New Hampshire Stimulus Spending Update: 22 Million Dollars, 221 Jobs Created…????

Stimulus: to spur, motivate or incentivize. Based on the numbers, none of that happen in New Hampshire:

Now New Hampshire.com: Stimulus Has Created 221 Private Sector Jobs in NH

New Hampshire has received roughly 22 million dollars in Federal Stimulus Funds, and only created 221 new jobs (22 million divided by 221 jobs = political farce!). And what is the Democratic response….we need more stimulus spending!

Dismantling GM and the Constitution: Driving Over The Cliff Together

To My Fellow GM Investors (formerly known as Citizens of the United States of America),

Today you and I have become willing participants in the further erosion of the Constitution and the outright violation of over 200 years of case law:

A Matter Of Law

"So the government, with roughly two times what private bondholders have on the table, gets a stake five times bigger. And the union, with about a third as much "invested," gets a 70% bigger stake. Even the Canadian government, with its $9.5 billion "invested," ends up with 12%."

No politics at play here, and frankly I am appalled at the suggestion of impropriety, shocked I tell you! It seems rather straight forward, and consistent with Obama's "spread the wealth" philosophy. You and I, as new shareholders in GM, should be thankful that someone as benevolent as President Obama, and his crack team of advisors, is looking out for our best interest. We can all sleep better tonight (as long as excessive drinking and sleeping pills are part of our nighttime regiment), knowing that the full weight of the US Government is behind GM (or in this case, on top).

As a fellow shareholder, we should also feel confident that a 31 year-old college graduate and former Obama campaign staffer, Brian Deese, has been task with overseeing the dismantling of the former grand lady of the automotive world. Forget the fact that Deese has NO EXPERIENCE at running a business, let alone has ever stepped foot in an automotive plant; although rumor has it he just got his learners permit. Familiarity and expertise are both highly overrated anyway.

Deese's selection should be an indication to us all of President Obama's keen business suave, and commitment to taking the automotive crisis seriously. Deese, who served as one of Obama's attack dogs during the presidential campaign, is "just too smart to fail (now the official motto of the Obama administration)."

But fear not my fellow automotive titans, not only do we have President Obama and wiz kid Deese taking care of our company, he have the Duke of Delaware in our corner as well:

Biden's Top Economic Adviser Says Getting Congressional Authorization for GM Bailout is 'Not a Concern' of the Administration

That's right, why worry about our representative form of government, we have a bloody car company to run! Besides, we will just have to wait until the next shareholders meeting to make any changes to the newly appointed board of directors, formerly known as the Democratic Congressional Caucasus, which is currently scheduled for November 2, 2010.

In addition, why should we be concerned that most economists believe this latest move by the Obama administration will scare away customers? How dare they question our leader and his sidekicks?

A Nationalized GM May Drive Off More Customers, Economists and Consumers Say

So until the holiday party, keep checking the mailbox for your dividend checks, and thank God every day that you live in a country where one day you are a regular schmo, and the next day the owner of your very own car company!

Obama To Chrysler: I Will Make Them An Offer They Can’t Refuse

What would happen if one branch of the government tries to interfere in an area that is the province of another branch? In a normal world the interfering branch is slapped back; but this is not a normal world, this is Obamaland.

The interview below features attorney Tom Lauria detailing how the Executive Branch of the United States government is serving as the negotiator, arbitrator, and judge, in the dismantling of Chrysler. This is clearly a violation of the separation of powers, and a dishonest attempt by the Obama administration to reward those that supported him.

The Obama administration has gone so far as to change the “pecking order” on who will be receiving money that is owed to them, and how much these companies will receive. It appears that the Obama administration has determined that entities (such as the unions) that had a lower financial commitment within Chrysler have been moved to the top of the monetary heap, receiving a higher percentage than companies who had been keeping Chrysler afloat before the government stepped in.

Fasicism, socialism…tomato, toemoto…let’s call the whole thing off!

Zero Hedge summarizes and surmises (from hotair.com):

In an interview of momentous importance, WJR’s Frank Beckmann interviews Tom Lauria, the Head of Restructuring at top five law firm White & Case, in which the lawyer, who represents Chrysler hold-out hedge funds Stairway Capital and Oppenheimer Funds, discusses on the record the amazing treatment by the White House of Perella Weinberg, which initially had been a transaction hold out but after threats by the White House (not my words) was forced to drop their objection and go with the administration. Says Lauria:

“One of my clients was directly threatened by the White House and in essence compelled to withdraw its opposition to the deal under threat that the full force of the White House press corps would destroy its reputation if it continued to fight…That was Perella Weinberg.”

…The full interview with Tom Lauria below is a must hear for everyone as it discloses not only the administration’s strong arming tactics in black and white, but also discloses some other critical facts that the president on his regular TV appearances has failed to mention such as:

- First lien holders were willing to accept a 50% discount on their positions, however the 71% demanded by the administration was seen as too much.
- The cash going to Junior claims (creditors below the first liens) will be between $10 and $20 billion, a number which in practice should satisfy a par recovery for the 1st liens if the Absolute Priority Rule was actually withheld.
- Among the creditors are not just vulturous hedge funds but “pensioners, teachers, credit unions, college endowments, retirement plans, and personal retirement accounts.”

In conclusion, Lauria summarizes the developing Chrysler mess best:

“The President is trying to abrogate contractual rights; if he will attack that contractual right, what right will he not attack?”

More Bailout Follies: TARP Could Cause More Harm Than Good

America's have resigned themselves to the fact that the bailout has not been what it was promised. But now we find out that the oversight (or lack thereof) may be putting the very people the bailout was intended to help at risk:

Study: Bank Bailout Exposes Government to Massive Losses, Fraud

Is this just another example of a failed government initiative? Or is it too soon to fully understand the impact the bailouts will have on our wallets?

Who Is Really To Blame For Our Current Financial Crisis?

Which was it………not enough regulation or too many regulations? Are the Republicans to blame, or the Democrats? Is this all Wall Streets fault, or is the weight on President Bush? Financial expert Phil Gramm wrote an enlightening piece on the cause of this crisis:

WSJ: Who Really Is To Blame For Our Current Mess?

Because it is Phil Gramm there are those on the Left who will immediately dismiss this piece, but what they are really ignoring is the truth. And why shouldn’t they, because in the end they would have to place blame where it belongs…..with them!

The Bailout Fairytale

Democrats Ignored Warning Signs

What Caused Our Economic Crisis?

The New York Times Presents: A “Fact-Less” Fairytale

I was raised to believe that all fairytales started with the statement “Once Upon A Time…..”, I was wrong. It has become apparent that in the 21st Century fairytales tend to appear within the pages “The New York Times.”

What is notable about the most recent New York Times hit piece on President Bush is not what it did “report,” but what it either failed to mention or what it downplayed:

NY Times: It Was President Bush's Fault

What this fairytale is lacking are the true villains. Nowhere it this story do we read about the details involving such names as Frank, Meeks, Waters, and Dodd, and what role they played in this meltdown. Nowhere in this story do we read about the repeated attempts by Republicans such as outgoing Senator John Sununu, to provide an appropriate oversight of the industry. And what cannot be found anywhere in the New York Times piece are all the attempts by the Bush administration to prevent this crisis; and the repeated roadblocks put up by the leading recipients of Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac campaign contributions……….the Democratic Party.

So from now on, when you do find it necessary to read the New York Times, just start each story with "Once Upon A Time....." You will enjoy the story more.

Bailout Hypocrisy: UAW Country Club

The media has made it a point to talk about the salaries and composition packages of most of the senior executives at Ford, Chrysler, and GM, they ignore stories such as the billions dollars spent by the union to support Democratic candidates, or the billions more thrown away on a union temple:

$27-Million UAW-Owned Country Club Includes Golf Course, Condos, Swimming Pools

The excuses keep coming, and one thing is clear, that both the UAW and the auto manufacture management are guilty of excess. Yet the only solution that Congress and the White House can come up with.........another bailout.

Economists Say No On Taxpayer Bailout of Auto Industry

Economists Say No On Taxpayer Bailout of Auto Industry Wednesday,

November 12, 2008

By Matt Hadro, of CSNNews





(CNSNews.com) - It would be better to let struggling U.S. auto firms file for bankruptcy and restructure their companies than subsidize them with a taxpayer-funded bailout, said free market economists and financial experts. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and Senate Majroity Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) have expressed support for a bailout.


Last weekend, Pelosi and Reid sent a letter to Treasury Secretary Paulson, calling for him to provide temporary support to the automobile industry. “A healthy automobile manufacturing sector is essential to the restoration of financial market stability, the overall health of our economy, and the livelihood of the automobile sector’s workforce,” Pelosi and Reid wrote.

On Nov. 6, the Democratic congressional leaders met with the president of the United Auto Workers (UAW) and the CEOs of Chrysler, Ford Motor Co. and General Motors to discuss the state of the auto industry and what could be done by the government. CNSNews.com talked with economists and experts in the financial markets about the proposal. “I think it’s a horrible idea,” said Bert Ely of Ely & Company, Inc., a financial and monetary policy consulting firm. “It’s not clear to me why it’s in the public interest to salvage those companies in that matter, other than the fact that this is obviously something that is a payoff to the labor unions and specifically to the UAW [United Auto Workers].”


“Quite frankly,” Ely said, “I think that all three of them ought to go into Chapter 11.” Both Dan Ikenson, associate director of the Center for Trade Study Policies at the libertarian Cato Institute, and Alex Tabarrok, associate professor of economics at George Mason University, disapproved of the bailout. “It definitely should not happen,” Ikenson told CNSNews.com. “It’s a farce to say that the U.S. auto industry is facing an existential threat.” The UAW, however, thinks the government should provide aid. “There is an urgent need for federal assistance,” a Nov. 6 UAW press release stated, “not just for our members, but for millions of workers and retirees and for thousands of companies who depend on the auto industry for jobs, retirement benefits, and revenue.”


UAW President Ron Gettelfinger called on Congress to immediately provide $25 billion in loans for auto companies to fulfill their obligations to provide health coverage for mreo than 780,000 “retirees and dependents,” the press release said. “Strategic assistance to a critical manufacturing industry makes sense for U.S. taxpayers,” stated Gettelfinger. “The alternative is lost jobs, business failures, and a shortfall in pension and health care obligations – all of which will cost far more in the future than the assistance we are requesting now.” But “they’re in the positions that they are in because of bad decisions that they have made,” said Ikenson. “As a result, they now have a very uncompetitive cost structure.” “Nowhere is it written in stone that these companies must exist,” he said. Prof. Tabarrok said it is foolhardy for the federal government to pick which industries get subsidies and which do not. The auto industry is not a key industry, he said. Many firms have pension and health care obligations, said Tabarrok, including the federal government with Social Security. Matthew Shapiro, a professor of economics at the University of Michigan, did not say whether he supports a bailout of the auto industry. “The auto industry is in extremely bad shape,” he told CNSNews.com, “because of the twin shocks of having oil prices shoot up, and then having the credit crisis, which basically means that it’s very hard for individuals to buy cars on credit.”

“They need to be part of a comprehensive solution, and I think it’s important that Congress, the current administration, and President-elect Obama all work together to do things for autos and other industries that will get them on a good footing going forward,” said Shapiro. “I would hope that the Congress would work with the incoming administration to craft a package that fits its longer-term plans,” he said.


“Longer-term includes both the next coming months where the auto industries face a very serious cash flow squeeze, but we also want to design a package that gets them on a sustainable path.”