Obstructionist policies

Nov 23rd, 2011
by Nicole Zimmerer

"Voters kept telling reporters and polltakers that their fundamental concerns - about economic growth and job security, health care and their children's education - were not being addressed by politicians... All these things are true. But both despite and because of them, there are grounds for hope for the future of American politics. Popular anger at politics is, in fact, a thoroughly healthy sign, an indication that our democracy is going through one of its periodic phases of self-correction. … politics dominated by false choices and phony issues is something very much worth being angry about. That anger is beginning to have an impact." EMPHASIS ADDED
-- E.J. Dionne, Jr from 1992's Why Americans Hate Politics

Perennial concerns. The only difference between political parties is how they address these concerns. While "compassionate" conservatives call for privatization and deregulation, they do so while at an economic and social advantage over those whose lives will be devastated by such policies. They tend to take the side of faceless corporate entities, and as history has proven, these entities do not have human concerns, they merely care about the bottom line. Im not claiming that the liberal left has perfect policies, but they are slightly more grounded in reality and take more into account than simply numbers on a piece of paper. They tend to take the human variable into account.

Image via Addicting Info

Take US Crane, LLC, for example. Addicting Info reports that owner Bill Looman has added a commentary to his company vehicles in the form of a sign that states: NEW COMPANY POLICY: WE ARE NOT HIRING UNTIL OBAMA IS GONE.


Doesn't this spit in the face of conservative economics?

He's a small business owner, he is one of the GOP's "Job Creators" and yet he is refusing to create jobs. I wonder how his employees are coping with this new policy, unless he only hires like minded people – which is his prerogative but it still flies in the face of democracy.

So, How does this help his cause? No, seriously – can someone please tell me how, because I simply do not understand. Is he hoping for a complete breakdown of American society through economic turmoil so that he and his militia brethren may take up arms against "liberals" and dispatch with anyone they don't like? (Calling Margaret Atwood). Ok, perhaps I just answered my own question. The biggest problem with this theory is that America is for lack of a better phrase - too big to fail, and even if it did, it wouldn't be an internal takeover, it would be external, from one of Mr. Looman's bad dreams, such as China, because they have the firepower and the desire, all they need is for loons like Looman to destroy America and give them the invitation.

But Looman is proud of his newfound notoriety and is claiming the article on Addicting Info is providing him with more business, and that he "MAY HAVE TO HIRE AFTER ALL" (emphasis is his, he posts in all caps). He says he may even have to send a christmas card to them for the advertisement. I wonder how many clients he lost as a result of the article, because as history has proved, for every boast about a "victory" there are always more defeats.

You should know that Mr. Looman is a self professed tea bag Tea Party conservative with racist ideals and ties to North Georgia's non-military militia and home grown terrorist plots. To see for yourself, all you have to do is go to his Facebook page and read his wall. He makes wild unsupported accusations about how President Obama is a muslim extremist that is causing so-called God fearing patriots to take up arms and protect themselves against the socialist invasion. He uses blogs which espouse his same viewpoint and that contain absolutely no supporting evidence to prove his points. Looman posts pictures of the Confederate Flag along with "this ain't coming down", he makes veiled threats of violence against anyone that disagrees with him. He cites the Founding Fathers and a desire to go back to what they wanted this country to be and Sun Tzu's "The Art of War" as his inspiration, but he fails to realize that everything he says and does completely contradict these basic teachings. Had he actually read The Art of War, he'd know that you don't destroy a country to conquer it, you take it whole and assimilate its resources into your own. Otherwise, you have merely conquered land, and land without resources is useless to the General.
He fails at being a patriot on so many levels. He claims to love America then denigrates the very pillars of American Democracy built by his "heroes." Ignorance like this must not be rewarded. He is a coward and a liar and a spoiled child. It's the ones carrying the bible and wearing the American Flag while carrying a weapon that have no idea what any of those things mean.