CARE Applauds President Obama's Call for Increased Focus on Food Security:
"CARE Applauds President Obama's Call for Increased Focus on Food Security
Humanitarian agency urges public support for fight to end global poverty
WASHINGTON, D.C. (April 2, 2009) - The international poverty-fighting organization CARE applauds President Barack Obama's focus on alleviating chronic hunger and lifting global communities out of poverty. At the G20 summit, the president called for doubling assistance for food security and increasing foreign assistance projects to alleviate chronic hunger that affects nearly one billion people worldwide.
'We know that the cycle of poverty will never be broken unless people are given the tools to end chronic hunger and become self-sufficient so they can provide adequate food for themselves, their families, and their communities. The fact that the president and concerned leaders on Capitol Hill understand this gives us hope for ending the crippling hunger that keeps so many people mired in dire poverty,' said Dr. Helene Gayle, president and CEO of CARE.
A few years ago when CARE took the bold step of pulling back from the historical practice of selling U.S. food on the open market in poor countries to fund development projects, the questions poured in. Why would any humanitarian agency essentially turn away money for its programs? There is a plain answer to that complex question. Simply put, CARE believes that humanitarian aid should serve the long-term purpose of ending poverty. U.S. food aid policy fell far short. It needed to be changed.
The president has made it clear that food security, a key priority for his administration, means setting policies and programs that contribute to safety and prosperity for developing nations as well as ours. When we address the underlying causes of food insecurity and malnutrition, we are well on the way to tackling the root causes of extreme poverty.
We encourage Americans to support the president's request for increased foreign assistance. We also call on fellow citizens to support provisions of the Global Food Security Act of 2009, authored by U.S. Sen. Dick Lugar and Sen. Robert Casey (D-PA) and approved by the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on March 31.
The legislation authorizes additional funding for agricultural assistance. It also calls for a comprehensive strategy that takes a whole of government approach to address global food insecurity.
CARE played an integral role in drafting the 'Roadmap to End Global Hunger' a collective effort by the NGO community which lays out a vision for U.S. leadership to end global hunger. Both the Food Security Act and the president's call today address key concerns raised in the Roadmap.
29.3.09
The Politics of Being Illogical
oin this cause 
5 comments
As I argued in a previous article, it makes no sense whatsoever to continue to criminalize and wage a costly battle against the cannabis drug. In an online forum with the public, where President Obama answered unfiltered questions sent in by millions, he would've been remiss to ignore the popularity of the one topic that kept popping up in different areas of discussion: the legalization of marijuana.
(It is inconclusive whether the popularity of the marijuana-related questions were the result of a voting campaign by particular interest groups, or in fact, the public at large is finding the issue of legalization much easier to digest given the condition of our economy.)
To his credit, President Obama did ultimately address the issue of whether marijuana should be legalized, albeit with a statement the U.S. Supreme Court would be proud of. Although the President did not explicitly state his opposition to the decriminalization of marijuana, he instead relayed his belief that it was not a "good strategy for our economy".
I can fully understand that Mr. Obama's primary concern, as it should be, is to lead our nation out of this deep financial crisis and use all the influence and negotiating acumen he possesses to create and pass the legislation that is probably necessary to keep our economy from falling much further.
It might appear to some, at least given the words from most of their members, that the Republican Party might be somewhat hesitant to give their full approval to all that President Obama seeks from Congress. Given the stress and opposition already in place, had he come right out and announced his support for the legalization of marijuana, his efforts to work with Congress for all of these economic and mortgage packages would've been made that much harder.
That's not to say the savings and revenue realized from such decriminalization and resulting taxation would've been fictional or insignificant in any way. Just the opposite.
But in the world of politics and Washington, D.C., negotiations and conflict are a daily occurrence, and the microscope is so trained on the opposition, by both parties, that everything said or done can be used positively or negatively. Elections for 435 members of Congress are every two years, which essentially means they are constantly running for office. Good or bad, polls in their district will largely dictate what they say and do as Representatives. Even national polls may influence the talking points of national candidates.
For instance, it is definitively Unconstitutional to prohibit same-sex marriages, yet most politicians, including President Obama, have failed to support such a right, maybe because most polls show a lack of support nationally. Add in the factor of an opponent whose most vocal supporters would be energized by such an issue, and it instantly becomes a topic to largely avoid, regardless of how wrong it is.
This could be tied to the backlash against several Republican legislators in California I noted in another previous article. They decided, on their own, to act in a way they thought was best. Yet, because of their party, and a few vocal constituents, they could face political retribution.
This is politics. Speaking with vagueness; acting with polling support; rarely saying and doing the right thing before everyone else believes it to be the right thing as well.
17.3.09
GlobalSecurity.org - SITREP Situation Report
GlobalSecurity.org - SITREP Situation Report: "Are the US and Russia Playing Nuclear Games
Posted by James Jay Carafano on 03/16/2009 :: Permalink :: Comments
US-Russian disagreements over the proposed deployment of land-based missile defenses in Poland and Czech Republic have renewed the debate over the impact of defenses on arms control. In an article posted on the Centre for Research on Globalization web site, former US intelligence and arms control official Scott Ritter asserted, 'If the members of the Obama administration would bother to take a stroll down memory lane, they might recall that once upon a time there was a document called the anti-ballistic missile treaty, signed in 1972 between the United States and the former Soviet Union, which recognized that anti-missile defense shields were inherently destabilizing, and as such should not be deployed.' Ritter's statement bears closer scrutiny.
During the Cold War the Soviets deployed the world's only active ballistic missile defense system. Today, Moscow is still protected by a Missile Defense System. This system never played a relevant role in destabilizing competition between the super powers. Additionally, although the issue remains hotly debated, some scholars (see, for example, William Odom, The Collapse of the Soviet Military) contend that the proposal to develop the Strategic Defense Initiative by US President Ronald Reagan accelerated arms control agreements with the Soviet Union.
Research at The Heritage Foundation employing game theory also suggests that missile defense, rather than being destabilizing, actually contributes to limiting the likelihood of nuclear confrontation. Heritage analyst Baker Spring developed a game theory application that studied the affects of missile defense on nuclear competition in a 'proliferated' environment where several countries (with independent foreign policies) had access to ballistic missiles and nuclear weapons. According to Spring the outcome of his research suggests that 'the presence of defenses in a multi-player setting not only does not feed instability, but also may contribute to stability.'
First, the outcome of the games generally showed that the more widespread the presence of defenses, the lower was the propensity to ready offensive (nuclear) arms and fire shots with these arms. It also showed a greater propensity to aban¬don offensive arms (disarm) as defenses became more widespread.
Second, the more widespread the presence of defenses, the lower the propensity to adopt hos¬tile attitudes toward one another or move to threaten each other.
Third, the more widespread the defenses, the less likely an aggressive actor's conclusions favored aggressive actions.
For full results of the nuclear games, see Nuclear Stability Working Group, Nuclear Games: An Exercise Examining Stability and Defenses in a Proliferated World (Washington, D.C.: The Heritage Foundation, 2005), at www.heritage.org/upload/NuclearGames.pdf.
Tags:
* Carafano
* foreign policy issues
* Nuclear weapons
* Russia and the United States
* The Heritage Foundation"
Posted by James Jay Carafano on 03/16/2009 :: Permalink :: Comments
US-Russian disagreements over the proposed deployment of land-based missile defenses in Poland and Czech Republic have renewed the debate over the impact of defenses on arms control. In an article posted on the Centre for Research on Globalization web site, former US intelligence and arms control official Scott Ritter asserted, 'If the members of the Obama administration would bother to take a stroll down memory lane, they might recall that once upon a time there was a document called the anti-ballistic missile treaty, signed in 1972 between the United States and the former Soviet Union, which recognized that anti-missile defense shields were inherently destabilizing, and as such should not be deployed.' Ritter's statement bears closer scrutiny.
During the Cold War the Soviets deployed the world's only active ballistic missile defense system. Today, Moscow is still protected by a Missile Defense System. This system never played a relevant role in destabilizing competition between the super powers. Additionally, although the issue remains hotly debated, some scholars (see, for example, William Odom, The Collapse of the Soviet Military) contend that the proposal to develop the Strategic Defense Initiative by US President Ronald Reagan accelerated arms control agreements with the Soviet Union.
Research at The Heritage Foundation employing game theory also suggests that missile defense, rather than being destabilizing, actually contributes to limiting the likelihood of nuclear confrontation. Heritage analyst Baker Spring developed a game theory application that studied the affects of missile defense on nuclear competition in a 'proliferated' environment where several countries (with independent foreign policies) had access to ballistic missiles and nuclear weapons. According to Spring the outcome of his research suggests that 'the presence of defenses in a multi-player setting not only does not feed instability, but also may contribute to stability.'
First, the outcome of the games generally showed that the more widespread the presence of defenses, the lower was the propensity to ready offensive (nuclear) arms and fire shots with these arms. It also showed a greater propensity to aban¬don offensive arms (disarm) as defenses became more widespread.
Second, the more widespread the presence of defenses, the lower the propensity to adopt hos¬tile attitudes toward one another or move to threaten each other.
Third, the more widespread the defenses, the less likely an aggressive actor's conclusions favored aggressive actions.
For full results of the nuclear games, see Nuclear Stability Working Group, Nuclear Games: An Exercise Examining Stability and Defenses in a Proliferated World (Washington, D.C.: The Heritage Foundation, 2005), at www.heritage.org/upload/NuclearGames.pdf.
Tags:
* Carafano
* foreign policy issues
* Nuclear weapons
* Russia and the United States
* The Heritage Foundation"
2.2.09
Facebook Plans to Make Money by Selling Your Data
Written by Lidija Davis / February 1, 2009 9:51 PM / 30 Comments
Starting this spring, companies will be able to selectively target Facebook's members in order to research the appeal of new products through a polling system called Engagement Ads as demonstrated at the World Economic Forum in Davos.
The Evolution of Engagement Ads
Engagement Ads are not new to Facebook. Last year, The Wall Street Journal reported that Facebook had begun "quietly testing" the product in August and was hoping to roll it out by the end of November.
Engagement Ads, said the WSJ, would appear on the home page of Facebook when you first log on and prompt you to interact with an ad. If you did interact with the ad, Facebook would then attempt to share your action with your friends thus "getting the ad in front of more eyeballs."
At the time, Chief Operating Officer Sheryl Sandberg said that ads systems are "built over time through continual tweaking." She added that Facebook's existing ad offerings were doing well but "undersell Facebook's broader opportunity."
If the Telegraph report is correct, Engagement Ads have had a massive tweak; companies will be able to pose questions to and receive feedback from selected members in real time based on user information that Facebook provides.
Randi Zuckerberg, Facebook's Global Markets Director told the Telegraph that companies are excited about this new polling system. "It takes a very long time to do a focus group, and businesses often don't have the luxury of time. I think they liked the instant responses," she said.
Facebook's Advertising Attempts
Facebook's foray into advertising over time has been weak at best. Forrester's Jeremiah Owyang has called Facebook's marketing toolset 'confusing', adding that brands will only succeed with engagement advertising if they lean on user behaviors like communication, self-expression, and social exploration.
When Facebook launched it's much hyped advertising strategy in 2007, we had hoped it would not be met with backlash. Unfortunately this wasn't to be the case and the Beacon saga came to an end the following month with Mark Zuckerberg apologizing for the way Facebook had dealt with the situation.
It appears Facebook has run the gamut when it comes to advertising efforts. What began with fliers, display banner ads and even the very similar Facebook Polls have not yet inspired marketers to run in droves to the popular social networking site.
But could this be the year things turn around for them? Maybe. Change certainly is in the air at Facebook. Zuckerberg had noticeably dressed up for Davos, telling blogger Robert Scoble it was to denote that this was Facebook's 'intense' year. The Facebook founder bio page has had a recent addition. And as for Engagement Ads? Well, we'll just have to wait and see. What do you think?
22.1.09
European Press Review: Welcome, President Obama!
Europe's media praised Barack Obama's inaugural speech for setting the right tone at the right time. But commentators pointed out that the new president had his work cut out for him. Obama is, after all, just a man.
European papers agreed that Barack Obama was breathing a fresh breath of air onto the world political stage. Yet many warned that he would have difficulties meeting the tasks ahead of him.
French daily Le Figaro said that the majority of US citizens and millions of people around the world have been gripped by a "frenetic-benevolent, but also a naive Obamania." They believe "a single man can change the fate of the world." (France missed the point -AGAIN. Obama inspired many of US to change the world, COLLECTIVELY- are YOU your part?)
But the Paris paper wrote, the realities of a world characterized by various interests would also impose themselves on the new president. George W. Bush and his advisors -- who had been blinded by the "axis of evil" -- had lost control of these realities for too long.
Bildunterschrift: Großansicht des Bildes mit der Bildunterschrift: Most Europeans are relieved that Obama has taken over from George W. Bush
"Barack Obama would be well advised to meet this new world by accepting that the revision of the rules for the world economy must be established with the whole of all players around the globe," it said.
The Danish newspaper Berlingske Tidende said a task "of historical dimension" lay before President Obama.
"His inauguration speech showed that he is aware of this fact," the Copenhagen paper wrote. "That is why he set recreating America as a goal. One must hope, not only for the good of the US but for the entire world, that he can now turn his words into deeds."
Obama's inauguration speech included a number of tasks to tackle. Yet Austria's Der Standard said it was not decisive that Obama didn't offer a master plan to do so.
"If it's true that psychology is one of the most significant reasons for the crisis, then Obama can also be the right president for these difficult times without a master plan," the paper said. After all, Ronald Reagan already once inculcated optimism into the buckled Americans in the 1980s.
"And who would be better suited for that today than the adept mass psychologist and cheerleader of hope, Barack Obama?" it wrote.
Germany's Frankfurter Rundschau warned, though, that Obama should set himself apart from the people.
"He is now president. He is no longer a part of this 'we' that is the people," the paper said, adding that it was crucial for Obama to realize this quickly.
"A government is based on checks and balances and not on this lofty, direct access to the will of the people," the paper said. "It's good that he stresses the danger of the United States' demise. It's good that he also makes clear that he believes he can avert this demise. But this will only succeed if he stops depicting himself as the speaker of the people's will."
Bildunterschrift: Großansicht des Bildes mit der Bildunterschrift: Some two million people crowded onto the National Mall for the inauguration
The Dutch paper de Volkskrant welcomed Obama's conciliatory tone and said the president made it clear that the US would not force its ideals on others with force. Obama had said that America is stronger precisely if it employs its military force with caution and in accordance with the ideals which the country itself strives for.
"These are welcome words after years in which the rift between the US and the rest of the world appeared to get ever larger," the Amsterdam paper said. "The concrete realization of his intentions remains to be seen."
Switzerland's Basler Zeitung said that Obama's small mishap during the inauguration ceremony, in which he began speaking his oath too soon, showed that he was not the "infallible redeemer" the masses believed him to be during his campaign.
"He is also just a human being," the Basle-based paper wrote. "In that his call to us all to support him in his task appears even more authentic."
Britain's Guardian said that the inauguration ceremony so "brimming with tradition" was a platform for a president who is anything but traditional.
"Obama delivered a message that was anything but conservative, offering a thorough rebuttal of his predecessor's foreign policy and signaling a break in the nearly 30-year grip the notion of limited government has exerted on US politics," the paper wrote. This suggested an approach that could come to characterize the Obama presidency.
"It is conservative in style, radical in substance," the daily said.
Italy's Corriere della Sera said Obama's speech completed his rhetorical cycle from his campaign. He had led his country "out of the joyous days of hope into a new era of responsibility."
"The hope has thereby not been laid to rest: the change we can believe in is still way at the top of Obama's agenda," the Milan-based paper said. "But his sky has a metal color, it is full of clouds and the horizon is no longer clear."
21.1.09
Demand a full investigation into U.S. detention and interrogation policies. Support our 100 Days Campaign. |  | |
| ||
 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
 | | | |  | |||||||||||||||||||||
Dear Kathy, Today, we expect President Obama to announce a plan to close Guantánamo Bay prison. This is a major victory in restoring our values and rehabilitating America’s image worldwide. I want to personally thank you for being part of this fight with us. However, you and I know that there is so much more that needs to be done — so many wrongs that still need to be righted. Alex Gibney’s Academy Award-winning documentary Taxi to the Dark Side showed in stark terms With your financial support Make a tax-deductible donation to our 100 Days Campaign and help us seize this unprecedented opportunity to make human rights a centerpiece of the new Obama administration. In addition to closing Guantánamo Bay prison, in his first 100 days in office, we are calling on President Obama to end the use of torture and other inhuman treatment and fully investigate U.S. detention and interrogation policies, including holding accountable those responsible for torture. Please watch this disturbing video Amnesty members like you have always remained vigilant in the protection of human rights. I am counting on your continued leadership and commitment as we demand a full investigation into all aspects of U.S. detention and interrogation policies and usher in a new era of respect for human rights around the world. Your steadfast commitment has helped us reach today’s remarkable victory for human rights. Thank you for your continued support as we work together to restore the America we believe in. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Larry Cox20.1.09
19.1.09
Collectively We- the Majority of USA and the World say Amen
Today, Americans in all 50 states answered President-elect Obama's call to service.
Thousands of people stood up to renew America together, doing everything from working in homeless shelters and mentoring young people, to assembling more than 80,000 care packages for our troops at a service event here in Washington, D.C.
Thank you for a great day of service.
Tomorrow, Barack Obama and Joe Biden will be sworn-in as President and Vice President of the United States.
You can watch the Swearing-In ceremony live on our website beginning at 11:00 a.m.
http://www.pic2009.org/live
In the evening, we will be throwing the first-ever Neighborhood Ball, a nationwide celebration of change -- and you don't have to be in the nation's capital to join in the festivities.
ABC will broadcast the Washington, D.C. Neighborhood Ball beginning at 8:00 p.m. EST, and people at Neighborhood Balls across the country will be sending in photos and videos of their celebrations. Some may even be featured in the official Inaugural book.
I encourage you to share your own photos and stories:
http://www.pic2009.org/
You can also text OBAMA to 56333 for instructions on how to send in congratulation messages and pictures from your mobile phone.
This inauguration is more than just the beginning of a new administration. It is the beginning of a nationwide spirit of unity and service.
I hope you will stay involved in the effort to renew America together.
Thank you,
Emmett
Emmett S. Beliveau
Executive Director
Presidential Inaugural Committee
16.1.09
Yes, He's the Man- fly me ANYDAY, and Teach others to do the same!
(CNN) -- Passengers on the US Airways flight that crash-landed into the Hudson River Thursday afternoon praised the actions and courage of the pilot, a safety consultant with 40 years of experience in the aviation industry.
Chesley B. "Sully" Sullenberger, a former Air Force fighter pilot, has been with US Airways since 1980.
Sources tell CNN that Chesley B. "Sully" Sullenberger was piloting US Airways flight 1549 from New York's LaGuardia airport to Charlotte, North Carolina, when at least one of the plane's engines failed.
Passenger Jeff Kolodjay offered "kudos" to Sullenberger for a landing that minimized damage to the aircraft and its 155 passengers and crew.
"All of a sudden the captain came on and he told us to brace ourselves and probably brace ourselves pretty hard. But he did an amazing job -- kudos to him on that landing," said Kolodjay, who was sitting in seat 22A.
Sullenberger's wife told CNN that she was stunned to hear the news from her husband after it was all over.
"I hadn't been watching the news. I've heard Sully say to people, 'It's rare for an airline pilot to have an incident in their career,' " said Lori Sullenberger of Danville, California.
"When he called me he said, 'There's been an accident.' At first I thought it was something minor, but then he told me the circumstances and my body started shaking and I rushed to get our daughters out of school."
US Airways said all 155 passengers and crew are alive and safely off the plane.
The crash-landing has also earned the former fighter pilot and private safety consultant accolades from state and government officials.
New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg commended the pilot for not leaving the plane without checking to make sure every passenger had been evacuated.
"It would appear that the pilot did a masterful job of landing the plane in the river and then making sure that everybody got out," Bloomberg said at a press conference Thursday.
Don't Miss
"I had a long conversation with the pilot. He walked the plane twice after everybody else was off and tried to verify that there was nobody else on board -- and assures us there was not."
Sullenberger apparently was forced to make an emergency landing after geese were sucked into one or both of the jet's engines. An eyewitness working on the west side of Manhattan said the belly of the plane touched the water first.
An official who heard tape recordings of the radio traffic from Flight 1549 reported the pilot was extraordinarily calm during the event.
"There was no panic, no hysterics," the official said. "It was professional, it was calm, it was methodical. It was everything you hoped it could be."
The pilot and air traffic controller discussed options, including landing at Teterboro airport in New Jersey, the official said. Then there was a "period of time where there was no communications back, and I'm assuming he was concentrating on more important things."
Sullenberger's background in aviation appeared to have prepared him for such a situation.
He has been a pilot with US Airways since 1980, following seven years in the U.S. Air Force.
His resume -- posted on the Web site for his safety consulting firm, Safety Reliability Methods, Inc. -- lists piloting procedures, technical safety strategies, emergency management and operations improvement, as areas of industry expertise.
He served as an instructor and Air Line Pilots Association safety chairman, accident investigator and national technical committee member, according to a biography on the site. He participated in several USAF and National Transportation Safety Board accident investigations, and worked with NASA scientists on a paper on error and aviation, his site says.
For the passengers on flight 1549, Sullenberger's skill and expertise were apparent. iReport.com: Did you see the crash-landing? Send images
"I've flown in a lot of planes and that was a phenomenal landing," said passenger Fred Berretta said.
Berretta was sitting in seat 16A right over one of the engines when it failed and the pilot turned the plane to align it with the Hudson River. He described silence in the plane as the passengers waited to hear from the crew.
A few moments later, the direction to brace for landing came.
"It was an amazing piece of airmanship," said Peter Goelz, a former NTSB managing director.NEW YORK (CNN) -- The pilot aboard U.S. Airways Flight 1549 came over the speaker system and told passengers "brace for impact." One passenger turned on his cell phone so his body could be found with its GPS tracking. Others reflected on their lives.
Unbelievable
iReporter Julie Pukelis used a camera and a telescope to get this view of the crash scene on the Hudson River.
Survivors said it was about 20 seconds later when the plane struck the water of the Hudson River on Thursday afternoon.
Each of them lauded the heroics of the pilot, Chesley B. "Sully" Sullenberger III.
Here are survivor accounts in their own words: 
Vince Spera
"He's the man! He's absolutely the man. ... If you want to talk to a hero, get ahold of him because that is the hero in this whole deal."
Spera descibed "the moment of impact": "Have you ever been in a speedboat and hit some wake? That's what it felt like, when you go over the wake and you hit the water again. ... It wasn't that bad of an impact, which was strange. And then after that, there wasn't a lot of yelling and screaming. It was fairly orderly getting off the plane."
Andrew Jamison
"God was certainly looking out for all of us."
Brad Wentzell
Wentzell cried when talking about returning home to snuggle with his young daughter. "When I get home, I am going to take my nose and put it by her ear, her little warm body and give her a nice kiss from Daddy. I'm alive. That's it. I don't have much else to say."
Don't Miss
"We have a second chance in life." 
Carl Bazariane
"We were all looking to see how we were gonna die. It was really strange."
On the crash landing, he said, "Usually in moments like that, you would expect chaos. It got really quiet and nobody said a word. There was a child crying. That was about it. That was understandable."
Joe Hart
He said passengers didn't panic on the plane. It was only after the crash when things got chaotic, he said. "It's when we got outside and in the cold water. And I mean the water was cold. Within seconds, my legs were numb, standing in the cold water." 
"We're just happy to be around. We're just happy to be around."
Jeff Kolodjay
"The plane started filling with water pretty quick. ... It was scary. There was a lady with her baby on my left-hand shoulder, and she was crawling over the seats."
Alberto Panero
On the "brace for impact" moment: "That's the only thing that was said. I guess that's probably a better thing so that people didn't panic. But at the time, he said it so calmly. From that point until we hit the water, it was pretty quick."
He said he turned on his cell phone before impact so that his body could be found via GPS.
Panero added, "We just hit, and somehow the plane stayed afloat, and we were able to get on the raft. It's just incredible right now that everybody's still alive."
Fred Berretta
"I think a lot of people started praying and just collecting themselves," Berretta said. "It was quite stunning." He said he was expecting the plane to flip over and break apart, but it didn't. "It was a great landing," he said.
Its a Sad day For Chester County, PA & Wilmington, Delaware
Andrew Wyeth, 'Christina's World' painter, dies:
- Story Highlights
- Wyeth died in his sleep at 91
- His most famous painting is that of a young girl in a field
- His "Helga" portraits were first shown in 1986
(CNN) -- Andrew Wyeth, the American painter perhaps best known for his painting of a young woman in a field, "Christina's World," has died, according to an official with the Brandywine River Museum in Pennsylvania.
Andrew Wyeth received the National Medal of Arts from President Bush in November 2007.
Wyeth, 91, died in his sleep Thursday night at his home near Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, according to Lora Englehart, public relations coordinator for the museum.
The acclaimed artist painted landscapes and figure subjects and worked mostly in tempera and watercolor.
He was widely celebrated inside and outside of the art world. President John F. Kennedy awarded him a Presidential Freedom Award and President Richard Nixon held a dinner and a private exhibition at the White House, according to a biography on the Ask/Art Web site.
Wyeth, who lived in Chadds Ford, Pennsylvania, and Maine, "has been enormously popular and critically acclaimed since his first one-man show in 1937," according to a biography in InfoPlease.
His main subjects were the places and people of Chadds Ford and Cushing, Maine.
Don't Miss
"Christina's World," painted in 1948, shows a disabled Maine neighbor who drags herself through a field toward her house in the distance. The painting, displayed at the Museum of Modern Art in New York, has been regarded as Wyeth's most popular.
"His 'Helga' pictures, a large group of intimate portraits of a neighbor, painted over many years, were first shown publicly in 1986," the InfoPlease biography says. Those were painted in Pennsylvania.
Wyeth, the youngest child of painter N.C. Wyeth, formally studied art with his father as a teen, "drawing in charcoal and painting in oils, the media of choice for N.C. Wyeth. It was during the family's annual summer vacations in Port Clyde, Maine, that Andrew was able to experiment with other media to find his own artistic voice," according to a biography in the Farnsworth Art Museum in Maine.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
