With the news that the home of former blues great Muddy Waters may be
demolished, everyone from local musicians to nearby neighbors are
scrambling to preserve it as a landmark.
[soundcloud url="http://api.soundcloud.com/tracks/76920570" params="" width=" 100%" height="166" iframe="true" /]
VIDEO: Wayne and Janelle Hockett discuss adopting haitian sisters
Three Haitian sisters were orphaned after a devastating earthquake hit Haiti almost three years ago. After viewing a blog post requesting a special family for the girls, Wayne and Janelle Hockett of Chicago decided to adopt the sisters, so they were able to stay together. Jan. 9, 2013 (Video by Josclynn Brandon and Angelica Robinson)
Chicago couple adopting sisters orphaned by Haiti earthquake
 |
| (Photo by Josclynn Brandon) |
In an orphanage just two hours away from Port-au-Prince, Haiti, three sisters have been waiting almost three years to be adopted. The sisters were orphaned after a 7.0 magnitude earthquake destroyed many areas of Haiti's capital city and left thousands dead on Jan. 12, 2010.
Now the girls are close to having a family again -- in Chicago.
Wayne and Janelle Hockett have been trying to adopt children for almost seven years. When Janelle stumbled across a blog post about the sisters -- ages 15, 10 and 8 -- she immediately called her husband.
"We both read it, and thought about it quite a bit, prayed about it quite a bit, and talked about it," said Janelle.
Neither Janelle nor Wayne had seen a picture of the girls but knew this was right for them. They began working with an Oak Park adoption agency to move forward with the adopting them.
The Hocketts said they hadn't been open with others about their adoption process over the years. But this time it was different.
"We felt like we have to be talking about this because we need help," she said. "We needed all of our friends alongside us."
The Hocketts were up against hefty cost of adoption-- roughly $50,000. But in addition to the cost, they learned that time was also a critical factor.
Under Haiti law, children are no longer adoptable at the age of 16. To make sure the girls can stay together, the adoption needs to be finalized before the oldest child’s 16th birthday in September.
Last March, just a few months after they committed to the adoption, the Hocketts started a blog about it. The blog not only documented their adoption journey, but also was a source of fundraising to help pay the for the adoption.
“Understanding that you need this help and trying to open yourself up to that is a very humbling process,” Wayne said.
But help did come. An anonymous donor gave almost $15,000 -- the remaining amount of money needed to pay for the adoption.
“When something this large comes along like the anonymous donor," Janelle said. "It’s incredible enough to take your breath away for minute.”
In October, they traveled to Haiti to meet the sisters in person for the first time.
The only sentence girls knew one sentence in English was, "Hello my name is ..." The Hocketts relied on smiles and charades to communicate with the girls during their visit at the Haitian adoption agency.
“Majority of the time we were there we just played and did quite a few things without worrying about language,” Janelle said. “The girls were more open than we expected with hugs, kisses, smiles, and consistently being with us.”
In one activity, the Hocketts made bracelets with the girls. All of them chose a different bead to represent each of them for the bracelet, but all of the bracelets had a heart-shaped bead.
Janelle pointed to the heart-shaped bead and said fanmi, the word for "family" in Haitian Creole. The girls understood.
“The best part about it is that we caught the youngest one later in the day touching [the beads] and saying each of our names.” Janelle said. “Which for us was over the moon … more than we could have expected from the activity.”
With that memory, the Hocketts are excited that eager to have the girls home.
“All along we have wanted a family,” Janelle said, “and this is a unique experience in that we get to join a family.”
Watch Party Gave Supporters a Voice
 |
| (Photo by Angelica Robinson) |
Thousands of people gathered in McCormick Place anxiously awaiting the results of the presidential election Tuesday night.
Among the list of high profile politicians and celebrities, were campaigners. The everyday people who volunteered their time to ensure the re-election of President Obama.
Ben Finkenbinder, a Midwest Press secretary for the Obama Campaign, said the volunteers on the ground are, “the engine of this campaign.”
Understanding that Wisconsin would be a key state in helping him win re-election, supporters went door to door Nov. 3-5 to help increase voter turnout. For doing this, Obama offered supporters an opportunity to a ticket to his Election night watch party in McCormick Place.
“We invested in a strong ground game well over a year ago across the entire country,” said Finkenbinder. “And making sure that they have all the tools they need to make sure they can go forward.”
Finkenbinder said it was important to make sure the volunteers had the resources they needed to talk to their neighbors and their friends about the election.
William Ocasio went out to campaign for President Obama because he believes Obama will look out for the middle class.
“I think major issues [like] Obamacare is probably the most important thing for me,” Ocasio said. “On the economy on taxes he’s the best person.”
Ocasio was able to attend the election night watch party because of his help canvasing Iowa and Wisconsin—two of the battle ground states.
The key factor in the president’s re-election was his ability to pull swing states including, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Iowa, Virginia and Nevada.
“I think the president ran a really good campaign, especially in the last few weeks,” said Gov. Pat Quinn.. “This was a battle for the soul of America.”
The audience erupted after it was announced that President Obama had been re-elected for a second term in office. People in the crowd cheered, danced, hugged, and shed tears of joy.
Before taking the stage for his acceptance speech, Obama addressed his supporters on Twitter and said, “This happened because of you. Thank you.”
“Coming from Illinois I think we are all proud of Obama,” Quinn said. “He has a Philosophy that I think will move our country forward and a program that will make America better.”
Posted on redlinproject.org November 7, 2012
Early Voting the Ticket for Some Chicagoans
 |
| (Photo by Angelica Robinson) |
It has been a familiar sight on Election Days of the past -- long lines snaking out of voting precincts and down the street.Today, you can still see those lines -- but now as many as two weeks before the election.
Early voting has become increasingly popular in this year's presidential race, just as it was in the historic 2008 election. With the election just five days away, voters are still making their way to cast their votes early.
As of Oct. 30, roughly 146,000 Chicagoans have cast their ballot early. Various locations all over the city say they have have seen a rise in early voter turnout.
Jim Allen, communications director of the Chicago Board of Election Commissioners, said it is difficult to measure the turnout against the 2008 election because this year, voters had 14 days to vote early, in comparison with an 18 day early schedule last year. The polls opened for early voting on Oct. 22.
"When we compare the first week of this year's early voting program to the first week of last year's presidential election we were up considerably," he explained. "We're looking at the possibility of breaking even with the 2008 numbers which would be great."
Last year, the county didn't have as many voters come out, which could be due to the rather early time frame, Allen said. This year though, voters came in huge crowds -- some standing in 90-minute lines at precincts last weekend in Bucktown -- a sign that there could be few undecided voters, he said.
"When it comes to early voting that usually means that there are that many more people that their mind is made up or there are that many more people who indicated a desire to vote,” he added.
The 19th Ward in Beverly has been the most popular voting spot. This is no surprise to Allen, because historically the 19th Ward has been among the leaders in voter turnout. The 43rd Ward, whose early voting site is at the Lincoln Park Library, has had consistent traffic during the early voting period as well.
Abby Awosogba went to the Lincoln Park Library to cast her vote Tuesday. As a graduate student at DePaul University, she found it convenient to walk across the street from campus to cast her vote. Although previously she had not considered voting early, it was the encouragement of her co-workers that convinced her to vote early.
"I actually was at work and a couple of my co-workers said they were voting today," she said. "I had an idea who I was voting for so I figured I might as well get it done."
Awosogba described the process as relatively easy.
"It was easy and calm… nothing outrageous,” she said. "I think I waited about 20 to 30 minutes, so it wasn't that bad."
Although Awosogba said she likes voting on Election Day, the convenience of voting early has made her consider voting early again in the next election. And convenience is what Allen said it's all about.
"If you are ready to vote, it's a way to cast your ballot and not have to worry about a scheduling conflict on Election Day," he said. "You don't have to worry that you have to work late, or about a daycare situation, or running errands."
Early voter Carol Bivat agreed. She said this is great alternative for people who may have conflicts on Tuesday.
“This makes it so you can pick a time during the whole week so I think more people will vote," she said.
Unlike Awosogba, this is not Bivat’s first time voting early. She said last year she came out to the polls before Election Day as well. Bivat said that last time she came to vote there was not a huge turnout. And although she had to wait in a line this year, she is pleased the people are going out to vote.
“It's kind of sad when you come and there aren't a lot of people,” she said. “So I don't mind waiting in the line."
Despite the rise in popularity for early voting, Allen said the majority of the ballots in Cook County are cast on Election Day.
“There are many traditionalists among us,” he said. “And some people would rather just wait and see if there are any surprises out there."
For those who would like to vote early, the Chicago Board of Elections website has an early voting traffic report. The site is an effort to help voters gauge which sites around the city will be less likely to have lines.
Published on redlineproject.org November 1, 2012.
Foreign Policy a Defining Factor for a President
Polls generally show that the American people are not particularly paying
attention to international issues, but foreign policy has a much broader -- and
more indirect affect -- on people's voting decisions, DePaul University
political science professor Patrick Callahan said Wednesday night.
"Specifically, I think people take cues about whether or not a person appears to be presidential from how they deal with international affairs," Callahan said at a weekly elections forum in Lincoln Park.
Both President Obama and Mitt Romney have very different ideologies as it pertains to foreign affairs. Callahan described Obama's administration as using a Liberal internationalism approach.
Liberal internationalism stresses the importance of international institutions, such as NATO. Representatives come together to figure out how to pursue a common interest or venture.
"What will make the decisions of international institutions effective is the desire of countries to be apart of the international community," he said.
Under liberal internationalism, the best interests of the country derive from inter-dependence. One country's insecurity directly affects the security of other countries.
This is why economic planning has to be done cooperatively, Callahan explained. In order for the US to move forward, countries must work together.
"International law and international norms provide a framework for thinking about what to do," he said.
Another key element of this ideology is that American leadership is necessary but limited. Callahan said that there are a variety of factors including domestic and fiscal constraints.
"No one institution is so powerful that it can impose its will and solve the world's problems," he said.
One downside, Callahan points out, is that liberal internationalism generates opportunity for conflicts -- particularly as it pertains to power distribution. An example of this is the recent situation with Libya and Syria.
"The U.S. intervened only as part of a handle operation and only after authorized by the United Nations," he said. "The president made it very clear that we would not use military force in the absence of international authorization."
Romney has a more of a traditional realism view on foreign policy. Romney has not had to deal with international affairs on a large scale like Obama.
Callahan said it is important to consider the rhetoric of his speeches and what was said in a Republican platform. Another clue into how he would handle foreign policy is to look at his advisers.
"There are two competing tendencies at work in Romney perspective on international affairs," he said. "And those are characterized as traditional realism and neo-conservatism."
Neo-conservatism has two parts: Hegemonism and Liberalism.
Hegemonism is the idea that leadership is necessary in order to prevent disorder from emerging. While Liberalism keeps basics interest of the US at the forefront and the thought is that democracy is better that other forms of government. The thought is that the US is the best leader, and others will follow.
"This is because the leadership of the US will be seen as being benevolent, in the common good, and consistent with widely shared values," he said.
This ideology is similar to that of the Reagan administration, Callahan said.
"It is very clear from the platform and other things that the rhetorical strategy of the Romney camp is attempting to establish some sort of association between Romney and Reagan," he added.
Romney has argued for a more confrontational stance against Russia and China, which falls in line with traditional realism ideology.
Published on redlineproject.org October 11, 2012
"Specifically, I think people take cues about whether or not a person appears to be presidential from how they deal with international affairs," Callahan said at a weekly elections forum in Lincoln Park.
Both President Obama and Mitt Romney have very different ideologies as it pertains to foreign affairs. Callahan described Obama's administration as using a Liberal internationalism approach.
Liberal internationalism stresses the importance of international institutions, such as NATO. Representatives come together to figure out how to pursue a common interest or venture.
"What will make the decisions of international institutions effective is the desire of countries to be apart of the international community," he said.
Under liberal internationalism, the best interests of the country derive from inter-dependence. One country's insecurity directly affects the security of other countries.
This is why economic planning has to be done cooperatively, Callahan explained. In order for the US to move forward, countries must work together.
"International law and international norms provide a framework for thinking about what to do," he said.
Another key element of this ideology is that American leadership is necessary but limited. Callahan said that there are a variety of factors including domestic and fiscal constraints.
"No one institution is so powerful that it can impose its will and solve the world's problems," he said.
One downside, Callahan points out, is that liberal internationalism generates opportunity for conflicts -- particularly as it pertains to power distribution. An example of this is the recent situation with Libya and Syria.
"The U.S. intervened only as part of a handle operation and only after authorized by the United Nations," he said. "The president made it very clear that we would not use military force in the absence of international authorization."
Romney has a more of a traditional realism view on foreign policy. Romney has not had to deal with international affairs on a large scale like Obama.
Callahan said it is important to consider the rhetoric of his speeches and what was said in a Republican platform. Another clue into how he would handle foreign policy is to look at his advisers.
"There are two competing tendencies at work in Romney perspective on international affairs," he said. "And those are characterized as traditional realism and neo-conservatism."
Neo-conservatism has two parts: Hegemonism and Liberalism.
Hegemonism is the idea that leadership is necessary in order to prevent disorder from emerging. While Liberalism keeps basics interest of the US at the forefront and the thought is that democracy is better that other forms of government. The thought is that the US is the best leader, and others will follow.
"This is because the leadership of the US will be seen as being benevolent, in the common good, and consistent with widely shared values," he said.
This ideology is similar to that of the Reagan administration, Callahan said.
"It is very clear from the platform and other things that the rhetorical strategy of the Romney camp is attempting to establish some sort of association between Romney and Reagan," he added.
Romney has argued for a more confrontational stance against Russia and China, which falls in line with traditional realism ideology.
Published on redlineproject.org October 11, 2012
Panelist Say Reporting Key In Covering Elections, Regardless of Medium
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="270" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/ctFrBlCNvqA" width="480"></iframe>
How important is the role of media in helping voters elect a presidential candidate?
A panel featuring some of Chicago’s top journalists and DePaul University’s political experts addressed that question on Wednesday night at an event moderated by Andy Shaw of the Better Government Association.
It was part of the Carlos Hernandez Gomez Memorial Forum on Politics and Public Service series. Gomez was a DePaul alum who worked in the Chicago media.
Dave Lundy, president of Aileron Communications, a strategic communications firm in Chicago, said the mainstream media is no longer just TV, radio and print.
"The elephant in the room that everyone has to discuss is social media," said Randi Belisomo of WGN. "We get so much information from the Internet, which is not filtered through the media."
Lundy said there is more relevant content available on political issues today than there has ever been. The difference is that now is that consumers can choose what information they would like to receive.
“What is extremely depressing as someone who cares an awful lot about policy as well as politics is what I characterize as the death of facts,” Lundy said.
According to Lundy and several other panelists, many news outlets lack substance in a newscast. Too often, news outlets are using social media to determine what is most popular and incorporating that into news headlines.
Digital media outlets like Twitter and FaceBook are not entirely to blame though. According to veteran journalist and DePaul adjunct journalism professor Mike Conklin, traditional news mediums like broadcast, print, and radio, should be held accountable for delivering relevant information on the issues.
"What I would like to see is for people to stop treating politics like a football game," he said. "There's very little in-depth reporting at all."
Michael Mezey, a DePaul professor in the department of Political Science, agreed with Conklin.
"The coverage of politics and the election is like ESPN meets Entertainment Tonight," Mezey said. "It's more on the horse race, not the issues."
Wayne Steger, professor of Political Science at DePaul, isn’t as concerned with social media or the blogosphere's impact on news content. He believes the content discussed on social media is usually taken from mainstream news outlets.
"I'm not sure the social media operates without the mainstream media," Steger said.
Perhaps the reason behind the lack of substance in news reports is a lack of concern among citizens, Steger added. Both Steger and Mezey agreed that most consumers of news aren't paying attention to real politics. Instead, they tune in to sensationalized stories.
"If you ask a people what they remember from last week's debate, I think the answer would be the Big Bird response," Mezey said. "It's the sensational type of thing which grabs people's attention."
The danger of this is that the uninformed public becomes susceptible to misinformation. The average person is not watching media enough to see watchdogs and fact checkers, Steger said. Therefore, voters can be easily swayed by a single event rather than where a candidate actually stands on the issues, he warned.
"If people aren't paying attention they can't be skeptical about what is going on," Steger said. "They can't call out a politician when they change their position."
Steger said he feels people want to hear information consistent with their own beliefs. Politicians are willing to tell people what they want to hear and people latch on to it, he said.
Therefore, Shaw said, it is the job of the media to really dig and find out about the candidates, regardless of the type of media -- mainstream, digital or online.
"Media has one amazing power ... and that's the power to find out something that no one has ever heard [and] change the course of a campaign," Shaw said. "The biggest thing we can do is is to find really important things that re-frame issues and perceptions."
How important is the role of media in helping voters elect a presidential candidate?
A panel featuring some of Chicago’s top journalists and DePaul University’s political experts addressed that question on Wednesday night at an event moderated by Andy Shaw of the Better Government Association.
It was part of the Carlos Hernandez Gomez Memorial Forum on Politics and Public Service series. Gomez was a DePaul alum who worked in the Chicago media.
Dave Lundy, president of Aileron Communications, a strategic communications firm in Chicago, said the mainstream media is no longer just TV, radio and print.
"The elephant in the room that everyone has to discuss is social media," said Randi Belisomo of WGN. "We get so much information from the Internet, which is not filtered through the media."
Lundy said there is more relevant content available on political issues today than there has ever been. The difference is that now is that consumers can choose what information they would like to receive.
“What is extremely depressing as someone who cares an awful lot about policy as well as politics is what I characterize as the death of facts,” Lundy said.
According to Lundy and several other panelists, many news outlets lack substance in a newscast. Too often, news outlets are using social media to determine what is most popular and incorporating that into news headlines.
Digital media outlets like Twitter and FaceBook are not entirely to blame though. According to veteran journalist and DePaul adjunct journalism professor Mike Conklin, traditional news mediums like broadcast, print, and radio, should be held accountable for delivering relevant information on the issues.
"What I would like to see is for people to stop treating politics like a football game," he said. "There's very little in-depth reporting at all."
Michael Mezey, a DePaul professor in the department of Political Science, agreed with Conklin.
"The coverage of politics and the election is like ESPN meets Entertainment Tonight," Mezey said. "It's more on the horse race, not the issues."
Wayne Steger, professor of Political Science at DePaul, isn’t as concerned with social media or the blogosphere's impact on news content. He believes the content discussed on social media is usually taken from mainstream news outlets.
"I'm not sure the social media operates without the mainstream media," Steger said.
Perhaps the reason behind the lack of substance in news reports is a lack of concern among citizens, Steger added. Both Steger and Mezey agreed that most consumers of news aren't paying attention to real politics. Instead, they tune in to sensationalized stories.
"If you ask a people what they remember from last week's debate, I think the answer would be the Big Bird response," Mezey said. "It's the sensational type of thing which grabs people's attention."
The danger of this is that the uninformed public becomes susceptible to misinformation. The average person is not watching media enough to see watchdogs and fact checkers, Steger said. Therefore, voters can be easily swayed by a single event rather than where a candidate actually stands on the issues, he warned.
"If people aren't paying attention they can't be skeptical about what is going on," Steger said. "They can't call out a politician when they change their position."
Steger said he feels people want to hear information consistent with their own beliefs. Politicians are willing to tell people what they want to hear and people latch on to it, he said.
Therefore, Shaw said, it is the job of the media to really dig and find out about the candidates, regardless of the type of media -- mainstream, digital or online.
"Media has one amazing power ... and that's the power to find out something that no one has ever heard [and] change the course of a campaign," Shaw said. "The biggest thing we can do is is to find really important things that re-frame issues and perceptions."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)