Anger at Town Hall Meetings

If politicians needed a wake up call to tell them the American people were not satisfied with the way they are handling things in Washington, they need look no further than their own "town hall" meetings. Lately, you can't turn on any news channel without seeing a lot of angry citizens calling their representatives to task for what is going on in the nation. While most of these meetings are about health care reform, I suspect a lot of the anger comes from the apparent lack of interest in Washington of how average citizens view their recent actions. I think the following article sums it up pretty well:

So why are Americans “mad as Hell”?

For the past year, we watched as the housing and financial sectors imploded, taking with them manufacturing and automotive companies. Job losses, foreclosures, and personal bankruptcies mounted into the millions, and the response of government has been to pass pork-laden legislation that spent huge amounts of future taxpayer dollars for questionable results. And when it is revealed that many of the same government policies, regulations, and politicians created the problems in the first place, it becomes obvious that politicians via the government are out of control and have no qualms about feeding at the public trough to achieve their own ends.

The current crop of politicians in office have run on the platform of hope, change, and transparency. That hope has changed into a morbid hopelessness, the change for the better is changing for the worse, and the only transparency there is the obvious attempt of the politicians to cram as much legislation loaded with their pet projects through before the public catches on. Are there any doubts that the government that we now have is not what the majority voted for?

And when the voters are protesting, they are called un-American, un-patriotic, and a whole host of other nasty names by the supporters of the current Administration. All for voicing their opinions. What is so hypocritical is that they did the same thing when the former Administration was in power, and they called it their God-given right under the power of Free Speech granted by the Constitution.

http://tomsplace.iblogger.org/

We heard a lot of politicians proclaiming their indignity at the banks who handed out bonuses while avoiding bankruptcy on the taxpayers dime. Yet the bank executives, who seem to have forgotten that they are only still in business because of the massive bailouts from taxpayers, doled out bonus money like their was no tomorrow. Over 4,800 people received more than a million dollars each, for what? Because they helped orchestrate one of the worst economies since the great depression? Maybe that was their intent all along and they are getting the bonuses for accomplishing their goals. Otherwise, I see no reason anyone working at any of the bailed out institutions should be collecting anything other than an hourly wage. And they should thank their lucky stars that they still have a job, since that puts them way ahead of the millions of Americans they helped put out of work.

Back on the health care front, I can't believe how dense some of our politicians are. It is as plain as the nose on their faces that the average citizen does not want government run health care. Some of the politicians have actually talked down to their constituents, saying we already have government run health care, in the form of medicare, medicaid and V.A. health care. If I were them, I would not be holding up these programs as an argument for more government involvement in medical treatment. While they all do some good, they are notoriously inefficient and let's not forget about the recent bout of infections caused by unsanitary equipment at some of the V.A. hospitals. If the current administration is so hell bent on ignoring what the people want, then they should be voted out. Let's get rid of them, lock, stock and barrel.

Obamanomics--Our Tax Dollars At Work

From the Associated Press:

"NEW YORK - Even when their profits dried up and they turned to taxpayers to stay afloat, the nation's biggest banks kept paying huge bonuses. But much of the money went not to top executives, but to star traders and salesmen, even as the economy battled through the worst recession in a generation.

The bonuses — including $1 million or more for each of nearly 4,800 bankers at nine of the largest firms — were paid for 2008, along with scores of smaller checks to thousands of rank-and-file employees. But their revelation this week has renewed criticism of companies relying on government aid."

Millions of Americans are out of work, yet the Obama team has sent our tax dollars to the very people who orchestrated the collapse of our economy, so they in turn can pay out billions of dollars in bonuses to their workers. Their excuse is that these people are the "producers", the ones generating the profits for their banks. Even if this is true, why are they being paid bonuses with our tax dollars? Shouldn't any bonuses be paid from the "profits" they produce?

http://www.cnbc.com/id/32243314/for/cnbc/

More Obamanomics:

With so many people out of work in the U.S. and the economy still in such bad shape, the administration is considering extending unemployment benefits. Not a bad thing in itself, but how do they plan to pay for it?

Again, from the Associated Press:

"Top U.S. officials said on Sunday more steps may be needed to firm up economic recovery -- including extended jobless benefits -- and declined to rule out future tax increases to tame massive budget deficits.

Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner

U.S. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner said the government needed to show the will to reverse deficits after the recovery, and would have to make some "hard choices" about whether this may include increasing tax revenues."

http://www.cnbc.com/id/32259702

But wait, that's not all you get, still more of our tax dollars at work:

"The House approved on Friday a $2 billion extension of the "Cash-for-Clunkers" automobile sales incentive program.

The Democratic proposal would run through Sept. 30, 2010, and tap funds from an Energy Department loan guarantee program included in the economic stimulus package enacted in February.

An initial $1 billion in funding approved this summer to boost stagnant industry sales has already been exhausted, officials said."

http://www.cnbc.com/id/32235069

So under Obamanomics and the Democrats, the taxpayers loaned the auto industry billions of dollars to help pay their debts, then subsidize the sale of their cars with another $3 billion. I'm just guessing, but I'd be willing to bet that some of the bankers, who collected million dollar bonuses, are driving taxpayer subsidized cars about now. It's a sure bet the millions of unemployed could not afford to take advantage of this program. Let's not forget Mr. Geitner's comment about the government making some, "hard choices" in regards to increasing tax revenues. If anyone believes they will really tax "the rich" to make up for budget shortfalls, then they're only fooling themselves. After all, these people are "the rich". Businesses that are overtaxed simply go out of business or move to another country with lower taxes. So who will pay increased taxes? The only ones left to tax. You and me.

I've read articles comparing Obama's handling of the economic crisis with Reagan's handling of the Savings and Loan crisis and the weak economy during his administration. Reagan had the "trickle down" theory and I was definitely better off after his first four years in office. With Obamanomics, even if through some miracle I am better off after his first four years, I'm pretty sure he and his band of merry men in congress will tax it all away. Obama campaigned on a platform of "change", to help the poor and "yes we can!". I can't help but wonder, before his four years are up, if instead of "yes we can", we might be saying, "Oh no you didn't.".

As a final thought, I'll leave you with this piece from the Weekly Standard, titled "Obamanomics Renders Economy Inefficient":

"Two thoughts pierce the gloom. The first is that the American economy might be large enough, and resilient enough, to remain competitive even bearing the weight of the new inefficiencies. The second is that voters will demand a change of course before Obamanomics is permanently embedded in our system. Voters worry that they are leaving their children a mountain of debt. Already Obama's approval rating among independent voters, whom Wall Street Journal analyst Gerald Seib calls "the canaries in the coal mine of American politics", has fallen from 60 percent to 45 percent. Even if the president doesn't get the message, Congress, faced with an election next year, just might."

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/06/29/opinion/main5122778.shtml

Let's hope someone in Washington is still paying attention.