Last week, Arizona State came under fire for not wanting to grant President Obama, who will be the commencement speaker, an honorary doctorate. Why? According to university officials, the honorary doctorate is meant to honor a lifetime of achievement, and the president’s full body of work had yet to be realized.

Right.

As a matter of tradition, high-profile commencement speakers tend to receive honorary degrees when they speak at the university. (For god’s sake, ICE-T has an honorary doctorate!) As far as lifetime achievement, Obama has published 2 best-selling books, was the first black editor of the harvard law review, the 3rd Black man elected to the senate since reconstruction, and, last I checked,PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA!!!!

I have a ton of critiques of Obama, but it’s absurd to suggest that he doesn’t satisfied the conditions for lifetime achievement.

Furthermore, the lifetime achievement argument doesn’t hold water when you look at the university’s previous awardees: Sandra Day O’Connor got it after being on the Supreme Court for only 3 years, Barry Goldwater got it 3 years BEFORE being nominated for VICE-president. “They’re both from Arizona,” you say? Well, they also gave one to the vice-minister of education from the People’s Republic of China. It’s safe to say that he wasn’t born in Scottsdale…

Of course, every university has the right to establish its own criteria for awards. I’m not saying that everybody has to give Obama a degree. However, if you don’t think he deserves it, then don’t invite him to speak!

WAS ASU RIGHT OR WRONG? TAKE THE POLL AT THE BOTTOM OF THE PAGE!

Texas Legislator Wants Asians To Americanize Names

Texas state Rep. Betty Brown suggested that Asian-American voters should change their names to something “easier for Americans to deal with.” What do you think?

Harvey Martin,
Systems Analyst
“Wouldn’t it just be easier to teach Texans how to read?”

Maria Delfina Lobry,
Nutritionist
“Maybe they should adopt names that sound like the love interest of a superhero, as Betty Brown clearly did.”

Tom Ong,
Pediatrician
“Yeah, that’s why I changed my name from Tim to Tom.”

Today’s photo of the day shows armed Somalians, three of whom were killed by Navy SEALS as part of a hostage rescue. Despite some of the GOP spin, this is certainly a victory for Obama. Still, this strategy does not address the fundamental issue of environment abuse and national sovereignty that prompt many of the Somalian action. To be clear, I’m not excusing lawless kidnapping, but many Somalians are responding to the West’s shameless and wreckless exploitation of their most valuable resource: seafood. 

This video and song is one of my favs. I first heard this, and the rest of the Love Jones soundtrack, in my dorm room at Morehouse and have loved it ever since.

Matt Tabibi wrote an interesting piece on Larry Summers, President Obama’s chief economic adviser. One of the main critiques is that he accepted major payoffs speaking fees from corporations that would soon demand billions of taxpayer dollars. He writes:

So I guess that $45,000 speaking fee from Merrill Lynch wasn’t technically a bribe because Summers wasn’t named to Obama’s economic transition team until Nov. 24 — a full 12 days later. I’m sure Larry Summers had absolutely no inkling whatsoever that he was going to be one of the key advisers to the new administration on Nov. 12.

It likewise makes perfect sense that Merrill Lynch, a company just months removed from having to be rescued from bankruptcy by an 11th-hour, pseudo-state-subsidized buyout by Bank of America, would decide to spend $45,000 on a speaking appearance by Summers because, well, they really valued his economic expertise and his proven ability to rally the troops with his stirring rhetoric.

It certainly had nothing to do with the fact that a) it was eight days after a Democrat was elected to the presidency; b) Summers had a long history of being one of the key policymakers in Democratic Party politics; and c) Merrill was absolutely not going to survive more than a few more months unless taxpayers forked over another 20 billion or so to cover the giant hole in Merrill’s balance sheet that was, at that time, still being hidden from Bank of America and its shareholders.

And how about that $135,000 appearance for Goldman Sachs in April, when Summers was already involved with Democratic Party politics again? That wasn’t a surreptitious campaign contribution at all!

For the rest of the story, click here.