DISCOVER the Card That Keeps on Taking

DISCOVER Card

The credit card company that keeps on taking by what in my view are patently deceptive practices. Recently, I signed up for Discover's promotional balance transfer and began paying down the balance as agreed.

After a couple months the card company sent me "Hurry and use your card now! Get $10 cash back on any purchase." I carefully examined all the disclosures on the offer and thought, well why not earn $10 and made a small under $50 purchase.

Of course, I should have known that a card company would not bother with full disclosure opting instead for the deceptive practice of baiting it's customers into using their card under false pretenses. Discover promptly started charging me interest on my small purchase. When I called to ask about this, not one, but two arrogant customer service representatives told me that it was my responsibility to read the 25 page card member agreement and NOT Discover's responsibility to disclose any of this on their "Hurry, use your card and get $10 now!" promotion.

To add further insult to deceptive practice, Discover's customer relations or should I say customer abuse personnel went on to tell me that I would never even receive the $10 unless I continued to use the card and make more purchases that would eventually total enough for my "Cash-Back" account to equal $20 because that is the minimum amount Discover considers valid to give cash-back. Apparently, they just keep any amounts under $20 for themselves because after all why would a consumer care about anything less than $20? As if $19.25 was a penny to be left on the sidewalk.

My only alternative was to either pay-off my entire "balance-transfer" as well as the small purchase I made because Discover baited me into using the card under the false pretense of giving me $10, or to live with paying interest on any purchases I made until my promotional balance transfer is paid off.

Discover's management can only be described by me as unethical, and if the Fed Reserve and Congress act on pending re-regulations that have not been pushed by our "business-friendly" Republican friends of the rich and the Bush Administration such behavior by Discover and other card companies will be (as it should be) illegal.

"Another part of the plan would create restrictions on how lenders apply payments borrowers make on their credit cards, people familiar with the matter said. If a borrower has a $500 balance at an introductory rate of 0% and another $500 balance at 10%, the lender would be prohibited from allocating payments only to the 0% balance first." Source: Wall St Jr April 29, 2008 "A Credit-Card Crack Down."

I do, however, have something positive to say about another credit card company. Citibank is my credit card bank of choice under the MasterCard umbrella. They have always gone out of their way to explain and disclose their offers so that consumers like myself can make an informed choice. I have been loyal to them over the decades, and they have in-turn gone so far as to reverse charges and fees even when it was my mistake if I didn't understand something.

As they say "that's why the Citibank MasterCard is the only card I need."

Iraq Camp Bucca

CNN aired an exclusive this morning on an Iraq detention camp named Bucca where reportedly up to 19,000 prisoners have been held - some for as long as 3 years.

General Douglas Stone explained to us that he is using counter-insurgency techniques to help rehabilitate and return thousands of prisoners back into Iraq society as a possible positive force for the American point of view, but the General also explained that many of the fighters including the so called Al Qaeda in Iraq actually took the job of fighting against the Americans for money to help support their families and with the full support and blessing of their families.

I don't know about you, but all of this seems very frightening. Almost 20,000 Iraqis being held in a prison camp and only released when they have been rehabiliated to our way of thinking?

Hmmm...if I'm in a prison camp for as long as 3 years I think I would just about say or do anything to convince my captors I was no longer a threat to them and that I was safe to be released.

This is what passes for converting hearts and minds in the so called war against terrorism? Is it just me or does anyone else find this abusive and hypocritical on the part of the United States?

In my opinion either we're in a war or we're not, and if we're in a war then these types of activities are at best a distraction. Of course, we're really not a in war in the traditional sense, we're attempting to educate and convert an entire country to the American way of living and thinking.

Are we really prepared to continue to put out 7 billion dollars per month of our citizen's tax money for an entire generation of 50 years or more to do this which is what it would take? And at what expense to our own country's needs in education, social security, jobs, and our economy?

Rev. Jeremiah Wright at the National Press Club

Rev. Jeremiah Wright spoke forthrightly this morning at the National Press Club about his position on many topics related to politics and religion.

While many people may not like his tone or his answers it was very clear that this is a highly educated man that is not apologizing for his forceful views. I will be the first to admit that I don't agree with all of Wright's positions such as his view about the United States creating the AIDs virus or causing the 911 attacks. These view are too extreme for my taste. Wright mixed humor with pointed wit and revealed a personality that is charismatic and at times "eyebrow raising."

For example, when the moderator asked him if Barack Obama was not a regular church goer, the Rev. shot back, "What did the Pastor at your church preach on this past Sunday?" No answer, but a little smile from the reporter and a generally free wheeling exchange in good humor characterized this morning's conference.

Two things stood out for me:

1. Anyone can be taken out of context, and if you have ever attended a black church whether Baptist or other denomination you know that the sermons can be firey and full of vim and vigor to make points that if only taken in one or two sentences would certainly be controversial, but taken as a whole during the length of 20, 40 or even 60 minutes or more are not that controversial.
2. The Rev. said this morning, "if you get two people in a room there will be 3 opinions."

The laughter from the audience of a truth being spoken erupted. Rev. Wright made it clear that others may not agree with him on his views, but he is not running for office, he is a religous leader not a political one. Even though he joked about being willing to accept a nod for the Vice Presidency that I can only believe caused groans from Obama strategists.

Finally, I did think the Rev's comparison of the Roman Empire to the U.S. bears some validity. Although, the U.S. is not trying to conquer the world, there is real evidence that we try to run it when things are not going the way we think they should. This extends to issues that are not always a national security threat.

There is a hubris in the United States that we have the best of everything, the best government, the best quality of life, the best "way of living." And as the Rev. pointed out, we also have troops stationed around the world. Just as the Roman Empire sent their armies throughout their known world. We have enough money and power to try to force our will on people and countries stretched over the entire globe, and yet...our own economy, job-losses to outsourcing, dependence on foreign oil, and trillion dollar borrowing from countries like China reveal some huge chinks in our armor!

I am not saying we should be isolationist, but clearly the way we have been approaching both domestic and foreign policies has caused us major problems. Does anyone really believe that peoples that have been ruled by tribal and religious laws for centuries want to be Democratic? I will grant you that Saddam Hussein was not a tribal/religious leader, but think about the power and influence of the Sunni and Shia under his control. Was that not the real culture simmering beneath an iron fist? And is it really our business to try to force Democracy in Iraq?

Is there any reason other than our own economic interests that we would try to impose our system of government in Iraq? Think about no bid Halaburton* contracts that coincidentally is the same company who's roots are in the oil field business. The same company our own Dick Cheney has an association. The same Dick Cheney that held "secret energy meetings" at the beginning of Mr. Bush's administration at which no one, but the participants (large energy companies were present). Mighty handy having your company right there to "help develop oil reserves."

And please don't bring up Al Queda in Iraq because until we invaded Iraq it really didn't exist there and Iraq had zero to do with our 911 attacks. Of course, there are human rights issues, but if that is really our reason for unilaterally* invading a country like Iraq, then why are we not invading Darfur where real genocide is happening now?

** "Total first-quarter revenue for Haliburton climbed 18% to $4.03 billion from $3.42 billion" Source: MarketWatch, April 21, 2008

* Note: by unilaterally I mean that the U.S. has and continues to supply the overwhelming number of troops and money, and many countries have at this writing either pulled out or substantially drawn down their forces which were never more than a small fraction of our own forces.

Groom Verdict Sean Bell

This morning's verdict in New York acquitting all the officers in the slaying of Sean Bell who was killed in a reported hail of over 50 bullets the night of his bachelor party should be a lesson to all of us that if we are pulled over for a traffic stop you have to expect that your life is in danger even if you have no weapon and no malicious intent.

In today's age of cell phones, Blackberry's, iPhones, Treo's, iPods and other electronic devices strapped to our belts or placed in cup holders and other devices in our cars we must all unfortunately keep in mind that if you are pulled over you should not reach for anything, you should not make any sudden movements, you should keep your hands where the officers can see them at all times, and you should address the officers with an even calm tone and respect because you simply cannot know what state of mind the police will be in and if even one of the officers feels threatened in any way they can and will take your life.

I'm not saying this is right...just reality, and as an Idealist, this is a scary thing for me or anyone to think about.

No one will probably ever know exactly what happened in this case. CBS news is reporting that, "the men...were ordered...to halt and...other officers began shooting only after Bell bumped an officer with his car and slammed into an unmarked police van while trying to flee."

Other reports on CNN state that one of the officers saw someone in the car reach for something.

The fact that over 50 shots were fired by police seems a little over the top considering that no weapons were found on the victims.

Speaking for myself I remember only several months ago when I was pulled over by an officer for speeding his partner walked up on the opposite side of my car which I could see through my passenger side mirror. She had removed the strap which kept her gun in its holster on her hip, and she had her hand firmly on the pistol ready to draw and fire at a moments notice. Don't think I wasn't hyper aware that my life was in danger and that if I made any sudden moves or reached for anything inside my car that I might not have been shot!

Granted we need police protection, but officers of the law must make split second decisions and those decisions must be based on very good judgement where lethal force is employed.

Police are people too, and they have bad days, arguments with their spouses, sleepless nights, and all the other problems people experience, but we must hold them to the highest standards of reasoned judgement since their fingers are literally on the triggers that can take lives.

Gas Prices - Who Is Responsible?

Extremely interesting report on CNN this morning who reported that as much as $60 per barrel of the cost of crude oil is nothing more than speculators in the stock market bidding up the price trying to make profits for their hedge funds and other investors.

Also reported - the markets were de-regulated in 2000 coincidentally under the Bush Administration who along with so many other Republicans seem to have complete faith that the free markets without government regulation will always be best for our country! Yeah...right, and Mr. Bush' brother Jeb has some nice Florida swampland we might want to invest in as well.

There is apparently an amendment to the Farm Bill now in the Senate to put back reasonable regulations on these oil speculators which CNN reports, if enacted, could bring down the cost of a gallon of gas by as much as $0.50 cents.

When will people wake up and realize the Republican agenda is rarely what's good for common middle class folk? When our economy collapses to allow a few wealthy Americans get obscenely rich at the expense of the rest of us!?