Well it would appear that Charlie Crist’s transition to the ‘Dark Side’ can now safely be said to be complete. He made that quite clear in a statement he made when asked a question regarding the raising of the minimum wage during what was the third and final gubernatorial debate here in Florida, just last night.
I think most reasonable people are quite able to recognize the fact that the Democrats’ continuing effort to make an issue of raising the minimum wage is really nothing more than an attempt to distract attention away from what are far more important issues. To make the claim that we have people trying to support a family of four on minimum wage, is simply untrue.
And it was Jake Tapper, of Communist News Network (CNN) fame, who was tapped to moderate the Jacksonville debate and in so doing he asked Charlie specifically what he would say to the Florida business owner who said that she would have to lay off one of her 17 employees if the minimum wage was raised.
"It's worth it," was Charlie's reply. Which I suppose is fine unless you happen to be the individual who would no longer have a job and for no other reason than so someone else could make more money doing the job that you used to do. This is nothing more than another example of what’s referred to as ‘Liberal Logic’.
Poll after poll shows that voters nationwide overwhelmingly say that jobs and the economy are their number one concern. At Tuesday night's debate, which was televised nationally, Charlie's comment was made in support of a policy that could cost the state as many as 50,000 jobs, according to The Miami Herald.
Under Rick Scott, unemployment here in Florida has dropped to 590,000, down from 1 million in January 2011, when he took office. Some 700,000 residents are working part time because they can't find full-time jobs or have dropped out of the labor force. So Charlie’s ok with nudging more folks onto the unemployment line, I guess.
Charlie, a Republican-turned-Independent-turned-Democrat, supports raising the minimum wage to $10.10 saying. And he went on to say, "Well, the reason I think it is worth it because people deserve it," though some firms might have to lay workers off as a consequence. That’s such an idiotic thing to say, but it’s typical Charlie.
So who is it, I wonder, that Charlie might think ‘deserves’ to lose their job so that liberal scumbags like him can feel better about themselves? And why is it that it’s the employer who’s left to be the one to decide who it is that must be made to either look for another job or to become another government dependent?
Scott pointed out that Charlie was responsible for the loss of some 800,000 jobs during his tenure as governor. He also said Charlie's wealthy upbringing, of which I was unaware, put him out of touch with ordinary working Floridians. I guess I’m confused about what it is that so many folks find so appealing about Charlie.
Scott said, "I grew up with families that struggled. I don't know my natural father. I lived in public housing. I have an adopted dad." He went on to say, "I didn't grow up with money. You did. You grew up with plenty of money. Charlie, you lost more jobs than any state but one." And now he wants another chance to do the same thing again?
Charlie, of course, accepted none of the blame for the loss of jobs that occurred during his tenure, blaming it instead on the "economic meltdown" that had hit the country. Well, that’s pretty much the same lame excuse that we’ve been hearing from every other Democrat, that it’s always someone else’s fault. Why should Charlie be any different?
No comments:
Post a Comment