If it can be used to target Obama…

Or, who truly regarded the unemployed as a speed bump

Earlier, over the weekend, President Obama was doing his level best to explain the increased unemployment numbers. Very simple, when hiring went on an upswing, more people started looking for jobs. But then businesses decided to slow down putting new people on the payroll. What ever the latest excuses that business interests used, but the president did try to address those excuses. Ultimately, the GOP twisted his actual words and tried to claim that Obama was treating the unemployed as a “speed bump.” Oh really?

In mid term election year 2010, it was the GOP who after all targeted Dem policies as “jobs killers.” “Vote for me, and ‘I’ll’ bring back the jobs.” The GOP spent more time pushing policies that catered to the wealthy, religious activists, and etc. than actually concerning themselves with home foreclosures, unemployment, and the fact that the so-called “free market” had established its own anti-business practices. That is, when the GOP weren’t going on record behaving exactly like two-year old children; Speaker of the House Boehner included. And then former Mass. Governor Mitt Romney declares his run for the presidency by stating how President Obama “failed.” Well, when you are dealing with obstructionist two-year olds who throw tantrums any time you are trying to get something done; I guess you would “fail.” The real issue, not because Obama “failed,” he did get a number of domestic policies right and did his best to kick start the American economy into motion. But rather, Point 1: Romney hates the fact (as do most GOP) that a Democrat won in 2008. Point 2: The GOP are only the party of accountability and personal responsibility when it doesn’t involve themselves. Hypocrisy was the underlying motivation of the GOP “response” to Obama’s weekly radio address. And for that, instead of the GOP flaying away at the president, maybe they should have looked in the mirror.

Cut to a Michael Ramirez “cartoon” published in the 7 June 2011 Spokesman-Review. While Mr. Ramirez doesn’t specifically target President Obama, his politicized tornado that is tearing up some small town is the result of anti-biz policies, unemployment, and home foreclosures. And when was Mr. Ramirez prepared to show much sympathy for the people who suffered major catastrophes and traumas from tornadoes hitting areas of the country and in a truly destructive way that hadn’t happened before? Only if he could politicize it and without taking into consideration that the GOP members of Congress regarded those who suffered the most from heavy tornado damage as nothing more than speed bumps. Actually, he didn’t. The destructive tornadoes were the fault of Dem policies. So, maybe “God” was trying to tell people who were hard hit by disasters something. That in the aftermath of nature-based tragedy, who showed the most concern for human welfare and who did not. President Obama had shown such concern, the GOP did not.

Speaking of anti-business policies, I finally found out why U.S. Bank wanted to change an account of mine tied to a retirement money market account with automatic transfer to an “easy checking account” so that they could force me to pay $8.95 for a paper bank statement mailed monthly. A statement that would take at most around $2.00 to generate and a discounted mailing rate to send it. That is because, they stand to lose 32¢ for every debit card transaction at a retail Point Of Sale by 21 July 2011. Well, to keep the shareholders happy, they’ll take money from people who don’t have the wherewithal to even keep 1,500 minimum in any checking account. In my case, I barely work and as a consequence, often do not make a hundred dollars every two weeks. But they are more than happy to waive the fees for people who have a lot more wealth. Well get this, even when I had a check card, I never used it. So, U.S. Bank never profited 44¢ at a time from my failure to use it. Yet, they were quite content to make my paper bank statements free to send. I also saw in this editorial (pro- and con-) that the banks were fighting tooth and nail to get this law overturned even before it is scheduled to take effect. Must be why those “fees” that are more likely to affect poorer people such as myself. The banks need the money of the poor to fight a law that benefits the retail industry, oh that by the way, hires a percentage of poor people. Instead of the banks working with a capitalist system, they are literally working against it. And yes, have the money to try to influence a GOP-controlled House of Representatives. Talk about your anti-biz policies, Ramirez. The retail industry that can save some 32¢ each debit card transaction at POS; could they hire more people? Could they stabilize hours and improve wages? Bet they could. People who could then put money into the very banks that are currently working at cross purposes to hiring, buying, and selling. Apparently, someone forgot to explain what capitalism means in this era of greed: Supply and Demand. But you are not going to be able to generate demand for the product and service offered, if1. You intend to rip people off, or 2. you seem to think that “demand” will still exist without a paycheck. Oh yes, I’d have to say that something “failed” all right; but that I can’t blame the president for what has become the underbelly of the human condition. In a free society, businesses are going to make the mistakes that ultimately work against their best interests. That’s a given. To insist that government has a role in correcting those mistakes, yes, under the commerce clause of the U.S. Constitution, such a role does exist. To argue that a “free market” that is run by people who are by no means saints should be “self-regulating,” is to forget that just because you enter into business does not place you a cut above the great unwashed masses that ultimately work for you and in turn, become your customer base. “If all men sin and fall short of the glory of God,” as the Apostle Paul had said, then sinners in the business world require regulations to guide them to be a little less damaging to their own best interests as well as the interests of anyone they do business with. Unfortunately, the banks have forgotten that. Bottom line: The GOP are as a consequence consistent about one thing, they love the money and the power (what ever it takes to acquire both). But, they no longer understand what governing means. For what it is worth, I endorse President Obama to continue as POTUS, because he does have that understanding.

A word or two about Rep. Anthony Weiner. I really do not care if you are a Republican or a Democrat exactly what about “social media” do you not understand? Sending photos of your crotch covered by a brief to some unknown woman by way of Twitter? Oh, puhleeze! You are actually old enough to know better than that. I’d expect this sort of embarrassing idiocy and the denials that followed, to come from some child or teenager, but not from a Representative of New York. While Jon Stewart could make jokes about it; Rep. Wiener (D. NY) it really was your decision to do something stupid. Being an idiot is bipartisan.


One Response to “If it can be used to target Obama…”

  1. crimit Says:


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: