Glenn Beck Thinks Obama Is A Racist

 

NEW YORK (AP) — Fox News Channel commentator Glenn Beck said he believes President Obama is a racist. Beck made the statement during a guest appearance Tuesday on the Fox & Friends morning show. He said Obama has exposed himself as a person with "a deep-seated hatred for white people or the white culture."

His remarks came during a discussion of Obama's reaction to the arrest of Harvard University scholar Henry Louis Gates Jr. Gates is black and was arrested for disorderly conduct by a white policeman over a misunderstanding about a break-in at Gates' home.

An Obama spokesman, William Burton, said the White House had no comment on Beck.

Beck's statement was challenged on the air by Fox host Brian Kilmeade, who noted that most of the people who work for the nation's first black president are white.

click to read more

Burris For U.S. Senate - Rights v. Preference

By Syreeta L. McNeal, CPA, JD

Recently, there has been a stimulating debate over whether Illinois’s U. S. Senator designate, Roland Burris, is entitled to fill the Illinois Junior Senate seat after embattled Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich’s appointment on December 30, 2008. Majority Senate Leader, Harry Reid, is stating that Illinois Governor Blagojevich’s appointment is tainted and is not valid because of Blagojevich’s recent arrest and federal complaint brought by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). With all due respect to the Honorable Harry Reid, his argument is more political than legal and shows his preferences in trying to determine the outcome of who should fill the Illinois Senate seat. Unfortunately, Senate Majority Leader Reid, who is a lawyer, should know that Burris is legally entitled to be seated as a U. S. Senator from the state of Illinois.

U. S. Constitution Denotes Senate Appointments as a State Right

The U. S. Constitution denotes the senate appointment after a vacancy as a specific state right not one to be manipulated by congressional leaders. The specific constitutional provision that addresses the replacement of vacancies in the U. S. Senate is the 17th Amendment of the U. S. Constitution. 17th Amendment, Clause 2 states “When vacancies happen in the representation of any State in the Senate, the executive authority of such State shall issue writs of election to fill such vacancies: Provided, that the legislature of any State may empower the executive thereof to make temporary appointments until the people fill the vacancies by election as the legislature may direct.”[1] This provision is important because it specifically grants the authority of senate appointments after vacancies in the hands of the states, not Congress.

Amendment XVII has backing because of another constitutional provision, Article V. Article V of the U. S. Constitution states “….Amendments…. shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures…. or by Conventions.”[2] The importance of Article V is that its gives the Amendments equal weight of importance to the Articles of the Constitution. Therefore, if an Amendment is ratified and specifically changes or narrows the scope of another provision in the Constitution, then the effect of any Amendment is binding as part of the Constitution.

An example of how Article V of the U. S. Constitution works is with the phrase “three fifths of all other persons” as mentioned in Article I.[3] In colonial times, three fifths of all other persons meant black slaves. What the 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments did was to remove the impact of blacks being classified as three fifths of a person. The same logic applies with 17th Amendment by it specifically tailoring the senate appointment after vacancies to be done by the states.

For Burris, Illinois Governor Blagojevich was still the formal governor of the state of Illinois on December 30, 2008. The Illinois legislature did not remove Blagojevich prior to the Burris appointment nor change the Illinois Constitution to allow a special election to determine the U. S. Senator appointment after the vacancy. Also, Illinois Governor Blagojevich did not resign his post. So, the Burris appointment is valid under the 17th Amendment of the U. S. Constitution.

Courts will likely Validate the Burris Appointment

For those students entering law school, you will likely get bombarded with the 1803 U. S. Supreme Court case, Marbury v. Madison, in Constitutional Law.[4] Well, the Burris appointment has legal backing because of this case. To summarize the facts of the case, outgoing President John Adams appointed William Marbury as justice of the peace for the District of Columbia.[5] President Adams signed the commission letter and affixed the seal of the U. S. Presidency and delivered it to Secretary of State James Madison for delivery.[6] With incoming President William Jefferson, Secretary of State Madison refused to deliver the commission letter of appointment to Marbury and as a result Marbury commenced a writ of mandamus to compel Secretary of State Madison to deliver President Adams’ commission letter for the appointment.[7]

The Supreme Court held that the appointment by President Adams and his signature on the commission letter is all that was needed to validate the appointment of Marbury as justice of the peace for the District of Columbia.[8] Also, the Court held that “with commission being signed, the subsequent duty of the secretary of state is prescribed by law, and not to be guided by the will of the president. He is to affix the seal of the United States to the commission, and is to record it.”[9]

Now, Marbury v. Madison is still good law. To follow the same logic as presented in the Burris appointment, Illinois Governor Blagojevich appointed Burris and signed the commission letter for the appointment. This is all that was needed to validate the act. The Illinois State Supreme Court has already ruled that the Burris appointment is valid and neither Illinois Secretary of State Jesse White nor any other state official is needed to certify the Burris appointment.[10] The U. S. Supreme Court, applying Marbury v. Madison, will likely uphold the Burris appointment to the Illinois Senate seat as well.

Similar to Secretary of State Madison, Majority Senate Leader Harry Reid is using games to delay or ignore the legal Burris appointment by keeping Burris out of the Senate swearing in ceremony due to the fact that he does not have the signature of the Illinois Secretary of State. However, any lawyer should know that this gamesmanship tactic will be to no avail because Burris has U. S. Supreme Court case law in Marbury v. Madison and the 17th Amendment of the U. S. Constitution to validate his Illinois Senate seat appointment.

Legal Disclaimer: This site provides information about the law designed to keep readers informed of pertinent legal matters affecting the African-American community. But legal information is not the same as legal advice -- the application of law to an individual's specific circumstances. Although we go to great lengths to make sure our information is accurate and useful, we recommend you consult a lawyer in your specific location if you want professional assurance that our information, and your interpretation of it, is appropriate to your particular situation.

[1] U.S. Const. amend. XVII, cl. 2.
[2] U.S. Const. art. V.
[3] U.S. Const. art. I, § 2, cl. 3.
[4] See Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 137 (1803).
[5] Id. at 138.
[6] Id.
[7] Id.
[8] Id. at 157.
[9] Id. at 158.
[10] http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/a52815d4-de26-11dd-8372-000077b07658.html?nclick_check=1

The Government - Can We Trust Them To Protect Our Money

By Dr. Boyce Watkins
www.BoyceWatkins.com

Media reports show that many Americans are not quite sure of what to do with their money. Watching banks fail left and right, people are logically afraid of what might happen to their savings. This fear is justified, as we are seeing our accounts beaten and stomped by the global financial meltdown.

This grave concern is magnified by the fact that those we’ve trusted are the ones who’ve left us vulnerable. Our most cherished financial experts handled our retirement accounts like flashy vehicles on a Nascar speedway. Our elected officials allowed executives in the banking industry to run rampant like 3-year olds with dirty diapers. Then, when the crash came, a massive bailout package was created for those most responsible for the damage, while the rest of us were left holding the tax bill.

This begs the question: Why in the hell should we trust the government?

I recall that during the failure of Enron, one of the most respected companies in America at the time, the firm made several statements designed to create confidence in the company’s financial condition. Like captains of the Titanic, company leaders explained that there was nothing to worry about, even as they themselves were preparing their lifeboats. When the company failed, those who did not protect themselves reminded us of one grim and fundamental truth: when the “you know what” hits the fan, it’s every man for himself….and every woman too, in case you’re wondering.

In response to such sentiment, the American consumer has been working overtime to protect his/her resources: people have (against my advice) moved their money away from the frightening stock market, they are diversifying money into different banks, and some are taking their money out of banks altogether. All of these actions are occurring in spite of government calls for calm in a world on the verge of financial panic.

The honest to goodness truth is that I don’t blame Americans for being afraid. I don’t blame them for not trusting the government right now. Trust must be earned in any relationship, whether it is a tough marriage of the relationship between a government and its citizens. Our government must work to regain that trust through sound and efficient financial management. It will NOT regenerate the public trust through excessive spending on meaningless wars, selfish pork-filled bills being passed through Congress and budget deficits that strain the resources of Americans everywhere.

I can’t tell you if the government is lying to you, but I can tell you this: There was a time when government guarantees such as FDIC insurance were as pure as the driven snow. There was a time when the United States Federal Government had pockets and resources so deep that even God himself could be bailed out with our cash. The sad truth, however, is that no empire lasts forever, and there is destined to be a day in the future when we are no longer the unquestionable economic super power that we once were. A country that can’t even afford its social security obligations is hardly a nation that has risen beyond economic risk.

Another sad truth is that if the financial world really were coming to an end, the citizens would be the last to find out about any such crisis. We would, simultaneously, be the first ones asked to suffer the burden of irresponsible behavior by our leaders. If that doesn’t justify a bit of skepticism, I am not sure what does.

Dr. Boyce Watkins is a Finance Professor at Syracuse University. He does regular commentary in national media, including CNN, ESPN, CBS and BET. For more information, please visit www.BoyceWatkins.com.

Tips For Consumer Confidence - Dr. Boyce Watkins

Dr. Boyce Watkins
www.Boycewatkins.com

If you wish to see a video explaining consumer confidence, which is one of the driving issues behind the recent moves in the stock market, please click here.

This has been an interesting week, with auto execs showing up on private jets to request a bailout from the government and the Dow moving to below 8,000 points for the first time in 5 years. I still hold to the fact that this is a great time to get into the stock market if one has never done so before, especially if you are under the age of 50. By the way - please visit our sponsor, GreatBlackSpeakers.com if you are interested in hiring a top notch African American speaker or seeking to become one.

Take care!
Boyce Watkins
http://www.blogger.com/www.boycewatkins.com
Click here to join our money advice list.

=====================================================================================
If you listen carefully to the words of Treasury Secretary Henry “Hank” Paulson and Ben “Big Ben” Bernanke (chairman of the Federal Reserve) you might notice a trend in their language. The word “confidence” is used a lot when they speak. Many of their monetary proposals are not necessarily valuable for their financial power, but also for their psychological power.

Some of you may wonder what confidence has to do with anything. After all, if you’re broke, confidence doesn’t exactly put money in your pocket. If you’re 100 pounds overweight, confidence won’t help you win the Olympic 100 meter dash. When you are flying on a crashing plane, confidence doesn’t keep the plane from slamming into the ground. But confidence is important to an economy, and one of the most significant drivers of economic growth. In fact, over confidence has driven US economic growth for the past 10 years. Here are some reasons that confidence matters in the minds of Hank and Big Ben:

1) Confident consumers spend money

If you think you might lose your job next year, are you going to max out your credit cards? I certainly hope not. If you are worried about being able to make ends meet, are you going to buy that big screen TV? Not unless you want your wife to leave you. So, even if it doesn’t hold any truth, the mere forecast of a weak economy is enough to make many Americans hold off on consumer spending, one of the great driving forces of the American financial system.

2) Confident companies invest money and hire workers

Investments involve risk. Your hunch may work out, and it may not. If you don’t believe the economy is getting better, you are not going to consider taking that risk. No one plans to go to the beach if the weather man says that it’s going to rain. When economic rain is in the forecast, companies pull out their umbrellas and hold off on new projects. This reduces the number of jobs in the economy, because nearly every job created in America is the result of someone making an investment.

3) Confident Americans do not take their money out of banks

In case you didn’t know, your bank does not have your money. Your money is part of a large base of financial capital that is loaned out to individuals and consumers seeking to get a good return on their investment. So, without investing, your bank would have no interest in paying you any interest at all. So if, say, 30% of all customers of the same bank decide to get their money out at the same time, the bank would have serious financial problems. It is a lack of confidence that could cause customers to “run” on their bank and take out their money.

4) Confident investors keep their money in the stock market

The stock market is a place where fortunes are made and lost. Some part of that fortune is psychological, given that no asset can have a value which exceeds that which someone is willing to pay for it. When investors lose confidence, they take their money out of the stock market, and reductions in demand for stocks lead to massive paper losses in the market. Additionally, most Americans are “momentum traders”, meaning that when the market goes up, they tend to buy more, and when it goes down, they tend to sell. History shows that it is actually the opposite approach that tends to work best.

5) Confident banks make loans

Banks have to keep a certain portion of their funds on hand at all times to meet federal requirements. If they are fearful that their customers might come and demand their cash, they hold onto their capital to ensure that it is available. If they are afraid that their borrowing customers will not be able to repay loans due to a weak economy, they also hold back on issuing new loans. The truth is that when economic forecasts are grim, conservative bankers become even more fearful than the rest of us.

The bottom line of this article is that confidence matters. So, the next time you hear Ben Bernanke give a speech, you can be confident that he is going to use language that makes you feel more secure. Whether you choose to believe those words is up to you.

Dr. Boyce Watkins is a Finance Professor at Syracuse University. He does regular commentary in national media, including CNN, BET, ESPN and CBS. For more information, please visit http://www.blogger.com/www.boycewatkins.com. To join our money list, please click here.

Dr. Boyce Wonders about Governments Trustworthiness