You lie!

This was originally posted back in May of this year but as promised, we are re-posting it as it is a tremendous representation of the outrageously callous disregard for the truth and transparency held by the regime as well as a callous disregard for the American people.






So, General Motors and its folksy CEO, Ed Whitacre, have paid off GM's TARP bailout money? What an incredible turnaround. If by "turnaround", though, you mean paying off your Visa card debt with your Mastercard.

All evidence points to the fact that GM is using a separate TARP line of credit to pay off its primary TARP debt.

During an April 20 hearing on Capital Hill, Sen. Tom Carper, (D-Del.) asked some pointed questions of Neil Barofsky, the “special watch dog” on the Wall Street Bailout, aka, TARP.

It’s good news in that they’re reducing their debt,” Barofsky said of the accelerated GM payments, “but they’re doing it by taking other available TARP money.”…

“It sounds like it’s kind of like taking money out of one pocket and putting in the other,” said Carper, who got a nod of agreement from Barofsky.

“The way that payment is going to be made is by drawing down on an equity facility of other TARP money.”

Senator Charles Grassley (R-Iowa) went off on the Obama administration and the TARP shell game in a letter sent to two-time tax cheat and tax collector-in-chief, Tim Geithner using Barofsky's testimony to level the credible claim that GM was not using GM earnings to pay off TARP debt but rather TARP funds from an escrow account at Treasury to make the debt repayments.

From the letter:

When these criticisms were put to GM’s Vice Chairman Stephen Girsky in a television interview yesterday, he admitted that the criticisms were valid:

Question: Are you just paying the government back with government money?

Mr. Girsky: Well listen, that is in effect true, but a year ago nobody thought we’d be able to pay this back.

Unbelievable. Dude actually wants some sort of recognition that GM was able to pay off tax payer-funded debt with... tax payer funds.

This is the first acknowledgement that we are aware of a shadow TARP. As if the publicly-known TARP wasn't bad enough there is a subterranean TARP that is backing the initial TARP.

This simply re-enforces our sentiment that we will never in our lives purchase a GM or Chrysler product. These people are straight-up gangsters. There is no other word to describe them and their actions to deliberately deceive and forcibly misuse U.S. tax payer dollars.

We believe this instance provides sufficient cover to get your hate on.

H/T: Hot Air


(UPDATE #1): This time, we lie! Much like GM's false claim that they have paid off its TARP debt with actual earnings, there is no actual update.

We originally posted this over the weekend, when readership is down a bit but we wanted to resurrect it during the week to highlight the sheer audacity of General Motors. The federal government is entirely complicit in what we can only tag as gangster capitalism. The government takeover and bankruptcy proceedings that screwed over the secured creditors in favor of the labor unions was executed in a thuggish manner and now the GM/federal government partnership openly displays their contempt for the American public by running an ad during the NBA playoffs patting itself on the back for a job well done.

We may re-run this post again next week. And the week after that. Whatever we have to do to ensure that we never forget what little regard this administration has for your interests and your tax dollars.

Frank Rich, Paul Krugman and the rest of the intelligentsia of this country may disagree with the politics of those who have opposed the bailouts but that they cannot at least understand where this anger may be coming from, again, speaks to a widening disconnect in this country between the taste-makers and those who are actually footing the bill for this fiasco.


(UPDATE #2): Reason TV's Nick Gillespie takes about as much time to explain the shell game that is General Motor's "paying off" its TARP debt as the GM commercial.




Again, the sheer gall that Government Motors has in running this outright lie will compel us to update this regularly or repost from time to time whether or not there is an actual update.





(UPDATE #3): The nation's paper of record is now on the beat.

AS we inch closer to a clearer understanding of the products and practices that unleashed the credit crisis of 2008, it’s becoming apparent that those seeking the whole truth are still outnumbered by those aiming to obscure it. This is the case not only on Wall Street but also in Washington.

Truth seekers the nation over, therefore, are indebted to Senator Charles E. Grassley, Republican of Iowa, who in recent days uncovered what he called a government-enabled “TARP money shuffle.” It relates to General Motors, which on April 21 paid the balance of its $6.7 billion loan under the Troubled Asset Relief Program.

G.M. trumpeted its escape from the program as evidence that it had turned the corner in its operations. “G.M. is able to repay the taxpayers in full, with interest, ahead of schedule, because more customers are buying vehicles like the Chevrolet Malibu and Buick LaCrosse,” boasted Edward E. Whitacre Jr., its chief executive.

G.M. also crowed about its loan repayment in a national television ad and the United States Treasury also marked the moment with a press release: “We are encouraged that G.M. has repaid its debt well ahead of schedule and confident that the company is on a strong path to viability,” said Timothy F. Geithner, the Treasury secretary.

Taxpayers are naturally eager for news about bailout repayments. But what neither G.M. nor the Treasury disclosed was that the company simply used other funds held by the Treasury to pay off its original loan.

The CBO estimates we will lose about $30 billion on the GM bailout. And in the article, GM officials are outrageously outraged that anybody would suspect that they are doing anything untoward with taxpayer money. Not that they are specifically denying doing anything untoward.

Greg Martin, a G.M. spokesman, said the company had made no misrepresentations about its repayment. “The bottom line is, our strong business performance has put us in the position that we don’t need these funds,” he said, referring to the cash in the escrow account. “G.M. is performing much better than anyone expected and that does represent a significant milestone for the company.”

And Ron Bloom, senior adviser to Mr. Geithner, bristled at Mr. Grassley’s criticism. “The Treasury Department has tried to be as straight as humanly possible,” he said in an interview. “We have never not been clear about exactly what we paid, exactly the terms of the investment. I’m finding it hard to find anyone obfuscating about this.”

(italics, ours)

They don't need the (TARP) funds... except that they need the funds to pay off the TARP debt.

We'll spare you the righteous indignation this time around because it's all there in black and white. A nice big F-you from General Motors leadership to the U.S. taxpayers.

And you all thought Enron was bad.

Stupaked in Ohio and Pennsylvania

B-Daddy here. Stupaked seems to have re-entered the political narrative. Dean has a regular series called Nancy's Nuances: a journey of discovery, the latest entry is in the post below. When Bart Stupak and "pro-life" Democrats cut the deal that passed Obamacare in the House, on mere assurances that a federal executive order would prevent tax dollars from subsidizing abortions, a new word entered our political lexicon, Stupaked. As in:

"Dude, I cannot believe you let that used car salesman play you like that. Now, you’re stuck with this lemon. You got totally Stupaked.”

Now Democrat congressmcritters in generally pro-life districts are crying over their spilled milk, as pro-life groups are airing ads that correctly point out that they voted for the biggest expansion of federal funding of abortion evah. Of course, they are crying like babies to their lawyers to get the ads pulled.

From Ohio:

Rep. Steve Driehaus (D-West Price Hill) has filed a complaint with the Ohio Elections Commission against anti-abortion group Susan B. Anthony List.

The complaint stems from the group attempting to erect four billboards blasting the Congressman for his vote on the health care bill, accusing him of voting for “tax-payer funded abortion.”

From Pennsylvania:

Attorneys for Democrat U.S. Rep. Kathy Dahlkemper's campaign want four Erie radio stations to pull an ad by an anti-abortion group that contends her vote for health care reform resulted in "the largest expansion of taxpayer-funded abortions ever."

Americans United for Life stands by the ad, saying the freshman lawmaker voted to pass a final version of the bill that omitted key safeguards to prevent federal funding of abortions.

Why aren't they proud of their votes? And look at this article to see the specific mechanisms under which the subsidy flows to insurance plans that cover abortions.

Pete Stark is really glad you are here

This video clip is a pull from our running series, Nancy's Nuances: a journey of discovery and remains one of our favorites because it represents the best take-down of ObamaCare that what we have heard and from what we can tell it's from not a pundit, commentator or another politician but a regular everyday citizen.

She hits on not only the compulsory aspect of ObamaCare but something on the other side of the equation that has not been brought up nearly enough and that is if you legislate a good or service as a right out of thin air, then you are confiscating, perhaps against their will, the those goods and services from the providers.

How, then, is this confiscation not a form of economic slavery?

We love how the young lady speaks slowly and enunciates all her big words as if talking to a 3 yr. old because that represents the level of understanding of the constitution held by Representative Pete Stark (D-CA) as he will demonstrate in his own words (with apologies to all 3 yr. olds out there).






Stark sneering "I'm glad you're here to save it (the country)" puts a cherry on top of this country class vs. ruling class smack-down.


If there is one video that represents the constitutional dubious-ness of ObamaCare as well as the yawning gap between the public and our elected representatives and how it is they perceive us, this would be the one. Please pass along as you see fit.

About that cost curve....

(This post has been bumped from a scheduled post to real-time as the addendum at the bottom relates directly to late-breaking matters with respect to ObamaCare and McDonald's)


One of the main selling points in pushing ObamaCare was that it would bend the cost curve downward. That notion just months after ObamaCare's passage looks to be going down in a flaming wreck across the board and across the nation.

Despite assurances from the Obama administration that the recently signed healthcare reform law would save Americans money, benefit professionals are seeing huge medical premium hikes and decreased benefits.

Employers and ultimately taxpayers could get sticker shock as plans companies begin to renew their medical benefits packages for 2011.

A Manhattan health benefits consultant says insurance companies are telling employers they will pay have to pay much more in 2011 -- and for reduced coverage.

"It should be noted that premium increases were in excess of 30 percent over the previous year," said Barbara Brody of Barbara A. Brody & Associates. Brody said average rate increases next year for Manhattan-based firms she advises could be as high as "67 percent but will average 30 percent."

That's because insurance companies, faced with higher costs after the passage of a giant health reform measure, plan to pass most of the costs onto consumers, according to several industry observers.

Of course, this isn't rocket science. When you dump 30 million more people onto the healthcare roles and you legislate that the health insurance providers can no longer deny people with pre-existing benefits, that is certainly going to cost more and health insurers, with profit margins in the 2 to 6% range simply cannot absorb that and will pass it along to its customers in the form of higher premiums. That's the way things work in the real world as opposed to the Harvard faculty lounge.

But perhaps Team O knew this but completely miscalculated how soon the market reaction would occur, as in, they did not anticipate this reaction until after the mid-terms.

Just this week McDonald's said it may drop its health-care plan for 30,000 employees unless it gets a waiver on the annual coverage.

However, a spokesman for the Obama administration says the benefits of the recently signed Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, designed in part to provide health insurance to tens of millions of Americans without coverage, will be phased in over the next decade.

Color us confused. McDonald's is threatening to drop coverage for these low-end wage-earners precisely because of the additional coverage they will be forced to provide their employees that will be phased in over the next decade. This concept is lost on either the writer of the article or Team O.

And this business with McDonald's should serve as a warning. What was already the most politicized piece of legislation in recent history what with its kickbacks and special deals and exemptions will become only more so now that businesses will lobby and lobby hard to get themselves exempted from the onerous provisions of ObamaCare once they figure out what is coming their way.

We suppose this was what was meant when they told us that we needed to pass the bill now so we can "fix it" and make it better in the future.





(Addendum #1): And as if on cue...

Nearly a million workers won't get a consumer protection in the U.S. health reform law meant to cap insurance costs because the government exempted their employers.
Thirty companies and organizations, including McDonald's (MCD) and Jack in the Box (JACK), won't be required to raise the minimum annual benefit included in low-cost health plans, which are often used to cover part-time or low-wage employees.

The Department of Health and Human Services, which provided a list of exemptions, said it granted waivers in late September so workers with such plans wouldn't lose coverage from employers who might choose instead to drop health insurance altogether.

Without waivers, companies would have had to provide a minimum of $750,000 in coverage next year, increasing to $1.25 million in 2012, $2 million in 2013 and unlimited in 2014.

An alternate to the very first sentence of the news item would be: "Nearly a million workers won't get dumped from their companies' health plans as those companies have been exempted from provisions levied upon them by ObamaCare that otherwise would be too onerous."

"The big political issue here is the president promised no one would lose the coverage they've got," says Robert Laszewski, chief executive officer of consulting company Health Policy and Strategy Associates. "Here we are a month before the election, and these companies represent 1 million people who would lose the coverage they've got."

The United Agricultural Benefit Trust, the California-based cooperative that offers coverage to farm workers, was allowed to exempt 17,347 people. San Diego-based Jack in the Box's waiver is for 1,130 workers, while McDonald's asked to excuse 115,000.

Bingo! ObamaCare is not about health care. It never has been - it is and will continue for ever more to be about politics and the wielding of political muscle. What is it about the above that indicates anything other?

And what about the self-employed, individuals, students and small businesses that purchase similar low premium/low benefits plans that McDonald's does? Will they be exempted as well? Please. They won't because they have no juice up on the Hill. This is precisely what we were talking about when we said the most politicized piece of legislation ever will become even more politicized.

Mark it down: As Laszewski alluded to above, the regime will spin this as some sort of victory for the little guy working for the big slavish corporations. As if, through their benevolence they have let the workers keep the health care plan they already have.

This abortion is a full 3-4 years away from full implementation and already the jockeying, greasing and currying of favors has begun.


(Addendum #2): Capt. Ed adds:

The Rule of Law depends on an environment with clear regulation and unbiased enforcement. From the start, ObamaCare lacked any clarity in regulation. Congress filled the bill with the phrase “The Secretary shall determine” in place of establishing rules and regulations for the massive regulatory regime Congress created. Now, the White House has added arbitrary enforcement to uncertain regulation and opaque processes. This is not the Rule of Law, but the Whim of Autocracy.

To which commenter Washingtons Wake responds:

This is an example of the crushing hand of tyranny – not whim of autocracy

Exit question(s): How deliciously perverse would it be for tea partiers to protest Jack in the Box headquarters here in San Diego for not offering all their workers all the benefits of ObamaCare as so graciously bestowed upon us by our minders in the regime? After all, isn't it about equality?

Not so random thought from the road

... and where we heap effusive praise upon the government... in a manner of speaking...



Heavy thunder showers across central and southern Utah and the four corners region, including a couple of tornado touchdowns in northern Arizona, is threatening our road trip but there is some collateral benefit to this inclement weather which we will share later.




One of the things promised by Porkulus was that they would spend between $2 and $4 billion on infrastructure upgrades in our National Park system of which we were assured was in dire need (this was in addition to radio spots begging for donations to the NPS for the same reason). Being frequent visitors to various sites of this nation's best idea, we were skeptical as the eye test simply did not warrant this outlay. Sure, an upgrade here and there, but upwards of $4 billion worth?

After giving it some thought, we felt that perhaps the easiest and most accurate way to assess the infrastructural health of an individual national park would be to grade what is probably the most representative feature of the efficiency and aesthetics of any publicly-held land and that would be...


.... the block house.







After a random sampling of 4 outhouses inside Canyonlands National Park, let's look at the scores.


Lighting: With plenty of windows for natural lighting, even with the stormy/overcast conditions: Good

Cleanliness: Probably the most important factor: Excellent

Quantity/Availability: Adequate

Provisioning: Eight rolls of TP good enough for you?: Again, Excellent.

And bonus points for each one being outfitted with an anti-bacterial (scented!) gel dispenser.



And let's all bear in mind that Canyonlands NP, located where it is in southeastern Utah is, by definition, remote.

In all seriousness, if the overall condition of the park infrastructure (visitor center, road conditions, camp site maintenance, condition of hiking trails, etc.) of Canyonlands NP is to be taken as an example, then our skepticism is only confirmed.

And if the National Park Service is truly operating under budget, then they should be held up as an example of a federal agency that is doing a masterful job with limited resources.

Overall, the Park Service does an outstanding job with balancing the desires of the public with respect to access on one hand and on the other, not turning our park system into a paved, four-lane, amusement park.

A Bravo-Zulu to the policy-makers and men and women in uniform of the U.S. National Park Service.





Oh, and those collateral benefits to crappy weather? This is what we were treated to traveling west on I-70 and which set north of the highway after a squall blew threw.







Needless to say, this picture does not do justice to this God-send.

County Road 59 and a naming contest

After traveling through the high desert farming region of the Hopi Nation Reservation in northeast Arizona, we needed to get back to Kayenta, AZ, the gateway to Monument Valley. There was an unmarked road on our Rand-McNally Atlas off of U.S. 191 that turned out to be County Road 59 and it did not disappoint.





















And now for our naming contest...

these dudes showed up about half-way through our trek from Many Farms to Kayenta.


















Our working title so-to-speak will be "Grumpy Norsemen" but we will submit any and all worthy submissions to the Navajo County fathers for their consideration.


P.S. If photos of the Norsemen and other formations are a bit sketchy that owes to them being taken on the fly from the hoopdie.

Battling with a semi and an RV for lead dog position on a remote and undulating single-lane highway was not to be sacrificed by stopping and getting out to take the pictures.

Fringe journalism

We originally posted this article back in March of this year. The sentiment still holds true, though the approval numbers we site for the tea party have improved and those of Congress have plummeted in the meantime.


When you are a former liberal columnist like Frank Rich and you have painted yourself into an ideological corner by defending the completely illiberal and illegitimate piece of legislation like ObamaCare, there is no defending its merits beyond lashing out and smearing those who have had the temerity to object and object strongly in a constitutionally-approved fashion.

That a tsunami of anger is gathering today is illogical, given that what the right calls “Obamacare” is less provocative than either the Civil Rights Act of 1964 or Medicare, an epic entitlement that actually did precipitate a government takeover of a sizable chunk of American health care. But the explanation is plain: the health care bill is not the main source of this anger and never has been. It’s merely a handy excuse. The real source of the over-the-top rage of 2010 is the same kind of national existential reordering that roiled America in 1964.

We'll spare you the balance of the sickening article but we will point out that reading Rich's tripe, one gets the feeling that he really, really is hoping for an honest-to-god racial incident to confirm and advance his agenda.

Rich likens what he perceives as hysterical opposition to ObamaCare to that towards Medicare and Social Security when those two programs' respective legislation were being passed. Perhaps Rich didn't get the memo but Social Security is running a deficit and Medicare is going broke and the demographic truth of the matter is that they are both completely unsustainable without a radical restructuring of both programs. This is fact. The objectors to both programs perhaps knew something back then that Rich cannot even acknowledge today.

Rich also refuses to acknowledge the completely unfounded nature of the charges of racism that occurred on Capitol Hill last Sunday by launching into his tea partiers = racist meme by invoking the Civil Rights Bill.

After reading Rich's article you really start wondering who's out-of-touch and who's representative of the fringe in American politics and society.

In official Washington, some consider the Tea Party movement a fringe element in society, but voters across the nation feel closer to the Tea Party movement than they do to Congress.

The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 52% of U.S. voters believe the average member of the Tea Party movement has a better understanding of the issues facing America today than the average member of Congress. Only 30% believe that those in Congress have a better understanding of the key issues facing the nation.

When it comes to those issues, 47% think that their own political views are closer to those of the average Tea Party member than to the views of the average member of Congress. On this point, 26% feel closer to Congress.

Finally, 46% of voters say that the average Tea Party member is more ethical than the average member of Congress. Twenty-seven percent (27%) say that the average member of Congress is more ethical.

That Frank Rich would even approach those generous numbers granted to Congress.

We will give Rich for credit for one thing though: the title of his putrid column is "The Rage Is Not About Health Care" and he is exactly right because ObamaCare itself is not about health care let alone reforming the American system. One doesn't need 3,200 pages (combining the Senate bill and the reconciliation bill) to
legislate coverage for 3o million unisured Americans and prohibit health insurance companies from denying coverage to people with pre-existing conditions, the two items proponents will tell you this law is all about.

We all saw the formation of this legislation (actually we didn't, and that's the problem) and we are beginning to learn what all is entailed within the bill. If Frank Rich were an honest journalist instead of just a deluded water-carrier, though he may still disagree, he would understand the why of the rage.

Not so random thought of the day

Tensions between President Obama and his supporters tore into the open this week as never before, signifying a real and developing fracturing of his party. Mr. Obama, in an interview in Rolling Stone, aimed fire at those abandoning him: "It is inexcusable for any Democrat or progressive right now to stand on the sidelines in this midterm election." The Democratic base "sitting on their hands complaining" is "just irresponsible. . . . We have to get folks off the sidelines. People need to shake off this lethargy, people need to buck up. Bringing about change is hard—that's what I said during the campaign. . . . But if people now want to take their ball and go home, that tells me folks weren't serious in the first place."

Let's take this by the numbers:

1. A nationalization of health care in America

2. A hostile take-over of two of three domestic auto manufacturers

3. A continuation of Bailout Nation started under President Bush

4. A raft of Keynesian gimmickry including programs to keep people in their homes they can't afford and to keep people out of perfectly fine-operating vehicles which only served to distort the new car market and damage the used car market as well as charitable donations.

5. And how could we ever forget the $800 billion Porkulus that represents the quintessential in Keynesian statism that did nothing to put people back to work nor stimulate the economy.

6. All the above is just part of the wracking up of massive amounts of debt that despite whatever hocus-pocus Paul Krugman is peddling, we cannot afford and are simply pawning-off to future generations.


All that in not even 2 years! And the lefty base of the Democratic party is still dejected?


Remember this next time you hear of an extremist element that is allegedly splintering apart and rendering irrelevant a particular American political party.

Alamosa, Colorado

home of:

Adams St. College and the San Luis Valley Brewing Co.












A pint of the Grande River IPA




As for the beer and the fare there, we will not ever speak ill of any of our gracious hosts, so let's just say that for 3 straight years, we've brought the head brew master a bomber of a San Diego beer hoping he would take a hint.





We don't always stay at motels on road trips, but when we do we prefer the Lamplighter.

Strange business

From Reason.tv:



For an industry that absolutely obsesses over the box office and the bottom line, Hollywood sure does have an odd view of capitalism.

Is it self-loathing? Or is it a peculiar statist disorder that sees its own profiteering as somehow more pure than other capitalist endeavors. Who knows?

Just keep making those movies, guys and maybe one of these days we'll get around to enduring the soul-crushing experience of the multiplex to watch one.

The Front Range and the Western Slope belong to this guy (UPDATED!)

(please scroll down for update)

Up over the Rockies we couldn't pull in much on the radio. Both ESPN Radio and Rush were fading in and out and/or were too full of static too tolerate but something called Progressive Radio out of Boulder (natch) was coming in loud and clear.

We needed only to listen to Ed Schultz's program (of which Dennis Miller claims is broadcast from Teddy Roosevelt's nostril in South Dakota) for 5 minutes to be informed of the following:


"Righties are stupid"

Nothing like insulting those who might just be dropping by out of courtesy or lack of other audible options on the dial.


"The Right Wing wants to destroy public education"

We'll settle for "reform" but ol' Ed didn't get the memo from the President about campaigning on fear.


"The Democrats will keep both the House and the Senate"

They can have the Senate - we just want a solid filibuster-utilizing minority there. Not the party of "No", the party of "Hell No".

And delusions of holding onto the House aside, he seemed to base this upon "the energy" he felt at that sparsely attended astro-turfed, lefty-palooza "One Nation Working Together" at which he was a speaker.



But the best was an exchange he had with a union longshoreman from the Philly area who claimed he was about to be out of a job because Del Monte was going open shop.

During the exchange while the caller was laying out the story about Del Monte and negotiations with the unions, Schultz interrupted, saying, "OK, now who is this Steve Dore guy?"

Caller: "That would be stevedore"

Clueless Ed: "What's that?"

Caller: "Those are the guys that do the loading and unloading of trucks and ships."

Stupendously Clueless Ed: "Oh."


Steve Freaking Dore

May Gaia strike us down right here in Fruita, CO if that exchange did not go down.

Ed Schultz, man of the working man and unions and public education and probably a bunch of other stuff if you asked him, could not even identify or recognize one of the most heavily unionized professions on the face of the planet.

As we said, all that in 5 minutes. And with that, it took only that amount of time to figure out why it is that lib-talk never quite caught on here in America: their most prominent hosts are about as sharp as a bag of wet mice.

Steve Dore.... Steve Dore!




P.S. We were able to pick up an oldies station for a brief while which was playing the following song and which serves as a constant reminder that no matter how much of a nit-wit one may be (and you know which one we are talking about), they may have also been making some great music back in the day.








(UPDATE #1): Hate to break up this stroll down Carnaby Street but we found some footage of Stupendously Clueless Ed at the non-partisan event this past weekend at the Mall in D.C. being non-partisan by giving this totally non-partisan speech.




"...fight the forces of evil in this country... the conservatives of this country.."





That's right... evil. Now, embrace your dark side, America.