Elizabeth Warren and a new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau; Obama’s approval ratings; a mosque near ground zero

Good watchdog?

Re “Wall Street nervous about watchdog’s bite,” Aug. 1

The only reason why the financial community and those politicians who offer unwavering support of it don’t want Elizabeth Warren to be the boss of the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau is because she speaks the truth — and she speaks to their collective wallets.

Profit is the goal. And anyone who scrutinizes that profit is not going to be welcomed into the old boys club, especially if that person is a strong woman.

Rodney K. Boswell

Thousand Oaks

So Elizabeth Warren has powerful enemies. When can she start?

Mike Hayford

Monrovia

Our slipping economy

Re “Decline in GDP growth raises alarms,” July 31

As long as businesses lay off employees or delay hiring — maybe they think they are helping the Republicans in the next elections, as they have done before — they keep consumers from buying their products.

All these transactions are connected and ruin the economy for everyone.

Peter H. Merkl

Goleta, Calif.

With malice aforethought, aligned with unfettered greed, American corporations have unnecessarily thrown workers off payrolls, cut hours and reduced wages.

If American corporations can hoard money, so can we. There is no incentive for us to open our wallets. This, in turn, will continue to discourage businesses from hiring.

Would we call this a Pyrrhic victory, or mutually assured destruction?

I am now off to our local farmers market in my 14-year-old car.

Melissa Verdugo

Rancho Palos Verdes

Everything sticks to this president

Re “The velcro president,” July 30

When will you guys finally catch on that President Obama’s success in getting his legislative program enacted is the reason his poll approval numbers are going down? Most Americans just don’t like the legislation.

The more Obama pushes his agenda through Congress, the lower his approval ratings will go.

Ben Tupper

Ramona, Calif.

This is simply another “poor poor Barack” article. Ronald Reagan got away with negatives while all the current bad stuff is “sticking” to Obama?

Please. These issues are sticking to the president due to his, and his administration’s, arrogance and lack of competence.

I am particularly amused by Sen. Byron L. Dorgan’s (D-N.D.) use of the word “accomplishments” to describe the administration’s work. As the late John Wooden used to say, “Don’t confuse activity with accomplishment.”

Marc Grossman

Calabasas

I just read this piece for a second time to make sure that I didn’t miss an important paragraph.

Where is mention of the Republicans? How can The Times ignore their input (and I use this word loosely)?

From the way this article was written, Obama and his administration seem to be governing within a vacuum and the other party does not matter.

Yes, voters did have exceptionally high hopes before and after November 2008, and we Democrats were justifiably excited. From the first days of Obama’s presidency, however, Republicans have been recalcitrant, disrespectful and destructive of the country they say they love. Tearing down Obama has been an end in itself, so it is no wonder that he does not have Reagan’s Teflon shield.

If the media spent as much time analyzing Republican policies as they do keeping score, we’d all be better off.

Victoria Faerstein

Los Angeles

Of the presidents listed in chart that accompanied this article, the two with the highest approval ratings at the two-year mark also had the absolute worst records of creating jobs.

George H.W. Bush and George W. Bush each had two-year approval ratings above 70%, but each grew the number of jobs by a paltry 2.3% during their terms, according to the Wall Street Journal.

Bill Clinton, Ronald Reagan and Jimmy Carter each had two-year approval ratings below 50%, but payrolls grew by 13% under Carter, by 18% under Reagan and by 21% under Clinton.

Obama seems to be measuring up quite well according to this metric, because the CBO estimates that he has already created or saved about

4 million jobs.

Charles Delgadillo

Santa Barbara

Mosque misses the mark

Re “Ground zero for tolerance,” Editorial, July 30

If American and worldwide leaders of Islam got together to decide what would be the most insensitive, offensive act of negative public relations they could commit against the vast majority of Americans, it would be to erect a mosque where their fellow Muslims killed 3,000 innocent people.

Just because they have the constitutional right to build it there doesn’t make it right. If they must build one, do it elsewhere.

Don Gately

Valencia

The Times should stop quoting Sarah Palin and Newt Gingrich about the building of a mosque near ground zero and poll the family members of the people who were murdered on 9/11 instead.

I am confident the vast majority of family members would staunchly oppose the building of the mosque.

Perhaps The Times needs to stop being so politically correct and show a bit of sensitivity toward the families.

Sam Chaidez

Mission Hills

Why is an Islamic community center being built two blocks from ground zero in New York City?

Maybe it’s because there are American citizens and legal permanent residents who are Muslims and who happen to live in Manhattan.

In case Palin and Gingrich have forgotten, in the United States of America, freedom of religion is a constitutionally-guaranteed right. It is also closely associated with separation of church and state, one of the principles advocated by the Founding Fathers.

Alba Farfaglia

San Clemente

Expensive wedding

Re “The Clintons do it their way,” Aug. 1

The Clinton wedding is the latest example of a political class completely out of touch with mainstream America. To spend reported millions on such a lavish affair reveals an arrogant disregard for the conditions of the people they claim to represent.

Harry Truman left the presidency with little more than a modest Army pension, and lived modestly thereafter. Perhaps he was the last of a dying breed who chose not to enrich themselves after holding public office.

Mark Ellis

Capistrano Beach

Feeling trapped in Santa Monica

Re “Santa Monica Place set to reopen as upscale venue,” July 30

I’m flabbergasted that The Times, in its adoring report on the revamped Santa Monica Place, makes no mention of the tremendous amount of additional traffic that it will attract. We already have more congestion and gridlock than our streets can handle.

When will our City Council and Planning Department come to grips with the fact that the 84,000 of us who live here do not want any more stores, restaurants, movie theaters, apartment blocks, condos or other development that will add to the several hundred thousand outsiders who come here every day?

Santa Monica is a great place to visit — and a nightmare to negotiate if you are a resident.

Bruce R. Feldman

Santa Monica