Mark Yudof said that University of California is one University with multiple campuses. It's good to know that we are all in solidarity with the students of UC Davis -whether we are fellow UCD students, UC students, Californians or Americans -we should all be in solidarity with the campus and stay resilient.

I stand with the students at UC Davis.

-------------------------------
November 21, 2011

TO: UCR Students, Faculty, and Staff

I have watched in sadness and shock this past week as peaceful protests on our sister UC campuses have erupted into scenes where students, faculty, and staff have been pushed back and pepper sprayed. The chancellors on these campuses and President Yudof have called for independent investigations of these incidents, and that is exactly what now needs to be done.

In addition, President Yudof issued a statement on November 20 indicating, “…Free speech is part of the DNA of this university, and non-violent protest has long been central to our history. It is a value we must protect with vigilance.” I could not agree more.

Over the past few weeks, and as you deserve and should expect, there have been many discussions among UCR leadership, including vice chancellors, deans, the Academic Senate, student leadership, Staff Assembly, and campus law enforcement regarding a principled, safe, and secure path forward.

We have affirmed the right to free speech and peaceful assembly for our students, faculty, and staff on campus. We have reviewed and reaffirmed clear and responsible procedures for responding to assemblies in a way that ensures the safety of participants and the campus community at large, while also protecting property and our capacity to carry out our mission.

During previous periods of protest at UCR, I have been proud of the manner in which our students, faculty, and staff have expressed themselves. Since my arrival here just over three years ago, rallies, marches, and teach-ins have been held with no ugly confrontations, no pepper spray, and no arrests. Student leaders, union protestors, and others have negotiated with campus leadership to establish expectations and understand policies and protocols of time, place, and manner.

Yes, UCR protestors have loudly raised their voices and expressed their opinions and even their anger. When it comes to the disinvestment by the State of California in public education, including the University of California, my voice joins in.

I want to conclude by again affirming the right of our students, faculty, staff, and community to gather peacefully and exercise free speech. The issues today are complex and many. Let us bring the intellectual strength of our university and our people to shed light on these issues and to engage in meaningful and constructive dialogue with the goal of deepening our understanding and mutual respect.

Fiat Lux,

Timothy P. White
Chancellor

I really miss this guy

Www.gallup.com

Hope it keeps up like this...

I mean, his entire movie was basically calling for us to do what people are doing right now. He's just a couple years ahead of the game. Prophet-worthy? I'll say so! My girlfriend put the idea in my head...

that was displayed by so many.

In looking back at that time, we remember the compassion, bravery and overall kindness that was brought about by such a disaster. But we also got a glimpse of the inhumanity, vindictiveness, hatred and bigotry which such a moment can bring: Much of which we are still experiencing.

As this is a day of mourning, and remembrance; I encourage us all to reflect on how we can address the left over hatred and anger by dedicating ourselves to continue working for each other, to serve our communities and honor the memories of those victims with extensive kindness and love. To give hope to those still overcome by the destitution of such times, and to remind ourselves that despite the evils that exist in the world: we can still choose the forces of love an kindness over those of hate and revenge.

I'm too broke to donate still ='''(


Also if somebody could point me in the direction of previous DU approval polls of Obama, that would be great. I'm not looking for the "are you going to vote for him" ones, since that's a bit different. Thanks in advance. You are amazing! =)

The government is composed and represented by all those in the Senate, House and Presidency whose say it is to pass which legislation and how. It's fair to say that the president can help set agenda, but if our government does not have people in both houses of the legislature who support him, it's not safe to say that agenda will necessarily fair well.

I say this because people are blaming Obama for getting laws passed that are not entirely his say. Progressives especially are blaming him for negotiating with the tea party -who was elected fairly to a substantial minority of the Republican party. And whether you like it or not, they get a say in what happens in our government because they are elected.

I want people here to understand that the government will not pass policies that are progressive if they do not have progressives to do so with. And the government cannot pass rational legislation if there are a substantial amount of irrational people who are helping to set the legislative agenda.

Our government -despite who is president, has become a RIGHT OF CENTER government. This shift came shortly after the swearing in of the new congress, as a result of the election of tea party members and a disillusionment by moderates and liberals alike about the current government. So I have this to say: We have a right of center government, not because of the policies that are represented by Barack Obama, but because of the policies that are being hijacked by the tea party. We have this, because some of the same people who complain about Obama not being liberal enough elected the tea party.

I made a lot of posts in the 2010 election season telling people that if you do not knock on as many fucking doors as possible in 2010 -or contribute to as many Democratic candidates as possible, we will lose. And many people did not do this. We lost. All of you who did not do everything you can to elect a Democratic member to congress, or protect the Democratic member, are responsible for electing the tea party-no matter how you voted. If you did not knock on as many doors in your free time as you can, or give as much extra money to candidates as you can, or make as many phone calls as you can, then you are responsible for electing the tea party.

The tea party is a vitriolic group of activists whose activism -promoted and fueled by corporate radio and television, spawned into a genuine movement. The fact that the other side was not equally as fired up and disillusioned by as a result of a liberal government that was not good enough for you -and you didn't fight to keep it: This is what you get. So let me tell you this for all of you who are still reading:

IF YOU DO NOT BEGIN KNOCKING ON AS MANY DOORS AS POSSIBLE, AND GIVE AS MUCH MONEY AS POSSIBLE TO DEMOCRATIC CANDIDATES AND MAKING AS MANY PHONE CALLS AS POSSIBLE IN THIS NEXT ELECTION CYCLE, WE WILL EITHER HAVE A RIGHT OF CENTER GOVERNMENT OR A MOTHERFUCKING FASCIST CORPORATE DICTATOR. AND FOR ALL OF YOU WHO DO NOT DO AS I STATED, YOU ARE THE REASON.

Thank you for your time, and have a nice day =)

Disclaimer: Obviously any health, physical, or mental (or other reasonable handicap) disadvantages may exclude you from blame.

As 2012 nears, and the choice of GOP candidates becomes clearer, I found it a reasonable idea to consider the benefits of having an unorthodox candidate take the stage in a general election match-up against Barack Obama. Now, by "unorthodx candidate," I am speaking of course of Ron Paul: The 10 term Texas congressman who has championed his opposition to the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, the Federal Reserve and Israel. His positions on many of these issues makes him an ideal candidate for the GOP nomination -not because he would be a great candidate for president, but for the issues he would bring to the table. Paul has been a steadfast opponent on "the war on terrorism," as well as for Guantanamo Bay and torture. He has opposed the Patriot Act and assailed the CIA secret prisons that were uncovered during the Bush presidency. Paul will likely bring a debate during the 2012 election season on issues that badly need to be discussed -and have long been avoided in this increasingly myopic political atmosphere.

For too long, we have had election seasons with neither candidate truly questioning the status quo: are there other systems of government that work? How about for the economy? What happened to the Patriot Act: Is it constitutional? How about this jaded history of US intervention over the years? Shouldn't we discuss it? The debate has always focused on which candidate is the most centered politically and who could label the other more extreme. But what if this wasn't an issue? What if we had a candidate who was extreme and had no qualms about criticizing the status quo and forcing an explanation and debate about the most serious issues that concern the state of the union: Like torture, poverty, the state of human rights and civil liberties during the "war on terror," and the reputation the US has had since?

Now, Ron Paul is clearly not my ideal candidate for president. He is no doubt the epitome of the "extremist" candidate that is invoked to scar opponents in a general election contest, and has had a reputation of incendiary comments against blacks and gays. His history of racicsm and homophobia alone would make me the first to shove a hornets nest down my pants and regret ever writing this were he to win. He also wants to get rid of our Federal Reserve and basic institutions that I feel are necessary for our basic economic function. However, his ability to raise issues on the war in Iraq, US intervention, our history in regards to Human Rights and civil liberties -as well as the current president's failure to make good on his promise to close GTMO; are all things that likely would not be central issues unless Ron Paul were to win the GOP nomination. Too much of the discourse in this country is singular in nature. Too often, discussions often revolve around how to either make a bad idea worse, or keep it the same. We need somebody to stir things up again, and I think Ron Paul has the best chance of doing this. A change in theme would likely be good for our political discourse.

Albeit, much of this is inspired by my firm belief that -while Paul has a chance of winning the Republican nomination, he will probably not win the general election. And like I said in the previous comment; if he won: it's gonna really hurt.

This is something I wrote on Sunday, and my thoughts behind what had happened. I'm not taking any particular stance about the bomb in this blog, but rather expressing the feelings and emotions that come from reflecting on such an event and other consequences of the war which provoked it. Just hotught I'd share =)

-------------------------

Today, August 9th, 2009 marks the 64th anniversary of the atomic bombing in Nagasaki, Japan. This happened 3 days following a similar attack on Hiroshima, Japan. In total, both bombings accrued about 300,000 deaths and billions of dollars worth of damage. Every year the Japanese Prime Minister visits the memorial of those killed in the blast. This is a memorial for both American and Japanese citizens because included in the death toll were approximately 2,000 American citizens whose movement had been halted by the Japanese government from the beginning of the war and a couple hundred allied POWs including about a dozen identified Americans who were being held in the cities. Immediately following the bombings, the general public celebrated as it marked an end to perpetuating war.


It took approximately five years before the US government allowed any photos of the aftermath of these bombings released, and following their release public support for such actions quickly plummeted. Nonetheless, mainstream historians have argued that these costly bombings were necessary in order to stop a more costly ground invasion of the Japanese mainland. In 1995, photos of the aftermath of these bombings were prevented from being shown in a World War Two exhibition at the Smithsonian largely by Veteran and POW groups. While the United States has yet to release any official apology for the incidents, people continue to protest the misuse of such a deadly weapon and demand one at least be made, yet the resistance to do so is possibly stronger.


It is clear that the United States was trying to set itself up as a hegemonic power around the world. That it wanted to send a message to Russia and other existing superpowers what it holds in its' hands. However, the numbers of Americans killed was a complete surprise to me upon finding out as the 6th marked the bombing of Hiroshima. I feel that no apology can make up for the horrors of the atomic bomb nor its potential devastation. I feel that no apology can make up for the horrors of war in general and that war, the fog of war, and the blind choices made in war force upon us an obligation to reflect heavily on such history. It forces us to consider Hiroshima and Nagasaki while considering all the lives lost; and to also understand the responsibilities of all parties as aggressors and victims. No matter national, ethnic or or other religious or identity boundaries: war will always be a civil war against humanity.


In an international relations theory, the rationalist argument by James Fearon puts forth that war is ex post inefficient. Meaning there is always a loss for all parties no matter the aggressor or the outcome. Nothing can be more clear of a truth then to see it happen in practice. The atrocities of war, not just from this incident but the millions killed by all sides involved should be something heavily considered, debated and studied in order to avoid repitition.

Alan Keyes files lawsuit in California alleging Obama is not a natural born citizen.


The California secretary of state should refuse to allow the state's 55 Electoral College votes to be cast in the 2008 presidential election until President-elect Barack Obama verifies his eligibility to hold the office, alleges a California court petition filed on behalf of former presidential candidate Alan Keyes and others.

The legal action today is just the latest is a series of challenges, some of which have gone as high as the U.S. Supreme Court, over the issue of Obama's status as a "natural-born citizen," a requirement set by the U.S. Constitution.


http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=...

This is just a general rant fueled by the frustration I have over peoples' lack of understanding and willing ignorance about the Muslim religion in general. The unwillingness to understand it, and a submissive attitude of fear and hate towards it.


White Christian Extremists have perpetrated the worst crimes the United States has ever seen, consistently, for 120 years. Through the KKK and through the holocaust, millions of people have been kidnapped and murdered because of their race and religion. These actions were perpetrated by mainly Christian extremists who felt that it was God's will to exterminate entire groups of people based on who they are. Horrific crimes committed on horrific precondition.

And you are seriously sitting there, at your computer, telling me that you're afraid of all the Muslims because they killed a few thousand people 7 years ago? Let's contrast this with the millions of Jews killed in the name of Christ and "purity" during the holocaust. Let's compare this to millions of blacks whose houses were burned, families murdered and lynched because of the color of their skin in the name of Christ. For a hundred and twenty years, this continued, and for a hundred and twenty years White Christians, on behalf of their churches, and secret societies continued to take part in these atrocities. And you are afraid of Muslims?

How many Muslims broke into your home, kidnapped your sons and daughters on a consistent basis without tell as to whether they will come home alive? How Muslims set religious fixtures in your front yard on fire as a sign that your house will burn down, and your family possibly murdered? How many Muslim Americans orchestrated riots and massacres on tens of thousands of Americans on a consistent basis? Let's take the amount of American civilians killed in atrocities committed by Muslim extremists. Now multiply that a hundred-fold: That's the amount of Americans whose lives over the past one hundred and fifty years were effected negatively due to White Christians.

White Christian extremists, with their fear, hate and bigotry did far more to harm America and Americans than any Muslim extremist could imagine. The fear and anger people concoct on behalf of their religion has lead to atrocities like that of September 11, the Holocaust or the hundreds of massacres during the Jim Crow days. And it won't stop there. Slowly, with many Christians teetering on the edge, and fear of Muslims ramped up to the max, it is clear that the hatred and bigotry of Christian extremists did not end with the holocaust, or the KKK. It is clear that as people congregate together, preaching, conversing and spreading the fear generated from tragedies such as September 11, that, intentionally or not, acts of violence and hate are conducted as a result. It is clear that the more we accept people's inferiority because of race and religion, the more volatile our society and religious sects will become.

There is no reason to be afraid of Muslims. The vast majority of Muslims did not hurt anybody. Just as there is no reason to be afraid of Christians. There is no reason to be afraid of anybody. Just because a person is different, just because people who may associate and relate with this difference committed atrocities, does not mean the difference is bad. Perhaps less atrocities would occur if we did not continuously ostracize each other because our beliefs. Perhaps less violence would occur if more of us tried to find a common ground, rather than disseminate fear and anger towards one another.

Discussing these matters with people who believe strongly a person's religion warrants them to be specially examined, can be rather difficult. It can get you to be called things which are particularly undesirable, and can lead to especially temperamental conversations. But it can be particularly rewarding, especially when you consider that these peoples' values and ethical standards are very much like yours and mine. I think we should find that common ground, and try to explain and call out the ignorance and double standards that are so evident in the fringe corners of America.

For example: Murder is bad, lots of Christians murder, but they are somehow not considered Christians. Lots of Muslims murder, but it's right to say all Muslims can be categorized as dangerous or a threat, even if many Muslims don't believe the things that Al Qaeda does are particularly very Muslim. It's easy to note the double standard of disowning the Christians who do similar atrocious acts and making the assumption Muslims will not (Without really consulting any of them).

Maybe I'm fooling myself. Maybe some people can't be changed...

>I used to know a man whose family was German aristocracy prior to World WarTwo. They owned a number of large industries and estates. I asked him how many German people were true Nazis, and the answer he gave has stuck with me and guided my attitude toward fanaticism ever since.
>
>"Very few people were true Nazis "he said," but many enjoyed the return of German pride, and many more were too busy to care. I was one of those who just thought the Nazis were a bunch of fools. So, the majority just sat back and let it all happen. Then, before we knew it, they owned us, and we had lost control, and the end of the world had come. My family lost everything, I ended up in a concentration camp and the Allies destroyed my factories."
>
>We are told again and again by "experts" and "talking heads" that Islam is the religion of peace, and that the vast majority of Muslims just want to live in peace.
>
>Although this unqualified assertion may be true, it is entirely irrelevant. It is meaningless fluff, meant to make us feel better, and meant to somehow diminish the specter of fanatics rampaging across the globe in the name of Islam. The fact is that the fanatics rule Islam at this moment in history.
>
>It is the fanatics who march. It is the fanatics who wage any one of the many shooting wars worldwide. It is the fanatics who systematically slaughter Christian or tribal groups throughout Africa and are gradually taking over the entire continent in an Islamic wave. It is the fanatics who bomb, behead, murder, or honor kill. It is the fanatics who take over mosque after mosque. It is the fanatics who zealously spread the stoning and hanging of rape victims and homosexuals. The hard quantifiable fact is that the "peaceful majority" is the "silent majority" and it is cowed and extraneous.
>
>Communist Russia comprised Russians who just wanted to live in peace, yet the Russian Communists were responsible for the murder of about 20 million people. The peaceful majority were irrelevant. China's huge population was peaceful as well, but Chinese Communists managed to kill a staggering 70 million people.
>
>The average Japanese individual prior to World War 2 was not a warmongering sadist. Yet, Japan murdered and slaughtered its way across South East Asia in an orgy of killing that included the systematic murder of 12 million Chinese civilians; most killed by sword, shovel, and bayonet. And, who can forget Rwanda , which collapsed into butchery. Could it not be said that the majority of Rwandans were "peace loving"?
>
>History lessons are often incredibly simple and blunt, yet for all our powers of reason we often miss the most basic and uncomplicated of points:
>
>Peace-loving Muslims have been made irrelevant by their silence. Peace-loving Muslims will become our enemy if they don't speak up, because like my friend from Germany, they will awake one day and find that the fanatics own them, and the end of their world will have begun.
>
>Peace-loving Germans, Japanese, Chinese, Russians, Rwandans, Serbs, Afghans, Iraqis, Palestinians, Somalis, Nigerians, Algerians, and many others have died because the peaceful majority did not speak up until it was too late. As for us who watch it all unfold; we must pay attention to the only group that counts; the fanatics who threaten our way of life.
>
>Lastly, I wish to add: I sincerely think that anyone who rejects this as just another political rant, or doubts the seriousness of this issue or just deletes it without paying heed to it, or sending it on, is part of the problem. Lets quit laughing at and forwarding the jokes and cartoons which denigrate and ridicule our leaders in this war against terror. Best we support them.
>
>William Haynes
>
> "Human beings understand reason, compassion, dignity ...
>Predators understand strength"

The hypocrisy still lives on....

What did he do? Some people said he was corrupt. What's the argument here? Was he just not as liked as Murtha, who was far more distingished than Hoyer in the follow up to the election?

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/03/us/polit...

WASHINGTON, Nov. 3 — President Bush campaigned in Missouri today for the embattled Senator Jim Talent, whose re-election Mr. Bush described as vital to the nation’s economy, security and values.

Now looky at Bush's Approval Rating in Missouri(Survey USA, 10/17)

http://www.surveyusa.com/50State2006/50Sta... :

Approve 38% Dissaprove: 59% (net 06 approval: -21%)

I think we owe a big "Thank You" to our Commander in Chief for handing the Democrats Missouri's Senate seat 4 days before the election.