!!Kal Penn for Obama!! - The White House Sitcom

Hey guys,
I´ve known this fact (call it disturbing, astonishing, amazing, boring, surprising or whatever) for several months, but as we were talking about Obama, his personality and charisma in class today I directly thought back to that: Kal Penn is about to work for Barack Obama in the White House - as a "full" member of staff.
For those of you who do not know him: Here is first of all a picture - that is him (taken from http://www.emeriandjonahscloset.com/ejc/aj/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/kal-penn.jpg).
Looks quite serious, doesn´t he?? A young serious man who can take his tasks and fulfill them!
Hehe - yes! But...


But there is also another side of Kal Penn (not that negatively connotated as it may sound now):
He used to work as an actor - okay, nothing special, you may think, but!!
Most of you might know him from the series Dr. House (I love it by the way, alothough I liked the first two seasons best). He played the young Dr. Lawrence Kutner working for Dr. House´s team. After being invited by Obama to work for him, the figure Kutner had to commit suicide as both jobs at the same time were incompatible. This was the more serious part of his work, but now let´s turn to some movies he made that are even less compatible with his future job:

They are still quite unknown here, but one must have seen them. It is firstly Harold & Kumar - Go to White Castle and secondly the sequel to it: Harold & Kumar - Escape from Guantanamo Bay.
In these movies, Kal Penn (which is actually only a stage name; his real one is Kalpen Modi) plays Kumar, a weed smoking, lazy young man who is forced to study medicine by his father. His purpose in life is having fun and smoking as much weed as he can get, together with his friend Harold (a Korean man - also a weedhead, but a little bit more reasonable), alone or with his Jewish friends. This is what it look like then (taken from flixster.com:



Now the question: Can such a man really take such a responsibility and work for the White House? At first glance he can absolutely NOT - I mean he is a weedhead who does not do anything with his life!
But: Barack Obama will not have chosen an unreliable man to work for him who could crash all his previous work. By the way - what is Modi´s job then? He is supposed to be some kind of a mediator between the American government and Asian immigrants and artists. He does not expect to get special treatment, but he would like to be regarded as any other member of staff and he does not want to take advantage of his former career as an actor.


Here is an online source reporting about this, but there are many other comparable ones, just google it, since you know how search engines work :)
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601088&sid=aFXnt_hqV._8&refer=muse

If you are interested in his movies, here is a trailer of the first movie where they try to get some burgers at White Castle ;)




This is an interview with Kalpen Modi; at first summarizing what he has done so far and then he talks about what his tasks are in the White House, and he is not only a "weedhead". Check it out!

Moment of Zen

This is the latest Moment of Zen:
"The Bradley Effect - Still A Threat Today?"

As you can see, this blog entry deals with the question of wether the Bradley Effect nowadays can still influence the election results in comparison to the number in the polls before or not.

In the run-up of the 2008 elections, many experts and political scientists were wondering if Obama could still fail although he seemed to be uncatchable for John McCain. They drew analogies to the election campaign of Tom Bradley in 1982 who really lost this election although he was superior to his opponent according to the polls before.
I think that this question is legitimate, because also in the 2008 elections a black politician fought against a white one. Obama showed that he did not fail due to the Bradley effect, but that he won almost as predicted. Why has there not been this special effect? Well, I do not know the ´82 elections for the gouvernor in California to that extent as I got it in Obama´s case, but I still think that first of all the politician has to "reach" the population and have fantastic ideas how to improve politics, economy, environment and so on and so forth. Secondly, this man must have a great charisma and authenticity to make the people trust him. I do not know if this was the case more than 25 years ago, but Obama had these character traits and political abilities - that is why he won.
Furthermore, TIMES HAVE CHANGED (but still, Obama calls for a further change ;) ):
I am of the idea that the vast majority of society has become much more liberal and open to new ideas and cultures, so that a black man can become the world´s most powerful man.
Nevertheless, one is absolutely NOT allowed to forget what has happened in history (especially WW2). Here in Germany the right-wing parties gain strength and one really has to fight against this to prevent these parties from winning seats in the German Bundestag.

But let us get back to America now: As I can judge the matter, Tom Bradley lost because many many voters only stated their support for this candidate, so that no one could accuse them of racism and other related things. When casting the ballots they voted according to their real opinion.
As mentioned above, one has to recognize that times have changed and that most of the people really concentrate on the candidate´s progam and his working abilities. It won´t be long till the world has the first female president - society is open for that! Liberality and Open-Mindedness!

In conclusion, to answer the Moment of Zen, one can say that the Bradley Effect is not a threat anymore in the "Western civilized world". But in contrast I think that this could happen in the Middle East (where ballott-rigging is a daily occurence: see blog entries below!) or in Asian countries, if a candidate does not correspond to the "regular" view. Censorship also looms large in this case.

Sincerely, see you in class!

What Kind of Tech User Am I??

Well, I did the test mentioned in the title and the result was that I am an Ambivalent Networker:
If you are an Ambivalent Networker, you have folded mobile devices into how you run your social life, whether through texting or online social networking tools. You also rely on ICTs for entertainment. At the same time – perhaps because of the volume of digital pings from others – you may sometimes find all your connectivity to be intrusive. You are confident in your ability to troubleshoot your various information devices and services.

Well, I think that this matches pretty well, because I think that I would be able to "survive" without my cellphone, TV, Radio, etc. Concerning the Web, it would be somhow difficult as it takes such a big part in life: it nearly replaces all the old media devices, you can watch TV online, or via a DVB-T stick, you can listen to the radio online, read newspapers, even local ones!
But, as I have already mentioned in a blog entry before, what do we actually do online? If we do not have to do any reference work for university, everyone of us has got his 4 or 5 webpages (email, YouTube, studiVZ, maybe amazon and ebay) and that is it! And how often do we sit in front of the monitor and think "Maaan... it is so boring, why does not anything happen??" - but then, there might be an event of a world-wide interest, such as Michael Jackson´s death (Rest in Peace, Jacko). Then we have got something else to do, because we try to find out the circumstances (in this case) and all that is connected to this event.
I was impressed by the extent the media reported on MJ´s death: Each and every headline looked the same: "Michael Jackson is dead!" There were even special programs on CNN and BBC so that the regular shows were not broadcast to report about Jackson...

But let´s get back to the test: I am pretty happy with the result, because I am sure that I can manage my life without all this technical stuff... at least temporarily ;)

My online behavior has not changed by taking this class very much, but I have to say that now I am much more active concerning blogs, blogposts, comments and stuff like that! Thanks Svetlana! :) I have always been somehow interested in blogging, but I have never taken the step. Now I see that it is pretty easy, does not take much time, and sharing thoughts with others and getting opinions of other people can actually widen your (mental) horizon and be much fun!

So guys, don´t be afraid of new things, especially technical devices! And tell your parents and grand-parents who might be frightened of them!

The Iranian Electoral System

Hey folks,

in addition to my blog entry about ballot-rigging and if it can only occur in the Middle East, such as probably happened in Iran as I mentioned this example and as we are supposed to write something in addition to last session, I decided to write this entry about the Iranian electoral system and want to compare it to the American one. I hope that I can write in “Plain English” ;)

Firstly, the biggest difference in these two electoral system is the degree of the power of each president. Whereas Obama is regarded as the “most powerful man in the world”, the Iranian president Ahmadinedschad is only ranked second – behind the “non-elected theocracy”, in this case it is Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. HE is the most powerful man in Iran and he has got the decisions to make, comparable to Obama: He calls the different ministers into office (e.g. foreign and defense minister) and he has got the control over the important and “trend-setting” decisions for the country of Iran. This man is not elected as the president, as mentioned above, but in his case, it is an appointment for life.
The president´s power in contrast is restricted. He is Head of Government and elected for four years. He has to make proposals for the candidates of the ministries and these proposals have to be accepted by parliament. Ahmadinedschad was finally elected and he fulfilled the conditions to become president: He is Muslim and between 25 and 75 years old. Women actually are allowed to run for president by law, but their candidacy has never been accepted by the “ruling clerics” so that they had to give their business up.
Now the question is: Who is allowed to vote? That is pretty simple and comparable tour German and American electoral system. Everyone being at least 18 years old. All in all this makes a sum of over 46 million eligible Iranian voters. It is important that all Iranian people are allowed to vote who fulfill these conditions – also those living abroad: another similarity.
The last important fact is that the president is elected directly by the population and he only needs a simple majority (>50%), not a majority of two thirds or something. Here the electoral system is some kind of, I do not want to say “primitive”, but very simple. I think, we like our electoral system better, because we are just used to it – but if you have a closer look at the Iranian one, one has to say that it does not sound that bad actually, if you can directly vote for the president! But then, there is of course the danger of ballot-rigging (see my entry about that down below ;) )!

I hope I did not get the Iranian electoral system wrong! Please feel free to comment on any mistakes!

Moment of Zen

Breakdown - How dependent is the Web on Google?

On May 14th the Internet users could not reach Google due to a routing-problem. This includes not only the search engine which many users think Google is only! But Google is much more than only this search engine: have a look at this German webpage http://www.drweb.de/magazin/google-dienste-kann-alles-weis-alles/ and you will count more than 70 tools that Google offers! There are the ones everyone knows and others that not everybody knows that they belong to Google , but they are as important as the popular ones.

1. Of course there is at first the search engine. If Google Search is not accessible, many users do not know how to handle other search engines and probably they do even not know where to find and how to use them!
2. Then there is YouTube. Did all of you know that YouTube belongs to Google?? If Google Search does not work, YouTube does not either. At first glance this does not sound, well, disturbing. But how many of us do have their 4 or 5 webpages they visit daily (mailaccounts, newsfeeds and probably YouTube and so on) and if one does not work, that is quite annoying!
3. blogger.com: Many of us have their blogs on blogger.com or blogspot.com. These pages also belong to Google! If Google broke down we could not post our Moments of Zen and other blog entries, and we would not receive points for that! You see, the Web is dependent on Google to a really high degree, it has also got far-reaching influence on the daily "offline" life!
4. There are probably some of us sharing their collection of photos on Picasa. This page cannot be accessed and if you used photos from Picasa in your blog entries or on your webpages, then these photos will not be shown, just because Google has broken down!
5. Do not forget Google Earth and Google Maps!

These are the most important Google tools that we get into contact with frequently, but there are others, such as Google Analytics and Google AdSense, which, if they cannot work properly due to Google´s breakdown, are responsible for the deathless loading times of web pages - everyone has experienced this at least some times and one always wonders if his or her PC has got a virus or something so that the pages cannot be loaded properly!
But it is all (of course not always, but often :) ) up to Google!

The continuative question now is: What can we as Internet users do against this dependency on Google? "Nothing", many will think. But a first step could be to try out Microsoft´s new search engine Bing! This shall not be advertising, but one has to ´fight´ against Google´s monopoly!


Try it out, folks!



annotation by the author: I used the names of Google and its tools this often and repeated them volitionally to show to what extent Google influences one´s online web behavior! Not that anyone accuses me of a bad syntax or of a ´narrow´ and restricted lexis! ;)

Moment of Zen

Ballot-Rigging - Only in the Middle East?

The Iranian population re-elected their president Mahmoud Ahmadinedschad with about two thirds of all people with voting power. Before, experts had seen his rival Hossein Mussawi and Ahmadinedschad on the same level - that is why the election result is astonishing (in the negative sense). Directly after the result obtained official certification, Mussawi accused Ahamadinedschad for ballot-rigging. He also claims that his election campaign was sabotaged: he was active on facebook which was blocked -according to Ahamadinedschad´s party this happened due to "supernatural" circumstances-, but with regard to the blocking of the mobile communications network in several areas in Iran, one can assume that this is obviously ballot-rigging.
Many politicians say, that this country missed a chance of opening towards the Western world and breaking out of the incrusted structures. The re-elected president also stated that he would not accept the conditions of nuclear arms reduction, but even to continue building them! This is a slap in the face of the Western countries trying to bring freedom to the country, first of all the USA.

We have heard many times that manipulation, sabotage and dictatorship are a common thing in the Middle East - just regard Saddam Hussein! He was finally overthrown, but Mahmoud Ahmadinedschad seems to take the same traits as Hussein. Now it is America´s job as the "world police" to calm the rumours there - not only America´s job of course, but of all the Western countries fighting for freedom and autonomy for Iran.


Now the question is: Does ballot-rigging only occur in the Middle East or is it possible that the American or German elections become sabotaged?
There were rumors that there was a ballot-rigging in the 2004-elections when Bush won against John Kerry, but nobody could ever prove this suspicion.
Here is a video that shows in a funny way how ballot-rigging worked in 2004 (here it is in Florida) so that George W. Bush could be re-elected. But keep in mind: The subject-matter of this video is obviously NOT funny! It has got a serious background!




You see: ballot-rigging is not only a thing that occurs in the Middle East, it is also ´there´ in the US and probably in Germany! There were the same rumors in the 2008 election and "The Simpsons" also picked this topic up:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1aBaX9GPSaQ
They parody, but as mentioned above, it is also the case here, that the serious background remains the same! KEEP THIS IN MIND!! Otherwise you numb yourself to these processes and it is up to us to keep a clear mind to distinguish what is right and what is wrong!

Best wishes!

Social Networks Online and Offline - in how far do they differ?

Good evening again!


this is the Moment of Zen for this blog entry: Social Networks Online and Offline - in how far do they differ?

It is my personal opinion, maybe you have got another perspective on this, I would appreciate if you left a comment about your own view below my blog entry!

I use StudiVZ and facebook to get in contanct with people online, so there I can find my peers and they build my social network online. But what is interesting is that the people I have added as "friends" there differ completely! On StudiVZ I have got my friends from my former school, now from university, from sports clubs, other institutions from everyday life and so on, I think you can imagine. Of course some of them are there on facebook, but most of them are those who I met during my stay in Australia. Consequently one could say that I have got two social networks... one on studivz, one on facebook...
the problem is that facebook has not been that popluar in Germany as StudiVZ, but the interest in it grows exponentially. At the moment there are about 2.5 million German facebook users online.

What is as important is the following: I have got nearly 300 friends on StudiVZ and some of them I even do not really or speak to regularly! Why are they my friends there though? Does not make sense, does it? You know each other from seminars or something else and then you add this person as a friend on StudiVZ; out of these 300 I am in close contact with about 20 to 30 at most!
That is the difference between offline and online networks: one has got a whole load of friends online, but you do not get in close contact with most of them when being offline. It is easier to just write a short message online and see how anyone is going, but is thhis essential?? I don´t think so... friendships, if you want to call them that, can also find an end pretty easily if the other one does not reply to these messages!

I prefer the offline social network! What do you think?