Obama, Inc. Rue this day.

Thus begins the long journey toward statism in American industry.  An Administration headed by a President who never held a real job in the private sector takes on the task of reinventing General Motors, starting with the forced resignation of GM’s CEO, Rick Wagoner.

This Administration needs some CEOs to do the perp-walk in acknowledgement of the failure of capitalism and as a testament of the wisdom of state overseers who ride to the rescue, cash in hand.  Bankruptcy, surely, would have been cleaner and more honorable than this.

Wagoner can certainly be drawn as the poster boy of an industry’s failure to adapt more quickly to foreign competition and to the spike in oil prices that pushed gasoline to $4 a gallon. Yes, it had too many brands, too many dealers, too much production capacity, and too-high labor costs.  But Wagoner is not the problem and it’s unlikely that there’s anybody better out there to run GM.  Certainly there’s no reason to think an Administration composed of people who’ve never punched a time clock — or for the most part worked with those who do — is any smarter or more equipped to determine how to fix it.

Government has no expertise here and, therefore, no business.  The Administration can yell out commands, humiliate CEOs, and turn the auto industry into the industrial version of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac — a plaything for politicians determine to move their social agendas outside the federal budget — but it has no expertise.  It’s academics running factories; the reverse would be shop stewards running universities.  It’ll be change. There’s no reason, however, to think it will be change for the better.

 This is a sad day for corporate America and a step, I fear, that the nation will be a lifetime reversing.  A clean bankruptcy would have been better for GM and for the nation.

85 comments Add your comment

Big Bucks GOP

March 30th, 2009
2:25 pm

Nearly seven years after National Century Financial Enterprises
collapsed in a $2.9 billion fraud, its founder, Lance K. Poulsen, was
sentenced to 30 years in prison on Friday in one of the harshest
white-collar punishments in history.

Big Bucks GOP

March 30th, 2009
2:27 pm

Lawyers for J. Ezra Merkin are still trying to get paid for defending a
hedge fund run by the New York financier since he was sued by New York
University for investing with Bernard L. Madoff, who admitted to
operating a $65 billion Ponzi scheme.

President Urkel

March 30th, 2009
2:57 pm

Working on nationalizing Faux News next so the peeps can get all the truth and nothing but the truth.

bugger

March 30th, 2009
3:05 pm

For those of you who wonder how the “new” auto industry will sell their little tin boxes, I think that this is very clear.

Conservation is very high on Obama’s list of priorities. Today pickup trucks and suv’s are once again the fastest selling vehicles on the market. Just six months ago you had to wait on a Prius. Now dealers are overstocked by 80 days. The best discounts going are on small energy efficient cars.If you doubt these statements, they are from Clark Howard.

Now this doesn’t fit the Obama model, but the solution is clear. He will raise the price of oil. This is a simple matter which can be achieved through tax increases, and further limitations on US oil exploration.

All of this will be done in the name of conservation and saving the planet.

I’m afraid you ain’t seen nuthin yet.

Shawny

March 30th, 2009
3:42 pm

Obama is flunking economics:
http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/03/27/navarrette.obama.economics/index.html

Where are the fiscal dems that praised Clinton for balancing the budget (though it was his republican congress that made it happen)?

Bueller?

Ward

March 30th, 2009
4:08 pm

Audrey, if the Tata Nano is ever sold here, once it gets by all the safety and emissions standards (and the liability lawyers get through with it), it will cost $10,000. Even as Obama says he wants to save GM and Chrysler, he’s upping the EPA standards they have to meet, increasing their costs further. Somehow, this makes perfect sense to him.

fed up

March 30th, 2009
5:02 pm

O-B-A-M-A!!!

@@

March 30th, 2009
5:13 pm

Peter:

You’re kinda dense too.

I’ll drag my post from Bookman’s over here since —–>I’m short on time<—–

For anybody with a brain, that would indicate I’m not gonna be around….have somewhere I’ve gotta be. A funeral to be specific.

But nope! Not everyone here (you) has a brain so they repond, in my absence, with this.

Being the thoughtful person that I am, I’ll offer a brief response.

A large portion of GM’s operating costs went to employee perks, the greater percentage of which was healthcare costs which covers my health provider/car manufacturer comment.

Management AND the union brought about the company’s demise.

Obama shouldn’t be EXPANDING on the mess.

I can tell you when my time wasn’t at its best — that’s when the Twin Towers fell. It’s when over 3,000 of my fellow man were either incinerated, plunged, or crushed by the rubble.

You have heard that Obama is EXPANDING on that war, haven’t you? I’m guessing it’ll be costly both in human and financial capital.

Clinton had Bin Laden handed to him on a platter but then I’m not one to complain about previous administrations. I leave that up to losers like you.

I was NOT on board with Bush’s bailouts and said as much here.

Like I said before, I had no problems with Clinton. Whether he did it voluntarily or under pressure from a Republican Congress, he cut government spending. Bush didn’t, and Obama sure has hell isn’t. When it comes to unemployment, feel free to slide down the blue lines and tell us which administrations carried the highest unemployment rates.

Here’s an added bonus. When Obama dropped the hammer on Wagoner, he walked away with a cool $20.2 million Salaried Retirement Plan and Executive Retirement Plan. In his 32 years with GM he made a little over $63 million. With one finger-wag, Obama handed him 1/3 of his overall salary.

Glenn

March 30th, 2009
5:30 pm

Actually I suspect that Ragnar grew impatient with the scewed up server, mysterious and suspect posting rules and inaccessibility to formatting on this new format, which does indeed seem to be driving away Wooten blog’s conservative denizens.

@@

March 30th, 2009
5:39 pm

Is my 5:13 here? I’m reading here or maybe not here that it’s awaiting moderation.

Seems like a dumb question, but RW explained how a couple of regulars banned from Bookman’s could still see their posts but no one else could.

Was it the “dense” comment or the link which, by the way, should have cut off before the last paragraph. Must’ve been that little left-pointing pointy thing — slash p — right-pointing pointy thing I forgot to add.

Life has become way to complicated to have to worry about such things.

@@

March 30th, 2009
5:42 pm

forward-slash p.

@@

March 30th, 2009
6:13 pm

<a href=http://www.redstate.com/blackhedd/2009/03/30/general-motors-hurtles-toward-bankruptcy/”(If you want to know who the political power brokers are in any given city or town, look for the car dealers.)

Think about it….there’s a lot of truth in ^^^ that statement.

When they’re not going to Rotary Club swear’esse, Chamber of Commerce swear’esse….they’re usually sitting on some government-formed committee making decisions about zoning, housing and the like. At least that’s the way it is in my county and the cities throughout.

The common shareholders of GM are going to get wiped out. That’s good, they should. The bondholders are going to get converted to equity at 30 cents on the dollar. That’s good, they should.

Many of GM’s dealers will receive lavish buyouts as an inducement to close their doors, for a total cost in the billions of dollars. That’s disgusting, but it’s required both by GM’s contracts with them and by the welter of state laws that protect the dealers. (If you want to know who the political power brokers are in any given city or town, look for the car dealers.)

This is going to be kept scrupulously out of the news, because car dealers contribute huge sums to every last man and woman in Congress and the Senate. The public was ready to torch the private residences of AIG executives, but they won’t make a peep about paying billions of their own hard-earned dollars to provide a cushy retirement for thousands of already-rich auto dealers.

@@

March 30th, 2009
6:16 pm

JIM!

My comments are consistently disappearing here.

I

GIVE

UP!!!!!!

Jim Jr

March 30th, 2009
6:23 pm

**Things to look forward to** 1st – Democratic President
2nd – Democratic Senate
3rd – Democratic House
4th – Republican Bush tried for war crimes before World Court
5th – Republican Bush convicted of war crimes by World Court
6h – Getting better and better
**War crimes proceedings started last week in Spain**

herbK

March 30th, 2009
6:37 pm

Jim, truthfully, who cares? America is a trash/garbage nation any more. It stinks. America, as I know it, and those around me with any intelligence (very few) know it, no longer exists. I don’t care what happens to this crap we call a country anymore, why should anyone else. Sh*t companies like IBM send jobs overseas, merely to make a small additional profit. Yet, people bitch about obammy, the moron loser bush, and all of the preceding garbage we’ve called leaders.This country is doomed, and I welcome that, just so more people go through bad times & hard times. Seriously, more people in this country need to lose what they have. THEN, and only then, will they begin to appreciate what life is about. And it ain’t about the crap we call america anymore. Maybe, will real people, not the losers we have populating and wasting space in the this nation now, it may occur once again.

do8883h

March 30th, 2009
6:47 pm

Enter yourJim, truthfully, who cares? America is a trash/garbage nation any more. It stinks. America, as I know it, and those around me with any intelligence (very few) know it, no longer exists. I don’t care what happens to this crap we call a country anymore, why should anyone else. Sh*t companies like IBM send jobs overseas, merely to make a small additional profit. Yet, people bitch about obammy, the moron loser bush, and all of the preceding garbage we’ve called leaders.This country is doomed, and I welcome that, just so more people go through bad times & hard times. Seriously, more people in this country need to lose what they have. THEN, and only then, will they begin to appreciate what life is about. And it ain’t about the crap we call america anymore. Maybe, will real people, not the losers we have populating and wasting space in the this nation now, it may occur once again.

4rwrw

March 30th, 2009
7:03 pm

all of america should die. That way, we all win.

Chipster

March 30th, 2009
7:25 pm

You know liberals are out of touch of reality when they start talking about the “people” owning GM as stock holders, and therefore it is not really a non-government run company when the Obamacrats take over. Maybe you fascism deniers need to look up the definition of fascism, no?

The stockholders of a US company vote on company policies in everything from who is on the Board of Directors to what new markets and ideas to jump into. If the Obamabots TELL a company like GM that their CEO needs to go and WHAT they need to be manufacturing, if that is not control, then I don’t know WHAT is.

But for kicks sake, let’s take a look at what the O-Team wants to expand power into:

“The Obama administration is considering asking Congress to give the Treasury secretary unprecedented powers to initiate the seizure of non-bank financial companies, such as large insurers, investment firms and hedge funds, whose collapse would damage the broader economy, according to an administration document. The government at present has the authority to seize only banks. Giving the Treasury secretary authority over a broader range of companies would mark a significant shift from the existing model of financial regulation, which relies on independent agencies that are shielded from the political process.”

Sounds like control and fascism to me. The fact that liberals here have no problem and are even excusing this tentacle expansion of government control over corporations is mind boggling. Those people are so ignorant of what is happening to America that either they don’t know enough to care, are too starry eyed in Obamalight, or both.

I for one hope that America wakes up and starts reversing course in 2010 with Congress and in 2012 with voting for ABO: Anyone But Obama. We don’t have too many chances left to stop this utter internal destruction of America as we know it.

Jackie

March 30th, 2009
8:10 pm

@Chipster

Either you do not pay close attention to how business ACTUALLY works or your attempt at conflating the facts are very transparent.

What public company do you know that the holders of common stock have the ability to vote on company policy? Please make the name of that company public.

Chipster

March 30th, 2009
8:33 pm

Jackie: do you enjoy showing your stupidity or are you just that ignorant? Exactly what part of share holders vote on the Board of Directors do you NOT understand?

http://www.foxbusiness.com/story/markets/industries/energy/pge-shareholders-advisory-vote-executive-pay/

http://news.cnet.com/Google-shareholders-vote-down-proposal-on-censorship/2100-1038_3-6182997.html

http://www.investopedia.com/articles/stocks/08/voting.asp

My GOD you are one ignorant liberal.

Chipster

March 30th, 2009
8:35 pm

Okay, those three links may not make it through. Jackie, here’s one that explains it. You don’t work hard at being an ignorant liberal, do you?

http://www.investopedia.com/articles/stocks/08/voting.asp

Chipster

March 30th, 2009
8:35 pm

Chipster

March 30th, 2009
8:36 pm

Chipster

March 30th, 2009
8:42 pm

Let me know if you want some more examples, Jackie. Here’s what my investment company says:

The Right to Vote:
Owning stock gives you the right to vote on important company issues and policies.

“As a stockholder, you have the right to vote on major policy decisions, such as whether a company should issue additional stock, sell itself to outside buyers, or change the board of directors. In general, the more stock you own, the greater your voice in company decisions. In addition, if you’ve held shares for more than a year, you may present a proposal to be voted on at the annual meeting, provided it meets the requirements of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC).”

Any questions liberal? Geeze what a moron.

http://www.morganstanleyindividual.com/education/topics/Investing/Stocks/mi36/mi36.html

Jackie

March 30th, 2009
9:01 pm

@Chipster

According to the document you just presented, here is the bottom line:

“The proxy lets shareholders vote yes or no or abstain on shareholder proposals and other issues affecting the corporation. The directors want you to vote yes on the issues they support and no on the others. If you don’t vote, your opinions aren’t counted.

Now, when was it that you last voted on company policies?

Do you want to remove your foot from your prodigious mouth?

Chipster

March 30th, 2009
9:10 pm

Stop digging, Jackie. You are in over your unused head. There is no liberal spinning out of this one. You asked me ONE corporation that allowed shareholders to vote on policies of said corporations. I presented to you GOOGLE’s shareholders rejecting a P-O-L-I-C-Y P-R-O-P-O-S-A-L to protect freedom of access to the Internet and not self-censor by Google Inc. You ignored it – unless you have a different definition of what a “policy” is in a company. My other links PROVED that shareholders have the right to vote on company policies IF said companies allow it. Every company is different.

Now you can sit here and split hairs, but the FACT is that as a shareholder, you DO have the potential to vote on company policy. You can’t spin/twist/distort your way out of it, Jackie. Oh, and you’re welcome for the free Monday Corporation 101 education, liberal.

Jackie

March 30th, 2009
9:16 pm

@Chipster

You argument is so specious that you do not understand that YOU AND YOUR DOCUMENTATION is undermining the very point you are attempting to make.

Who is in over their head, when you say special “Now you can sit here and split hairs, but the FACT is that as a shareholder, you DO have the potential to vote on company policy. ”

Say it slowly, P-O-T-E-N-T-I-A-L!!!! When was it you voted last?
Now, try to use another pejorative to justify you lunancy!

Chipster

March 30th, 2009
9:18 pm

Finally, if electing/dismissing the Board Of Director members isn’t worthy of influencing company policy as a stock holder, then I don’t know what is and am glad ignoramus liberals like Jackie are few and far between in the corporate world. I guess in her warped liberal world by her logic displayed here, The People don’t really control who controls our government. And with that, good night. I’ve wasted enough time on the clueless.

Chipster

March 30th, 2009
9:23 pm

Jackie. ONE LAST TIME:

I presented to you GOOGLE’s shareholders rejecting a P-O-L-I-C-Y P-R-O-P-O-S-A-L to protect freedom of access to the Internet and not self-censor by Google Inc. You ignored it.

I’m done, and so are you. I proved you wrong and know that you as a liberal will NEVER admit that you were wrong. ONE COMPANY I gave you in shareholders affecting company policy. There are countless others. Try reading some investment magazines like Forbes and you may just learn something some day. Good night. I’ll reinforce the point with a hammer until it sinks in, moonbat:

I presented to you GOOGLE’s shareholders rejecting a P-O-L-I-C-Y P-R-O-P-O-S-A-L to protect freedom of access to the Internet and not self-censor by Google Inc. You ignored it

I presented to you GOOGLE’s shareholders rejecting a P-O-L-I-C-Y P-R-O-P-O-S-A-L to protect freedom of access to the Internet and not self-censor by Google Inc. You ignored it

I presented to you GOOGLE’s shareholders rejecting a P-O-L-I-C-Y P-R-O-P-O-S-A-L to protect freedom of access to the Internet and not self-censor by Google Inc. You ignored it

I presented to you GOOGLE’s shareholders rejecting a P-O-L-I-C-Y P-R-O-P-O-S-A-L to protect freedom of access to the Internet and not self-censor by Google Inc. You ignored it

I presented to you GOOGLE’s shareholders rejecting a P-O-L-I-C-Y P-R-O-P-O-S-A-L to protect freedom of access to the Internet and not self-censor by Google Inc. You ignored it

Jackie

March 30th, 2009
9:25 pm

@Chipster

Do you have common stock in your company? If so, you have an opportunity to vote on items that the company allows you to vote on.

I would wager, YOU DO NOT KNOW who the Board of Directors are for the company that you own stock. Please rush to the web and find this information, as it is public knowledge.

Secondly, by owning pieces of common stock, companies have deemed it would be too unwieldy for those millions of shareholders to make everyday decisions relation to company policies and procedures.

Oh yes, you forgot your closing pejorative!

Jackie

March 30th, 2009
9:30 pm

@Chipster

You cut and paste well, but you supporting documentation does not offer you any support for the SPECIOUS argument you presented.

You may pronounce the words relative to investment in magazines, but, YOU DO NOT KNOW WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT relative to business policies and practices.

Care to refute that point?

Secondly, you have used moonbat multiple times; have another one you can use, SLOW MOTION?

Glenn

March 30th, 2009
10:22 pm

Said @@ today:

“JIM! My comments are consistently disappearing here…I…GIVE…UP!!!!!!”

Me too.

That makes Ragnar, @@, and me.

Screw the AJC.

Lee

March 31st, 2009
1:08 pm

Truism of the day, “Government money ALWAYS comes with strings attached.”

Those folks who press for school vouchers and universal healthcare should take heed.

SaveOurRepublic

March 31st, 2009
5:11 pm

This whole economic crisis was manufactured to further empower the Central Banking Cartel (CBC) and their Big Government pawns. Corporate Welfare has been embraced on both sides of the aisle…again proving the fallacy of the “Left/Right” paradigm (i.e. – smokescreen control mechanism). The standard M.O. of the Elite is to create artificial “peaks & valleys” via the CBC’s fractional reserve banking, fiat currency & constant tinkering with usury rates.

***-P.S. – For much more in-depth (fact based) info, watch “The Obama Deception” documentary (free on YouTube & Google Video).

Mister Earl

April 1st, 2009
8:22 am

Scream Socialism

1971: The Nixon administration guaranteed $250 million in loans to the Lockheed Aircraft Corp. The government ended up netting the equivalent in 2008 dollars of $112 million in loan fees.

1974: The Nixon, Ford, and Carter administrations spent the equivalent of $7.8 billion in 2008 dollars to bail out Franklin National Bank, the 20th-largest bank in the country, eventually selling off its assets for the equivalent of $5.1 billion in 2008 dollars.

1980: The Carter administration provided Chrysler with $1.5 billion in loan guarantees. Chrysler finished paying off the loans in 1983. The U.S government netted the equivalent in 2008 dollars of $660 million.

1984: The Reagan administration assumed an 80 percent share of Continental Illinois National Bank and Trust Company. This remains the “most significant bank failure resolution in the history of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation,” according to an official FDIC history. In 1991 the government sold off Continental Illinois at a loss to the FDIC of $1.1 billion. This was the bailout that bequeathed the catchphrase, “too big too fail.”
1989: The first Bush administration bailed out the savings-and-loan industry at a cost to the taxpayer equivalent to $220 billion in 2008 dollars.
2001: After 9/11, the second Bush administration lent the airline industry $10 billion and gave it $5 billion outright. A stock warrant provision in the deal netted Treasury somewhere between $140 million and $330 million