INTERPRETATIONS

I am always struck by how different people can see the same information but reach significantly different interpretations of the facts. No one is an exception or at least I am not. The issue that brings this issue to the forefront in my might tonight is the continuing argument about President Obama's attending or not attending Columbia University in New York City from 1981-1983. Admittedly, the \evidence for his being a student is not rock solid. Those who believe he was never there will only accept as proof the witness of many people (more than the two or three that have been found so far) or seeing his transcript. Although presidents are not required to produce their transcripts (George W. Bush never did), still there as many who seem to believe President Obama should. On the other hand, I do not require such certainty. The evidence that is available is:

1. The witness of  at least two fellow students.
2. His article in the school's journal. 
3. His name listed on the 1983 graduation program.
4. Acknowledgment of his status as an notable graduate when he was elected to the Illinois Senate in the Columbia University newspaper. 

Full disclosure demands that I say I am a strong President Obama supporter. I voted for him twice... three times if I include the Presidential Primary. However, I have to wonder why it is so important to some to have absolute proof of his Columbia University undergraduate degree. There is no debate that he then attended Harvard University where he graduated with his Law Degree. They must have seen his Columbia University transcript! If it was good enough to get him into Harvard, it has to be good enough for me. 

There are at least two explanations for this difference in interpretations between me and the "birthers" must be either that they have stronger opposition to Obama being president than I did about George W. Bush and/or they are at least slightly racists. I know that the first option is true; I suspect that the second is also true. 

It is interesting to me that none of Obama's major political rivals are concerned either.

34 CANTIGA AO LUAR

LES MISERABLES

In the mid 70's, I came across the book Les Miserables by Victor Hugo. I fell in love with this story. I am not an avid reader and am a slow one but I could not put down the book. Its mixture of love found, love lost, struggle freedom, and the tension between true justice and blind obedience to the law, captivated me. In the forward of his book, Victor Hugo wrote:

"So long as there shall exist, by reason of law and custom, a social condemnation which, in the midst of civilization, artificially creates a hell on earth, and complicates with human fatality a destiny that is divine; so long as the three problems of the century --the degradation of man by the exploitation of his labor, the ruin of woman by starvation, and the atrophy of childhood by physical and spiritual night -- are not solved; so long as in certain regions, social asphyxia shall be possible; in other words, and from a still broader point of view, so long as ignorance and misery remain on earth, there should be a need for books such as this."

I am baffled that this beautiful movie did not win more Academy Awards.