Author Archive


April 15, 2009



April 15, 2009


Monday, April 13, 2009
Big Win: Obama First National Security Test

The U.S. economy is showing only glimmers of life and two costly wars remain in the balance, but President Barack Obama’s “no drama” handling of the Indian Ocean hostage crisis proved a big win for his administration in one of its first critical national security tests.

Obama’s two quiet backstage decisions to authorize the Defense Department to take necessary action if Capt. Richard Phillips’ life was in imminent danger gave a Navy commander the go-ahead to order snipers to fire on the pirates holding the cargo ship captain at gunpoint.

For Obama, the benefits were instantly clear: an American life saved and a major victory notched against an increasingly worrisome scourge of the seas off the Horn of Africa.

Obama’s handling of the crisis showed a president who was comfortable in relying on the U.S. military, much as his predecessor, George W. Bush, did.

But it also showed a new commander in chief who was willing to use all the tools at his disposal, bringing in federal law enforcement officials to handle the judicial elements of the crisis.

The rescue appeared to vindicate Obama’s muted but determined handling of the incident. What won’t be known for some time is whether Obama will benefit politically.

When Obama campaigns for re-election, he may take Bush’s approach of turning any such incident into evidence of his leadership acumen. On the other hand, Obama didn’t go before the cameras Sunday to trumpet the success, instead releasing a written statement that saluted the bravery of the military and Phillips but claimed no credit for himself.

Also, this crisis, while topping the news now, may fade into distant memory by the time voters get a chance to take any new measure of Obama and his party.

Still, it goes some way toward dispelling the notion that a liberal Democrat with a known distaste for war — Obama campaigned on his consistent opposition to the Iraq invasion — doesn’t have the chops to call on U.S. military power.

The sniper operation Sunday, with pirate guns aimed at Phillips, was a daring, high-stakes gambit, and it could have easily gone awry. If it had, the fallout would have probably landed hardest on Obama.

Indeed, the last Democratic president to unleash American military might against Somalis suffered miserably from the failure of that operation. Portrayed in the book and movie “Black Hawk Down,” a U.S. peacekeeping mission in Somalia ended with a deadly clash in the capital of Mogadishu and former President Bill Clinton’s humiliating withdrawal of troops.

The outcome this time was vastly different. This crisis proved a big win for Obama’s administration in one of its first critical national security tests.


April 9, 2009




About the Council of Independent Black Institutions (CIBI)
Founded in 1972, the Council of Independent Black Institutions (CIBI) is an umbrella organization for independent Afrikan-centered schools and individuals who are advocates for Afrikan-centered education. CIBI members are found primarily throughout the United States. Most of our institutional members are full-time Afrikan-centered independent schools. Our institutional membership also includes a number of part-time and supplementary schools. These schools enroll students at all levels from pre-kindergarten through secondary. The heaviest concentration, however, is at the elementary level.

CIBI activities include:

• Bi-annual conferences (in odd numbered years) designed to educate members of the Afrikan community about issues and prospects in Afrikan-centered education in general and specifically in CIBI. Unlike the convention, the conference is open to the public;

• Bi-annual conventions (in even numbered years) provide educators from CIBI schools and elsewhere opportunities to share information on curricula and other Afrikan centered education related matters. CIBI also installs its incoming Ndundu (leadership council) members during its convention;

• The Walimu Development Institute (WDI) attracts teachers in CIBI schools as well as CIBI home schools. CIBI also organizes intensive, on-site workshops for African-centered educators;

• Semi-annual publication of a newsletter, FUNDISHA! TEACH!, provides a forum for curriculum innovations, book reviews, news about member schools and other features pertaining to people of Afrikan ancestry.

• Annual Science Expositions held each year in April. During each Science Expo, children from the various member schools have an opportunity to display their science projects in a uniquely non-competitive environment in which they are evaluated according to criteria based upon the Nguzo Saba.

• A speakers’ bureau;

• An alumni association for graduates of CIBI institutions;

• Consultation and technical assistance to those operating or wishing to open independent Afrikan-centered schools. Services are also available to public and private schools or to any institution or group that serves children of Afrikan descent.

CIBI member contributions help make it possible to publish some of the outstanding Afrikan-centered curriculum materials that have been developed and used effectively over the years by teachers in institutions affiliated with CIBI as well as in other schools. CIBI’s social studies curriculum guide, Positive Afrikan Images for Children, published in 1990, is an example.

CIBI Mission Statement (Approved January 14, 1995)
Definition, Standards and Interpretations

• To define Afrikan-Centered Education
• To establish appropriate terminology, conditions, interpretations and standards consistent with the definition


• To vigorously promote the philosophy of Afrikan-centered education as defined by the organization
• To serve as the primary regional, national, and international spokesperson for the Afrikan- centered education movement and the institutions associated with that movement


• To establish Afrikan-centered standards and procedures for the certification of educational institutions, program, initiatives, organizations, etc.
• To establish Afrikan-centered standards and procedures for the certification of instructional and administrative personnel associated with educational institutions or programs

Curriculum Development and Standardization

• To develop and promote an Afrikan-centered curriculum philosophy
• To establish appropriate definitions and terminology associated with that philosophy
• To establish an Afrikan-centered curriculum design and methods for its implementation and evaluation
• To establish Afrikan-centered curricula for all ages (infancy through post-graduate levels) and in all subject areas
• To sponsor and/or facilitate the development of curriculum materials consistent with the design and content of Afrikan-centered curricula

Academic Performance Standards and Evaluation

• To establish academic performance standards consistent with the philosophy and design of the Afrikan-centered Curriculum
• To sponsor and/or facilitate the design of appropriate performance and diagnostic instruments, and procedures for the measurement of academic performance
• To establish standards and appropriate instruments for the evaluation of curriculum design and operations, instruction, and administration within Afrikan-centered educational institutions

National and International System Development and Coordination

• To facilitate the development and linkage of Afrikan-centered institutions world-wide through staff and student development programs, exchange programs, expositions, conventions, computer networking, bulk purchasing, joint investments and fundraising, etc.
• To establish designs, criteria, procedures, models, and necessary training\orientation programs that facilitate the development of viable institutions of Afrikan-centered education and culture.
• To serve as that administrative vehicle that coordinates the affairs of a national and international system of Afrikan-centered education.

CIBI’s Definition of Afrikan Centered Education: A Position Statement (Adopted November 11, 1994)
CIBI defines Afrikan-centered education as the means by which Afrikan culture — including the knowledge, attitudes, values and skills needed to maintain and perpetuate it throughout the nation building process — is developed and advanced through practice. Its aim, therefore, is to build commitment and competency within present and future generations to support the struggle for liberation and nationhood. We define nation building as the conscious and focused application of our people’s collective resources, energies, and knowledge to the task of liberating and developing the psychic and physical space that we identify as ours. Nation building encompasses both the reconstruction of Afrikan culture and the development of a progressive and sovereign state structure consistent with that culture.

We, in CIBI, further believe, that in practice, Afrikan-centered education:
1) acknowledges Afrikan spirituality as an essential aspect of our uniqueness as a people and makes it an instrument of our liberation (Richards, 1989; Clarke, 1991; Anwisye, 1993; Ani, 1994);
2) facilitates participation in the affairs of nations and defining (or redefining) reality on our own terms, in our own time and in our own interests (Karenga, 1980);
3) prepares Afrikans “for self-reliance, nation maintenance, and nation management in every regard” (Clarke, 1991, p. 62);
4) emphasizes the fundamental relationship between the strength of our families and the strength of our nation;
5) ensures that the historic role and function of the customs, traditions, rituals and ceremonies — that have protected and preserved our culture; facilitated our spiritual expression; ensured harmony in our social relations; prepared our people to meet their responsibilities as adult members of our culture; and sustained the continuity of Afrikan life over successive generations — are understood and made relevant to the challenges that confront us in our time;
6) emphasizes that Afrikan identity is embedded in the continuity of Afrikan cultural history and that Afrikan cultural history represents a distinct reality continually evolving from the experiences of all Afrikan people wherever they are and have been on the planet across time and generations;
7) focuses on the “knowledge and discovery of historical truths; through comparison; hypothesizing and testing through debate, trial, and application; through analysis and synthesis; through creative and critical thinking; through problem resolution processes; and through final evaluation and decision making”
(Akoto, 1992, p. 116);
8) can only be systematically facilitated by people who themselves are consciously engaged in the process of Afrikan-centered personal transformation;
9) is a process dependent upon human perception and interpretation [Thus, it follows that a curriculum can not be Afrikan-centered independent of our capacity to perceive and interpret it in an Afrikan-centered manner (Shujaa, 1992)];
10) embraces the traditional wisdom that “children are the reward of life” and it is, therefore, an expression of our unconditional love for them. In order to best serve Afrikan children our methods must reflect the best understandings that we have of how they develop and learn biologically, spiritually and culturally.


Akoto, K. A. (1992) Nation building: Theory and practice in Afrikan-centered education. Washington, DC: Pan- Afrikan World Institute.

Ani, M. (1994). Yurugu: An African-centered critique of European cultural thought and behavior. Trenton, NJ: Africa World Press.

Anwisye, S. (1993). Education is more than the three “R”s. Harvard Journal of African American Public Policy, 2, 97-101.

Clarke, J. H. (1991). African world revolution: Africans at the crossroads. Trenton, NJ: Africa World Press.

Karenga, M. (1980). Kawaida theory: An introductory outline. Inglewood, CA: Kawaida Publications.

Richards, D. M. (1989). Let the circle be unbroken: African spirituality in the diaspora. Trenton, NJ: The Red Sea Press. (originally published in 1980)

Shujaa, M. J. (1992). Afrocentric transformation and parental choice in African American independent schools. The Journal of Negro Education, (61)2, 148-159.

How CIBI Defines “Independent” As it Relates to the Fiscal Affairs of Independent Afrikan Centered Educational Institutions
An Afrikan-Centered educational institution is considered by CIBI to be “independent” in the context of its fiscal affairs, if:

a. The programmatic emphasis of the institution is directed toward nation building and the security of liberated space.

b. Pan-Afrikan nationalist interests determine institutional decisions about soliciting, accepting and investing funds.
c. The operational budget (i.e., that which includes the rent/lease/mortgage, payroll, utilities, kwk (etc.)) is funded primarily from sources within and controlled by the Pan-Afrikan community in order to ensure that the ability of the institution to maintain itself is contingent upon Afrikan people.


April 7, 2009



lamar perryman wrote:

Shalom El Hetep and Greetings,
To The Mambos, Queens and Princesses Of Traditional
Black Spirituality, To The Elders, Chiefs and Houngans Of Black Spirituality, To All Group
Members United Here in Our Struggle and Quest For A Common Identity and Union, and
To Bro Yao-Heru-Tehuti.

1. Semitic
2. The Anthropological and Ethnological Evidence
3. Akan
4. The Habiru/Apiru
5. The Avrahamic Peoples
6. Kana Yisrael As A Pharoanic State
7. Israel’s Ontology
8. The Archaeological Evidence
9. Overview
10. The Conclusion

( foreword : Bro. Yao-Heru-Tehuti, It is my suggestion that you read the evidentiary portions first and
then read Israel’s Ontology last. But Respecting your sagacity that is only a suggestion. The
materials gathered here in our discussions and elsewhere is to be the subject matter of a
larger volume entitled : The Egyptian And Aramaic Origins Of West Africans And Black
Americans. )

In order to faciliate the interests of scholastic aptitude for laypersons and academics alike I
shall set out what I believe to be The Philosophical Doctrine Of The Base in the discussion between You and I seek to help the understanding of all concerned.

I would like to start by addressing your present responses and also some of the ones from
your earlier posts and highlight some issues that are of important consideration even with
the present historical records and cast some light on the questions (s) posed by scholars
as to Who Were The Canaanite/Israelite/Hyksos People instead of just saying that it is not
known who they were. This, among some other things.
To get to the heart of your arguments again. In your first response you state again that
“there is no historical archaeological evidence of an “Israel” that matches up with the mythical writings found in religious text such as the Bible. There is evidence of a people
that the Kemetic peoples called “ysri ri”….though the peoples of Israel don’t have as many
interactions with any other people as they do with the Kemetic peoples.” [Note: To High-
light Something, that is precisely my point in my response And I might also add Sumer/
Chaldea as peoples that Ancient Canaan/Israel interacted with. End Note]……You state
“There is absolutely no historical connection that can be shown between any land or
people known as “Israel” and any people known as “Hebrew” or “Habiru”. [Note: The words
Habiru/Apiru is still in serious contention among scholars and at present simply means a
homeless person, a wanderer, a brigand, a street dweller or a criminal of some sort without
regards to race.!!! It Also Means They Who Have Crossed Over Meaning By Land Or The Rivers And They Who Have Come From A Certain Place To A Certain Place In The Lands And Countries Spoken Of, ( Egypt, Sumeria, Canaan ). It Is Also A ETHNIC DESIGNATION!!! End Note].
2. You hold to the view that all of the names given in the stele and defeated by the Kemetics are foreign city-states ( meaning foreign races to you, I suppose ) and that the
determinative for ‘Israel” is simply a foreign group of people ( also meaning a foreign race
or non-black peoples to you, I suppose ). You mention the punishment of Yanoam in
comparison to Israel being just as severe… [Note: Yanoam and Israel are Virtually Syn-
onomous as Canaanite People. End Note], and……The vast majority of the inscriptions on
the stele is actually about invaders from Libya [ I Note that this is True] ….They were the
most serious threat from the study of the inscriptions…[ Note: With that last statement I
most fully disagree. These campaigns were not conducted at the same time and Canaan’s
rebellion seems to have been put down first and still fresh/recent in the minds of the
Kemetic inscribers from a reading of the inscriptions. End Note].
3&5. I have combined your responses in three and five for relation. You disagree that the
Stele proves conclusively that “Israel” were native indigenous Canaanites and that Israel/
Canaan as shown in the Stele is actually one single group of people representing their
Country. You disagree that we can tell who they actually were or are, to state: ……. we
cannot tell that they are an ethnic group from that one line….we cannot tell if they are
Canaanites from that one line or a people who invaded and assimulated Canaanite culture.
…. we cannot tell if they were black from that one line…..there is not much at all in reality
that can be discerned from that one line as to who those peoples were…… [ Note: All of
Canaan’s Towns and Peoples received a one liner from the Egyptian inscribers of the
Stele. Also it has been noted and inferred by various scholars such as Drs. J.J. Bimson,
M.G. Hasel, Sigmuend Freud, C.G. Jung and Profs. C.A. Diop, Theophile Obenga, J.A.
Rogers, Frances Cress Welsing, Josef ben-Jochanan and others that it takes a long, long
time to assimulate the language, science, art, technology and customs of a foreign
superior culture and then make a appreciable contribution to it in terms of mechanical
usage. End Note].
4. And No. 4, in response to my position about there being no foreign racial groups that
were mentioned in regards to Canaan, period, You stated : “Actually all of the people
mentioned, not only in “Canaan” but also in Libya are mentioned as foreigners. Those
other city-states in Canaan that were mentioned all have the determinative symbol indicating
foreign city-states and “ysri ri” has a determinative indicating a foreign people…” [ Note:
WITH FOREIGN BY RACE!!! There were some White/Indo-Oriental Foreigners mentioned
as Allies of Libya But No White/Indo-Oriental Foreigners SHOWN or Mentioned in Canaan
on the Stele And That is Why The Kemetics REFERRED to Two Campaigns in One Stele!
As I have said before, They KNEW who they were looking at and Dealing With!!! More will
be said on this later, though.!!! End Note].

I have subsumed all of your responses and assertions into one so that I may answer them all in toto.
My entire position on this matter is that The Black Peoples of Canaan/Israel/Phoenicia were all One and the Same
and That it is These Black Peoples who were and are none other than The Mysterious Hyksos that
have been called Semitics and Asiatics by Indocentric, Eurocentric and some Afrocentric authors
and scholars.!!!
The first issue that I must address is the word Semitic. Understanding this word and its usages is one
of the KEYS to understanding our subject matter. The Akkaddian Inscriptions calls the Name of
Shem/Sem as Semu or Shu-Mu. it is the name of a Person, a Peoples and a Country, Sumer.
We Have To Be Very Careful When We Use The Word “Semitic” because it originally
applied to Black peoples in Mesopotamia, Sumeria and The Indus-Valley of Asia. See The
Akkaddian Inscriptions,;
and This is for your contention in an earlier
post that no historical person named “Shem” ever lived because of the lack of a historical
inscription to that effect outside of the Bible. As to Sumer and Shem, once again, from the
Mesopotamian view we look South. It is certain now that the peoples of Mesopotamia called
themselves Sumerian because they descended from and venerated the Orisha/Irumole/Imole
Person called SHU by the Egyptians. The very word means to derive from, to proceed from,
without regards to politics or religion but RACE. It also means an Act, An Event, A Social
Movement, such as the peopling of The Mesopotamia from Nile Valley and Indus-Valley
populations. Going further as to originality we are told by Prof. Amelineau and Prof. Cheikh
Anta Diop that the Orisha/Irunmole Ausar/Osiris was a True, Living Person as well as the
other Orisha/Imoles and Prof. Diop notes that the “God’s” head and other sacred parts were
found in four canopic jars at Abydos.!!! See The African Origin of Civilization, Myth or Reality.
Among these Nile Valley groups were the Akan/Kanaan peoples whose original home appears
to be Kenya as this Country still bears their ethnic name to this day. The origination of these peoples
must then have been Southern and Western, Nubian and Dravidian, which is to say South Africa
before many African/Asiatic Groups of Black Peoples assumed their own Ethnic/Tribal
Identities, Lands and Regions.
I submit that the first group of Nile Valley and Indus Valley peoples who settled the Mesopotamian
region ( Iraq, Canaan, Arabia ) were venerators of the Irumole, Imole, Neter SHU and so
named the land, its peoples, language and culture after their Patron Orisha. Even to this day
Black Hebrews refer to Black Jews as Shema Israel. The language of Canaan is called Semitic
( meaning Sumerian, Akkaddic, Ugaritic, Hebrew and ARAMAIC ). It is an Afro-Asiatic
language and is NOT Indo-Oriental or Nordic European. The language system of Black Asia
( The Dravidian Indus-Valley ) is conclusively shown to be Dravidian/Tamil/Kali/Dalit. The
Indo-Orientals/Indo-Aryans have no language system but that adopted from the Tamil system
is Vedic, Sanscrit and Hindu. The Dravidian is the Original Indigenous Asiatic Black Man and
Woman ( The South-East Asian Indian and Australian Aboriginal Type! ).
The original language system of Caucasians is the Nordic, Scandinavian, Teutonic, Celtic,
Germanic, Caucus and a corrupted bastardization of these tongues called Slavic! We also
note that Semitic referred to the Blacks of Asia First and Their Language and after that to
Japhetic Indo-Oriental and Caucasian peoples who adopted and spoke the language afterwards
and that is the SOLE origin of the word, land and peoples called Shumitic/Semitic!!!
See Semitic/Semitic Languages,
With this one single fact we can clearly begin to explain the times of Canaan, its provincial
state periods under Egypt and Sumer, its Nationalistic periods of Independence and Regional
Rule as Canaan, Israel, and Phoenicia, its rise and fall and the reasons therefor. Also with this
one single fact we can begin to set straight the Confusion of the Torah/Tanakh Records of
The Sumerian Hebrews and The Egyptian Yewes by the Western European and American
State/Church Academic Establishments!

The Anthropological And Ethnological Evidence

For purposes of clarifications throughout this treatise ( and for rebuttals, if any ) I will proceed
first to IDENTIFY the peoples now known to the World’s State and Religious Academia as the
HAMITICS and the SHEMITICS. See Gen. 10: 6-32 ( The Western Torah, miscalled The
Christian Holy Bible ). In the beginnings of Man’s Evolution on the earth as the Human Life Form
we all know that there was only ONE Homogenous race of peoples. A critical fact long over-
looked is that there was two (2) different groups of these peoples. One group was dark-skinned
with Woolly-Hair and called Nubian. The other group was dark-skinned with Straight-Hair and
called Dravidian! See An Authentic Anthropology, by Prof. Cheikh Anta Diop, ;and Dravidian India, by Prof. T.R. Sesha Iyengar, .
Both appear to have originated in Southern Africa. The Nubian is The Biblical
Hamitic and The Dravidian is The Biblical Shemitic as well as The Original Asiatic Black Man and
Woman. Eighty 80% percent of our Human History is the Story of These Two (2) Groups of Black
INTERMIXTURES.!!! And now for The Paleontology of Ancient Israel.!!!

The Anthropological and Ethnic evidence will best be considered by giving the four (4) Ethnic-Tribal
Groups and their societies which form the basis, origin, developement and actual peoples called the
Canaanites, Hebrew Israelites and The Black Jews. They are:
1. The Sumerian Hebrews, The Igbo (Ibo)
2. The Egyptian Yewe, The Ewe
3. The Akan of Canaan, and
4. The Colchin of India, The Indus-Valley
Outside of biblical text the evidence shows that the Patriarch Abraham and his Wife the Matriarch
Sarah were of Sumerian Dravidian descent. His Great-Great-Great Grandfather is Eber. Eber is
nothing more or less than an Igbo/Ibo man. Whether Eber was a Nubian Man or a Dravidian I
cannot tell but the record bears out the fact that there was much, much intermixing between these
two black groups in the Middle East, Iraq and Arabian Peninsula for long, long, long periods of
time before, during, and after Abraham’s migration. We ALL, laypersons and scholars alike, appear
to forget sometimes that all of the groups mentioned in Nubia-Egypt and Sumeria-India were ALL
Ethiopian Peoples. In other words and to be more specific, Nubians and Dravidians.!!!
( Early Dynastic period, Dynasties I and II; The “Ethiopians”
according to Diodorus Siculus); and a History of The Ancient Black Races Including The Black
Hebrews, by Prof. Rudolph R. Windsor , .
In all of my treatises in this Thesis I have presented the ONE VIEW that the Canaanite Hebrew
Israelites and Black Jews were the product of the Intermixing of The Nubian and Dravidian Black
Peoples, The Biblical Hamitics and Shemitics. As to the antiquity of the four (4) tribes of peoples
in Sumeria, Egypt, Canaan, India and Mesopotamia See Chayah bayith Elowahh,; and The Archaeology of The Bible Lands, by Magnus
Magnusson, B.C.; AND Ephramite
Forum-2, Other Peoples: Canaan, Ghana, Uganda. ; AND Igbo People,
The Egyptian Yewe, Ewe or IU are mentioned in Egyptian historical texts and it is from this tribe
of Peoples that we get the very word JEW. It is well known now by laypersons and scholars that
Hamitic and Shemitic language systems contain no letter “J”. The use of the letter “j” came about
as a translation of hamitic and shemitic tongues into Caucasian alphabet that uses the letter “J” such
as the English language. The word Iu, Iue, Yewe and EWE evolved into the word Jew as a matter
of the translation of languages and That Alone is the Whole Matter of the modern english word
Jew. It STILL MEANS the Yewe/Ewe peoples that the word describes and comes from as these
peoples were and are the Original Jews to start with.!!! I also submit that the very word HEBREW
is from the union of these peoples dialectical tongue from their biological intermixture as a socio-
ethnic group. The word Ibo or Igbo as Eber and the word Iu, Yewe or Ewe being conjoined to
form the Ethnic word : Hebrew as IBRI-EWE or IVRI-YEWE. I believe this very, very, very strongly.
The Ewe/Yewe peoples as a whole describes their Origins as being from the lands of EGYPT and
SAUDI ARABIA. I also Highly Note that Joseph I ( Yuyasof I of On ) was born in PADAN-ARAM
EWE.!!! He married ASENATH, the daughter of Potipherah, High Priest of the fabled City of On,
later celebrated as the Greek Heliopolis. ON is the Fabled Egyptian City of The Sun. The importance
of this will be seen later as we go on. He was buried in SHECHEM. I believe the word Shechem has
hamitic and shemitic implication and derivation from the reasons described herein. See The Ewe, ; The Africans Who Wrote The Bible, by Dr. Nana Banchie Darwah, ; Ancient Egyptians Wrote The
Holy Bible, by Dr. Kwame Nantambu, ; Gerald Massey, Ancient Egypt, The Light of The World, pgs. 474-498.
BUT SEE; in which Bro. Keita presents the opposing


Because of its importance to our discussion here, the Land and People of Canaan will be dealt with at
length. My point is that it is the Country that all four tribes mentioned came into one as a Socio-Ethnic
Group and Nationality. I begin this by identifying the Geographical Area of Ancient Canaaan from their
historical records and those of Egypt and Sumeria. To state: Modern Day Israel, Jordan, Lebanon,
Syria and Saudi Arabia. This region was called the Retennu, Sirion and later on the Levant by Egypt and
Sumeria. The importance of this description will become clearer as we move on. See Canaan, ; ; and ; and
Bro.Yao, to elaborate on what I will present in this treatise I submit that the Hurru, Mittani, Hatti etc.,
WERE ALL Black Peoples of The Societies of Nubia, Libya, Egypt, Sumeria and India, The Indus-
Valley. Going further on what Profs. Cheikh A. Diop, Ivan Van Sertima and Josef ben-Jochanan has
said, until we see the societies of Nubia, Egypt, Libya, Canaan, Sumeria, and India as RELATED
Nations and NOT Isolated Societies we will continue to be as CONFUSED abour OUR Origins and
Ancestors as Caucasian and Indo-Oriental scholars are about THEIRS and OURS. This, My Brother is
The Philosophical Doctrine Of The Base in our discussions and Debate. To further illustrate what I am
saying here let us view a map of the Ancient Near East during these times. See ; and Maps of The Ancient Near East, ;( Especially Asia, The Indus-Valley Civilization ).
Bro. Yao, in one of my prior treatises in this thesis I told you that the conflict between Canaan, Egypt
and Sumer was not just Political, Religious and Ethnic but also Scientific! I will state a list of Canaan’s
accomplishments and then I will proceed to show just who the Canaanites/Hyksos/Israelites truly were.
The Archaeological record from about 3000 B.C. shows that :
1. The Canaanites were the first mercantile nation in the world, the very first to use coins and paper money
(papyrus) as currency !!!
2. Their Political units were the very first Federated City-States in the world ( Ugarit, Aradus, Tripoli,
Ursalima (Jurusalem), Batrun, Byblos, Beirut, Sidon, Tyre, Raphia ( the first one ) and others ).
3. They recorded much (not all) of their history and system on papyrus (paper) which they also used in
the schools and business system.
4. Among the first to have a Merchant Marines and a Regional Navy with sophisticated warships.
5. Introduced the War Chariot into Egypt, Sumeria, Libya and surrounding Countries. The Canaanite
Chariots were made of Iron and equipped with Shields.
6. The Mortuary Science was sophisticated in both cremation, mummification and burial techniques.
7.Among the first to found a Agricultural based food, textile, chemical, clothing, industrial and medical
system from the land.
8. The first in the Art of Air Travel by way of the Gas Air Ballon which later gave way to our modern
Airships called Derrigables.
9. The first peoples to fuse Egyptian Hieroglyphics and Sumerian Cuneiform into one language to create
a Phonetic Alphabet (Aleph-Beth) and Mathematical system called ARAMAIC on which all other Modern languages have been based upon since then. This language system appears to be much, much
older than 5000 years.!!!

The name Amurru, Amorites, Amar, Aamu and Amu is synonomous with Canaanite. According to
biblical archaeology Genesis 10:16 indicates that the “Amorites were descended from Canaan but they
must have intermarried with Semitics at a very early age because they appear as a SEMITIC people in Near
Eastern references to them. Their origin is something of a mystery, but they probably arose not too far
from the Syro-Palestine region, perhaps in the northern euphrates area. We know that Amorite mercen-
aries were used in overthrowing the Akkaddian empire of Sargon I, about 2200 B.C. Thereafter they
invaded Mesopotamia and established themselves there; the Hammurabi Dynasty (1830-1550) was
Amoritic. From certain artistic representations we may conclude that they were entering Egypt as traders
by 1900 b.c. The Amorites occupied an area in Trans-jordan as well as in Canaan. Numbers 21:21
speaks of Sihon, King of the Amorites, and Joshua 10:5 lists the towns of the Amorite league: Jerusalem,
Hebron, Jarmuth, Lachish and Eglon. Probably they occupied the hill country while the Canaanites lived
in the lowlands of Palestine. At one time the Amorites controlled an extensive area in Mesopotamia, Syria
and Palestine”. Genesis and Archaeology, pgs. 88-89, by Dr. Howard Frederic Vos.
Let us view some other matters that Dr. Vos comments on. On Abraham’s Identity, Dr. Vos states that
recently the idea has been advanced that Abraham was not merely a powerful Patriarch but a Merchant
Prince. In this Dr. Vos cites Cyrus Gordon who concludes ” the patriarchal narratives, far from reflecting
Bedouin life, are highly international in their milieu, in a setting where a world order enabled men to travel far and wide for business enterprise…. Abraham comes from beyond the Euphrates, plies his trade in Canaan, visits Egypt, deals with Hittites, makes treaties with Philistines, forms military alliances with Amorites, fights kinglets from as far off as Elam, marries the Egyptian Hagar, etc” and simply admits that
this shows the Patriarch Abraham to be much more than the Bedouin nomad that scholars a generation
ago thought him to be. pgs. 51-54. On the Garden of Eden, The Flood, and their many similarities Dr. Vos states: ” That there was such a place of perfection may be reflected in the Sumerian account of the
land of Dilmun. He cites both Pritchard, who believes Dilmun was the Island of Bahrein in the Persian
Gulf, and Dr. Samuel Noah Kramer who locates Dilmun in the Indus-Valley, p.19, as well as the view
that Sumeria’s Mesopotamia is the original home of the Hebrews”, p.43.
On Genesis 14 Dr. Vos writes : ” the assertion made formerly that travel was not so extensive in the
patriarchal period and that Mesopotamian ( Sumerian ) Kings did not control the area must now be
discarded. The expeditions of Kings of Elam and Babylonia appear in different light when we learn, for
instance, that as early as 2300 b.c. Sargon of Akkad ( near Babylon ) made raids on the Amorites of
Syria and Palestine. Hammurabi himself claimed that his empire extended to the Mediterranean. Of
particular significance for the present study is the fact that prior to Hammurabis’s rule in Babylon, Kudur-
Mabug, an Elamite King of Larsa ( north of Ur ), claimed to be “prince of the land of Amurru” ( Palestine
and Syria ). Furthermore, a wagon contract found at Mari in the Middle Euphrates region and dating to
the patriarchal period gives as one of its conditions of rental that the wagon shall not be driven to the
Mediterranean coastlands, hundreds of miles away. Dr. Vos also comments on the discovery by Albright
of a line of buried cities along the legendary Highway of Kings. These cities dated to the Early Bronze
(3000-2000 B.C.) and Middle Bronze (2000-1500 b.c.) Ages. Also identified was the town of eastern
Gilead, Ham, Ashteroth Karnaim in southern Syria, Kadesh-He ( along with many others ) with Ain el
Qudeirat in the Sinai Peninsula. pgs. 66-73.
On Joseph ( Zaphnath-Paaneah; Yuyasof I of On ) as Prime Minister or Pharoah Vizier of Egypt, Dr. Vos observes : ” First, it is clear that the Egyptians did not consider the Hebrews to be part of the Hyksos
movement. When the Egyptians drove out the foreign overlords in the 16th century b.c., the expulsion did
not involve the Hebrews”. Again : ” Critics used to doubt the possibility of a Palestinian slave’s rising to
such high position in Egypt as scripture says Joseph did but archaeological investigation has provided
several interesting parallels to this occurrence. A Canaanite, Meri-Ra, became armor-bearer to Pharoah;
another Canaanite, Ben-Mat-Ana, was appointed to the high position of interpreter; and a Semitic,
Yankhamu ( Jauhamu ), became deputy to Amonhotep III, with charge over the granaries of the delta,…
In commenting on the position of Jauhamu, who some believe officiated in the region of Goshen, Price
observes ” to him the Egyptian subjects in Canaan-Syria appealed in case of necessity, as he was the
high official of the Egyptian Government for that foreign state. He had all power to respond to the appeals
for grain in exchange for silver, wood, or even the sons and daughters of the buyers. The position of
Joseph as Commissioner of graneries in Goshen ( Gen.47:13 ff ) and his authority to retain the sons of
Jacob ( Yaa’kov ) as hostages remind one of the position of Jauhamu”. pgs. 101-108. Genesis and
Archaeology, by Dr. Howard Frederic Vos, 1963.
Bro. Yao. I have reprinted some of the conclusions in this book to Illustrate again the Truth and the
Modern Confusion on the subject here. Dr. Vos, a Caucasian scholar, was at least truthful to what the
evidence showed and did not show and was sensitive in his comments on race and religion in the book.
He also admitted the confusion of scholars on the Identity of The Canaanites, Hyksos, Semitics and
Habiru!!! Of course Anthropology, Archaeological research and Afrocentric Academia has shown and
proved much since then but to my knowledge has not said who the groups mentioned truly were in a
definitive sense.
The Canaanites are SIMPLY the Akan Peoples of Egypt’s Nile Valley and Sumeria’s Mesopotamia as
the many Tribal/Sub-Tribal groups throughout the region who descended from them along with the Igbo
Colchin and Ewe as a common ethnic group and CALLED THEMSELVES and their land KINAHHU.
The Hyksos and Semitics ( Amu, Aamu, Asiatics ) are SIMPLY The Black Dravidian Peoples of Sumeria, India and Canaan among them The Ibo ( Igbo), Ewe, Akan and Colchin.!!!


Because the meaning of the word Habiru is “still” in contention among Scholars I will present my own
view of the Ethnicity and Race of the peoples called Hapiru. This will digress from our earlier discussions
on the Hapiru. By all accounts it is certain now that the term hapiru/apiru referred to peoples who were
homeless, outcasts and downtrodden at that time. In other words street peoples. The same goes for
sag’gaz, a robber without regards to race.!!! The promblem is solved in Sumeria and Egypt when we look
at where this underclass dwelt at. They erected large homeless camps near the edges of forests, deserts,
lakes, streams and along the banks of The Rivers. It is certain now that these peoples worshipped the Life
Giving Spirit of The Land, the River God HAPI. They, the lower class of Hyksos, also dwelt at the Deltas and by the Red Sea, being peasants, servants, prisoners and street peoples. This River, The Nile
(Hapi) and its deltas also being the home of Apophys-Set-Typhon, the Crocodile Gods, and Ipi. In
Sumeria the same is Enbil-Ulu. These peoples in the areas were no Indo-Orientals or Caucasian foreigners
but the Egyptians and Sumerians OWN UNDERCLASS being mainly Canaanites with poor Egyptians,
Libyans, Sumerians and Nubians included. It is also a known fact and no secret that Egyptian/Sumerian
peoples and dynasties had many of these peoples as house servants and field slaves. For all of the talk
about “crossing over the Rivers and Red Sea” these are the Hapiru/Habiru so-called from their veneration
or worshipping at that time of the Spirit of The Nile, a favorite of the oppressed and downtrodden, The
River God HAPI.


These are the peoples, the descendants of ABRAHAM, who produced Isaac ( Yitzhak ), Jacob
( Yaa’Kov ), the 15th to 16th dynasties of Ancient Egypt, the Nation-State of Kana Yisra’el, and its
connections to the 18th dynasty of Ancient Egypt. I also note the fact that their native presence was
attested to in Ancient Egypt as early as the 13th Dynasty.!!! In order to explain the 18th Dynasty of Ancient Egypt it is helpful if we look at the 15th to 16th dynasties and the formation of Kana Yisra’el
as a socio-ethnic and political group. The names of the Hyksos Kings are unquestionably Canaanitish.
As the Akan, Igbo, Yewe and Colchin groups began to coalease in the region of Canaan, they all
originating from a common background and bond, along with the minor substrata of other various small
tribal groups ( the mixed multitude of the Torah and Biblical records ) we see the people of Canaan as
Israel finally take shape as a Nation. One of the reasons for this is that the 15th to 16th Dynasties were
THESE CANAANITES themselves. It is important to note that the timeline for Canaan/Egypt’s most
important events concerning Israel is from 1650 to 1150 b.c.e. It is especially important to anaylyze the
time period for the 15-16th dynasties for this is when the Patriarch Jacob ( Yaa’Kov, the Supplanter )
appears. Jacob is called Yaa’kov-Aru, Yaa’kov-Her and Yaa’kov-Baal. The founder of the 15th Dynasty
was Salitis ( also called Shalik, Saites and May-Ebre Sheshi, literally translated as MAH-IBRI-SHE-ISHI.!!!), and the last King of this dynasty was Auserre Apophis I ( Ausar-Re Apophys I ). In other
words these Canaanites were the Self-Styled Pharoahs of the Delta, Canaanite and Arabian Peninsular
regions. It is said that Yaa’kov-Her had 12 sons by the Matriarchs Rachel, Leah and the Matriarch
Mistresses Bilhah and Zilpah. It it also a fact that Canaan had 12 Tribes. The CONFUSION results from
modern scholars giving the family names of Each Son as the Tribal names itself of each group. And these
were the 12 Sons of Yaa’kov that settled in each of the lands and territories of the 12 Canaanite tribes.
The 12 Sons and their Wives were SIMPLY the heads of these 12 Canaanite families, clans, groups and
Tribes of peoples in Canaan. As time went on from the earliest periods, their names and the Canaanite
tribal names became synonomous and identical. That is what happened there. That is all.
On Joseph ( Zaphnath-Paaneah; Yuyasof I of On ) again, I believe that Joseph was a Pharoah Vizier
under his Father Yaa’kov-Baal of the 16th Dynasty. When comparing the historical records from the
ancient texts to modern theoretical interpretaions it is interesting to note the similarities and differences as
told by academia of all schools. They make it so confusing, perplexing and non-common sensical at times.
In my opinion it would seem to me that Joseph was not just “sold” into slavery but was bartered, ransomed, captured and/or taken as a political prisoner-of-war (after all, they were at war with the
southern dynasties and others in that day and time) and his release was effected by BOTH Official
Diplomatic and Spiritual means. I also note that in the Book Joseph And Asenath, Ase-Nath, his wife to
be, already a Queen Princess at this time looked MORE LIKE A DAUGHTER OF THE HEBREW
ISRAELITES ( Read : Canaanite/Hyksos/Israelite ) than any of the other women belonging to the various
socio-ethnic tribes making up the population of Egypt in that day and time. I submit that Joseph was a
Pharoah Vizier of the 16th Dynasty ( called Hyksos ) under his Father Yaa’kov-Her and simply
ascended the throne after the death of the Partriarchal Pharoah. Again, See Joseph and The Hyksos,, echoeing the same conclusions reached by Dr. Vos
and others that the “expulsion of the foreign overlords” by the Southern Theban Dynasty did not include
the Hebrews. However as Dr. Vos admits, western academic scholars were labouring under the
“assumption” ( Academic Theory ) that the Canaanites/Hyksos/Israelites were different ( non-black,
non-native ) groups of peoples or a foreign race of people altogether which is the view that you presently
hold also Bro. Yao. Again I propound the fact that there is not a shred of anthropological or archaeological evidence to support your theory.!!!
See Joseph In Egyptian Historical Records,; and Jacob-Baal, ; and also See Genesis, KJV : Chap. 44: 1-34 ; Chp. 45: 1-28 ; Chp. 47: 1-31 ; andChp. 48: 1-22 ( Where The Land of Egypt and Canaan are VIRTUALLY INDISTINGUISHABLE ) !!!
All of the anthropological, archaeological, ethnological and linguistic evidence supports the fact that the four tribes mentioned herein ARE the
peoples known as the Hebrew Israelites and Black Jews. After much intermixing in the Nile Valley and Mesopotamia ( Egypt, Sumer, Canaan )
Canaan is the land where these four groups, already ONE, merged into a Nation as a Socio-Ethnic Group with a NATIONAL, INDEPENDENT,
SOVEREIGN IDENTITY. And that is how a SOCIO-ETHNIC GROUP AND A NATION IS BORN!!! The evidence supports the fact that
these Indigenous Canaanites are indeed the peoples of the book. Using this as our primary ideology here, let us approach the finding and
identification of the Israelites from the Egyptians OWN words in describing them and what they called them in the Middle Kingdom and Early
New Kingdom period and see just how easily we can find Israel in Egypt again and again and at almost every single turn. They called them
SYRIANS and referred to Canaan-Arabia as The RETENNU and LEVANT. This as we can easily see was a RACIAL as well as a Geographical
Classification, Retennu meaning Blacks but not of Egypt but the Akinahhu of The Land of Canaan. To put it plainly the Hyksos peoples was
nothing but these peoples and the Rulers, Chieftains, Nobles and the powers that be of Canaan ( along with the other small groups of Libyan,
Sumerian, Nubian and Indus-Valley populations that were present among them ) as evidenced and described by the SUMERIANS AND EGYPTIANS THEMSELVES. !!! See Joseph, The Alignment of The Chronological Records, .
They were also referred to as the WEARERS OF THE LOCKS ( you know, as in plaits, braids, sidelocks, Dreadlocks ). The Merneptah
Stela clearly DEMYSTIFIES Ancient Israel rather than MYSTIFY them. ( I myself have always known that the Stele itself is the
Incontrovertible Proof of the Black Canaanites who were denoted as Israel by none other than themselves and their Sister Nations, Ancient
Egypt and Sumer every since laypersons and scholars alike have tried to use the Stele to Prove or Disprove the existence of Israel as a
Canaanite Ethnic Group for quite, quite, quite some time now !!! heh, heh, heh, heh, heh ). See The Merneptah Stela,
Once again, for what a Native Canaanite looked like in the fifteenth century b.c. to 70 A.D. to present, See Harpers Bible Dictionary, pgs. 151-153, First Edition, 1985 ( Description : Canaanite Dignitary
with arm raised in salute; Bronze Plaque from Hazor, Fifteenth Century B.C. : The Canaanite Official in
this Stele is a very black person, extremely dark-complexioned. He wears undergarments similar to our
modern day clothing over which there is a Robe. In the olden days these Officials often wore a circular
ribbon about their upper body with Aramaic language and Adrinka symbols inscribed thereon denoting the
rank, country, station and function of the dignitary. This clothing is identical to West African Clothing today
called KENTE CLOTH. ), And, to further Drive The Point Home > See Rabbi Mordecai Abi Serour,
History of The Jews of Bilad el-Sudan ( In Fact, Read The Whole Article and The References in it ), ; and this one too, The
Igbo People :; Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt, pgs.
174-175, by Margaret Bunson. The Hyksos/Israelites were no “new race and/or new people”. Egypt
called them SIRIONS, Sumerians called them ARAMEANS and Manetho himself called them ARABS
and PHOENICIANS. These Canaanite peoples were indigenous to Canaan, Sumer and Egypt. See
Handbook to Life in Ancient Egypt, pgs. 87-89, by Rosalie David ; Ancient Syria, ; And Hyksos ; ;Hyksos, ; ; And Hyksos,

The 15th to 16th Israel dynasties were the basis, origin and developement of the Canaanite State of
Israel as a Independent, Sovereign Pharoanic State. After their expulsion from North Egypt in 1567 by
the Southern Pharoah Ahmose I ( Kamoses ) they withdrew again to Canaan. Still Canaanites continued
to play a large role in the Egyptian dynasties and society. In continuing the socio-political drama this leads
us up to the famous 18th dynasty of Pharoah Akenaton and his Vizier, The Priest-King Osarseph ( The
Tetmoses Osarseph or Tetmosi Osar-Yuyasof II of On ) better known as the biblical King Moses.
Yes, Bro. Yao. What I am saying is that the Chief Dynasties of The Canaanites were the Amurru and
the 15th to 16th Dynasties of Egypt were the Proto-Israelite and Israelite Dynasties who sat on the Thrones of Ancient Egypt as they sat on the Thrones of Mesopotamia also.!!! To understand this better
See The Prophecy To The Avrahamic ( Abrahamic ) Peoples. Western Torah, Gen. Chap. 17: 1-27 ;
Chaps. 16-17 ; and Chap. 25: 1-23.
However we are concerned now with the Administration of Akenaton ( Amonhotep IV ). It seems that
after the Theban southerners drove the Canaanites back into Canaan they oppressed the Hebrews still in
Egypt and made frequent incursions into the Land of Kanaan. But again, a Canaanite family rose to power
in the 18th dynasty of Egypt in the person of Pharoah Tetmoses Osarseph. [ Note: To explain the Pharoah/Pharoah Vizier King Tetmoses Osarseph ( also known as Yuyasof II of On, Damoses and
Tamoses ) the name SEPH or SOF MEANS descendant of Joseph, ( Yuyasof I of On, Zaphnath-Paaneah ), Ephraim, Manesseh, Benjamin and Judah whom the Levites lived among and intermarried with in Goshen, North Egypt. A practice which Pharoah Tetmoses discontinued as he assigned the Levite-Zadoks a special status when he withdrew ALL Hebrew Canaanites back into their own native land within their own national borders, named it Kana Yisrael, and established himself as the First and Founding Pharoah of Kana Yisra’el’s First Dynasty with Joshua as the Pharoah Vizier or Prime Minister. This was The Second Exodus. A voluntary one. The first dynasties were A COLONIZATION OF NORTHERNKEMET/EGYPT BY THE HEBREWS. Now, the first exodus or expulsion of the last Kings of the Israelite 16th Dynasty in North Egypt and the attempt by southern Kemetics to REMOVE ALL TRACES of the CANAANITE presence WAS because that was the first and only time in its native history that KEMET had been COLONIZED, albeit an INTERNAL ONE.!!! Phr. Tetmoses, in founding a Independent Canaanite State, had to deal with native elements loyal to the southern dynasties, Sumeria, and selfish ones out for their own power, resettle the 12 Canaanite Tribes, and write The First Democratic Constitution.The Constitution of Man and Woman, The Torah.!
This is the BASE of the stories about Phr. Tetmoses and Joshua’s wars with the Egyptians and hostile
elements in native Canaan. He and Joshua oversaw all of this along with the High Priest Aaron and Matriarch Queen Miriam. Pharoah Tetmoses also lived for 120 years beginning his work at the age of
40 !!! End Note ]. He made the final break with the southern Theban dynasties after Akenaten’s death,
re-established Canaan as a Independent State as Kana Yisrael and begin Judaism according to the
Patriarchal Command as the Native Culture.This is the Whole Story of the Exodus and The Mosaic-Joshua Dynasty of Ancient Kana Yisra’el in Canaan, more or less. This is ALSO for the unleavened,
half-leavened, half-mixed, half-baked Hebrew Israelites in CERTAIN GROUPS and Individuals with
street level, race-based so-called “Knowledge” who are teaching the Lie that Judaism ( YAHUDAISM )
is a Japheth Russian/Caucasian Ashkenazi “invention”. There are Hebrew Israelites, that just like other
Black peoples, are not prepared to accept and face the Facts of Israel and its True History. Having been
De-Culturized for so long they do not understand the real and true meaning of what it means to be the Hebrew Israelites. That will be addressed in Israel’s Ontology. See The Moses Mystery, The African
Origins Of The Jewish People, by Gary Greenberg , ( Go To: Look Inside Another Edition Of This Book for an Academic Introduction ); Ahmed Osman, ; Moses In History,
Hyksos, ; ; Osarseph ; Breaking News: Man Named Moses Declares “Set My People Free!” Leads Gang Of Hoodlums Into Wilderness, ; The Origin of the Jewish People and the Land of Canaan, by David Storobin, ; And, ; AND Genetic Evidence : West African/SubSaharan Peoples Are The Original Canaanites, Israelites And Arabs,; And The Israelites Were Pharoahs of Egypt, page 1, by Ralph Ellis, ; And, .

Also See
The Original And Only Amorites Were Black Canaanites, The Mount Zion Assembly Of Yah, ; And,

To begin with I will give the definition of Ontology : The branch of metaphysics that deals with the nature
of being ; a particular theory about the nature of beings or the kinds of existents. I have heard it said by modern Caucasian Greek scholars, Indo-Arabs and Black Egyptologists the Hebrew Israelites/Black Jews worship a Demiurge. Scholastic conjecture COULD NOT be better than this. Let a layman person
enter the FRAY here. I will give you the old magical Hebrew formula for determining “a God” and THE
GOD. Let us apply this formula Right Here! The first one is Linguistics with its ETYMOLOGY ( Etymology MUST be applied because languages can be corrupted, badly Translated and falsely Transliterated ! ). The other two (2) are FUNCTION and PLACE. YAH/YAA, the Sole and Supreme
Creator God has descended down to us as OM-YAH, AMYN-YAH, and EL YAH from Nubia-Kush
( Nubi-Yah, Nabi-Yah ), Indus-Kish ( Indi-Yah, Indu-Yah ) and Sumeria ( Semeri-Yah, Shemi-Yah )
from Time immemorial. YAH was known in Egypt ( Kemet, Kemi-Yah ) as YHUH, HUHI ( NOT AS
LAH ), in India as OYM/OM, YAA/YOM/YAM, Sumeria as ELYON ELYON EL, meaning The God,
The God, The Great God, in Nubia as AMYN, AYM, AMN and AM, The AMEN, and in Canaan as
EL YAH, The God who is Known but Unknown. This is why YAH was and still is taught by word and
thought only, The Sacred Three/Four Letter Word of The Ancestors!!! YAH is not Interchangeable and
Transliterable with Lah.!!! ( The “Y” is only transliterable as O,A,U,I BUT is equivalent to the First Three
Only as “O”, the SYMBOL of the Cosmos, All in All, The ALL ONE ). The LAH of Egypt directly
descends to us today as identically Lah, meaning the MOON and el-El or al-Al, meaning “a God”,
literally translated as AL-LAH, The Moon God. Also See ALLAH, The Moon God in the form of a
person as DUMUZI, The Sumerian Messiah, Shepherd King and Shepherd of Men equal to the Egyptian
Tehuti ( All the Kings and Priests were called Shepherds of Men by The Ancestral Nations, NOT just
Egyptians and Hebrews ! These Are Facts Without Emotion, Hate or Sacrilege Also. Just THE FACTS ). .
No such translation exists for YAH and IAH is a corruption of LAH, NOT YAH !!! If IAH is proposed
or theorized as a corruption of YAH it is a badly disconfigured one.Now, even PTAH is a form of YAH
as PTYH, PTHY, and PTYAH.!!! YAH is the Hebrew Israelite word for Supreme Being and Creator
God. That is All ! ( Compare Meroitic-Egyptian Hieroglyph, Tamil-Sumerian Cuneiform and Aramaic
Ugaritic Hebrew !!! ) .
2. Place : YAH could not be a form of Tehuti or he a form of YAH because YAH is First and Tehuti was
merely a messenger, teacher, guide and initiator into the various Religio-Spiritual systems of that day and
time. Second of all, YAH is the Aramaic Hebrew word for Ideal, Divine, Cosmic, Transcendental, The
Universal One. The same meaning as YAH has Today for YAH changes not. Third of all, YAH can not
be a “Moon God” or “a Tehuti” for YAH has no Images or Representations. It is said and taught that YAH
dwells in the Thick, Thick, Thick Darkness. A Ontological term for The Melanated Essence of the Cosmos
and ALL. Even today Israelites have no artistic representations and images of YAH and no else does either !!!
Fourth of All, YAH was known and worshipped in the Secret Societies by the High Initiates Only and Only
By The 3 Letter and 4 Letter Sacred Secret Word of The Ancient World.!!!
3. Function : The Supremacy of YAH as EL YAH in the Canaanite Pantheon is well illustrated in several,
numerous instances where the Orishas, Neters, Anunaki, the BAALIM of Israel , the “lesser Gods, Lords
Deities or SPIRITS” Have to go to YAH to get permission for to do just about almost anything, whether it
be good, evil, or to bestow a favor, curse, or impreesion upon someone especially if that person ( Man,
Woman, Child ) be loyal and beholden to YAH or be given a destiny by YAH or Not bothered at all.!
I will give 3 instances from the Torah/Tanakh and bring this part to a close about YAH’S Supremacy in
Hebrew and World Ontology !!! See Holy Tanakh/Bible, Book of Job ( Iyyob ), Chap. 1: 1-22 ; Numbers,
Chapters 22, 23 and 24 ; and I Kings, Chap. 22: 1-53.

And Now for the HARD Part. Hard because Indigenous Black Spiritualists and those of Organized
Religions Do Not Want to Accept WHAT IS AND IS A FACT !!! Now, to explain The ROOT AND
BASE of ANCESTRAL JUDAISM. In Israel, the word for Yoruba-Dogon-Kemet and Dravidian Tamil
Indian Orishas, Anunakis, and Loas IS BAALIM AND ELOAS. The basis of Judaism in its origins and
and developements is nothing but Traditional Black Spirituality of Africa and Asia known as VODUN.!!!
And Black Evolutionary Science known as ANIMISM. Our Ancestors Have Always Taught us that
this World Of Nature is Just AS Important, Alive and Diverse as is The World of Spirit. This System of
The Teaching of Judaism comes from The School of MELCHIZEDEK, THE ANCESTRAL SPIRIT
OF KANAAN BENE YISRAEL, Just as Osiris is The Ancestral Spirit of Egypt/Kemet and Enlil The
MOST HIGH GOD ( El Yah ; YHVH The El; Elyon Elyon El ) whom Our Patriarchal Father Abraham Met and gave Tithes, Supplication and Ancestral Veneration to. This was before The Patriarchal Father
married his Matriarchal Mistress, Mother Hagar, Our Mother Also. Matriarch Hagar is Agar, A Agaritic or Ugaritic Woman, A CANAANITE! And that is Also why Patriarchal Father Abraham ( ABBA’ HAM ) is ALSO called The Father Of Ham.!!! There also goes out the Door and Window
of Truth “The Lie of The Mythical Curse On Canaan” INSERTED into Our Torah/Tanakh
Records by Roman, English, Indo-Arab and Russian Ashkenazi “White Jews” Academia!!!
To Illustrate on BAALIM again : The Neter SHU in Egypt, The Anunaki SHU in Sumeria, is
to the Canaanite Hebrew Israelites : The BAAL SHEM or BAAL SHU-MU. A word that HEBREWS still use today to refer To Our Origins. He is the Brother of Ham ( Who is OSIRIS ), Anu,
Enki, Enlil and others. The word Baal in Hebrew means a Lord of The Land .
Because This Treatise is to Promote Unity, Love, Peace and Harmony I will set out how Black Hebrewism and its Culture Judaism is to be viewed and defined by. Judaism has No Law of Coercion
whether by Force or Guile!!! The Most Critical Fact, LONG OVERLOKED, is That ALL Black
Spiritual Systems SHARE a Creator-God Concept surrounded by a host of lesser Spirits. Judasim should be seen as ALL African Religions and Spiritualities such as Egyptian Amenism, Sumerian Anuism, Indian
Brahmanism and Buddhism, Orisha-Ifa, Santeria, Candomble, Sectarian Christianity and Sectarian
Theocratic Islam PURIFIED and STRIPPED of The Multiplicities. The multiplicities that causes conflicts
and DIVISIONS. We believe that YAH, through Pharoah Tetmoses, preserved YAH’S name through all
Hebrew Spirituality and Mystical Judaism should be viewed as a UNITY system. In commenting above on the relation that we all SHARE of a Creator-God and lesser Orishas, Loas, Deities and Spirits Hebraic Spirituality and Mystical Judaism teaches that the SPIRITS, if they be True and Real, are all a part of and function of God (YAH) and not SEPARATE from YAH. Just as one Cannot separate a Ray
of Sunlight from its Source, The Sun. For this reason these functions of God (YAH) are called ELOHEEM. This is the context that Hebrew Spirituality and Mystical Judaism should be viewed in by
Traditional Spirituality and Orthodox Religions.
For Messianic Hebrew Israelites who look to a Messiah, the belief, veneration and practice of a Divine
Virgin Mother who gives Birth to a Son who IS THE MESSIAH coming to SAVE His People for Their
GOD IS JUST AS OLD AS THE CREATOR-GOD CONCEPT among ALL the Afro-Asiatic Peoples in the World to this day. I am a practicing Mosaic Messianic Hebrew Israelite because I KNOW that there is No DIVISION in Our Scriptures and that BOTH Moses and Yashua lead to the same ONE : YAH ! And That Is ISRAEL’S ONTOLOGY !!!
For Hebrew Israelites in this Age of Increased Knowledge, The Scientific Technological Age, when
beset on all sides by psychological and material coercions, made to feel that Hebrewism and its Culture
is borrowed, or made to think that Judaism is a Inferior Spirituality, YOU NEED NOT BE DISMAYED.
Hebrewism and its Judaism is quite the contrary and its Effectiveness has been Time-Tested through our
ANCESTORS and US! In The Darkest And Finest Hour That Is When YAH is There.
And that, My Bro.Yao-Heru-Tehuti, and all others concerned is The Ontology of Israel!
See Biblical Beginnings In Ancient Egypt, ( A Very, Very Good and Interesting Site When One Knows How To Read It, Whether Black Egyptologist, Sumerianist or Hebrew ; Scroll To Jehovah and
Read The Portion About HUHI=IHVH=YAH and then Go To RE HPRW NEB translated as the GOD
HUHI=IHVH=:YAH No Matter how Many Persons, Moon Images and Human Beings That YAH is
Associated With !!! In Fact Hebrews and All Others Should Read This. As For Languages ALL of The
TAMIL SCRIPTS ….. !!!!!!!! . See : ; And The Names Of God In Judaism,

See ; ; ; ; ; Then See : Afrocentrism, 4. African as a race, ; I Rest My Case on The Universality of Hebrew Israelites and

(Message over 64k, truncated.) Mon Jan 7, 2008 3:05 pm


lamar perryman

FORWARD TO DRAFT BOX AND RE-EDIT. lamar perryman wrote: Shalom El Hetep and Greetings, To The Mambos, Queens and Princesses Of… lamar perryman
Jan 7, 2008
3:05 pm


April 7, 2009







April 4, 2009































2006 visit to Kenya

2006 visit to Kenya

– The Return of America – (UPDATE) Michelle Mobbed by School Girls

April 3, 2009



– The Return of America – (UPDATE) Michelle Mobbed by School Girls

Posted using ShareThis


March 31, 2009





Carlos Watson MSNBC Anchor
Posted March 16, 2009
America’s Skin-Deep Crush on Michelle Obama

America has fallen for Michelle Obama. Fashionistas love her style. Ivy Leaguers love her class. Moms love her priorities. Even white guys are crushing on her. The First Lady is everywhere: Vogue, O, this week’s New York Magazine. Like her husband, Michelle is a canvas onto which people can paint whatever they like, a mirror in which we can all glimpse something of ourselves. What do I see? Not those famous arms.

I see dark skin.

America may be falling for Michelle, but it wasn’t love at first sight. When I heard her described as “intimidating” and “angry” or as Obama’s “baby mama,” I often looked at her rich, brown skin and saw the reason. In this country, you’re less likely to get a job if your skin is dark. I can tell you from experience, you’re less likely to get a cab. Think of the A-list African-American cover girls whose ranks Michelle has joined: Beyonce, Rihanna, Halle Berry — none share her complexion. Academic studies show that Americans of all colors associate light skin with attraction and intelligence, and dark skin with poverty and fear.

Those “Americans of all colors” include African-American men, who are often criticized for preferring light-skinned or white partners. The literature on this is explosive and exhaustive, from Morrison to McMillan, Essence to Encarta. No doubt many black women, when they first heard of Barack Obama, assumed he followed the trend: prominent black man, light-skinned or non-black wife. Then they saw Michelle.

More than 1 in 5 of the votes that put Obama in office were cast by African-Americans, almost two-thirds of them women. African-Americans made the difference in critical states: Virginia, North Carolina, and Indiana, among others. Would the black community have supported Obama that enthusiastically if his wife had been lighter? I don’t think so. And if she had been white? Forget it. Obama’s ship would have sunk before it left the shores of Lake Michigan, his presidential run impossible without the early and deep backing of so many black women who believe that successful black Americans should work and love together in order to advance the community as a whole.

To be clear, I’m not saying that all black women feel this way, or that all white Americans initially hesitated to embrace Michelle because her skin is darker than Beyonce’s. But Michelle’s complexion has helped shape the way the world sees the Obamas, moving the national and international conversation on race forward in the process.

And I admire her for that.


March 30, 2009


Office of the Press Secretary
For Immediate Release March 26, 2009


East Room

11:39 A.M. EDT

THE PRESIDENT: Thank you so much. Well, it is great to see all of you. And I am thrilled that all of you here in the White House and everybody who is viewing this online is participating in this experiment that we’re trying out. When I was running for President, I promised to open up the White House to the American people. And this event, which is being streamed live over the Internet, marks an important step towards achieving that goal. And I’m looking forward to taking your questions and hearing your thoughts and concerns — because what matters to you and your families, and what people here in Washington are focused on, aren’t always one and the same thing.

Here in Washington, politics all too often is treated like a game. There’s a lot of point scoring, a lot of talk about who’s up and who’s down, a lot of time and energy spent on whether the President is winning or losing on this particular day or this particular hour. But this isn’t about me. It’s about you. It’s about the folks whose letters I read every single day. And for the American people, what’s going on is not a game. What matters to you is how you’re going to find a new job when nobody seems to be hiring or how to pay medical bills after you get out of the hospital or how to put your children through college when the money you’d put away for their tuition is no longer there.

That’s what matters to you. That’s what you expect your leaders to be focused on. And that’s why I’ve been working to deliver the changes you sent me here to make; to ensure that we’re not only making it through this crisis, but come out on the other side stronger and more prosperous as a nation over the long term. That’s the future that I believe is within our reach.

But that future will not come about on its own. It will come because we all, every single one of us, from Main Street to the halls of Congress, do what generations of Americans have done in times of trial; because we remember that at heart we are one nation, and one people, and united by a bond that no division of party or ideology can break; because we come together as Americans to choose that better day.

And that’s what we’ve already begun to do. We, as a nation, have already begun the critical work that will lead to our economic recovery. It’s a recovery that will be measured by whether jobs are being created and families have more money to pay their bills at the end of each month. That’s why we’re preventing teachers and police officers from being laid off, and putting Americans to work rebuilding our crumbling roads and bridges and dams, creating or saving 3.5 million jobs in the coming years.

And that’s why we’re putting a tax cut into the pockets of 95 percent of working families who will see it — see that tax cut in their paycheck by April 1st.

It’s a recovery that will be measured by whether families can achieve that most American of dreams, and own a home without fear of losing it. That’s why we’ve launched a plan to stabilize the housing market and help responsible homeowners stay in their homes. This plan is one of the reasons that mortgage interest rates are now at near-historic lows. And we’ve already seen a jump in refinancings of mortgages, and homeowners taking advantage of lower rates. And every American, by the way, should know that up to 40 percent of all mortgages right now are eligible for refinancing.

It’s a recovery that will be measured by whether families and entrepreneurs can get the loans they need. That’s why we’re freeing up credit that’s frozen with a program that supports the market for more car loans, and student loans, and small business loans; and with a plan that will partner government resources with private investment to break the logjam that is currently preventing our banks from lending money to even the most creditworthy customers.

And in the end, it’s a recovery that will be measured by whether it lasts, whether it endures; by whether we build our economy on a solid foundation instead of a overheated housing market or maxed-out credit cards or the sleight of hand on Wall Street; whether we build an economy in which prosperity is broadly shared. That’s what the budget I expect to sign is intended to do. It’s a budget that cuts the things we don’t need to make room for the investments we do; a budget that cuts the massive deficits we’ve inherited in half by the end of my first term and offers a blueprint for America’s success in the 21st century.

That success will require preparing every child, everywhere in this country, to out-compete any worker anywhere in the world because we know that those students who are getting the best education are going to be able to compete. And that’s why we’re making a historic investment in early childhood education. That’s why we’re going to make a historic investment in improving K-12 education, making sure that our children get a complete and competitive education from the cradle up through a career. It’s an investment that will expand and improve not just early learning programs, but reward good teachers while replacing bad ones, and put college or technical training within reach for anyone who wants it.

Our success will also require freeing ourselves from the dangerous dependence on foreign oil by building a clean-energy economy, because we know that with this will not only come greater security and a safer environment, but new high-paying jobs of the future to replace those that we’ve lost.

And our success will also require controlling spiraling health care costs that are bankrupting families, and crushing businesses, and driving up skyrocketing deficits. At the current course and speed, these health care costs are unsustainable. And that’s why my budget takes a first big step towards comprehensive health care reform that will reduce costs, improve care and ensure that everyone who works has coverage they can afford.

This is what Americans’ success demands and this is what our budget will do. And I’m under no illusions that a better day will come about quickly or easily. It’s going to be hard. But as I said the other night at my press conference, I’m a big believer in the idea of persistence — the idea that when the American people put their mind to something and keep at it, without giving up, without turning back, no obstacle can stand in our way, and no dream is beyond our reach. That’s why we’re here today — because it will take all of us talking with one another, all of us sharing ideas, all of us working together to see our country through this difficult time and bring about that better day.

So I want to thank all of you for this opportunity to talk with you. And now I’d like to bring Jared back up to the stage, and he’s going to open it up for questions. So, Jared, let’s see how this thing works.

DR. BERNSTEIN: Thank you, Mr. President. Our first question comes from Boston, Massachusetts, on the topic of education: “The Founding Fathers believe that there is no difference between a free society and an educated society. Our educational system, however, is woefully inadequate. How do you plan to restore education as a right and core cultural value in America?”

THE PRESIDENT: Well, it’s a great question, and — let me see if this mic works so that I’m not stuck at this podium. I’m here only because of the education I received. I wasn’t born into wealth, I wasn’t born into fame, but I had parents who cared about education and grandparents who cared about education, and I was lucky enough, through scholarships and sacrifice on the part of my family, to get the best education that America has to offer.

Too many of our children aren’t getting that kind of education. It’s not because their parents don’t believe in the value of education; it’s not because these young people are less talented. It’s because of two reasons: One, in many cases, our schools are under-resourced. There aren’t enough teachers; the teachers aren’t getting enough of the training they need for the classroom; there’s a shortage of supplies. Some of the schools that I visited during the course of traveling around the country just shock the conscience. There are schools that I’ve seen that were built in the 1850s that are still being used but haven’t been upgraded the way they need to.

Now, there’s a second problem, though, and it’s one that money alone cannot solve, and that is that we have a school system that was designed for the agricultural era — there’s a reason why we’ve got three months off during the summer. That’s supposed to be when everybody is working on — out on the farm and bringing in harvest. And it’s not just the amount of time our kids are spending, it’s how our classrooms are designed, how curriculums are structured, how things like teacher promotion and training happen.

So a lot of times in Washington we get an argument about money versus reform. And the key thing to understand about our education system is we need more resources and we need reform. If we just put more money into a system that’s designed for the 19th century and we’re in the 21st, we’re not going to get the educational outcomes we need. On the other hand, if we talk a lot about reform but we’re not willing to put more resources in, that’s not going to work.

So let me give you just a couple examples of what we need to do. Early childhood education we know works. Let’s invest in that. That’s what my budget calls for — substantial investment; every dollar we invest in early childhood education, we get potentially $10 back in improved reading scores, reduced dropout rates, reduced delinquency rates and so forth.

Number two, let’s focus on the most important ingredient in the school, and that’s the teacher. Let’s pay our teachers more money. Let’s give them more support. Let’s give them more training. Let’s make sure that schools of education that are training our teachers are up to date with the best methods to teach our kids. And let’s work with teachers so that we are providing them measures of whether they’re effective or not, and let’s hold them accountable for being effective.

Now that doesn’t mean just a single high-stakes standardized test. It also means that we’re working with teachers to determine, what’s the best way to discipline — maintain discipline in a classroom? What’s the best way to get kids excited about science? Giving them the time and the resources to improve, but also having high standards of expectation in terms of their performance.

If we do early childhood education, if we focus on teacher training, if we invest in math and science education, which is vital — and we’re falling behind other countries on that front — then I actually feel pretty confident that we can out-compete any country in the world. But it’s going to take more money and it’s going to take more reform and it’s going to take, by the way, openness to innovation on things like charter schools or performance pay. There are a whole range of things that may work, in some cases may not work, but we’ve got to try some new things because right now too many of our kids are stuck, and we can’t afford to lose them.

DR. BERNSTEIN: The next question is on homeownership, from Heather from Ohio: “President Obama, what benefits from the stimulus plan are there to those of us who are paying our mortgages but living paycheck to paycheck?”

THE PRESIDENT: Well, I mentioned this in the opening remarks. This is something that I really want everybody to understand. Our housing plan — and we’re devoting $50 billion to it — has a number of different components. One component is setting up a mechanism where people who just can’t afford their mortgage right now are able to renegotiate with banks, and the banks lower their interest, and the homeowner assures that they’re going to make a commitment to pay a certain amount every month, and the government helps to step in to bridge the gap. But the point is, it’s going to be cheaper, not only for that family but also potentially for the entire community, if they stay in their home.

And so that’s — that part of the housing plan is targeted for folks who are really in distress. They’re getting close to the point where they might be losing their home.

But there are a whole bunch of folks out there who are not about to walk away from their home, but are getting killed right now because their home values have dropped drastically; they’re still making payments, but they’re in trouble. And for that huge set of responsible homeowners out there, I want people to understand what we’ve done is created mechanisms in the credit markets that have lowered mortgage rates down to historic levels, and what we’ve done is we’ve opened it up so that FHA loans that used to be only for people with a certain mortgage level, that we are using FHA and other mechanisms to open up refinancings to a whole bunch of homeowners who previously weren’t qualified.

So now what you’ve got is a situation where 40 percent of the people sitting here, 40 percent of the people who are participating in this virtual town hall, could potentially refinance their mortgage. And they’ve got to take advantage of that. We are providing additional support from the government in order to facilitate those refinancings. We’re starting to see refinancings go up significantly.

So you have the potential to cut your monthly payments, but you’ve got to take advantage of it. And if you need more information, you can go on our web site,, or you can contact your local bank and find out whether you qualify to participate in this refinancing.

DR. BERNSTEIN: Next we have a video question from Harriet in Georgia about bringing jobs back to America: “Hello, President Obama. Here is my question for your online town meeting. When can we expect that jobs that have been outsourced to other countries to come back and be made available to the unemployed workers here in the United States? Thank you so much for all your hard work. God bless you. Bye-bye.”

THE PRESIDENT: Well, I appreciate that. Let me talk more, first of all, broadly about what’s happening in the job market. We have had just a massive loss of jobs over the last several months, the kind of job loss we haven’t seen at least since the early ’80s and maybe since the 1930s, in terms of how quickly we’ve seen the economy shed jobs.

A lot of that is prompted by the financial crisis and the locking up of the credit markets. And that’s why when we are — when we talk about dealing with this credit crisis and the banks, I just want everybody to understand it’s not because we’re overly concerned about Wall Street or a bunch of CEOs; it’s because if we don’t fix credit, if we don’t get liquidity back to small businesses and large businesses alike who can have that — use that line of credit to buy inventory and to make products and sell services, then those businesses shrivel up and they start laying people off.

Ultimately, our measure of whether we’re doing a good job or not is, are we going to be able to create and save jobs? And part of that involves fixing the financial system.

There is a long-term issue, though, that we have to deal with — and this was true even before the current crisis — and that is that so much of our economic activity was in the financial services sector. It was related to an overheated housing market. It was dependent on huge amounts of consumer saving. And we were seeing those steady declines in manufacturing. We were seeing steady declines in a lot of other productive sectors of the economy. And one of the things that my budget is designed to do is, by fixing our education system, by reducing costs of health care, by going after the clean-energy jobs of the future, trying to put our economy on a more solid footing.

Now, a lot of the outsourcing that was referred to in the question really has to do with the fact that our economy — if it’s dependent on low-wage, low-skill labor, it’s very hard to hang on to those jobs because there’s always a country out there that pays lower wages than the U.S. And so we’ve got to go after the high-skill, high-wage jobs of the future. That’s why it’s so important to train our folks more effectively and that’s why it’s so important for us to find new industries — building solar panels or wind turbines or the new biofuel — that involve these higher-value, higher-skill, higher-paying jobs.

So I guess the answer to the question is, not all of these jobs are going to come back. And it probably wouldn’t be good for our economy for a bunch of these jobs to come back because, frankly, there’s no way that people could be getting paid a living wage on some of these jobs — at least in order to be competitive in an international setting.

So what we’ve got to do is create new jobs that can’t be outsourced. And that’s why energy is so promising. We’ve been talking about what’s called a smart grid, and some of you may have heard of this. The basic idea is, is that we’re still using an electricity grid that dates back 100, 150 years ago. Well, think about all the gizmos you guys are carrying — (laughter) –all the phones and the BlackBerrys and the this and the that. You’re plugging in all kinds of stuff in your house. We’ve got an entirely new set of technologies, huge demands in terms of energy, but we’ve got a grid that’s completely outdated.

Now, one of the things that we wanted to do in the stimulus package was to go ahead and start laying a new grid. And to do that, it’s like building the Transcontinental Railroad. You’ve got a — it’s a huge project involving all 50 states.

The benefits of the grid are that we could reduce our energy costs by billions of dollars. We could set up systems so that everybody in each house have their own smart meters that will tell you when to turn off the lights, when the peak hours are, can help you sell back energy that you’ve generated in your home through a solar panel or through other mechanisms. If we get plug-in hybrid cars, you can plug it in at night and sell back electricity to the utility, and then charge up your car again in the morning before you leave.

All this can be done, but it also creates jobs right now. Our biggest problem, we don’t have enough electricians to lay all these lines out there. And these are jobs — these are union jobs that potentially pay $80,000-$90,000 a year, with benefits. But it’s a matter of making the investment in infrastructure and also then training the workers to be able to get those jobs. And that’s where we’re going to be focused on. That’s where the job growth is going to occur.

One last point I want to make — and I know I’m not supposed to talk this long, but we’re going to have to be patient and persistent about job creation because I don’t think that we’ve lost all the jobs we’re going to lose in this recession. We’re still going to be in a difficult time for much of this year. Employment is typically what’s called a lagging indicator. Now, this is — Dr. Bernstein, he’s a Ph.D. economist, so he’ll correct me if I’m wrong here, but —

DR. BERNSTEIN: I’m sure I can make this really confusing. (Laughter.)

THE PRESIDENT: But historically, if you look at every recession, what happens is that when the economy starts getting in trouble, it takes a while before businesses decide, you know what, this economy is in trouble, it’s not bouncing back — we better start laying off workers. So what we’re seeing now is a lot of businesses have decided that our sales are way down, we’ve got to start shedding workers. And that’s going to continue for a while.

Now, the reverse is true, as well. When the economy starts recovering, when these businesses start being a little more confident that, you know what, we think we’ve bottomed out; the recovery package President Obama passed gives us some optimism about making investments in certain areas — it takes a while before they start hiring even if they’ve started to make these investments.

So the reason I point that out is, I don’t want people to think that in one or two months suddenly we’re going to see net job increases. It’s going to take some time for the steps that we’ve taken to filter in. The fact that the housing market is starting to stabilize a little bit — there’s still a lot of inventory out there before people then actually start building new homes. At some point people are going to start buying new cars again, but it’s going to take a little bit of time for the automakers to get back on their feet.

So employment is something that we’re going to have a difficult time for the next several months, maybe through the end of this year, but I’m confident that we’re taking the steps that are required to create these new jobs of the future.

DR. BERNSTEIN: After the last recession ended in 2001, the unemployment rate went up for another 19 months before it started coming back down.

This next question — an area close to your heart — health care reform. From Richard in California: “Why can we not have a universal health care system, like many European countries, where people are treated based on needs rather than financial resources?”

THE PRESIDENT: Well, first of all, I was in this room last month in what we called a health care forum. And we brought all the members of Congress, Republicans and Democrats who were interested in this issue; we brought together various constituency groups, insurance companies, drug companies, you name it. And my message to them was: Now is the time to reform the health care system — not four years from now, not eight years from now, not 20 years from now. Now.

And the reason — (laughter) — the reason that I think it is so important is that the high costs of health care are a huge drag on our economy. It’s a drag on our families. I can’t tell you how many personal stories that I hear about people who are working, maybe have two parents working and yet still don’t have health care. And the decisions that they have to make — excruciating decisions about whether or not somebody goes to a doctor — it makes them less productive, it makes them less mobile in terms of being able to take new jobs or start a new business because they’re worried about hanging on to their health care. So it’s a drag on families.

But it’s a drag on businesses, as well. There’s not a small business or large business out here who hasn’t seen their health care costs skyrocket, and it cuts into their profits.

And it’s a drag on the federal budget and the state budgets. That’s the thing that is going to potentially break the bank here in the United States. Medicare and Medicaid, if we don’t get control of that, that is the biggest driver of our long-term deficits.

So when people — when you hear this budget debate that’s taking place right now, and folks say, oh, you know, President Obama’s budget, he’s increasing money for veterans and he’s increasing money for education, and he’s doing all these things that — that’s going to bust the budget, what they don’t understand is, is that if you add up the recovery package that we’ve already passed and you add up the various proposals I have to grow the economy through clean energy and all that stuff that we’re doing, that amounts to a fraction of the long-term deficit and debt that we’re facing. The lion’s share of it has to do with Medicare and Medicaid and the huge, rising cost of health care. So our attitude is, better to pay now and make an investment in improving the health care system rather than waiting and finding ourselves in a situation where we can’t fix it.

Now, the question is, if you’re going to fix it, why not do a universal health care system like the European countries? I actually want a universal health care system; that is our goal. I think we should be able to provide health insurance to every American that they can afford and that provides them high quality.

So I think we can accomplish it. Now, whether we do it exactly the way European countries do or Canada does is a different question, because there are a variety of ways to get to universal health care coverage.

A lot of people think that in order to get universal health care, it means that you have to have what’s called a single-payer system of some sort. And so Canada is the classic example: Basically, everybody pays a lot of taxes into the health care system, but if you’re a Canadian, you’re automatically covered. And so you go in — England has a similar — a variation on this same type of system. You go in and you just say, “I’m sick,” and somebody treats you, and that’s it.

The problem is, is that we have what’s called a legacy, a set of institutions that aren’t that easily transformed. Let me just see a show of hands: How many people here have health insurance through your employer? Okay, so the majority of Americans, sort of — partly for historical accident. I won’t go into — FDR had imposed wage controls during war time in World War II. People were — companies were trying to figure out how to attract workers. And they said, well, maybe we’ll provide health care as a benefit.

And so what evolved in America was an employer-based system. It may not be the best system if we were designing it from scratch. But that’s what everybody is accustomed to. That’s what everybody is used to. It works for a lot of Americans. And so I don’t think the best way to fix our health care system is to suddenly completely scrap what everybody is accustomed to and the vast majority of people already have. Rather, what I think we should do is to build on the system that we have and fill some of these gaps.

And I’m looking to Congress to work with me to find that optimal system. I made some proposals during the campaign about how we can lower costs through information technologies; how we can lower costs through reforms in how we reimburse doctors so that they’re not getting paid just for the number of operations they’re doing, but for whether they’re quality outcomes; investing in prevention so that kids with asthma aren’t going to the emergency room, but they’re getting regular checkups.

So there are a whole host of things that we can do to cut costs, use that money that we’re saving then to provide more coverage to more people. And my expectation is, is that I will have a health care bill to sign this year. That’s what we’re going to be fighting for. That’s what we’re going to be striving for.

Can I just interrupt, Jared, before you ask the next question, just to say that we — we took votes about which questions were going to be asked and I think 3 million people voted or —

DR. BERNSTEIN: Three point five million.

THE PRESIDENT: Three point five million people voted. I have to say that there was one question that was voted on that ranked fairly high and that was whether legalizing marijuana would improve the economy — (laughter) — and job creation. And I don’t know what this says about the online audience — (laughter) — but I just want — I don’t want people to think that — this was a fairly popular question; we want to make sure that it was answered. The answer is, no, I don’t think that is a good strategy — (laughter) — to grow our economy. (Applause.)

So — all right.

DR. BERNSTEIN: Thank you for clearing that up. (Laughter.) This next question comes from Columbia, South Carolina: “The unemployment rate for Iraq and Afghanistan veterans is higher than the national unemployment rate. Our veterans are a national treasure. How can you, the VA, and I ensure our veterans are successfully transitioning into civilian life?”

THE PRESIDENT: That’s a great question. You know, I had just an extraordinary honor — yesterday was Medal of Honor Day. And I went to Arlington National Cemetery, and we had a ceremony in front of the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier with a collection of Medal of Honor winners from all our various wars.

And a special place of honor was a guy named John Finn, who had been present the day Pearl Harbor was bombed. He was on one of the ships, was shot by — was strafed by the fire from the planes coming in, and yet still had the presence of mind to shoot down a plane, and won the Medal of Honor — or was awarded the Medal of Honor for that.

And it just reminds you that we wouldn’t be here if it hadn’t been for the sacrifices of earlier veterans. We would not — (applause) — we would not enjoy the same safety and security and liberty that we do.

So when our veterans come home from Iraq and Afghanistan — and they have performed brilliantly, they have done everything that’s been asked of them, regardless of what your views are on these wars — they have earned these benefits that all too often we fail to give them.

And that’s why in my budget we are increasing veterans funding by more than any time in the last 30 years. We’re going to make sure that we deal with the — (applause) — we’re going to make sure that deal with the backlog that too many veterans experience in terms of getting benefits. We’re going to make sure that homeless veterans are receiving housing and services.

The homeless rate for veterans is multiple times higher than it is for non-veterans. That’s inexcusable. It means that we’re going to provide services for Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder, that we’re going to provide services for Traumatic Brain Injury that are the signature injuries of these recent wars. So we are going to significantly increase veterans spending.

Now, just as is true generally, government alone can’t do it. So all of us individually are going to have roles. If you’re a business owner, hiring a veteran, not discriminating against somebody who’s a veteran is going to be absolutely critical. In your communities, in your churches, in your neighborhoods, making sure that there’s outreach and celebration of veterans when they come home, that’s going to be critical.

I think we’ve done a much better job during these wars than we did during Vietnam, where in many cases our treatment of veterans was inexcusable. But we can always do more. Government is going to do its role, and then we’ve got to make sure that our communities do their role, as well.

DR. BERNSTEIN: Mr. President, the next video will be our last Internet question before we turn to the audience for Q&A for follow-up. Let me also note that this question from Alex in Ohio happens to be about the same topic that the Middle Class Task Force is focusing on this month. Let’s turn to this:

“Hi, Mr. President. My name is Alex. My name is Kristin (ph). And I’m Mallory (ph). We are all sophomores at Kent State University in Ohio. We really like the emphasis you’ve put on education so far in your administration, but we’re concerned about higher education. Our question is: What proposals do you have to make college more affordable and to make student loans easier to get? And when will your national service program be available so we can take advantage of the scholarship? Thank you, Mr. President!”

THE PRESIDENT: That was pretty well done. (Laughter and applause.) Well, I am very excited about the possibility that we may be able to get national service done in the next few weeks. National service was a priority for me during the campaign, partly because of my own biography. I found my calling when I became a community organizer working in low-income neighborhoods when I was 22, 23 years old. And it gave me a sense of direction, a sense of service, it helped me grow, it helped me give back. And I think there are young people all across America who are eager for that opportunity.

And so what we’ve said during the campaign was, let’s set up a situation where every young person who is so inspired can take advantage of service, and in exchange they will help be able to finance their educations.

And I’m confident that we’re about to get legislation passed. And once that legislation is passed, I think that before the end of the year potentially we can get something implemented on that front.

In addition, what we are also doing is to try to make the student loan and student grant programs that are already in place work better. So just to give you one example, right now a lot of the student loan programs run through banks, but a lot of them go directly to students from the government — so-called direct loans. The banks make several billion dollars’ worth of profits off managing these student loans, which would be okay except for the fact that these loans are guaranteed by the federal government.

So, the reason banks are able to make money lending you is because — that there’s some risk that you might not pay it back, plus you’re giving up the use of your money for — they’re giving up the use of their money for a while. If, on the other hand, this is the government’s money and they’re just a pass-through, it doesn’t seem very sensible that banks should be making money that way.

So what we’ve said is let’s make all these direct loans, as opposed to having bank intermediaries or — and not just banks — financial services organizations. They can make profits on other things, but let’s not have them make profits on this. Let’s take those billions of dollars, and that then allows us to either lower student loan rates or expand grants.

And one of the things that we want to do is on the Pell grant program, for example. We want to increase the amount of the Pell grant so that it catches up with inflation and we want to — we want more young people to be eligible for the Pell grant program. And that’s particularly important because anybody who’s financed their educations understands that grants are a lot better than loans. And when I was going to college, about — and this was typical for I think college students — the average student who needed financial assistance, about 70 percent of it came in grants and about 30 percent of it came in loans. Today, it’s reversed: 30 percent come in grants; 70 percent come in loans. And so students are loaded up with $20,000, $30,000, $40,000 worth of debt — and this is just for their undergraduate education; that doesn’t even start counting their higher ed.

And if you come out of college with $50,000 worth of debt, it’s hard for you to then start making a decision about wanting to be a teacher, or wanting to go into social work, or wanting to be a scientist and research to find the next innovation. You may decide, well, the only thing I can do is to work on Wall Street or work in a big corporation that’s not doing cutting-edge research.

And we want people — all that’s fine, I mean, those are good career choices — but we want our young people to have more flexibility, not to mention we want them to be able to — if they choose to get married, to be able to buy a home and start a family without already having essentially a mortgage that they’re carrying with them out of college, before they even buy a house.

So we’re going to spend — this is another area where we devote a considerable amount of money in our budget. And I just want to remind you of this, because we’re having this budget debate in Washington right now. And again, everybody says — a lot of the critics out there are saying, how is it that you’re going to be spending all this money? We’ve got to worry about the deficit, et cetera.

I just want to remind you that the money that we are spending on education, on health care, and on energy — if you added up all that increased money that we’re spending, it still is not what’s driving our long-term deficits. What’s driving it is Medicare, Medicaid, a structural gap that we have because of the Bush tax cuts over the last several years that left us spending a lot more than we were saving.

And it’s going to take us a while to dig our way out of that problem. But the way to dig our way out of that problem is not to shortchange investments in our people. A lot of — I’ll bet there are a bunch of families here who are making some tough choices right now, and who are scrimping a little bit and saving.

Now, somebody could make the same argument to you that folks are making to us with respect to the budget, which is, you can’t afford to be sending your kids to college right now. That’s fiscally irresponsible. You’re taking out debt for your kids to get an education. It’s better for you to just put them to work right now at a fast-food place, and they’ll be bringing in a little bit of income. And maybe later they can go to college.

Well, most of us don’t make that decision, because we understand that making the investment now will lead to greater opportunity, greater economic advancement later. Well, the same thing is true in our economy. We can’t shortchange the investments that will allow us to grow in the future.

We’re going to have to impose discipline and eliminate programs that don’t work, and we’re doing that. We’re cutting this budget by $2 trillion. And we’re cutting the deficit in half by the end of my first term.

But what we can’t shortchange are those things that are going to allow us to grow long term. I don’t want us to constrict and reduce our ambitions, and set our sights lower for our kids and the next generation, because we weren’t willing to make those investments now. That’s not how America works. (Applause.)

All right. So now — the folks here have been very patient, so all of you who are watching this live-streaming online, we’re actually going to have some live stuff instead of some virtual stuff. We’re going to ask — get some questions or comments from the audience. And I’m going to go boy, girl, boy, girl — (laughter) — to avoid anybody being mad at me. We’ll start right there, yes. And we’ve got some microphones so everybody can hear you.

Q Mr. President, my name is Ellie (ph). I’m from Maryland, but I’m originally from Michigan. I have family members who work for GM and Ford. I know the top executives have made — of the auto companies — have made a lot of bad moves over the years, but I can’t imagine the suffering that we would see in the Midwest if these companies went under. So my question to you is, what specific steps do you see your administration taking about the health of the auto industry?

THE PRESIDENT: Okay. It is a very topical question because I’m going to be making some announcements over the next several days about the auto industry. I don’t want to make all the news here today, so I’m not going to be as specific as you’d like, but I guarantee in the next few days you will have a very extensive answer on what we need to do.

Let me give you my general philosophical approach, and that is that we need to preserve a U.S. auto industry. I think that’s important. I think it’s important not just symbolically; it’s important because the auto industry is a huge employer — not just the people who work for GM or Ford or Chrysler, but all the suppliers, all the ripple effects that are created as a consequence of our auto industry.

But my job is also to protect taxpayers. And you’re right — there’s been a lot of mismanagement of the auto industry over the last several years.

Now, right now we are in such a bad crisis that even Toyota is losing a whole lot of money. So typically you’re looking at $14 million — or 14 million new cars are sold every year. Is that right, Jared, in an average year for our population? It’s gone down to 9 [million]. Everybody has pulled back — partly because the credit-crunch people couldn’t get auto loans; people were worried about, am I going to keep my job, so they decided let’s put off buying the new car. The point is, is that you’ve seen this huge drop-off. So every automaker is getting killed right now.

I think it is appropriate for us to say, are there ways that we can provide help for the U.S. auto industry to get through this very difficult time — but the price is that you’ve got to finally restructure to deal with these long-standing problems. And that means that everybody is going to have to give a little bit — shareholders, workers, creditors, suppliers, dealers — everybody is going to have to recognize that the current model, economic model, of the U.S. auto industry is unsustainable. Even if sales go back to 14 million, which eventually they will, it’s still a model that doesn’t work. Just trying to build more and more SUVs and counting on gas prices being low and that’s your only profit margin, that’s just not a model that’s going to work.

So what we’re expecting is that the automakers are going to be working with us to restructure. We will provide them some help. I know that it is not popular to provide help to autoworkers — or to auto companies. But my job is to measure the costs of allowing these auto companies just to collapse versus us figuring out, can they come up with a viable plan? If they’re not willing to make the changes and the restructurings that are necessary, then I’m not willing to have taxpayer money chase after bad money.

And so a lot of it’s going to depend on their willingness to make some pretty drastic changes. And some of those are still going to be painful because I think you’re not going to see a situation where the U.S. automakers are gaining the kind of share that they had back in the 1950s. I mean, we just didn’t have any competition when — back then, Japan was in rubble, Europe was in rubble — we were the only players around. And that’s not going to be true. This is going to be a competitive global market. We have to make those adjustments.

All right. Okay. It’s a gentleman’s turn. All right, this gentleman right here. We got a microphone behind you.

Q Good afternoon, Mr. President. My name is Carlos Del Toro. I served in the Navy for 26 years, retired four years ago, and started a small business. So I first want to thank you for all the efforts that you and your administration has done on behalf of veterans and also on behalf of small businesses.

THE PRESIDENT: Well, we appreciate your service. Thank you.

Q Thank you, sir. My question is, one of the things that I have experienced over the last four years as a small business trying to do business in the federal procurement business, essentially, as a small engineering company, is the challenge of the bundling of contracts, which has made it increasingly difficult for service-disabled businesses — all small businesses across the nation — to compete basically within the federal procurement system. I know that you believe in fair and open competition on a broad basis. I would suggest to you, and my question to you is, will your administration look at this issue and try to unbundle these contracts that make it more competitive for small businesses to work in the federal marketplace?

THE PRESIDENT: It’s a great question. It’s an issue that I’m familiar with. Just by way of background for people who aren’t as familiar with federal purchasing, the federal government is such a big customer that sometimes for administrative convenience, what they do is they just say, here, Halliburton, here’s a contract for $20 billion to do all these various things, and then you sort of figure out how you’re going to divvy it up. Well, it may be that — I’m sorry, what was your name?

Q Carlos.

THE PRESIDENT: It may be that Carlos has a better product to sell — (laughter) — you know, for a segment of that contract, but he can’t bid on the entire thing, all right? And so what ends up happening is the taxpayer loses the benefit of a better product at a better price because everything is bundled into this huge contract with a giant general contractor who then divvies up the business.

So one of the things that we’re trying to figure out is, are there are ways that we can unbundle and unpackage some of these goods and services that the government purchases. It’ll save taxpayers’ money. It’ll promote more competition. Carlos is still going to have to bid. He’s still going to have to prove that his price is better and his product is better, but at least he’s got a chance.

Now, we’re not going to be able to do that on everything, because there are some things that, frankly, you need some economies of scale, right? But what we want to do is make sure that we’re looking for every opportunity to unbundle to give everybody a chance to compete so that we don’t just have one or two or three major contractors who are getting every contract, because at a certain point what ends up happening is those contractors get so much clout in Washington, they’re getting such huge contracts, then they start spending a million dollars on lobbyists to make sure that the contracts keep going the same way. You start seeing the system distorted in ways that aren’t healthy. And the more players there are, the more Carloses there are who are out there scratching and striving to get some business, ultimately the better deal we’ll get as taxpayers.

So, great. Okay. Here you go.

Q My name is Linda Bock and I’m a registered nurse just in Prince George’s County, Maryland — been there 34 years at a free senior health center. And I’m here with my fellow nurses from SEIU. First of all, thank you for listening to us, because as nurses we do listen to our patients all the time. We’re their advocate. And so we appreciate this opportunity for you to hear from us.

One of the things we want to make sure is that nurses are represented in the health care forum committees — reform committees because we want to be there on behalf of our fellow nurses and on behalf of the patients that we sometimes have to speak up for. So I really hope that we can be there so we can push the things like prevention and education that are so very important so that we don’t use our emergency rooms for their doctor visits and that we have more community-based health centers for those that are in need. And I just — I really appreciate this opportunity to be heard.

THE PRESIDENT: Well, I appreciate that. I guarantee you nurses were part of the health care summit, and they will be at the table in all these discussions. I’m biased toward nurses, I just like nurses — (laughter). When Michelle and I went in and Malia was being born, the OB/GYNE was a close friend of ours and so was much more attentive than the usual OB/GYNE might be. But the fact is, we only saw her for like 15 minutes. The rest of the time, it was nurses who were doing everything. When Sasha, our little precious pea — (laughter) — she got meningitis when she was three months old — very dangerous. The doctors did a terrific job, but, frankly, it was the nurses that were there with us when she had to get a spinal tap, and all sorts of things that were just bringing me to tears.

And we’ve got a problem in this country, which is we have a shortage of nurses — makes no sense, given this unemployment rate. But the reason is, is because the pay of nurses, the hours of nurses, the quality of life of nurses, the fact that nurse professors are even worse paid than the nurses themselves, so that you get these huge bottlenecks in terms of training as many nurses as we want.

All these issues are part of the inefficiency of the health care system that has to be fixed. And the more we’re emphasizing primary care, preventive care, wellness — all of which will save us money in the long term — the more that we can deploy nurses as the troops on the front lines in ultimately driving down some of these health care costs.

So I think it’s very important that nurses are a part of this process.

Here, we’ve got a mic. I’m hanging on to my mic. (Laughter.)

Q Yes, sir.

THE PRESIDENT: I might not get it back. (Laughter.)

Q Sir, you’re the President, you always get it back. (Laughter.) Sir, I’m Tom Sawner. I’m a service-disabled veteran, small-business owner in Arlington, Virginia. My company, Educational Options, works with public schools. We serve more than 200,000 at-risk kids within public schools, providing online content, partnering with teachers, and I was honored to serve on your education platform committee.


Q Today my question is, as a small-business owner, my company is still profitable. We’re still growing, we’re still hiring. The money that I make as a profit, I’m plowing right back in, and even the money that I pay to the bank for my business loans. Yet under current tax laws, all of that counts as income to me before I ever see a penny of it.

Sir, could you please help small businesses by allowing, some way, somehow, money we pay to the bank in principle to not count against our income, and put us in the “richest” before we ever seem a dime, and allow us to invest in this huge engine to drive economic recovery?

And a final question: As a veteran, would you please see if we can enforce the existing laws for veteran and other small-business set-asides? Thank you, sir.

THE PRESIDENT: Okay, good. Well, thank you for the question. Obviously, I’m not completely familiar with your circumstances or your tax status. But we want to do everything we can to relieve the tax burden on startups and small businesses, and as they grow, then their tax burden is going to grow accordingly.

So one of the things that we have already proposed and is reflected in our budget is that we are eliminating capital gains taxes for small businesses. That’s something that we’ve already proposed and put in place.

Now, what’ll happen is, you won’t see that reflected in an immediate benefit because it will kick in five years from now. The law starts now, but you have to have those capital gains accumulate over the course of five years before it counts, because we don’t want people gaming the system. But that’s an example of the kinds of tools that we are already putting in place in the tax code to provide you relief, so that as you’re reinvesting, that you are not penalized for that reinvestment.

And we will do everything we can to enforce the existing rules with regard to small businesses for veterans.

Okay, this young lady back here.

Q Hi, Mr. President. Thank you so very much for having me, a public school teacher from Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, here to be with you.

THE PRESIDENT: What’s your name?

Q Bonnee Breese.

THE PRESIDENT: Good to see you, Bonnee.

Q Thank you. I’m from Overbrook High School. I have to say that, because I know all the children are watching. (Laughter.)

THE PRESIDENT: All right. Hello, Overbrook. (Laughter and applause.) There you go.

Q Thank you. Two questions in reference of education, since this is a major part of your budget plan and platform. Definitions of charter schools and definitions of effective teachers — how do you plan to define those two categories? And are you willing to have teachers on the platform, in the committees, as a part of developing those plans?

THE PRESIDENT: Absolutely. Well, as I said, the teachers are the most important person in the education system. So if we don’t have teacher buy-in, if they’re not enthusiastic about the reforms that we’re initiating, then, ultimately, they’re not going to work. So we’ve got to have teacher participation in developing these approaches.

The definition of charter schools is pretty straightforward. And that is that in most states you now have a mechanism where you set up a public school — so this is not private schools, these are public schools receiving public dollars — but they have a charter that allows them to experiment and try new things. And typically, they’re partnering up with some sort of non-for-profit institution.

So, in Chicago, you’ve got charter schools that are affiliated with a museum, or they’re affiliated with an arts program, and they may have a particular focus. It may be a science charter school, or it may be a language academy. They are still going to have to meet all the various requirements of a state-mandated curriculum; they’re still subject to the same rules and regulations and accountability. But they’ve got some flexibility in terms of how they design it. Oftentimes they are getting parents to participate in new ways in the school. So they become laboratories of new and creative learning.

Now, there are some charter schools that are doing a great job, and you are seeing huge increases in student performance. And by the way — one last point I want to make about these charters — they’re non-selective, so it’s not a situation where they’re just cherry-picking the kids who are already getting the highest grades; they’ve got to admit anybody. And typically there are long waiting lines, so they use some sort of lottery to admit them.

Some of them are doing great work, huge progress and great innovation; and there’s some charters that haven’t worked out so well. And just like bad — or regular schools, they need to be shut down if they’re not doing a good job. But what charters do is they give an opportunity for experimentation and then duplication of success. And we want to encourage that. So that’s the definition of charters.

In terms of teachers, how we measure performance — as I said before, I have been a critic of measuring performance just by the administering of a single high-stakes standardized test during the year, and then the teacher is judged. And that was, I think, the biggest problem with No Child Left Behind. It basically said that you just go in — (applause) — here’s the standardized test, we’ll see how the kids are doing; and because it doesn’t even measure progress, you could have a very good teacher or a very good school in a poor area where test scores have typically been low, and they are still punished even though they’re doing heroic work in a difficult situation.

The other problem is that you started seeing curriculums and teachers teaching to the test — not because they want to, but because there’s such a huge stake in doing well on these tests that suddenly the science curriculum, instead of it being designed around sparking people’s creativity and their interest in science, it ends up just being, here’s the test, here’s what you have to learn — which the average kid is already squirming enough in their seat; now they’re thinking, well, this is completely dull, this is completely uninteresting. And they get turned off from science or math or all these wonderful subjects that potentially they could be passionate about.

So what we want to do is not completely eliminate standardized tests — there’s a role for standardized tests. All of us have taken them and they serve a function. We just don’t want it to be the only thing. So we want to work with teachers to figure out how do we get peer review, how do we have evaluation — I was just talking to Bill Gates yesterday and he was talking about the use of technology where you can use videos to look at really successful teachers and how they interact with their students, how they’re monitoring students, et cetera, and then you bring in the teachers at the end of the day and, just like a coach might be talking to his players about how you see how on that play you should have been here and you could have done that — same thing with teachers.

But they don’t get that feedback. Usually, especially beginning teachers are completely isolated. They’re in this classroom — they’re sort of just thrown in to sink or swim. Instead, let’s use a variety of mechanisms to assess and constantly improve teacher performance.

Now, one thing I have to say — I know you’ll admit this, although maybe you can’t on TV, but in private I’ll bet you’d admit that during the — how long have you been teaching?

Q Fifteen years.

THE PRESIDENT: Fifteen years. Okay, so you’ve been teaching for 15 years. I’ll bet you’ll admit that during those 15 years there have been a couple of teachers that you’ve met — you don’t have to say their names — (laugher) — who you would not put your child in their classroom. (Laughter.) See? Right? You’re not saying anything. (Laughter.) You’re taking the Fifth. (Laughter.)

My point is that if we’ve done everything we can to improve teacher pay and teacher performance and training and development, some people just aren’t meant to be teachers, just like some people aren’t meant to be carpenters, some people aren’t meant to be nurses. At some point they’ve got to find a new career.

And it can’t be impossible to move out bad teachers, because that brings — that makes everybody depressed in a school, if there are some folks — and it makes it harder for the teachers who are inheriting these kids the next year for doing their job.

So there’s got to be some accountability measures built in to this process. But I’m optimistic that we can make real progress on this front. But it’s going to take some time. All right?

DR. BERNSTEIN: Mr. President, we have —

THE PRESIDENT: How many times —

DR. BERNSTEIN: One more question, please.

THE PRESIDENT: Oh, one more question. Now, yelling — just saying it right here is not going to get you the question. (Laughter.) You know what I’m going to do, is — I hope I don’t seem biased here; I’m going to go with a young person here. Last question — at least younger than me. (Laughter.)

Q Thank you, Mr. President. My name is Sergio Salmeron. I want to find out about health care. In a society, a lot of times we have to step back and ask ourselves if what we’re doing in principle, not in practice, is right. And so when we think about health care, I want to know from you if the things like preexisting conditions and preventive medicine, if they are a symptom of what’s going on in our health care system, then what is the problem and how do you address it?

THE PRESIDENT: Well, I’ll talk to you about preexisting conditions, because this is something that I talked about during the campaign; it’s something that touched on me personally.

My mother contracted ovarian cancer when she was 53, and she died six months later. It’s one of those cancers that typically is diagnosed very — at late stages; it’s hard to catch early.

She was at the time working as an independent contractor. She was working for an international assistance organization. And so she had insurance, but when she was diagnosed and the medical bills started mounting up, some of — this insurance company started saying that this is a preexisting condition, so maybe we don’t have to reimburse you. And we had to spend a bunch of time fighting with these insurance companies about this issue.

Now, eventually we were lucky we got these costs approved, because the point was she didn’t know, nobody had diagnosed it, and if you start having a — the standard of preexisting condition is you might have had that illness some time at some point before you — or you were genetically predisposed to it, potentially none of us would ever get any insurance.

So — but I still remember watching her — you know, she’s sick, she’s going through chemotherapy, and she’s on the phone arguing with insurance companies. And she’s lucky she had insurance. There are tons of people out there who, once they’ve had one heart attack, once they’ve been diagnosed with diabetes, once they’ve got some form of chronic illness, from that point forward it is almost impossible for them to get health insurance. And if their employer, especially if it’s a small employer, wants to give them health insurance, the costs are so prohibitive that they can’t do it even if the employer wants to help.

I mean, if Carlos has got a small business, if — I don’t know how many employees he has, but if he has 10 employees, 22 employees, and if one of them got a serious illness like leukemia, it would send his insurance rates skyrocketing to a point where he just couldn’t operate.

So this is why any reform of the health care system I think has to address this issue, and to say we are going to allow anybody to get health insurance. And if you’ve got a preexisting condition you’re not going to be excluded but you’re going to be able to obtain health insurance. And if you can’t obtain it through a private plan then there is going to a public plan that is available in some way to give you insurance, or insurers are obligated to provide you with insurance in some way.

Now that’s a principle. What are the details of how we’re going to do that? There are a lot of different approaches.

We have seen some progress with the insurance companies where they have said, we are willing to take everybody in, but only if everybody is required to be in. That’s the position that they’re taking right now. So the idea is you combine a rule that eliminates preexisting condition exclusions with mandatory health insurance, just like auto insurance is mandatory. That’s a proposal they’ve put forward.

Now, that’s progress in the sense that they’ve acknowledged that this preexisting condition situation is a real problem. Whether that ends up being the best mechanism — during the campaign, I was skeptical of mandates only because my attitude was the reason people don’t have health insurance is not because they don’t want it, it’s because they can’t afford it. And if we drive down cost, then people will have it.

But that’s part of the debate that’s going to be taking place over the next several months as we try to develop a health care plan for the future.

Okay? Listen, I know that there were other people who had questions, both here in the live audience, as well as in our virtual audience. But we’re out of time. I just want to say thank you for participating. Thanks for paying attention. And we need you guys to keep paying attention in the months and years to come. (Applause.)

Thank you, everybody. (Applause.)

12:50 P.M. EDT

You are Here: Home > The Briefing Room
The Blog Your Weekly Address Slideshows Speeches Official Statements Press Briefings Press Releases Presidential Actions Nominations & Appointments THE AGENDA
Civil Rights Defense Disabilities Economy Education Energy & Environment Ethics Family Fiscal Foreign Policy Health Care Homeland Security Immigration Iraq Poverty Rural Seniors & Social Security Service Taxes Technology Urban Policy Veterans Women Additional Issues THE ADMINISTRATION
President Barack Obama Vice President Joe Biden First Lady Michelle Obama Dr. Jill Biden The Cabinet White House Staff Executive Office of the President ABOUT THE WHITE HOUSE
History Presidents First Ladies Vice President’s Residence & Office Eisenhower Executive Office Building The Oval Office Camp David Air Force One White House Fellows White House Internships White House 101 Tours & Events OUR GOVERNMENT
The Executive Branch The Legislative Branch The Judicial Branch The Constitution Federal Agencies & Commissions Elections & Voting State & Local Government Resources CONTACT

The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Ave NW
Washington, DC 20500


March 23, 2009


Jennifer Donahue Political Director, New Hampshire Institute Of Politics
Posted March 20, 2009 | 11:15 AM (EST)

Obama on Leno: This is Why This President Got Elected

Move over Ronald Reagan.

President Barack Obama is the best communicator in the history of the American presidency.
He is a storyteller and speaks from his heart. Going on Leno was the best communications strategy possible during a week of bloodletting over AIG bonuses and the chord it has struck.

AIG is the tipping point that has boiled the blood of the American public. The economic breakdown and distrust Americans feel for their government was the energy that provided Obama the margin of victory that he needed to become president. But his ability to show his human side to the American people is what allows him to lead. His ability to make an emotional connection with the public through speaking have allowed him to win the nomination, the presidency, and move large spending bills through Congress despite their size and Republican opposition.

In going on Leno, Obama and his aides are revealing that they know they have the best communicator to come along in the oval office. He has and will take his message directly to viewers, going over the heads of all of us political analysts and media pundits, so the audience can hear HIM explain what is going on.

Only Obama can warm parents up like he can, talking about Sasha’s Starburst moment on Marine One. Only Obama could explain the subprime mortgage crisis in a minute. Only Obama could defend Geithner and put that story to bed on a Thursday night.

He is on the record with his position, and took his case straight to the public. In choosing this media strategy, Obama bypassed the news media establishment. Ironically, the Leno show provided Obama a venue that was as close to C-SPAN style as you can get: live to tape, unedited, and gavel to gavel.

“The climate’s nicer. So’s the conversation, sometimes,” Obama told a town hall meeting earlier in the day in California. He could just as well have been talking about Leno.


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 2,096 other followers

%d bloggers like this: