I disagree. I don't base my opinion of Obama's intellectual capacity on what
he says. Actually, I often become very angry at what he says because he's
repeating a government line and he often lies about issues. And he talks
down to the public because he sees us as less intelligent than he is and,
therefore, manipulatable. But given his education and his accomplishments
and the understanding of complex events that he has been shown to have, I
think he is intelligent. Just the fact that as a Black man, he was able to
attain the Presidency, shows his ability. He had to be able to convince some
very rich and powerful people that he was the right person to back, even
though there is still so much hatred of black people in this country..
Miriam
________________________________
From: blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of R. E. Driscoll Sr
Sent: Friday, October 16, 2015 11:31 PM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: Obama Administration Hits Back at Student
Debtors Seeking Relief
Miriam:
I would posit that Mr. Obama is, indeed, very ambitious but I cannot
classify him as being intelligent. What seems to be intelligence is an
extremely high level of glibness (as in 'the fast and easy and smooth talk
of a used car salesman'.
In my opinion of course.
R. E. (Dick) Driscoll, Sr.
On 10/16/2015 8:31 PM, Miriam Vieni wrote:
Obama is an intelligent, ambitious man who very much wanted to
become
President and who, when he attained that office, perhaps because of
lack of
experience and/or because of fear, or lack of moral courage, chose
advisors
who were centrist and right of center. His racial heritage is mixed.
He was
raised by a white mother and white grandparents. He lived the first
part of
his life away from the US and its racial definitions. The part of
his
heritage which is African, is symbolic to a lot of people, with
different
meanings depending on who the people are. But race is always only,
what
people perceive it to be. I think that in Obama's case, although his
race is
meaningful to a lot of people, it actually has little relevance to
the
choices he has made as our President. Only perhaps, it has made him
somewhat
more cautious about taking truly progressive stands on issues.
Miriam
-----Original Message-----
From: blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Carl
Jarvis
Sent: Friday, October 16, 2015 9:04 PM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: Obama Administration Hits Back at
Student
Debtors Seeking Relief
When are we going to get through our thick heads that Barak Obama is
not
now, nor ever was a friend of the Working Class. Obama is not now,
nor ever
was that Prince of Peace the "Winner" of the Nobel Peace Prize.
Obama is not now, nor ever was the friend of innocent people around
the
world, nor was Obama ever a proponent of free speech. In fact,
nearly
everything Barak Obama campaigned on is now off his list. He is
just one
more War Lord, one more Terrorist, dropping his Death around the
world,
telling his lies, protecting those who are the real killers and
murderers of
helpless humans. Obama would allow the Israelis to do to Palestine
what our
forefathers did to those people who lived here before us.
Personally, I would go so far as to say that Barak Obama has no
business
calling himself a Black Man, as long as he allows our prisons
to be the holding pens of Blacks. At best, he is a Puppet, being
used by the Corporate Rulers. At worst he is a willing participant.
Which would entitle him to be called a Traitor.
Carl Jarvis
On 10/15/15, Miriam Vieni <miriamvieni@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
<mailto:miriamvieni@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Kitroeff writes: "On a day when Democratic presidential
candidates
sparred in a national debate over who would do more to help
indebted
students, the U.S. government launched a new attack on
student debtors
seeking loan relief."
President Barack Obama listens to senior Marissa Boles
during a
roundtable discussion with students currently receiving
Stafford
federal student loans at the University of Iowa in Iowa
City. (photo:
Chuck Kenned)
Obama Administration Hits Back at Student Debtors Seeking
Relief By
Natalie Kitroeff, Bloomberg
15 October 15
The U.S. government is becoming student borrowers' worst
enemy.
On a day when Democratic presidential candidates sparred in
a national
debate over who would do more to help indebted students, the
U.S.
government
launched a new attack on student debtors seeking loan
relief.
On Tuesday, the Department of Education intervened in the
case of
Robert Murphy, an unemployed 65-year-old who has waged a
three-year
legal battle to erase his student loans in bankruptcy.
Unlike almost every single form of consumer debt, student
loans can be
erased only in very rare circumstances. Murphy's case, which
is
currently being heard in a federal court in Boston, could
make things
a little easier for certain borrowers. A win for Murphy
would relieve
him of $246,500 in debt and could loosen the standard used
to
determine how desperate someone needs to be to qualify for
relief.
The court asked the Education Department to weigh in on the
matter. In
a document submitted to the court on Tuesday, government
lawyers urged
the federal judges not to cede any ground to borrowers who
say they
are in dire financial straits. Doing so would imperil "the
fiscal
stability of the loan program" that has existed for half a
century.
The Department of Education did not immediately respond to
requests for
comment.
Murphy doesn't deserve a break just because he is 65 years
old,
department lawyers wrote. Repaying his debt loan may require
"that he
remain employed at or past normal retirement age," they
said, even
though "his income may top out or decrease" and "further
employment
opportunities may be limited."
"That is part of the bargain that parents strike when they
take out
loans later in their work life," the lawyers added. Murphy
took out
several loans to send his three children to college, but he
lost his
job at a manufacturing company in 2002 and has not been able
to find work
since.
No student debtor should get a break on student loans unless
they can
show a "certainty of hopelessness," said the government's
lawyers.
"[A] debtor must specifically prove a total incapacity in
the future
to repay the debt for reasons not within his control," they
added. The
lawyers said that the point of keeping such a stringent
standard is to
ensure "that bankruptcy does not become a convenient and
expedient
means of extinguishing student loan debt."
The Education Department is seasoned at waging this
particular battle.
For over a decade, the department, through its lawyers, has
pushed the
courts to adopt the harshest standards possible when
considering pleas
from bankrupt students.
"The general purpose of the Bankruptcy Code to give honest
debtors a
fresh start does not automatically apply to student loan
debtors," the
government's lawyers wrote.
Filing for bankruptcy ordinarily allows debtors to wipe out
what they
owe in exchange for marred credit for up to 10 years. In the
1970s,
Congress made student loans unique. To get a reprieve on
education
debt, federal law requires proof that repaying it would
impose an
"undue hardship."
Lawmakers have never defined undue hardship, though, so
courts have
tried to work out exactly how poor Americans need to be-and
for how
long-in order to qualify for student loan forgiveness.
The Department of Education has been successful at
convincing judges
to make that threshold incredibly high. A borrower now has
to show
that making payments on a loan would "strip himself of all
that makes
life worth living," according to one court. Lawyers rifle
through
debtors' daily expenses to determine whether they will be
able to
maintain a "minimal standard of living" if they are required
to repay
student loans. Attorneys arguing on behalf of the Education
Department
have called such things as retirement account contributions,
fast-food
dinners, cell-phone plans, and nutritional supplements
"luxury
expenses."
The government argues that such scrutiny of a borrower's
financial
life is crucial for "protecting the solvency of the student
loan
program." Consumer advocates say the Education Department's
fears are
exaggerated because most debt that could be discharged in
bankruptcy
is not collectable if bankrupt borrowers can't pay it back.
Murphy calculated that even if he were to find a job paying
$50,000
per year and then work until he turns 77, his student debt
would
nonetheless balloon to $500,000.
Error! Hyperlink reference not valid. Error! Hyperlink
reference not
valid.
President Barack Obama listens to senior Marissa Boles
during a
roundtable discussion with students currently receiving
Stafford
federal student loans at the University of Iowa in Iowa
City. (photo:
Chuck Kenned)
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-10-14/obama-administration
-hits-
back-at-student-debtors-seeking-reliefhttp://www.bloomberg.com/news/ar
ticles
/2015-10-14/obama-administration-hits-back-at-student-debtors-seeking-
relief Obama Administration Hits Back at Student Debtors
Seeking
Relief By Natalie Kitroeff, Bloomberg
15 October 15
The U.S. government is becoming student borrowers' worst
enemy.
n a day when Democratic presidential candidates sparred in
a national
debate over who would do more to help indebted students, the
U.S.
government
launched a new attack on student debtors seeking loan
relief.
On Tuesday, the Department of Education intervened in the
case of
Robert Murphy, an unemployed 65-year-old who has waged a
three-year
legal battle to erase his student loans in bankruptcy.
Unlike almost every single form of consumer debt, student
loans can be
erased only in very rare circumstances. Murphy's case, which
is
currently being heard in a federal court in Boston, could
make things
a little easier for certain borrowers. A win for Murphy
would relieve
him of $246,500 in debt and could loosen the standard used
to
determine how desperate someone needs to be to qualify for
relief.
The court asked the Education Department to weigh in on the
matter. In
a document submitted to the court on Tuesday, government
lawyers urged
the federal judges not to cede any ground to borrowers who
say they
are in dire financial straits. Doing so would imperil "the
fiscal
stability of the loan program" that has existed for half a
century.
The Department of Education did not immediately respond to
requests for
comment.
Murphy doesn't deserve a break just because he is 65 years
old,
department lawyers wrote. Repaying his debt loan may require
"that he
remain employed at or past normal retirement age," they
said, even
though "his income may top out or decrease" and "further
employment
opportunities may be limited."
"That is part of the bargain that parents strike when they
take out
loans later in their work life," the lawyers added. Murphy
took out
several loans to send his three children to college, but he
lost his
job at a manufacturing company in 2002 and has not been able
to find work
since.
No student debtor should get a break on student loans unless
they can
show a "certainty of hopelessness," said the government's
lawyers.
"[A] debtor must specifically prove a total incapacity in
the future
to repay the debt for reasons not within his control," they
added. The
lawyers said that the point of keeping such a stringent
standard is to
ensure "that bankruptcy does not become a convenient and
expedient
means of extinguishing student loan debt."
The Education Department is seasoned at waging this
particular battle.
For over a decade, the department, through its lawyers, has
pushed the
courts to adopt the harshest standards possible when
considering pleas
from bankrupt students.
"The general purpose of the Bankruptcy Code to give honest
debtors a
fresh start does not automatically apply to student loan
debtors," the
government's lawyers wrote.
Filing for bankruptcy ordinarily allows debtors to wipe out
what they
owe in exchange for marred credit for up to 10 years. In the
1970s,
Congress made student loans unique. To get a reprieve on
education
debt, federal law requires proof that repaying it would
impose an
"undue hardship."
Lawmakers have never defined undue hardship, though, so
courts have
tried to work out exactly how poor Americans need to be-and
for how
long-in order to qualify for student loan forgiveness.
The Department of Education has been successful at
convincing judges
to make that threshold incredibly high. A borrower now has
to show
that making payments on a loan would "strip himself of all
that makes
life worth living," according to one court. Lawyers rifle
through
debtors' daily expenses to determine whether they will be
able to
maintain a "minimal standard of living" if they are required
to repay
student loans. Attorneys arguing on behalf of the Education
Department
have called such things as retirement account contributions,
fast-food
dinners, cell-phone plans, and nutritional supplements
"luxury
expenses."
The government argues that such scrutiny of a borrower's
financial
life is crucial for "protecting the solvency of the student
loan
program." Consumer advocates say the Education Department's
fears are
exaggerated because most debt that could be discharged in
bankruptcy
is not collectable if bankrupt borrowers can't pay it back.
Murphy calculated that even if he were to find a job paying
$50,000
per year and then work until he turns 77, his student debt
would
nonetheless balloon to $500,000.
http://e-max.it/posizionamento-siti-web/socialize
http://e-max.it/posizionamento-siti-web/socialize
________________________________
Avast logo <http://www.avast.com/> This email has been checked for
viruses by Avast antivirus software.
www.avast.com <http://www.avast.com/>