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

Algonquin J. Calhoun

March 30th, 2009
8:06 am

The whole nation is clean bankrupt, thanks to George w. Hitler and his minions. They killed capitalism!

Yankee

March 30th, 2009
8:14 am

Take no money and you can make your own rules. Well, except for Wall Street, but their special.

Redneck Convert

March 30th, 2009
8:25 am

Well, I sure hope this Obama don’t take over the beer business. He would probly make the big guys lower pay for beer truck drivers and put a hurt on me and my fambly. But leastwise with all the drunks out there we ain’t never going bankrupt unless the librul Democrats raise taxes on booze the way they done on tobacco. The price of a can of Skoal is going out of sight on Wednesday and they already raised the price on it. I bought two whole rolls a couple weeks ago to beat them to the punch.

I don’t know how a god-fearing redneck is going to make it in these times under the libruls. And this Obama got 3 1/2 more years before we can put Sarah in the White House. And they ain’t in a hurry to do nothing about keeping My President’s tax cuts. You want to hear squealing? Just wait till Raghead and I Report/You Whine get a look at their first paycheck in January 2011.

Anyhow, times are tough enough without guvmint taking over Private Innerprize. I don’t know how that GM head is going to make it, what with him being out of a job now and long lines at job fairs and the unemployment office.

Wooten is 100% Right. This is a sad day for the U.S. of A. When a godly business head ain’t even free to go bust without the guvmint firing him we ain’t got no freedom any more. Have a good day everybody.

obummer

March 30th, 2009
8:32 am

Jim is absolutely right. The best thing GM and Chrysler could have done would have been to restructure under bankruptcy laws and get away from the awful UAW contracts they signed. I mean, let’s face it, the only reason the government was remotely interested in bailing out GM was because of the unions, not because of the “pride of American cars” or anything like that. The democrats wanted any way possible for GM not to declare bankruptcy because they didn’t want their precious union voters and funders to be out of millions. At least Ford had the good sense to not take any bailout (translated government puppet strings) money and are working to fix their financial problems on their own.

This is truly a sad time for America and I hope we come to our senses by the end of next year and vote out at least some of the morons on Capital Hill trying to regulate and legislate us into statism.

Davo

March 30th, 2009
9:14 am

It’s all about votes in the midwest and iron-belt. I don’t understand why they are throwing money at this still…GM was never going to make it. I read somewhere that they were beyond the protection given under bankruptcy better than 2 years ago. It’s a zombie corporation.

I feel sorry for those folks up north but nobody is buying cars now and we have just got to let GM go for all our sakes.

Jackie

March 30th, 2009
9:17 am

If the UAW contracts were bad, would one consider the executive bonus contracts with all the Wall Street banks bad?

It is funny how many get all bent out of shape about unions, yet complain about the wages made that are in relationship with the wages of company executives.

Peter

March 30th, 2009
9:18 am

HA HA HA Jim……..”Government has no expertise here and, therefore, no business.”……….

Jim like you have a clue……. which you do NOT ! As told in your last statement……..

“A clean bankruptcy would have been better for GM and for the nation.”

Yes Jim more unemployed is good for the nation !

Hey Jim write about you “MAY” know something about………

Peter

March 30th, 2009
9:35 am

Hey Jim………

GM’s CEO, Rick Wagoner did about as good of a job as George Bush did running America……..Thank God George is gone, America now has a fighting chance to fix everything the Republican’s tried to do to Bankrupt America.

It is quite obvious Republican’s know how to create DEBT…..thus the huge Deficit…….

You should start writing about something you know about…..AS a REPUBLICAN, I Guess that could be Whining !

Saul Good

March 30th, 2009
9:39 am

Wagoner ran the company for the past 9 years. What happened during that time? SUV sales sky rocketed as GM (along with Ford), etc… choose to make over sized gas guzzling pieces of junk compared to what foreign manufacturers were producing. It’s not like he was with the company for 3 months and was working on re-organizing them. I’ve read over and over this morning how some said he was slowly turning the company around. Nothing could be further from the truth. He ran the ship into the ground on his watch. Just like Bush and Co. ran the country into the ground on their watch (along with letting our country get attacked…which I add happened under their watch as well… GWB…keeping our nation safe since 9/12..).

Anyway, if GM wanted more money…it was time for him to step down and admit he was part the of the problem as to why they have failed so miserably. He can now be like the thousands he laid off over his tenure…the only difference is that he’ll live in a mansion while those that had low paying jobs now suffer. Just like those that voted for Bush (twice)… hurting financially now? Perhaps our economy should have been the focus of your voting instead of gay marriage and abortion. Last time I checked…gays were still er….GAY…and abortion was still legal. Yet your votes caused the ruin of our nation. Including this guy’s job…not Obama. You did this.

AmVet

March 30th, 2009
9:50 am

“This is a sad day for corporate America and a step, I fear, that the nation will be a lifetime reversing.”

Not bad Jimbo. You are only six months late. Not too bad for a loyal neo-conned.

Where was that same sentiment last September, Mr. Defender of the Free Market?

Oh yeah! You were still busy shucking and grinning for the composers and musicians in that hit musical, “The Corporate Destruction of Capitalism”.

And your stupid, willfully ignorant faithful were on the cr@pper and missed the opening act…

Chunrchill MOM

March 30th, 2009
10:09 am

Canetus Poontang

March 30th, 2009
10:10 am

Ragnar could have sustained this column at four times the length without losing the essential tone of whine. Whither the Rand references, Jim? Why no links to Sowell and Coulter? Can’t you muster the energy to throw in the line about government only being good at killing people?

Take the buyout and bring on your replacement, Wootie…you’re just phoning it in.

Cam

March 30th, 2009
10:14 am

The “O”man was elected, in large part, by people who never held a real job in the private sector. The “O”man, leading by example, will prove their incompetence once and for all.

The “O”man=c”O”nman=Used-car salesman.

Glenn

March 30th, 2009
10:17 am

As the Chinese move toward a proto-capitalist, authoritarian government, the United States moves toward a post-capitalist, authoritarian government. Perhaps the two could meet one day soon in the Greater East Asian Prosperity Sphere…

Rush Limbaugh for President

March 30th, 2009
10:38 am

Now Jim shares his expertise in the area of business… Maybe you should be helping your own paper stay in business…

Listen up knuckleheads.. Wagoner and Nardelli both said bankruptcy was the worst option for GM and Chrysler. The CEO’s said it. So if Wagoner is the best person for the job at GM then why do you MBAs keep insisting the Gov’t should have let them go bankrupt? Bush didn’t believe it was the right course of action, nor Pauleson. Wooten just doesn’t like Obama and it wouldn’t matter what he said or did Wooten would take a contrary position.

Who was President when we bailed out Chrysler? Anyone remember? I think it was Ronald Regan.

Copyleft

March 30th, 2009
10:42 am

It’s always a “sad day for America” when any hint of accountability or oversight creeps into Corporate America–at least, if you listen to trickle-downers like Wooten & Company.

Of course, Wagoner didn’t HAVE to step down. He could’ve refused to let his company be bailed out, AGAIN, with public funds. He could’ve truly stuck to the free-market principles and let GM sink or swim on its own merits.

Except he knew that wouldn’t work. They HAD to go begging to the American people for further bailout support. And that means they had to accept our conditions for getting that money. What could be fairer than that? Surely no one’s suggesting that we toss around corporate checks with no strings attached, no oversight, and no conditions…?

Nahh, nobody’s silly enough to do something like that. Except the Republicans in Congress, every time they had the opportunity.

AmVet

March 30th, 2009
10:44 am

BONN, Germany — Once booed at international climate talks, the United States won sustained applause Sunday when President Barack Obama’s envoy pledged to “make up for lost time” in reaching a global agreement on climate change.

What a breath of fresh air!

The neo-conned’s pollution-loving pigs are no longer stinking up the White House! And their intellectually unevolved ostriches no longer have a real voice!

Let the flat-earthers and enviro-rapers gum-gnashing begin in earnest!

Road Scholar

March 30th, 2009
11:04 am

And what “real” job did Bush have? Now we need to leave out his military career since there are no records of his attendance history, and the businesses (not to speak of the government) he ran into the ground!

After watching “What ever happened to the electric car?” movie, whomever is still in mgmt at Detroitfrom those days should be fired and possibly brought up on treason charges. I know that will bring uot the whiners! Have you seen the movie?

I’ll cut to the chase: Let GM go through Bankrupcy; let Chrysler fold. Remember they already have been bailed out.

bugger

March 30th, 2009
11:08 am

Jim, Obama saved the auto industry from bankruptcy for one simple reason. He thought he would do a better job of restructuring than the court system. Had they gone into bankruptcy, the courts would decide who would oversee their restructuring, not Obama.

As to Obama’s chances of success, He has already succeeded. He has essentially nationalized the financial industry. He has packaged his first term wish list: Healthcare, Education, Energy, under the guise of a stimulus plan. He is not too concerned if it will work because at this point he can blame the previous administration, but he has built the framework he wanted and financed it with our childrens future.

In his own eyes, he is a roaring success.

Gregg

March 30th, 2009
11:33 am

It is trully amazing at which depths stupidity you dwell. Do you understand when things are done they are usually done for the common good (except in the last administration) and not the good of the elite few. With every step President Obama takes there is some clown/ass/pundit talking about how they could do it better, when the majority do not make the rules in their own houses (right Jim the panty wearer Wooten). Tell me have you seen the Stock and housing markets starting to get their swagger back rather than free fall they were both in. No, maybe because you were too buried in your hate and the B/S you want to sprew. Go sit and listen to your pill-popping leader and let him tell you what you think you followers you.

Dusty

March 30th, 2009
11:41 am

bugger, you got that right. Except, he is a roaring success at increasing debt. He seems oblivious to the fact that government has unlimited funds. He is going to an international meeting on global warming. Whatcha bet he will promise more money (we don’t have) to be spent by our government to control the uncontrolable!

And speaking of money, how in the world did Obama make 4.2 million in 2007? That was what was on his tax forms. I believe he was a US senator and Michelle was taking care of the children. I wish he would tell us how to do that. Oh well, at least he paid taxes, which is more than I can say for the people he has called to join his cabinet.

Obama firing the head of GM reminds me of Mugabe in Zimbabwee. Mugabe took the land from “fired” white farmers who had made that country the “breadbasket” of Africa. Mugabe gave it to “veterans” who knew nothing about farming. Now the country is starving and people dying from cholera and food and medical supplies are being shipped in by mostly outsiders. Another president who CHANGED his country.

Gregg

March 30th, 2009
11:50 am

Yeah Dusty brain you sure are right! Maybe he will get some of that money from stopping this war in Iraq where we are paying more than a billion a week and then turn around and buy their products. You people are so dumb do you realize when he is talking about taxing the wealthy he falls into that bracket. Would you a pass a legislation that will hit you in the pockets? Do you think Bush passed any that hit him in his pockets no he just padded him and cheater Cheney and made you think he was doing it for you. You are a token solider with nothing to talk about and trying to make this a race issue. It’s people like you on both sides that makes everything racial and I loathe you all. Assanine as an ass and dumb as one too! Tell me Dusty when was the last time you dusted of your brain and thought for yourself.

Peter

March 30th, 2009
11:53 am

Dusty.That has to be the silliest blog in a while…….. comparing US to Africa, and “white Farmers” to GM…… HA HA HA………

Plus you apparently don’t know squat about the folks in office……..How did Dick Cheney make millions while he was on a VP salary annually ?

Gee you never mentioned this stuff while Bush and Cheney were in office !

What the heck does that have to do with anything anyway ?

This is really funny as well……….”Whatcha bet he will promise more money (we don’t have) to be spent by our government to control the uncontrolable!”

Yes Dusty despite your thoughts……… America can control it’s pollution, and needs too so your grand kids and their kids can live healthy lives.

Gee I guess we had 3 Trillion Dollars to spend on a WAR correct Dusty ?

By the what what was the US debt when George Bush took office ?

Who was in office when all the Corporate bailouts started ? I am sure you can remember !

Chris Broe

March 30th, 2009
12:07 pm

Bail out Detroit!

@@

March 30th, 2009
12:11 pm

Peter:

You’re tiresome! If you followed Obama’s presidential campaign, it was he who said….

“THIS IS OUR TIME!”

I’m assuming he was talking about yours and his.

Jim:

I’ll drag my post from Bookman’s over here since I’m short on time:

GM has been nothing more than an “insurance” provider that just happens to manufacture vehicles for quite some time. Why wasn’t the “CEO” of the union fired as well?

Let’s see how Obama’s “expertise” has impacted “the engine” that fuels the American vehicle, shall we?

Dow Jones down 282.83 points.

Should have let GM file for Chapter 11…..wouldn’t have cost the taxpayers a dime. It’s headed that way anyhoo under the clumsy “mechanical hands” of government.

Later “Tater” <——–(That’s for you Peter!)

Chipster

March 30th, 2009
12:31 pm

For years we have heard the moonbats on the liberal left whine about Bush trampling the Constitution with a “dictatorship” of sorts. I’d REALLY like to know idiots who think like that explain how Bush was a “dictator” when the Pelosicrats ran congress for his last two years of office, as well as how any president can be a “dictator” in this nation when it is Congress that writes and passes legislation. In six out of his eight years, Bush did not veto one single congressional bill brought to his deks. Yet to the brain dead liberals in this nation, this was somehow a “dictatorship.”

Fast forward to today. Obama and his cohorts in Washington are using executive power to usurp and re-define the Constitution and expand powers in everything from taking over corporations like a true fascist nation to stifling free speech under the guise of the Fairness Doctrine.

So Obama says his administration has no interest in running GM. Really? When he tells a private corporation’s CEO to take a walk on one side of his mouth while he says that GM will rise up to the challenges of “change” for the future in everything from mandated fuel economy standards to what kinds of vehicles GM (and Ford & Chrysler as well) will produce, that is NOT running said company? On what planet? GM will be forced to build cute little tin boxes on wheels that nobody wants, yet they would be expected to make a profit in the so-called free market economy that we have… or what’s LEFT of it?

You asked for it America, you wanted change, and buddy you are getting it. The real damage is only just starting for what a full liberal Democrat Washington is capable of. It’s just disgusting that the lib mainstream media is not calling Obama and his cohorts like the Pelosicrats on this. A few, like CNN’s Lou Dobbs, are starting to wake up from their Obama dreamscape and wipe the sand out of their eyes. Others however would support this administration and congress right off the cliff to hell.

Chuck

March 30th, 2009
12:34 pm

Talk about a rock and a hard place… do I defend the US auto industry, which is run by bean-counters and hedge-fund managers (whose cars seem to be just a by-product of their financial activity) or the Feds, who will turn the auto industry into nothing more than a massive jobs program (that just happens to turn out cars as a by-product of political policy). The idea of an America without a the manufacturing base to build cars and trucks is hard to imagine, but if all they turn out is a 21st century answer to the East German Trabant, well then, who needs that? Let ‘em die.

Peter

March 30th, 2009
12:36 pm

Hey @@ say something …..anything…….. make some sense….any kind of sense ?

This was thought out ? “GM has been nothing more than an “insurance” provider that just happens to manufacture vehicles for quite some time. Why wasn’t the “CEO” of the union fired as well?”

Gee did the Unions run GM, or did GM executives run GM ?

Gee I guess American’s actually thought GM was an Auto Manufacture……..Thank you for the update !

Gee what do you want Obama to do with the mess he inherited ?

What was your time @@……when America went into a “Made UP WAR” ?

When America began spending trillions of dollars for said war ?

When Bush allowed Bin Laden to be free ?

When Bush began the Corporate Bailouts ?

When America went from being in a place of no debt to Billions in debt ?

When America went from being employed to the highest Unemployment in decades ?

What was your time @@ ?

Chuck

March 30th, 2009
12:45 pm

Peter, don’t confuse a ‘balanced budget’ with ‘a place of no debt’… America has a national debt going back decades. We only stopped adding to it for a year or two… and now the Obama administration is about to double the national debt within 6 years. No one is blameless here.

And, in English now, what does @@ mean?

Disgusted

March 30th, 2009
12:52 pm

“And, in English now, what does @@ mean?”

I believe Debbie DoRight explicated that more than a year ago: it stands for double a-hole.

Chuck

March 30th, 2009
12:59 pm

Sweet explication.

Rush Limbaugh for President

March 30th, 2009
1:01 pm

Peter,

Don’t waste your time on DUSTY. You can’t have a debate with an irrational person who is particularly clueless on the issues.

Dusty, Obama wrote two best selling books that produce a lot of income. You might try writing a book on your political philosophy. It would be the world’s shortest book comprised of one sentence. I hate liberals or anybody else who don’t think like me.

Gregg

March 30th, 2009
1:11 pm

All of you Limbaugh-nut-holders talk of the amount the debt with double or triple as though it is a gaurantee. Tell me if we stay with this war effort where will the budget be? If do nothing and let local and state governments fail where would we be? If we sent back and sang Kumbala abd prayed real hard mabye everything will be alright. He has to make decisions for what he thinks will benefit us in the long run. I don’t agree with everything he proposes but that does not nor do I hope it fails so I can say I told you so.
Chipster Bush admittly said he was in charge and will do what he wants regardless of the little group of people called Congress. We will support this admin like you did Bush and it fell straight of the cliff and now we are left to pick up the pieces.

DebbieDoRight

March 30th, 2009
1:14 pm

The price of a can of Skoal is going out of sight on Wednesday and they already raised the price on it. I bought two whole rolls a couple weeks ago to beat them to the punch.

OMG Redneck, you are too funny!!! :lol:

Jackie: If the UAW contracts were bad, would one consider the executive bonus contracts with all the Wall Street banks bad? It is funny how many get all bent out of shape about unions, yet complain about the wages made that are in relationship with the wages of company executives.

Too true Jackie — too true. Noticed that double standard huh?

RLFP: Listen up knuckleheads.. Wagoner and Nardelli both said bankruptcy was the worst option for GM and Chrysler. The CEO’s said it. So if Wagoner is the best person for the job at GM then why do you MBAs keep insisting the Gov’t should have let them go bankrupt? Bush didn’t believe it was the right course of action, nor Pauleson. Wooten just doesn’t like Obama and it wouldn’t matter what he said or did Wooten would take a contrary position.

Word!!

Chunrchill MOM

March 30th, 2009
1:14 pm

Where’s Raghead???

Plae G. Wrist

March 30th, 2009
1:18 pm

Bail out Detroit!

Gregg

March 30th, 2009
1:28 pm

Raghead does not agree with Jim on this issue. He has nothing nice to say so he is satying quiet.

lanerlaw

March 30th, 2009
1:29 pm

State control of corporations, what could that be, anyone, anyone? Fascism! Ironic that all of these “progressives’ have gone on for years calling conservatives by that name when in fact the first one to finally cross that line is the big O.

Audrey in Georgia

March 30th, 2009
1:51 pm

GM needs to make and sell TATA cars over here for $2,000. They should re-invent themselves by making smaller and more fuel efficient cars. This should have been
done at least 10 years ago.

Gregg

March 30th, 2009
1:58 pm

Lanerlaw you asked for strings to be tied to the money we give to corporations. They were given a mandate and did not comply. If you want to make changes you start at the top and work your way down. Help me to understand why you are playing both sides of the issue. You right wingers wanted oversight and control with OUR money and you are getting that. If they do not comply they are asked or forced to step down and the problem with that IS?

Jackie

March 30th, 2009
2:03 pm

@DebbieDoRight,

Glad to see you have found to add your voice to this forum.

Big Bucks GOP

March 30th, 2009
2:12 pm

By Tuesday, General Motors will have to decide whether its struggling
Hummer brand will die a quiet death or live on with a new owner.

Big Bucks GOP

March 30th, 2009
2:12 pm

Citigroup is inviting bids for Nikko Cordial, Japan’s third-largest
brokerage, in an auction that could net the struggling U.S. financial
giant more than $5 billion,

Big Bucks GOP

March 30th, 2009
2:14 pm

The chief executives of the nation’s largest banks told President Obama
at a meeting Friday that they were committed to helping the
administration spur an economic recovery. After the gathering,
President Obama continued to warn Wall Street’s chieftains about the
necessity of reining in perceived excesses, particularly in regards to
compensation.

Big Bucks GOP

March 30th, 2009
2:14 pm

The financial giant Goldman Sachs bailed out two senior executives last
fall who were tens of millions of dollars short on cash, according to
the bank’s preliminary proxy statement filed on Friday.

Big Bucks GOP

March 30th, 2009
2:15 pm

UBS, the Swiss bank under a growing federal investigation for tax
fraud, has forced out the executive formerly in charge of secret
offshore accounts for wealthy Americans, the bank said Sunday.

Big Bucks GOP

March 30th, 2009
2:16 pm

A top Bank of America executive, Brian Moynihan, president of global
banking and wealth management, told traders and investment bankers on
Friday that the bank would increase base salaries as a percentage of
total compensation, while bonuses would become a smaller portion.

Jackie

March 30th, 2009
2:18 pm

The US government, the taxpayers, own 70% of GM and Citi.
Since we are the super majority and the President of the USA is the leader of the government, he is like a super-member of the Boards of Directors of these companies.

To all who have screamed about government takeover and fascism, keep in mind you are a shareholder of those companies. Still think these enterprises are government controlled?

Big Bucks GOP

March 30th, 2009
2:24 pm

The market-making unit of Bernard L. Madoff’s securities company will
be sold to Castor Pollux Securities, a financial firm based in Boston,
unless a better offer is submitted in an auction supervised by a
federal bankruptcy judge.

Big Bucks GOP

March 30th, 2009
2:25 pm

The regulator of U.S. government-controlled Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac
is looking at ways the two firms might help finance small mortgage
banks hobbled by a dearth of credit,

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