Blog @ MoreWhat.com

Welcome to Blog @ MoreWhat.com’s Open Trackback

Secure the Borders Linkfest

This is an open trackback linkfest. It happens on Tuesday and Saturday or… Each linkfest is open until the next one starts. Trackbacks will be on the frontpage in a post called MoreWhat Matters. The Secure the Borders theme is intended as a reminder to all for obvious reasons. If you have any suggestions, criticisms, questions or just feel the need to communicate, trackback or post it in the comments. If you want to be added to Z’ Blogroll, register and/or inquire to make arrangements. The Honor Roll is reserved for blogs viewed as special by this blog’s owner.
JIHAD stands for Jesus I Have A Deathwish.

This linkfest is dedicated to the guest worker who never left.There are plenty of illegal immigration posts on this blog.

If you’re here legally and behavin’ yo self, welcome aboard.
.
.

We suggest using the Linkfest Haven Deluxe Trackback pinger for ease of use and time savings to catch all the festive linking activities today. Or, if you have done this less than we have, the permalink for this Open Trackback is the title link and the trackback is located near the bottom of the permalink page for this post. Just poke around, you’ll find it.

links in the sidebar

NOTE: It may be worthwhile to comply with the unofficial standard of submitting your blog’s best work for open trackbacks whether here or at multiple sites. The practice may have been inspired by a desire for increased quality versus quantity as well as providing greater impact from the power of the blogosphere.

Well President Bush, if you are looking for public approval of bankruptcy for the auto industry you can start here. Yes, bankruptcy however viewed and the difficulties attached to it is a long standing method for repairing failing companies as well as an option for individuals who find themselves in critical financial failure. There are more than several forms of bankruptcy and Chapter 11 is common and has been used many times to restructure failing companies and have them emerge later stronger for the effort. Certainly there have been those who have failed even with the option of bankruptcy. But if the auto industry is sincere in their expressed interest to save jobs and the businesses they represent as well as having an honest and practical plan for restoring the companies they operate, bankruptcy is the answer.

To receive public funding and risk taxpayer’s money with the probability they will not honor their obligations or be required to by the federal government, a bailout would do more harm to consumer confidence and to that of the markets if they are allowed a free pass on their dismal records at other’s expense. There should not be this much discussion on the subject which indicates the whole matter has become political and should be concluded with bankruptcy.

As for the article below, President Bush is right. The warnings were given and ignored. The subprime mortgage mess was the prime mover in the financial meltdown. Much needs to be repaired and the bailout frenzy is part of that. No one is as concerned, Mr President, about your legacy as they are the economic strength of the nation. Please use your remaining time if office to help fix the economy in a prudent manner. By default that will help shape your legacy in a way you will like as well as the rest of us.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Bush Says Economic Meltdown Forced Aggressive Intervention

President Bush says the ongoing financial crisis has forced him to endorse aggressive government intervention in numerous economic sectors in spite of his core, free market principles. President Bush restated his desire to prevent the U.S. auto industry from going bankrupt, while stressing that federal intervention should be temporary.

President Bush came into office eight years ago with an agenda of low taxes and limited government. But, in a wide ranging discussion in Washington, Mr. Bush admitted that the economic meltdown of the last year has forced him to set some of those principles aside.

The latest example is a rescue package the administration is contemplating for troubled U.S. automakers. An earlier attempt at a rescue plan passed the U.S. House of Representatives, but the measure failed in the Senate.

Mr. Bush noted that the U.S. auto industry employs millions of people, and that it is on the brink of collapse. “I am worried about a disorderly bankruptcy and what it would do to the psychology and the markets,” he said.

Mr. Bush said he intends to act, but has yet to decide how best to do so.

Earlier this year, Congress approved a $700-billion financial rescue package. Mr. Bush said he disliked the idea of such massive government expenditure and intervention, but that he had been warned of a possible economic catastrophe worse than the Great Depression if no action were taken.

The president was speaking at a gathering of the free market policy organization, the American Enterprise Institute. He was asked to respond to accusations from Democrats that his economic agenda sowed the seeds of the financial crisis.

“I’m looking forward to the true history of this financial crisis being written,” said Mr.Bush. “No question part of the crisis came about because of excesses in lending in the housing market. My administration early on expressed concern about implicit government guarantees in the mortgage industry, in Fannie and Freddie.”

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are government-sponsored mortgage insurers that have benefited from the financial rescue package.

Mr. Bush added that he understands the frustrations of ordinary Americans whose tax dollars are propping up corporations because of what he described as the “excesses on Wall Street.”

The president, whose term ends next month, also expressed disappointment that free trade pacts with Colombia and Panama have not been ratified during his time in office.

With the President-elect’s choices to fill vacancies for a new administration heavy on former Clinton cronies and the often heard criticism of this being a third Clinton term the ‘change’ mantra of the Dems or ‘change you can believe in’ slogan from the Obama campaign suggest that all you can do is invoke the other Dems mantra….. hope. Not an impressive beginning for the next Presidential Administration but those who support the next President urge withholding criticism until he has had a chance to lead.

If not from the Clinton clan the choices for vacancies in the coming Obama Administration seem to focus on Illinois or Chicago politics. President-elect Barack Obama announced Arne Duncan, the head of the Chicago school system, as education secretary Tuesday and declared that failing to improve classroom instruction is “morally unacceptable for our children.” Relying on Illinois for filling vacancies may be a little risky. One example would be from the press announcement linked just above. A reporter was ‘cutoff’ when inquiring about Rahm Emanuel being on a federal wiretap discussing the Senate vacancy with the Blagojevich camp. All just mentioned are tied to Illinois and Chicago politics. It has been suggested that Blagojevich is not stepping down in hopes of negotiating deals for himself and his wife without which he might use whatever he has to damage Obama or Mayor Daley.

The only change seen so far appears to be 60 or so members of the freshman class for the 111th Congress. Al Franken is still engaged in the recount fight with Norm Coleman in Minnesota. The process, at the outset anyway, was grindingly slow. In the first two hours, the board had ruled on 46 votes challenged by Franken. Of those, the board awarded 26 votes to Coleman, 7 to Franken and 13 to the pile for ballots where intend couldn’t be determined or were disqualified because of marks that might identify the voter.

And Caroline Kennedy has decided to follow in the family tradition seeking to fill the US Senate vacancy left by Hillary Clinton in NY. And of course there is the vacancy in an Illinois seat for the US Senate that surrounds the soap opera that is Governor Blagojevich. The controversy for Kennedy lies in the fact that she emphatically endorsed Obama early in the campaign and now wants Hillary Clinton’s Senate seat. On top of that there are those who publicly question her credentials for being a senator. One quote addressing her name recognition suggested J Lo has name recognition too. She has taken a different path in her life to this point than many in her famous family and that fact was even complimented on this blog in the past. Now that the family’s political prominence may be fading is that the driving force behind her decision?

Then there is the real Democratic party situation which is ‘no change’. Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi is still, well, Nancy Pelosi. Quick to make statements and predictions as in her forecast that Congress will pass a $600 billion stimulus package early next year but says hopes of accomplishing anything yet this year is fading. For Nancy, that certainly is not new. Continue to predict what will happen and when it does not blame the opposition party. In other words, we did nothing again this time but just wait until next time. Ya, whatever. And BTW Nancy, where is all the money coming from anyway? What happens when it runs out? Are you just going to start printing more?

More of no change from the Dems finds Dianne Feinstein as head of the Senate Intelligence Committee and John Kerry to head the foreign relations committee. Nothing new there and nothing to get excited about unless you are interested in worrying about what will go wrong next. Feinstein’s questionable conflicts of interest with her husband engaged in the defense business and her post on MILCON, the military construction appropriations subcommittee, never saw the light of day even though she resigned that post when allegations surfaced and claims to be an ethics reformer with earmarks transparency legislation. And John Kerry fancies himself some kind of major player in politics. He has seen his share of controversy but that does not necessarily translate into a stellar resume’. Failed attempts at a White House bid and running errands for the Dems elite does not propel a career. It would appear the committee assignment is a consolation prize for not getting Secretary of State after doing the party’s bidding.

The final note in this post on recent news features more irony from the Dems. It would be humorous if not so pathetic. The very people responsible for promoting policies that ignited the subprime mortgage mess are now complaining that the White House has not done enough to relieve homeowners in or near foreclosure.

“Absolutely nothing has been done to respect that part of the legislation,” Pelosi, a California Democrat, told reporters as she discussed the House’s agenda in coming weeks.

She and Frank have talked about “legislation that insists that the provisions of the (TARP) law be honored, before we release any more funds,” Pelosi said.

Legislation demanding more foreclosure mitigation will be ready within the next couple of weeks, said Steven Adamske, an aide to Frank, the Massachusetts Democrat who chairs the House Financial Services Committee.

Senate Banking Committee Chairman Christopher Dodd said last month he was willing to legislate if the financial sector failed to do more to curb foreclosures, restrain executive pay and modify mortgages to help struggling homeowners.

The GOP has made some progress in returning to conservative principles including fiscal restraint by opposing more bailout programs but the effort is not entirely convincing. The White House seems content to negotiate a legacy by spending us into oblivion and the Dems are right behind them with a $600 billion stimulus package with no end in sight.

It might be fair to say that leaders in both the public and private sectors have lost their collective minds except for the fact these sort of dealings are not new. It is just the small matter of the numbers being used do not fit any reasonable equation. The math is not working. Politics and business as usual have run into a severe problem with reality. How large a burden is the American taxpayer expected to bear. It is understood that the small percentage of wealthy taxpayers at the top pay the majority of taxes in this country. But that is small consolation to the unemployed or those whose own budgets are strained to the breaking point even while employed. Not that we don’t all share in the problems currently faced. But those in a position to affect the most change toward solutions seem to be slightly out of touch with reality. Unless the only reality is to use their influence for their own gain and the rest be damned.

Merry Christmas

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

This post is another in a series inspired by fellow bloggers and the ISI civil literacy test which most Americans fail. The Intercollegiate Studies Institute has for several years provided testing on matters of civil literacy among college students and the general public. The results are dismal and need to be addressed. The following excerpt is from the most recent report and is linked to the ISI site. You are encouraged to read it and/or check the link as well as do your best to improve your understanding of the knowledge required of every citizen as the responsibility tied to the rights everyone believes they are entitled to exercise.

Our Fading Heritage: Americans Fail a Basic Test on Their History and Institutions is the third major study conducted by ISI on the kind of knowledge required for informed citizenship. In 2006 and 2007, ISI published the first ever scientific surveys of civic learning among college students. Each year, approximately 14,000 freshmen and seniors at 50 schools nationwide were given a 60-question, multiple-choice exam on basic knowledge of America’s heritage. Both years, the students failed. The average freshman scored 51.7% the first year and 51.4% the next. The average senior scored 53.2%, then 54.2%. After all the time, effort, and money spent on college, students emerge no better off in understanding the fundamental features of American self-government.

The first question on the test addressed the well-known phrase ‘life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness’ and the source document. The following transcription is from the Declaration of Independence provided by the National Archives. The well-known phrase is in the first sentence of the second paragraph listed below. After the statements of the first two paragraphs is a list of accusations against the ‘King of Great Britain’ and the government ruling over the 13 states or colonies of America in the eighteenth century.

IN CONGRESS, July 4, 1776.

The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America,

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.–That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, –That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.–Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.
He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.
He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.
He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.
He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.
He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected; whereby the Legislative powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.
He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.
He has obstructed the Administration of Justice, by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary powers.
He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.
He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harrass our people, and eat out their substance.
He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.
He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil power.
He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:
For Quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:
For protecting them, by a mock Trial, from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:
For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:
For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:
For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by Jury:
For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences
For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies:
For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws, and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:
For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.
He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.
He has plundered our seas, ravaged our Coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.
He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.
He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.
He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.

In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.

Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our Brittish brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which, would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.

We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States; that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.

The 56 signatures on the Declaration appear in the positions indicated:

Column 1
Georgia:
Button Gwinnett
Lyman Hall
George Walton

Column 2
North Carolina:
William Hooper
Joseph Hewes
John Penn

South Carolina:
Edward Rutledge
Thomas Heyward, Jr.
Thomas Lynch, Jr.
Arthur Middleton

Column 3
Massachusetts:
John Hancock

Maryland:
Samuel Chase
William Paca
Thomas Stone
Charles Carroll of Carrollton

Virginia:
George Wythe
Richard Henry Lee
Thomas Jefferson
Benjamin Harrison
Thomas Nelson, Jr.
Francis Lightfoot Lee
Carter Braxton

Column 4
Pennsylvania:
Robert Morris
Benjamin Rush
Benjamin Franklin
John Morton
George Clymer
James Smith
George Taylor
James Wilson
George Ross

Delaware:
Caesar Rodney
George Read
Thomas McKean

Column 5
New York:
William Floyd
Philip Livingston
Francis Lewis
Lewis Morris

New Jersey:
Richard Stockton
John Witherspoon
Francis Hopkinson
John Hart
Abraham Clark

Column 6
New Hampshire:
Josiah Bartlett
William Whipple

Massachusetts:
Samuel Adams
John Adams
Robert Treat Paine
Elbridge Gerry

Rhode Island:
Stephen Hopkins
William Ellery

Connecticut:
Roger Sherman
Samuel Huntington
William Williams
Oliver Wolcott

New Hampshire:
Matthew Thornton

An historical analysis of the complaints against Great Britain from the 13 United States of America is offered at Colonial Hall dot com. It presents the set of circumstances leading to the conflict between America and Great Britain during these times which reflect scenarios quite common among nations today. Commercial interests and shifting strengths among people and nations causing greed and lesser human attributes to affect the balance of power and influence leading to unstable relationships as they always have throughout hsitory. The Declaration of Independence and the link above are suggested reading for anyone with a less than stellar grasp of American history and for those who agree we need to do a better job on civics in this country.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

On the topic of people being ‘offended’ and American businesses, etc., using the phrase ’seasons greetings’ or similar in preference to Merry Christmas this post is offered. One piece of good news is that a simple Google search of the words ’seasons greetings’ and ‘Merry Christimas’ shows about a 12 to 1 advantage for Merry Christmas. Maybe that means there is still time for American business to stop doing stupid things, at least this stupid thing. Christmas is Christmas and no apology for honoring or celebrating it should be required.

If you want to know why some people, the author of this blog included, resist the whimpy, politically correct nonsense of ‘embracing diversity’ or making special allowances for others who may not share common values the answer is simple. Before all the fuss was made about who is offending whom most people recognized the differences between cultures and did embrace diversity without being told to. That was also a characteristic of American culture. Then someone decided to make it a rule and assume Americans did not value other cultures and their customs and that they needed guidance which included abandoning their own values so as not to offend anyone from a different culture. You know what you can do with that proposal.

When did we decide it was not acceptable to continue offering the greeting of Merry Christmas to others as an expression of faith and friendship or goodwill or good tidings during the seasonal celebration of the birth of Jesus Christ? That’s right, we did not. So until the next post on this topic, Merry Christmas to you all whether you participate in this celebration or not. And take a look at this post from Maggie’s Notebook for an additional take on the subject which was the reminder and inspiration for the post you are reading now. Thanks Maggie. Merry Christmas.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Visit this link for a long list of Merry Christmas in other languages.

from White House Press Secretary Dana Perino:

It is disappointing that while appropriate and effective legislation to assist and restructure troubled automakers received majority support in both houses, Congress nevertheless failed to pass final legislation. The approach in that legislation provided an opportunity to use funds already appropriated for automakers, and presented the best chance to avoid a disorderly bankruptcy while ensuring taxpayer funds go only to firms whose stakeholders were prepared to make the difficult decisions to become viable, competitive firms in the future.

Under normal economic conditions we would prefer that markets determine the ultimate fate of private firms. However, given the current weakened state of the U.S. economy, we will consider other options if necessary - including use of the TARP program — to prevent a collapse of troubled automakers. A precipitous collapse of this industry would have a severe impact on our economy, and it would be irresponsible to further weaken and destabilize our economy at this time.

While the federal government may need to step in to prevent an immediate failure, the auto companies, their labor unions, and all other stakeholders must be prepared to make the meaningful concessions necessary to become viable.

# # #

Does anyone else smell the White House caving to the auto industry?

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Dear White House: No means no (Michelle Malkin) 

The U.S. Senate has failed to reach agreement on an aid package to shore up the U.S. automobile industry. Despite intense negotiations this week, Democrats and Republicans could not bridge their differences over several issues, including Republican demands for wage cuts for unionized workers. Congressional leaders have decided to put off further consideration of the legislation until next year. VOA’s Deborah Tate reports from Capitol Hill.

In a procedural vote, the Senate voted 52 to 35 to advance a House-passed bill that would provide $14 billion to General Motors, Chrysler and Ford. The vote was eight short of the 60 necessary to move the legislation forward.

Asian stocks immediately began falling after the vote, which came late Thursday night after negotiations broke down on a Republican-sponsored compromise.

Senator Chris Dodd, a Connecticut Democrat who had played a key role in the negotiations, said the main stumbling block in the talks was a Republican demand that unionized autoworkers accept a wage cut next year to match the salaries at foreign automobile manufacturers.

The Bush administration issued a statement describing the collapse of the talks as “disappointing,” and saying it is evaluating its options. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid expressed disappointment. “We’re not going to get it over the finish line,” he said.

Efforts to reach a deal were unsuccessful despite warnings from many Democrats that millions of jobs could be lost if one or more of the automakers go bankrupt.

White House spokeswoman Dana Perino echoed the concerns:

“We believe the economy is in such a weakened state right now that adding another possible loss of one million jobs is just something our economy cannot sustain at the moment,” she said.

But many Senate Republicans said the House bill was the wrong approach. Senator Richard Shelby is an Alabama Republican.

“Unless these companies are materially reconstructed, we’re wasting our time to try to keep them alive,” he said.

Lawmakers are now urging the Bush administration to help automakers by using funds from the $700 billion rescue package approved earlier this year for the financial industry - something the White House had opposed.

from MoreWhat.com:

Some say the auto industry bailout is dead at least until the new Congress is convened in January 2009. Now Reid, Pelosi and others are again calling on Bush to use TARP money to bailout the big (loser) three. Labor and management in the auto industry seem to be saying the same things they have said for years. Those in the public not directly affected by the auto industry troubles have been asking where their bailout is. Are the Dems and GOP at odds over this topic for the usual reasons of party politics or is it something else? How’d that go? Bear/Stearns, yes. Lehman Bros., no. Banks, other financials, yes. AIG, yes. Auto industry, no?

The details with each bailout provided or rejected certainly don’t simplify the analysis. Has to make you wonder what is going on behind closed doors. But in terms of the auto industry bailout alone, there does not seem to be a reassuring response from the industry that public money would solve anything. They have not presented a convincing argument that they are capable of saving their own industry with or without public bailout funding.

The public, aka voters, need to maintain a full court press on those in the federal government responsible for overseeing the transfer of massive amounts of public money to the private sector in an effort to guide public officials to actually deliver that which was promised at the beginning of this mess. Banks, corporations and any other beneficiaries of the bailout fiasco need to be held to the terms of the transactions. Get your house in order and repay the public money through sale of assets or other provisions of the deal. If the public goes to sleep on this one too it will become the disaster everyone wants to avoid.

Stanford Matthews

The GOP through the voice of Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell does not provide a convincing argument that Republican leadership supports bankruptcy for the auto industry rather than a taxpayer funded bailout. Simply arguing over the details of a bailout does not protect the American taxpayer. If the auto industry is unable or unwilling to formulate a radical approach to solve the industry’s problems no amount of taxpayer money will succeed in solving the problem.

As for others who may be affected by an auto industry failure what is different about that then all the past failures of other businesses. Are businesses that tied themselves to the auto industry incapable of transitioning to a different industry? Are workers displaced by failure in the auto industry incapable of doing what others do when they lose a job? Isn’t labeling a business as too big to fail just rhetoric for believing you have enough political influence to have someone else pay for your mistakes?

When animals dominated the American landscape of transportation in the ‘horse and buggy’ days what happened to all the people and jobs involved in that arrangement when the internal combustion engine and mechanically powered vehicles arrived on the scene? Did the government bail someone out then? Or did people adjust to changing times and develop their own solutions?

A more recent McConnell response on video is only currently available in Windows Media at republican.senate.gov won’t be linked here as this blog will not promote MS products. But the text version is here. (click)

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

An AP report suggests Barack Obama will try to improve America’s image as viewed by other nations. The report also blames America’s image problem entirely on the war on terror. Could it be many nations are not happy with the US for refusing to do nothing about 9/11? Could it be those nations had hoped that after the attack on the World Trade Center America would simply withdraw from the international stage or offer surrender or appeasement to the terrorists and their state sponsors?

Rather than suggest America has an image problem it may be reasonable to suggest there are plenty of countries in the world that need to address their own ‘image’ problems. According to the USA Today on Feb 6, 2002 15 of the 19 hijackers from the 9/11 attack were from Saudi Arabia. The Saudis disputed this information and at one point suggested it was Israeli-inspired. Well no one is disputing Osama bin Laden was born in Saudi Arabia and had his citizenship withdrawn in 1994.

What about those of power and influence in Saudi Arabia? The royal family in all its luxury and fundamentalist views has been accused of many things with regard to the way ordinary citizens are treated in their country. How much different is that to the way others are treated in countries like Iran, Syria, or even Iraq? In general, how are Muslims doing on matters of human rights, treatment of women, tolerance of other religions and violence or oppression of individuals in their midst who may not share their views? But America has an image problem. How ironic.

Yet President-elect Barack Hussein Obama (the full name as he intends to use at inauguration) intends to make his case to the Muslim world in an effort to improve America’s image as viewed by Islamic nations. Obama promised during his campaign that one of his top priorities would be to work to repair America’s reputation worldwide, and that one element of that effort would be a speech delivered in a Muslim capital. It is reported as customary for American presidents to be inaugurated using their full name. It is also reasonable to believe that Barack Obama’s parents are responsible for selecting his full name. But every choice made by Barack Obama as an adult is a responsibility he must shoulder. Does his intention to essentially ‘apologize’ to the Muslim world add support to the notion that liberals favor surrender and appeasement to those who favor our destruction as well as anyone else viewed as infidels. Which by the way sometimes includes members of their own religion.

“It’s something I intend to follow through on,” Obama said in an interview published Wednesday in the Chicago Tribune and the Los Angeles Times. “We’ve got a unique opportunity to reboot America’s image around the world and also in the Muslim world in particular. So we need to take advantage of that.”

‘In the Muslim world in particular’ is a troubling statement. The President-elect seems to be focusing on an agenda item discussed by many during the 2008 campaign in which bloggers in particular were criticized for suggesting. That Barack Obama may demonstrate his affinity with the Muslim world through policy and initiatives while in the White House. Another major concern by those opposed to his election deals with his connection to corrupt Chicago politics all the way up to the Illinois governor who was arrested on corruption charges this week. How about the following excerpt in light of that and concerns with his associations with the likes of Tony Rezko and William Ayers, etc.

Obama said he, his wife Michelle and their two young daughters will make frequent visits during his presidency back to their home in Chicago, perhaps as often as every six weeks. “My Kennebunkport is on the South Side of Chicago,” he said. “Our friends are here. Our family is here. And so we are going to try to come back here as often as possible.”

His continued closeness with all things Chicago may be his undoing. Blagojevich is keeping that possibility alive. Here is another link on this story for you to ponder.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Parents worldwide inspired to name kids for Obama (Michelle Malkin)

Another classic situation of two competing arguments vying for taxpayer money.  Those who claim the sky is falling and not bailing out the auto industry will offer chaos to the American economy and the other argument which says ‘not so fast’.  The typical ploy of describing impending doom as a method to gain support for a dumb idea is once again at the heart of the discussion in Washington DC.

Rather than spending more taxpayer dollars and then trying to get them back if the auto industry continues to fail, forcing them into bankruptcy, take bankruptcy now. The auto industry would certainly not be the first business to accept such a fate.  And if successfully emerging from Chapter 11 at some point in the future they would not be the first to do that either.

Enough with the frenzied approach to use taxpayer dollars to bail out everyone who has failed.  Stop the insanity now.  Let those who are failing or those who have failed use standard measures to fix their problems rather than making those problems ours.

Good for you, Senate Republicans opposing the auto industry bailout.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Senate Republicans Vow to Block Aid to US Automakers

Tate report - Download (MP3)
Tate report - Listen (MP3)

Congressional Democrats say they have reached agreement with the White House on a deal to give U.S. automakers billions of dollars in loans and require the companies to restructure to stay competitive in the global marketplace.  Although the deal has wide support in the House of Representatives, but its fate remains unclear in the Senate, where Republicans say the measure does not go far enough to force the industry to reform.

The proposal would make $14 billion in loans immediately available to General Motors, Chrysler, and Ford to help shore up the beleaguered automakers through March. The loans would come from already-appropriated money.

In return, by the end of March the companies would have to submit a restructuring plan to achieve long-term viability and international competitiveness.

Some Senate Republicans were quick to express their opposition to the plan. They argue that giving automakers money first and then demanding that they restructure is the wrong approach.

Senator Richard Shelby of Alabama is among several Republicans who are vowing to block the bill from advancing in the Senate.

“Unless Chrysler, Ford and General Motors become lean and innovative and competitive in the marketplace, this is only delaying their funeral,” he said.

But Democratic Senator Debbie Stabenow of Michigan, the state where the automakers are based, warns that if one or more of the companies go bankrupt, millions of jobs would be lost - further harming a U.S. economy, which is already in recession.

“This is more than just penalizing a company that you are mad at. This is about the underpinnings of our economy, and fundamentally whether we are going to compete with every other country and make things in an advanced, manufacturing economy,” said Stabenov.

At the White House, Deputy Chief of Staff Joel Kaplan says President Bush would be in touch with individual Republican lawmakers to win their support for the plan.

“We wanted to make sure that it was tough and that this was not a bridge financing to nowhere, that we could look these members in the eye, and we could look the American people in the eye and say that this measure gives these companies a chance and their stakeholders a chance, but its not a lifeline to continue with bad management and a bad business plan,” said Kaplan.
The plan also calls for the president to appoint a so-called “car czar”, someone to oversee the loans and monitor the companies’ progress toward reforming.

For those who are awaiting the crumbling of Illinois politics, the Chicago political machine, President-elect Barack Obama and anyone else connected to Governor Blagojevich it is suggested you withhold your excitement. The entities or groups listed above have survived for a long, long time. What are the odds that the arrest of an Illinois governor on corruption charges will inflict any permanent damage on anyone but Blagojevich?

But we can all make an exception here and invoke the liberal mantra of hope. We can all hope this event will flush a number of political careers down the….. drain.

An interesting note on the topic was featured on Sean Hannity’s radio program today. Axelrod had said Obama was in touch with the governor regarding a replacement for his Senate seat. Obama has stated he had no contact. Hmmmm. Can they both be right?

The only disappointing item in this story today is that Blagojevich was released on his own recognizance. Does anyone seriously believe that he has the integrity to receive this benefit from the courts? Right, wrong, honest or corrupt, being well-known has its perks.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Illinois Governor Arrested in Corruption Scandal 

You have to just love these stories. Several posts back is reference to an article where Scotch whiskey is touted as a ground water purifier. Needless to say, being a fan of Scotch whiskey, there is an upside to that story on environmental solutions. Now a story on very small homes as an answer for the downturn in the economy as well as a promotion for ‘green’ thinking and hopping on the global warming bandwagon. In general, most discussions including those on the environment and even global warming are worthwhile and serve a purpose. But to accept the premise of each and every one without performing due diligence on the proposals put forth nor the problem they are to solve screams undue panic and a less than sensible approach.

To be repetitive, doing nothing or instantly signing on to every suggestion proposed related to environmental practices are extreme notions and that is rarely where the answers lie. In the case of tiny homes and the story presented below, there is something to be said for examining the way we live and how it can be improved. Reducing waste and limiting the amount of ’stuff’ we have or seek is a legitimate pursuit. But the focus on green initiatives and measures whose sole purpose is to combat a global warming concern that is not without serious flaws lends itself to the criticism of a ploy by special interest to promote a money making enterprise.

Those in the scientific community who fully support the notion of global warming including the human contribution to it could have another motive for their support than altruism or finding of fact. It is not uncommon for those in research to compete for grants and dollars for programs which translate into how they make a living. Likewise it is not uncommon for those with an entrepreneurial spirit to latch onto the latest fad and build a business model for extracting as much cash as they can while the fad lasts.

Governments may also have a seflish motive for supporting the ‘green’ thing and global warming initiatives. This appears to be a topic in which many people have chosen not to challenge claims made or proposals presented in an effort to separate the wheat from the chaff.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Video: Tiny Home - Download (WM)
Video: Tiny Home - Watch (WM)

One man’s solution to tough economic times, the high cost of living, and all that housework… is to live in, build, and sell really tiny houses.

Eighty kilometers north of San Francisco in northern California is a rural community called Sebastopol, Jay Shafer, founder of the Tumbleweed Tiny House Company, lives and works there in his tiny home.

Everything in the tiny house is scaled down including this tiny kitchen

“Well there are a lot of reasons I’ve decided to live in a tiny house,” he explained. “Probably first and foremost is because it frees up my time otherwise. So all of the time I would spend earning money to pay off a mortgage or rent can be spent doing things I love to do. I don’t have much housework either.”

The average American family home has about 230 square meters. His is 30 years old. It is tiny, cozy, energy efficient and, according to Shafer, all he needs.

“I just don’t like the idea of spewing tons of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. I know that the average American house puts out eighteen tons of greenhouse gases per year, and you know, that’s not even including all of the consumption that is involved with the, you know, materials, and also just heating fuel,” Shafer said.

Margie O’Driscoll with the American Institute of Architects says Americans have a tendency to acquire stuff, a trend she thinks may be changing.

“You can hire professionals to come in and organize your garage and your closet, and really that speaks to having a lot of stuff. And if you have to organize it, and you don’t even know what it is, you sort of start to wonder: ‘well do I really need to have as much as I have’. And I think that the time of American excess has really begun to shift and people are starting to identify what is really important to them,” O’Driscoll said.

Bill Kastrinos gave up traditional home building last year to start a company called Tortoiseshell Homes.

“I’ve had several people, young people that just want to downsize. I’m getting rid of stuff. I’m having garage sales. I have three sets of China. What do I need three sets of China for?” Kastrinos noted. “So there is just a thought process that is going on where people are saying ‘well okay, if global warming is really a big problem, how much help am I by changing light bulbs to fluorescence.’ It is going to take a major rethinking of everything we do.”

Tortoiseshell homes are less elaborate than Shafer’s and cheaper.

Tiny home

But both constructions are well insulated, both can be mounted on trailers, and both sleep two comfortably, in an upstairs loft.

“The bathroom becomes the shower. I have another door over here to protect the window from water, and that works out pretty well,” Shafer explained. “The little composting toilet is down here, and I can pull a plastic curtain in front of that so it doesn’t get wet.”

Tiny houses are not for everyone, but Shafer is more than happy to call his tiny house, home.

Congress and the American automobile industry’s CEOs from GM, Ford and Chrysler continue their kabuki dance in Washington. In public view it would appear that politics and business as usual are responsible for avoiding a sensible approach. From concerns about an initial bailout of 25 or more billion taxpayer dollars being offered as an early Christmas present for automakers the latest figure in the press seems to be 15 billion with oversight. Is that the Congressional effort to make the whole thing more palatable to the general public? Lowball the front end offering and when things quiet down hand them more money when no one is looking? Why are the carmakers not being required to use the typical restructuring plan of bankruptcy available to all troubled businesses?

Senator Bob Corker (R-TN) stopped just short of advocating bankruptcy for the automakers. His plan concludes with the following statement. “These are the same types of conditions a bankruptcy judge might require to ensure that these companies become viable and sustainable into the future, and if they will agree to these terms then we have something to talk about. The process I have suggested would allow them to avoid the problems and stigma that accompany a formal bankruptcy, while forcing them to do the things they need to do to be successful companies.”

The ‘problems and stigma’ Senator Corker states pale in comparison to the refusal of automakers to accept the fact they have done little to remain competitive over the last few decades. Bankruptcy is exactly the course that should be taken. It requires the same entities who were involved in this failure, the automakers and their creditors, to arrange for salvaging the situation they all contributed to without involving the American taxpayer. The same could be said for other bailouts on the public dime but it is probably too late for that but no reason for allowing the insanity to continue.

Progress made in bailout plan for Big 3 automakers
By JULIE HIRSCHFELD DAVIS – 6 hours ago

WASHINGTON (AP) — Congressional negotiators continue hammering out legislation that would dole out billions to automakers — but promises to yank back the money if a government-run board and overseer decided the companies weren’t taking steps to overhaul themselves.

The plan would draw the emergency aid from an existing loan program meant to help the automakers build fuel-efficient vehicles. The size of the package hasn’t been finalized, but it is expected to be about $15 billion, several congressional aides said.

The unnamed Congressional negotiators and aides as well as the attempt to convince the public their money will be carefully utilized to save the auto industry provide little comfort based on Washington’s track record for decision making to date. It would not be a surprise if the politicians and business ‘leaders’ in this particular scenario employ the time tested tradition of dragging this out until the average citizen loses interest and they have no fear of public outrage to do what they planned from the beginning. Let the public pay for the fiasco. Perhaps that is why they always express concern for the ‘middle class’ as that is the group who shoulders the burden of paying for politics as usual.

Not that the general public shares no responsibility for the current economic problems and the bailout frenzy active in the nation’s capitol but they are not in as strong a position as those who control government and corporate America when it comes to influencing the outcome of public affairs. If the current problems and their implications for the future strength of the American economy are not sufficient to cause the public to change that fact it is likely nothing ever will.

(A Monday report from Reuters suggests a deal may be completed today. Wonderful, just wonderful

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com