Tales from Bailout Nation Pt. XXVI (UPDATED)

(please scroll down to bottom of post for update. Thanks.)

Now, would these be jobs created or saved?

The Treasury Department encouraged automakers seeking TARP funds to rapidly close their dealerships, even though the plan contributed no specific savings to the companies and caused job losses at a time of mounting unemployment, according to a scathing new audit published Monday.

The report focuses on the plans by Chrysler LLC and General Motors Corp. to rapidly reduce their number of dealerships by about 25 percent each, and the role that Treasury played in encouraging the automakers to do so quickly instead of over the course of five years.

The audit was prepared by Neil Barofsky, a former federal prosecutor who now serves as special inspector general for the $700 billion Troubled Asset Relief Program.
Chrysler eliminated 789 dealerships in June 2009, and GM plans to wind down 1,454 dealerships by October of this year. The rationale behind those moves was that the old dealership network was too big, and that by closing some of the dealerships, the remaining ones would be more profitable and better positioned to re-invest in their businesses.

Chrysler and GM , part of the $81 billion auto industry bailout, were told by Treasury that their plans to spread out those closures was not acceptable, largely because the agency thought that the companies should take advantage of their bankruptcies and close their dealerships as quickly as possible, to avoid state franchise laws that would have made the gradual closing more difficult and more costly.

But Barofsky's report said that Treasury should have taken further steps to ensure that the speedy closures were truly necessary to save the automakers. It added that the agency should have considered whether the benefits to Chrysler and GM outweighed the cost to the economy of potentially tens of thousands of job losses.

And later from same article:

The report said the accelerated closures were encouraged even though they afforded no particular cost savings to the automakers and instead provided "amorphous" benefits, such as reduced incentive payments to dealerships and better customer service at the surviving sales outlets. Estimates of how much the closing would save the automakers were only developed after the decision to close them had been made.

The report also reveals that there wasn't widespread agreement on the plan. Some experts consulted by Treasury's auto team noted that the strategy of having fewer dealerships and concentrating on metro areas - the so-called "Toyota model" - wouldn't work for Chrysler and GM, which appeal to customers in rural areas where foreign cars are less popular.

(italics, ours)

Awesome. Among other sins, first the Feds screwed over the secured creditors in the bankruptcy cram down, then GM flat out lies about the repayment of their TARP loan which was doubled-down by Steve Rattner, former head of the Treasury's auto task force, double-talking his own way around the source of the TARP re-payments and now we find out Team O effectively axed thousands of jobs before they really even had a plan to move forward with dealership closures.


(UPDATE #1): We had seen her piece earlier in the day and in the comments B-Daddy reminded us of yet another egregious transgression in Team O's handling of the Chrysler and GM dealership shut-downs (goodness. it's like some sort of right-wing Journolist cabal). Michelle Malkin dug into Inspector General Barofsky's report and came up with this:

“no one from Treasury, the manufacturers or from anywhere else indicated that implementing a smaller or more gradual dealership termination plan would have resulted in the cataclysmic scenario spelled out in Treasury’s response; indeed, when asked explicitly whether the Auto Team could have left the dealerships out of the restructurings, Mr. Bloom, the current head of the Auto Team, confirmed that the Auto Team ‘could have left any one component (of the restructuring plan) alone,’ but that doing so would have been inconsistent with the President’s mandate for ‘shared sacrifice.’”

(italics, ours)

There it is, again. That whole equality of outcome thing.

They knew they could've kept dealerships open but that did not square with the narrative of this administration. Jobs were lost because of a narrow-minded and bankrupt ideology.

This is the exact same philosophy that will dictate how ObamaCare will operate. It matters not if the product or service being provided is substandard or that its delivery makes no earthly sense, as long as it's portioned out by the ruling class in equal amounts, success will have been achieved.

Jobs, health, lives... mere objects to be tinkered with in making America a better place.

That didn't work out so well, did it? (UPDATED)

(please scroll to bottom of post for update)

Let's get straight to it. Left Coast Rebel has the full video of the axed USDA worker, Shirley Sherrod, in her presentation at an NAACP event where she allegedly makes her racist comments regarding a white farmer which caused her termination. Here's what we wrote in the comment section at LCR in an earlier post on this subject:

At this point, I don't feel comfortable with this. The video I saw cut off at what possibly may have been the "but..." moment. As if her narrative went from an act of bigotry to the realization that what she was doing was wrong. Except, if the realization part did indeed happen, we didn't see it.

If Breitbart edited the video in any way so that we did not get the full context then that is despicable as, for all we know, a dedicated civil servant was terminated.

If I am mistaken then so be it. This one, however, doesn't pass my gut check and is why I ran, instead, with goofy Brown Beret mama at the Angels game for my daily lefty racism/bigotry post.

At 18:45 begins the "but..." moment that did not make the original video that blew up on the internet on Monday.

Now, about these Alinsky tactics that many on the right, including ourselves, were so eager to embrace, especially after witnessing the guerrilla ops of James O'Keefe and Hannah Giles as they infiltrated Planned Parenthood offices: Be careful what you wish for. The left lives and dies by these tactics - we merely die because we can't afford screw-ups like that which Andrew Breitbart presented us.

The problem with adopting Alinsky tactics is precisely because in adopting Alinsky tactics you have explicitly bought into the mindset of the opposition. It is a mindset where everything you do, everything you say is informed by politics; that being the politics of gender, race, sexual orientation, religion, class warfare, grievances, victimhood, etc.

It is our contention that our conservative beliefs are apolitical by nature. In our mind, the embracing of conservatism is, in large part, to free the mind of the political road map by which to live your life. The Alinsky tactics represent a day after day grind of bending the individual will to the machinery of politics as dictated by the ruling class when what it is we are trying to accomplish is to free the individual from this crushing grind.

In the end, it's about ideas, not gotcha. Should real instances of racism be brought to light? Absolutely. But playing this game is a dangerous one because it detracts from the end goals of increased individual freedom and liberty and too easily lends itself to embarrassing and shameful instances like this.

Shirley Sherrod is no racist and deserves her job back.

Let's all chill out for a moment, spend some time with Friedman, Hayek and the Book of Proverbs and think about what were doing.


UPDATE #1: We understand Andrew Breitbart received the edited version of the video and did not edit it himself. This does not excuse him from what transpired after he released this video. His supporters will say that he merely threw the video out there so that we all could come to our own conclusions. Bull shit. The "context" provided was to smear this woman as a bigot. Breitbart should have demanded to see the full-length video when presented with the edited version.

Having said that, we're big fans of Andrew Breitbart and the work he has done to date in battling the statist left. He screwed up on this one, however, and he needs to make things right.

Re: the White House... who acted stupidly. Good lord. What a bunch of spineless creeps. Video shows up Monday, Sherrod is out Tuesday. Got due process? Not these guys.

All your health care are belong to us Pt. II

If you were to come up with reasons as to why to be very troubled regarding the coming of ObamaCare, you can go to fine places like the Heritage Foundation or the Cato Institute, both of whom (among others) which have been doing yeoman's work in compiling studies and figures debunking the claims of ObamaCare supporters.

But why go through all the trouble when one of the chief players in administering ObamaCare, the recess-appointed Dr. Donald Berwick, gives you all the ammunition that you need.

Dr. Berwick, the floor is all yours (Pt. I is here):

"A progressive policy regime will control and rationalize financing—control supply."

The man is absolutely obsessed with rationing.

"The unaided human mind, and the acts of the individual, cannot assure excellence. Health care is a system, and its performance is a systemic property."

Again, you're too stupid to figure out complicated stuff like health care. Let "the machine" do it for you.

"And it's important also to make health a human right because the main health determinants are not health care but sanitation, nutrition, housing, social justice, employment, and the like."

"Hence, those working in health care delivery may be faced with situations in which it seems that the best course is to manipulate the flawed system for the benefit of a specific patient or segment of the population, rather than to work to improve the delivery of care for all. Such manipulation produces more flaws, and the downward spiral continues."

It's not really about "health" at all but rather about nearly every damn thing else. It's time to embrace the notion that ObamaCare really isn't about providing excellent health care but instead providing crappy health care as long as its provided equally.

We don't want to hear any static when we use the terms "rationing", "regime" and yes, "fascist" when describing ObamaCare when the big dogs of the ObamaCare regime use the exact same language or describe their vision of ObamaCare in manner that is synonymous with our chosen terms.

Again, a shout-out to our liberal friends and supposed fans of ObamaCare. Is Dr. Berwick's vision of health care in this country similar to yours?

The Bay State: once again the health care bell cow

Since this is yet more wonderful news we are finding out after the ObamaCare legislation has been passed, this qualifies for Nancy's Nuances: a journey of discovery.

Remember, folks, if it is happening to the Massachusetts health care sector you can pretty much bet on it happening to the rest of us when all the "benefits" of ObamaCare start kicking in.

The relentlessly rising cost of health insurance is prompting some small Massachusetts companies to drop coverage for their workers and encourage them to sign up for state-subsidized care instead, a trend that, some analysts say, could eventually weigh heavily on the state’s already-stressed budget.

Since April 1, the date many insurance contracts are renewed for small businesses, the owners of about 90 small companies terminated their insurance plans with Braintree-based broker Jeff Rich and indicated in a follow-up survey that they were relying on publicly-funded insurance for their employees.

In Sandwich, business consultant Bill Fields said he has been hired by small businesses to enroll about 400 workers in state-subsidized care since April, because the company owners said they could no longer afford to provide coverage. Fields said that is by far the largest number he has handled in such a short time.

“They are giving up out of frustration,’’ Fields said of the employers. “Most of them are very compassionate but they simply can’t afford health insurance any more.’’

Compassion and a couple of bucks might get you a cup of coffee but as the employers of Massachusetts are quickly finding out, paying the $300 fine instead of covering their employees to the tune of an order of magnitude more than the fine just makes more business sense, compassion be damned.

This, even after Romneycare which was signed into law in 2006 included incentives for employers to provide coverage to low income workers.

Word around the campfire is that Congressional liberals that were not initially onboard with ObamaCare because it did not include the single-payer/public option were convinced otherwise because of this perverse incentive built into ObamaCare whereby businesses saw the option of paying the fine preferable to providing health care for their employees and thus dumping them into a public health plan.

The single-payer model is the defacto endgame here, even though it was never expressly written into the legislation.

H/T: Hot Air

You just don't know what's good for you

They've got the House, Senate, Oval Office and by every measure, the media and yet Joey B. whines never mindful of the high irony content of what he's saying.

W.C. Varones has more here and who also reminds us that the ruling class thinks that the ruling class is doing a damn fine job.

Take us out to the ball game

Lots of fun for the entire family last week up at Angels Stadium in Anaheim, CA where a group of folks gathered to show their support for Arizona's anti-illegal immigration law.

And, er, joining them were a couple from the Brown Berets, a Latino supremacy group.



A couple of things struck us about what you just watched: a) the protesters were ready for the Brown Berets. They got veritable curb side valet service from beginning to end. And b) after hearing and seeing this woman, you will know that she has at least two things in common with Helen Thomas.

via Gateway Pundit with a H/T to Instaglen

Love, hate and speech

You'd be pleased to find out that Europe's myriad of human rights organizations aren't too keen on free speech rights. You see, free speech contains power and power is something that the ruling class is loathe to part with in any form or matter.

We didn't know much of the history of hate speech laws but we assume it should not be a huge surprise to learn that the largely arbitrary and vaguely-worded hate speech laws ginned-up at the U.N. over the decades were very popular with Soviet bloc states and 3rd world countries ruled by autocrats.

By empowering an active civil society, freedom of expression can thus be said to include its own safety valve against hatred, propaganda, and racism. There is no clear evidence that hate-speech laws foster a higher degree of racial and religious tolerance or help eradicate racism, and it is in any case both condescending and oppressive for the government to presume it knows which views and information its citizens can be trusted to express. Allowing the unquestionably racist and bigoted to speak their minds does not imply official endorsement of their views, just as declining to criminalize adultery does not imply state endorsement. Racism, religious hatred, and homophobia can and must be combated through an open and unfettered debate. When confronted with genuine hatred, it is perfectly possible — and morally imperative — to heed Holocaust survivor Elie Wiesel’s warning that “indifference is not an option” without resorting to coercion and thought control.

Did you get that? Don't let the government dictate to you what is and is not hate speech. Much like the current regulatory regime is picking winners and losers in the market place so do hate speech laws proffer special treatment upon its chosen "victims".

Don't fall for it. Be ungovernable.

The best way to combat hate speech is, in reality, via a robust freedom of expression. Bring the full arsenal of logic, reason, ridicule, mockery and love afforded by our 1st amendment to the battle.

Embrace the hatred of hate speech laws.

Redux?

From the Wall St. Journal:

Fannie Mae,(...) launched an initiative in January that allows some first-time home buyers to get a loan with a down payment of as little as $1,000. Securities firm Morgan Stanley Smith Barney, a brokerage operation jointly owned by Morgan Stanley and Citigroup Inc., is offering some clients home-equity credit lines of as much as $2.5 million.

Credit-card issuers mailed 84.8 million offers of plastic to U.S. subprime borrowers in the first six months of this year, up from 43.7 million a year earlier, estimates research firm Synovate. Nearly 8% of loans for new cars in the latest quarter went to borrowers with the lowest range of credit scores, up from 6.2% in (...)'s fourth quarter, according to J.D. Power & Associates and Fair Isaac Corp.

(deletions, ours)

So when was this written? 3 years ago? Maybe 5? How about last week.

What does this tell us possibly about the financial reform bill's ability to address sub-prime lending and too big too fail?

It would appear that, at least on the surface, there has not been a fundamental change to how business will be done on Wall Street and that the large financial institutions know that Bailout Nation is here to stay.

The best thing you'll read this week (UPDATED...again)

(please scroll to bottom for update)


We feel duty-bound to draw your attention to a fantastic piece written by Angelo M. Codevilla for the The American Spectator titled, "America's Ruling Class - And the Perils of Revolution".

We've written before in these pages that in our lifetime, there has not been a greater rift between the ruling class and the rest of us which Codevilla terms "the country class" as there is at this very momemt. Codevilla takes his time in explaining why and how it is we got to this point and what is to come.

It's a tremedously well-written essay that brought to mind some of our favorite contemporary writers as it contained the sage probity of Victor Davis Hanson, the historical context of George Will, the humorous contempt of P.J. O'Rourke and the unshakeable faith in American exceptionalism of Tom Wolfe.

It's a long read but well worth the time. As such, we're debating excerpting portions of it but one thing did catch our eye as it related to another item we saw over the weekend.


From Codevilla's pseudo-manifesto:

Today's ruling class, from Boston to San Diego, was formed by an educational system that exposed them to the same ideas and gave them remarkably uniform guidance, as well as tastes and habits. These amount to a social canon of judgments about good and evil, complete with secular sacred history, sins (against minorities and the environment), and saints. Using the right words and avoiding the wrong ones when referring to such matters -- speaking the "in" language -- serves as a badge of identity. Regardless of what business or profession they are in, their road up included government channels and government money because, as government has grown, its boundary with the rest of American life has become indistinct. Many began their careers in government and leveraged their way into the private sector. Some, e.g., Secretary of the Treasury Timothy Geithner, never held a non-government job. Hence whether formally in government, out of it, or halfway, America's ruling class speaks the language and has the tastes, habits, and tools of bureaucrats. It rules uneasily over the majority of Americans not oriented to government.

And this from Russell K. Nieli:

Participation in such Red State activities as high school ROTC, 4-H clubs, or the Future Farmers of America was found to reduce very substantially a student's chances of gaining admission to the competitive private colleges in the NSCE database on an all-other-things-considered basis. The admissions disadvantage was greatest for those in leadership positions in these activities or those winning honors and awards. "Being an officer or winning awards" for such career-oriented activities as junior ROTC, 4-H, or Future Farmers of America, say Espenshade and Radford, "has a significantly negative association with admission outcomes at highly selective institutions." Excelling in these activities "is associated with 60 or 65 percent lower odds of admission."

Exit question: How are all those Ivy League educations littered throughout Wall Street, Capitol Hill and 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. working out for America?


(UPDATE #1): Codevilla's essay is absolutely blowing up around the internet and on the airwaves. Wanted to link you to The Liberator Today and B-Daddy's thoughts here as well as Left Coast Rebel who has the entire essay posted at his site (that's totally cheating, Tim ;)).

(UPDATE #2): The conservative equivalent of the cover of The Rolling Stone chimes in on Codevilla's essay here describing the situation as due to what we like to refer to as the West Potomac virus.

Quickies

A round-up of articles, columns and blog posts that caught our eye this past week:


Left Coast Rebel has the details on yet more racism within the tea party movement, here.



So let's get this straight: The Feds raid work places and turn the illegals they find out onto the street without deporting them. Now we have illegals roaming around without any means of supporting themselves. How's that for compassion? B-Daddy has more on the incoherency of our federal immigration policy.



Guardian columnist thinks George Steinbrenner was like the Iraq War or something.



And WaPo columnist whines that we really do need the estate tax because... the government needs the money.




Charles Krauthammer on the Wall St. reform bill:

Well, the place to start when asking what it means is to see what Senator Dodd, the chairman, the author of this said a month ago about the bill: "This is about as important as it gets. It deals with every aspect of our lives." And then he adds: "No one will know until this actually is in place how it works." Well, that gives you a lot of confidence!

The fact is there are hundreds of regulations that are going to be as a result of the bill that have not been written. They are going to be lobbied and litigated. The big banks who have the big lobby operations and the big lawyering operations are going to have the upper hand here. Every comma, every adjective will carry hundreds of billions of dollars worth of importance over time.

(itlalics, ours)

If you aren't at the table then you are on the menu.

The more we read of and about this bill, the more we are convinced that it has less to do with actual reform and more to do with the further entrenchment of crony capitalism, corporatism, carve-outs and any number of other alliterative maladies.
A fitting way to end his Congressional career for Chris Dodd, we think we all could agree.




And finally, the question if unions will ever abide by any degree of outsourcing is answered:

Billy Raye, a 51-year-old unemployed bike courier, is looking for work.

Fortunately for him, the Mid-Atlantic Regional Council of Carpenters is seeking paid demonstrators to march and chant in its current picket line outside the McPherson Building, an office complex here where the council says work is being done with nonunion labor.

Priceless

Deadspin commenters... they'll be here all week.

Writes Deadspin:

Michigan Stadium, opening after renovations, will again be the nation's largest with a capacity of 109,901. They've still got a ways to go to catch Pyongyang's Rŭngrado May Day Stadium, which seats 150,000.

Steve U:
Of course, attendance at Rungrado only approaches capacity on Dollar Dog Night.

Babcocksure:
wow, 109,901, that's amazing...I didn't know you could fit that many arrogant douchebags in one place.

bevraj ofchoice:
Finally, the UAW brass have a suitable site for their company softball games.

FavreFAIL:
Well on one hand you have a secretive, chaotically run regime with millions of feverishly devoted followers who worship it as though it were deity, and on the other you have North Korea.

don't-forget-where-you-:
Seats 109,901? Are they renaming it the Palindrome?