Tuesday, September 15, 2009

The L-Word

Since when did calling a man out on a lie make him racist? Former president James Carter needs to just sit down, shut up, and slink off into oblivion before he hurts himself.

In a very strange, partisan attempt to suck as much juice out of a controversy as possible, Jimmy Carter, among others, is twisting S.C. Rep. Joe Wilson's timely comment during Our Dear Leader's prime time propaganda hour into racism. Please, someone explain to me just how this leap is made, and then how it is actually reported as though it is a serious addition to the issue. It would seem, in fact, that Mr. Carter's comment was the racist one here, as it would logically follow that he presumes blacks to be liars, so that any reference to a black man as a liar would automatically trigger a racial connection in his mind, just as the N-word came to do in the American language.

Add to my list of racist words: The L-Word.

How does Mr. Carter square Joe's comment with the thousands of L-bombs lobbed at the most recent former president?

This whole incident is nothing but hypocritical partisanship at its worst. Joe Wilson simply said to the president what I, and many thinking citizens around the nation, were yelling at the TV set at that same moment. Was it out of place? Well, a little more than half the House, and many other sanctimonious pansies in Washington and across the media seem to think so. I would disagree, however. I think it was totally appropriate. In fact, those around him should have applauded, and stood up, and joined in with him. Those two words should have been a chant that lasted so long that Obama finally shrugged his shoulders and sauntered off into the protective arms of the media, his Congressional partisans, and yellow-bellied Republican pansies who prefer form over substance.

See, Joe Wilson actually used the L-word in its proper context. Contrast, if you will, with the context in which it was used over the previous seven years, where "Liar" meant one who promotes the defense of his nation with statements which he believed to be true at the time they were made, but which later turned out to be unverified. Joe Wilson used the term to mean one who makes assertions that he knows at the time to be completely false.

Jimmy Carter used the term to mean a black man.

From here on out, any time Obama, or any other Democrat, opens his mouth, he should be met with passionate chants of "You Lie! You Lie! You Lie! You Lie!..."

Saturday, September 05, 2009

You Sure You Wanna Hear This?

Bank of America asked me to conduct a satisfaction survey regarding my recent call to its customer service center. I just about lost it when this message appeared:

Bank of America appreciates your business and is committed to provide you with world-class service. Thank you very much for taking the time to provide your feedback and for choosing Bank of America.

I thought it would be fun to complete the survey. It won't result in any change in the Bank's position, but, well, they asked.

Friday, September 04, 2009

My Personal Protest - Update

Last night, I called Bank of America's 800 number. A very nice, polite young man helped me get one overdraft fee refunded. With the account I had signed up for, you are entitled to a "Stuff Happens" refund. Then he very clearly explained that he as a customer service representative was not the person with the authority to refund any others. Catching on to his suggestion, I told him I guessed I better talk with someone who does. "So, are you asking to talk with my supervisor (who has the authority)?" he clarified. "Sounds good, sir." I replied.

Shelby then came on the line. I remember her name because I was sure to use it a number of time during our one hour conversation. She politely explained to me how this system was designed for my benefit. I politely explained to her how this system didn't seem to be benefitting me, and that it seemed more for Bank of America's benefit. She replied that if Bank of America was intent on scamming its customers out of their money, she was sure there were other ways to do it. I replied that seems like the most effective so far. I explained to her that I wasn't asking her to change the system. If it works for some customer's benefit, great. But in the instances where it does more harm, wouldn't it make sense to correct that individual account for that particular situation. I said that the bank would still be able to retain some of its overdraft fees, but it wouldn't kill the customer in the process. She said that if the bank were to do that, everyone would be calling everytime they got an overdraft fee. I said no they wouldn't. Most people don't want to bother with, get frustrated, and then go on with their lives. Of those that do challenge it, most will quit after the first "No". But at least you would be helping those who unexpectedly get hit with $200-$400 in overdraft fees because of one large overdraft. She finally decided she just wasn't willing to help me. I told her she had the opportunity right here to save a customer and help salvage Bank of America's rapidly declining image. She decided it wasn't worth it.

Today I went back to work picketing the bank. Later, I went back inside to see if Patrick had changed his mind about keeping my money. He smiled and reminded me that he was half brain-dead. He insisted that he had proven to me that I did not have the money in the account to cover all those charges. I reminded him that I, in fact, did have the money to cover those charges. He assured me that was merely my opinion, to which I defined the difference between opinion and fact (I figured he must have struggled through his public education). He laughed and told me he was keeping the money. I didn't laugh, and reminded him that it was not his money and that I wanted it back. At that point, I noticed his very nervous hand punch three numbers on his cell phone and wait to push the send button. I politely informed him of the customers I had discouraged from opening an account with his bank, and the others who will be closing their accounts. He laughed again... keeping his shaking hand on the send button. I figured I'd be back another day, so I left.

The positive from all of this has been the many people who have shared their stories of hopelessness and anger caused by the nonsensical, cold hand of the Bank of America. I know of only one person who is neutral on the Bank of America. I now know of many who have an abiding hatred of this institution. I hope that they can find ways to deny this stupid monster of their money.

If there is any way possible for you to find another bank, please do so immediately. Open an account with that bank, get all your deposits and direct payments set up, and then walk into the Bank of America and loudly proclaim your intent to cancel all your accounts. Demand the money in cash, immediately, or be immediately transferred to your new bank, "the one that wants my business." When they ask you why you are cancelling, tell them loudly that it is because they do not deserve to be in business. They need to be knocked down to main street level to be given a reminder of what life is really about.

The government was afraid to let banks fail. This has given them a false sense of importance. Together, we may not cause them to fail, but we can sure support the smaller banks who appreciate your business and want to help... and make money.

Thursday, September 03, 2009

Bank of America Stole My Money!






















I knew we were getting close, but I thought we had enough to clear. As it turns out, we actually did, except for one larger bill that was scheduled to come out that day. So what did Bank of America do?

Well, although all our smaller transactions had been done several days ago, and had already been pending (meaning the bank had put a hold on those funds), Bank of America decided to post them all the same day, starting with the largest first, and then proceeding downward until it started posting the $6, $5, ..., $1.75 Sonic drink (purchased 4 days prior). Unfortunately, by this time, there was not enough in our checking account to clear these (which totaled $21). Fortunately, I have a set up where if there are enough funds in my checking account to clear, the bank will automatically move money from my savings account to cover it, which it did. There was enough to keep our balance in the black... until they deducted their $10 transfer fee. And yet, the bank decided that, despite all this, I would pay it $35 for every transaction that was originally in the red... which was 6 transactions, for a total of $210.

So I figure maybe I could talk to the bank I have been loyal to for 5 years and have two accounts with, they would see where this is ridiculous, and would kindly refund at least 4 or 5 of those fees so a man can continue to feed his family until his next paycheck.

Smiling, the bank officials proceeded to describe that this method of applying the large transactions first is for my own protection. "Wouldn't you rather make sure your mortgage or car payment is paid first?" said the man. "No, I would not," I replied. "Well, 98% of Americans would disagree with you," he stated. "No, they would not," I replied, explaining, "If they were $21 short, they would prefer to pay you one insufficient fund charge and then scrape together that $21 deficit, along with the returned check charge that the mortgage company will charge them, and get it done the next day." I went on, "Besides that, I have overdraft protection as a customer of your bank, which means you would have paid it anyway, and then I would only be owing you one $35 overdraft charge and have that and the $21 deficit come out of my next deposit, which I made later that very afternoon."

"No," he said.

"Yes," I said. "Most people would consider that as logical, and fair and reasonable. If your system is truly designed to protect me, it doesn't seem to be working all that well at this moment. All you have to do is rearrange the order in which you honor my debits, and 'poof', I owe you $35."

Smiling, the manager explained that that is not possible, to which I explained that yes it is quite possible, since I have seen it done once before.

Smiling, he told me that it is a technical issue, and that I would have to call the 800 number, because there is nothing he can do here.

Not smiling anymore, I pointed to a large deposit that I had just made that same day, which the bank so kindly decided to hold for 8-10 days, and which I intended to use to open a business checking account. "Do you see this transaction, right here?" I asked. "Why, yes," he said, smiling. "Well, this will clear in a week, and when it does, I will take every last dime of it out of this bank, because I am thru with your b.s., and then I will close down both my accounts and take my business to a friendlier, more reasonable bank."

I then proceeded very loudly to tell him that I was tired of being robbed by my own bank, that they know that what they are doing is wrong, and that it is nothing but theft.

Not smiling anymore, he told me that I was welcome to leave the bank now. As I stormed past the not smiling customers who were turning their heads, I reminded him loudly that he has lost my business, and that he can tell his managers that. He kindly followed me out of the bank and into the street, where I proceeded to proclaim to Springdale downtown that Bank of America just stole my money, and that they are nothing but a bunch of theives. As one man got out of his car, and looked at me, I said, "Isn't that right?" "Hell, yeah!" he replied, just as loudly.

Realizing that an 800 number is not going to get me any more than a live person would, I took a different tack. I created a sign, and stood outside the bank for two hours, warning people about the bank they were about to enter.

I haven't got my money back yet, but I did persuade one young lady who was about to make the mistake of opening an account at the Bank to pursue other options. I also convinced our legal secretary to go ahead and change banks as well.

I'll be back out there tomorrow.

The Numbers Are In