The Wayfarer Philosophy

One of the great things that has happened over the last year is that more and more American people started paying attention to their government. No longer is it enough to just sit there, listening to sailing rhetoric and big promises. Now, most Americans know that they need to pay attention to what is actually going on, not just what the politicians SAY is going on. They use spin and carefully worded phrases to make it seem like what they are doing is all wonderful while the very important details remain hidden. In the last year, more and more Americans are now looking at the truth underneath the well-constructed surface that looks golden. Barack Obama’s first State of the Union Speech tonight was a great example of surface gilding, spun results, and all-out lies that make crap and BS seem wonderful.

Playing Favorites and Dealing out Punishment and Blame

Obama’s comments on green energy and innovations were all great tonight. He even said it would be productive for the country even if there are doubts about global warming (which have grown exponentially in the alst few years). But right after these nice superficial, agreeable platitudes, Obama said that the house had passed a great energy bill and he wanted to Senate to take it up and get it to his desk. If the house Cap and Trade bill is an example of what he wants, then his soaring surface rhetoric has nothing to do with the actual legislation! The Cap and Trade bill that was passed by the house was a job killer, a business killer, and a country-wide ton of regulations that would increase the cost of energ significantly for everyone. Punishing and taxing is not a method of creating incentives. You don’t help one are simply by hurting others, especially when the whole population is one of those areas you hurt.

Obama made his plans on taxing big banks sound nice. He said that he would be asking them to pay the American people back for helping them out. Well, virtually all of the banks have paid back their loans with interest. What is the purpose of taxing them more? He said that he didn’t want to punish banks, but that’s basically what he’s doing. Once again, he’s all about punishing some as a method of helping others. Now, many Americans may not have a problem with this because it is easy to not have regard for large banks, especially after the crisis. Yet, given the fact that most of the banks he will be taxing already paid back their loans with interest, and many of them weren’t involved int eh crisis and were forced to take the TARP funds to begin with, how do they deserve this punishment? Now, you may still feel that it’s ok to punish big companies, but what good comes from it? Will singling them out and taxing them extra make them loan more? Will it encourage them to hire more people? the banks are the ones being demonized right now, but once again it will be the insurance companies, then it will be the energy companies, and so on and so on.

If you listened carefully during the student loan promises, you would have heard more favoritism. obama stated that he wanted grants where students who graduate would not have to pay more than 10% of their income toward their loans. He added that the loan payments would even end after 20 years whetheer or not the loan was paid back. Then, he promised that this loan forgiveness would come after 10 years for those in public service. Hmmmmm… public serice just means government jobs. Why should those working for government get a better deal than those who do not? It’s merely a reward to the public service unions, who already have realy sweet salary and benefit packages.

Now he is a Budget Balancer

Yeah, once again, even after a year he comes back with blaming Bush for putting us on the brink of a depression that he saved us from. He talked about how there were budget deficits under Bush, and he HAD to quadruple them in order to save us from economic disaster. But now, he is going to put a spending freeze on the budget. As I said in a detailed earlier post, that only freezes the spending in 1/6 of the budget at their already outrageously high levels! We need a spending cut, not a spending freeze. So, all that rhetoric about how he does not want to pass a debt burden on to the next generations is just a bunch of BS. what is truly grand is to hear Obama justify his spending by the high, but far-less spending under Bush. He spends most of the time bashing and insulting Bush, but he uses him as a model to justify his own decisions!

Putting a Nice Spin on a Bad Year

It is almost as if Barack Obama did not go through the same year we all did last year. He went on about jobs, jobs, and more jobs. He praised his own “Recovery” or “Stimulus” bill that was actually written by Nancy Pilosi and the far0left Apollo Project. It was tauted to keep unemployment below 8%, but unemployment has been at 10% or above for a few months now. He says how it saved or created 2 million jobs. His staff members say varying figures to show ho how accurate these estimates actually are. In any case, the method that they use to calculate these numbers is based on calculating how much money went to whatever projects or areas and then calculate the number of jobs there. They ASSUME that the money that they sent to different groups or areas actually saved all the jobs that are there! Recovery.gov has not been updated in 3 months, more of that unprecedented transparency. About $15 billion went to districts that don’t exist as is un-accounted for. Of course, this is just a small amount to government. Yet, $15 billion is also the amount that Obama’s spending freeze is supposed to save. Yet, supposedly this is supposed to make us forget that we have lost 3 million jobs since the bill was passed.

It’s also kind of funny how he still talks as if they are trying to move the country forward and all these interest groups and the Republicans are holding him back. With an overwhelmingly Democratic house, a filibuster-proof mejority in the senate (up until a week ago), and ownership of the White House shows that there was no possibility of the Republicans stopping them! The resistance came from the American people, who, for example, overwhelmingly apposed the Healthcare agenda. They want healthcare improvements, but they paid attention tot eh actual bills that came through and saw what disasters they would create! Yet, tonight, Obama talked about how great it was and how we cannot give up on it. 60% of the country does not want your Obamacare!

As usual, any groups against Obama’s plans are called “special interest” groups, but all the groups that support him are unlabeled as interest groups. Obama got a special tax reprieve for unions in the health care bill. He gave partial union ownership to GM and majority union ownership to Chrysler, butting out the bond holders who were 1st in line to be paid back. He talks about improving education, but he cut out charter and school choice programs int he inner city of Washington, DC at the request of the NEW and AFT. He talks about how the peple want less bickering in Washington, yet the Democrats have been portraying the worst in sleazy politics. They work on bills in backroom meetings where they don’t allow Republicans nor the press inside to see what’s going on. Then he complains about the Republicans not working with him. They aren’t even allowed int he room! The reason why he is falling in the polls and Scott Brown got elected last week is because the American people are getting wise to him, his lies, and the Democrats ACTUAL actions not their rhetoric.

I could go on and on, but I’m tired and I want to go to bed. Obama, you’re full of crap as usual.

Still think it’s silly to think of Barack Obama as a coming tyrant? Just keep reading. He says that he doesn’t want to own car companies, but he’s done nothing but trying to take them over. Well, now he did. He has his own staff of an auto committee who never sold a car in their lives to run the bankruptcy. If he wanted to do things legally, they would have gone to Chapter 11 with the bankruptcy court making business decisions about the restructuring of the companies, but no, Obama’s got to be in charge.

Obama fired the previous CEO of GM, Rick Wafaner, like he somehow had the authority to do that. Normally, corporations have their shareholder vote on business decisions, but not with a tyrant like Barack Obama. He fires the guy, restructures the board, and then lies about it saying that he doesn’t want to run auto companies. Next, after they do go into bankruptcy, Obama decides to put together a panel to run the bankruptcy. Hey, guess what, that’s not LEGAL! Since, he is our tyrant dictator, that doesn’t matter, Obama runs the bankruptcy.

In the first bankruptcy with Chrysler, Obama breaks legal contracts and makes the shareholders take pennies on the dollar, calling them rich hedge funds. These funds were regular investors like you and me as well as rich people! Who cares about the distinction, they had the legal right to the first line of payout from he debts that the company accumulated. In any case, Obama breaks that law and then gives majority ownership to his friends at the UAW who raised money for his campaign. Too bad they didn’t put that money into saving their company, no, they want to own it, and now they do!

Obama’s going to do the same thing with GM. The night before they went bankrupt he called the mayor of Detriot and said that he will make sure that the car company stays there. The company wanted to move to nearby, Warren, Michigan, but Obama trumped them. He’s running the bankruptcy. He’s running everything about Chrysler and GM. And you know what? Next thing he’ll do is put pressure on Ford, the one American Auto company that isn’t owned by him. He’s going to hurt them so that he can rule them too!

Listen to this crap. he doesn’t agree with the previous administration, but he voted for the TARP and all the other things that they did about the banks and the auto industry! Now he wants to fix the auto companies, but he’s going to control their “tough decisions” all without being someone who ever sold a car! He’s going to own them until they’re “stabilized” and find private buyers. Who’s going to be a private buyer when the government steps in and ignores contracts and does what they want?! This is a dictatorship folks!

Pretty soon people are oging to have to wake up and forget the fact that he “acts cool” and is a “historic” president and actually pay attention to what he is doing!

I am sick and tired of hearing how outraged the administration and the congress are about AIG bonuses for employees. I certainly do not think that bonuses should be going out to those AIG employees that are working in the division that bankrupted the country and encouraged our government to spend $173 billion in bailouts for AIG alone. What ticks me off with Barney Frank, Chris Dodd, and Harry Reed acting all outraged about it is the fact that they could have avoided this problem during multiple bailout packages along this course they have taken. Chris Dodd and Harry Reed were the main authors of the original bailout package back during the Bush administration. During that time they knew that the American people were upset that we were bailing out companies that engaged in risky lending. Shouldn’t they have thought about making sure that they money was going to be used properly? They were the authors of the legislation. They had the responsibility to make the legislation effective.

And then there is Barney Frank. When are his constituents going to wake up and get this idiot out of the House of Representatives? Barney’s the head of the house finance committee and has been personally overseeing the financial institutions and their use of taxpayer funds. How come he was not the first to notice the bonuses? He was not even among the first notice this? How come he did not even try to prevent it since he has been involved in putting forward all of these bailouts since the beginning? Shouldn’t Barney Frank also be concerned about the bonuses that are going out to executives at Fannie Mae and Freddie MAc? Of course he doesn’t mind that, because those banks are his buddies. He gets to decide who is allowed to have bonuses and who does not. Note to Barney, Fannie and Freddie were at the heart of the banking crisis.

Tax cheat Tim Geithner is, of course, our Secretary of the Treasury. Remember why he was tapped to for that position? Because, being the Fed chief of New York, he was involved with bailouts way back at the beginning with Bernanke and Paulson in the Bush administration. In fact, he was put in charge of managing the AIG bailout from the beginning. How come he did not know anything about this until a week ago? He was in charge of AIG’s bailout from the beginning!

Chris Dodd, the chairman of the Senate banking committee was not only in charge of the first bailout, but he has been involved in all the spending since. He was involved int eh writing of the so-called “stimulus” bill that spent $780 billion on a wide variety of liberal pursuits, 23% of which actually goes out this year. Remember the rush and the urgency to pass that through? Why was there such a rush since the overwhelming majority of it was set to go out after this year? Remember how it was not finished until 11pm the night before voting and that nobody even read the thing before the Democrats rammed it through? Chris Dodd actually wrote language in the bill that protected executive bonuses like this one. That seems to indicate that maybe he knew ab out it, since he acted to protect the bonuses at that point? Some might even say that he was part of the problem.

Why can’t the Democrats take responsibility for not doing their jobs and and shift the blame to the Bush administration or the concept of “greed” in general?

Do you see what happens when you have the Federal government managing the financial sector? Do you really think we should have the Federal government be more involved in the financial sector? How do you think it will work out with the Federal government running healthcare too?

White House Press Conference on the “Stimulus Package”

I watched the new president’s press conference last night and continue to see him misleading the public, and during these difficult economic times, he should be affording the public witht eh transparency that he promised. First, Obama states an outright lie when he says that the so-called “stimulus package” does not have any earmarks in it. This is absolutely false. while technically, earmarks are additional spending added by senators and representatives for projects in their states and districts at the expense of the whole country, the understanding should be focused on wasteful spending. While there is certainly wasteful spending, there are even earmarks by the very definition of the term. $40 billion federal dollars are going to state governments who are having budget shortfalls. so, in other words, every state has to pay for those state governments that cannot keep their books balanced. $9 billion are going to Milwaukee are schools. While funding education is fine, these expenses are not stimulus-oriented and should go through the Congressional Budget Office like all other spending. How about the $50 million for the ANational Endownment for the Arts? These items should be calculated as part of the budget. These are even the least wasteful examples of the bunch. A large amount of money is even going to Hollywood film studios that have their hands out. Money is being handed out to teacher’s unions (not tot he teachers or schools themselves). A simple compromise would be to put all non-immediate spending programs through the normal congressional debates and budget discussions as separate items rather than putting them on the plate of a “stimulus bill” that MUST be passed now.

Obama says that the debate is about whether or not something should be done, obviously trying to mislead the people into believing that the debate is about whether we should do something or do nothing. This is a gross mis-representation of the truth. The debate is about the different spending items in the bill itself and whether they are the right choices or wrong choices. At the same time, the debate is about whether some of these items should be part of a “stimulus bill” instead of their own separate pieces of legislation where the American people can look at them item by item or at least one spending category at a time.

Obama obviously does not want that because then the American people can more easily see what the government is spending our tax dollars on. It is much easier for him and his Democrat colleagues to shove all their spending desires through in one package that has a simple title of being a necessary “stimulus package.” Of course, the condom funding and re-surfing the International Mall have been removed, but there is still a lot more rediculous spending items there. Either way, these different items should be addressed by category and separate from a so-called “stimulus bill.”

In short, Obama wants to put a lot of liberal spending programs through under the cover of a “stimulus package” without having debate on the different things that the money goes toward. He wants to rush it through before we have time to examine all of it. He’s spending a hell of a lot of our taxpayer dollars without even being honest about what is in the bill and the need for debate on the specific items of the bill.

Senator Bill Nelson is happy to recklessly spend the money

A response from my letter to Bill Nelson

The American people are hurting. They are losing their homes, their jobs, their businesses and their life savings. Economists across the political spectrum agree that the government needs to take bold and immediate action to stimulate the economy and curb the risk of a protracted economic recession.

The economic stimulus package will provide critical tax relief, shore up unemployment benefits and food stamps, improve access to health care, and promote energy independence. I believe the stimulus package is narrowly targeted to spend and invest in ways that will get the economy moving again.

When I wrote the email and received thsi response from Bill Nelson, the condom and re-surfing spending as well as all the other pork where in the package. So, this statement from Senator Nelson is absolutely incorrect. Economists at the time calculated that only 18% of the bill was going to tax relief and that all job creation was going to government jobs in public works projects that would still need to undergo environmental impact approval, hiring, planning, local permission, and the whole nine yards to getting projects like bridge building started. Job creation starts in the private sector and can be achieved much more quickly why business tax cuts that are permanent, so that the businesses can plan ahead to hire more workers for long term jobs. Simply lowering the payroll tax would do this. Lowering the corporate tax fromt he second highest in the world would also provide immediate relief. Nancy Pilosi and Barack Obama’s tax proposals where just $700.00 handout checks to everybody even if they do not pay taxes. We tried that one year ago under George W. Bush and it did not work. Why do it again?

I understand your concerns about the stimulus package. Last year I voted against spending $700 billion to bail out Wall Street because the bill lacked meaningful relief for homeowners facing foreclosure and didn’t include adequate protections for American taxpayers. I am committed to reducing wasteful spending and improving transparency in Federal funding. For too long have we ignored the consequences of a burgeoning Federal deficit.

As Congress considers measures to put the economy on the right track, I will be sure to keep your views in mind. Please do not hesitate to contact me in the future.

Given his assessment of the original bill I am not hopeful that Bill Nelson seeks to do much to work toward changing the bill to be more of a true stimulus bill than a typical big government liberal spending package. The bill as it stand today still has too much spending in it and not enough relief on private business which is necessary for job creation in the long term.

Bill Nelson does not seem to realize that this country is low on money with way too much debt rising above us to spend this stimulus money poorly. We need to create long-term job growth, not short-term handouts, paybacks and government increases. Remember, the car companies will probably be back in a few months for more billions. Just like he voted for it last time, I’m sure that Bill Nelson would be happy to throw more money their way even after this $800 billion spending spree.

Good news, Senators Bill Nelson and Mel Martinez did finally get back to my emails concerning the Auto Company Bailout. I will post their responses here and my comments.

Senator Bill Nelson’s Letter

Below I have pasted in Senator Nelson’s response paragraph by paragraph. The quotes from his letter are in boxes, and my responses follow after each paragraph. I did not send these responses, because the email comes with a message that one should not respond to the email, but should post again from the senate.gov comment form. Due to the amount of emails they must receive, I do not think that a conversation will be able to pursue since it took a week and a hlaf for this response to come from the office. I am glad that a response did come, and I find the response to be informed opinions; however, I disagree with the points as you will see below. I will consider sending another comment in with specific responses, but I am not sure how productive it would be considering how the communications with senate offices must be overwhelming.. Understandably, these responses from the senate offices are form responses that are copy and pasted in since they receive thousands of emails.

Dear Mr. Moore:

Thank you for contacting me regarding the proposed bailout of the auto industry .

In my judgment, the Big Three automakers have arrived at this point through their own poor management. The fact that so many American manufacturing jobs are at risk is the only reason these companies deserve any taxpayer assistance. In order to avoid digging ourselves into a deeper economic hole, we must take action. But we cannot simply have another bailout. Any assistance from the government must come in the form of a loan with significant strings attached to force these companies to restructure the way they do business.

I agree that poor management has led to this situation, but I think the fix not only requires new management, but new contracts with debtors and employees. The average auto worker for the big 3 earns $78 an hour including benefits and retirement. The average American auto worker for Honda, Toyota, and other foreign manufactures is about $43 an hour including benefits and retirement. I think that this salary is still quite respectable, and would be happy to earn that much myself as a professor with a doctorate. I am all for higher wages for workers, so long as the companies can afford it. Through chapter 11 bankruptcy, the companies will be able to re-negotiate contracts with the UAW, which has over-drawn wages that the companies obviously cannot pay. At the same time, they would be able to re-structure their debt. The taxpayer does not have to be on the hook for this re-structuring. Cahpter 11 bankruptcy does not end all employment nor the companies. It is designed specifically for getting companies back on their feet again.

First, we must insist that the Big Three increase their average fuel economy to 50 miles per gallon by 2020. Automakers must also increase production of flex-fuel, electric, and plug-in hybrid vehicles. Foreign car companies have been building fuel-efficient cars for years, and now in this era of volatile gas prices, the American manufacturers find themselves at a disadvantage.

Fuel efficiency standards really have nothing to do with the financial troubles of the big 3. The big 3 produce cars whose fuel efficiency rival those of foreign competitors. In fact, the government’s CAFE standards for fuel efficiency got rid of the station wagon. Because it is on a car chasis, the station wagon does not meet our government’s CAFE standards for fuel efficiency. As a result, to provide cars that have seating capacity that the consumer wants, the car companies responded with the less fuel-efficient, SUV on a truck chasis. In this case, the government’s fuel efficiency standards have actually hurt the industry as well as hurt the emission amounts that they were actually designed to reduce. The market should dictate the energy consumption of cars. People are more than happy to buy more fuel efficient cars as they become more affordable. The technology is not at the point where it is affordable to most consumers. I think having the taxpayer subsidizing this expense will make the financial conditions of our country far worse. The green issue is obviously how the big 3 are selling their plans tot he Democrats in congress, but it will only make the problem worse. This will just put more restrictions and epenses on these companies without fixing the economic issues that they are facing.

We also must ensure that no taxpayer money goes to reward the people who got us in this situation in the first place. Shareholders in these companies should not receive dividends until the companies return to financial health. We must place limits on executive compensation and eliminate golden parachutes. Finally, we must insist that these companies replace their senior management. We need new leadership and fresh ideas to get us out of this mess.

I have no argument with this statement, however, he seems to leave out the largest portion of the economic drain on the companies, the outrageously high union contracts. Even putting their executives on an hourly salary or just firing them and hiring new executives at low pay, this certainly will not come close to reducing their costs. While the executives may have high salaries in the six to seven figure range, there are such few executive positions that that, in and of itself, is not enough to make up for the fact that their entire workforce is paid almost double the amount of the successful automotive manufacturers in the U.S. Just because foreign manufacturers have foreign ownership does not change the fact that they have American workers who are obviously quite silent in their complaints about their income and benefits. When companies need to cut expenses, they need to cut them all around, expecially since the UAW has outrageous contracts and other things like the job bank, where laid-off employees go to not work and still earn their pay. The unions just took it way too far and killed their companies. Now, Senator Nelson wants the U.S. taxpayer to pay for the UAW’s greed.

I appreciate the time you’ve taken to contact me about this important issue. I am committed to keeping America on the leading edge of manufacturing and technological innovation. Please do not hesitate to share your views with me in the future.

While I disagree with him, I am glad to get a response from Senator Nelson. I will continue tow rite in on important issues as all of us should. We need to show them that we care. They at least keep a tally on the number of opinions for or against the issues.

Senator Mel Martinez

Having seen the vote, I noted that Senator Martinez voted against the bailout that was presented. I agree witht his move, this letter gives more insight to his decision making and what he feels should be done.

Dear Mr. Moore:

Thank you for contacting me regarding the automobile industry. I appreciate hearing from you and would like to take this opportunity to respond.

On November 17, 2008, Senator Harry Reid (D-NV) introduced two bills (S. 3688 and S. 3689) that included provisions that would amend the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act to direct the Secretary of the Treasury to make a loan of up to $25 billion to automobile manufacturers and parts suppliers. Both S. 3688 and 3689 have been placed on the Senate Legislative Calendar and await further consideration. In the meantime, Congressional leaders have directed the auto manufacturers to present a comprehensive proposal by December 2, 2008, that explains exactly how they would use public financing and details a clear plan to return to profitability. The Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs is scheduled to hold hearings on the proposal prior to any consideration by the full Senate.

Like the other response I got from Mel Martinez on another issue, he once again gives a good history of bills and actions, so we know what is going on. I am concerned about anything that Housing and Urban Affairs decides. Focring banks to loan to people who cannot pay the loans back is at the heart of the financial crisis in the first place. This is why I am worried about the whole bailout thing, because now so many people are at the table looking for money and the gtovernment politicians are now playing God deciding who “deserves” what. This is not the way it should be in a free market economy.

I believe that the domestic auto industry is an integral part of the American landscape and that the failure of General Motors, Chrysler, or Ford could, in the short term, further damage our already fragile economy. However, I do not support using funding from the Troubled Assets Relief Program (TARP) to assist the auto industry, as Senator Reid’s legislation would direct. TARP is specifically targeted to the credit markets and should remain narrowly focused on that industry. I do support altering the Section 136 program to allow automakers to immediately tap a $25 billion loan program included in a broader energy package enacted by Congress last year (P.L. 110-140). The original intent of the Section 136 loan program was to help the auto industry retool to produce more fuel-efficient cars. To date, not one of the auto companies has utilized any of this funding.

I believe that the pre-planned bankruptcy option with government support over warranties and the like to keep the companies alive is much better. Unfortunately, the UAW does not want this because they want to keep their outrageously high contracts. They feel that if they hold out onger, the new senate will have more Democrats and with Obama in the White House, they will get the support that they want, where the taxpayers will fund their high salaries while the government engages in the plans that they want for fuel efficiency. Unfortuantely, none of this would get the companies indpendent again. It basically will be a nationalized auto industry, and the UAW will be happy with that, especially with the Democrats running everything.

I do not want to see the American automobile industry fail, but equally, I do not want to see taxpayer dollars put at risk in an investment that is at best risky. Florida families deserve to know that their hard-earned money will not be squandered. I will be working with all of my colleagues in the coming days to ensure that any plan Congress considers is in keeping with the best interest of taxpayers.

I agree. We are heading toward socialism. The government is starting to control the banks, and now might be controlling the auto industry. Goodbye free makret. Government will decide who “deserves” money and who does not.

Again, thank you for sharing your views with me on this important issue. For more information about issues and activities important to Florida, please sign up for my newsletter at http://martinez.senate.gov.

Conclusion

Well, Senator Nelson is taking the party line of the Democrats right now even though he lives and represents in a right to work state. Ignor the outrageous UAW contracts, fund them with taxpayer dollars, fund the green cars with taxpayer dollars, and just blame it all ont eh executives, while not solving the economic woes of the companies. Government control, plain and simple. Do you really think the government can run the banks and the automotive industry well? Do you trust them in being fair? We should not even be at this point, government should not play God.

On December 12th, 2008 the senate voted on the bailout plan for the Detroit automakers. I did not receive any response from Bill Nelson, nor Mel Martinez concerning my emails to their offices. I have, in the past, received responses for Senator Martinez’s office concerning votes, but I guess this vote probably brought in a lot of emils. It still would have been nice to gt a format response form the office. In any case, I did not expect a response from Senator Nelson’s office becase his office never responded to any o my emails. I submit all emails from the senate.gov website comment forms and filled out the address fields to show that I am a resident of Florida. Apparently, Bill Nelson does not care the way his state residents think. This is a problem.

How they Voted

At senate.gov one can click on “public disclosure” to see how their senators vote on everything that comes before them. I checked the voting results. Senator Nelson voted in favor of the bailout and Senator Martinez voted against it. Here is the roll of how all senators voted below…

Alphabetical by Senator Name Akaka (D-HI), Yea
Alexander (R-TN), Not Voting
Allard (R-CO), Nay
Barrasso (R-WY), Nay
Baucus (D-MT), Nay
Bayh (D-IN), Yea
Bennett (R-UT), Nay
Biden (D-DE), Not Voting
Bingaman (D-NM), Yea
Bond (R-MO), Yea
Boxer (D-CA), Yea
Brown (D-OH), Yea
Brownback (R-KS), Yea
Bunning (R-KY), Nay
Burr (R-NC), Nay
Byrd (D-WV), Yea
Cantwell (D-WA), Yea
Cardin (D-MD), Yea
Carper (D-DE), Yea
Casey (D-PA), Yea
Chambliss (R-GA), Nay
Clinton (D-NY), Yea
Coburn (R-OK), Nay
Cochran (R-MS), Nay
Coleman (R-MN), Nay
Collins (R-ME), Yea
Conrad (D-ND), Yea
Corker (R-TN), Nay
Cornyn (R-TX), Not Voting
Craig (R-ID), Not Voting
Crapo (R-ID), Nay
DeMint (R-SC), Nay
Dodd (D-CT), Yea
Dole (R-NC), Yea
Domenici (R-NM), Yea
Dorgan (D-ND), Yea
Durbin (D-IL), Yea
Ensign (R-NV), Nay
Enzi (R-WY), Nay
Feingold (D-WI), Yea
Feinstein (D-CA), Yea
Graham (R-SC), Not Voting
Grassley (R-IA), Nay
Gregg (R-NH), Nay
Hagel (R-NE), Not Voting
Harkin (D-IA), Yea
Hatch (R-UT), Nay
Hutchison (R-TX), Nay
Inhofe (R-OK), Nay
Inouye (D-HI), Yea
Isakson (R-GA), Nay
Johnson (D-SD), Yea
Kennedy (D-MA), Not Voting
Kerry (D-MA), Not Voting
Klobuchar (D-MN), Yea
Kohl (D-WI), Yea
Kyl (R-AZ), Nay
Landrieu (D-LA), Yea
Lautenberg (D-NJ), Yea
Leahy (D-VT), Yea
Levin (D-MI), Yea
Lieberman (ID-CT), Yea
Lincoln (D-AR), Nay
Lugar (R-IN), Yea
Martinez (R-FL), Nay
McCain (R-AZ), Nay
McCaskill (D-MO), Yea
McConnell (R-KY), Nay
Menendez (D-NJ), Yea
Mikulski (D-MD), Yea
Murkowski (R-AK), Nay
Murray (D-WA), Yea
Nelson (D-FL), Yea
Nelson (D-NE), Yea
Pryor (D-AR), Yea
Reed (D-RI), Yea
Reid (D-NV), Nay
Roberts (R-KS), Nay
Rockefeller (D-WV), Yea
Salazar (D-CO), Yea
Sanders (I-VT), Yea
Schumer (D-NY), Yea
Sessions (R-AL), Nay
Shelby (R-AL), Nay
Smith (R-OR), Not Voting
Snowe (R-ME), Yea
Specter (R-PA), Yea
Stabenow (D-MI), Yea
Stevens (R-AK), Not Voting
Sununu (R-NH), Not Voting
Tester (D-MT), Nay
Thune (R-SD), Nay
Vitter (R-LA), Nay
Voinovich (R-OH), Yea
Warner (R-VA), Yea
Webb (D-VA), Yea
Whitehouse (D-RI), Yea
Wicker (R-MS), Nay
Wyden (D-OR), Not Voting

I encourage all people to see how their representatives and senators vote on different issues. This is how you become an informed voter. Voting records define how candidates stand on issues and is the substance of what they do. Instead of listening to campaign slogans, one should see how their congress people actually vote.

Bill Nelson

Even though he is a senator of a right to work state, Vill Nelson voted in favor of this bailout, obviously in support of the outrageous contracts of the United Auto Workers Union. He also does not see fit to respond to his constituents. I will continue to follow both senators in the upcoming votes. Bil Nelson likes to hide behind the fact that a lot of people do not pay attention to the votes in congress and see how they vote. I intend to promote the philosophy of seeing what the congress actually does and holding people accountable to their votes.

Well, here we are, past the December 2nd deadline for the Detroit auto companies to submit business plans for how they will use the now $34 billion from the tax payer. I am sure that the Democratic congress will put this through and then only wait for President Elect Obama to take office and pass it. This is more of the new policy that has taken over Washington, DC. We now reward irresponsibility and failure and make the responsible pay for it. Companies that are able to runt themselves right and profitably now have to pay taxes that are primarily going toward those companies that did not. A key principle to The Wayfarer Philosophy is to take responsibility for one’s actions. If a business fails, it needs to go into chapter 11 bankruptcy, re-structure itself and then move on as a stronger company. If it cannot restructure, then it goes out of business. Now, this principle has gone away from our society and our government. Now, the responsible must bail out the irresponsible. What will be the motivation to be responsible anymore?

Writing the Senators

Knowing that the Nancy Pilosi driven House of Representatives with a large Democratic majority will obviously pass this legislation through, I decided to write only the two senators from Florida, Bill Nelseon and Mel Martinez

Here is the email that I wrote to them. On a previous issue, I received an informative response from Senator Martinez and no response from Senator Nelson. I will post whatever responses I receive from this email in an upcoming message, pending the responses. Below is the email that I wrote to both senators through their senate.gov comment forms.

I want to share with you my concerns about the auto company bailout. As a citizen and a seven year resident of Florida, I believe that it is important that we stay in touch with our senators and representatives.

I like most of the American people have serious concerns about this Detroit bailout. Its supporters do not call it a bailout, but call it a loan. Yet, when tehre is real fear about the loan being paid back, it is truly a bailout. Now that it has grown from $25 billion to $34 billion, we are even more concerned since this over 40 percent increase has come in less than a month of waiting for the auto companies’ second shot at taxpayer money.

if the UAW is willing to restructure contracts and help make the business models of the companies more streamlined, then why can’t this be done in chapter 11 bankruptcy where the taxpayer is not ont he hook for it? After setting preced3ence with this “loan,” how many more sectors of industry will come to the American people with their hands out? Will this even be the last bailout of the auto companies? This is doubtful since this isn’t even the first.

Some of the supporters of the bailout say that the companies will be strong going forward in that they have such great selling lines of cars. If this is true, why do they need the bailout now in the first place? This is just the beginning of an economic downturn, not the end, so one presumes that at the end of it they will not be any better off. They are crying that this is urgent. If their situation is so urgent at the beginning, we can only imagine what it will be like at the end with the same business models.

Chapter 11 is the best way for the companies to be re-structured to be competitive. Throwing money into it will not help bad companies get better. This country is going too far down the path of rewarding irresponsibility and ignoring responsibility. The auto companies have about $30 billion in debt and interest rates around $3 billion a year. I am sure that this will not be their last bailout. The American people are watching what you decid4e.

I hope that you will take these concerns and others from the people of your state in making your decision on this issue. I will be sure to see how you vote.

Pay attention to how your Senators and Representatives vote! Write to them about your opinions and hold them accountable!

Businesses in Line

Ever since the Senate TARP bill went through, businesses have been lining up for hand outs. There is a 5 page form that businesses can fill out for hand outs from the government. TARP stands for Troubled Asset Reform Plan. After the signing of the bill, however, Hank Paulson decided that buying troubled assets would not be effective, so the first $250 billion wnet to buying bank stocks to give them more cash flow. Of course, the requirements for how they use that money is kind of fuzzy. The top 2 executives from any company cannot receive bonuses from the bailout, but there no no requirements as far as the rest of company executives are concerned. Goldman Saks got $10 billion in tax-payer funding, and are using $6.8 billion to go for executive bonuses for this year. Nice, huh? Reward those comapnies and executives who are not doing well. Companies who did things right, however, get nothing. I do not believe that anyone should be getting bail outs. Those who run good companies and do not get into risky business should be rewarded by surviving the problems that risky companies have to go through. But no, we reward mediocrity and failure in this country now.

Now the Democrats want to go further with the bailouts even though the $700 billion TARP bailout has not worked yet. They want to put $25 billion into the Detroit auto industry in addition tot he $25 billion already given to them. They are even using false facts to do it. They say that the car industry is responsible for 10 percent of the jobs in the country. The sneaky thing about it, is they are not focusing on the car industry in general, just the three Detroit companies with unionized workers. In other words, we have to help the failing unionized companies so that they can continue to fail. The non-unionized comapnies are doing fine, so they do not get a bailout. The Democrats need to pay off their union help from the election, so they got to get the American taxpayer to pay for them. They are paying back their supporters with all of our money!

We all heard about how AIG executives went on two high-priced vacation/conferences after the initial $15 billion bailout, and then they somehow qualified for more bailout money. The thing is, you do not have to worry about how companies use or misuse tax dollars if you do not give them tax edollars int eh first place. Bad companies deserve to fail, otherwise you are rewarding their behavior with the tax dollars of the American people. The Democrats love to be generous with other peoples’ money.

Cities and States are in Line

Cities like Philadelphia and Detroit are no getting in line for Federal government welfare. Mayor Nutter of Philadelphia is first in line to get money for his city’s poor management. So now the whole country has to pay for his city’s failure. The state of California is in line too. In fact, now that the door has been opened to bailing out failed economics, everyone can get in line. Who is to judge who deserves what? That is why the natural free market is the best judge. Then, you do not put judgment in the hands of individuals, the judgment is decided by the success and failure within the free market.

Complaining Without Respnsibility

A couple of days ago, the recently re-elected Barney Frank (from Freddie and Fannie over-regulation fame) mentioned his complaints of how some of these businesses are rewarding executives witht he bailout money. I seem to remember Frank as one of the biggest proponents of the TARP bailout. Should he not really be taking some responsibility for the looseness of the bill? Chuck Schumer announced today that the banks are hoarding the money instead of providing it as credit as TARP was supposed to do. Hmmmm… Schumer was one of the Democrats in the senate that proposed this bill and forced it through the way it is. Should he also not take some responsibility for the results?

Obama has some Pay-outs to Make

With the raising of expectations that the Obama campaign did to get elected, saying that they are about hope and change are are going to run a new kind of administration, there are a lot of people that he now needs to pay back for support. Some of it is political support, such as paying back MoveOn.org by not building a missile defense system in Poland (even though he promised the president of Poland that he would(. Some of it is financial. The Democrats need to reward the unions for their support by paying a bailout to the UAW-based companies in Detroit. They also need to pay back the unions by pushing the “Employee Free Choice Act,” which requires that employees vote on unionization WITHOUT having the right to a secret ballot. Hmmmm… yes the bill is exactly the opposite of its name. How do you get freedom of choice without having anonymous voting? Now that Obama is going to be the president, he also has to pay for all the hopes of his supporters. They are expecting some serious money. You know that 95 percent of the country is going to get a tax cut… not really a tax cut, but a pay-out, because Obama’s figure include the 40 percent of Americans who do not pay personal income taxes. Many of Obama’s supporters agree with taking money from good-earners and re-directing it to them. Here’s a recording of an Obama supporter after a rally. She is expecting the government to pay for her gas and mortgage.:

Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.

The country has its hands out and now Obama’s is obligated to pay out our tax dollars. Is it true generosity when he is deciding to all of us pay for his generosity?

Barrack Obama and the Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac Issue

FANNIE MAE EASES CREDIT TO AID MORTGAGE LENDING
By STEVEN A. HOLMES

Published in the New York Times on September 30, 1999.

In a move that could help increase home ownership rates among minorities and low-income consumers, the Fannie Mae Corporation is easing the credit requirements on loans that it will purchase from banks and other lenders.

The action, which will begin as a pilot program involving 24 banks in 15 markets — including the New York metropolitan region — will encourage those banks to extend home mortgages to individuals whose credit is generally not good enough to qualify for conventional loans. Fannie Mae officials say they hope to make it a nationwide program by next spring.

Fannie Mae, the nation’s biggest underwriter of home mortgages, has been under increasing pressure from the Clinton Administration to expand mortgage loans among low and moderate income people and felt pressure from stock holders to maintain its phenomenal growth in profits.

In addition, banks, thrift institutions and mortgage companies have been pressing Fannie Mae to help them make more loans to so-called subprime borrowers. These borrowers whose incomes, credit ratings and savings are not good enough to qualify for conventional loans, can only get loans from finance companies that charge much higher interest rates — anywhere from three to four percentage points higher than conventional loans.

”Fannie Mae has expanded home ownership for millions of families in the 1990′s by reducing down payment requirements,” said Franklin D. Raines, Fannie Mae’s chairman and chief executive officer. ”Yet there remain too many borrowers whose credit is just a notch below what our underwriting has required who have been relegated to paying significantly higher mortgage rates in the so-called subprime market.”

Demographic information on these borrowers is sketchy. But at least one study indicates that 18 percent of the loans in the subprime market went to black borrowers, compared to 5 per cent of loans in the conventional loan market.

In moving, even tentatively, into this new area of lending, Fannie Mae is taking on significantly more risk, which may not pose any difficulties during flush economic times. But the government-subsidized corporation may run into trouble in an economic downturn, prompting a government rescue similar to that of the savings and loan industry in the 1980′s.

”From the perspective of many people, including me, this is another thrift industry growing up around us,” said Peter Wallison a resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute. ”If they fail, the government will have to step up and bail them out the way it stepped up and bailed out the thrift industry.”

Under Fannie Mae’s pilot program, consumers who qualify can secure a mortgage with an interest rate one percentage point above that of a conventional, 30-year fixed rate mortgage of less than $240,000 — a rate that currently averages about 7.76 per cent. If the borrower makes his or her monthly payments on time for two years, the one percentage point premium is dropped.

Fannie Mae, the nation’s biggest underwriter of home mortgages, does not lend money directly to consumers. Instead, it purchases loans that banks make on what is called the secondary market. By expanding the type of loans that it will buy, Fannie Mae is hoping to spur banks to make more loans to people with less-than-stellar credit ratings.

Fannie Mae officials stress that the new mortgages will be extended to all potential borrowers who can qualify for a mortgage. But they add that the move is intended in part to increase the number of minority and low income home owners who tend to have worse credit ratings than non-Hispanic whites.

Home ownership has, in fact, exploded among minorities during the economic boom of the 1990′s. The number of mortgages extended to Hispanic applicants jumped by 87.2 per cent from 1993 to 1998, according to Harvard University’s Joint Center for Housing Studies. During that same period the number of African Americans who got mortgages to buy a home increased by 71.9 per cent and the number of Asian Americans by 46.3 per cent.

In contrast, the number of non-Hispanic whites who received loans for homes increased by 31.2 per cent.

Despite these gains, home ownership rates for minorities continue to lag behind non-Hispanic whites, in part because blacks and Hispanics in particular tend to have on average worse credit ratings.

In July, the Department of Housing and Urban Development proposed that by the year 2001, 50 percent of Fannie Mae’s and Freddie Mac’s portfolio be made up of loans to low and moderate-income borrowers. Last year, 44 percent of the loans Fannie Mae purchased were from these groups.

The change in policy also comes at the same time that HUD is investigating allegations of racial discrimination in the automated underwriting systems used by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to determine the credit-worthiness of credit applicants.

Yes, you heard me right, the media blew the “Bail-Out Bill” of 2008 and the Democrats sure helped them. Ever since last week, when John McCain said that he was going to go to Washington to try to help the congress come to an agreement on the bill, the Democrats went crazy about him getting int he way and causing problems. Mainly, they just did not want McCain to get any credit for helping the bill go through. It is kind of amazing how the Democrats are so upset with Republicans being skeptical of this Bush supported plan, while they say that they are all for it with little or no change. So, the party that blames everything on Bush and is saying that we need to vote for Barack Obama because he is change form Bush and McCain is not, now are showing that being Republican is quite different from being a George Bush Republican. All this, while Barack Obama stays silent about his being either in favor or against the bill as he waits to see which way things go. He is doing what he does, playing campaigner. When he becomes president, however, and I think he probably will, he will need to actually make decisions.

How did the Media blow it?

This is an epidemic that has been plaguing our media for a long time. Simply put, they do not convey information well. They do not concern themselves with educating the public about unbiased facts and figures, but are more concerned with entertainment. This entertainment is mostly just talking aboutt he contrasting opinions and battles between liberals and conservatives (as the usually fall ont he side of the liberals quite openly). Amid this back and forth, the press mostly talks about how they, their commentators, and the American public probably think about the different things that they discuss. Rather than focusing on opinion, they should focus on fact checking and informing. The media should be itemizing the details of this bill in the congress so that we know the details, rather than talking about peoples’ opinions about it. Let us make our own opinion after being provided the facts without bias.

The main reason why there were 228 votes against the bill and 203 in favor, including 95 Democrats voting against, is because the representatives are getting so many phone calls from the people int heir districts that are against the bill, that they fear whether or not they could be re-elected by supporting it. Of course, true conservatives also believe that the government should not be throwing out bail outs of this size, but they also propose alternatives in which a more secure way of loaning the money can be done. Of course, this concept often does not get mentioned by the liberal media. Yet, it also gets missed that the representatives are basically doing their jobs. They are hesitant about this bill because the American people are, and they represent us.

If the populous was well-informed about the details of this plan, they would be less likely to be panicked. They are panicked because they are not sure of the details and they think that it is simply just bailing out the financial industries that got us in this mess. It is hard for me to talk about my own support or lack of support for the bill, because I only hear little fragments of what it contains. Apparently, John McCain did the right thing in giving the House Republicans support in getting some of their worries addressed as far as having safety measures in place for the tax payers in order to make sure that we get repaid. I think everyone is in favor of this. One other fragment that I heard on the news is that, believe it or not, the Democrats did not put their mortgage bail outs for the general public included. Hmmmm… looks like they are more like Bush than the House Republicans. If the public felt more informed about this bill, then their representatives would probably have passed it. If people were supporting the plan, they would have no choice. Yet, polls show that most of the country is against it. So, it is difficult for representatives to vote against the people that they represent.

Some Fact Checking

• This is all Bush’s Fault – Democrats love to just blame Bush as the only cause for the mortgage and credit crises. Yet, there is enough blame to go around in Washington. But simplifying it to Bush is easy, it helps Democrats win elections, and they benefit from the fact the a lot of the media does not inform people about details, so they just believe it because it is easier and simpler to blame one person. Most of the country, unfortunately, just think that the president controls everything, so everything is his responsibility. Democrats blame Bush because of “de-regulation,” saying that he just let the market run wild. Well, the last major change in regulation of the financial markets came at the end of Clinton administration, and very little had been changed by the Bush administration. The lower interest rates that we have been having did not cause the problem. You cannot blame the responsibilities of businesses on low interest rates. You can also not blame the indecision to act by lawmakers in enforcing regulations already in the books based on interest rates. It is simply a problem of the regulators not doing their jobs.
• Barney Frank – He is the Chairman of the House Finance Committee. So, for the last two years this guy was not saying or doing a damn thing about the financial crisis that everyone’s been talking about. As a legislator, he is part of the law-making body. As the chairman of the finance committee, he is in charge of the financial state of the nation and lawmaking that governs that area. So, why was he not sounding the alarm about needing to work on laws for trying to fix this situation and preventing it from happening again? Well, truth be told, more regulation probably is not necessary. What needs to happen is enforcement of the regulations that are already there. Part of Frank’s job is to be watching over this. He did not. If he did, then he just stood by and let things go down the toilet, probably hoping that it would only help the Democrats in the upcoming elections. Barney Frank also takes large sums of money from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, two government-backed loan agencies that were at the center of this profit-taking without restraint. Why do the Democrats still have Frank in charge of this bail-out plan when he was part of the problem to begin with? How dare he blame it on House Republicans that this bill did not pass when you have such a corrupt, gutter politician in charge of working on the bill without even informing everyone of the details last week before McCain came to oversee this crappy effort on behalf of the Democrats.
• Chris Dodd -Ok, now here’s the single biggest recipient of payoffs from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. It was close, though, Barac Obama was a close second (no wonder he keeps quiet about his opinions on the issue – other than blaming it on Bush and by party affiliation, John McCain). Chris Dodd is the Chairman of the Senate Banking Committee. Hmmm, doesn’t that sound like he should take a look at the banking industry? He turned his blind eye because he gets money from them. Once again, we see that the two Democrat-led houses of congress are being led int he financial sector by people that take money from the banks that were at the core of the problem. They are also both in charge of the house and senate moves toward passing this bill. When Barack Obama gets elected, then the president will also be in the tank for the corrupt government backed banks, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, along with the Democratically controlled congress.
• John McCain = Bush – In another article, I will address how this Democratic strategy of equating John McCain to George Bush is working but is incorrect. At this time, I will focus on just this issue. In 2005, John McCain played a major role in the Housing Reform Act of 2005 that was being put forward to address the problem that they saw on the horizon with the bad mortgages being held by banks. It had Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac at the center of the attention, so it obviously was something that the Democrats were against. So, John McCain was trying to do something before it happened, but the Democrats blocked him.

Conclusion

If the media would do a better job of informing the public, we would ahve a better chance of knowing what this bill actually contained. If the liberal media would stop just working for the Democratic party and leave bias aside, as they are supposed to, then we could actually get some clear facts and figures out there rather than just hearing partisan bickering with the media cheerleading the Democrats.

Barney Frank should be removed from the House Finance Committee, he’s bought off.

Chris Dodd should be removed from the Senate Bank8ing Committee, he’s bought off too

Barack Obama, stop hoodwinking us, give back the money you got from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and maybe start talking about your own decision making rather than blaming Bush and equating him to John McCain! At least pretend like you could be a president.

MEDIA – Be an information provider rather than an entertainer and at least pretend like you are unbiased.