Episode 57: Différences entre Consulats et Ambassades
Lorsque vous êtes dans un pays étranger, selon la situation dans laquelle vous vous trouvez, l’ambassade ou le consulat de votre pays d’origine qui existe dans le pays où vous vous trouvez, peut vous aider à résoudre votre problème ou à vous faire sortir de ce pays étranger, si nécessaire.
Lorsque vous êtes dans un pays étranger, selon la situation dans laquelle vous vous trouvez, l’ambassade ou le consulat de votre pays d’origine qui existe dans le pays où vous vous trouvez, peut vous aider à résoudre votre problème ou à vous faire sortir de ce pays étranger, si nécessaire.
Cette série traite des différences entre un consulat et une ambassade. Plus important encore, elle explique les services qu’une ambassade peut fournir à ses citoyens par rapport à un consulat. Connaître la différence entre une ambassade et un consulat peut être inestimable lorsque vous voyagez à l’étranger. Sans plus tarder, commençons.
Lorsque vous êtes poursuivi par une foule de personnes en colère dans un pays étranger ; trouver l’ambassade ou le consulat de votre pays le plus proche dans ce pays étranger. Une fois que vous l’atteignez ou y êtes à l’intérieur, vous êtes dans votre pays d’origine. Si la foule tente de s’introduire de force pour vous attraper, elle viole le territoire de votre pays d’origine et les articles de la convention de Vienne sur les relations diplomatiques. De plus, lorsque vous êtes politiquement persécuté dans votre pays d’origine, si vous pouvez pénétrer l’enceinte d’une ambassade ou d’un consulat d’un pays étranger hébergé par votre pays d’origine, votre gouvernement ne peut plus vous toucher et vous pouvez demander l’asile politique pour cet pays étranger pendant que vous êtes dans cette ambassade.
Les ambassades et les consulats prouvent que deux pays entretiennent des relations diplomatiques ou reconnaissent la souveraineté de l’un l’autre. Les pays qui n’ont pas de relations diplomatiques entre eux n’hébergeront pas les ambassades et consulats des uns et des autres. Par exemple, si la Russie et les USA n’ont pas de relations diplomatiques, vous ne verrez pas d’ambassades ou de consulats américains en Russie et vice-versa. Une ambassade et ses consulats sont des territoires légaux d’un pays dans un pays étranger. Cela signifie que le pays d’accueil n’a pas de juridiction sur l’ambassade et les consulats d’un autre pays. Permettez-moi de le décomposer davantage pour vous; une ambassade américaine en Inde est le prolongement des États-Unis en Inde, et le gouvernement indien doit obtenir l’autorisation légale du gouvernement des États-Unis avant d’entrer dans les locaux de l’ambassade américaine en Inde. selon la Convention de Vienne sur les relations diplomatiques, une seule ambassade de votre pays dans un pays étranger. Cependant, vous pouvez trouver plusieurs consulats de votre pays d’origine dans un pays étranger.
Parlons maintenant des différences entre les consulats et les ambassades et de la manière dont ils aident leurs citoyens dans les pays étrangers. Supposons que vous ayez l’intention de vous rendre au Nigeria, vous devez vous renseigner si votre passeport vous permet d’y aller sans visa. Si non, vous devez localiser un consulat nigérian dans votre pays d’origine pour demander et obtenir un visa nigérian. De plus, supposons que vous perdiez votre passeport au Nigeria ou que vous y donniez naissance à un enfant, le consulat de votre pays d’origine peut vous aider à demander un passeport de remplacement ou un certificat de naissance pour votre enfant. Les pays n’ont pas leurs propres consulats sur leur territoire, ce qui signifie que les États-Unis, par exemple, n’ont pas de consulat américain aux États-Unis; idem pour Haïti, le Canada ou la République Dominicaine.
A l’inverse, les Haïtiens vivant aux États-Unis doivent se rendre dans un consulat haïtien aux États-Unis pour demander ou renouveler leur passeport. Pratiquement, un consulat d’un pays étranger n’assiste ses citoyens qui vivent dans ce pays d’accueil que si les citoyens du pays étranger n’ont pas besoin de visa pour se rendre dans ce pays en question. Par exemple, puisque les Américains n’ont pas besoin de visa pour rentrer en Haïti, les consulats haïtiens aux USA ne leur offrent aucun service consulaire. Cependant, le consulat américain en Haïti fournit des services consulaires aux Haïtiens et aux Américains.
Parlons maintenant des ambassades.
Une ambassade est un bureau diplomatique représentant un gouvernement étranger auprès du gouvernement du pays hôte. Elle renforce les relations internationales, résout les problèmes et maintient une communication solide entre pays. Les ambassades protègent les droits de leurs nations dans le pays d’accueil et promeuvent leurs politiques culturelles et étrangères. Par exemple, en cas de litige entre les pays liés au commerce, l’ambassade s’en occupe et négocie avec le pays d’accueil. À l’intérieur d’une ambassade, vous pouvez trouver un consulat. Dans ce cas, il y a un ambassadeur et un consul avec deux missions différentes dans le même bâtiment. Dans certains cas, un pays peut avoir une ambassade mais pas de consulat dans un pays hôte. Dans un tel cas, l’ambassade assume tous les services consulaires pertinents en plus de sa mission diplomatique assignée. Les pays n’ont pas leur propre ambassade sur leur territoire, ce qui signifie qu’Haïti, par exemple, n’a pas d’ambassade d’Haïti en Haïti.
Étant donné que les ambassades sont des missions diplomatiques d’un pays dans d’autres pays étrangers, tous les ambassadeurs sont des diplomates. Cependant, tous les diplomates ne sont pas des ambassadeurs, car un diplomate est une personne dont le gouvernement accrédite la conduite de la diplomatie dans un autre État souverain.
En résumé, lorsque vous voyagez dans un pays étranger, il est important de comprendre les rôles d’une ambassade et d’un consulat. Une ambassade est la principale représentation diplomatique d’un pays étranger et elle fournit des services de soutien politique ou économique à ses citoyens. En revanche, un consulat est un poste diplomatique plus petit qui fournit des services de visa et de passeport et d’autres services juridiques liés au pays d’origine. En cas d’urgence, l’ambassade ou le consulat peut offrir refuge et protéger ses citoyens dans un pays étranger, car ils sont considérés comme faisant partie du territoire du pays d’origine et sont protégés par la Convention de Vienne.
Cette série traite des différences entre un consulat et une ambassade. Plus important encore, elle explique les services qu’une ambassade peut fournir à ses citoyens par rapport à un consulat. Connaître la différence entre une ambassade et un consulat peut être inestimable lorsque vous voyagez à l’étranger. Sans plus tarder, commençons.
Lorsque vous êtes poursuivi par une foule de personnes en colère dans un pays étranger ; trouver l’ambassade ou le consulat de votre pays le plus proche dans ce pays étranger. Une fois que vous l’atteignez ou y êtes à l’intérieur, vous êtes dans votre pays d’origine. Si la foule tente de s’introduire de force pour vous attraper, elle viole le territoire de votre pays d’origine et les articles de la convention de Vienne sur les relations diplomatiques. De plus, lorsque vous êtes politiquement persécuté dans votre pays d’origine, si vous pouvez pénétrer l’enceinte d’une ambassade ou d’un consulat d’un pays étranger hébergé par votre pays d’origine, votre gouvernement ne peut plus vous toucher et vous pouvez demander l’asile politique pour cet pays étranger pendant que vous êtes dans cette ambassade.
Les ambassades et les consulats prouvent que deux pays entretiennent des relations diplomatiques ou reconnaissent la souveraineté de l’un l’autre. Les pays qui n’ont pas de relations diplomatiques entre eux n’hébergeront pas les ambassades et consulats des uns et des autres. Par exemple, si la Russie et les USA n’ont pas de relations diplomatiques, vous ne verrez pas d’ambassades ou de consulats américains en Russie et vice-versa. Une ambassade et ses consulats sont des territoires légaux d’un pays dans un pays étranger. Cela signifie que le pays d’accueil n’a pas de juridiction sur l’ambassade et les consulats d’un autre pays. Permettez-moi de le décomposer davantage pour vous; une ambassade américaine en Inde est le prolongement des États-Unis en Inde, et le gouvernement indien doit obtenir l’autorisation légale du gouvernement des États-Unis avant d’entrer dans les locaux de l’ambassade américaine en Inde. selon la Convention de Vienne sur les relations diplomatiques, une seule ambassade de votre pays dans un pays étranger. Cependant, vous pouvez trouver plusieurs consulats de votre pays d’origine dans un pays étranger.
Parlons maintenant des différences entre les consulats et les ambassades et de la manière dont ils aident leurs citoyens dans les pays étrangers. Supposons que vous ayez l’intention de vous rendre au Nigeria, vous devez vous renseigner si votre passeport vous permet d’y aller sans visa. Si non, vous devez localiser un consulat nigérian dans votre pays d’origine pour demander et obtenir un visa nigérian. De plus, supposons que vous perdiez votre passeport au Nigeria ou que vous y donniez naissance à un enfant, le consulat de votre pays d’origine peut vous aider à demander un passeport de remplacement ou un certificat de naissance pour votre enfant. Les pays n’ont pas leurs propres consulats sur leur territoire, ce qui signifie que les États-Unis, par exemple, n’ont pas de consulat américain aux États-Unis; idem pour Haïti, le Canada ou la République Dominicaine.
A l’inverse, les Haïtiens vivant aux États-Unis doivent se rendre dans un consulat haïtien aux États-Unis pour demander ou renouveler leur passeport. Pratiquement, un consulat d’un pays étranger n’assiste ses citoyens qui vivent dans ce pays d’accueil que si les citoyens du pays étranger n’ont pas besoin de visa pour se rendre dans ce pays en question. Par exemple, puisque les Américains n’ont pas besoin de visa pour rentrer en Haïti, les consulats haïtiens aux USA ne leur offrent aucun service consulaire. Cependant, le consulat américain en Haïti fournit des services consulaires aux Haïtiens et aux Américains.
Parlons maintenant des ambassades.
Une ambassade est un bureau diplomatique représentant un gouvernement étranger auprès du gouvernement du pays hôte. Elle renforce les relations internationales, résout les problèmes et maintient une communication solide entre pays. Les ambassades protègent les droits de leurs nations dans le pays d’accueil et promeuvent leurs politiques culturelles et étrangères. Par exemple, en cas de litige entre les pays liés au commerce, l’ambassade s’en occupe et négocie avec le pays d’accueil. À l’intérieur d’une ambassade, vous pouvez trouver un consulat. Dans ce cas, il y a un ambassadeur et un consul avec deux missions différentes dans le même bâtiment. Dans certains cas, un pays peut avoir une ambassade mais pas de consulat dans un pays hôte. Dans un tel cas, l’ambassade assume tous les services consulaires pertinents en plus de sa mission diplomatique assignée. Les pays n’ont pas leur propre ambassade sur leur territoire, ce qui signifie qu’Haïti, par exemple, n’a pas d’ambassade d’Haïti en Haïti.
Étant donné que les ambassades sont des missions diplomatiques d’un pays dans d’autres pays étrangers, tous les ambassadeurs sont des diplomates. Cependant, tous les diplomates ne sont pas des ambassadeurs, car un diplomate est une personne dont le gouvernement accrédite la conduite de la diplomatie dans un autre État souverain.
En résumé, lorsque vous voyagez dans un pays étranger, il est important de comprendre les rôles d’une ambassade et d’un consulat. Une ambassade est la principale représentation diplomatique d’un pays étranger et elle fournit des services de soutien politique ou économique à ses citoyens. En revanche, un consulat est un poste diplomatique plus petit qui fournit des services de visa et de passeport et d’autres services juridiques liés au pays d’origine. En cas d’urgence, l’ambassade ou le consulat peut offrir refuge et protéger ses citoyens dans un pays étranger, car ils sont considérés comme faisant partie du territoire du pays d’origine et sont protégés par la Convention de Vienne.
Episode 56: Consulate vs. embassy
When you are in a foreign country, depending on the situation you find yourself in, the embassy or the consulate of your home country that exists in the country you are in, can assist you in resolving your issue or getting you out of that foreign country if necessary.
When you are in a foreign country, depending on the situation you find yourself in, the embassy or the consulate of your home country that exists in the country you are in, can assist you in resolving your issue or getting you out of that foreign country if necessary.
This series discusses the differences between a consulate and an embassy. Most importantly, it explains the services an embassy can provide its citizens versus a consulate. Knowing the difference between an embassy and a consulate can be invaluable when traveling abroad. Without further ado, let’s begin.
When you are being chased after by a mob of angry people in a foreign country; find the nearest embassy or consulate of your country in that foreign country. Once you reach or are inside, you are in your home country. If the mob attempts to force their way in to get you, they are violating your home country territory and articles of the Vienna convention on diplomatic relations. Moreover, when you are politically persecuted in your home country, if you can penetrate the inside of any embassy or consulate of a foreign country hosted by your home country, your government can no longer touch you and you can apply for political asylum for that foreign country while you are in that embassy.
Embassies and consulates prove that two countries have diplomatic relations or recognize each other’s sovereignty. Countries that do not have diplomatic ties between them will not host each other’s embassy and consulates. For example, if Russia and the USA do not have diplomatic relations, you will not see American embassies or consulates in Russia and vice versa. An embassy and its consulates are legal territories of a country in a foreign country. This means that the host country does not have jurisdiction over the embassy and the consulates of another country. Let me break it down further for you; an American embassy in India is the extension of the United States in India, and the Indian government must get legal permission from the United States government before entering the premises of the American embassy in India. per the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, just one embassy of your country in a foreign country. However, you may find several consulates of your homeland in a foreign country.
Now that I have the bottom line up front out of the way, let’s talk about the differences between consulates and embassies and how they help their citizens in foreign countries. Suppose you intend to travel to Nigeria, you should find out whether your passport allows you to travel there without a visa. If not, you must locate a Nigerian consulate in your home country to apply for and obtain a Nigerian visa. Moreover, suppose you lose your passport while in Nigeria or give birth to a child there, the consulate of your home country can assist you in applying for a replacement passport or a birth certificate for your child. Countries do not have their own consulates on their territory, meaning the United States, by example, does not have an American consulate in the United States.
Conversely, Haitians living in the United States must go to a Haitian consulate in the United States to apply for or renew their passport. Practically, a consulate of a foreign country only assists its citizens who live in that host country if the citizens of the foreign country do not require a visa to visit the host country. For example, since Americans do not need a visa to enter Haiti, the Haitian consulates in the USA do not offer consular services. However, the American consulate in Haiti provides consular services to both Haitian and American.
Now, let’s talk about embassies.
An embassy is a diplomatic office representing a foreign government before the host country’s government. It strengthens international relationships, solves issues, and maintains strong communication between the countries. Embassies protect their nations’ rights in the host country and promote their national cultural and foreign policies. For example, in the event of an issue between the countries related to trade, the embassy handles it and negotiates with the host country. Inside an embassy, you can find a consulate. In that case, there is an Ambassador and a Consul with two different missions in that same building. In some cases, a country may have an embassy but no consulate in a host country. In such an instance, the embassy assumes all the relevant consular services in addition to its assigned diplomatic mission. Countries are not required to have their own embassy on their homeland, meaning that Haiti, by example, does not have an Haitian embassy in Haiti.
Since embassies are countries’ diplomatic missions in other foreign countries, all ambassadors are diplomats. However, not all diplomats are ambassadors because a diplomat is someone whose government accredits to conduct diplomacy in another sovereign nation.
In summary, when traveling in a foreign country, it is important to understand the roles of an embassy and a consulate. An embassy is the main diplomatic representation of a foreign country, and it provides political or economic support services to its citizens. In contrast, a consulate is a smaller diplomatic post that provides visa and passport services and other legal services related to the home country. In emergencies, an embassy or consulate can provide refuge and protect its citizens in a foreign country, as they are considered part of the home country’s territory and are protected by the Vienna Convention.
This series discusses the differences between a consulate and an embassy. Most importantly, it explains the services an embassy can provide its citizens versus a consulate. Knowing the difference between an embassy and a consulate can be invaluable when traveling abroad. Without further ado, let’s begin.
When you are being chased after by a mob of angry people in a foreign country; find the nearest embassy or consulate of your country in that foreign country. Once you reach or are inside, you are in your home country. If the mob attempts to force their way in to get you, they are violating your home country territory and articles of the Vienna convention on diplomatic relations. Moreover, when you are politically persecuted in your home country, if you can penetrate the inside of any embassy or consulate of a foreign country hosted by your home country, your government can no longer touch you and you can apply for political asylum for that foreign country while you are in that embassy.
Embassies and consulates prove that two countries have diplomatic relations or recognize each other’s sovereignty. Countries that do not have diplomatic ties between them will not host each other’s embassy and consulates. For example, if Russia and the USA do not have diplomatic relations, you will not see American embassies or consulates in Russia and vice versa. An embassy and its consulates are legal territories of a country in a foreign country. This means that the host country does not have jurisdiction over the embassy and the consulates of another country. Let me break it down further for you; an American embassy in India is the extension of the United States in India, and the Indian government must get legal permission from the United States government before entering the premises of the American embassy in India. per the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, just one embassy of your country in a foreign country. However, you may find several consulates of your homeland in a foreign country.
Now that I have the bottom line up front out of the way, let’s talk about the differences between consulates and embassies and how they help their citizens in foreign countries. Suppose you intend to travel to Nigeria, you should find out whether your passport allows you to travel there without a visa. If not, you must locate a Nigerian consulate in your home country to apply for and obtain a Nigerian visa. Moreover, suppose you lose your passport while in Nigeria or give birth to a child there, the consulate of your home country can assist you in applying for a replacement passport or a birth certificate for your child. Countries do not have their own consulates on their territory, meaning the United States, by example, does not have an American consulate in the United States.
Conversely, Haitians living in the United States must go to a Haitian consulate in the United States to apply for or renew their passport. Practically, a consulate of a foreign country only assists its citizens who live in that host country if the citizens of the foreign country do not require a visa to visit the host country. For example, since Americans do not need a visa to enter Haiti, the Haitian consulates in the USA do not offer consular services. However, the American consulate in Haiti provides consular services to both Haitian and American.
Now, let’s talk about embassies.
An embassy is a diplomatic office representing a foreign government before the host country’s government. It strengthens international relationships, solves issues, and maintains strong communication between the countries. Embassies protect their nations’ rights in the host country and promote their national cultural and foreign policies. For example, in the event of an issue between the countries related to trade, the embassy handles it and negotiates with the host country. Inside an embassy, you can find a consulate. In that case, there is an Ambassador and a Consul with two different missions in that same building. In some cases, a country may have an embassy but no consulate in a host country. In such an instance, the embassy assumes all the relevant consular services in addition to its assigned diplomatic mission. Countries are not required to have their own embassy on their homeland, meaning that Haiti, by example, does not have an Haitian embassy in Haiti.
Since embassies are countries’ diplomatic missions in other foreign countries, all ambassadors are diplomats. However, not all diplomats are ambassadors because a diplomat is someone whose government accredits to conduct diplomacy in another sovereign nation.
In summary, when traveling in a foreign country, it is important to understand the roles of an embassy and a consulate. An embassy is the main diplomatic representation of a foreign country, and it provides political or economic support services to its citizens. In contrast, a consulate is a smaller diplomatic post that provides visa and passport services and other legal services related to the home country. In emergencies, an embassy or consulate can provide refuge and protect its citizens in a foreign country, as they are considered part of the home country’s territory and are protected by the Vienna Convention.
Episode 55: Social media: Influence in 90 seconds or less
Social media allows everyone to say it in 280 characters or get their point across in three minutes or less. After listening or watching them, our whole demeanor changes and we become a totally different person.
Summary: Social media has the power to make politicians get off their butt in order to take interest in various social issues. The latest from the Trayvon Martin, the immigration border crisis, and the Michael Brown issues are living testimonies of media influence on American politics as well as on public opinions.
In a world where social media is becoming a popular social commodity, reporters and journalists hold the strongest tools to increase public awareness. They are the first on sites to talk to witnesses, criminals, and victims and then report to the people what occurred. However, they purposely aim on passing emotional information in order to get high ratings and to increase their financial benefits instead of on providing fair and balanced reporting that involve fair trials and due process. Yet, the people are too busy to check and balance information against validity and objectivity; take as true the first reports made available to them.
The notions “One is innocent until proven guilty” and “The judicial branch is granted the power to bring charges and to judge perpetrators” have no bearings in journalism’s ethics and code of conduct for it is noticeable that reporters are rabble-rousers and attention seekers with a knack to impact legal judgments or to assign culpability to whomever they want. They are one sided, focusing solely on what they want the people to know and, very often, sympathize with the aspect of the issue that increases emotions and empathy so the public can more likely lean toward the victims. Worse of all, they all deliver the same information at the same time and the lone channel showing a different aspect of the question at issue is considered as out of touch, as too conservative, as too rich, as too racist, as too much to the left, etc.
Social media workers use their influence not to remain neutral and not to perform their job based on moral, ethics, and professionalism, but to twist facts into opinions in order to better control how the public enthusiastically reacts to issues. They decide which issues are important and how long such important issues should remain in headlines as they impose on the public their judgments and condemn whoever they want to condemn; the people buy in whatever they are selling because, although educated or rich, Blacks or Whites, young or old, are too lazy to form their own opinion and thus leave it to people dumber than they are to make their judgments for them.
In simpler terms, like fang bangers and vampires using their glamour and their charm to feed on humans, reporters brainwash and compel people to think and act toward the direction they want them to. If social media were judges and jurors; one would have been denied the right to trials and due process and their verdict would have always been “Guilty, Guilty, Guilty.”
The media has more power on the people than all the three branches of the federal government combined. With that said, should the media want the people of Ferguson, MO to stop protesting and rioting; a 144-character post on Twitter could do so. However, they want people to riot; they want the police to shoot at people. They are in Ferguson to fuel the issue so more stores can be broken and so more people can be arrested and possibly shot. The longer the protests, the more they stay relevant, the more money they make, and the more power they hold onto the public. They do not want the protests to end.
In a world where social media is becoming a popular social commodity, reporters and journalists hold the strongest tools to increase public awareness. They are the first on sites to talk to witnesses, criminals, and victims and then report to the people what occurred. However, they purposely aim on passing emotional information in order to get high ratings and to increase their financial benefits instead of on providing fair and balanced reporting that involve fair trials and due process. Yet, the people are too busy to check and balance information against validity and objectivity; take as true the first reports made available to them.
The notions “One is innocent until proven guilty” and “The judicial branch is granted the power to bring charges and to judge perpetrators” have no bearings in journalism’s ethics and code of conduct for it is noticeable that reporters are rabble-rousers and attention seekers with a knack to impact legal judgments or to assign culpability to whomever they want. They are one sided, focusing solely on what they want the people to know and, very often, sympathize with the aspect of the issue that increases emotions and empathy so the public can more likely lean toward the victims. Worse of all, they all deliver the same information at the same time and the lone channel showing a different aspect of the question at issue is considered as out of touch, as too conservative, as too rich, as too racist, as too much to the left, etc.
Social media workers use their influence not to remain neutral and not to perform their job based on moral, ethics, and professionalism, but to twist facts into opinions in order to better control how the public enthusiastically reacts to issues. They decide which issues are important and how long such important issues should remain in headlines as they impose on the public their judgments and condemn whoever they want to condemn; the people buy in whatever they are selling because, although educated or rich, Blacks or Whites, young or old, are too lazy to form their own opinion and thus leave it to people dumber than they are to make their judgments for them.
In simpler terms, like fang bangers and vampires using their glamour and their charm to feed on humans, reporters brainwash and compel people to think and act toward the direction they want them to. If social media were judges and jurors; one would have been denied the right to trials and due process and their verdict would have always been “Guilty, Guilty, Guilty.”
The media has more power on the people than all the three branches of the federal government combined. With that said, should the media want the people of Ferguson, MO to stop protesting and rioting; a 144-character post on Twitter could do so. However, they want people to riot; they want the police to shoot at people. They are in Ferguson to fuel the issue so more stores can be broken and so more people can be arrested and possibly shot. The longer the protests, the more they stay relevant, the more money they make, and the more power they hold onto the public. They do not want the protests to end.
Episode 54: Black Voters Matter, But Black issues don’t
94% of Blacks voted for democratic party’s candidates and the other 6% either did not vote or they voted for Republican candidates.
Black people vote their color or their background but not their creed or interests. They vote to enjoy some feel-good moments but not to formulate policies to build sustainable and self-sufficient black communities. Forgive them for they are manipulated into thinking they ain’t blacks if they do not vote democrats.
This series discusses black voters’ behavior. Most importantly, it explains how black people, regardless of their social status and academic achievements, often vote their background but not to resolve their underlying issues. Without further ado, let’s get right into it.
A Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies survey found that during the last three general elections, 94% of Blacks voted for democratic party’s candidates. Moreover, that same survey stated that the other 6% either did not vote or they voted for Republican candidates. These numbers proved that, although blacks have different social issues, most have the same voting behavior. In most layman’s terms, they vote for all democratic candidates and reject all Republican candidates because, peg the republican party as the anti-black, racist, unjust, and suppressor party.
Joe Biden does not consider “black” black people who have a problem figuring out whether they are to vote for democrats or republicans. Such a sentiment echoes well among blacks in the sense that they call traitors, racists, Uncle Tom, and various other degrading terms the few black people who do not vote democrat. According to Biden, to be Black in America is to act in political solidarity with other Black people to protest, revolt, or band against segregation and racial violence.
White Americans either vote democrat or republican, and a white democrat may vote for a republican candidate or vice versa depending on such a candidate’s agenda. However, black people vote democratic tickets and do not change their vote even if the republican candidate is black or if such a candidate promises to invest or has already invested millions in black communities.
Needless to say, American politics has not been about interests but race for a long time now. Candidates, regardless of their political party or the position they are seeking, court the black vote by making blacks believe that their vote matters.
Although blacks have always helped democrats win elections, black communities are still underserved. It is simply because the African-American leadership does less in leveraging the black community-building power to enable voter engagement, policy change advocacy, and civic engagement.
I see individualism in the Blacks’ perception of racial injustice and political diversity. They ask for inclusion or first consideration for employment, school admissions, etc. However, they show no desire to formulate good sense policies to build black communities as collectivism with a common agenda.
The black vote makes lawmakers and presidents, but black issues never make it to the government’s public agenda. It is a constant fight for Blacks to get something in return for their vote. It seems that they vote to have feel-good moments but not to have their interests represented.
Since both parties treat blacks like kings during their campaigns, blacks must become politically literate to formulate strategies as they remain unaffiliated. They must also mesh their resources and human capital to have their political party to bring black issues to the forefront of American politics.
In summary, 94% of Blacks have uniform voting behavior, overwhelmingly voting for the Democratic Party. In contrast, Black who voted Republican are often derogatorily labeled as traitors, racists, or Uncle Toms. They often view the Republican Party as being anti-black and racist. Yet, Black communities are still underserved, and neither party takes their issues seriously. I suggest that, to ensure that their vote has power and to give importance to their issues, Blacks must become politically literate to create their own political party.
This series discusses black voters’ behavior. Most importantly, it explains how black people, regardless of their social status and academic achievements, often vote their background but not to resolve their underlying issues. Without further ado, let’s get right into it.
A Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies survey found that during the last three general elections, 94% of Blacks voted for democratic party’s candidates. Moreover, that same survey stated that the other 6% either did not vote or they voted for Republican candidates. These numbers proved that, although blacks have different social issues, most have the same voting behavior. In most layman’s terms, they vote for all democratic candidates and reject all Republican candidates because, peg the republican party as the anti-black, racist, unjust, and suppressor party.
Joe Biden does not consider “black” black people who have a problem figuring out whether they are to vote for democrats or republicans. Such a sentiment echoes well among blacks in the sense that they call traitors, racists, Uncle Tom, and various other degrading terms the few black people who do not vote democrat. According to Biden, to be Black in America is to act in political solidarity with other Black people to protest, revolt, or band against segregation and racial violence.
White Americans either vote democrat or republican, and a white democrat may vote for a republican candidate or vice versa depending on such a candidate’s agenda. However, black people vote democratic tickets and do not change their vote even if the republican candidate is black or if such a candidate promises to invest or has already invested millions in black communities.
Needless to say, American politics has not been about interests but race for a long time now. Candidates, regardless of their political party or the position they are seeking, court the black vote by making blacks believe that their vote matters.
Although blacks have always helped democrats win elections, black communities are still underserved. It is simply because the African-American leadership does less in leveraging the black community-building power to enable voter engagement, policy change advocacy, and civic engagement.
I see individualism in the Blacks’ perception of racial injustice and political diversity. They ask for inclusion or first consideration for employment, school admissions, etc. However, they show no desire to formulate good sense policies to build black communities as collectivism with a common agenda.
The black vote makes lawmakers and presidents, but black issues never make it to the government’s public agenda. It is a constant fight for Blacks to get something in return for their vote. It seems that they vote to have feel-good moments but not to have their interests represented.
Since both parties treat blacks like kings during their campaigns, blacks must become politically literate to formulate strategies as they remain unaffiliated. They must also mesh their resources and human capital to have their political party to bring black issues to the forefront of American politics.
In summary, 94% of Blacks have uniform voting behavior, overwhelmingly voting for the Democratic Party. In contrast, Black who voted Republican are often derogatorily labeled as traitors, racists, or Uncle Toms. They often view the Republican Party as being anti-black and racist. Yet, Black communities are still underserved, and neither party takes their issues seriously. I suggest that, to ensure that their vote has power and to give importance to their issues, Blacks must become politically literate to create their own political party.
Episode 52: The origin of deadbeat dads
The origin of deadbeat dads can be traced back to Abraham, who had Ishmael with his maid, Hagar and then, fourteen years later, had Isaac with his wife, Sarah. Abraham did not pay too much attention to Ishmael, and that set the precedent for deadbeat dads. Abraham and Sarah’s story echoes in many households and workplaces today although there are laws that protect children born outside of wedlocks. And the generational curse of deadbeat dads continues.
Taking care of a child is a moral, legal, and ethical duty, And yet, many of us lack the decency to fulfill such parental responsibilities.
This series discusses the origin of deadbeat dads and its consequences on today’s society.
It all started with Abraham, who, under the advice of his wife Sarah, went to sleep with Hagar, his maid. A child, Ishmael, was born as a result of him stepping out of his marriage. Fourteen years later, as promised by God, his wife Sarah gave birth to Isaac. Abraham did not pay ample attention to Ishmael because he was inclined towards many wicked things.
Yet, Sarah was jealous of Ishmael, but she claimed that the boy would negatively influence the young Isaac. Therefore, she ordered Abraham to kick Hagar and Ishmael out of the house. Abraham agreed after God told him to do as Sarah requested; he sent them away and implored them never to return.
Let’s analyze the actions in the order they occurred. Sarah sent her husband to have sex with the maid because she knew the maid could not say no. The maid agreed because if she said no to a powerful man, she would be fired. Such action is happening today in many households where husbands sleep with maids while wives know but close their eyes. I don’t know about you, and with all the respect I have for the Bible, I said Abraham was a cheater. If God and his wife were testing his fidelity and his loyalty; he failed miserably. I strongly believed that he wanted to sleep with Hagar or he had feelings for her even before Sarah offered him the opportunity.
The second action was that a child was born, and the wife sent him and his mom away. These actions are occurring as we speak in several families or workplaces where the man feels entitled to fondle their maid or the secretary. As always, kids born out of these relationships paid a hefty price. They are not as lucky as Ishmael to grow into a strong man and dominate nations. I am saying loudly that Sarah was wicked. She sent her man to cheat on her, and she got pissed because he got the maid pregnant. The way I interpret her behavior is that she was covering her shame with anger.
Did I tell you that Ishmael and his mom lost their way in the wilderness of Beersheba where they suffered from hunger because they ran out of food and water? Abraham knew where he sent them but never felt the need to send more food and water to them, even to travel there to see if they were safe. Why did not God send an angel to him to tell him that Ishmael was suffering and his mon was crying her eyes out. We all know what kind of men have wealth but do not take care of the children they bore with their mistresses.
Abraham was a deadbeat dad, and his wife enabled him to be so. I don’t intend to justify absent fathers; I am simply saying that deadbeat dad is a generational curse, or better yet, a Bible curse that begins with Abraham and is passed down to today’s society. God could have prevented Abraham from cheating, and more so, he should not have told Abraham to agree to his wife’s demand. For what it was worth, though, God redeemed himself by sending an angel to tell Hagar that he saw Ishmael’s suffering and assure her that he would allow him to live and become the father of a mighty nation.
In summary, the origin of deadbeat dads can be traced back to Abraham, who had Ishmael with his maid, Hagar and then, fourteen years later, had Isaac with his wife, Sarah. Abraham did not pay too much attention to Ishmael, and that set the precedent for deadbeat dads. Abraham and Sarah’s story echoes in many households and workplaces today although there are laws that protect children born outside of wedlocks. And the generational curse of deadbeat dads continues.
This series discusses the origin of deadbeat dads and its consequences on today’s society.
It all started with Abraham, who, under the advice of his wife Sarah, went to sleep with Hagar, his maid. A child, Ishmael, was born as a result of him stepping out of his marriage. Fourteen years later, as promised by God, his wife Sarah gave birth to Isaac. Abraham did not pay ample attention to Ishmael because he was inclined towards many wicked things.
Yet, Sarah was jealous of Ishmael, but she claimed that the boy would negatively influence the young Isaac. Therefore, she ordered Abraham to kick Hagar and Ishmael out of the house. Abraham agreed after God told him to do as Sarah requested; he sent them away and implored them never to return.
Let’s analyze the actions in the order they occurred. Sarah sent her husband to have sex with the maid because she knew the maid could not say no. The maid agreed because if she said no to a powerful man, she would be fired. Such action is happening today in many households where husbands sleep with maids while wives know but close their eyes. I don’t know about you, and with all the respect I have for the Bible, I said Abraham was a cheater. If God and his wife were testing his fidelity and his loyalty; he failed miserably. I strongly believed that he wanted to sleep with Hagar or he had feelings for her even before Sarah offered him the opportunity.
The second action was that a child was born, and the wife sent him and his mom away. These actions are occurring as we speak in several families or workplaces where the man feels entitled to fondle their maid or the secretary. As always, kids born out of these relationships paid a hefty price. They are not as lucky as Ishmael to grow into a strong man and dominate nations. I am saying loudly that Sarah was wicked. She sent her man to cheat on her, and she got pissed because he got the maid pregnant. The way I interpret her behavior is that she was covering her shame with anger.
Did I tell you that Ishmael and his mom lost their way in the wilderness of Beersheba where they suffered from hunger because they ran out of food and water? Abraham knew where he sent them but never felt the need to send more food and water to them, even to travel there to see if they were safe. Why did not God send an angel to him to tell him that Ishmael was suffering and his mon was crying her eyes out. We all know what kind of men have wealth but do not take care of the children they bore with their mistresses.
Abraham was a deadbeat dad, and his wife enabled him to be so. I don’t intend to justify absent fathers; I am simply saying that deadbeat dad is a generational curse, or better yet, a Bible curse that begins with Abraham and is passed down to today’s society. God could have prevented Abraham from cheating, and more so, he should not have told Abraham to agree to his wife’s demand. For what it was worth, though, God redeemed himself by sending an angel to tell Hagar that he saw Ishmael’s suffering and assure her that he would allow him to live and become the father of a mighty nation.
In summary, the origin of deadbeat dads can be traced back to Abraham, who had Ishmael with his maid, Hagar and then, fourteen years later, had Isaac with his wife, Sarah. Abraham did not pay too much attention to Ishmael, and that set the precedent for deadbeat dads. Abraham and Sarah’s story echoes in many households and workplaces today although there are laws that protect children born outside of wedlocks. And the generational curse of deadbeat dads continues.
Episode 51 – Get free internet and a free smartphone and assist your friends in getting theirs too
The federal government has launched the Affordable Connectivity Program to help people living under the poverty line have internet services and a smart device of their choosing for free. Individuals receiving government benefits can also benefit from the program. Those who do not meet these criteria can still take advantage of the program by becoming a distributor of internet services. By becoming a distributor, individuals can help their communities gain free access to internet services and help them access telehealth services.
Listen to me attentively so you don’t claim ignorance later. I can help you pay $0 for your internet, and get a free smartphone, tablet, mobile hotspot, or laptop or I can explain to you how to be a distributor to enroll other people to get that same deal. Which one of these two do you want me to go over with you? Smart choice.
In this series, I discuss the Affordable Connectivity Program. Most importantly, I explain how to have internet for free and how to launch your business to become a distributor of internet services in their community.
The federal government launched the affordable connectivity program through which they partner with major internet services providers to ensure individuals making less than $27,180 or households making less than $36,620 a year do not pay a cent for internet and phone, tablet, or laptop. Moreover, the program can also benefit individuals who receive government benefits like SNAP, Medicaid, SSI, WIC, Pell Grant, or Free and Reduced-Price Lunch.
The government will pay your monthly internet bills and give you a one-time discount of $100 to purchase a device of your choosing if you earn less than 200% below the poverty line or receive government assistance. However, if you don’t qualify for the program or you qualify but want to earn residual income, you can still benefit from the program by becoming a distributor of internet services.
As a distributor, not only will you be building residual wealth each time you enroll a qualified individual in the program, but you will also help your community drive further economically by helping them save money to afford the retirement lifestyle they deserve. Moreover, as a distributor, you can enroll your clientele in Telehealth, where they can consult a doctor on the phone you give them for free using the internet you give them for free.
Only some people are eligible for these benefits, but everyone can become a distributor of these services. If you’re interested in either, contact me at 618-823-8701 or the person who shares this podcast link with you.
In summary, the federal government has launched the Affordable Connectivity Program to help people living under the poverty line have internet services and a smart device of their choosing for free. Individuals receiving government benefits can also benefit from the program. Those who do not meet these criteria can still take advantage of the program by becoming a distributor of internet services. By becoming a distributor, individuals can help their communities gain free access to internet services and help them access telehealth services.
I can help you pay $0 for the internet and a tablet
Listen to me closely. Don’t pay for your internet, and don’t pay full price for a phone, a tablet, or a desktop computer if you or your family is making less than $36,620 a year. Too good to be true, you are saying, aren’t you? Listen to this podcast to learn how to use the Affordable Connectivity Program.
In this series, I discuss the Affordable Connectivity Program. Most importantly, I explain the process and the criteria for eligibility. By the end of this podcast, you will know where to go or who to contact to receive your free laptop, desktop computer, or tablet from the federal government.
The Affordable Connectivity Program (ACP) helps low-income households pay for internet service and connected devices like laptops or tablets. Eligible individuals began to apply on December 31, 2021. The major American Internet Services Providers participate in the program to ensure you have continuous access wherever you are.
Individuals whose incomes are below 200% of the Federal Poverty Line or who are currently receiving a government benefit like SNAP, Medicaid, SSI, WIC, Pell Grant, or Free and Reduced-Price Lunch. Practically, individuals making less than $27,180 or households making less than $36,620 a year are eligible for the program.
The program offers qualified individuals up to a $30/month discount on internet service and a $75/month discount if they live on any federally recognized Indian tribe’s reservation, pueblo, or colon. Moreover, if qualified individuals do not have a laptop, tablet, or desktop computer, the program offers them a one-time discount of up to $100 to purchase one.
The slight caveat about the Affordable Connectivity Program is that if your internet plan is less than $30 and you find a laptop or a tablet that costs less than $100, you will have internet and a device for free. However, if your internet plan is $31 per month and your device costs $101, you will have to pay $2 out of pocket.
Now that you know what the Affordable Connectivity Program is and whether you are eligible, let me tell you how to enroll so you can start saving money on your phone and internet bills.
The only thing you need to do is to determine your eligibility. Once you determine that, ensure that you have documents to prove that; contact Louis Peyko at………he will enroll you in the program, and before you know it, you will save more money to afford the retirement lifestyle you deserve.
In summary, the Affordable Connectivity Program (ACP) provides low-income households discounted internet service, laptops, tablets, and desktop computers. Eligibility requires an income of less than $27,180 or a household income of less than $36,620 a year. Additionally, those receiving government benefits like SNAP, Medicaid, SSI, WIC, Pell Grant, or Free and Reduced-Price Lunch are also eligible. The program offers up to a $30/month discount on internet service and a $75/month discount if they live on a federally recognized Indian tribe reservation, pueblo, or colon. A one-time deal of up to $100 is also available to purchase a laptop, tablet, or desktop computer. To apply, individuals must determine their eligibility and contact Louis Peyko, who will enroll them in the program. By taking advantage of the Affordable Connectivity Program, individuals can save more money to afford their desired retirement lifestyle.
In this series, I discuss the Affordable Connectivity Program. Most importantly, I explain how to have internet for free and how to launch your business to become a distributor of internet services in their community.
The federal government launched the affordable connectivity program through which they partner with major internet services providers to ensure individuals making less than $27,180 or households making less than $36,620 a year do not pay a cent for internet and phone, tablet, or laptop. Moreover, the program can also benefit individuals who receive government benefits like SNAP, Medicaid, SSI, WIC, Pell Grant, or Free and Reduced-Price Lunch.
The government will pay your monthly internet bills and give you a one-time discount of $100 to purchase a device of your choosing if you earn less than 200% below the poverty line or receive government assistance. However, if you don’t qualify for the program or you qualify but want to earn residual income, you can still benefit from the program by becoming a distributor of internet services.
As a distributor, not only will you be building residual wealth each time you enroll a qualified individual in the program, but you will also help your community drive further economically by helping them save money to afford the retirement lifestyle they deserve. Moreover, as a distributor, you can enroll your clientele in Telehealth, where they can consult a doctor on the phone you give them for free using the internet you give them for free.
Only some people are eligible for these benefits, but everyone can become a distributor of these services. If you’re interested in either, contact me at 618-823-8701 or the person who shares this podcast link with you.
In summary, the federal government has launched the Affordable Connectivity Program to help people living under the poverty line have internet services and a smart device of their choosing for free. Individuals receiving government benefits can also benefit from the program. Those who do not meet these criteria can still take advantage of the program by becoming a distributor of internet services. By becoming a distributor, individuals can help their communities gain free access to internet services and help them access telehealth services.
I can help you pay $0 for the internet and a tablet
Listen to me closely. Don’t pay for your internet, and don’t pay full price for a phone, a tablet, or a desktop computer if you or your family is making less than $36,620 a year. Too good to be true, you are saying, aren’t you? Listen to this podcast to learn how to use the Affordable Connectivity Program.
In this series, I discuss the Affordable Connectivity Program. Most importantly, I explain the process and the criteria for eligibility. By the end of this podcast, you will know where to go or who to contact to receive your free laptop, desktop computer, or tablet from the federal government.
The Affordable Connectivity Program (ACP) helps low-income households pay for internet service and connected devices like laptops or tablets. Eligible individuals began to apply on December 31, 2021. The major American Internet Services Providers participate in the program to ensure you have continuous access wherever you are.
Individuals whose incomes are below 200% of the Federal Poverty Line or who are currently receiving a government benefit like SNAP, Medicaid, SSI, WIC, Pell Grant, or Free and Reduced-Price Lunch. Practically, individuals making less than $27,180 or households making less than $36,620 a year are eligible for the program.
The program offers qualified individuals up to a $30/month discount on internet service and a $75/month discount if they live on any federally recognized Indian tribe’s reservation, pueblo, or colon. Moreover, if qualified individuals do not have a laptop, tablet, or desktop computer, the program offers them a one-time discount of up to $100 to purchase one.
The slight caveat about the Affordable Connectivity Program is that if your internet plan is less than $30 and you find a laptop or a tablet that costs less than $100, you will have internet and a device for free. However, if your internet plan is $31 per month and your device costs $101, you will have to pay $2 out of pocket.
Now that you know what the Affordable Connectivity Program is and whether you are eligible, let me tell you how to enroll so you can start saving money on your phone and internet bills.
The only thing you need to do is to determine your eligibility. Once you determine that, ensure that you have documents to prove that; contact Louis Peyko at………he will enroll you in the program, and before you know it, you will save more money to afford the retirement lifestyle you deserve.
In summary, the Affordable Connectivity Program (ACP) provides low-income households discounted internet service, laptops, tablets, and desktop computers. Eligibility requires an income of less than $27,180 or a household income of less than $36,620 a year. Additionally, those receiving government benefits like SNAP, Medicaid, SSI, WIC, Pell Grant, or Free and Reduced-Price Lunch are also eligible. The program offers up to a $30/month discount on internet service and a $75/month discount if they live on a federally recognized Indian tribe reservation, pueblo, or colon. A one-time deal of up to $100 is also available to purchase a laptop, tablet, or desktop computer. To apply, individuals must determine their eligibility and contact Louis Peyko, who will enroll them in the program. By taking advantage of the Affordable Connectivity Program, individuals can save more money to afford their desired retirement lifestyle.
Episode 50: Telehealth: Your cellphone is your clinic
My guest today is Dr. Daffar Aditi. Dr. Daffar is a public health expert with commendable achievements in community health in India, Pakistan, Syria, the United States, and Haiti. Dr. Daffar and I discuss telehealth and how he used technology to reach out to millions of patients around the world.
Did you know you can consult, talk, text, and video chat with your doctor and receive your lab results on your cell phone 24/7 and wherever you are? This, my friend, is called telehealth.
If you want to know more about telehealth and how it is changing healthcare delivery and access to care, check out my latest podcast on azazel.info. Telehealth: Your cellphone is your clinic.
My guest today is Dr. Daffar Aditi. Dr. Daffar is a public health expert with commendable achievements in community health in India, Pakistan, Syria, the United States and Haiti. Dr. Daffar and I discuss telehealth and how he used technology to reach out to millions of patients around the world.
Dr. Daffar, in your own words, what is telehealth?
Hello to all, and thanks for having me as your guest Dr. Rousseau. Before I delve further, let me give you my opinion about telehealth. I love telehealth because it brings medical care to places and patients that otherwise would have never had access to healthcare, providers, or medical facilities. I have patients who live in rural areas which are now receiving care for the first time in their lives. Trust me, Dr. Rousseau, it is rewarding. I urge governments to fund projects aiming at bringing such a revolutionary medical tool to remote or low-provider availability areas.
Excellent, Thank you for sharing this with me, Dr. Daffar.
You are welcome Dr. Rousseau. Telehealth delivers health care, education, and information services via remote technologies. Telehealth allows patients to consult health care providers, mental health counselors, or nurses via online videos or phone chats, whether at home, at work, or even in their car.
Dr. Rousseau, you use the right words, timely and convenient. Telehealth is convenient because it reduces ER utilization. With telehealth, patients no longer have to visit the clinic or the hospital for a minor headache or wait to get an appointment. They can log in to the virtual platform to book and receive remote appointments as soon as possible.
Dr. Daffar, you mentioned earlier that telehealth could improve access to care in remote areas; can you expand on that?
Telehealth improves access to care for everyone, whether rich or poor, whether they can drive to a medical center or whether there is a medical facility or providers near them. The real benefit of telehealth is that patients can use their cell phones to consult any doctor and, in various instances, 24/7. This means that people, regardless of their status or geographical location, have the opportunity to take care of their care. Many hospitals offer this service to their patients at low or no additional cost. Still, lately, I have seen individual doctors, NGOs, and even social entrepreneurs offering telehealth to underdeveloped neighborhoods.
Dr. Daffar, I understand your statement, but my concern is social communication and outreach. Before we talk about how remote patients become aware of this program, do you foresee telehealth replacing face-to-face consultations and traditional hospitalizations?
Oh no. never, because telehealth mostly focuses on non-life-threatening conditions. Patients are still required to go to emergency rooms for life-threatening diseases. Telehealth might be able to treat a patient with a headache or a skin rash, but it will not treat a patient with stroke, AVC, or cardiac arrest. Face-to-face consults and hospitalizations will never go away.
Dr. Daffar, how do follow-ups work with telehealth? Do patients have to come to a clinic to get their lab results?
Another benefit of telehealth is that providers can order labs and X-Rays. They can also read the results to patients over the phone and provide referrals to patients if necessary. Using telehealth, providers can also prescribe medications to pharmacies nearest to the patients and even talk to mental health patients. Therefore, the patients will return or ever visit a clinic if only their health requires it.
Thanks for your time Dr. Daffar. That was insightful. We must encourage more people to sign up for telehealth because it offers shorter waiting times and allows patients to get care in the comfort of their homes.
See you next time.
Thanks
If you want to know more about telehealth and how it is changing healthcare delivery and access to care, check out my latest podcast on azazel.info. Telehealth: Your cellphone is your clinic.
My guest today is Dr. Daffar Aditi. Dr. Daffar is a public health expert with commendable achievements in community health in India, Pakistan, Syria, the United States and Haiti. Dr. Daffar and I discuss telehealth and how he used technology to reach out to millions of patients around the world.
Dr. Daffar, in your own words, what is telehealth?
Hello to all, and thanks for having me as your guest Dr. Rousseau. Before I delve further, let me give you my opinion about telehealth. I love telehealth because it brings medical care to places and patients that otherwise would have never had access to healthcare, providers, or medical facilities. I have patients who live in rural areas which are now receiving care for the first time in their lives. Trust me, Dr. Rousseau, it is rewarding. I urge governments to fund projects aiming at bringing such a revolutionary medical tool to remote or low-provider availability areas.
Excellent, Thank you for sharing this with me, Dr. Daffar.
You are welcome Dr. Rousseau. Telehealth delivers health care, education, and information services via remote technologies. Telehealth allows patients to consult health care providers, mental health counselors, or nurses via online videos or phone chats, whether at home, at work, or even in their car.
Dr. Rousseau, you use the right words, timely and convenient. Telehealth is convenient because it reduces ER utilization. With telehealth, patients no longer have to visit the clinic or the hospital for a minor headache or wait to get an appointment. They can log in to the virtual platform to book and receive remote appointments as soon as possible.
Dr. Daffar, you mentioned earlier that telehealth could improve access to care in remote areas; can you expand on that?
Telehealth improves access to care for everyone, whether rich or poor, whether they can drive to a medical center or whether there is a medical facility or providers near them. The real benefit of telehealth is that patients can use their cell phones to consult any doctor and, in various instances, 24/7. This means that people, regardless of their status or geographical location, have the opportunity to take care of their care. Many hospitals offer this service to their patients at low or no additional cost. Still, lately, I have seen individual doctors, NGOs, and even social entrepreneurs offering telehealth to underdeveloped neighborhoods.
Dr. Daffar, I understand your statement, but my concern is social communication and outreach. Before we talk about how remote patients become aware of this program, do you foresee telehealth replacing face-to-face consultations and traditional hospitalizations?
Oh no. never, because telehealth mostly focuses on non-life-threatening conditions. Patients are still required to go to emergency rooms for life-threatening diseases. Telehealth might be able to treat a patient with a headache or a skin rash, but it will not treat a patient with stroke, AVC, or cardiac arrest. Face-to-face consults and hospitalizations will never go away.
Dr. Daffar, how do follow-ups work with telehealth? Do patients have to come to a clinic to get their lab results?
Another benefit of telehealth is that providers can order labs and X-Rays. They can also read the results to patients over the phone and provide referrals to patients if necessary. Using telehealth, providers can also prescribe medications to pharmacies nearest to the patients and even talk to mental health patients. Therefore, the patients will return or ever visit a clinic if only their health requires it.
Thanks for your time Dr. Daffar. That was insightful. We must encourage more people to sign up for telehealth because it offers shorter waiting times and allows patients to get care in the comfort of their homes.
See you next time.
Thanks
Episode 49: County vs. district and how they shape local governments and politics
In summary, in this series, I explored the difference between counties and districts, and the thin line between redistricting and gerrymandering. I mentioned that a county is an agglomeration of several districts, which are further subdivided into cities. Districts, on the other hand, which are composed of many cities, form a congressional collectivity forming state legislatures or state assemblies. Moreover, I explained that redistricting or political equality was the process of adjusting the boundaries of a district or county to meet population changes, while gerrymandering was the manipulation of the boundaries of a district by either political party to gain political advantages.
As you drive on highways and inner cities, you see signs that say“Entering Bexar County or Leaving Orange County.” Do you know what that means? As you send your children to school, you hear about school districts. Moreover, as elections approach, you hear candidates saying they represent district 3, 7, 30, and so on. Do you know what that means? Do you know the difference between a district and a county?
This series talks about the different levels of American governance, and most importantly, it establishes differences between county and district and their role in local governments and politics. It also discusses the differences between redistricting and gerrymandering.
A state is a territorial political and administrative division of the entire United States. Each state generally is divided into counties. The county is subdivided into districts, and districts are further subdivided into cities and towns.
A county is part of a state that is larger than a city and has its own government to deal with local issues. I am sure you heard of El Paso County, Bear County, Orange County, Suffolk County, etc. Under the governance of various elected and appointed officials, a county serves as an administrative arm of the state to maintain records, provide courts and law enforcement, build roads, assess property, collect taxes, administer jails, and conduct elections.
A county is further subdivided into districts. A district is an agglomeration of many cities forming a congressional collectivity. Congressional districts, also known as electoral districts or legislative districts are divisions of a larger administrative county that represent the population of that county in the larger congressional body. What I meant was that district residents elect house and state representatives, and these elected officials go on to form the state legislature or the state assembly. The state legislature or the state assembly performs the same duties as members of the U.S. Congress, except that they vote on laws and legislations for their specific state. Do you now understand what I was trying to say? May I please proceed?
The number of districts depends on how many residents live in the county. Although the number of counties may not change, the number of districts may, due to population growth. As such, not all counties have the same number of districts, and the total of districts a county has may change at each election cycle. The federal and state constitutions allow parties to create new districts to bring more candidates to the field. This is called redistricting or political equality. Political equality means that all the districts must have the same number of residents to ensure equal representations at state assemblies. When redistricting favors one party or when a party does it to gain more seats at their state legislature, dissidents call it gerrymandering. Gerrymandering is the act of manipulating the boundaries of an electoral constituency so as to favor one party. It is the process of updating the maps for various districts to balance the population after each census. In a much simpler term, redistricting or gerrymandering takes voters from a current district to place them in a newly created district.
In summary, in this series, I explored the difference between counties and districts, and the thin line between redistricting and gerrymandering. I mentioned that a county is an agglomeration of several districts, which are further subdivided into cities. Districts, on the other hand, which are composed of many cities, form a congressional collectivity forming state legislatures or state assemblies. Moreover, I explained that redistricting or political equality was the process of adjusting the boundaries of a district or county to meet population changes, while gerrymandering was the manipulation of the boundaries of a district by either political party to gain political advantages.
This series talks about the different levels of American governance, and most importantly, it establishes differences between county and district and their role in local governments and politics. It also discusses the differences between redistricting and gerrymandering.
A state is a territorial political and administrative division of the entire United States. Each state generally is divided into counties. The county is subdivided into districts, and districts are further subdivided into cities and towns.
A county is part of a state that is larger than a city and has its own government to deal with local issues. I am sure you heard of El Paso County, Bear County, Orange County, Suffolk County, etc. Under the governance of various elected and appointed officials, a county serves as an administrative arm of the state to maintain records, provide courts and law enforcement, build roads, assess property, collect taxes, administer jails, and conduct elections.
A county is further subdivided into districts. A district is an agglomeration of many cities forming a congressional collectivity. Congressional districts, also known as electoral districts or legislative districts are divisions of a larger administrative county that represent the population of that county in the larger congressional body. What I meant was that district residents elect house and state representatives, and these elected officials go on to form the state legislature or the state assembly. The state legislature or the state assembly performs the same duties as members of the U.S. Congress, except that they vote on laws and legislations for their specific state. Do you now understand what I was trying to say? May I please proceed?
The number of districts depends on how many residents live in the county. Although the number of counties may not change, the number of districts may, due to population growth. As such, not all counties have the same number of districts, and the total of districts a county has may change at each election cycle. The federal and state constitutions allow parties to create new districts to bring more candidates to the field. This is called redistricting or political equality. Political equality means that all the districts must have the same number of residents to ensure equal representations at state assemblies. When redistricting favors one party or when a party does it to gain more seats at their state legislature, dissidents call it gerrymandering. Gerrymandering is the act of manipulating the boundaries of an electoral constituency so as to favor one party. It is the process of updating the maps for various districts to balance the population after each census. In a much simpler term, redistricting or gerrymandering takes voters from a current district to place them in a newly created district.
In summary, in this series, I explored the difference between counties and districts, and the thin line between redistricting and gerrymandering. I mentioned that a county is an agglomeration of several districts, which are further subdivided into cities. Districts, on the other hand, which are composed of many cities, form a congressional collectivity forming state legislatures or state assemblies. Moreover, I explained that redistricting or political equality was the process of adjusting the boundaries of a district or county to meet population changes, while gerrymandering was the manipulation of the boundaries of a district by either political party to gain political advantages.
Episode 48: What is the State of the Union?
The State of the Union is an annual address Presidents give to Congress to report on the country’s progress and to outline their plans for the coming year. The Constitution requires that Presidents deliver this message to Congress to keep them informed on the country’s economic condition. The State of the Union is also a platform for both political parties to promote their agendas and fact-check the President. It presents an opportunity to discuss and solve the country’s problems and propose new public policies. It is a key part of the American political process, and ensures that the President can keep the people informed and the country on track for growth and prosperity.
On Azazel podcast today, my guest is Heather Almeyda. She is a law student at St-Mary’s School of Law. She and I will talk about the State of the Union Address. I am your host Dr. Bobb Rousseau, and without further ado, let’s begin.
Hi Angelica, welcome to my show. To me, the State of the Union is an American political tradition through which a sitting president tells Congress how the country is doing economically. It is a platform that both political parties use as a campaign tool to boost their agenda. In your own words, what is the State of the Union?
Hi Dr. Rousseau and thanks for having me. The American constitution establishes that all presidents must address Congress to inform Americans on the country’s economic condition. As the name suggests, in a State of the Union, presidents tell America what they did in the previous years and what their administration will be doing in the years to come to improve the economy and foreign relations. As you mentioned in your intro, the State of the Union is also an excellent opportunity for the opposing party to fact-check the sitting presidents and provide different strategies to improve America.
Thanks Header, now, please tell us. how often do Presidents deliver their state of the union message?
Annually. The State of the Union message is from the President to Congress, usually delivered once a year in January or February. In the State of the Union, the President exposes the country’s problems and proposes strategies to solve them, including suggestions for new laws and public policies. Some presidents delivered their message in writing; others delivered a speech on radios or televisions.
Again thank you Heather, what happens during the night of the State of Union. Better yet, how does the government prepare for such a big night?
During the night of the State of the Union, the members of the Congress meet in the House of Representatives alongside the President of the Chamber who happens to be also the Speaker of the House and the Vice-President, who is also the President of the Senate. The President of the Senate and the Vice President sit on the dais, a raised platform directly behind the place where the President speaks.
Key members of the Lower and the Upper Chambers escort the President to the chamber when the President arrives. The sergeant-of-arms of the House of Representatives announces the arrival of the President. The Speaker of the House then presents the President, who delivers his speech before Congress.
Heather, it seems to me that the entire government attends this event; what happens if something catastrophic happens to the president and the vice-president?
The State of the Union also implies presidential succession through a principle called “Blue Star.” Designated Survivor is another name for the blue star principle. According to custom, a member of the President’s cabinet does not attend the State of the Union address. This way, if a catastrophe were to occur and harm the President, the vice president, and the other members of the cabinet present, the member of the cabinet who would not be present at the State of the Union could then assume the duties of the President.
Heather who else attend the State of the Union?
Presidents usually invite several American citizens to Congress for their State of the Union message. These citizens are invited because they have done something extraordinary. During their speeches, the presidents present and honor them for their achievements.
After the message, there is a response from the opposition. This gives the opposing political party a chance to express its point of view on what the President said. Usually, they offer different suggestions than the President on how to improve America.
Heather, your friends told me that you are also an historian. As such do you know of any facts related to the State of the Union?
Thanks Dr. Rousseau. That was a great question. Here are some facts related to the State of the Union
George Washington gave the first State of the Union message in 1790. It was also the shortest message (833 words).
The most extended State of the Union address was given in 1946 by President Harry Truman. It was more than 25,000 words!
President Franklin Roosevelt gave 12 State of the Union messages – more than any other president.
President Calvin Coolidge was the first to deliver a State of the Union message on the radio (1923).
Harry Truman was the first president to give his State of the Union message on television (1947).
To keep up with traditions, Presidents deliver their State of Union on the first Tuesday of January or February.
Due to COVID, Biden was the first president to deliver his State of the Union on the first Tuesday of March 2022.
Thank you Ms Heather Alemyda for your participation. Here is a summary of the interview.
The State of the Union is an annual address Presidents give to Congress to report on the country’s progress and to outline their plans for the coming year. The Constitution requires that Presidents deliver this message to Congress to keep them informed on the country’s economic condition. The State of the Union is also a platform for both political parties to promote their agendas and fact-check the President. It presents an opportunity to discuss and solve the country’s problems and propose new public policies. It is a key part of the American political process, and ensures that the President can keep the people informed and the country on track for growth and prosperity.
This concludes our interview with a guest Ms Heather Alemyda who is a law student at St-Mary Law School in San Antonio. I was your host, Dr. Bobb Rousseau. Thanks for your contribution.
Hi Angelica, welcome to my show. To me, the State of the Union is an American political tradition through which a sitting president tells Congress how the country is doing economically. It is a platform that both political parties use as a campaign tool to boost their agenda. In your own words, what is the State of the Union?
Hi Dr. Rousseau and thanks for having me. The American constitution establishes that all presidents must address Congress to inform Americans on the country’s economic condition. As the name suggests, in a State of the Union, presidents tell America what they did in the previous years and what their administration will be doing in the years to come to improve the economy and foreign relations. As you mentioned in your intro, the State of the Union is also an excellent opportunity for the opposing party to fact-check the sitting presidents and provide different strategies to improve America.
Thanks Header, now, please tell us. how often do Presidents deliver their state of the union message?
Annually. The State of the Union message is from the President to Congress, usually delivered once a year in January or February. In the State of the Union, the President exposes the country’s problems and proposes strategies to solve them, including suggestions for new laws and public policies. Some presidents delivered their message in writing; others delivered a speech on radios or televisions.
Again thank you Heather, what happens during the night of the State of Union. Better yet, how does the government prepare for such a big night?
During the night of the State of the Union, the members of the Congress meet in the House of Representatives alongside the President of the Chamber who happens to be also the Speaker of the House and the Vice-President, who is also the President of the Senate. The President of the Senate and the Vice President sit on the dais, a raised platform directly behind the place where the President speaks.
Key members of the Lower and the Upper Chambers escort the President to the chamber when the President arrives. The sergeant-of-arms of the House of Representatives announces the arrival of the President. The Speaker of the House then presents the President, who delivers his speech before Congress.
Heather, it seems to me that the entire government attends this event; what happens if something catastrophic happens to the president and the vice-president?
The State of the Union also implies presidential succession through a principle called “Blue Star.” Designated Survivor is another name for the blue star principle. According to custom, a member of the President’s cabinet does not attend the State of the Union address. This way, if a catastrophe were to occur and harm the President, the vice president, and the other members of the cabinet present, the member of the cabinet who would not be present at the State of the Union could then assume the duties of the President.
Heather who else attend the State of the Union?
Presidents usually invite several American citizens to Congress for their State of the Union message. These citizens are invited because they have done something extraordinary. During their speeches, the presidents present and honor them for their achievements.
After the message, there is a response from the opposition. This gives the opposing political party a chance to express its point of view on what the President said. Usually, they offer different suggestions than the President on how to improve America.
Heather, your friends told me that you are also an historian. As such do you know of any facts related to the State of the Union?
Thanks Dr. Rousseau. That was a great question. Here are some facts related to the State of the Union
George Washington gave the first State of the Union message in 1790. It was also the shortest message (833 words).
The most extended State of the Union address was given in 1946 by President Harry Truman. It was more than 25,000 words!
President Franklin Roosevelt gave 12 State of the Union messages – more than any other president.
President Calvin Coolidge was the first to deliver a State of the Union message on the radio (1923).
Harry Truman was the first president to give his State of the Union message on television (1947).
To keep up with traditions, Presidents deliver their State of Union on the first Tuesday of January or February.
Due to COVID, Biden was the first president to deliver his State of the Union on the first Tuesday of March 2022.
Thank you Ms Heather Alemyda for your participation. Here is a summary of the interview.
The State of the Union is an annual address Presidents give to Congress to report on the country’s progress and to outline their plans for the coming year. The Constitution requires that Presidents deliver this message to Congress to keep them informed on the country’s economic condition. The State of the Union is also a platform for both political parties to promote their agendas and fact-check the President. It presents an opportunity to discuss and solve the country’s problems and propose new public policies. It is a key part of the American political process, and ensures that the President can keep the people informed and the country on track for growth and prosperity.
This concludes our interview with a guest Ms Heather Alemyda who is a law student at St-Mary Law School in San Antonio. I was your host, Dr. Bobb Rousseau. Thanks for your contribution.
Episode 47: Exploring how critical race theory widens the racial divide
In summary, in this series, I examine how race shapes society and social interactions. I suggest that racism is deeply embedded in our culture and that it is pervasive in everyday life. I argue that critical race theory drives a wedge between different racial communities and promotes anti-realism and separatism. I conclude by stating that critical race theory leads to feelings of guilt and mistrust between the two races. My advice is that it is important for people of all races to understand the implications of this theory and be open to discussing it.
Do you ever feel great when you learn that it is someone who did not look like who committed a crime? Or even proud when it is someone who looks like you who achieved something great? Well, you are either racist or hypocrite or both and either way it is normal to wish good for our kind and bad for not our kind. All who we are and however we deal with others is based on our race and their race.
This series discusses critical race theory and how it further divides us to become our own minoritized or majoritized racial group. Let’s begin; shall we?
Martin Luther King’s dream of judging people based on their character and values, rather than the color of their skin, has not been realized. People are still judged based on their race, and no matter what their race is, they are still victims of racism.
According to critical race theory, the most important thing about you is not your value, your behavior, or your qualifications but your race or the color of your skin. The way you succeed, the way others treat you, and the way you behave are based on your race. That theory holds that if you are a minority, the system is rigged against you, and conversely, if you are white, you are privileged, and the system is built to make you succeed.
Critical race theory places institutions, workplaces, and even stores in a tight situation where they wonder who to address or hire first when the choice is between a black person or a white person. If the institution addresses or employs the black person, the white person will claim discrimination because the CEO rejected him based on his race, regardless of his values and character. On the other hand, if the institution addresses or hires the white person, the black person would claim that the boss is a racist.
As you can see, both the white person and the black person would feel that the system discriminates against them because critical race theory takes the merit system notion out of the equation.
Let me show how critical race theory leads us to find issues where they are supposed to be none.
The five police officers who killed Tyre Nichols were all blacks. In less than 30 days, they were fired, judged, and sentenced. Critical race theory proponents advanced that the justice system handled the situation so quickly because the officers were blacks. If they were whites, the process would have taken more than six months as it was for Michael Brown and George Floyd.
The killing of Tyre Nichols proves that not only white officers kill black people or that police officers whether they are black or white simply kill people whether they are blacks or whites. On that note, I wonder if the killings black people by white police officers is police brutality or police racism. I wonder how the black lives matter movement would have reacted if the police officers who killed Tyre Nichols were whites. And yet, they reacted negatively because the justice system worked too fast for these five black officers.
Critical race theory promotes a damn if you do, damn if you don’t logic. It bullies blacks to think that white people are exploiters and white people to believe that they are losing benefits because of affirmative action and diversity inclusion. Either way, when either race does not get what they deserve, they are victims of racism.
Critical race theory enforces racism, infects people’ minds, and drives them further apart. It is a double-edged sword that makes both black and white people feel guilty and uneasy about their background.
In summary, in this series, I examine how race shapes society and social interactions. I suggest that racism is deeply embedded in our culture and that it is pervasive in everyday life. I argue that critical race theory drives a wedge between different racial communities and promotes anti-realism and separatism. I conclude by stating that critical race theory leads to feelings of guilt and mistrust between the two races. My advice is that it is important for people of all races to understand the implications of this theory and be open to discussing it.
What is your position about critical race theory? Please share your opinions with me.
This series discusses critical race theory and how it further divides us to become our own minoritized or majoritized racial group. Let’s begin; shall we?
Martin Luther King’s dream of judging people based on their character and values, rather than the color of their skin, has not been realized. People are still judged based on their race, and no matter what their race is, they are still victims of racism.
According to critical race theory, the most important thing about you is not your value, your behavior, or your qualifications but your race or the color of your skin. The way you succeed, the way others treat you, and the way you behave are based on your race. That theory holds that if you are a minority, the system is rigged against you, and conversely, if you are white, you are privileged, and the system is built to make you succeed.
Critical race theory places institutions, workplaces, and even stores in a tight situation where they wonder who to address or hire first when the choice is between a black person or a white person. If the institution addresses or employs the black person, the white person will claim discrimination because the CEO rejected him based on his race, regardless of his values and character. On the other hand, if the institution addresses or hires the white person, the black person would claim that the boss is a racist.
As you can see, both the white person and the black person would feel that the system discriminates against them because critical race theory takes the merit system notion out of the equation.
Let me show how critical race theory leads us to find issues where they are supposed to be none.
The five police officers who killed Tyre Nichols were all blacks. In less than 30 days, they were fired, judged, and sentenced. Critical race theory proponents advanced that the justice system handled the situation so quickly because the officers were blacks. If they were whites, the process would have taken more than six months as it was for Michael Brown and George Floyd.
The killing of Tyre Nichols proves that not only white officers kill black people or that police officers whether they are black or white simply kill people whether they are blacks or whites. On that note, I wonder if the killings black people by white police officers is police brutality or police racism. I wonder how the black lives matter movement would have reacted if the police officers who killed Tyre Nichols were whites. And yet, they reacted negatively because the justice system worked too fast for these five black officers.
Critical race theory promotes a damn if you do, damn if you don’t logic. It bullies blacks to think that white people are exploiters and white people to believe that they are losing benefits because of affirmative action and diversity inclusion. Either way, when either race does not get what they deserve, they are victims of racism.
Critical race theory enforces racism, infects people’ minds, and drives them further apart. It is a double-edged sword that makes both black and white people feel guilty and uneasy about their background.
In summary, in this series, I examine how race shapes society and social interactions. I suggest that racism is deeply embedded in our culture and that it is pervasive in everyday life. I argue that critical race theory drives a wedge between different racial communities and promotes anti-realism and separatism. I conclude by stating that critical race theory leads to feelings of guilt and mistrust between the two races. My advice is that it is important for people of all races to understand the implications of this theory and be open to discussing it.
What is your position about critical race theory? Please share your opinions with me.