Engineers back in charge at GM

True conservatives that subscribe to limited government did not support the Wall street bailout either. Personally, I also didn’t support the Iran war either. Saddam was clearly a sociopath, but Iran had not attacked us, threatened us, or interfered with us in any way. I don’t believe we have the right to invade a country and interfere in its internal affairs unless they’ve threatened us, attacked us, or pose a threat to our national security in an overt manner.

The comment that conservatives support the Wallstreet wealthy over the middle class is just plain wrong, and that as well as the accusation that conservatives use Faux News idioms to justify their statements is typical of the mudslinging that the left uses in lieu of facts. The fact is that it was never the intention of taxation to raise money to be used for bailouts, and a thorough reading of our founding documents and their creation shows a very clear intent to restrain any one branch of the (at that time newly formed) federal government, or even the three branches in unison, from assuming powers not allocated to it by the Constitution and Bill of Rights.

To the best I’ve been able to research, the Constitution has never been amended to allow the use of tax dollars for bailouts of private industry. And I contend that this practice is being used to buy voting blocks. King George III himself would bee stunned at how far out of control the Washington crowd has strayed. And this new practice of the administration choosing what laws to enforce, and even suing Arizona for creating laws that do nothing more than mandate enforcement of federal laws, is an absolute disgrace IMHO. It’s a violation of the oaths of office of everyone involved, from Obama to Eric Holder.

It wasn’t just the 8 Bush Administration years. It started, basically, in 1994 when interstate banking was expanded greatly, and was really bolstered in 2000 during the final months of the Clinton Administration when the Commodity Futures Trading Commission was prevented from regulating most OTC derivatives, including credit default swaps. Both had broad, bipartisan support. All our elected officials got us into this mess.

And Mountainbike, the market was not only unstable, there was no money market. There was absolutely no credit from anyone except the Federal government. Voting for TARP was one of the last bipartisan acts in Washington. Until last week’s House bill to fund the government for the next two years, that is.

Jt, I agree with you about the origin. A major factor was also the repeal of the Glass-Speilman Act (sp?) during the Clinton administration. That Act was passed at the end of the Great Depression to prevent the financial institutions from behaving in a manner that would create another one. If ever there was a single decision that sacrificed the working class in favor of the Wall Street crowd, that was it.

I maintain that the GM bailout had zero effect on the automobile market demand, and thus zero effect on the industry’s activity. All it did was allow a poor producer to not be displaced by more efficient producers. If anything, that would be a negative effect long term.

I agree wholeheartedly that the Glass-Steagall Act should never have been repealed.
Unfortunately, Senator Phil Gramm had very persuasive powers when he convinced a majority of the Senate (and, later, The House) to vote to repeal Glass-Steagall. And, we have all seen the disasterous consequences of this bill, which was supported by those who stood to gain from the further enriching of the large banks in this country.

Incidentally, the “Honorable” Mr. Gramm was the chief advisor on economics to Mitt Romney during the last presidential campaign, and it is widely believed that he would have been Mitt’s Secretary of The Treasury if Romney had been elected. Talk about dodging a bullet…

Hey, I don’t want to dodge the Bullitt…

Mountainbike, it looks to me that you are changing your requirements concerning GM. I suspect that anything the did would have incited ire in you.

You do realize Saddam Hussein was the leader of Iraq, not Iran, right?

You were just testing us, I suppose

Anyways, I agree with you that Iraq was absolutely no threat to the US. They obviously were a threat to some other countries, but NOT the US

“You do realize Saddam Hussein was the leader of Iraq, not Iran, right?”

There is one theory–unconfirmed, of course–that GWB–whose language and comprehension problems were legendary–may just have confused Iran and Iraq when he and his minions repeatedly insisted that a connection had to be found between the 9/11 attacks and Iraq. When he and his minions were told that there was no connection between Iraq–which was a secular Islamic country–and these fundamentalist-inspired Islamic attacks, his administration insisted that there HAD to be a connection to Iraq.

Regarding his legendary language and comprehension issues, more than one of his aides later reported that after an informational session on the historic differences between Shiites and Sunnis, GWB’s comment was, “I thought that they were Muslims”. Even with my experience teaching Special Education students, I am appalled that someone with this little ability to comprehend information was ever put in charge of our Executive Branch.

Was GWB really this dense, and did his inability to comprehend information lead to the deaths of thousands of our troops, and the unnecessary squandering of $800 billion-$1 trillion on a totally invalid exercise?

Whether that insistence was a result of GWB’s language and comprehension problems, or because of some other mysterious issues for his administration, the bottom line is that we went to war with Iraq–a country that had no connection to the 9/11 attacks. Meanwhile, any effort to root-out the real perpetrators, who were then residing in Afghanistan and Pakistan, was sidelined in order to carry out the attack on Iraq.

The bottom line is that WE spent somewhere between $800 billion and $1 trillion on an Iraq war that never had any strategic importance for the US. And, in addition to that $800 billion-$1 trillion (that was totally UNfunded)–translation: GWB put it on a virtual credit card–the toll of thousands of US soldiers who were lost in that unnecessary experiment is truly tragic.

Speaking of Iran vs Iraq, the irony (if such a sad debacle as Iraq can be called ironic) is that the arms sanctions against Iraq worked so well that Saddam basically had to pretend to have bad stuff in order to keep his neighbors (Iran) from knowing how weak he really was. And his pretending, plus artful lies from Iraqi “sources” like Curveball who wanted Saddam gone, gave Rumsfeld et al enough of an excuse to invade anyway. Even though their sanctions were actually working.

OK, back to GM…

I do realize that Saddam was the leader of Iraq and not Iran. That was a simple typo on my part. Mea Culpa. My brain said Iraq and my fingers typed Iran.

Jt, I don’t understand your statement. My ire is with the feds re: the bailout, not with GM. My problem is with the politicians that gave GM the money, not with GM for accepting it. GM did not take the money on false pretenses.

For the record, while I may prefer Toyotas for myself I have nothing against GM as a company. I wish them all the best, always have. I’d like to see them succeed. But that doesn’t mean I want someone giving them my money if they DO screw the pooch! One division in particular, Cadillac, has done a phenominal job in returning their brand to prominence, and I applaud them for doing so. It pains me to see Lincoln, who was also one of the finest luxury car manufacturers in the world, struggling to find the way back.

Iran is a whole 'nother story. Something tells me our alliance with Egypt is in jeopardy. And Putin is laughing hysterically.

@VDCdriver–another theory is that when GHWBush sent troops in to push Saddam Hussein;s forces out of Kuwait, Saddam Hussein put out a contract on GHWB. GWB therefore decided to invade Iraq, even though his father was against it.
Whatever the reason, I believe that going into Iraq was foolish. The Iraq forces beat a hasty retreat out of Kuwait when the U.S. intervened and Saddam Hussein had limited weapons to stop the U.S.
I live in east central Indiana in an area where we have the closing of big factories that manufactured auto parts. The effect has been devastating on the communities where the plants were located. Although the factories in my area are gone, I don’t mind having my tax dollars spent to save jobs in other areas. It is sad for me to drive past a closed factory on Thursday and see the large number of people seeking assistance from a food bank. The two high schools in my community have had to be consolidated to one school. The same thing happened in the neighboring community. When a family owns a home that can’t be sold because there is no demand, we’ve seen houses abandoned and foreclosures. I would rather see my tax dollars go to help preserve jobs than to go for a needless war in Iraq.
By contrast, my son lives in central Tennessee where Nissan has a big plant. The plant keeps expanding and adding more workers. My son is thinking about selling his house as he wants to return to graduate school and believes his house will sell quickly.

The comment that conservatives support the Wallstreet wealthy over the middle class is just plain wrong, and that as well as the accusation that conservatives use Faux News idioms to justify their statements is typical of the mudslinging that the left uses in lieu of facts.

While I agree that TRUE conservatism is not for the wealthy. But I find many of them fall into 2 categories.

  1. Some ARE very much pushing an agenda that ONLY is good for the rich and super-rich. They are against almost anything that will allow someone of meager means make something of themselves. I will admit I think this group is small…but they are vocal and have a lot of money. The Koch brothers and the MILLIONS they put into starting and funding the Tea-party…and then groups like the Heritage foundation are prime examples

  2. There are still a lot of conservatives clinging onto Trickle-down economics…even when the facts hit them in the face it doesn’t work…never has worked…and never will work.

I think the vast majority of conservatives are good hard working individuals who don’t fall into those two categories. But they aren’t heard that often and when they are…people like Rush Limbaugh call them Liberals.

“I thought they were Muslims”

That’s like putting Greek Orthodox and Catholic in the same basket. While I may be simplifying it, I was led to believe that the Orthodox can’t stand the pope, and everything he stands for. I’m talking about the office of pope, not a particular individual.

And, unless I’m mistaken, the Orthodox and Catholic countries have very different cultures.

You need only look at the Ryan budget which eliminates the capital gains tax, privatizes as much as possible SS and Medicare so vouches paid by tax payers will go into “for profit” insurance companies to insure the elderly and SS assets will be deminished by a portion going into Wallstreet. It that isn’t reverse Robin Hood, taking from the working poor and the middle class to feed the coffers of the rich, what is.
Absolutely, conservatives support Wallstreet over the middle class. And making statements like " the bailout was done to gain the support of the unions" when conservatives also supported it at the time is an example of “Faux News idioms”

Look at the Ryan budget and listen to the number of times Faux News connects Unions to just about everything that goes wrong from the deficit (ie bailout) to causing lost wages, recession, you name it. It’s hard to get through a news night without them dissing Unions or blaming them for something. Oh, in response, to the Ryan budget, you’ll get something like “trickle down economics” as being good for the middle class. Well it hasn’t been when put into practice and it never will be…anything but another Faux News idiom; and there are a lot of them. It’s like calling someone a mud slinger when he throws the truth at a mudslinger (Faux News).

The Ryan Budget… The one that help cost Romney an election…it’s what conservatives in general stand for and it’s in their platform. Also, practices like redistricting to fill the house with tea party members and restricting voting rights doesn’t help their brand either.

Glass Steagall…ahah, this is one of the reasons why I’m an independent !
One of ideas behind eliminating the restriction under Clinton to banking activities was to help keep interest rates down and make home ownership possible for more Americans. Allowing banks to be less restricted in their investments allowed them to realize more profit outside of their banking activities; a noble thought.

At the same time, the oversight of the Fed was expanded to prevent improper use in unwise investments of depositor’s funds. This came to light when Greenspan was being grilled by congress. Greenspan admitted he didn’t do his job…after the fact. The guy walked away from guilt, scot free. I feel He was personally a very big player in this debacle. He was given the authority and the responsibility, and didn’t use it.

This is solely my opinion but, We will never know why he isn’t held responsible for first being a part of this reprehensible practice and later denying it under oath then making a public admission later…I sat and listen to him in utter amazement watching the live hearings and later read the article of admission. The guy was a lacky…that’s why he was every president’s appointment, Rep or Dem and had a free " get out of trouble card" to be used anytime.

I just hope at some point we can get away from the liberal conservative labels where everyone has to be pigeon holed into having ALL of the same views in lock step. I have both conservative and liberal views depending on the subject and have voted both ways, and if I could recind my last vote I certainly would. I’m interested in what is good for the long term health of the country. Saving the auto industry was good for the country.

Outside of saving both direct and indirect jobs, it is important to not lose the infrastructure like we have in electronics over the past 20 years. We even have to buy parts for our military from Japan. Very dangerous in my view. Friends today can be enemies tomorrow, or have we learned nothing in the past century? And like I said if you think Japan and China are more efficient and they should rule, do you really think their governments are not providing the unfair edge to them? Do you think they even honor our patents or just steal the designs we have worked and paid for?

I agree with Capri though, let’s move on. We are split down the middle, half for and half against and somehow we have to govern.

Orthodox Christians don’t hate the Pope, but the head so their church is the Bishop in Constantinople. A friend at work grew up I the Ukrainian Orthodox Church and married a Roman Catholic man. She told me that the main difference in the services is the language, but otherwise, they are almost identical. Any hatred is politically derived, IMO.

As we know, it’s not always so easy to separate religion and politics

Look at the US, if you need an example

Ronald Reagan had been rumored to remark during a frustrating trip to the Middle East: “Why can’t those Jews and Arabs live together peacefully like good Christians?”.

Ah yes, Istanbul. Nice place and people once you get used to the call to prayers blaring over the loud speakers all over town five times a day. To be inclusive I think they should play Martin Luther music too.

Of course its a rats nest. Tribalism, various sects of religions, warfare going back a thousand years, but . . . when you try to introduce religious views into the political system, the result is catastrophic and smothering. Whether you like women drivers or not, they do have a right to drive and should not be forced to cover their heads, and girls should be educated the same as boys. Some of these things we cannot compromise on.

Dag, the Ryan plan wasn’t why the Republicans lost. The entire Republican campaign was a disaster…and Mitt Romney was a really bad horse to bet on. The moment Mitt Romney was nominated I feared the election was lost. He simply is not a good candidate.