Welkome to the U.S.S.A., Komrade!

hmmmmmm....

The last few years I've been hearing more and more about the government being permitted to spy on and invade the privacy of any US citizen who should become a person of interest, without a court order or any legal justification.

It seems people on "the left" are concerned about such policies, while people on "the right" seem to be willing to accept it as a necessity of the times.

I mean...if you're not up to something, what do you have to worry about? (so they say).

Then, when the government steps into the business world, "the right" gets all bent out of shape, while "the left" sees this as something that the government has an obligation to do. It is in the best interest of Americans to regulate businesses and make policies restricting certain business activities. (so they say).

I realize this is a major generalization, however I have noticed reading those kinds of comments on the blogs.

Why is it "the right" believes it's ok for the government to overstep boundaries when dealing with American citizens, but it's wrong for the government to overstep boundaries associated with businesses?

Does "the right" think businesses have MORE rights than people?

Yes.

The difference Johnson, is that in this case the government is stepping in after the Company asked for help from the government.

Have any of the individuals spied on done so?

Damn Hugo Chavez would be so proud of Massa Obama he has come a long way from Democracy. And in a few short years will surpass Hugo in is bid for a communist state...

Damn Hugo Chavez would be so proud of Massa Obama he has come a long way from Democracy. And in a few short years will surpass Hugo in is bid for a communist state...

There must be some news about to break that makes Geithner look like a fool again. This has the appearance of a deflection all over it.

There must be some news about to break that makes Geithner look like a fool again. This has the appearance of a deflection all over it.

#6 | Posted by IraqiBukkake

"In the past four years, GM has piled up $82 billion in losses."

What kind of an idiot would look at GM and say "Gambling on them seems like a wise investment of our extremely tight resources...."????????

If only my guy would have one. President Nader would not be engaging in such idiocy.....

Welkome to the U.S.S.A., Komrade!

Of course, when the Bush administration did the same with AIG last fall you never voiced your opinion.

US Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner confessed on Wednesday that he had not read the plans by China's central bank governor for a "super-sovereign reserve currency" run by the International Monetary Fund, but nevertheless let slip that Washington was "open" to the idea.

He had not read the plan, but yet knew exactly what it was about (Special Drawing Rights) and exactly what that means (unlike Timmy's nephew AU).

"President Nader would not be engaging in such idiocy.....

#9 | Posted by Sully "

He's be too busy welcoming our Chinese overlords to America.

meanwhile Honda and Toyota are building more plants....

If only my guy would have one.
#9 | Posted by Sully

I had no idea. You're not half bad after all. Welcome to the club.

He's be too busy welcoming our Chinese overlords to America.
#12 | Posted by LetUsPrey

Since your post didn't really offer anything, I'll point out that you should've said "He'd" not "He's".

In fairness, I think you meant "won" not "one", sully.

Should have been left up to shareholders, (if there are any left.)

Dear Mr. President,

My boss can be a real pain and he makes me work hard. Would please fire him too?

Sincerely,
Tired, broke, and angry American

I know the Obama administration is taking actions like this because it is trying to save the economy, but it still creeps me out. It's too Venezuela.

Where's John Boner and Eddie Cant decrying the loss of salary for this poor, unloved, overworked guy who's driven his company into the ground?
Rushpublicans, get into your benzes and beamers and go defend this guy!

I know the Obama administration is taking actions like this because it is trying to save the economy, but it still creeps me out. It's too Venezuela.

Posted by rcade at 2009-03-30 10:52 AM | Reply

I think You somewhat forfeit Your right to run a company when You seek bailout monies. When You are an adult and have to run back home to Mommy and Daddy(No Jokes Please) don't You somewhat forfeit Your right to come and go as You please Unless the Parents OK it?? I see nothing wrong with this.

Larry

I think You somewhat forfeit Your right to run a company as You see fitwhen You seek bailout monies. When You are an adult and have to run back home to Mommy and Daddy(No Jokes Please) don't You somewhat forfeit Your right to come and go as You please Unless the Parents OK it?? I see nothing wrong with this.

Edit:

This just in:

Obama picks new CEO for GM. A man with unmatched integrity and business savvy...TIMMY GEITHNER!

Question that comes to mind is why the car makers are being torqued to this level when the banks carry on as if the sun shines out of their asses and are conducting business in the same same manner...tighter regs on the way, of course.

Could it be that these car companies have been bailed out so many times before? They've failed miserably over the past 30 years to accomplish anything remotely close to innovative, they barely achieve industry standards in terms of quality and design. Maybe that's the reason change was needed and requested.

I don't see what all the fuss is about. All you have to do is look to Amtrak or the Post Office to see that all will be well with GM. I mean after all, the Government know's what it's doing.

"I think You somewhat forfeit Your right to run a company when You seek bailout monies"

You can "think" that all you want, but unless it was in writing, you're wrong.

The bailouts alone were stupid enough. Now we're deciding how much people should be paid, and who the CEO should be? I don't like where this is going.

Could it be that these car companies have been bailed out so many times before? They've failed miserably over the past 30 years to accomplish anything remotely close to innovative, they barely achieve industry standards in terms of quality and design. Maybe that's the reason change was needed and requested.

Or could it be that Obama is bought and paid for by the corrupt banking elite? Still waiting for Obama to name the AIG CEO replacement. You know...since we pretty much own them?

Welkome to the U.S.S.A., Komrade!

Of course, when the Bush administration did the same with AIG last fall you never voiced your opinion.

#10 | Posted by taxman at 2009-03-30 10:11 AM

Speaking of Bush... Did he fall of the face of the fucking earth or something?... Or did he fall down and go boom again after eating a pretzel?

When a company goes public, they are owned by the people. The government is the people. What's the problem? Don't want the "people" in you business? Keep it private.
I'm a Republican and a capitalist thru and thru. But there are people in the business world that are not acting responsibly with "the peoples" (stockholders) money. If the government (the people) doesn't stand up for the people (the goverenment), who will?

Good thing Obama & Company now run the world's largest hedge fund. They'll get GM back to profitability in no time flat. Given Obama's vast experience as a community organizer in Chicago, and his Treasury team's fantastic work overseeing the big Wall Street banks, why should anyone doubt their ability to turn around the moribund US auto industry during an economic depression?

Keep buying!

The bailouts alone were stupid enough. Now we're deciding how much people should be paid, and who the CEO should be? I don't like where this is going.

How about the Chrysler situation: You get no money until you merge with FIAT. You have one month. If you were FIAT, why would you do anything until you get exactly what you want from Chrysler? Thanks Obama for helping out Italian auto makers.

Read the book Liberal Fascism by Jonah Goldberg. This purging of the GM CEO is right out of that book. The Democrat progressives in America have had a love affair with fascism since the start of the 20th century -- Wilson, FDR both fawned over Mussolini. FDR saw Hitler's Germany as the perfect model for how a state should be run, and said so in writing and in public until the late 1930's. Mussolini's credo was "create a crisis and use it to make the rules" -- scarily similar to the recent "never let a good crisis go to waste" actions of the current administration. Both Wilson (in WW1) and FDR (in the Depression) confiscated property, dictated what and how industry must produce, froze habeus corpus, jailed any person who publicly denounced their programs, instituted invasive controls over industry. It was only when fascism took on the very ugly face of the Holocaust that fascism became discredited, and the left, out of necessity, abandoned its direct fawning of the European practitioners of the ideology. But the New Deal fascism credo was firmly cast and maintained by the left through the years and is in full evidence in the actions and apporaches of the Obama administration, whether in the form of Geitherner's request to allow him confiscatory powers over business, or in the form of Obama's bold-faced dictums that "those that have must contribute for those that have not -- it is the whole that supercedes the individual". He said this even as recently as his press conference last week.

Read the book. I did not agree with a few of the conclusions in it, but the vast majority of it is eye-opening and completely backed by included references and footnotes. And it was written a couple of years ago, so it didn't even anticipate the rise of New Deal fascism's latest incarnation in the form of the Obama surge.

Buy it or check it out from your library. And then turn on your TV and see if all this Obama-nomics doesn't look awfully familiar to early-20th-century Europe.

""Or could it be that Obama is bought and paid for by the corrupt banking elite? Still waiting for Obama to name the AIG CEO replacement. You know...since we pretty much own them?"""

If you set aside your like or dislike for this particular administration for 2 minutes, the past year's activity should be proof positive of who really runs your country, regardless of who is in the WH.

-Read the book Liberal Fascism by Jonah Goldberg

Just be sure and use protective glasses. Radioactive bullshit in your eyes can be painful.

Yet no one's mutated yet from reading your drivel.

If you set aside your like or dislike for this particular administration for 2 minutes, the past year's activity should be proof positive of who really runs your country, regardless of who is in the WH.

...and if you look at the posts from me during the last administration you would see me railing against their profligate spending as well. I knew what was coming...whenever bi-partisan is thrown around, you know we're getting fucked good and hard.

Too bad the same can't be said for the poor bastards who read yours.

People DO own public companies. But they own them by choice. They invest and take a chance that the company will reward their investment.

However, when the government intervenes, we become owners, but not by choice and when the company that we didn't choose to invest in fails, we fail.

So, the government is investing in bad companies with our money. Sorry, but I'd like someone with a better track record making my investment decisions.

"Of course, when the Bush administration did the same with AIG last fall you never voiced your opinion."
#10 | Posted by taxman at 2009-03-30 10:11 AM

Well the AIG CEO was under investigation for fraud, and eventually lead to him being served.

"We cannot, we must not, and we will not let our auto industry simply vanish." - President Obama, March 30, 2009.

I guess the president hasn't read the latest AGW proposals coming out of the United Nations.

Under Kyoto II, any American manufacturing company deemed as having too large a carbon footprint can be FORCED to relocate overseas as a part of their carbon-balancing scheme.

Sign away American sovereignty Mr. President, and a lot more than just the auto industry are going to vanish.

Just be sure and use protective glasses. Radioactive bullshit in your eyes can be painful.

I agree. Here's the entire thought process that Jonah Goldberg went through in planning that book:

1. I think fascism is bad.
2. I think liberalism is bad.
3. Therefore, liberals must be fascist.

lmao, Rogers.

Imagine that the way you gained popularity was because your mother was the President's surprise pimp!

btw, Bendor.

Could you let me know when the UN black helicopters are arriving?

I though I might bake a cake.

CORKY.

If you can't read and understand what is written, I have nothing to say to you.

The U.N. proposals are very clear and readily available for anyone who cares enough to read them.

Have you?

When I start worrying about UN "proposals", of which there are thousands every year, I hope someone shoots me before I become you.

"Since your post didn't really offer anything, I'll point out that you should've said "He'd" not "He's".

In fairness, I think you meant "won" not "one", sully."

Rough weekend. My brain cells are trying to charge me with genocide. What I mean and what I type won't be the same thing today.

"The bailouts alone were stupid enough. Now we're deciding how much people should be paid, and who the CEO should be? I don't like where this is going."

To me, if you are going to bail out a company, you have to get rid of the leadership that ran it into the ground and you have take measures to limit the expenses. So I don't have any extra outrage about the strings that come attached to the bailouts. I just don't agree with the bailouts in the first place.

I win.

Then go to Didney and stfu.

Letting GM/Chyrsler fail is the smartest thing to do, it's not sinking the US auto industry, if I remember correctly their is still a US big boy around(FORD) who hasn't taken a bailout penny!! Let GM/Chrysler die and Ford can fill their void with their vehicles, as well as managemenmt who doesn't run companies like crawford rancher. If those true Americans who love their dodge's and Chevy's can avoid the temptation to buy foreign trash this will position Ford nicely to stabilize and be the Toyota of America......

If you continue to buy foerign vehicles and bitch about the US economy you don't get the problem. It doesn't matter if it's a mercedes from Georgia, Hyundaii from Cali, Toyota from N.C., it's not American and the majority of profits go to homeland of comapny.

LM

"To me, if you are going to bail out a company, you have to get rid of the leadership that ran it into the ground and you have take measures to limit the expenses. So I don't have any extra outrage about the strings that come attached to the bailouts. I just don't agree with the bailouts in the first place"

Well said!!

LM

LM.

If the U.N. AGW lynch mob gets their way, a lot of things currently manufactured in the U.S. will be moved overseas.

And auto manufacturers will be high on that list.

Under the coming U.N. mandates, the United States carbon footprint is too large and will need to be "balanced" across international borders.

Read the UNFCCC documents yourself at:

I'm presuming of course that, unlike CORKY, you actually care enough to read!

Um, how DO you get that black helicopter to fit under your bed?

Yep, black helicopter manufacturing will be gone too.

Thanks for pointing that out CORKY.

Just another reason to purchase a Honda, Toyota, Subaru, Hyundai, etc. If you thought American cars sucked before, just wait for the product coming from the government.

How much money is Wagoner going to get in his package?

Even fired, these guys have clauses that guarantee them money.

So, how much?

I don't see what all the fuss is about. All you have to do is look to Amtrak or the Post Office to see that all will be well with GM. I mean after all, the Government know's what it's doing.

We have the Senate taking aim at some corporations by imposing taxes via legislation? Kind of reminds me of the uproar the repubs took writing legislation for Terry Schiavo. How are these personal agendas any different?

The Japanese just bought CHLYSLER!

I thought they just entered a pact with Fiat??

LM

Bendor I tried your link and had some problems getting it to pull up. I will try to query it a bit later when I can read it and give it true attention.

LM

You have to look at his associations and background...being President is not enough... he wants to be 'Dictator'... carrys an entirely different agenda...!!!

RCade #38: Not sure if you read the book, or if you are just doing a Jon Stewart "I disagree with your book, so I will simply ridicule you rather than read it" deal. I thought Goldberg's main point is not that fascism is bad -- the classic Italian Fascism of the early 20th century. He says that the things about fascism that worked (like bolstering the economy) were attractive to progressives in America and adopted by them to accomplish similar advances during WWI and the New Deal, and that progressives/liberals have worked to bury this fact ever since fascism got discredited. Fascism was unattractive to conservatives of the time primarily because it involved government insinuation into how companies manage themselves.

It's not a case of saying that FDR = Hitler. That would be a ridiculous argument. It's a case of saying that the economic rescue plans of the current administration are very similar to those used by FDR, who in turn took his New Deal directly from Mussolini's Italian model and Hitler's early economic policies.

Oh, and I am sorry my original posting ended up causing Corky to once again stick his tongue in your anus (#39) and any discomfort that caused.

If the merger with FIAT goes thru--there goes GM.

They have the worse cars and their engines are referred to as "Fix it again Sam".

Obama is just exercising to taking away of our freedom and liberty.

They should have let it go BK in the firt --same for AIG.

The taxpayer is getting screwed royally.

Obama is a fascist pure and simple and the scariet president in the history of the United States. He abuses his power by "firing" a private sector CEO. He uses taxpayer money to socialize the banking and insurance industries. He complains that private company CEOs are greedy and don't understand the working class man while, he, Obama serves $100/pound Wagyu beef at the White House, got a $500,000 new book deal advance 5 days before being sworn in as president and will be taking a jaw-dropping 500 person staff to G20. Loves how he even picks on the Special Olympics folk to boot. What turd!

Even Hugo Chavez and Vladamir Putin didn't start off this brazen in their power grabs.

Finance remains in charge, at great risk to this country.

FASCISM: a governmental system led by a dictator having complete power, forcibly suppressing opposition and criticism, regimenting all industry, commerce, etc., and emphasizing an aggressive nationalism and often racism.

A perfect description of Shrub and three generations of his crime family.

Prescott: Caught selling steel, oil and weapons to the Nazis. Caught planning a military coup against Roosevelt after the Social Security System was established.

GeorgeI: Head of the CIA, assassinations et al. Traded arms for hostages with an enemy state, established the crack cocaine business in the USA after Congress cut off funding for the Contras. Did business with Saddam Hussien during the embargo after his Supreme Court handed Pennzoil a victory over Texaco.

GeorgeII: Won 5 of 6 elections whose results contradicted exit polls, by cagging, rigging computers, stagging riots in Florida and/or calling in family favors at the Supreme Court. Initiated extensive wiretapping immediately after assuming the Presidency. Orchestrated the "Patriot Act", "Mean Bankruptcy Law" "Securities Modernization Act", abolition of regulations for health, safety, pollution, and price fixing for energy and drugs. Built prisons and torture chambers for anybody he arbitraily labeled a "terroist". Bombed, maimed and killed the living shit out of a million innocent people in Iraq and Afghanistan in order to prevent Hussien from trading oil in Euros and Argentina from running an oil pipeline across Afghanistan. Initiated the use of taxpayer money to reward corruption in the financial institutions he helped deregulate.

The bailouts alone were stupid enough. Now we're deciding how much people should be paid, and who the CEO should be? I don't like where this is going.

#23 | Posted by JOE
-----------------
Ditto Joe. Fidel Castro, Adolph Hitler, Karl Marx, and Hugo Chavez would all be impressed.

Lonnie

RCade #38: Not sure if you read the book, or if you are just doing a Jon Stewart "I disagree with your book, so I will simply ridicule you rather than read it" deal.

No, I haven't read it. I've read enough about it to form an opinion on the ludicruous logic of his premise, though, and it ought to be filed in the fantasy section.

"Oh, and I am sorry my original posting ended up causing Corky to once again stick his tongue in your anus (#39) and any discomfort that caused.

#58 | Posted by SE4NY6969 at 2009-03-30 02:07 PM"

....Se4ny6969 types with one hand....

Only in America can you take a company to massive losses, expect government help, and not get fired (or so the righties would want).

This goes to show how 'capitalism' in America is broken, where CEO's can take their companies into massive losses and still pay themselves a mint (and expect to and quite frequently do keep their jobs).

Not One Penny for Bailouts without first firing Top Management. Anything else is rewarding incompetence, which is a continuation of BushCo Policy. Very Bad for America.

Someone give Obama a copy of the book Animal Farm so he sees what he is doing

Murphy,

If the merger with FIAT goes thru--there goes GM.

They have the worse cars and their engines are referred to as "Fix it again Sam".

Are you really this stupid?

FIAT = Fix It Again Tony

Italian and the name. Sam........did you just make that up?

Someone give Obama a copy of the book Animal Farm so he sees what he is doing

#68 | Posted by JJD1187

JJ, people here are not going to agree with you.

Obama is not a socialist; this is not social engineering.

Obama is just suggesting that GM makes the cars that Obama says it should make. That's all. Obama even went so far to fire the CEO and will be putting a GOREon in his place.

#69 | Posted by moneywar

lol

You are funny $war--and yes--I couldn't remember the name--does it matter?

It is Tony--

SO you agree about Fiat motors? They suck yes?

I like how Obama is going to honor all warranties.

Now that is hilarious.

I like how Obama is going to honor all warranties.

#71 | Posted by MURPHY

Remember the cartoons of Nixon holding up both hands showing the victory sign and saying "I'm not a crook".

I can see Obama doing that and saying "I'm not a socialist"

No, I haven't read it. I've read enough about it to form an opinion on the ludicruous logic of his premise, though, and it ought to be filed in the fantasy section.

#64 | Posted by rcade at 2009-03-30 05:43 PM

Translation... I ain't stepin off da farm. I let most people make up my mind. Just ask my wife.

Speaking of nationalization, having just spent 35 minutes in line to mail a small package, why doesn't somebody nationalize the Post Office?

Speaking of nationalization, having just spent 35 minutes in line to mail a small package, why doesn't somebody nationalize the Post Office?

#74 | Posted by sitdown

FF

I know the Obama administration is taking actions like this because it is trying to save the economy, but it still creeps me out. It's too Venezuela.

#16 | Posted by rcade at 2009-03-30 10:52 AM | Reply | Flag

Ditto. OTOH, I'm pleased that GM's CEO is toast.

EXCELLENT!

Well done Obama! Keep doing the things necessary to turn this economy around and ignore the hypocrites of the right. Fuck'em, they lost.

EXCELLENT!

Well done Obama!

I find it extremely odd that someone can find such joy in a head of state directly meddling with corporations. I find it scary as hell.

Detroit plan has GOP all over the map

Yesssssssssssssss The GOP is going nuts and their collective brains are scattering. ehhehehehehehehe I just love it. It couldn't happen to a "Nicer" bunch. I hear belleveu can help the GOP out.

Larry

Seems like all the righties are in an uproar over the forced resignation of Wagoner. That can only mean that President Obama is on the right track.
They have been completely wrong about EVERYTHING, do they honestly believe their irrational opinions are valued now???

Yesssssssssssssss The GOP is going nuts and their collective brains are scattering. ehhehehehehehehe I just love it. It couldn't happen to a "Nicer" bunch. I hear belleveu can help the GOP out.

Larry -- let's see if you can be honest for a minute.

If Bush had fired Wagner, would you have posted such a joyful post and praise him?

Or would you say something like, "that fucking bush. First he destroys the US constitution, now his is trying to run America' corporations"

Be truthful if you can Larry. What is your answer? Being the blind partisian shill that you are, I predict tht you would do the latter. Am I right?

Can't speak for Larry but most liberals supported Bush when he called for the bank bailouts. You can pretend we are all just partisan hacks Goatman but unfortunately history just doesn't back you up on that. Had Bush made the case that Wagoner needed to go before more $$$$ went to GM we would have supported the decision, better question might be for people who thought union contracts should be torn up but now don't think CEOs should be fired.
Big double standard, always benefiting management and never labor. As if GM's primary problems come from unions instead of bad management decisions.

CEO Rick Wagoner is the guy that engineered the takeover of the California Air Board, placed his man in charge and then forced EV1 lovers to return their cars so he could crush them. Then he sold the metal hydrid technology, that made the EV1 a success, back to the oil companies who took large capacity batteries off the market. A venture capitalist offered GM $50,000 cash each for his entire fleet of EV1s and Wagoner refused to even talk to them. Is t any wonder he managed to bankrupt the company?

Can't speak for Larry but most liberals supported Bush when he called for the bank bailouts. You can pretend we are all just partisan hacks Goatman but unfortunately history just doesn't back you up on that

My question had nothing to do with bailouts, Danni. That word was not even used. I was referring to the president getting involved in corporate management decision making and firing CEOs.

Danni Goatman was just His usual pathetic trooling. Pay Him no mind. He is just a useless stalking and trool.

Larry

Well, Larry, I knew you didn't have the guts and honesty to answer my question. You've proven that man times and this is yet again. You never were honest enough to admit your error about claiming that Kansas had 2 'senatorial districts' for example.

I'll answer it for you. Correct me if I'm wrong:

"I would have continued playing the shill, of course, and criticized Bush if he had done what Obama did to Wagner".

My question had nothing to do with bailouts, Danni. That word was not even used. I was referring to the president getting involved in corporate management decision making and firing CEOs.

#85 | Posted by goatman

You mean like when Bush & Paulson made AIG CEO Willumstad step down as a condition of getting the bailout funding, and then appointed his replacement?

I thought that was a good move at the time and that we need to exercise some pretty rigid control over companies getting large amounts of taxpayer money.

Most of the people here criticizing the administration for this would likely be screaming the loudest that there isn't ENOUGH oversight if they hadn't done this.

Biggest hypocrite of the week = John McCain whining that this move was "unprecedented" when Bush did something very similar just a few months ago.

Drudge Report has a headline...GM: Government Motors...LOL.

Ditto. OTOH, I'm pleased that GM's CEO is toast.

#76 | Posted by Alexandrite

I'm not sure that firing him wasn't what he wanted anyway (the CEO)

Firing him might have done him a huge favor.

You mean like when Bush & Paulson made AIG CEO Willumstad step down as a condition of getting the bailout funding, and then appointed his replacement?

I don't care who did it. I do not think the government should be meddling with corporate America.

I don't care who did it. I do not think the government should be meddling with corporate America.

#91 | Posted by goatman

That's fine. I was responding to your contention of a double standard among liberals. I did support Obama and criticize Bush for similar actions.

oops - did NOT

"I don't care who did it. I do not think the government should be meddling with corporate America."

Then no government $$$ should be used to help corporate America and the millions of folks who lose their jobs...tough. When we land in a deep depression we'll have our ideology to support us.
How does ideology taste anyway??

Ideology tastes great.
Those that work hard earn what they do.
Those that don't deserve their effort's reward.
Depression is only a setback.
Giving up makes it permanent.
Stand on the corner with your hat out while others will shovel manure to make a buck that you in turn ask for with no labor.

Radio this morning: Why don't they fire the Union's leader.

Yawn, someone tell danni to stop posting stupid comments and get back inline for their wealfare check. ;)

Then he sold the metal hydrid technology, that made the EV1 a success...

The EV1? A success???

BWUHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

The EV1 was a 2-seater with very limited range and an 8-hour re-charging period of time. Also, without massive tax-incentives it was frightfully expensive.

It NEVER was going to be successful in anything beyond niche applications. The same holds true for today's "modern" electric vehicles. But, it "feels" right, so it must be good.

Then no government $$$ should be used to help corporate America and the millions of folks who lose their jobs...tough. When we land in a deep depression we'll have our ideology to support us.
How does ideology taste anyway??

#94 | Posted by danni at 2009-03-

well I dont know but one thing retirement has reminded me of...a good PB and J sandwhich is still pretty good.
maybe some companies should have started eating those instead of cavier and they might be okay today.

HOWEVER....this is a perfect place to post my quote of the day
its not ftanklin but just as good

to paraphrase

the government using or having in place a national bank is as much of a threat as a standing army.

okay so its thinner than a paraphrase but you get what he was trying to WARN US AGAINST LIBErALS even THAT long ago.

oh YEAH..
the paraphrase was LOOSLY taken from a thomas jefferson quote.

Why don't they fire the Union's leader.

#95 | Posted by Petrous

Why not do away with Job Banks?

Now why would the Community Organizer in Chief ever do that?

The man has never written a Business Plan--or run a business.

But he will fire the CEO and make the other one merge with FIAT (Fix It Again TONY).

They want GM to drop their trucks and SUV line of vehicles--but these are the very lines that are turning a profit.

SO they will have to do a BK and it will be Obama's fault.

But don't worry--Obama will guarantee your warranty! lol

at risk of being called a spammer this is what I posted on the nooner because it applies to almost any thread we have at the moment.

please see the FIRST post on todays nooner.

How about the "Pay for Performance Act of 2009"

This is some scary shit and people are not even bothered in the slightest degree..

murph..

its scares the hell out of me which is why I have joined a couple of groups here in texas such as the tea party people and another one dedicated to showing our anger at what dems are doing this great country.

its time to DO something besides get on here and bitch about it all.

MURPHY

You are funny $war--and yes--I couldn't remember the name--does it matter?

It is Tony--

#71 | Posted by MURPHY at 2009-03-30 07:42 PM

Yes it does Murphy, that's how it works. When you say FORD stands for Found On Road Dead, you see how the beginning of each letter of those string of words spells FORD? Like an Acronym?

So when you said FIAT stands for "Fix it again Sam", you just spelled out FIAS. How does that make any sense??? How did you not catch that?

Seriously!

Seems like all the righties are in an uproar over the forced resignation of Wagoner. That can only mean that President Obama is on the right track.
They have been completely wrong about EVERYTHING, do they honestly believe their irrational opinions are valued now???

#81 | Posted by danni at 2009-03-31 07:53 AM

It's the Costanza effect. Everything they think is right is actually wrong, so the opposite of what they think must be correct.

the paraphrase was LOOSLY taken from a thomas jefferson quote.

#100 | Posted by afkabl2 at 2009-03-31 12:02 PM

So you are for eliminating our military, no standing army?

big...please..we got the point even if FIX IT AGAIN...TONY wasnt what was used...hey it was close.

and no IM not in favor of eliminating that...thats not what he was talking about...he was talking about a standing ENEMY army wasnt he?
meaning that the economic threat was worse than a military threat...at least thats what I got out of it.

Anybody see that Wagoner is getting a $20M golden parachute?

Seems like all the righties are in an uproar over the forced resignation of Wagoner. That can only mean that President Obama is on the right track.
They have been completely wrong about EVERYTHING, do they honestly believe their irrational opinions are valued now???

#81 | Posted by danni at 2009-03-31 07:53 AM

It's the Costanza effect. Everything they think is right is actually wrong, so the opposite of what they think must be correct.

They also don't think it is right to give them a dime. It is clear they are beyond saving. Changing CEO's which used to be up to shareholders now falls under the Presidents duties? How does replacing the CEO with another insider, who was right next to Wagoner the last few fatal years a step in the right direction? How is he not as responsible as the outed CEO?

Anybody see that Wagoner is getting a $20M golden parachute?

#110 | Posted by Hagbard_Celine

No, they saw the President take over an important industry of the US to make Obamabots and Goreonion Cars!

Anybody see that Wagoner is getting a $20M golden parachute?

Corporate Crime Pays.

More money is stolen every year by guys in suits with pens than will ever be stolen by guys with masks and guns.

Strewth.

Be Well.

Anybody see that Wagoner is getting a $20M golden parachute?

Corporate Crime Pays.

More money is stolen every year by guys in suits with pens than will ever be stolen by guys with masks and guns.

Strewth.

Be Well.

#113 | Posted by dethspud

Spud, I agree with you. I've seen too many CEOs make off with HUGE paychecks while a company goes down in flames. But, if the stockholders agree with it, then it's their problem.

I got out of my corporate gig and started a small business this year; a micro-business, 4 employees.

But, don't you have a problem with Congress going after innocent Americans just so they could showboat?

EXCELLENT!

Well done Obama!

I find it extremely odd that someone can find such joy in a head of state directly meddling with corporations. I find it scary as hell.

#78 | Posted by goatman

Goatman,

There are many many people who think this is ok. Too many trust Obama while he and the Dems in Congress are shredding the Constitution and their excuse is "Well, the Republicans did it".

I advise everyone who thinks this is not a good thing to buy guns, bury them, and the rest of your money, buy gold. Start making friends with people with farmland and be prepared to work in a co-op.

JJ,

Success in a limited context. When GM replaced their Delco batteries with Oshevsky's it soon became clear that they would last the life of the car. One huge step for battery technology.

The other success was that the cars were a non-polluting bargain when gasoline hit $4.75/gallon. Not so much right now, but still a terrific alternative for LA, Houston and other smog infested places. Worthless for long trips and likely to remain so for some time. Great for going to work.

GM had no business corrupted the California Air Board. They are supposed to be making cars.

Chevron has no business taking Oshevky's battries off the market. Phillips/Exxon/GM have all had their fingers in it and like leaded gasolne couldn't care less what happens to the countryor its people as long as they maximize THEIR profits. We need GOvernment to keep the crooks in line.

Nutcase,

but still a terrific alternative for LA, Houston and other smog infested places. Worthless for long trips and likely to remain so for some time. Great for going to work.

Which is nothing more than a niche market, particularly when given the cost of the vehicle. In certain, extremely-limited applications, it was a good product. However, it utterly lacked the versatility to meet the needs and demands of your average American citizen. The same holds true for "modern" iterations of the EV1.

Look, I am cool with the notion of electric cars.

Having said that, this post of mine is "gospel" (I couldn't resist a religious invokation on a site like this!)

Electric cars will never be anything more than a niche vehicle until they become competitive with gas vehicles in the following areas:

1. Comparable range on 1 charge.

2. Re-charging stations being comparably accessable as gas stations.

3. Re-charging times comparable to the time it takes to pump a tank full of gas.

Oh, and let's not forget that quirky little aspect of an electric car low on charge making a fraction of full power - think of the brightness of a flashlight when the battery is low relative to a fresh battery.

Electric cars don't make sense and WON'T make sense for a long time in coming.

Posted by JeffJ at 2009-03-29 11:59 PM

Nutcase,

Going further...

'Niche' vehicles are net-loss producers unless they can command a premium price tag. Example: Overall, do you really think that the Dodge Viper is more "advanced" than a well-equipped 300C for half the price?

My point being, that until the electric car can at least come close to matching the wide-ranging demands/needs of the consumer that the petrol-powered car easily fills, it HAS to be priced exhorbitantly high in order to justify it's production and R&D costs.

My point being, that until the electric car can at least come close to matching the wide-ranging demands/needs of the consumer that the petrol-powered car easily fills, it HAS to be priced exhorbitantly high in order to justify it's production and R&D costs.
#119 | Posted by JeffJ

Why can't we give automakers a tax deduction for R&D costs?

Why can't we give automakers a tax deduction for R&D costs?

If we can make a broad case as to why an electric car is considerably better for our national interest than an electric auto, I'd be OK with this. However, what almost always happens is NOT a tax deduction limited to R&D to help a technology become competitive, but a HUGE tax-incentive to prop-up technologies that are currently VERY non-competitive. This is true for ALL advocacies of existing "green" technologies.

Electric car is better than a petrol auto.

Sorry for the typo.

I find it extremely odd that someone can find such joy in a head of state directly meddling with corporations. I find it scary as hell.

#78 | Posted by goatman at 2009-03-30 10:42 PM | Reply | Flag:

Well, he IS a dictator, socialist and communist ya' know.

Well, he IS a dictator, socialist and communist ya' know.

I didn't believe the rumors at first, but as time goes on, I'm paying more attention to them