The Wayfarer Philosophy

One of the principles that Barack Obama really seems to have trouble with is “take responsibility for your actions.” He also has a great deal of trouble with honesty. Last week, after the big Scott Brown election, Barack Obama came out fighting with more campaign appearances and softball interviews. His interview with George Stephanopoulos of ABC included a great line about why the American people are not in favor of the various Democrat health care plans. Obama said it was because they “lost a sense of speaking directly to the American people about their what their core values are.” I guess we need to be told what our values are instead of deciding for ourselves. There has certainly been no lack of Obama telling us what he wants, and his campaigning on the various health care proposals was pretty non-stop. I guess we are just not thinking the way he wants us to. He needs to tell us what our core values SHOULD BE. Apparently, we cannot decide for ourselves. Once again, the problem is with us, not his policies.

Obama also started a new crusade of “populism” last week by talking about how he is fighting for job creation. During his campaign speech in Ohio last Friday, he even stated that he would fight for us against those who stand in his way of creating jobs for us. Who exactly is standing in his way of creating jobs? The republicans? Are they fighting to not create jobs? In what way? What are they proposing to stop job creation? They are mostly arguing how all the things that Obama has Well, if you are a company who is in the private sector, not owned by government done and is planning to do do not seem to be geared toward actual job creation. The stimulus package obviously did not work, and it was clear at the time that most of it was just pay offs to state and local governments as well as left wing interest groups. No surprise why this big spending bill did not create private sector jobs. It was mostly geared to creating public sector union jobs.

Simultaneously, Obama decided to shift the public’s anger toward the banks again. He wants to create a new tax just devoted to banks. He says that it is to have the banks pay back penalty funds for having borrowed money from the TARP program. The thing that goes unsaid is that virtually all of the banks have paid back their TARP loans WITH INTEREST. If they have completed their financial agreement with the government, why do they need to be punished further? Additionally, many of the big banks did not request TARP funds are were forced to take the funds. Some of them even stepped in to save other banks. Now, all of these banks too must be punished. Just like with energy companies, insurance companies, and other businesses, Obama likes to announce an attack on these “evil corporations,” playing on peoples’ emotions and anger in order to divert frustration away from him. If he is really bothered by the banking disaster that occurred, why is he a stalwart supporter of Ben Bernanke, the Fed chairman? Why does he not have a problem with all the bonuses from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the government banks that were at the center of the catastrophe?

Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, AIG, GM, and Chrysler are all companies that have taken a lot of taxpayer money from TARP, have not paid it back, and are now protected both financially and politically by the Democrats in government. As has become customary, Obama and the Democrats select those groups and companies that they consider to be allies in their cause and protect them. Likewise, they point out those who they want to demonize and attack them. How do you know if you are an ally or enemy?

Obama will protect you and fight for you if…

If you are a member of a union that has paid a lot of money to the Democrat party, you will be protected and favored. For example, int he health care bill, the unions negotiated a
stipulation that they would not have to pay the taxes on expensive health care plans that the rest of the population would have to pay. The United Auto Workers union was given significant partial ownership of GM and
Chrysler. These companies will not be demonized for needing bailouts. They will not even be criticized for not paying back the loans either.

Businesses that create private sector jobs will be demonized unless they pay off Obama and the Democrats for protection. For example, the big pharmaceutical companies were not targets of Obama in his health care promotion, because they paid a lot of money to Obamacare promotion nd supported it. On the other hand, the insurance companies did not support nor pay money to Obamacare promotion, so they become demonized.

It’s Chicago Mob Philosophy plain and simple. You ahve to pay and offer support to Obama to get his protection. If you don’t, you may need to be demonized, so he can get his agenda across and/or make himself look better tot he people.

For the past few weeks, the mantra of the government healthcare promoters has been “Health Insurance Reform.” Barack Obama, Nancy Pilosi, Harry Reed, Henry Waxman, and Barney Frank (the usual far-left suspects) have been demonizing health insurance companies and have been blaming the surge of disappointment from the American public with the Obamacare bills on “special interest groups.” Obama and Pilosi have been characterizing their plans to take over the healthcare system as fighting for the little guy against big special interest. Of course, the polls indicate that it is the majority of the American public that is against Obamacare. Does the majority of the American people work for the health insurance industry?

At the same time, the Democratic National committee has been mobilizing its union groups, including SEIU, NEA, UAW, and AARP on bus trips to town hall meetings to pressure congressmen to support whatever Obamacare bills come out of committee. This sounds more like the real “Astroturf” to me. As Nancy Pilosi characterizes anyone against the Democrats’ plans as “swastika bearing neo-Nazis,” the polls seem to indicate that the majority of the people in our country are apparently neo-Nazis because they do not support the Obamacare proposals.

Organizing for America, Barack Obama’s campaign fund-raising organization is now run out of the DNC and is staging town hall meetings and funding their union thugs to go to these meetings to look like they are actually int he majority of opinion instead of what the polls clearly indicate. So, where’s the real Astroturf? It’s amazing how the far-left is actually trying to get away with having their paid operatives fake the semblance of having the majority of the public in favor of Obama’s healthcare plans. No wonder his approval ratings are plummeting. How long will he be able to get away with his lies and propaganda?

Here, SEIU thugs wearing their purple union T-shirts are beating up a man outside of a town hall meeting. This reminds me of the kind of stuff that Chavez or Castro would organize. no wonder why these two dictators like Obama so much.

What is a Lobbyist?

Lobbyists are groups that are hired by companies, individuals, foundations, and groups that have a special interest that they want addressed by the government. The lobbyists then work on their behalf to try and convince members of government that the cause that they represent is something that would benefit the nation and should be given special consideration in law making. This is why they are controversial. Basically, they are paid money to influence politicians. While lobbyists are typically required to be registered so that they are known as lobbyists, anyone who has a law degree can work as a lobbyist without registering for some reason. This means that a lot of lobbyists are not officially known as such.

Good or Bad?

Well, this is the point, different lobbyists work for different issues and groups. It’s difficult to define whether or not they are good or bad because they work for diverse interests. For example, some lobbyists lobby on behalf of labor unions, agriculture, the environment, and foreign governments. Each one of those areas has a diversity of issues for people to draw their own opinion of. What might be a good cause for one person is not a good cause for another. The thing that must be remembered is that these lobbyists do have a strong influence on government above and beyond the average person. What is more dangerous is the fact that there are special interest groups that work as lobbying groups and get special favors from government, and little is known by the people about their actions.

The Lie

During both the primary and general election campaigns, Barack obama continually put down Hillary Clinton and John McCain for having former lobbyists working for their campaigns. He said that lobbyists and the special interest would not have a presence in his administration. This was an outright lie. Obama has 16+ former lobbyists in his administration so far, and there are still more positions to fill. He, of course, did not get into specifics about what interests the former lobbyists in his opponents’ campaigns worked for. Obama simply used the word “lobbyist” and “special interest” as buzz words to attack his opponents. Now, he runs an administration that is more beholden to special interest groups and political favors than any other in recent memory.

• UAW – During the recent bankruptcy of Chrysler, which the Obama administration did not let go through the normal bankruptcy preceding in court, but managed the bankruptcy on their own. This, first of all, does not appear to be legal. The administration over-stepped its authority. Barack Obama basically played arbitrator over the whole thing. Things finished up with Chrysler being owned 35% by the Federal government, 55% by the United Auto Workers Union, and 10% by Fiat, the Italian automaker. Obama put the UAW before all of the debt holders that held Chrysler debt, paying them pennies on the dollar and giving majority ownership to the UAW. These debt holders are average investment companies, many of which hold securities for our pensions, retirement, and investment portfolios. He muscled them out of the way to give special favors to the UAW, a big funder of his and other Democrats’ campaigns. This is paying favors to special interest, plain and simple. Additionally, it shows how Obama feels that he and his administration are above the law.

• UAW 2 – The same type of arrangement is being put forward for GM. The UAW is slated so far to own about 35% of the company and the Federal government is currently slated to own 72% of the company. Remember, Barack Obama fired the CEO of GM a month or so ago before the government even owned common stock int he company. Basically, the government did not have voting ownership int he company, but Barack Obama was still able to change the leadership like some sort of dictator who believes that he controls everything in the country. Once again, regular investors will get paid back pennies on the dollar for the debt that they invested in, and the UAW comes out with a large portion of ownership. Not only that, but the American people will have to pay for the pensions and benefits of the UAW during the time that it takes for GM to be able to afford it again. Another big pay off to the UAW.

• GE – GE, the company that owns a lot of different diverse companies also own NBC, CNBC, and MSNBC. During his rise to power, Obama was gifted propaganda-like campaign support from these networks and continues to receive their favorable reporting to this day. GE was paid back with a $140 billion bailout from the government that does not get a lot of attention. Additionally, GE was given a no-bid contract to run the medical database system that Obama is proposing as part of his socialized healthcare plan. Hmmm, the Democrats didn’t like the Halliburton contract from the Bush administration, but this is ok to pay out favors to their favorite corporate conglomerate. Additionally, GE is being awarded with the smart-grid plans for improving the electrical grid of the country. They are also being given contracts for the windmills as well. Basically, special itnerest pay offs to the company that works for the administration through their propagandist news networks.

• SEIU – Here’s another union that is getting special favors from the Obama administration. When California’s overwhelmingly Democratic legislature votred to reduce benefits of state employees due to the fact that the state is bankrupt, the Obama administration stepped in and said that they could not do that. In other words, Obama fought his own party against reducing the numbers or the benefits of SEIU members. This is because they raised a lot of money for him. Special favors for special interest.
• ACORN – This is the community organizer group that had election fraud in the last presidential election as well as many before. They also protest corporations and banks that do not give hand outs or special favors to their interests. Now, Obama has not only awarded them with stimulus money, but is putting them in charge of many aspects of the U.S. census. Hardly an un-biased group, ACORN is still under investigation from the FBI for election fraud in 3 states. Also, ACORN called in death threats to the AIG employees that got bonuses. They also protested out in front of their private homes. They are the brown-shirts of the Obama regime.

Conclusion

Barack Obama hands out political favors all the time to those who funded his campaign and continue to promote him through their propaganda. He is the poster-child of a tyrannical dictator. He feels that he is above the law and can do whatever he wants. And so far, we are letting him get away with it.

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.