Former President Jimmy Carter says Obama never calls him for advice.

Former President Jimmy Carter says Obama never calls him for advice.

 Jimmy Carter wants President Obama to pick up the phone.

Carter (right) with U.S. President Barack Obama (center) and former president Bill Clinton (left) on August 28, 2013.

James Earl "Jimmy" Carter, Jr. is an American politician and member of the Democratic Party who served as the 39th President of the United States from 1977 to 1981 and was awarded the 2002 Nobel Peace Prize.

Brief history of former President Jimmy Carter:
    Born: October 1, 1924 (age 89), Plains, Georgia, USA
    Nationality: United States of America
    Height: 5' 9" (1.75m)
    Spouse: Rosalynn Carter (m. 1946-present)
    Parents: Lillian Gordy Carter, James Earl Carter, Sr.
    Children: Amy Carter, James Carter, Jack Carter, Donnel Carter

In an Interview on NBC says,
In an interview on NBC’s ‘Meet the Press,’ Carter, 89, expressed sadness that Obama never asks for his opinion. Carter said that many other past Presidents have gotten in touch with him.

 Jimmy Carter wants President Obama to pick up the phone.

The former commander-in-chief expressed sadness during an interview Sunday that Obama doesn’t ever call him for advice.

“Unfortunately, the answer is no,” Carter, 89, said on NBC’s “Meet the Press” after he was asked whether Obama ever calls him to ask for his opinion on domestic and international matters.

 “President Obama doesn’t, but previous Presidents have called on me and the Carter Center to take action,” Carter added, listing situations in which former Presidents George H.W. Bush, Bill Clinton and George W. Bush and even Ronald Reagan have enlisted his help or opinion.Latest new updates

When asked why he thought Obama refused to get in touch for his thoughts on domestic and international matters, Carter suggested that it had to do with their differing views on how to best achieve peace in the Middle East.

 “That’s a hard question for me to answer with complete candor,” Carter said. “I think the problem was that in dealing with the issue of peace between Israel and Egypt, the Carter Center has taken a very strong position of equal treatment and I think this was a sensitive area in which the President didn’t want to be involved.”

“But I can understand those sensitivities and I don’t have any criticism of him,” he added.

 Carter, who was President from 1977 to 1981, also expressed fear that the federal government is “probably” spying on him.

“I have felt that my own communications are probably monitored,” Carter, who has frequently criticized the National Security Agency in the past, said. “And when I want to communicate with a foreign leader privately, I type or write the letter myself, put it in the Post Office and mail it, because I believe if I send an email, it will be monitored.”

Mistakes should to avoid in applying for US citizenship.

Mistakes to avoid in applying for US citizenship. 

If you want to apply for the citizenship of US you have to think first carefully. otherwise you can be a loser.

A nonprofit briefing in Dallas, Texas, on mistakes to avoid in applying for US citizenship(photo online).

 According to the reports of online INQUIRER.net, Even honest mistakes in application can lead to US citizenship denial.Applications for US citizenship have surged in the last 12 years; so have denial rates.Filipinos have the highest rate of naturalization among Asian countries.

Dr. Pedro Servano and his wife, Salvacion, have lived in the United States as legal permanent residents for over 30 years. Their four children are Americans, having been born in this country.

But when the Filipino couple applied for US citizenship in 1991, their application was not only denied, but they were also put in removal proceedings.  It has now been over two decades since they started battling a deportation order and to remain in the country.

Like the Servanos, there are many long-term immigrants who believed they were in good moral standing for naturalization. However, because of past mistakes or through the application period, they were rejected from completing the final step of their U.S. immigration process.

According to immigration lawyers and advocates for U.S. citizenship, these legal immigrants may have run afoul of complicated immigration laws without even knowing it.

Others may have had a criminal conviction or provided untruthful information in their application, which are all grounds for naturalization denial, getting their green card revoked or an order of deportation. latest news updates
“Secretly” married

For the Servanos, the federal government charged them with misrepresenting their marital status when they first came to the United States.

In the early 1980s, according to several reports, their mothers moved separately to this country as legal permanent residents. They filed successfully the petition for Pedro and Salvacion to get their green cards under the category of unmarried children.

As they settled in their new country, Pedro completed his medical residency in Selinsgrove, Pennsylvania. He and Salvacion, a registered nurse, got married in New Jersey in 1987. Without any problems, they renewed their green cards every 10 years.

But when they submitted their application for naturalization on their own, the immigration officers reportedly discovered that the Servanos were secretly married in the Philippines, before the green cards were issued to them in 1985.

Accused of lying to get their green cards, the couple received an order of deportation.

No guess-timating

“Anything you say that isn’t absolutely correct, even if you are just guess-timating your answers, will be considered a lie,” said Paul Zorlan, an immigration lawyer based in Dallas, Texas. “Lying is perjury and you can find yourself being deported.”

Applicants who withhold their real names, try to guess the birthday of their parents or the exact date of their departure and arrival of their past travels abroad, or not being precise about their medical condition, Zorlan added, may be considered “committing fraud” and the immigration office could reject their applications.

A study conducted by Migration Policy Institute, an independent research organization, shows that as applications for naturalization have surged in the last 12 years, denial rates have also been consistently higher at any time.

The highest year was in 2000, when 399,670 applicants were denied or one-third of the applicants. Eight years later, the report added, the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) rejected more than 121,000 naturalization petitions, representing 10.4 percent of the 1,167,822 naturalization applications presented.

Reasons for denials, according to MPI, may include: applicant could not prove five years of permanent residence in the United States; was determined to have lack of allegiance to the United States; have bad moral character (which includes criminal convictions); or failed the English language or American civics test.

Finding pro bono legal help

Facing barriers such as limited English-language skills and ignorance of highly technical immigration laws, immigrants can avail of free citizenship workshops in different cities across the country. These workshops, sponsored by New Americans Campaign, are being held each month.

“This campaign has already spent $85 million in services for eligible immigrants,” Luis Arango-Petrocchi, project manager for the citizenship program at Catholic Charities of Dallas (CCD), said in a briefing with ethnic media. “We’re here to help complete your N-400 [new] application [form], and have immigration attorneys and accredited representatives to review your applications.”

The biggest benefit of the workshop, according to advocates, is that it helps examine the applicants’ eligibility for naturalization and address early detection of red flags, if any, in their applications.

“At the citizenship workshops, we help them practice the test and interview questions and refer them to ESL [English as Second Language] classes,” added Dan Adriansen, CCD’s immigration case manager. “We also inform our clients where to find court documents, if they need to show them, and see if they are eligible for the [$680] application fee waiver.”

Benefited from workshop

Mario Vargas, a 23-year-old political science student at University of Texas, was one of those who benefited from these citizenship workshops. When he applied for an internship with a federal government agency, he realized that his green card was not enough.

“I was told that they will accept me if I became a U.S. citizen. During the [naturalization] interview, I asked the interviewer if they could speed up the process,” he added. “And I was told that they will do the pledge that day so I could get the internship.”

Through the help of Proyecto Inmigrante, one of the immigrant groups based in Dallas and Forth Worth, Texas, that is part of the citizenship campaign, Vargas became a naturalized US citizen last year.

“Between 2010 and 2014, there has been an increase in the number of legal permanent residents eligible for naturalization, and yet we are not tapping into that,” said Claudio Ortega-Hogue, Texas director of civic engagement for NALEO Educational Fund.

Philippines and naturalization rate

Nationally, in 2012, an estimated 13.3 million immigrants were granted legal permanent resident status in the country — and nearly 8.8 million were eligible for naturalization. Yet, according to the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Office of Immigration Statistics, only 757,434 were naturalized.

Of all immigrants from different ethic groups who naturalized in 2012, about 5.9 percent came from the Philippines— the highest among Asian countries, followed by India, 5.7 percent; China, 4.2 percent; Vietnam, 3.1 percent; and Korea, 2 percent. Mexican immigrants had the leading number of naturalization at 13.5 percent.

Some of the obstacles that people get deterred from applying for naturalization include lack of English skills and civic knowledge, criminal and immigration history, and the $680 fees for each applicant.

To be eligible for naturalization, the applicant must be a legal permanent resident and at least 18 years old; have lived in the United States continuously for five year or three years if married to a U.S. citizen.

The applicant must also be able to speak, read and understand basic English; pass a background check; show knowledge of U.S. government and history; and swear allegiance to the United States.

Acquiring citizenship gives immigrants not only the right to vote and to work for the federal government, but also protects them from deportation, allows them to travel and live abroad indefinitely without losing their status in the United States and petition their children and immediate family members, advocates say.

“A petition from a citizen has a faster approval than the one filed by a legal permanent resident or a green card holder,” added Adriansen. So, mistakes should to avoid in applying for US citizenship.

Inquirrer.nets another reports says,"2014—best time to become a US citizen".latest news updates

If you are a legal permanent resident eligible for American citizenship, there is no better time than 2014 to resolve to become a citizen.

As someone who has spent years working with Arab-American immigrants here in Detroit, my own resolution is to help as many of them as possible here in Detroit to take the necessary steps toward citizenship with the New Americans Campaign.

Your community is larger than you might think. Michigan is home to 130,000 lawful permanent residents who could become citizens.

Why follow through on citizenship now? Start with money and power.

First, the money: On the whole, naturalized citizens make more — a new citizen sees an average boost in individual earning of 8 to 11 percent. That makes naturalization a golden opportunity for the entire U.S. economy, which could see growth of $21 billion to $45 billion if all eligible immigrants become citizens.

Second, the power: New citizens can help steer our country, state and cities in the right direction. We are just beginning a critical election year, with a key governor’s race and important congressional elections coming up.

Citizenship gives you a voice on big challenges such as health care, the economy, foreign policy and immigration — not to mention numerous local issues that affect us. Citizens have the responsibility and opportunity to elect the right men and women to handle those challenges in the coming years.

Our country’s strength stems from our ability to work together as fellow Americans. And we work more effectively when all of us work side by side as citizens fully engaged in our communities.

On a more practical level, upcoming changes to the citizenship application form offer an incentive to apply for citizenship now. In coming months, the N-400 form is expected to double in length. Although citizenship will remain achievable, applying for it could be more time-consuming. Thankfully, that change is still a few months away.

As immigration reform dominates the headlines nationwide, more of our neighbors are realizing just how important citizenship is to our national fabric. For the first time in 30 years, the country is heavily engaged in a debate on the merits of immigration, including the opportunity to earn citizenship. That opportunity has always been one of our country’s defining values. And there is no better time to seize it.

"nobody can stand on the sidelines anymore": Barack Obama on Climate Summit 2014

"nobody can stand on the sidelines anymore": Barack Obama

  'Bigger threat than terrorism': Barack Obama signals Australia, India and China must improve on climate change

US President Barack Obama.

 The Sydney Mornig Herald reports, Barack Obama has signaled to developed economies such as Australia and emissions-heavy emerging giants such as India and China that they must lift their games on cutting pollution – declaring "nobody can stand on the sidelines anymore".

In a powerful speech listing out recent weather calamities sweeping the world, he told the UN Climate Summit it was still possible to act but only if the interests of air and water quality for future generations were put ahead of politics – an open challenge to the new backmarkers in the global climate debate such as the Abbott government, to step up the pace of climate change mitigation.

While he singled out no individual countries, there was little doubt as to the targets of his argument: the rapidly developing economic giants of India and China and the high-carbon wealthier economies such as Canada and Australia.

More than a 120 leaders attended the meeting – the biggest and most senior climate gathering since the disappointment of Copenhagen in 2009 - the leaders of China, India and Australia, were conspicuous through their absence. Latest news updates
Mr Abbott was on his way to New York at the time for the UN Security Council meeting on global terrorism, but the man who built his 2013 election win on a promise to roll back a price on carbon, had pointedly refused to attend the climate meeting.

Instead he sent Foreign Minister Julie Bishop to present the case for his as yet unlegislated Direct Action replacement scheme.

The US President argued that the problem of climate change had surpassed terrorism as the biggest threat to life on Earth.

"For all the immediate challenges that we gather to address this week – terrorism, instability, inequality, disease – there's one issue that will define the contours of this century more dramatically than any other, and that is the urgent and growing threat of a changing climate," Mr Obama said.

"In America, the past decade has been our hottest on record. Along our eastern coast, the city of Miami now floods at high tide.  In our west, wildfire season now stretches most of the year.  In our heartland, farms have been parched by the worst drought in generations, and drenched by the wettest spring in our history. A hurricane left parts of [New York City] dark and underwater. And some nations already live with far worse.Latest news updates

"Worldwide, this summer was the hottest ever recorded – with global carbon emissions still on the rise.
This past Sunday, nearly 400,000 people marched in New York to show support for action on climate change, and similar events were held on the same day in more than 160 countries worldwide. President Obama noted that as "our citizens keep marching ... we cannot pretend we do not hear them".
"We have to answer the call ... we cannot condemn our children, and their children, to a future that is beyond their capacity to repair."

Actor Leonardo DiCaprio

 Actor Leonardo DiCaprio also weighed in, dubbing global warming the greatest challenge humans face.
"Now it is your turn," he told the high-powered session.

"The time to answer humankind's greatest challenge is now. We beg of you to face it with courage and honesty."

But the language of the Australian Foreign Minister was far less emotional.
"Australia remains committed to reducing its emissions by five per cent below 2000 levels by 2020," Ms Bishop told the summit.

"This is a bipartisan target. It is an ambitious target because it means that Australia will reduce its emissions by 22 per cent against business as usual levels. This compares well to the targets of other major economies."

She said Australia was still moving to take "serious domestic action" on global warming.

"We have committed significant funds – $2.55 billion – to an Emissions Reduction Fund. The Fund is the centerpiece of our Direct Action Plan."

UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon staged the summit in the hope of kick-starting climate negotiations ahead of a Paris meeting on global warming set for 2015.

The Abbott government has removed the carbon price introduced by the former Labor government and is looking to trim down the renewable energy target amid complaints from fossil fuel energy generators that retail power consumption has dropped as people switch to clean energy and look to consume less electricity overall. 

'Short-term thinking'

 Australia's statement at the UN Climate Summit was labelled disappointing by environment groups on Wednesday in comparison to announcements by other countries.

The Climate Institute said while the summit had brought a "mixed bag" of commitments from world leaders, the Abbott government's failure to share a post-2020 target put Australia at risk of "being bogged in the backwaters as other countries and capital move on in serious climate action, investment and opportunities".

"Unlike others, Australia's only commitment to share a post 2020 target was after it reviewed that of all its 'trading partners and competitors' – without a specific timeline. This appears to completely ignore its previous commitment to play its fair part in global action to avoid dangerous climate change," CEO John Connor said from New York.

"Australia's national interest should not be defined solely by the perceived impact of action on our pollution intensive industries."

Environment Minister Greg Hunt told Fairfax Media on Tuesday the government was committed to its review of Australia's targets next year and would complete the process in time to meet its international deadlines.

The UN has demanded countries establish targets beyond 2020 by the end of March next year.

Economist Frank Jotzo from ANU's Crawford School of Public Policy said the statements from the United States and China showed those countries were taking positive steps to do more to combat climate change.

While the US has not yet set its targets for the next three decades, its submission to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change foreshadows emissions cuts of 30 per cent by 2025, 42 per cent by 2030 and 83 per cent by 2050.

China made clear its intentions to enact a national emissions trading scheme, put a cap on total energy consumption and vigorously develop non-fossil fuels.

Dr Jotzo said Australia, by contrast, was stuck in what was now considered "old thinking", in which economic growth was seen as a trade-off for action on global warming.

"That's not the paradigm being used by China or even the US," Dr Jotzo said from New York.

"They see climate change as an opportunity for economic growth. He said Australia's position was rooted in the view that "coal is king", an outlook that ignored the fact that Australia would not determine how much coal the rest of the world would use.
"When you look a little further ahead, really the strategy for Australia should be to search out opportunities in a low carbon world," he said.
"Australia is an energy superpower and can be an energy superpower no matter what type of energy the world chooses."