Holder’s Statement: Is our country really a “nation of cowards”?

Eric Holder, the nation's first black attorney general, said Wednesday the United States was "a nation of cowards" on matters of race, with most Americans avoiding candid discussions of racial issues. In a speech to Justice Department employees marking Black History Month, Holder said the workplace is largely integrated but Americans still self-segregate on the weekends and in their private lives.

"Though this nation has proudly thought of itself as an ethnic melting pot, in things racial we have always been and I believe continue to be, in too many ways, essentially a nation of cowards," Holder said.

Race issues continue to be a topic of political discussion, but "we, as average Americans, simply do not talk enough with each other about race."

Holder's speech echoed President Barack Obama's landmark address last year on race relations during the hotly contested Democratic primaries, when the then-candidate urged the nation to break "a racial stalemate we've been stuck in for years" and bemoaned the "chasm of misunderstanding that exists between the races." Obama delivered the speech to try to distance himself from the angry rhetoric of his former pastor, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright.

 

Click to read.

Technorati Tags: eric holder,nation of cowards,black news,african american news,black politics,african american politicsl

Black Attorney Roland Burris Might Get Taken Down for Perjury

U.S. Sen. Roland Burris' admission that he tried to raise campaign funds for ousted Illinois governor Rod Blagojevich is prompting calls for his resignation and a perjury investigation.

Burris told reporters in Peoria late Monday that he "talked to some people" last year about holding a fundraiser for the now-disgraced former Democratic governor. At the time, Burris was seeking the appointment to the U.S. Senate seat vacated by President Obama.

ILLINOIS GOP LEADER: Sen. Burris should resign

SEN. BURRIS: Insists he did not change his testimony

Burris did not organize a Blagojevich fundraiser, but his latest statements about contacts with the former governor's brother and other advisers appear to contradict previous public comments, testimony and affidavits he had given to the Illinois General Assembly.

Burris originally told the Illinois House impeachment committee last month that he had no contact with Blagojevich or his representatives before he was approached about the Senate seat Dec. 26.

 

Click to read.

Technorati Tags: roland burris,black news,african american news,black politics,african american politics

The President Plans to Stop Foreclosures

His massive stimulus plan now signed into law, President Barack Obama is turning to attack the home foreclosure crisis at the heart of the nation's deepening economic woes.

His goal is to prevent millions of American families from losing their houses because they can't make mortgage payments.

"We must stem the spread of foreclosures and falling home values for all Americans, and do everything we can to help responsible homeowners stay in their homes," Obama said Tuesday as he signed his tax cut and spending package into law.

The ambitious plan he was announcing at a Phoenix high school Wednesday was expected to offer government cash to mortgage companies that reduce interest rates — and therefore monthly payments — for homeowners in danger of default, according to several people briefed on the plan. What remained unclear was how the government will decide who qualifies for relief.

One Democratic official familiar with the plan said it also would allow homeowners to refinance their mortgages if they owed more than their homes were valued. Still another section would give bankruptcy judges more authority to change mortgages. That last provision has been opposed by lenders, who said it would add risk and lead to higher interest rates.

 

Click to read.

Technorati Tags: black money,african american money,black wealth,african american wealth,president obama

Roland Burris Under Fire

Sen. Roland Burris, D-Ill., talks to the media about an affidavit that he filed Feb. 5 with the Illinois House committee. (Tribune photo by Nuccio DiNuzzo / February 15, 2009)

Facing a perjury probe in Illinois and an ethics investigation in Washington, U.S. Sen.Roland Burris pleaded for yet another chance to explain himself after admitting he tried to raise campaign cash for then- Gov. Rod Blagojevich while seeking the Senate seat from him.
The junior senator, just a month in office, struggled to maintain a sense of normalcy on a Downstate "goodwill tour" but found no goodwill from fellow politicians. Republicans and even some Democrats in Illinois called for his resignation, and in Washington, senators who had barely begun to accept his controversial appointment chafed at the revived scandal.
Burris tried to stem the political damage by limiting his public comments Tuesday, but his evolving explanations had already set off a cascade of new questions about how he came to be picked by Blagojevich, who was charged with trying to sell the former Senate seat ofPresident Barack Obama for personal or political profit.
"There were never any inappropriate conversations between me and anyone else," said Burris, who took no questions from reporters. "And I will answer any and all questions to get that point across to keep my faith with the citizens of Illinois."

Click to read.

 

Technorati Tags: roland burris,black news,african american news,black politics,african american politics

President Barack Obama Angers Supporters by Doing Bush-Like Work

Despite President Obama's vow to open government more than ever, the Justice Department is defending Bush administration decisions to keep secret many documents about domestic wiretapping, data collection on travelers and U.S. citizens, and interrogation of suspected terrorists.

In half a dozen lawsuits, Justice lawyers have opposed formal motions or spurned out-of-court offers to delay court action until the new administration rewrites Freedom of Information Act guidelines and decides whether the new rules might allow the public to see more.

In only one case has the Justice Department agreed to suspend a FOIA lawsuit until the disputed documents can be re-evaluated under the yet-to-be-written guidelines. That case involves negotiations on an anti-counterfeiting treaty, not the more controversial, secret anti-terrorism tactics that spawned the other lawsuits as well as Obama's promises of greater openness.

"The signs in the last few days are not entirely encouraging," said Jameel Jaffer, an attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union, which filed several lawsuits seeking the Bush administration's legal rationales for warrantless domestic wiretapping and for its treatment of terrorism detainees.

Click to read.

 

Technorati Tags: barack obama,president barack obama,black president,black news,african american news,black politics,african american politics

Credit Card Companies Using Crisis to Change the Rules

By Dr. Boyce Watkins

www.DrBoyceMoney.com

In case you weren’t sure, credit card companies are not out to help you. If you are financially illiterate and uninformed, they are going to exploit you. If you are worried about the financial crisis, they are going to prey on your fear to get money out of you. They are also doing exactly what the rest of us are doing: trying to remain protected in a fragile economy.

The stimulus is stymied. The bailout is a failout. The stock market has consistently given a “thumbs down” to every piece of legislation passed in response to this crisis. Our economy is like the sick man who won’t respond to antibiotics. While the results of the latest package are yet to be seen, the truth is that no one is sure what will work. Every company is out to protect their assets and hold on to their cash, which means they no longer have much interest in loaning money to you.

Yes, this is true even if you have a good credit score, which is the ironic part.

Customers are opening their monthly statements to find that credit card companies have started to either ration credit (give less of it) or raise the interest rate being paid on outstanding debt. This doesn’t even count all the dirty tactics used, like using your payments to pay off low interest debt first, quietly getting rid of the grace period or charging interest on your balance from the prior two months vs. the current one. Even when you’ve been making payments on time for years, banks keep raising the bar to maximize shareholder wealth. When liquidity is scarce, those giving out water demand a higher cost per bottle. Additionally, higher default rates have justified the increase in interest rates, but higher interest rates increase the likelihood of default. It’s a nasty cycle, really.

Lawmakers are trying to intervene. Congressional hearings have taken place. Banks are being scolded by senators who keep telling them that this form of business practice is unethical and that they are gouging the American consumer. All this might be true, but what is also true is that you can’t force banks to loan you money. Also, it is very difficult, if not impossible, to legislate a strong economy.

If you have a less than stellar financial history, there is an even greater opportunity for your credit card company to raise your interest rates. If you have defaulted on other loans or are a slow payer in other areas, then they have no problem telling you to pay up or ship out. The days of easy money are long behind us, and companies are dramatically shifting their business practices.

The bottom line is that THEY’VE GOT YOU. They know that you’ve become addicted to the debt they so readily offered in the past, and this debt has become the lifeblood for the lifestyle to which you’ve chosen to become accustomed. They know that they can charge you a higher interest rate because you can’t do anything about it. Like a drug addict who is angry about paying more for his product, you really don’t have any other choice.

Well, maybe you do.

Here is one solution: tighten your economic belt. That means putting together a financial fitness plan today that consists of getting rid of as much debt as possible. I’ve mentioned in prior articles and on our website that paying off debt can be one of the best investments you make with your money. This is especially true if you have a stable job and are paying a high rate of interest to your credit card company.

So, the Dr. Boyce Challenge for this month is simple: Create a budget which includes the steady elimination of credit card debt. That means you should list every single expense you have for the entire month on one piece of paper or a spreadsheet. Don’t leave anything out. Count the money you want to use for getting your hair done, your nails, paying your mortgage, car note, whatever. Count everything. That will be your first step toward obtaining financial fitness.

As you create the budget, allocate at least 10% of your monthly after tax income toward reducing credit card debt. So, if you earn $3,000 per month after taxes,$300 per month should be allocated toward removing credit card debt, not including interest. So, if you owe $5,000 in credit card debt, you can remove this debt in roughly a year and a half. While $300 may seem like a lot of money to find in your budget, it’s there if you look hard enough. In fact, if you spend $10 per day on lunch and/or coffee, you can find the bulk of the money by taking your lunch to work. Make this one of the first bills you pay, not the last. The last bill is the one that only gets paid half the time. It’s easier to negotiate with creditors if you don’t need them so much. Take small steps toward finding your financial freedom.

Next month, we will move to step 2 of the Dr. Boyce Financial Challenge. While I confess that this change won’t be easy, I can promise that it will be worth it in the end. Be strong and remain focused, this is your opportunity to shine.

Dr Boyce Watkins is a Finance Professor at Syracuse University and author of “Financial Lipo 101: From financial fat to fitness”, to be released in April, 2009. For more information, please visit www.DrBoyceMoney.com.

Technorati Tags: black money,black wealth,african american money,african american wealth

Senate Finally Passes the Stimulus

The U.S. Senate gave final approval Friday to a $787 billion recovery package that President Obama hopes will help boost an economy in freefall with a combination of government spending and tax cuts and credits.

Sen. Sherrod Brown speaks to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid at right on the Senate floor Friday.

Approved earlier by the House, the plan -- which went through multiple permutations as it bounced back and forth on Capitol Hill over the past week -- now goes to Obama's desk, where he plans to sign it into law by Presidents Day.

Spending in the package includes about $120 billion for infrastructure -- new projects repairing bridges, roads, government buildings and the like -- more than $100 billion for education and $30 billion on energy-related projects that Obama says will create "green jobs."

More than $212 billion goes to tax breaks for individuals and businesses, and another $267 billion is in direct spending like food stamps and unemployment benefits.

The Congressional Budget Office has predicted that the plan will create between 1 million and 3 million jobs.

Most individuals will get a $400 tax credit, and couples will get $800.

The vote by the Senate took several hours longer than a simple roll call of its 100 members generally would. Sen. Sherrod Brown, a Democrat from Ohio, attended a wake for his mother until about 8 p.m. Friday.

Voting began about 5:30 p.m. Then, the Senate chamber sat nearly empty until Brown arrived to vote about five hours later.

He was flown from Ohio to Washington on a plane provided by the White House, which said no commercial flights were available that would have allowed Brown to cast a vote and return to Ohio in time for his mother's funeral Saturday.

Click to read

 

Technorati Tags: black news,african american news,black wealth,african american wealth,barack obama,president obama,stimulus package

War Crimes? Sri Lanka Government Denies Aid to Citizens in a War Zone

Dear friends:

I am overcome by the following news from Sri Lanka that more than 100,000 of my people are sandwiched between the Sri Lankan government and the Tamil militants.  http://tamilnet.com/art.html?catid=13&artid=28378

It is a pity that we hear very little in our media about potential human tragedies of this magnitude.

Although not a poet, I have written this poem to express my feelings and to awaken the conscience of the international community.

Please pass this on to people who may be able to do something to save the lives of these innocent civilians. 

Tamil people and a Silent World

When their rights were being taken away, the world was silent.

When their land was being colonized, the world was silent.

When their protests were being ignored, the world was silent.

When their politicians were being expelled, the world was silent.

When their press was being crushed, the world was silent.

When their ladies were being raped, the world was silent.

When their loved ones were being abused, the world was silent.

When their leaders were being bought, the world was silent.

The world was willing speak only after matters reached the two extremes:

The world expressed their sorrow after their people were massacred in 1983.

The world expressed their anger after their youth spoke back with violence.

Of world, do you have eyes to see only the violence of their youth?

Don’t you have eyes to see the prejudice of their government?

Oh world, do you have ears to hear only the lie of their government?

Don't you have ears to hear the cry of the Tamil people?

Oh world, won’t you speak while the Sri Lankan Tamil people are still alive as a people group?

Do you have to wait for another massacre to break your silence?

Alex Thevaranjan

Technorati Tags: sri lanka,tamil tigers

The History of Faubourg Treme

By Leland C. Abraham, Esq.

Outside of the New Orleans, very few of Black Americans have heard of this historic place. Faubourg Treme (hereinafter called “Treme”) was one of the first communities of black free men during slavery. Treme began as a plantation like any other plat of land during the time. Near the end of the 18th century, Claude Treme purchased the land. Within a few decades of this purchase, a canal was built that split the land. Some developers then began to make the land into neighborhoods. These neighborhoods would go on to house whites, creoles and free people of color throughout the 1800s.

Louisiana was a little different from the other southern states in that blacks could purchase their freedom. In fact, some blacks had their own slaves during this time period. Treme was extremely unique in that it was a precursor to a lot of black history. For example, the first black newspaper publication came from Treme. The Tribune started out as a French language publication but later became bilingual. This was important because after the civil war, the Tribune urged it black readers to “boycott” the rail system until there was equal treatment among the races. This would have been in the latter portion of the 19th Century, well before the “Birmingham Bus Boycott.”

Shortly after the civil war, the federal government sent federal troops to New Orleans. This allowed for an “integrated” society. In fact, Louisiana was very progressive in that blacks could vote during the early years of Reconstruction. Because blacks had the right to vote, the Louisiana legislature was an equal mix of blacks and whites. Louisiana was on the way to great feats in racial relations at a time in which the rest of the country still looked down on blacks. Unfortunately, this society for blacks would not last. About ten years after the federal troops were sent to New Orleans, they were removed with “The Compromise of 1877” and the beginning of what we know as “Jim Crow” began to take effect in the area. Gone were the days of blacks and whites serving together on the legislature and blacks were relegated back to second class citizens. The Tribune still urged it citizens to fight for their rights. The rail system had become segregated again and things were starting to look bad for the black folk of the area.

In a last stand effort, Homer Plessy, a black civil rights activist in Treme, boarded a railcar that was designated for “whites”. Plessy was an extremely light-skinned individual, who could pass for white. When he entered the railcar, he was asked by the conductor whether he was white or “colored.” He replied that he was a “colored” and was asked to go to the “colored” car. When he refused to leave, he was arrested. In the case Plessy v. Louisiana, he argued that he was denied his rights under the 13th and 14th Amendments to the U.S. Constitution. The judge in his case, John Howard Ferguson, ruled that the state had a right to regulate the rail car system as long as it operated within the state. The Louisiana Supreme Court did not give a favorable ear to Plessy either.

He appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court in the case Plessy v. Ferguson. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled against Plessy as well. The case would be pivotal for the beginning of the Civil Rights era for Black Americans. The case helped to cement the doctrine “Separate but Equal.” Unfortunately for blacks, southern states did not provide blacks with equal accommodations as their white counterparts. As a result of the case, Homer Plessy pled guilty and paid the fine.

What a history the Treme has had on African American history! From one of the first communities for free men during slavery to the establishment of the first black newspaper to a landmark case that would impact the civil rights movement. Treme has seen it all and it was also pivotal point in the modern Jazz movement.

In the late 1960s, an urban renewal project went underway in Treme. Unfortunately, a large portion of the center of Treme was torn down. In the 1970s, Louis Armstrong Park was created in which Congo Square, a major landmark in Treme is located. Like most of New Orleans, Treme was affected by the devastation of Hurricane Katrina. The efforts to rebuild Treme are underway as the locals feel there is too much history to let the neighborhood die. I personally thank God that they are willing to tell its story.

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.

President Barack Obama Painter Gets Arrested

A street artist famous for his red, white and blue "Hope" posters of President Obama has been arrested on warrants accusing him of tagging property with graffiti, police said Saturday.

Shepard Fairey was arrested Friday night on his way to the Institute of Contemporary Art for a kickoff event for his first solo exhibition, called Supply and Demand.

Two warrants were issued for Fairey on Jan. 24 after police determined he'd tagged property in two locations with graffiti based on the Andre the Giant street art campaign from his early career, Officer James Kenneally said. One of the locations was the railroad trestle by the landmark Boston University bridge over the Charles River, police said.

Fairey, 38, of Los Angeles, is scheduled to be arraigned Monday in Brighton District Court, said Jake Wark, a spokesman for the Suffolk District Attorney. Wark said Fairey would also be arraigned on a default warrant related to a separate graffiti case in the Roxbury section of Boston.

Fairey has spent the last two weeks in the Boston area installing the ICA exhibit and creating outdoor art, including a 20-by-50 foot banner on the side of City Hall, according to a statement issued Saturday by the museum.

 

Click to read.

 

Technorati Tags: barack obama,president barack obama,black politics,african american politics,black news,african american news

Judge in Barry Bonds Case May Toss Evidence

A federal judge says she might toss some of the strongest evidence against Barry Bonds, a blow to prosecutors trying to prove the home run king lied when he denied knowingly using performance-enhancing drugs.

U.S. District Judge Susan Illston said her "preliminary thoughts" were to exclude from trial three 2000-2001 positive drug tests that prosecutors say belong to Bonds unless there is a direct link that the urine samples came from the former San Francisco Giants slugger.

"If there's no testimony to establish that, I don't think any of them work," Illston said.

The only person who can do that seems to be Bonds' personal trainer, Greg Anderson, who spent more than a year behind bars for refusing to speak to a federal grand jury investigating Bonds. And Anderson's attorney, Mark Geragos, has said his client will not testify against Bonds at the trial, scheduled to start March 2.

If her preliminary thoughts stand, the government's case against Bonds will suffer a significant blow — but not a fatal one, legal analysts said.

"It hurts, but the government still has quite a bit of other evidence," Golden Gate University law professor Peter Keane said.

That includes a recorded conversation between Anderson and Bonds' former personal assistant Steve Hoskins in which they discuss injecting steroids; a conversation Illston said she's inclined to allow at trial.

Illston will issue a formal decision on the evidence discussed Thursday at a later date. She also will hold a separate hearing on whether to allow testimony from expert doctors the government hopes would persuade a jury that changes in Bonds' body were due to steroid use.

 

Click to Read.

Technorati Tags: barry bonds,black sports,black athletes

Obama and Faith-Based Initiatives

President Obama established his own faith-based initiatives office Thursday, reversing a Bush administration policy that allowed churches to discriminate in their hiring practices.

"Whatever our differences, there is one law that binds all great religions together . . . It is, of course, the golden rule, the call to love one another, to understand one another, to treat with dignity and respect those with whom we share a brief moment on this Earth," Obama said at the National Prayer Breakfast.

"It is an ancient rule, a simple rule, but also perhaps the most challenging, for it asks each of us to take some measure of responsibility for the well-being of people we may not know or worship with, or agree with on every issue or any issue," he added as he unveiled his faith-based agenda.

Obama signed an executive order creating the Office of Faith-based and Neighborhood Partnerships. Unlike ex-President Bush, churches with hiring policies that discriminate won't be eligible for federal grants under the executive order.

 

Click to read.

Technorati Tags: president barack obama,african american news,black news,black politics,african american politicsl

President Obama “I screwed up”

"I don't think Washington wins," President Obama tells NBC's Brian Williams in the interview that the TV network will broadcast this evening -- one of five sit-downs the president did with national news anchors this afternoon.

"The fact of the matter is Tom Daschle pulled out today," Obama continues. "And I'm here on television saying I screwed up and that's part of the era of responsibility; is not never making mistakes; it's owning up to them and trying to make sure you never repeat them and that's what we intend to do."

The networks are sending out excerpts. Highlights from the others we've gotten so far:

• Obama tells ABC's Charles Gibson this was an embarrassing day for his administration, with the collapse of Daschle's nomination as Health and Human Services secretary and Nancy Killefer as chief performance officer.

"We're going to have some glitches," Obama adds, "and I understand that that's what people are going to focus on. And I'm focused on it because I don't want glitches. We can't afford glitches because, right now, what I should be spending time talking to you about is how we're going to put three to four million people back to work. And so this is a self-induced injury that I'm angry about, and we're going to make sure we get it fixed."

 

Click to read.

Technorati Tags: black news,african american news,black president,barack obama

Cheating on the Down Low: What’s Love Got to Do with it?

By Syreeta L. McNeal, CPA, JD

Recently, New York Knick’s basketball player, Eddy Curry, a married father of several kids, received notice of a sexual-harassment lawsuit by his former limo driver, Kuchinsky. Kuchinsky is alleging that Curry tried to solicit gay sexual activity from him while working as a 24/7 chauffer for the NBA hoop star and his family.[1] With the national press coverage of this story, I am reminded of the movie, Cover, which explored the current situation that appears to be facing many black families. Cover is a film about a devoted, churchgoing wife, and mother whose faith is shattered when she discovers that her husband is living a secret double life.[2] Also, there is a 30-minute internet movie, Results, which tackles the same type of betrayal and shows how the couple tackles it in the span of one night.[3] So, as it relates to married men who happen to cheat on their spouse on the down low, I ask, what’s love got to do with it? I understand the question is paying tribute to the hit single by Tina Turner. However, I think people should explore the reasons why married men choose to cheat on the down low and should a wife, who takes a vow of fidelity with her husband, continue in the relationship after discovering the betrayal.

People might ask why a lawyer would write an article on a social topic such as married men who cheat on the down low. Well, a lawyer is considered an attorney and counselor at law. When a wife chooses to get a divorce due to infidelity from their husbands cheating on the down low, it is important for lawyers to understand the origin of the relationship and what caused the heartache to their client so that they can effectively provide legal advice and counseling for their client. In a majority of states, infidelity is just one factor in how marital property is divided between former married couples. Even though a wife might want her husband, who cheated on the down low, to get nothing and pay dearly for the betrayal, the courts in a majority of states will not find fault (e.g. infidelity) a determining factor in the division of marital property. Therefore, it behooves the lawyer to try other methods of counseling to explain the law to jilted married clients.

This article will analyze the meaning of love, the reasons why people get married, and what actions people should take to minimize the potential of being married to men who cheat on the down low.

Meaning of Love

Love has many meanings. Webster dictionary defines Love as a strong affection for another arising out of kinship or personal ties (e.g. maternal love for a child).[4] Also, love is an attraction based on sexual desires (e.g. affection and tenderness felt by lovers).[5] Love is also an affection based on admiration, benevolence, or common interests (e.g. love for old schoolmates).[6] Also, love is a warm attachment, enthusiasm, or devotion (e.g. love of the sea).[7] Love can also be used as a term of endearment.[8] Love is also the unselfish loyal and benevolent concern for the good of another.[9] Love is a sexual embrace.[10] In all, love embraces a form that is erotic, romantic, familial, platonic, and religious.

Similar to Webster dictionary, Christianity embraces four forms of love: Agapē, Philia, Eros, and Storge.[11] Agapē means charitable, selfless, altruistic, and unconditional.[12] It is parental love seen as creating goodness in the world.[13] It is the way God is seen to love humanity and it is seen as the kind of love that Christians aspire to have for others.[14] Philia is defined as the human response to something that is found to be delightful.[15] Also, it is known as "brotherly love".[16] Eros is defined as sexual love.[17] Storge is defined as the needy child-to-parent love.[18]

One thing that is fascinating is the explanation of what Eros is. Eros is a very passionate love, with sensual desire and longing.[19] In the classical world, the phenomenon of love was generally understood as a kind of madness or, as the Greeks put it, theia mania ("madness from the gods").[20] This love passion is best illustrated by a scheme involving “love arrows” or “love darts.”[21] The source of the arrows is said to be the image of the beautiful love object itself.[22] If the arrows arrive at the lover’s eyes, they would then travel to and ‘pierce’ and ‘wound’ his or her heart and overwhelm him/her with desire and longing.[23] This creates an image of an “arrow’s wound” where an oxymoron of pleasure and pain is created.[24]

As illustrated above, love has different meanings. Saying “I love you” to a person can mean a variety of things. The issue for married couples who are dealing with husbands who cheat on the down low is not whether they love their wives. The issue is what type of love does husbands who cheat on the down low have for their wives. In my opinion, this is the heart of the conflict that exists between married couples who have husbands who cheat on the down low. Next, it is important to understand why people marry.

Why People Marry

Marriage is a social, religious, spiritual or legal union of individuals.[25] People marry for many reasons, but usually they marry for one or more of the following reasons:[26]
· legal, social, and economic stability;
· the formation of a family unit;
· procreation and the education and nurturing of children;
· legitimizing sexual relations;
· public declaration of love; or
· to obtain citizenship

In almost all Protestant forms of Christianity, they hold marriage to be ordained by God for the union between a man and a woman.[27] They see the primary purpose of this union to be to glorify God by demonstrating his love to the world.[28] Other secondary purposes of marriage include intimate companionship, rearing children and mutual support for both husband and wife to fulfill their life callings.[29]

Like love, people marry for a variety of reasons. What is extremely interesting is that when protestant Christians marry their primary purpose is for the union to glorify God. One example of the betrayal for protestant Christians is when married men cheat on the down low. This action is not one that glorifies God especially when the bible states that men (or women) who practice homosexuality will not inherit the kingdom of God.[30] So, the conflict exists and men and women need to be aware of who their partners are before entering into marriage.

The Reality of the Conflict of Down Low Activity with Marriage

Some married men who cheat on the down low believe that down low activity is similar when men cheat with other women. I beg to differ. As these movies illustrate, a woman cannot compete with a man sexually. Women and men are not equal in physical form. Men and women have different sexual features and different purposes of use for these features. I equate the differences between men and women similar to placing pieces of a jigsaw puzzle together. Do like parts unite or do opposite pieces fit together?

If a married man cheats on the down low, they have a sexual attraction for another man. Sorry ladies. Physically, there is nothing you can do, except do a sex change, to sexually fulfill a man who wants to sleep with other men. A married man might love his wife, but the sexual love a wife is craving from her husband does not exist the way she wants or believes it should exist especially if this type of infidelity occurs after the coupled exchanged wedding vows to be married. There are always signs of men who have a sexual attraction for another man. However, you have to open your eyes and find out who your spouse truly is before you enter into marriage.

Attributes of Counseling Before Marriage

One way to discover whether your significant partner is ready to be married is to participate in marriage counseling. In essence, you are treating your marriage as a long term investment and gathering as much information about your spouse before you enter into marriage. As illustrated above, love has many meanings and people marry for different reasons. Just because someone says “I love you” is not all you need to know to venture into marriage. What a man and woman need to find out from each other is what type of love exists and is it reciprocally felt. If your potential spouse only feels an admiration for you and you feel romantic love for that person, then you need to find this out before you venture into marriage and not get married to the person. Also, what are the reasons why the man and woman are getting married and is it reciprocal. If your potential spouse wants to get married to obtain citizenship and you want to get married for public declaration of love, then you need to find this out before you venture into marriage and not get married to this person.

Ideally, married couples expect their spouses to solely want them only. They believe their spouse will be the complement human being to help fulfill their needs mentally, physically, spiritually, and emotionally. No one is perfect, but the union of a man and woman is expected to be one that works to perfection as seen in God’s light. When married men cheat on the down low, there is an erotic and sexual attraction for people of the same sex that their wife can’t fulfill. A potential spouse needs to know this before hand and not marry the individual especially if they seek their spouse to solely want them only.

Effective marriage counseling will be able to discover the compatibility of the couple. Marriage counseling should emphasize substance over form. The counseling should explore the type of love that exists and if it is reciprocally felt. Also, marriage counseling should explore the reasons why each person wants to marry and whether it is reciprocal. Furthermore, there is nothing wrong with doing an extensive background check on people before getting married. When you choose to marry someone, you are making a societal and private contract that this individual is someone you will honor and cherish, to have and to hold, until death do you part. With any type of long term investment, you need to know what you are getting into. This is not to say that marriages will not have problems, but if you choose someone to be married to you, you are making a long term investment in that individual expecting that the good will outweigh the bad. Know what you are getting into so you can minimize suffering betrayals like having married men cheat on the down low.

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] http://www.nypost.com/seven/01132009/news/regionalnews/knick_gets_called_for_sex_foul_149982.htm
[2] http://www.coverthemovie.com/
[3] http://www.imdb.com/video/wab/vi3195994137/
[4] http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/Love
[5] Id.
[6] Id.
[7] Id.
[8] Id.
[9] Id.
[10] Id.
[11] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Love_(religious_views)
[12] Id.
[13] Id.
[14] Id.
[15] Id.
[16] Id.
[17] Id.
[18] Id.
[19] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eros_(love)
[20] Id.
[21] Id.
[22] Id.
[23] Id.
[24] Id.
[25] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marriage
[26] Id.
[27] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_views_of_marriage
[28] Id.
[29] Id.
[30] 1 Corinthians 6:9

Banks taking U.S. taxpayers money to bring thousands of foreign workers to the U.S. for high-paying jobs.

AP Investigation: Banks sought foreign workers

Associated Press - February 1, 2009 7:13 AM ET

SANTA CLARA, Calif. (AP) - An Associated Press review of visa applications shows banks collecting billions of dollars in federal bailout money asked for permission to bring thousands of foreign workers to the U.S. for high-paying jobs.

The dozen banks have received the biggest rescue packages, worth more than $150 billion. They tried to bring in almost 21,800 foreign workers over the past six years to fill openings that paid an average salary of nearly $91,000.

As the economic collapse worsened last year the numbers of visas sought by the dozen banks in AP’s analysis increased by nearly one-third, from about 3,300 in fiscal 2007 to nearly 4,200 in fiscal 2008.

It’s unclear how many foreigners actually got hired, but it’s likely only a fraction of the requests were approved.

Foreigners are attractive hires because companies have found ways to pay them less than American workers.

Copyright 2009 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Obama's Stimulus Package - Obama Speaks on Middle Class Americans

Technorati Tags: barack obama,black men in america,african american men

It’s Time for the NCAA to Adopt the Rooney Rule

By Leland C. Abraham, Esq.

While baseball may have once been America’s pastime, few can argue that football has quickly replaced baseball as America’s sport of choice. As a graduate from a South Eastern Conference school, I was able to see first hand how important football is to the American Psyche.

There is a disturbing trend within college football in which very few African-Americans are given the ultimate leadership position, head coach. Out of 119 Football Bowl Subdivision institutions, only 6 have black head football coaches. This is a disturbing trend as most of these schools that refuse to hire black football coaches have a majority black football team. This problem was once seen in the National Football League. Several black assistants and coordinators were not getting interviews for head coaching positions, so the NFL instituted the Rooney Rule in 2003. The Rooney Rule requires that when a head coaching vacancy becomes available, the team must interview at least one minority candidate. Many saw the Rooney rule as reverse discrimination, but a statistical analysis of the interviewees suggested that prior to the Rooney Rule, very few African American or Latino coaches were brought to the table for an interview. Since its inception, the number of minorities in coaching positions jumped from 6% prior to the Rooney Rule, to 22%. This rule does not apply, however, if an assistant has language in his contract that states he will be offered the head coaching position when there is an opening. In 2003, the NFL fined the Detroit Lions $200,000 for its failure to interview a minority candidate when the head coaching position became available.

In college football however, there is no such rule. In fact, some of the most qualified candidates are not getting viable opportunities. Of the 6 black coaches in the Football Bowl Subdivision (formerly Division 1), only one, Randy Shannon, is at a school that competes in one of the 6 major conferences; Randy Shannon is the head coach at the University of Miami, Fl. One of the more interesting coaching scenarios to occur during this past bowl season was the job search of Buffalo coach Turner Gill. Gill is a former Nebraska Quarterback who currently coaches at the University of Buffalo, a program that is in the mire of college football. After posting 4 wins at a university that has never been much of a winner, Gill was not interviewed when the Nebraska coaching job came open in 2007. Gill remained at Buffalo the following year where he took Buffalo to its first ever MAC Championship after beating Ball State in the MAC Championship game. Opportunities came open at Syracuse and Auburn. Of the two, Auburn would have been the most attractive opportunity as it is in the SEC, a major conference. Gill was passed over for the Auburn job in favor of Iowa State coach Gene Chezick. This sparked a lot of media controversy as Gill has won 7 games this past season at Buffalo whereas Chezick had won 5 games combined in two seasons at Iowa State. While the comparison of the resume would lead one to choose Gill over Chezick, Gill at least got an interview. Gill decided to remain at Buffalo.

There is another highly qualified coach who did not receive an interview this football year, despite all the coaching vacancies. Charlie Strong has been a successful defensive coordinator at the University of Florida for several years. He has been a successful component of two national championship teams, but has not received an interview. In a secret meeting with the athletic directors from 3 SEC schools, an ESPN correspondent discovered that the reason that Charlie Strong has not received any interviews is the same reason Turner Gill would not be hired in the SEC; they are married to white women.

It is surprising that in 2009, on the precipice of the nation’s first black presidential inauguration, the color of skin is still an issue. In the case of Gill and Strong, it is the color of their wives’ skin. Could the Rooney Rule help in situation like these? It is hard to say, but in the NFL, Herm Edwards who coaches the Kansas City Chiefs and Lovey Smith who coaches the Chicago Bears are married to white women. It would appear that the capitalism of the NFL has led owners to only care about who can get the job done whereas the college game is still subject to a “Good Ole Boys Club.” It is time for college football to adopt the Rooney Rule.

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.

Burris U.S. Senate Seat: State’s Rights v. Congressional Leader’s Preferences

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 the 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 to the U. S. Senate.

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

Are Our Presidents a Picture of Perfect Health?

By Glenda Westerfield, Esq.

I found the Newsweek article, “Picture of Health” (referenced below), extremely interesting, and I also have empathy. I have never done anything as important as lead a nation, but I do fully understand the concept of having to hide illness and trying to function in a professional setting while on heavy doses of narcotic that it was necessary to have just to be able to stand up. Been there, still doing that. I think the question is, when does it become ones moral obligation to step aside when too sick? I gave a majority of my cases to other attorneys back in March when I came to the realization that I could not in good conscience call myself an advocate if I was taking pills and getting shots just to be able to function at a pedestrian level each day....much less having to do my best at fighting for someone's life and liberty. I was late for court, losing what little hair I had, looked like a walking skeleton, and had judges pulling me to the side asking if there was a problem.

These Presidents made the choices to hide their illness "in the name of the country" but I believe, because once again, been there done that, that there is also selfishness involved. I hid my sickle cell until I could no longer because I wanted to finish college and law school (a dean once asked me why I kept coming back to school if I was ill...not knowing that my alternative was to lay down and die), and then again because I wanted to keep my shiny new law firm job, and I did not want anyone to doubt that I could do it.

Hell, I hid my illness during my grade school to high school years (many of my friends never knew until I was about grown, but now say that it answers a lot of strange things that they were wondering about me...kinda the "OHHHH, so that's what that was about, makes sense to me now") because I did not want others to think less of me, or ask questions.

I hid my degenerative disks in my back and taught my law classes seated or wearing house slippers to avoid my classes being cut back or taken from me. Some days I was in so much pain, I had to go in the bathroom, cry, compose myself, and come back out to teach.

Even now, I am hiding my cancer from my neighbors to avoid the stares, the "pity parties", the questions, and the barrages of bad potato salad, pies, etc. brought to the house like I am dead (my daughter slipped and told one neighbor who told everyone else, I no longer go outside unless I have to). In the beginning stages of my treatment, I hid my cancer from my kids to keep them from worrying, but also selfishly to shield myself from their worry about me.

Sometimes, like the past few days, I even avoid going to the doctor when I am ill because I get tired of being poked and prodded, but also because unfortunately, due to what I believe can only be racism. If a sickle patient needs meds, they are given a speech about narcotics addiction and not given refills on the scrip (which in turn leads to me having to call the doctor for each refill, which makes me look like a fiend begging for drugs). Whereas, since I have been a cancer patient, I can ask for those same exact drugs with no questions asked, no speeches about addiction or questions about if I really need the meds, and there are refills on the bottle. Both are horribly painful diseases, with some of the same symptoms (which is why I believe my cancer was not caught earlier...the docs all thought it was the sickle cell), yet the one that affects minorities only is the one with the drug addict stigma attached to it. To have an illness is tough by itself, but to admit to it is even harder...

Newsweek Article: Picture of Health

Some U.S. presidents have gone to great lengths to hide their physical and mental illnesses. Is that kind of deception necessary—or even possible today?

By Anne Underwood

Newsweek Web Exclusive

Updated: 2:05 PM ET May 24, 2008

Sen. John McCain, the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, released 1,173 pages of personal medical records this week. Such candor in politicians is a recent development. Dr. Jerrold Post—director of the political psychology program at George Washington University and author of "Leaders and Their Followers in a Dangerous World" (Cornell University Press, 2004)—has studied the history of presidents and their health problems. He spoke with NEWSWEEK's Anne Underwood.

Excerpts:

NEWSWEEK: John McCain has been candid about his health. Does that represent a break with the past?

Jerrold Post: There has been increasing pressure for candidates to reveal information that was once considered a personal matter. Today, you have to give up that privacy to run for the highest office.

But even in recent years, not all candidates have been that honest. I'm thinking of Sen. Paul Tsongas, who competed against Bill Clinton to be the Democratic nominee in 1992. That was a cover-up. He indicated that he had had non-Hodgkins lymphoma. He and his doctor attested that, because of his bone-marrow transplant, his prognosis was as good as anyone else's. But at the time the statement was made, he had already had a recurrence of the cancer that wasn't made public. That kind of information needs to be revealed.

The public is demanding more information today. But are people also more forgiving, now that better treatments exist?

Yes and no. Part of the distinction has to do with what kind of illness it is. Dwight D. Eisenhower had a heart attack in 1955, an abdominal operation in 1956 and a stroke in 1957. People were sympathetic after the heart attack, because it was clear that it was mild and he would survive it. But the stroke, which temporarily affected his speech, raised the specter of a president who was unable to communicate. People look to their leaders for wisdom, strength and clarity of speaking.

What about cancer?

In France, François Mitterrand was an interesting example. When Mitterrand came to office, he swore that his would be an open presidency. But on his first day in office in 1981, he called in the presidential physician, Dr. Claude Gubler, and told him that his prostate cancer had spread to his bones. Mitterrand solemnly declared, "We must reveal nothing. These are state secrets." He led for 14 years with the constant and painful companion of metastatic cancer. How could that not have affected his decision making?


What about depression? There used to be such a stigma attached.

Depression is interesting. In 1924, just after Calvin Coolidge's nomination to a second term, his favorite son, Calvin Jr., developed a blister after playing tennis on the White House grounds without socks. He developed septicemia and died three days later [at the age of 16]. This was before antibiotics. Coolidge was called a do-nothing president, but it was probably as a consequence of a severe grief reaction from which he never recovered. After that, he spent 11 hours a day sleeping. His work day shrank. He was irritable and disinterested in affairs of state.

Today much of the country seems to be on anti-depressants. Aren't we more tolerant now?

In 1972, George McGovern [the Democratic candidate] chose Sen. Thomas Eagleton as his running mate. But when it was revealed that Eagleton had had electroconvulsive therapy for depression years earlier, it created a huge uproar. There was such a fear of shock therapy and the possibility of a mentally ill president [if McGovern should die in office] that Eagleton had to step down. Interestingly, Eagleton returned to the Senate, where he had an excellent reputation. We can tolerate a history of depression in the Senate, but not in the highest office.

What are some of the more intriguing cases of presidents who have concealed information about their health?

Grover Cleveland [who served as president 1885-1889 and 1893-1897] was brushing his teeth one morning, when he noticed a lump in the roof of his mouth. He called in his dentist, who summoned a head-and-neck surgeon. The surgeon diagnosed the lump as a carcinoma of the roof of the mouth. Cleveland thought it would cause an economic crisis if the information was released that he had cancer, so during the night, he smuggled an anesthesiologist, nurses, his dentist and the head-and-neck surgeon onto the presidential yacht under the guise of a pleasure trip on the Hudson River. During the trip, they removed the roof of his mouth up to his left eye, and inserted a rubber prosthesis internally. People were suspicious, but it wasn't revealed until 15 years after his death what had happened.

In more recent years, after the assassination attempt on Ronald Reagan, how cheered we all were when he waved from his window at George Washington University Hospital. But what people didn't know was that Reagan was only alert for one hour a day. The nightly news regularly showed clips of a vigorous Reagan in good spirits. But in fact, these moments were carefully chosen. When he went back to the White House—Bob Woodward conveyed this vividly in his book "Veil"—he showed only brief intervals of lucidity and vigor. This was only the beginning of the Reagan presidency, but according to Woodward, his aides were afraid it would end up as a crippled presidency, like Wilson's caretaker presidency.

You're referring to Woodrow Wilson after his stroke. In the fall of 1919, Wilson had a disabling stroke while he was on a train trip across the country to mobilize support for his cherished League of Nations. The public knew he was ill, but they didn't know how ill. Only Edith Wilson, chief of staff Joseph Tumulty and his personal physician, Cary Grayson, were allowed to see him. Issues were brought in, and decisions would come out. We talk today about the possibility of having the first woman president, but we effectively already had one in Edith Wilson. After her husband partially recovered, Mrs. Wilson said, "I don't know what you men make such a fuss about. I had no trouble running the country when Woody was ill."

I guess Franklin Roosevelt would be the most famous example of a president who concealed information about his health. His polio was well known—and it humanized this aristocratic man—but the press was respectful. There were only two or three pictures of him in a wheelchair. What wasn't so well known was how ill he was when he went to the Teheran summit with Winston Churchill and Joseph Stalin in 1943. He came back quite ill. The White House doctor, [Vice] Admiral Ross McIntire, directed cardiologist Howard Bruenn, a Navy [lieutenant] commander, to examine Roosevelt. Bruenn was alarmed at the gravity of Roosevelt's illness. He diagnosed congestive heart failure, hypertension, acute bronchitis and longstanding pulmonary disease. McIntire told Bruenn, you must not tell the president and his family the extent of his illness, and you certainly cannot tell the American public. He issued a reassuring communiqué to the effect that, for a man of his age, Roosevelt was in remarkably good health. But Franklin's son, James Roosevelt, later said he'd never been reconciled to the fact that his father's physicians allowed him to run for a fourth term. It was his death warrant. At the Yalta summit in 1945, Churchill's physician said that Roosevelt looked old and drawn and sat staring ahead with his mouth open. He intervened little in the discussion. He died shortly after the summit of a massive cerebral hemorrhage.

President Kennedy had Addison's disease. Yes, but it was only in Robert Dallek's 2003 biography of John Kennedy that we learned the extent of Kennedy's illnesses, which he concealed and which his family continued to conceal after he was assassinated—colitis, duodenal ulcers, osteoporosis and Addison's disease, which is a life-threatening insufficiency of the adrenal glands, requiring twice daily steroids. By 1950, he had constant back pain from vertebral collapse. From the mid-1950s, he was taking powerful narcotics like Demerol and methadone. He took barbiturates for sleep and tranquilizers for anxiety—as many as eight medications a day. There's some indication that he may have abused amphetamines. Before press conferences, he often required injections in the back to control his pain. Throughout his career, he concealed his illnesses.

If elected, John McCain would be 72 when sworn in. Is age an issue?

The first generalization is that one shouldn't generalize. There are some highly creative individuals who function well into their 90s. Konrad Adenauer [who served as German chancellor until the age of 87] was one. Having said that, the danger is that one may attempt to force a new situation into a template from the past and draw false parallels. With the passage of years, there can also be an increased sense of urgency that makes you want to accelerate the pace of change and fit a political timetable to your own. In China, the Cultural Revolution was related to Mao's realization that his time was short and his desire to fully consolidate the revolution before he died.

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.

A Day of Reckoning for the Juice

By Leland C. Abraham, Esq.

O.J. Simpson, a former NFL great and Canton-enshrined National Football League Hall of Famer, was convicted of 10 counts on October 3, 2008 and sentenced on December 5, 2008. Most of the counts that Simpson was convicted and sentenced will run concurrently. Perhaps, the most serious of the counts was attempted armed kidnapping. Nevada State judge Jackie Glass expressed that the sentencing would not reflect Mr. Simpson’s prior case in California. If you did not know, 13 years ago, O.J. Simpson was tried and acquitted of double murder in the deaths of Nicole Brown Simpson and Ronald Goldman. Most media outlets have been calling for his head ever since. Many felt that the 9-33 year sentence that he received last week may be retribution for the acquittals 13 years ago.

An examination of the case speaks that O.J. Simpson, along with five other people, robbed Bruce Fromberg and Alfred Beardsley at the Palace Station Hotel and Casino in Las Vegas in September 2007. Simpson is alleged to have taken items including footballs with his autograph on them. Simpson claims that he was attempting to retrieve personal memorabilia. Whatever the story, a gun was introduced at some point which elevated the attempted retrieval to a punishable felony. Simpson stated during his sentencing that he was not aware that he was committing a crime. Unfortunately for Simpson, the reports from the incident state he, along with the other men who accompanied him, locked the door to the hotel room and then introduced a gun. Because the alleged victims did not have a way to escape the situation, this is considered to be kidnapping in most prosecutorial circles. Many may think that the sentencing of Simpson is retribution for the acquittal in the murder case. However, a review of the sentencing guidelines for kidnapping alone would lead to a different conclusion. In some jurisdictions, kidnapping is considered a capital offense. These crimes usually carry the traditional “25 to life” sentence. In most of these cases, the defendant will have to serve at least 15 years before he is eligible for parole. The minimum that Simpson may serve on this count alone is five years.

The next question may be “should there have been a first-degree kidnapping charge in the original indictment?” According to authorities, once Simpson and the men who accompanied him burst into the hotel room, Simpson is heard on an audiotape saying, “Don’t let nobody out of this room.” This is undoubtedly where the kidnapping charge stems from. This would be all the prosecution would need to secure a conviction of kidnapping because Simpson and his acquaintances entered the room with a weapon and Simpson is heard directing the others to not let anyone out of the room. Because members of Simpson’s team were armed and because he secured five other people, the events that occurred were premeditated, meaning Simpson planned them. The next mistake was directing his team to not let anyone leave the room.

The notion that he thought he was taking what was rightfully his reminds me of the traditional law school scenario. It typically goes, “You lend your favorite watch to your friend with the understanding that he is supposed to return the watch on Wednesday. It is now Sunday and the friend has not returned the watch. You go by his house and no one is home but you peek through the window and see the watch on the coffee table in your friend’s living room. Is it okay to go into your friend’s house to retrieve your watch?” The answer of course is “no.” This would be breaking and entering your friend’s house and depending on the prosecutor, it could be larceny as well. The proper thing to do would be to speak with the friend to get the property back. If that does not work, call a sheriff or other law enforcement officer to see if you can retrieve the property that way. If all of these things fail, you can sue your friend for the return of your property. As the latest Simpson case has shown, when you take matters into your own hands and have your own form of vigilante justice, you end up serving the time.

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.