As U.S.-Israel rift continues, Netanyahu finds himself in a bind
(Page 1 of 5)
By Janine Zacharia
Friday, Mar 26, 2010

The Washington Post

JERUSALEM -- Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu was welcomed home Thursday night with signs reading "Obama, No You Can't" and "Netanyahu Stand Strong" after a trip to Washington that appeared only to widen a two-week-old rift between the close allies over Israeli housing construction.

The support expressed by a few dozen people at the entrance to Jerusalem belied widespread doubts here about Netanyahu's handling of relations with President Obama. The premier's tough U.S. visit came during a week in which Israel also found itself at odds with Britain, which on Tuesday expelled an Israeli diplomat over what it said was the use of forged British passports in an alleged Mossad operation.

Netanyahu had hoped to use his visit to defuse tensions sparked by the announcement of Israeli plans to build 1,600 homes in a disputed area of Jerusalem. The announcement was made during Vice President Biden's visit to Israel this month, and it thwarted what was supposed to be a celebration of fresh negotiations on talks toward an Israeli-Palestinian peace agreement. The Obama administration now says that failure to resolve the Middle East conflict is harming U.S. national security interests in the region...link to complete article

Immigration Rally in D.C.

Some people are saying that it will be impossible to pass an immigration bill these days... But you never know. Many didn't think the Health Care bill would fly...

The Washington Post

Senators draft plan to rework U.S. immigration policy

(Page 1 of 4)
By Spencer S. Hsu
Thursday, Mar 18, 2010


Sens. Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) and Lindsey O. Graham (R-S.C.) announced the building blocks Thursday for a new push in Congress to overhaul the nation's immigration laws, outlining a plan to require U.S. citizens and legal immigrants to obtain a new high-tech Social Security card tied to their fingerprints or other biometric identifiers and to create a system to bring in temporary workers as the U.S. economy demands.

The immigration "blueprint," outlined in an opinion column posted on The Washington Post's Web site, drew an immediate vow of support from President Obama, who urged Congress "to act at the earliest possible opportunity."

"I . . . pledge to do everything in my power to forge a bipartisan consensus on this important issue so we can continue to move forward on comprehensive immigration reform," Obama said in a statement released by the White House. Obama congratulated Schumer and Graham on what he called "a promising, bipartisan framework which can and should be the basis for moving forward."

In the editorial, Graham and Schumer shied away from details, and did not say when they would produce a bill...link to complete article

Harold Meyerson: Still stuck in the shadows
(Page 1 of 4)
By Harold Meyerson
Wednesday, Mar 17, 2010

The Washington Post

On Sunday, tens of thousands of Americans who supported Barack Obama's presidential campaign in 2008 will gather on the Mall to protest the president's lack of action on a cause to which he had committed himself throughout the campaign: immigration reform.

As a candidate, Obama spoke eloquently of the need to bring the estimated 11 million immigrants here without documentation "out of the shadows." As president, he stepped up the number of deportations to an all-time high: 298,401 in fiscal 2009, a 13 percent increase over the last year of George W. Bush's presidency. But reforming our ridiculous immigration laws so that the millions of immigrants here illegally could have a path to legalization was deferred, like so many administration commitments, until health-care reform was enacted.

So immigrants and Latinos held their tongues, despite the increase in deportations that wreaked havoc in their communities, in hopes that Year Two of the Obama presidency would be better. They waited until Obama's State of the Union address, in which the president devoted one sentence -- "one paltry sentence," in the words of Rep. Luis Gutierrez, the Chicago Democrat who is the leading advocate for America's immigrants in the House -- to the issue...link to complete article

Please Stop Leaving Students Behind

A few days ago I went to a bank in an affluent part of Houston. I was making a wire transfer to London. After struggling for a few minutes, the clerk told me she couldn't find London on the list and asked me if it was in France.

We are not talking about a poor minority 20 something from the inner city. She was white and fairly articulate.* This along with hearing that some of my students don't know who Napoleon convince me that something needs to be done about our public school system.

Why didn't she know that London is in the UK (England)? She seemed fairly intelligent. She also looked young enough to be caught in the throws of No Child Left Behind. I can tell you that the amount of knowledge students bring with them to college has greatly decreased since schools began teaching for the test.

This young woman and my students who think Queen Victoria lived in the 1600s are all capable of learning and completing a university degree. Unfortunately, their high schools have not been helping prepare them.

---

The Washington Post

Obama: Revise 'No Child Left Behind'
(Page 1 of 6)
By Nick Anderson
Sunday, Mar 14, 2010


President Obama proposed overhauling the No Child Left Behind law that was his predecessor's hallmark education initiative, aiming to eliminate several of the measure's controversial mandates on public schools but adding new ones.

Students would still be tested every year in reading and math under Obama's proposal, but scores in other subjects could also be used to measure progress, addressing concerns of parents and teachers who say the law has shortchanged such topics as history and science.

The president's proposal to Congress, released Saturday, would place more importance on academic growth than the current pass-fail approach to judging schools. If a student were to start class work three grade levels behind and move up two by the end of the school year, that would count as a victory. Now, it is rated a failure because the student is still behind...link to complete article

*this means that the stereotype that only poor minority kids are ignorant is wrong. What I am trying to say is that that all kids are suffering the consequences of our abysmal public education system

A Love Story or Are They Just Using Each Other: U.S. and Israel

The Washington Post

Topic A: Are America and Israel drifting apart?
(Page 1 of 8)
Topic A
Sunday, Mar 14, 2010


The Post asked former officials and policy experts whether there is a divide between the Obama administration and the Jewish state. Below are responses from Elliott Abrams, David Makovsky, Aaron David Miller, Danielle Pletka, and Hussein Agha and Robert Malley.

ELLIOTT ABRAMS

Senior fellow for Middle Eastern studies at the Council on Foreign Relations

The current friction in U.S.-Israel relations has one source: the mishandling of those relations by the Obama administration...link to complete article

Who is the REAL Scooby-Doo?

The Republican National Committee recently put out a video that portrayed Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid as Scooby-Doo... I think they are wrong. I don't see any resemblance. Maybe they are projecting, because this type of behavior befits the RNC to a tee.

Of course, there might be a few Democrats that are acting like Scooby-Doo, but Reid is certainly not one of them.
-----------

Washington Post

Scooby-Doo and the state of American politics


Steele: What would Scooby-Doo?


By Dan Balz
Sunday, Mar 7, 2010


Mark down this past week as a case study in why so many people are so angry with politicians and the practice of politics.

Rep. Charles Rangel (D-N.Y.), one of the longest-serving and most powerful members of Congress, was forced to give up the chairmanship of the House Ways and Means Committee (a leave of absence, he called it).

Caught in a swirl of allegations involving unpaid taxes and accepting company-underwritten trips, Rangel finally stepped aside to avoid a potentially embarrassing vote against him by his colleagues. His case is far from over.

Meanwhile, New York Gov. David Paterson (D) fought to hang on to his office amid rising indignation and calls for his resignation over reports that he intervened in a domestic abuse allegation lodged against one of his highest-ranking aides...link to complete article

Biden condemns move by Israel

The Washington post

Vice President Joseph Biden, center, enters a car upon his arrival to Ben Gurion airport, near Tel Aviv, Israel, Monday, March 8, 2010. Biden arrived to Israel Monday, the first leg of a five-day tour of the Middle East. Biden's trip is the highest-level visit to Israel and the Palestinian territories yet by an Obama administration official. (AP Photo/Baz Ratner, Pool)


By Janine Zacharia
Wednesday, Mar 10, 2010


JERUSALEM -- After spending most of Tuesday celebrating what he called the "unshakable" bond between the United States and Israel, Vice President Biden ended the day strongly condemning the longtime U.S. ally for approving 1,600 new housing units in disputed east Jerusalem -- an awkwardly timed move that threatened to kill a new push for Mideast peace by the Obama administration.

The housing announcement -- affecting an area Palestinians view as their future capital -- soured Biden's efforts to re-energize the United States' relationship with Israel, which has felt snubbed by President Obama, who has yet to visit. It also came a day after Israel and the Palestinians agreed to U.S.-mediated, indirect peace negotiations after a year of no talks on Palestinian statehood...link to complete article

Neighborhood of slaves and presidents
By Liza Mundy
Monday, Feb 15,
2010


Sometime around the middle of April 1804, a slave named John Freeman wrote a letter to the president of the United States. Freeman, technically owned by a Maryland doctor, William Baker, had been contracted to work for Thomas Jefferson, who engaged him to serve in the White House and accompany Jefferson on trips to Monticello...link to complete article

The Washington Post

Sunday Take: The theater in the meeting between Obama and House Republicans

By Dan Balz
Sunday, January 31, 2010

Friday's encounter between President Obama and House Republicans proved to be riveting political theater. The question is whether it will be remembered as a moment that began to ease the tensions between the two parties -- or an asterisk in this era of polarized politics.

Obama and House Republicans delivered 90 minutes of sharp but civil give-and-take, a spirited debate on both the substantive differences that divide Republicans and Democrats and a frank discussion about the breakdown of government in the age of the permanent campaign.

Rarely has there been such an encounter between a president and the opposition party and certainly never on national television. It was the antithesis of the kind of snarling exchanges that often pass for political dialogue, whether between strategists in the two parties, candidates in the heat of a campaign or on the worst of cable television...
link to complete article

An open letter to the New York Times, the Washington Post, and the Los Angeles Times

It is reprehensible that you, as the most important newspaper media outlets in the country have not been informing the American people about the S.A.V.E. ACT (HB 4088) - that is currently being discussed in Congress.

There is no legitimate excuse for keeping this information a secret. Is your concern that if you publicize this, the nation will react with numerous protest marches (again)? Are you not wanting to receive the thousands of emails and phone calls from irate Americans who want all undocumented immigrants sent back to their home countries? Or are you worried about more death threats like the ones you received when you covered the congressional discussion on immigration last summer (2007)?

It is clear that one of the best ways to get an unethical bill passed is to keep it secret. You still have a chance to redeem yourself. Congress goes back into session in a few days - there is still time to send out your reporters. Just remember, if you let the S.A.V.E. ACT happen, you could get arrested for giving your babysitter a ride home.

Marie Theresa Hernandez

Washington Post Reader Comments

The Immigrant as punching bag





On occasion a colleague or a DREAMER I know will mention to me that they read the comments to newspaper articles on immigration and were surprised at the venom emanating from these comments. What is said is generally so hurtful, many DREAMERS avoid reading the commentary (as do I).

Its a nasty world out there - a while back I posted a commentary on a blog about the Mexican Presidential election of 2006. I got blasted for what I said (was just asking a question about where I could find the most reliable information). My daughter who is much more informed about blogs and the net told me that people are generally rude and insulting when they make comments on-line- it comes with the territory.

The author of the article below provokes a number of questions. How do DREAMERS react when they see abusive language in commentaries about immigration? Does it do any good to respond?

For one, the comments have to leave some hurt feelings. I saw the reaction in the DREAMER's faces last spring when we (the students and I) attended a Texas legislative committee hearing - some of our own supposedly wise, respectful, and well-informed Texas legislators spoke in such a hateful manner about DREAM act students that I still cringe when I recall the event.

Howell, the WP "ombudsman" has a good point when she notes that enraged commentators are generally not a valid representation of the newspapers readership. While they could be only 1% of the papers readers - they scream so loudly they make it seem like they are representing almost everybody.

For those that want to anonymously let loose on a commentary about immigration, if at all possible, remember that you are talking about real people - would you speak to your neighbor; your teacher; your boss; or your mother that way?



'Web site comments can be more than ugly and are often aimed at private citizens quoted in stories. National reporter Darryl Fears would stop them. "Comments attached to stories about race, ethnicity and related issues such as immigration often reek of racism, intolerance and ignorance. To ignore them, in my opinion, is to endorse them."' - Deborah Howell


-----

Facing Up to the Feedback
By Deborah Howell
Washington Post
Sunday, January 6, 2008; B06

For as long as newspapers have existed, readers have complained that they focus on the negative and critical. Journalists tend to blow that off: That's what's news. But when readers are negative toward The Post or its journalists, they often are met with what former Post executive editor Ben Bradlee called "the defensive crouch."

My new year's resolution for journalists is: Suck it up and forget the abuse. My resolution for angry readers is: Don't assume malevolence on the part of the reporter or the paper when mistakes are made. Most transgressions are caused by human error or ignorance.

If The Post makes a mistake, or if readers think The Post is leading them astray, they can have at it. But if readers, in e-mail and online comments, say we're all idiots and ought to resign in disgrace, what do we do with that?

Having been attacked frequently and believing deeply both in free speech and civil discourse, I didn't come easily to this conclusion: Journalists need to stop whining. The only thing we have to lose is our self-importance. We are just another part of the great public marketplace that is subject to this treatment. If the comments are simply abusive rather than critical, ignore them.

Reader Beverly Larson of Bristol, R.I., raised the issue recently: "Would you please explain The Post's policy on reader feedback on articles? Do reporters and editors look at the e-mail exchanges? Or is The Post merely providing a forum for expression and dialogue among readers? Or to foster a sense of connection to the paper?"

Anonymous online comments don't foster a sense of connection to the paper. But, along with blogs and chats, they lure visitors and build loyalty to washingtonpost.com, said Jim Brady, the Web site's executive editor. My problem is that quicker removal of offensive postings is badly needed. Brady said there will be more monitoring at nights and on weekends. Good. The paper is a far different news medium and doesn't print anonymous attacks. Well, except on Sports section blog excerpts.

Some reporters and editors read the online comments. Others flatly avoid them as poisonous. They're daunting and don't raise morale. But free speech doesn't have to be decorous.

The venom rolls off the backs of some journalists; others hate it. Prince George's County reporter Ruben Castaneda tries to respond to e-mails "calmly and professionally" even "if they're abusive. Now and then responding sparks a thoughtful dialogue."

Web site comments can be more than ugly and are often aimed at private citizens quoted in stories. National reporter Darryl Fears would stop them. "Comments attached to stories about race, ethnicity and related issues such as immigration often reek of racism, intolerance and ignorance. To ignore them, in my opinion, is to endorse them."

Metro columnist Marc Fisher disagrees. "I don't mind abusive or insulting comments in the least. Like anyone else, I find the most extreme abuse unsettling, but short of that, it's all part of the exchange with readers. We have our say in our articles and comments; if we're going to let readers have their say, we ought to let those boards be a true reflection of all the wrath, foolishness, wisdom and range of opinions that people bring to our work."

Fisher makes a good point with this reminder: "I have never understood why some colleagues treat the online comments as if they were representative of the overall reader reaction to a story. Online comments are like the phone calls on talk radio. They tend to be the folks with the most polarized and virulent of viewpoints."

Style reporter Paul Farhi said, "I'm not sure why anyone would be offended by negative comments. It's part of the territory. We're not here to be loved and praised. Negative commentary is part of the conversation, too. News flash: There are a lot of ignorant, angry people in the world. And so what? Let those people blow off steam, too."

National congressional reporter Jonathan Weisman "never" reads comments posted on the Post Web site, but he almost always reads e-mails, as do most reporters I know. "If they're polite, I want to respond when I can. Sometimes I will respond to very abusive ones with a very polite reply that says, 'I would like to know how your mother would respond to this.' " Often, reporters say, angry e-mailers are surprised by a response and are apologetic.

Weisman admits he committed a blunder when he replied with an obscenity to a nasty e-mail. Of course, "it showed up on every Web site, and I was taken to task by the executive editor. I was wrong; it was a foolish mistake."

Business columnist Steve Pearlstein said that when he makes a mistake, "it is invariably the e-mailers who are the first to point it out. I particularly look forward to the short, biting, irreverent e-mails that are negative or critical. They not only keep me on my toes but remind me to keep those qualities in my own columnizing."

Post subscribers tend to be the most thoughtful responders. About 700 attended a recent Post Points gathering at the paper to meet editors, reporters and columnists, and it was good to be reminded that not all readers are angry.

In fact, readers do compliment stories, and, bless them, they offer tips that turn into good articles. Thousands praised The Post for the Walter Reed series. Readers almost always respond with compassion to stories of people down on their luck; they offer money, rent, groceries. And journalists shouldn't forget that.

Deborah Howell can be reached at 202-334-7582 or atombudsman@washpost.com.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/04/AR2008010402937.html?hpid=opinionsbox1
cartoon: http://www.cartoonstock.com/newscartoons/cartoonists/mba/lowres/mban869l.jpg

http://www.youtube.com/9500Liberty : The Real World of Prince William County

An Immigration Flashpoint, Through Our Lens
Sunday, December 16, 2007; Page B04
Opinions
Washington Post

How did Prince William County, one of the richest, most diverse counties in the nation, become a flashpoint in America's battle over immigration? What led to threats of racial violence during public meetings and grown men screaming at children on the streets? And how did a team of Asian American documentary filmmakers end up in the middle, with both pro-immigration and anti-immigration forces demanding that they take sides?

On Oct. 9, Eric Byler and Annabel Park began posting short video clips on a YouTube channel they created called "9500Liberty" at http://www.youtube.com/9500Liberty. The "interactive documentary" project took its name from a street address in Old Town Manassas where a sign had been posted, reading: "Prince William Co. Stop Your Racism to Hispanics!" The sign -- on what was known as "Liberty Wall" -- protested a county policy that requires police to check immigration status during routine traffic stops and denies some services to undocumented immigrants. The county, like many places across the nation, is in the middle of a demographic transformation: Since 1990, its Hispanic population has quadrupled; today one in five of the county's 360,000 residents is Hispanic; and the number of Asians has more than doubled.

Since it started, "9500Liberty" has been viewed more than 270,000 times and garnered comments from all over the globe, including hate mail and death threats. On Friday, Byler testified before the U.S. Civil Rights Commission.

In the following two articles and a video essay, the filmmakers turn the camera on themselves and reflect on their experiences.

Annabel Park: I Can Relate to America's Identity Crisis.

Eric Byler: My Heart is Where the Bottles Shatter.

Blog Conversation on the DREAM ACT - Washington Post

"A very sad moment."

A Washington Post blog thread on the DREAM ACT. Much of the comments responding to Dionne seem to be inaccurrate - but its still worth reading and responding to.

-----
E.J. Dionne of the Washington Post published this comment on 10 26 07:


OK, I understand that many Americans worried about illegal immigration have honest concerns about the law and our inability to control our borders. But I really cannot believe that the Senate killed the Dream Act, sponsored by Sen. Richard Durbin. As Karin Brulliard reported in the Post, the bill "would have given conditional legal status to illegal immigrants now younger than 30 who graduated from American high schools, came to the United States before they were 16 and have lived in the country for at least five years. They would be eligible for permanent residency after two years of college or military service." The bill got 52 votes, eight votes short of the 60 needed to begin debate. "What crime did these children commit? They committed the crime of obeying their parents, following their parents to this country," Durbin said. "Give them a chance to prove themselves to this country." Sounds right to me, but not to Senator James Inhofe who said: "This or any other type of an amnesty bill would be a slap in the face of all of those who came in legally." Give me a break. This bill is trying to reward kids who do the right thing and who cannot be blamed for failing --when they were five or 10 years old -- to tell their parents, "Oh, no, Mom and Dad, don't cross that border illegally." It's also amazing, as The Post editorialized, that the Bush Administration "having supported a comprehensive immigration reform bill containing essentially the same provision, came out against the bill on the morning of the vote." What's your take on what I see as a very sad moment?


-----
There have been over 50 responses so far. Worth reading some of them. Perhaps some DREAMERS can write in and correct some of the mis-information being published on these posts.

The address is:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/community/groups/index.html?plckForumPage=ForumDiscussion&plckDiscussionId=Cat%3aa70e3396-6663-4a8d-ba19-e44939d3c44fForum%3a1d815998-efbb-465a-8a40-74441676780fDiscussion%3a1488523d-2908-4d6c-8a00-64c6a22d3518