Actions Completely Like That of Central Planning Communist

[ImWithStupid]

As places like Detroit grew into Left wing social justice wastelands over years of liberal control of social regulations along with regulations on big government and big union failures, this latest attempt is a more like a coup of how to decide who should prosper and who should fail, based on social justice and not on success based on ability to thrive. Flagrant use of socialism in the Obama agenda.

 

Step 2, cut out the bondholders and give the UAW control of the company by cutting out the investors.

 

 

With word that former White House 'car czar' Steve Rattner's tell-all book is on the way, it's worth revisiting the 'Dealergate' controversy that broke in May of 2009.

 

[attach=full]2967[/attach]Late that month, after receiving an anonymous tip, I began researching the list of nearly 800 Chrysler dealerships targeted for closure by the Obama administration. What I found, and what another excellent researcher named Joey Smith also discovered, was stunning: the closings benefited certain Democrat donors and minorities and had little correlation to sales, service or regional need.

 

We found anomalies like four Democrat-friendly dealer groups, representing 40 (forty) Chrysler dealerships, that actually gained dealerships while their in-market competition got wiped out across the board.

 

We found dealers that, despite having numerous judgments, defaults and fines levied against them, kept their dealerships -- no doubt completely unrelated to the fact that they had maxed out donations to Democrat candidates.

 

[attach=full]2968[/attach]We found that minority-owned dealerships, in urban areas and with diminishing sales, should have been closed if any reasonable, business-centric metrics had been applied. Instead, only a small fraction of these dealerships actually were shuttered.

 

In short, it was obvious, even after a cursory examination, that the process was more political than economic in nature. It smacked of favoritism, revenge and skulduggery -- to the point that even legacy media had to pick up the story.

 

 

The Media Jumps In

 

Leading conservative pundits like Michelle Malkin and Jim Hoft ran the legacy media gauntlet with the Dealergate story. I was startled to find out from my college roommate that Ms. Malkin had mentioned me on a morning talk show one day.

 

Mark Tapscott at the invaluable Washington Examiner also ran with the ball, adding a Reuters report that the White House itself was apparently deciding which dealerships were to be closed.

 

[attach=full]2969[/attach]Progressives were none-too-happy to see their infallible, messianic president assailed. MediaMatters and Nate Silver's 538.com came rushing to the defense of Obama. Their argument, such as it was, boiled down to this: Of course more dealerships with GOP donors were shuttered -- Republican donors are more likely to own dealerships, therefore that should be expected!

 

Apparently awakened from a bathtub slumber by his RSS feed from Media Matters, Keith Olbermann leaped into the fray. He cribbed Silver's story, with its completely half-assed 'methodology' and reported that, yes, more GOP-contributing dealers were closed because there were simply more GOP-contributing dealers.

 

[attach=full]2970[/attach]Silver reported that self-described "car dealers" donated to the GOP by a 3-to-1 margin. But he omitted the most telling stat -- intentionally. Dealers that were forced to close by the White House 'Car Czar' had donated to the GOP by a 42-to-1 margin.

 

Weird how they forgot to report that statistic.

 

 

Enter 'Car Czar' Steven Rattner's Tell-All Book

 

Steve Rattner's newly published Overhaul is a brutal examination of the Obama administration's handling of the auto companies during the takeover.

 

-When Obama was told of the plan to pay GM CEO Rick Wagoner a $7.1 million severance package after Obama ordered that he be sacked, Rattner writes: "Suddenly I felt that I was indeed in the presence of a community organizer..."

 

- Rattner describes presidential political adviser David Axelrod coming to car meetings armed with poll data to support the takeover and Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel identify

Congressmen in whose districts large Chrysler facilities were located

.

 

-"[Obama's economic team] veered dangerously close to having the government take control of the two most troubled banks, Bank of America and Citigroup."

 

-"If his team had linked arms with the outgoing administration, as President Bush's advisers had proposed, billions of dollars could well have been saved."

In fact, a recent Inspector General report confirmed that the premature and bizarrely orchestrated closures needlessly cost the American economy tens of thousands of jobs. And this was Obama's own I.G.!

 

With its takeover of the American auto industry, putting taxpayers on the hook for more than $80 billion, the Obama White House "pushed the car companies to eliminate thousands of jobs - with unjustified haste using dubious economic models." The Inspector General's report concluded:

 

"(A)t a time when the country was experiencing the worst economic downturn in generations and the government was asking its taxpayers to support a $787 billion stimulus package designed primarily to preserve jobs, Treasury made a series of decisions that may have substantially contributed to the accelerated shuttering of thousands of small businesses and thereby potentially adding tens of thousands of workers to the already lengthy unemployment rolls - all based on a theory and without sufficient consideration of the decisions' broader economic impact."

Stated simply, the Obama administration's central planners failed in this situation, just as they failed on the Stimulus, the jobs bill, and the 'financial reform' effort. But don't worry: I'm sure they can run the entire health care system, which only represents one-sixth of the entire U.S. economy.

 

 

Where's my apology, Olbermann and Silver?

 

While additional details aren't yet available -- Rattner's book is slated to be published in the next few weeks -- it's clear that every aspect of the takeover was politically motivated.

 

David Axelrod brought polling data to car meetings?

 

Rahm Emanuel identified Congressional districts with Chrysler facilities?

 

Oh, yes, it would appear that this administration acted lawlessly, as it has in so many matters.

 

That is why it is critical to take over the House in November. So we can begin investigating this perverse behavior.

 

And speaking of perverse, Keith, ...oh, never mind. I'll withhold descriptions of the emails we receive every so often from your former girlfriends. I have a family audience, after all.

[builder]

As places like Detroit grew into Left wing social justice wastelands over years of liberal control of social regulations along with regulations on big government and big union failures, this latest attempt is a more like a coup of how to decide who should prosper and who should fail, based on social justice and not on success based on ability to thrive.

 

Here I was thinking that Detroit auto manufacturers stubbornly continued to manufacture dinosaurs of the gas-guzzling kind in the stoopid belief that bigger is better. By failing to listen to intelligent market analysts, they rapidly lost there dwindling market share to thriftier imported models.

 

Now you say that Obama should have been on hand back then to tell them what the future will hold for them if they don't wise up and listen to the customer for a change?

 

Incredible logic you're playing with there, Chief.

 

As for liberalisation of the workers via the unions, that's what happens when you pay people subsistence wages. Greed, crappy human resource skills, wasteful spending by the CEO's and even worse marketing ability killed off the auto industry.

 

http://money.cnn.com/2008/12/04/news/companies/saving_detroit/index.htm?postversion=2008120404

 

The CEOs of the three firms are due to appear in front of Congress Thursday and Friday to make their case for what's now a $34 billion loan package. They had originally been requesting $25 billion.

 

GM is asking for up to $18 billion and says it needs $4 billion of that almost immediately to avoid running out of cash before the end of the year.

 

Chrysler is seeking $7 billion and has warned that it too could run out of cash.

 

The situation is a bit better at Ford but it said it wants to be able to access up to $9 billion as a backstop.

 

The Big Three's last visit to Capitol Hill was nothing less than a public relations disaster, as many members of the House and Senate denounced the CEOs for their bad decisions and worse symbolism. Each CEO flew to Washington to ask for help aboard their own corporate jets.

 

This time, GM CEO Rick Wagoner, Ford CEO Alan Mulally and Chrysler CEO Robert Nardelli all drove to Washington in fuel-efficient hybrids. And they all have agreed to cut their salaries to $1 a year if they get federal loans.

 

Will that be enough to convince a skeptical Congress to grant Detroit the help it needs? Here's a look at how various rescue situations for the Big Three could play out, even if Congress says no (or simply doesn't vote on) a bailout.

Congress gives in

 

Even critics in the House and Senate may be reluctant to reject the automakers' request for help.

 

There are few members of Congress who haven't heard from the auto dealers in their district, as the U.S. automakers mobilized dealers to turn up the pressure on Washington.

 

And since the Big Three's 14,000 dealers employ about 740,000 people nationwide, legislators have to worry about rising job losses if a Big Three automaker were to fail -- even if their district is no where near the Midwest auto belt.

 

But one of the problems facing the automakers is that they are asking for money from the current session of Congress, which includes more Republicans than the new Congress that will take office on Jan. 6.

 

Democratic leaders of both houses, who support the automakers' request for help, still won't commit to a vote by the current Congress. But once the new session starts, there could be a vote early in the year...even before President-elect Obama is inaugurated on Jan. 20.

 

While GM officials stress they need help before then, others believe they might be able to survive long enough for the new Congress to keep them out of bankruptcy.

 

"If the GM board decided there was help on the way in early January, I'm sure they'd make an effort to preserve cash and get to that point," said Bob Schulz, Standard & Poor's senior auto credit analyst.

The Treasury or Fed decide to help

 

If Congress doesn't act before the end of this year, it's still possible that other parts of the government step in.

 

Some Democrats, including House Speaker Pelosi, insist that the Treasury Department could use some of the $700 billion set aside in October to help banks and Wall Street firms.

 

But Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson and the Bush administration strongly oppose that idea. What's more, the Treasury has already committed all but $20 billion of the first $350 billion it is allowed to hand out without approval from Congress.

[ImWithStupid]

As places like Detroit grew into Left wing social justice wastelands over years of liberal control of social regulations along with regulations on big government and big union failures, this latest attempt is a more like a coup of how to decide who should prosper and who should fail, based on social justice and not on success based on ability to thrive.

 

Here I was thinking that Detroit auto manufacturers stubbornly continued to manufacture dinosaurs of the gas-guzzling kind in the stoopid belief that bigger is better. By failing to listen to intelligent market analysts, they rapidly lost there dwindling market share to thriftier imported models.

 

Now you say that Obama should have been on hand back then to tell them what the future will hold for them if they don't wise up and listen to the customer for a change?

 

Incredible logic you're playing with there, Chief.

 

 

The problem is everything you posted here, is wrong.

 

These automakers were building smaller fuel efficient vehicles. They had to because of left wing, big government. Thing is, nobody would buy them. They bought up all the "dinosaurs of the gas-guzzling kind" as you say, they could get their hands on, but because of big gov't regs, had acres of small, fuel efficient vehicles rotting away, because nobody would buy them.

 

The other thing that killed them is the UAW, demands and benefits.

 

So what does big gov't do to fix it? Put the UAW in charge and make them make less of the vehicles that people want to buy and more of the ones that nobody wants.

 

Taxpayer money down the drain.

 

There are all kinds of car companies in the US doing well. The only difference is, they don't have the UAW involved in their business and their workers are just fine.

[timesjoke]

And why exactly did the UAW get the free gift of part ownership of the company while those with actual secured loans were told to piss off by Obama?

 

Did that have anything to do with the fact that many of these people who had the secured loans were not Obama supporters?

 

 

 

This entire mess was all about taking care of the Unions who had been so supportive of Democrats for all these years.

[builder]

You two are sleeping together?

 

Read the script before Obama.

 

Or is there simply no history before Obama for you girls?

[timesjoke]

You two are sleeping together?

 

Sexual insult? Really?

 

Read the script before Obama.

 

What script? Are you gonna fall on the sword that "Bush did it" for everything? Did Bush set aside contract law and give the UAW ownership of GM or did Obama do that Builder?

 

When will Obama and you blind followers ever hold him accountable for his direct actions?

 

 

Or is there simply no history before Obama for you girls?

 

Girls? More attempts at insults? That is all you guys have, insults and claims that we only oppose these actions because Obama is black.