So how is Obama relevant to this?
He came out in support.
I'm still not following. The original point was:
And I'm sure if they were angry about Bank of America not repaying their loan, the check would've been written out to the Treasury. But that's not what it was about.
Just Curious, Why is Obama Targeting B Of A, and not Citi, Chase, or Wells Fargo, again???
So again. Where's the relevance? How does Obama supporting the protesters mean anything? How is bringing up an apparent 'targeting' of Bank of America by Obama relevant to the protests at all?
So again. Where's the relevance? How does Obama supporting the protesters mean anything? How is bringing up an apparent 'targeting' of Bank of America by Obama relevant to the protests at all?
That is for you to see, No One is going to do it for you.
Yes, it's up to
me to provide evidence for
your claim.
No wait that's retarded. I'm gonna have to conclude that your point was irrelevant in the first place.
By Adam Levin
This week, Senator Dick Durbin(D-Ill) made a remarkably pithy statement on the floor of the Senate that Bank of America patrons should “vote with your feet, get the heck out of that bank.”
By now, everyone who reads, watches and listens knows that Bank of America instituted a five dollar per month charge for usage of its debit cards effective early next year, and, of course, that’s what prompted Durbin’s remark. While there will be no fee if you have at least $5,000 in a Bank of America account, have a mortgage with the bank, are a B of A employee, or only use the debit card for ATM transactions, any one purchase in a given month will ding you the five bucks. This is in addition to all other fees on its “basic” accounts—of which there are many types—and which can already carry fees as high as $12 per month if minimum balances are not maintained. Not wanting to miss out on the fee-for-all, Citibank also announced a substantial rate increase, hiking the minimum balance requirement for certain checking accounts from $6,000 to $15,000, else a $20 a month fee will be charged. They also announced that “EZ Checking” account holders will be charged $15 a month if they don’t maintain a balance of at least $6,000.
Bank of America, Adam Smith and a Fee Market System
Yes, it's up to
me to provide evidence for
your claim.
---------------------------------------------------------------
When is a protest not a protest?
Now this event would accurately be called a "protest" if it were taking place at, say, a bank or the U.S. Capitol. But when hundreds of loud and angry strangers are descending on your family, your children, and your home, a more apt description of this assemblage would be "mob." Intimidation was the whole point of this exercise, and it worked-even on the police. A trio of officers who belatedly answered our calls confessed a fear that arrests might "incite" these trespassers.
What's interesting is that SEIU, the nation's second largest union, craves respectability. Just-retired president Andy Stern is an Obama friend and regular White House visitor. He sits on the President's Fiscal Responsibility Commission. He hobnobs with those greedy Wall Street CEOs -- executives much higher-ranking than my neighbor Baer -- at Davos. His union spent $70 million getting Democrats elected in 2008.
In the business community, though, SEIU has a reputation for strong-arm tactics against management, prompting some companies to file suit.
What's really behind SEIU's Bank of America protests - May. 19, 2010
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
SEIU's International Secretary-Treasurer Eliseo Medina attended the president's address in El Paso, Texas and made the following statement:
"President Obama is to be commended for leading a forthright discussion on one of the more vexing issues facing our nation: immigration reform. By keeping attention on the issue and uniting divergent interests from across the political spectrum, the president is challenging the nation to set aside divisive politics and find real solutions.
"Congress needs to listen. For years, Republicans have blocked congressional debate on comprehensive immigration reform with the false argument - proven wrong many times over - that securing the border was a pre-requisite for comprehensive immigration reform. Their repeated stalling tactic is calling for securing the border before engaging in a debate on other reforms that would resolve the status of undocumented workers and their families already here and also level the playing field for all workers.
"Today, the president made a forceful case for moving forward on comprehensive solutions. There is no question that reforming the system would treat all employers fairly and increase the wage scale for all workers in the U.S. It would eliminate a massive underground "cash" economy that takes advantage of cheap labor and depresses wages and working conditions for everyone. Consequently business and labor leaders across the country and across the political spectrum have stood up against short-sighted state legislation and demanded a federal solution.
SEIU's Medina: President Obama Boldly Moves Towards Immigration Reform
What I want to know here is who catches and who pitches? Is this just a One night stand? Nah.
No wait that's retarded. I'm gonna have to conclude that your point was irrelevant in the first place.
No Wait. You are Retarded.
Yeah okay buddy. Keep pointing out something that doesn't have to do with it, so you don't have to respond to the original point.
