself, or even just one other person? What if it were I, my neighbors, and many others. To quote Obama.

And if they can shake in Georgia, they can shake all across America. And if enough of our voices join together; we can bring those walls tumbling down. The walls of Jericho can finally come tumbling down. That is our hope – but only if we pray together, and work together, and march together.

Brothers and sisters, we cannot walk alone.

In the struggle for peace and justice, we cannot walk alone.

In the struggle for opportunity and equality, we cannot walk alone

In the struggle to heal this nation and repair this world, we cannot walk alone.

That is what I want. Not to have someone do it all for me, not to sit there and support someone to do what they want. I want someone to walk with; I want someone to be a leader of a movement. Someone to change the world with me, not for me. Not to change it, or not change it, based on their need for power or control.

His speech last night continued this. He spoke not of what he would just do. He spoke to his rivals for the nomination, how their efforts are part of a greater whole. He spoke of respect for them; they are not his enemy really. We are on the same side after all. He spoke about what he thinks we all can do, not as a single person, not as a just one man running for President of the USA. He spoke about what he could do because of and with us. The difference is powerful. That is why I support this man in his desire to become President. Not because of what he will do, but because of what we can all do.

Technorati Tags: clinton, obama, Politics, presidental election, speeches, video, youtube

“My husband did not wrap up the nomination in 1992 until he won the California primary somewhere in the middle of June, right? We all remember Bobby Kennedy was assassinated in June in California. I don’t understand it.”

There is some video of the interview on youtube as well.

Now many think this was just some gaffe, and it may have been. The point is not really whether it was or not. It is the inferences that can and have been drawn from the statement. Some people play it off as just a dumb remark. It definitely was that but the deeper meaning if you read into it is more disturbing. I can see many thinking “well she is saying that if Obama gets killed I can step in for the nomination.” That is a horrible thing to say and rightly pisses some people off. This got me to thinking about the importance of what we say, how we say it, and when we say it.

Language is a powerful tool that can shape the outcome of many things. A harsh word at the wrong moment, a kind word at the right one. Words that can inspire both love and hate. It’s remarkable how much we are controlled by speech and language. And it does control us. Not only does it allow us to express ourselves, but it also modifies our behavior. I often wonder how this came to be, why we developed speech to begin with.

I am not trying to speculate on the origins of language right now. But it does amaze me how powerful language is. How words we use can have a powerful effect, intentional or unintentional. So in the end I guess one should be careful about what they say and when. I know I am an expert of inserting foot in mouth, but I do try and control it.

Technorati Tags: clinton, language, obama, Politics