FJM Blog

By Ken Blackwell

President Obama’s Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) seems determined to go after a small Catholic college in North Carolina. Readers of First Things, the thoughtful journal founded by Rev. Richard Neuhaus, are familiar with the funny ads regularly run by Belmont Abbey. “Got Monks?” reads the white-on-black ad that encourages serious young Catholics to consider a college where the Benedictine monks seek God and where the students seek truth.

But Obama’s EEOC obviously reads that ad as an invitation to “get the monks.” The EEOC’s district office in Charlotte, N.C., is demanding that Belmont Abbey cease and desist violating Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. If you thought that act was about ending racial and sex discrimination, you would be right. If you thought that unelected bureaucrats could not use that law as a sledgehammer to threaten religious schools, you would be naïve.

What the EEOC is complaining of is Belmont Abbey’s practice of not providing abortion-inducing contraceptives to their employees in their health insurance plan.

But Belmont Abbey is a Catholic institution, one that prides itself on its adherence to Catholic teaching. The college maintains that it cannot be guilty of discriminating against female employees since it does not provide any form of contraceptives to its all-male body of monks, or to its lay male employees. How can this be sex discrimination?

Why should all Americans, whether they are Catholic or not, be concerned? Because the legal theory being advanced by the Obama administration would force all employers to provide abortifacient drugs as part of health insurance plans for employees. They are maintaining that not only the 1964 Civil Rights Act, but the 1978 amendment, the Pregnancy Discrimination Act, mandate coverage of all “drugs, devices, and preventive care.” The Obamatons love that word “mandate.”

So, we see, laws intended to protect Americans’ basic civil rights are now being used as sledgehammers to destroy the most basic of our civil rights—the right of conscience. President Obama’s radical appointees to the EEOC include Stuart Ishimaru. Named on Inauguration Day, acting chairman Ishimaru pledged to attack “both traditional and emerging forms of workplace discrimination. [emphasis added]” Emerging forms could readily include employers who would prefer not to hire or promote employees who dress as members of the opposite sex. Would you rather not have a receptionist or customer service representative of your company who has tattooed his or her face with fierce Maori markings? You could be forced by the EEOC to make that hire.

The Belmont Abbey case is currently being litigated. President William Thierfelder acted in 2007 to remove abortion and sterilization coverage from the college’s health insurance plan. He rightly noted that such “procedures” are in total violation of the Catholic Church’s well-known opposition to abortion as the taking of innocent human life. It is doubtless because of his fidelity to church teaching that President Thierfelder’s little college has been singled out for persecution.

It takes no stretch of the imagination to see how all religious colleges are endangered by the persecution of Belmont Abbey. President Thierfelder says he will close down the 150-year old college rather than submit to EEOC’s radical demands.

Will Evangelical colleges permit transvestite employees on campus? Will Evangelical or Lutheran colleges give their employees access to abortifacient drugs and devices? Most colleges in America accept students whose tuition is financed by federal student loans. This could well be the “hook” by which these religious schools are pulled into the federal net.

This aggressive EEOC action only promises to get worse. President Obama’s latest appointee to EEOC is Georgetown University Law professor, Chai Feldblum. A longtime activist for radical gay and lesbian causes, Commissioner Feldblum has openly acknowledged that gay liberation trumps religious liberty wherever they collide.

Not since King Henry VIII seized church lands in England has there been such a radical threat to religious freedom. I hope President Thierfeld never has to carry out his firm resolution of closing this wonderful old school rather than submit. I pray that all Americans who cherish religious liberty will awaken to this new militancy being unleashed against them.

President Washington said it best in his 1790 Letter to the Hebrew Congregation at Newport. The government of the United States gives to “bigotry no sanction, to persecution no assistance.” The members of the EEOC should be required to read that letter. More important, they should be required to abide by its enlightened spirit.

Tags: Uncategorized by Dr. Eric Wallace
No Comments »

By Ak’bar Shabazz

Unless you’ve had your head in the sand during the past few months, you know our nation has been engaged in heated debate over the direction of health care reform efforts.

Health care costs have skyrocketed by 300 percent - adjusting for inflation - over the last decade.  It’s about 16 percent of our economy.  But, at this rate, the National Bureau of Economic Research says it will nearly double to an estimated 29 percent by 2040.

Despite increasing costs, complaints abound about deceasing services.  Insurers are criticized for denying coverage to those who have paid for it or refusing coverage to those with pre-existing conditions.

Half of all home foreclosures in the country and 62 percent of all bankruptcies in 2007 reportedly occurred in part due to the competing costs of a medical condition despite having insurance.

People are finding unexpected and infuriating problems when they get sick and try to use their health care insurance.  After dutifully paying for years, people are shocked to find just what and what is not covered.

At the same time, they are finding out about lavish salary packages for health insurance executives.  For example, the CEO of United Health Care - Stephen Hemsley - makes a salary equivalent to $464,000 each day, not including pension and bonuses.

Can this problem be fixed?  There is a wide partisan gulf regarding possible solutions.

Liberals favor of a “public option” in which the federal government is tasked with providing competition enough to keep the insurance companies honest.  Can bureaucrats do this effectively and efficiently?  That’s a good question.

There are conservatives who don’t believe there is anything wrong, but others have ideas. Some suggest changing laws to allow people to buy insurance across state lines.  Others promote “co-ops” that would allow smaller business to consolidate their buying power and give them the ability to purchase insurance at rates equivalent to larger corporations. This, however, doesn’t ensure policies get paid when needed or costs will stay manageable.

Something needs to be done to ensure Americans actually get what they pay for.  Based on examples such as the DMV and the Post Office, it’s unlikely the federal government can provide an efficient solution that Americans would be willing to pay for - if they get a choice. Most Americans also do not want “welfare type” health insurance.

How about promoting competition?

This is America. Our country was built on the fundamental principle of supply and demand.  There is no reason this cannot be applied in this case.

With only a handful of companies truly in the American insurance market today, there is tremendous demand but no real supply-side competition.

Let new players into the game.  Allow international companies to get involved if necessary.  If the government must be involved at all, let them simply set the ground rules and allow companies to compete in similar fashion to a standard bid contract.  There is no need for federalizing our health care.

When the most qualified and lowest bidder wins - so do Americans.  People can keep their existing providers.  Additional providers might provide new and possibly revolutionary means of coverage.  Rates should drop tremendously due to these increased options.

We should also allow Americans to purchase their health insurance a la carte for specific levels of coverage.  Someone with a family history of diabetes can get that covered, while others with cancer in their family can get coverage specific to them.  The young and healthy can choose a basic plan such as coverage only for accidents.

Maintaining the status quo, however, is no solution.  We need to protect Americans lives and wallets by ensuring a multitude of options are available and consumer quality is ensured.

#  #  #

Ak’Bar A. Shabazz is a member of the national advisory council for the Project 21 black leadership network and president of Shabazz Enterprises.  Comments may be sent to akbar@akbarshabazz.com.

Tags: Uncategorized by Dr. Eric Wallace
No Comments »

By Herman Cain

Christina Romer, the chairperson of President Obama’s Council of Economic Advisers, said Thursday that the $194 billion already spent from the $787 billion economic stimulus gave a jolt to the economy that contributed to growth in the second and third quarters of the year.

According to the Bureau of Economic Analysis, Gross Domestic Product (GDP) in the first, second and third quarters of 2009, respectively, were negative 1.9 percent, negative 3.3 percent and negative 3.8 percent. It looks like economic growth got increasingly worse each quarter.

Maybe I am missing something, but this does not look like a jolt to the economy.

Romer also told that same congressional panel that, by the middle of next year, the impact of the stimulus will level off. In other words, what we have seen so far is as good as it is going to get.

She went on to say that spending so far has saved or created 600,000 to 1.5 million jobs, but warned that unemployment will remain high, above 9.5 percent, through the end of 2010. She’s right. By the way, the administration said we needed the stimulus bill passed to keep the unemployment rate under 8 percent.

The Bureau of Labor Statistics reports show that 2.7 million jobs have been lost since the stimulus was passed, reflecting the fact that 49 out of 50 states lost jobs during that period.

The 9.8 percent of the workforce (15 million workers) that are unemployed really do not care about imaginary “saved jobs” because they were not among them.

I know it is not politically correct to ask this question, but, how do you measure “saved jobs”? I must have missed that class when I was a mathematics Major in college. Shame on me.

The phrase “the economy, stupid” has become popularized over the last two decades. It still is all about the economy, and the administration is not being honest with the American people.

Their policies to stimulate the economy simply are not working!

So they continue to distract the public with ineffective economic crumbs like Cash for Clunkers, first-time home buyers’ tax credits filled with fraud and abuse, and a $250 bonus to senior citizens on Social Security that wasn’t legally required, and that seniors didn’t even ask for. They know this country is headed for bankruptcy.

With a national debt of $12 trillion and a 2009 national debt ceiling of $12.1 trillion, Congress will need some more breathing room for its spending habits. Since it is a Democrat-controlled Congress with a Democratic president, they will probably authorize an increase over a beer when we are not looking.

It appears that, to this administration and Congress, down is the new up and red is the new green. When businesses and families have more money going out than coming in, we call that “in the red” from traditional accounting lingo. We can’t raise the debt limit on ourselves and sell the debt to foreigners, nor can we pass a tax increase on to anybody at will.

Not only does this administration and Congress deny that we can count or read. They now believe that we the people are color blind.

Red is red and we are not stupid.

Tags: Uncategorized by Dr. Eric Wallace
No Comments »

By Bob Parks

After being ousted from a group seeking to buy the St. Louis Rams, Rush Limbaugh has a duty to punch the media in its collective mouth.

Not literally, of course.  What Rush must do is sue the mainstream media for damaging his reputation.  His earning potential in not being able to buy into the football team was clearly hurt when the media helped create a firestorm of controversy based on out-of-context or completely made-up statements.

By definition, the Merriam-Webster dictionary says “libel” is “a written or oral defamatory statement or representation that conveys an unjustly unfavorable impression… published without just cause and tending to expose another to public contempt.”

That seems to be what happened here.

For example, CNN’s Rick Sanchez and several sports columnists relied on an undocumented quote found on Wikipedia attributed to Limbaugh that allegedly lauded slavery. Rush denies it, and no one can produce evidence to the contrary.  Likewise, football player Mathias Kiwanuka’s assertion that Rush is racist want unchallenged in the New York Daily News.

After failing to filter out untruths or challenge wild assertions - something the media has criticized bloggers for - Rush has reason for redress.  And it’s not just for himself.

No one is safe when the media can pull incendiary remarks out of thin air and allow them to be assumed to be true.

Think of the potential damages.  The Rams may now be derided as the “St. Louis Lambs,” but they were “The Greatest Show on Turf” not too long ago.  It’s cyclical.  Think of the team’s ticket sales, merchandising and broadcasting rights potential.  Even as a minority partner, Limbaugh stood to make a lot of money.

Who’s at fault? CNN’s Sanchez and those who fabricated the slavery quote in the first place, among others, certainly share moral culpability.

In the end, Limbaugh could end up owning portions of the networks that have been on a virtual crusade to destroy him.

Rush also has a bone to pick with non-media types such as NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell and Indianapolis Colts owner Jim Irsay for taking the media’s cue and branding Limbaugh an enemy of the league.

Al Sharpton also cannot be allowed to continue dictating public sensibility without effective rebuttal.  Just the fact that Sharpton said he was going to talk to Goodell is laughable. Why does he merit an audience?  Could it be because Sharpton is a darling of the race-obsessed media?

If Rush doesn’t take the lying slanderers out back once and for all, they will do it again to anyone right-of-center who dares to open his mouth.

Pulitzer Prize-winning journalism professors who moonlight as cable news experts should not go to any old website and use a post with no attribution as the basis for character assassination.  Likewise, partisan pundits shouldn’t hide behind freedom of the press to repeat false quotes.

Race hustlers should not be allowed to interject themselves into a false controversy and anoint themselves as speech arbiters.

News anchors similarly should not be allowed back on set after knowingly reading a false quote. And the players, who laughably claim to be victims, shouldn’t just go to the media and repeat false quotes.

The media in general also has to really believe in fairness and equality.

Now’s the time for those who willingly perpetrate smears to find out what it’s like to have their lives destroyed.  It’s time for the message to be sent that the arena of ideas is just that. Should they decide to play fast and loose with the rules, they must suffer the same consequences as the common man.

I believe Rush Limbaugh has an obligation to sue everybody involved in this sham.

#  #  #

Bob Parks is a member of the national advisory council for the Project 21 black leadership network and operates the Black and Right web site (http://www.black-and-right.com). Comments may be sent to Project21@nationalcenter.org.

Tags: Uncategorized by Dr. Eric Wallace
No Comments »

By Harry R. Jackson, Jr.

The media would have you think that same sex marriage in the US is inevitable. Gay marriage activists would also have you believe that public opinion has suddenly shifted in their favor. Nothing could be further from the truth. A Pew Research Survey was released last week that shows our citizens’ true views on same-sex marriage. The poll found that 53 percent of Americans oppose allowing couples of the same sex to marry legally. This number is hardly an endorsement of gay marriage.

On the other hand, 57 percent of Americans want to give same-sex couples rights afforded married couples by allowing civil unions. This is a 3 percent increase since 2008. The numbers suggest that this is not a losing battle. We are not ready to give in to a small segment of society who wishes to completely redefine family, marriage and our society.

The battle for marriage reminds me of the battle between the Israelites and the Philistines in the Old Testament. The battle lines were drawn; it was beginning to look like a losing battle. To add insult to injury, the Philistines took to making a public spectacle out of the Israelites by hiring giant mercenaries who taunted the Israeli army daily. The well-known story of Goliath and the young boy David comes from this backdrop. An untrained, under-armored David is sent to fight a professional, gargantuan soldier. As we know from the account, David killed the giant with a mere slingshot and a stone applied to the place where Goliath’s armor was lacking—at the temple.

Our fight for marriage needs a David spirit…one that exudes the belief that a stone placed in the right way can truly make a difference in our battle. We have several stones to choose from: righteousness, truth, and justice.

Righteousness and responsibility are on our side. The Pew Research survey mentioned above showed that half the public (49 percent) believes that homosexual behavior is morally wrong. In fact, 64 percent of blacks think that homosexuality is morally wrong while 48 percent of whites agree. These figures include all segments of society and not just religious ones. Of the religious groups questioned, 76 percent of while evangelicals and 65 percent of black Protestants say that homosexuality is morally wrong.

Truth is also on our side. Studies by sociologists have shown that countries and states that legalized same-sex marriage have noticeable negative changes in the state of marriage and families. Some of these changes to marriage are that fewer people marry, fewer marriages remain monogamous and sexually faithful, fewer marriages last a lifetime, and polygamy becomes an accepted norm. Negative impacts to the family are that many more children would grow up without the benefit of a mother and a father, which has been shown repeatedly to be the best environment for positive development of children, emotionally, intellectually and socially. The truth is that our society, as a whole, will have to bear the economic weight of same-sex couples receiving health and other benefits. The professionals who serve our citizens will be impacted if they refuse to give their services to same-sex couples, even if doing so goes against their belief system. (To see more detail about these issues visit www.thetruthinblackandwhite.org and read What’s the Vex of Same-sex?)

Justice is also on our side. Although it might “sound good” on the surface to allow civil unions for same-sex couples, many Americans have not been educated on the impacts explained above. As the support for civil unions for same-sex couples inched up, attitudes on same-sex marriage remain almost exactly the same as they did a year ago. The Pew Research survey showed that over half of Americans (53 percent) oppose marriage for lesbians and gays. This public opinion reflects the heart of the American people. We want all Americans to receive fair treatment and overcome discrimination, but we do not want to redefine society by their issues. More than three-fourths of white evangelical Protestants and two-thirds of black Protestants oppose same-sex marriage. These figures show the battle line and the strength and make-up of our army.

This week is an important one for the definition of traditional marriage. An interfaith gathering of Catholics, Baptists, Missionary Baptists, Southern Baptists, Presbyterians, Muslims, Mormons, Pentecostals, and Charismatics will oppose a Goliath. The People’s Rally - Let the People Vote! will make a powerful stand against the DC City Council’s proposed bill to allow same-sex marriage within the District. We want people from all over this country to gather this Sunday, October 25 from 2:00-5:00 pm at Freedom Plaza across from the Wilson Building. Stand for Marriage DC is seeking to place a voter initiative – the Marriage Initiative of 2009 on the November 2010 ballots to preserve the definition of marriage as between one man and one woman.

With the heart of David, we can win this fight. Gather your friends and family and join us this Sunday. Visit www.thepeoplesrally.com to learn more.

Tags: Uncategorized by Dr. Eric Wallace
No Comments »

By Star Parker

DeMaurice Smith, NFL Players Association chief, urged the league to nix Rush Limbaugh’s participation in a consortium to buy the St Louis Rams.

Buying Al Sharpton’s hype that Limbaugh is a racist, Smith whined that football is at its best “when it overcomes division and rejects discrimination and hatred.”

But who are the discriminators and haters here?

Sharpton blocked Limbaugh like Governor Orval Faubus tried to block black children from entering Central High in Little Rock, Arkansas in 1957.

Limbaugh can’t make an investment because some don’t like him? Based on something he did? No, based on who they allege he is.

Once blacks could not live as equals in America because of their race. Because of bigotry, they could not freely mix in society at large, buy a house, get a loan, or vote.

Dr. King led a movement whose goal was supposedly that the ideals and laws of a free society apply to all. That a person’s humanity and God given rights are generic and cannot be denied because of myth, slander, or innuendo about whom they supposedly are.

Unfortunately, these are not the ideals of the race entrepreneurs who took over this movement and who refuse to recognize its completion because it would put them out of business.

We see today that if Al Sharpton does not like a man, and he pulls circumstantial evidence to claim he is a racist, he can get that man’s rights to freely operate and do business in our society abrogated. It is a process no different from the past in which racists produced “information” that “proved” that blacks were inferior and incapable of living as free and equal citizens.

But give credit where it’s due. Sharpton is a skilled entrepreneur and knows how to get his business done.

What is pathetic is the gutless, ill informed, and misguided businessmen and businesswomen, from all walks of American life, who are ready to cave to race blackmail at the drop of a hat.

Like racists of the past who bought bigoted claims about blacks to rationalize their racism, so NFL team owners showed zero interest in investigating claims and allegations made about Limbaugh.

There was zero interest in the fact that Limbaugh never made most of the provocative statements attributed to him. Zero interest in investigating if the few remarks that Rush did indeed make that might be construed, as incendiary was indicative that he is racist. And no interest to see if Limbaugh actually ever did anything that might be considered discriminatory.

Captains of American industry — multimillionaires and billionaires who own NFL franchises — acted with the greatest of ease to discriminate against Limbaugh based only on allegations from those who hate him.

One of the owners vocal against Limbaugh was Arthur Blank, owner of the Atlanta Falcons. Blank is a billionaire who co-founded Home Depot.

Blank’s family foundation makes contributions to Planned Parenthood. Planned Parenthood was founded by eugenicist and racist Margaret Sanger and is the number one killer of unborn black children in the nation. A few years ago Planned Parenthood workers were recorded agreeing to earmark someone’s contributions for only black abortions.

In my view, Blank’s support of Planned Parenthood is infinitely more damaging to America’s black community than any off-handed remark made by Rush Limbaugh. Should Blank be forced to divest his ownership in the Falcons?

American businessmen should be the first defenders of the principles of our free society. Sadly, few even seem to know what they are, let alone defend them.

America’s largest corporations funnel millions every year to Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, and black left wing organizations that promote moral relativism and socialism.

Its no wonder that so many Americans sense today that American greatness is becoming a relic of history.

Tags: Uncategorized by Dr. Eric Wallace
No Comments »

By Herman Cain

House Resolution 554 was introduced on June 17, 2009 by Congressman Brian Baird (D-Washington). It would require a 72-hour reading period for all non-emergency legislation before a vote by the House of Representatives. It is stuck in committee.

A motion, or discharge petition to force a House floor vote on the resolution was initiated by Congressman Greg Walden (R-Oregon) on September 23, 2009. It needs a simple majority of Member signatures (218) to force a vote.

As of this writing, the petition has only 182 signatures.

We should not even have to petition Congress to read legislation before they take a vote, nor should the public have to beg to see it for 72 hours. This is doubly insulting to the intelligence of the citizens of this country, and brazenly irresponsible on the part of the Democratic leaders in Congress.

But here’s why the resolution is needed. The “stimulus bill” of 1,073 pages was voted on within 12 hours after it was made available to members of Congress. The 1,420-page “Cap & Trade & Tax & Kill” bill was passed in 16.5 hours. One version of the health care deform legislation was passed out of committee in 14 hours.

The next huge legislation will be the backroom consolidation of the five health care Trojan horses voted out of committees, and Nancy Pelosi and the Democrats do not want us to know what’s in the bill before they vote on it. Why?

In the early colonial history of this country, it was illegal to teach a slave or a “free person of color” to read and write. Slave owners believed if a slave was taught to read and write they would no longer listen and obey their master and would then be worthless. They also believed that the education of slaves could lead to revolts.

Well, informed voters might not like what’s in the legislation if they have 72 hours to read it, and we might not listen to or obey our Congressional masters.

Nancy Pelosi and the Democrats would rather for us to remain in the dark, ignorant and stupid. I pray that someone will get the following message to Speaker Pelosi and the Democrat-led Congress.

We are not slaves. We can read and this is our declaration.

We the people are fed up with being insulted, ignored and abused as taxpayers. We will not sit by and allow this blatant power grab by the president, the administration and Congress, using socialist-structured environmental and health care legislation. We will not tolerate the endless tsunami spending on top of an already out-of-control national debt and exponentially growing annual national deficit, which is leading this country into bankruptcy.

Promoting class warfare with tax policy will fail, because even unemployed and low-income families are waking up to the class warfare deception. The short-term gratification of gimmicky government giveaways, such as Cash for Clunkers and $250 senior citizen bonuses, are losing their sizzle. And convenient race baiting by avid supporters of the president are becoming old and ineffective as a smoke screen for a lack of effective policy, real economic results and real leadership.

This is not a threat. It is a promise from the majority of Americans that you choose to ignore and marginalize. You may ignore our voices, but you will not be able to ignore our votes.

The revolt will be at the ballot box.

We can read, and we are not going to become a slave nation to the government.

Tags: Uncategorized by Dr. Eric Wallace
No Comments »

Live Broadcast by Ustream.TV

Tags: Uncategorized by Dr. Eric Wallace
No Comments »

By Armstrong Williams

The social engineering of liberal policy makers often has the unintended consequences of making life more difficult for the people it is trying to help.  They justify liberal policies by correctly highlighting real institutional barriers like racism and historical poverty that have historically held back the disadvantaged. However, instead of teaching the disadvantaged to fish so they can feed themselves for a lifetime, they merely give them a fish to eat.

Implicit in these liberal policies are condescending attitudes that minorities and poor people do not have the ability to help themselves.  These liberals subconsciously believe that minorities lack the intelligence, hard work and ambition to succeed.  They believe that only through government policies can the disadvantaged obtain an acceptable middle class life style.  Only through lowering the bar can these people get into prestigious universities, law firms, business firms and prominent government positions.  If they do not have the money to buy a house in a nice neighborhood, then the government must provide one. Unfortunately, the liberal proponents of these policies do not recognize that they sap its intended beneficiaries of the ambition and confidence and create a victim mentality.

Antidiscrimination hiring laws adversely affect protected classes.  Look at the case an employer looking to hire a person for a managerial job.  There are two candidates with the same skills; a young white male and a disabled old b lack lesbian.  The employer’s experience with job candidates is that one out of four candidates does not work out and will have to be let go.  If he hires the young white male and fires him after six months, he has no antidiscrimination law to deal with.  It cost him nothing to fire him so it is easy for him to take a chance on a marginal white male.  On the other hand if he hires the disabled black lesbian and then decides to fire her, he is faced with huge costs.  He must first bring in expensive lawyers to deal with antidiscrimination laws regarding disabled people, race, gender and sexual orientation.  Then there are huge costs of compliance - proper documentation, legal consultation, dealing with government agencies, and the potential of wrongful termination lawsuits and regulatory hearings.  If the skill set of the two candidates is equal, there is no question that the rational employer will hire the young white male who is less costly to layoff.

Affirmative action has similar unintended consequences.  At elitist law schools, like Harvard and Yale, the implicit assumption by faculty and students is that black and Hispanic students have lower LSAT scores and college grades than their Asian and white classmates.  The rebuttable presumption at these law schools is that these minority students are not as smart as their classmates.  When minority law school students graduate, the prestigious law firms make the same assumptions.  Consequently, minority students do not get the same job opportunities as their classmates.

Exhibit one to test this proposition is Justice Clearance Thomas.  The liberal media questioned his intellectual and legal competence notwithstanding that he was a graduate of Yale Law School.  They even pointed out the apparent irony that even though Thomas did not support affirmative action, he would not have gotten into Yale without it!  Thomas was one of the f few Yale Law graduates who did not get a prestigious law firm offer upon graduation. Justice Thomas, to his credit, opposed affirmative action because he recognized the insidious stigma that it puts on competent minorities who do not need a lower bar to succeed.

Exhibit two is Barack Obama.  No other member of the Harvard Law Review ever made the national news upon his election as president of the Law Review.  Liberal media at the time made a big deal of an African-American being the first president of the Law Review.  It is news to the liberal media that there are smart African-Americans.  Had Obama been Jewish or Asian, it would not have been news!  Under the most benign interpretation, this attitude is condescending to smart American Blacks.

Exhibit three speaks for itself. According to McClatchy News service “In just an hour, the court’s newest justice [Sonia Sotomayor] asked more questions than Justice Clarence Thomas has asked over the course of several years.”  It was not coincidence that the first female Hispanic justice was compared favorably to the courts only American Black justice.  But was it because Justice Thomas was black or conservative? Perhaps the real truth is that it is an anathema in the liberal media for a well educated black man to be a conservative and not a slave to the liberal plantation ideology.

Social engineering in housing that goes beyond pure antidiscrimination policy also has unfortunate consequences.  Most Americans agree that a person should be able to buy any house he or she can afford.  However, when courts force communities to build affordable housing or low income housing, it is not clear that this benefits the intended victims.  First, this type of house is generally clustered together and not fully integrated into the surrounding community.  The Chicago South Side housing projects are perhaps the most egregious and failed example.  Low incomes residents, overwhelmingly minorities, of these houses are segregated into subsidized dysfunctional communities.  These residents are subjected to gang warfare, poor schools, substandard shopping and inadequate maintenance.  This liberal policy of subsides public housing results in segregation in its most virulent form.

These liberal policies of antidiscrimination laws, affirmative action laws, housing subsidy policies and many others not discussed in this commentary often lead to unintended consequences of harming the people they are trying to help.   They are implemented with only the best of intentions.  Unfortunately, we all know where the road to good intentions leads.

www.armstrongwilliam.com

Williams can be heard nightly on Sirius/XM Power 169 9 pm -10 pm EST.

Watch Armstrong Williams on WICS/WICD-ABC20/ABC15 Sundays at 12:00 a.m. and WYZZ-FOX 43 Sundays at 7:00 a.m.

Tags: Uncategorized by Dr. Eric Wallace
No Comments »

By Star Parker

The latest installment of “change we can believe in” is sweeping reform of the financial services industry.

Central to proposed Democrat reforms is the establishment of a new Consumer Financial Protection Agency. This agency would have broad authority to oversee and regulate financial service products like mortgages and credit cards and will be responsible to protect consumers from “unfair” and “abusive” products.

Unfortunately, when bureaucrats get authority to determine what is fair, the very people who they supposedly are charged to protect — us — are the ones who get hurt.

The most important product in our country is freedom and, unfortunately, it’s this product that President Barack Obama and House Financial Services Chairman Barney Frank find most defective. They really think that politicians and bureaucrats can take better care of people than we can take care of ourselves.

Consider one of the most politically besieged financial services businesses in the country. Payday advance loans.

According to the website of the industry trade association, the Community Financial Services Association of America, the industry is relatively new — it got started in the 1990’s — and now delivers about $40 billion in short term, low denomination loans.

You can’t help but conclude this is a service many consumers want.

Sure, it’s tough out there. Families trying to make ends meet and dealing with short-term cash flow problems is not a pretty picture. There’s a lot of ways the challenges have been and are met. Bounced checks, pawnshops, bank overdraft protection, late fees on payments, informal extension agreements with creditors, etc.

Payday advance loans emerged as another way for families to deal with these challenges. And, as indicated by pretty phenomenal growth, it’s clear that the product is successful.

Yet the industry is under constant attack by groups who appoint themselves to be the champions for consumer protection.

Regarding payday advance loans, their claim is that fees are too high. The business is regulated at the state level. State by state political initiatives have been advanced to put ceilings on rates loan providers can charge. Voters in Ohio last year approved capping annual rates on payday loans at 28 percent.

The result? According to one industry spokesman, “700 of the 1600 payday loan offices in the state have closed.”

No one has been protected. They’ve only limited options available to free men and women. They can’t seem to conceive that these consumers are adults who would not buy this product if they didn’t want it.

There are many companies providing payday advance loans — I count 55 on the membership list of their trade association — so clearly competition is fierce to price these loans competitively.

I reported a number of years ago about the Illinois Fairness in Lending Act that established state oversight on mortgages offered in targeted low income-zip codes. Bureaucrats were given authority to dictate conditions of the loans and to require lenders to provide credit counseling. The result was drying up of credit in these zip codes.

Politicians can write their own music. But so far we’re still free enough that people cannot be forced to dance to it.

So it will be with CFPA.

It’s not an accident that the same organizations that attack the payday advance business are actively lobbying for the Consumer Financial Protection Agency. Nor is it an accident that one of these organizations has been the now scandal drenched ACORN.

These organizations, which unfortunately have the sympathies of our president and of Barney Frank, have little respect for creative dynamism of free markets. Their business is accumulating and exercising political power.

The great economist Milton Friedman once observed, “Many people want government to protect the consumer. A much more urgent problem is to protect the consumer from the government.”

Tags: Uncategorized by Dr. Eric Wallace
No Comments »