Bankruptcy Is The Right Option

The other day I stated one of my basic philosophies "Opinions should always be in flux, depending upon an open mind and what you discover", and I think I have reached that point with the domestic auto manufacturers.

For the past few months I have railed on how the government needed to step up to the plate and help our auto industry. I've tried to recite reasons that would only benefit our country and the working guy to take an action similar to what was done for the banking industry. I felt the auto industry was a victim of our governments lax attitude towards the cost of oil, unfair trade restrictions and blaming the auto industry for a lack of sales that was obviously the result of people being unable to borrow money at a reasonable rate.

I watched as the Presidents Auto Team, made up of money guys without a single car guy, came to Detroit to "assess" the viability of the automakers. After their report I watched President Obama say the plans they submitted for a "loan" didn't cut deep enough. They said the Big-3 was too fat, they needed to cut plants, workers and debt by 2/3, and they gave GM 60 days to accomplish this. Of course before they made this commitment essentially the President fired GM CEO Rick Wagner, because he knew Wagner was a strong personality, and replaced him with Fritz Henderson. Henderson started singing the bankruptcy blues from day one. They all but gave Chrysler the last rights and told them to go see if Fiat will save them. I then watched in astonishment as 30 days into the GM timetable Obama changed the rules again saying debt needed to be cut by 90% instead of 66%. As I told a friend yesterday that is like planning a 10 course meal for 6:00pm tonight only to have someone change the main course at 3:00pm. It's kind of hard to do. In fact almost impossible.

I've sat here an tried to figure out what the governments agenda was. Green cars? National health care? Greater dependence upon a centrist government to survive? It all made sense yet none of it made sense.

Since the year 2000 the domestic auto industry has lost over 428,000 jobs with nearly 50% of those being lost in the last 3 years. I have been staunchly against any of the Big-3 filing bankruptcy because of the ramifications that action will have upon their retirees, employees, and the ripple effect through their support system of suppliers.

But as I said in the opening paragraph, a persons thought must remain in flux depending upon what he or she learns. In the last few days what I have learned is General Motors should be changing its name to Government Motors. When this is all said and done we have a General Motors that is a mere shadow of itself, with the government appointing members of the board, not run by the majority of the stockholders but run by the government and the union. Not only is that wrong on so many levels, it goes against the concept of "free enterprise". How is Ford, who didn't take a dime of government money supposed to compete with the government? I'm not saying that, Bill Ford Jr made that statement the other day.

The government has pushed GM to cancel the Pontiac nameplate and brand. How does that help things? What difference does the trim package and name make in a car? Well, if you've owned 7 Pontiac's the way I have, perhaps a lot. Will the government now be directing the engineers and designers as to what cars you and I may chose from? It's starting to look that way. In fact I've heard they are already taking deposits for the 2011 Pelosi Hybrid, it runs on bull manure and wax, man! And on top of it all they still may have to go through bankruptcy anyway, but we're going to have a "bad" GM and a "good" GM. What is that?

Chrysler on the other hand seems to be close to a deal with Fiat that gives Fiat 30% of the company for free (BTW I'll do that too if you'll let me), the UAW will control 52 percent and the government will control the balance. Sweet.

Well gang all of this has convinced me that both GM and Chrysler should waltz into the Federal Building in downtown Detroit next Monday morning and file chapter 11. They have nothing to lose, their stockholders have nothing to lose, plus you and I have nothing to lose. Those states, like Michigan, that depend heavily upon the auto industry are already ruined and with the size of the new GM, any form of recovery is years away. Those that have lost their jobs have already been ruined financially, and I would suggest they line up right behind GM and Chrysler at the clerks desk on Monday to file papers.

I don't say this tongue and cheek, and I certainly don't take my words lightly but the bottom line is 2/3's of the Big-3 is going to be run by the government. And we all know how well the government runs things! The die was cast 20 years ago when Reagan began to speak of NAFTA and it was pushed along by Bush Sr, and then Clinton. Since that time Clinton, Bush Jr and now Obama have used the lingering effects to work their own personal agendas with no thought about the lives that have been ruined along the way.

I would rather have GM and Chrysler file bankruptcy, and come out clean to control their own destiny, than to have the government corrupt the concept of free enterprise. For without free enterprise we are no longer capitalist, and we are no longer the United States as we knew it.

This Should Make You Think

Every so often I come across a post on Craiglist R&R that is worth repeating and this is such a post. The OP acknowledges this is a cut and paste from another site and while I don't agree with it item for item, I do appreciate any post that stimulates dialogue and thought.

From Craiglslist:

My friends, we live in the greatest nation in the history of the world. I hope you'll join with me as we try to change it." - Barack Obama

History Unfolding

I am a student of history. Professionally, I have written 15 books on history that have been published in six languages, and I have studied history all my life. I have come to think there is something monumentally large afoot, and I do not believe it is simply a banking crisis, or a mortgage crisis, or a credit crisis. Yes these exist, but they are merely single facets on a very large gemstone that is only now coming into a sharper focus.

Something of historic proportions is happening. I can sense it because I know how it feels, smells, what it looks like, and how people react to it.. Yes, a perfect storm may be brewing, but there is something happening within our country that has been evolving for about ten to fifteen years. The pace has dramatically quickened in the past two.

We demand and then codify into law the requirement that our banks make massive loans to people we know they can never pay back? Why?

We learned just days ago that the Federal Reserve, which has little or no real oversight by anyone, has "loaned" two trillion dollars (that is $2,000,000,000,000) over the past few months, but will not tell us to whom or why or disclose the terms. That is our money. Yours and mine. And that is three times the $700 billion we all argued about so strenuously just this past September. Who has this money? Why do they have it? Why are the terms unavailable to us? Who asked for it? Who authorized it? I thought this was a government of "we the people," who loaned our powers to our elected leaders. Apparently not.

We have spent two or more decades intentionally de-industrializing our economy. Why?

We have intentionally dumbed down our schools, ignored our history, and no longer teach our founding documents, why we are exceptional, and why we are worth preserving. Students by and large cannot write, think critically, read, or articulate. Parents are not revolting, teachers are not picketing, school boards continue to back mediocrity. Why?

We have now established the precedent of protesting every close election (violently in California over a proposition that is so controversial that it simply wants marriage to remain defined as between one man and one woman. Did you ever think such a thing possible just a decade ago?) We have corrupted our sacred political process by allowing unelected judges to write laws that radically change our way of life, and then mainstream Marxist groups like ACORN and others to turn our voting system into a banana republic. To what purpose?

Now our mortgage industry is collapsing, housing prices are in free fall, major industries are failing, our banking system is on the verge of collapse, social security is nearly bankrupt, as is medicare and our entire government. Our education system is worse than a joke (I teach college and I know precisely what I am talking about) - the list is staggering in its length, breadth, and depth.. It is potentially 1929 x ten... And we are at war with an enemy we cannot even name for fear of offending people of the same religion, who, in turn, cannot wait to slit the throats of your children if they have the opportunity to do so.

And finally, we have elected a man that no one really knows anything about, who has never run so much as a Dairy Queen, let alone a town as big as Wasilla, Alaska . All of his associations and alliances are with real radicals in their chosen fields of employment, and everything we learn about him, drip by drip, is unsettling if not downright scary (Surely you have heard him speak about his idea to create and fund a mandatory civilian defense force stronger than our military for use inside our borders? No? Oh, of course. The media would never play that for you over and over and then demand he answer it. Sarah Palin's pregnant daughter and $150,000 wardrobe is more important.)

Mr. Obama's winning platform can be boiled down to one word: Change. Why?

I have never been so afraid for my country and for my children as I am now.

This man campaigned on bringing people together, something he has never, ever done in his professional life. In my assessment, Obama will divide us along philosophical lines, push us apart, and then try to realign the pieces into a new and different power structure. Change is indeed coming. And when it comes, you will never see the same nation again.

And that is only the beginning..

As a serious student of history, I thought I would never come to experience what the ordinary, moral German must have felt in the mid-1930s. In those times, the "savior" was a former smooth-talking rabble-rouser from the streets, about whom the average German knew next to nothing. What they should have known was that he was associated with groups that shouted, shoved, and pushed around people with whom they disagreed; he edged his way onto the political stage through great oratory. Conservative "losers" read it right now.

And there were the promises. Economic times were tough, people were losing jobs, and he was a great speaker. And he smiled and frowned and waved a lot. And people, even newspapers, were afraid to speak out for fear that his "brown shirts" would bully and beat them into submission. Which they did - regularly. And then, he was duly elected to office, while a full-throttled economic crisis bloomed at hand - the Great Depression. Slowly, but surely he seized the controls of government power, person by person, department by department, bureaucracy by bureaucracy. The children of German citizens were at first, encouraged to join a Youth Movement in his name where they were taught exactly what to think. Later, they were required to do so. No Jews of course.

How did he get people on his side? He did it by promising jobs to the jobless, money to the money-less, and rewards for the military-industrial complex. He did it by indoctrinating the children, advocating gun control, health care for all, better wages, better jobs, and promising to re-instill pride once again in the country, across Europe , and across the world. He did it with a compliant media - did you know that? And he did this all in the name of justice and .... . .. change. And the people surely got what they voted for.

If you think I am exaggerating, look it up. It's all there in the history books.

So read your history books. Many people of conscience objected in 1933 and were shouted down, called names, laughed at, and ridiculed. When Winston Churchill pointed out the obvious in the late 1930s while seated in the House of Lords in England (he was not yet Prime Minister), he was booed into his seat and called a crazy troublemaker. He was right, though. And the world came to regret that he was not listened to.

Do not forget that Germany was the most educated, the most cultured country in Europe . It was full of music, art, museums, hospitals, laboratories, and universities. And yet, in less than six years (a shorter time span than just two terms of the U. S. presidency) it was rounding up its own citizens, killing others, abrogating its laws, turning children against parents, and neighbors against neighbors.. All with the best of intentions, of course. The road to Hell is paved with them.

As a practical thinker, one not overly prone to emotional decisions, I have a choice: I can either believe what the objective pieces of evidence tell me (even if they make me cringe with disgust); I can believe what history is shouting to me from across the chasm of seven decades; or I can hope I am wrong by closing my eyes, having another latte, and ignoring what is transpiring around me..

I choose to believe the evidence. No doubt some people will scoff at me, others laugh, or think I am foolish, naive, or both. To some degree, perhaps I am. But I have never been afraid to look people in the eye and tell them exactly what I believe-and why I believe it.

I pray I am wrong. I do not think I am. Perhaps the only hope is our vote in the next elections.

Fed says gov't ready to save stress-tested banks

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090424/ap_on_bi_ge/us_banks_stress_tests

So our government is ready to rescue the banks again, if necessary, I can't tell you how happy that makes me. I mean it's not like half of them showed a profit in the last quarter or anything on our tax dollars. It's not like all of them collectively "flipped off" the government and the taxpayers, and said we will give out bonuses 'errr retention pay.

This would be the same government, and don't kid yourself it is the same government, that stood by and let us all pay $4.00 a gallon for gas due to fraudulent trading and pricing practices. They told us we had to bite the bullet while Exxon-Mobil posted profits exceeding $100 billion. They shrugged and said we need more fuel efficient cars, you need to turn down your thermostats, and they watched as the world of the working man began to collapse.

This would be the same government that has basically told GM and Chrysler you're going through bankruptcy so you can break your contracts with your workers and stiff your bond holders. And it's not only the UAW guys that is losing their jobs or having their pay cut by 40%, it's the suppliers, it's the local restaurants, bars, dry cleaners, convenience stores, gas stations, small factories, shipping companies, steel industry, scrape metal industry, tire manufacturers, mining, trucking, insurance companies, hospitals, medical profession, lawyers, accountants, banks, and more, they are all being told you have to take a hit. The only one protected are the ones with deep pockets. You and I aren't that lucky.

Some will say this is "old news" and maybe it is but this is about "perspective" as much as it is about substance. You see a lot of people will say this is GWB's fault and other will say it is Obama's. You people argue this point endlessly. It's Fox News against MSNBC. It's Rush versus common sense. It's Democrat versus Republican. When in reality they are almost one and the same.

What is going on in this country right now is basically class warfare. You have the "Elitist" in government trying to control everything we do. Think about it. You just had the President of the United States pretty much fire the CEO of what used to be the worlds largest corporation. You had the government cast blame on the auto industry so they can push forward with their agendas of "green" cars and a nationalized health program, when in reality even Stevie Wonder could see the auto industry wasn't broke until gas went to $4.00 and the banks stopped lending money to buy cars. And who stood buy and did nothing to the banks and oil traders? The government! Oh wait they did do something...they bailed one out and told us to buy duct tape on the other. Then they told the auto industry to downsize and start laying people off.

A day will come when the people of this country will start to use their brains again and think, instead of being told what to think. I wonder if I'll see it in my lifetime? Doesn't anyone find all of this just a little strange? Any of you over the age of 40, do you think this would have happened back in the 60's, 70's or 80's?

One last thing. If this made you think, now start to question, then get involved and act.

Save GM with bold trade stroke

This was a commentary in last Fridays Detroit News by Jerry Kroth. It brilliantly illustrates why our domestic auto industry is on the ropes. I hope you enjoy it!

Save GM with bold trade stroke

Jerry Kroth

We hear about General Motors' struggling, bailouts and bankruptcy, and we hear about how Toyota, Honda and Nissan will fill the vacuum created by any GM or Chrysler bankruptcy.

But what we don't hear ought to pique your interest: Last year Japan imported a whopping 8,000 Fords. That's right, 8,000 Fords were sold in Japan while Toyota alone sold 2 million automobiles here in America. Honda sold a million. According to Frank Fillipo of Autoblog, poor GM only sold 2,000 cars in Japan last year.

Why? The average GM car in the United States costs about $25,000, but in Japan the same car costs $50,000. A big mark up, plus tons of other obstacles and restrictions. No one calls that protectionism, but that is exactly what it is.

There is an overwhelming pressure to keep foreign imports out of Japan, whether its so-called "inferior" American cars, "infected" Washington apples or "tainted" American meat. Eleven Saturn vehicles were sold in Japan -- a car made jointly by the U.S. and Japan -- and a piddling 12 Rolls Royces. I guess Rolls Royce is considered inferior as well.

Peter Mandelson, the European Union's external trade commissioner, said last week that Japan was "the most closed developed market in the world and that imbalances ... were truly staggering." The social pressures within Japan and the complex layer-cake of bureaucratic restrictions keep all imports marginalized, not just our cars.

To be specific: The Japanese car market of 4.5 million vehicles begrudgingly allowed 6 percent of their car market to be made up of non-Japanese manufactured vehicles. In South Korea, the situation is even worse. It imported 9,000 U.S. cars but sold 800,000 cars in ours. If you think a Kia outperforms a Malibu, good luck.

Imagine a refreshing change -- a new law requiring that Japanese and Korean car manufacturers only allowed to sell the same number of cars in the United States that they reluctantly import into their countries. In other words, the playing field would finally be leveled.

GM, Ford and Chrysler would start filling the vacuum created by the sudden absence of Toyotas, Nissans and Hondas from American showrooms. If Japan could only sell to us what it purchased from us, it would be limited to 5.5 percent of the U.S. car market and not a fraction more, and Korea would be limited to a mere 2 percent.

Thousands of American jobs would be saved; thousands more created. The Rust Belt would experience a renaissance.

Instead of Detroit, let's have Toyota City take it on the chin for a change.
Sure, the Japanese would protest that they had to start letting their showroom dealers start selling Fords and Chevys at competitive prices. Maybe a trade war would start; maybe they'd cash in their T-bills, but it is just as likely that the bigwigs of Toyota, Nissan, Honda and Kia would hurriedly ask parliamentarians to open markets to allow more American cars to be sold there so more of their cars could be sold here.

Maybe Congress and the media are opposed, but in the days of Jimmy Hoffa and Walter Reuther, a healthy strike by autoworkers and sympathetic truckers could shut our country down until we saw some real action. Maybe its time to clog the turnpikes, slow interstate commerce to a crawl, and demand that fairness in trade finally be implemented. If now is not the time, well, just how close does the patient have to get to death before we decide to stop the bleeding?

Jerry Kroth is an associate professor of psychology at Santa Clara University in California and a former Detroiter.

Good Job President Obama

In the past few weeks I have taken President Obama to task on his actions regarding the economy and spending. I disagree with the path that he has chosen but with that said I also want to thank him when he does something I think is long over due.

This past month Mr. Obama has reached out his hand to Castro in Cuba, Ahmadinejad in Iran and to a lesser extent Chavez in Venezuela. I know many feel this is wrong, but we have tried the "ignore and isolate" policy on all of these nations for decades now and it hasn't produced a single positive result.

By definition, insanity is to repeat the same action and expect a different result and that has been the diplomatic approach of the United States towards these countries. If we are to regain our position as a leader of the free world then we need to establish we can lead by methods other than threats and military action. I say this because the world knows our military is pushed to it's limit right now and isn't capable of handling another full scale outbreak, plus with the dissecting and removal of our industrial base over the last decade we are no longer capable of being self reliant in times of emergency.

There is a saying" Keep your friends close and your enemy's closer" and I believe this is the approach Obama is taking. I liked it when he said he'd do it during the debates and I like it now.

Thank you President Obama for living up to this campaign promise.

The Best And The Brightest Was Real Change

While the Obama administration continues to focus on a path that alienates 40% of the country I couldn't help but think back a year ago to all of that wonderful talk of change. Now in retrospect, a mere 100 days into Mr. Obamas Presidency, do you see or are you satisfied with the "change" in the White House?

I look at the President, his appointments and his policy moves, and I'm sad to say I don't see much change whatsoever. I see a President that recycled the old Clinton Administration, showed either a lack of due diligence or poor decision making by making several appointments of people with tax or character issues. I see betrayals in policy making moves against those that elected him so that he can acquiesce to the liberal agenda of Pelosi and Waxman, almost as if he were a hand puppet. Lives are being ruined in the rust belt due to a green agenda that, while it may be necessary, could have been phased in such a manner to minimize the collateral damage. Of course the risk there would be Obama losing his popular edge and people starting to question his moves. Where Bush abused our privacy, Obama is manipulating our free enterprise. This democratically controlled government just passed retribution tax laws and that is something to fear.

The idea of change was a good one. Change is indeed what this country needed and still needs but I'm afraid our new sitting President isn't the change we thought he was. I don't know about you but I was hoping for change the way President John F. Kennedy did it upon his election. Kennedy didn't recycle old, tired politician tied to the Washington machine. He did what many of us hoped Obama would do, get a fresh start, go out into the private sector and bring in the best and the brightest, with fresh ideas to move this country forward. Did Kennedy have some politicians around him? Yes, both Democrat and Republican, but he also had leaders of industry join his team. People that knew how to run things. During the election campaign more than one person mentioned they could see Warren Buffet being Obama's choice for the Fed or Secretary of the Treasury. Now did Obama say he would seek out people like Buffet? I think he did, and if he didn't he certainly implied it.

There are some that will say I am anti Obama and nothing could be further from the truth. What I am tired of though is a double standard in this country. What I am tired of are politicians that put their own agendas or personal wealth ahead of the electorate. What I am tired of is people that will blindly line up behind an ideology or party and act like everything they do is perfect. There is nothing I enjoy more than to talk to a ditto head and listen to him say how Bush didn't do a single thing wrong during his 8 years in office, yet when he left the Dow was below when he started, the unemployment rate was rising, wall street was falling, we were in two wars, we became known as torturers, housing was losing value for the first time in 40 years, but hey GWB could do no wrong. These people are brain dead! Just like those that will stand here now and say Obama has brought change!

Last night while watching television I came across Keith Olbermann interviewing Janeane Garafalo and they were discussing the tax day Tea Party protests around the country. Garafalo made the comment that these illiterates probably knew nothing of the Boston Tea Party, and that most were nothing more than redneck, racist Obama haters. Ummm Janeane that statement is about as valid as all those that said if you questioned Bush's policies you were a traitor or a terrorist. Oh and Janeane, I'm kinda doubting you even know what a redneck is, with that deprived childhood of being the daughter of an Exxon Executive. I'm sure you had many a meal that consisted of Ramman noodles. You personify the blind faith idiot afraid to admit the truth.

There are several things in life that truly piss me off. One is the poor little rich kid playing the die hard liberal or conservative like they have any idea what it is like to live without a safety net. Another one, being that I am from Detroit and see this quite frequently, playing the race card because someone disagrees with you. I guess there are those that find her insightful and entertaining, me I found her almost as arrogant as Rush.

The bottom line is unless you are ready to forfeit a whole lot more of your freedoms, freedoms that this country was not only founded upon but has allowed her to thrive for over 200 years, you better start demanding more of your elected officials. Change without change is nothing more than a six letter word found between "coward and chump". Which one are you?

So far he's no Jack Kennedy.

Bankruptcy for General Motors

Dan Howe's had an interesting opinion piece in the Detroit News today regarding President Obama's auto team announcing that GM should get ready for bankruptcy. This announcement came even though GM has about 45 days left to present their turn around plan. Mr. Obama came out today and stated it is his desire for Chrysler and GM to avoid bankruptcy.

To which I respond....hog wash! Below is a copy of my comment to Dan on his piece:

Dan, while I am an avid fan I take exception with your last paragraph. Indeed there is an agenda at work here, in fact several agendas. First you do have the "green" faction lead by Pelosi and Waxman, they are the reason Wagner was forced out.

Then you have the southern Republican Senators that want to bust the union before more liberalized union organizing laws take effect.

And finally you have our President, Mr. Obama. At first I couldn't understand why he would be interested in seeing the UAW go away, after all they helped him get elected. Then it became plain as day, if indeed the union contracts are void, and legacy promises are void, Mr. Obama has leverage to push his national health plan through Congress virtually unopposed.

The sudden influx of a couple of million people without health insurance will not only put a huge financial burden on the people directly effected but the medical industry as well.

We just came off 8 years of a President that wiped his feet on the Constitution and seemed to forget which country he was President of. So in response we elected a new President of "Change". The sad reality is the only change is we swapped an elephant for a donkey.

Beyond that the political agendas win and the people lose.

http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090414/OPINION03/904140326/&imw=Y

I Wish I Wrote This

Rescue the economy? Try the SEALs
Commentary: If banks act like pirates, they should be treated like them
By MarketWatch

Last update: 11:31 a.m. EDT April 13, 2009

WASHINGTON (MarketWatch) -- President Barack Obama has put the wrong federal agency in charge of the rescue of the financial system. Instead of hiring Tim Geithner and the TARP, he should have hired the U.S. Navy and the SEALs. When lawless pirates captured an American sea captain, the Navy put the hostage first. Now he's safe, and the hostage-takers are dead or jailed.

When lawless bankers captured the global economy, Geithner put the hostage-takers first. And the hostage-takers are stepping up their demands: Change the accounting rules, guarantee us against any losses from the toxic assets, and rig the stress test so we all come out smelling like roses.

Old-timers may remember with nostalgia the days when it was easy to tell the difference between a major financial institution and a criminal enterprise. Those days are long gone.

Consider, for instance, the indictment unveiled last week against a San Diego street gang on multiple counts of mortgage fraud. According to federal prosecutors, the gang arranged to buy 220 properties for more than $100 million from 2005 to 2008. They overpaid for the properties by taking out liar loans using phony appraisals. They then funneled a kickback to a company controlled by the defendants, the indictment says.

Liar loans? Phony appraisals? Kickbacks? That sounds pretty much like the business model for the mortgage brokerage industry in California during the bubble. Maybe the real complaint is that the mob was muscling in on their territory.

Or consider the report in Monday's Wall Street Journal that the Troubled Asset Relief Program oversight panel is investigating complaints that the banks that received money from the TARP are raising interest rates and imposing new fees on customers. See full story.

It is indeed shocking to learn that banks are behaving like banks. Isn't the whole point of the TARP to help the banks get back on their feet? And if they can't sell trillions of dollars in credit default swaps to each other, the most profitable line of business they have left is the customer-gouging unit, also known as their credit-card businesses.

Sponsored by:
C 3.80, +0.75, +24.6%) defended a recent loan promotion that didn't disclose that the annual interest rate was 30%. The interest rates "compare competitively to similar offers in the market," a Citigroup spokesman told the Journal. So this is like an offer you can't refuse?

With interest rates like those, it sounds like Citigroup is muscling in on the mob's territory. Fair is fair.
-- Rex Nutting, Washington bureau chief

http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/Rescue-economy-Try-SEALs/story.aspx?guid=%7BE3A45585%2DE746%2D4A07%2DB22B%2D1166E0C1BFB7%7D

Times They Are A Changing

I'm 55 years old and in the course of my lifetime I have seen many changes in every aspect of life. Which got me to thinking about things that gone or nearing extinction. This is a partial list and feel free to add to it:

Typists, Newspapers, Soda Counters, 5 & 10 Stores, Local Restaurants, Paperboys, Photographers, Film, Tube Electronics, Imaginations in Children, Manual Transmissions, Rear Wheel Drive, Butcher Shops, Record Stores, Mechanics, Mom & Pop Stores, Driving Ranges, Block Parties, Print Shops, Hardware Stores, Truth In Advertising, Intelligent Television Programming, Locally Produced TV Shows, Saturday Morning Cartoons, Newspaper Comics, Comedians, Charcoal BBQ's, Leaf Burning, Curb Side Airlines Check-In, Tailors, Hobby Stores, Slot Car Tracks, Kids Doing Odd Jobs, Record Players, Motorcycles w/Kick Starts, Sans A Belt Slacks, People That Can Count Change, Cash Registers That Ding, Baking From Scratch, Double Headers, Kids Playing Tag, Soap Box Derby, Model Cars, Lemonade Stands, and Local Banks.

I got it started what can you add?

Whither the Dems of Michigan's supine congressional delegation?

Sometime you come across written words and say to yourself "I wish I had written that". The following is such an article. It is written by Daniel Howes of the Detroit News and it reflects the feelings of many Michiganders. I hope you enjoy it:

Posted by Daniel Howes (-->The Detroit News-->) on Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 7:34 PM
Whither the Dems of Michigan's supine congressional delegation?

Carl Levin nailed it today: President Obama's direct talk of bankruptcy Monday is "self-defeating," the veteran senator from Detroit said. "It undermines the companies' economic position to talk about bankruptcy. They can do all the exploration they want (privately), but all the public exploration makes it more likely that that becomes the option used, and I think that would be a serious blow."

Yes, all the chatter -- especially the presidential kind -- does make "BK" more likely, and yes, it would be a serious blow.

To make Levin's point, the feds proposed a new program to guarantee warrantys of General Motors Corp. and Chrysler LLC metal. And GM today unveiled a new "GM Total Confidence" program intended to induce skittish consumers to plump for Detroit metal despite their fears of losing a job, losing their local dealer or losing GM to bankruptcy. If nothing else, the program is evidence the "public exploration" lamented by Levin is having the exact effect he predicts.

Doubt that matters to the Obama White House, anymore than the accurate perception that the president unilaterally removed GM's CEO and began the process to recast the board of directors -- even though the government does not hold a single ownership share in the beleaguered automaker. Unprecedented? Pretty much. Strong arm? No question, not that you'll hear much "public" protest (Gov. Jennifer Granholm excepted) from Michigan Democrats in Congress.

Because they're defeated. Not by Republicans, but by the larger, stronger, lefter wing in their own party that hails from the coasts and is allied with an environmental lobby that considers Detroit, its automakers and much of the industrial heartland an obstacle that needs to be reconstituted in an image they deem to be appropriate, politically correct and, most of all, "green."

The market? They don't need no stinkin' market.

And the Michigan delegation -- the Levin brothers, Dearborn's Rep. John Dingell, the longest serving member of Congress -- look increasingly powerless to influence their own party, while the rest of the Dems in the Michigan delegation appear irrelvant to anything of remote importance to the critical economic issues of the day.

Late today, an e-mail arrived from Dingell's Washington office offering qualified praise for the Waxman-Markey energy & climate bill, officially titled "The American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009." I read Dingell's comments. I gagged: "I look forward to continuing to work with Chairmen [Rep. Henry] Waxman [of California] and [Rep. Ed] Markey [of Massachusetts] to get a bill that reduces greenhouse gases by the levels the science tells us is necessary and that protects jobs and consumers."

Fine, except that they have no intention of working with Dingell. Or anyone else interested in balancing jobs and consumer costs against the march to environmental nirvana envisioned by congressional leaders whose states are mostly devoid of anything approaching industry.

They won. They don't have to compromise with their own caucus, much less deal with the opposition. Here, the job is to salute, lay down and roll over.

Some change!

http://apps.detnews.com/apps/blogs/danielhowesblog/index.php

Where There's Smoke There's..........

Zealots? Now let me say this right up front if you are an anti-smoking zealot you probably aren't going to like this entry. So you may want to go read "How to impose my will on people that don't want it" on one of the other blogs.

I'll start by saying "Hi, I'm Barry and I'm an addict!" up until 2 years ago I smoked two packs a day for 42 years. I finally quit after a couple of attempts because it was getting harder and harder to breath. I smoked my last cigarette on May 28, 2007, and as a test of my resolve I keep two open packs on the top of my refrigerator still today.

As many of you know I started working out about 2 months ago and I do 3 miles on the treadmill three days a week plus lift weights to tone. Everyone has the Achilles heel and mine has always been my lungs. As a kid I had pneumonia 3 times and I burnt my bronchial tubes with a pesticide when I was in my middle 30's. Plus I enjoy working on cars and home improvement projects so I've sucked back more than my share of drywall dust and brake dust, probably 10 times what the average person might in their lifetime.

No, I'm not making a dating profile but I thought I give you some background that I understand respiratory problems and risks. I saw my Mother die from COPD and the associated treatment but I still defend a persons right to light up. Until the time our elected officials have the balls to give up the PAC and Lobbyist Contributions from the tobacco industry, and make smoking illegal I believe every adult over the age of 18 has the right to make a choice. Smoke or not smoke that is the question! I have several pet peeves when it comes to the smoking zealots and I thought I'd share them here with you.

The New Tobacco Tax:
Today President Obama's new tax on tobacco products went into effect. In levying this tax it does two things, it again puts an undue financial burden on those that earn under the median income in this country and secondly in doing so Mr. Obama has broken another campaign promise. During his campaign Mr. Obama promise not to enact any tax that will effect those earning under $250,000 annually.

The 62-cent tax hike on tobacco products to fund a federal children's insurance program became effective Wednesday. I admire his cause, and unlike local Legislators such as Governor Granholm here in Michigan who raises taxes on cigarettes every year to offset our financial crisis, I truly believe Obama's thought is funding for the children. I also believe that he might feel this extra cost may persuade some people to quit.

What he fails to realize is he is hurting those that can afford it the least. Thirty-four percent of the lowest income Americans smoke, compared with 13 percent earning $90,000 a year or more, results from interviews Gallup conducted as part of its Gallup-Healthways Well-Being Index for 2008 indicated. Slightly more than half of today's smokers -- 53 percent -- earn less than $36,000 per year, while 35 percent earn between $36,000 and $89,999 per year, the Princeton, N.J., polling agency reported. Right now those people don't need any additional expenses because unlike the millionaires in Washington they are trying to survive.

The Smoking Zealot:
This is the guy that coughs furiously from 50 feet away when someone lights up, this is the guy that makes comments under his breath but never to your face, this is the guy that writes letters to his Congressman trying every year to get a ban on smoking. This is the guy that believes if you can smell it you're ingesting it and it will kill you, then splashes on enough cheap cologne to smother a small heard of elephants.

This is the guy, while talking to the hostess in a busy restaurant on a Saturday night and she asks "smoking or non-smoking?" he answers "non- smoking" but when she says "fine that will be about 90 minutes" his reply is "first available". What happened to all of the moral indignation and those health concerns there, Cochise? You non-smokers have 200 tables and we smokers have 15. Wait your turn.

This is the guy that will rattles off hundreds of statistics about how smoking cause everything from cancer to gout to athletes foot. But when you ask him where he got those statistics he can't quite remember? That's when you ask him if there are any known carcinogens in cologne, perfume, cosmetics or hairspray, and he looks at you like you have a third eye in the middle of your forehead. This is the guy that has no concept of how many PPM (parts per million) of airborne chemicals it takes to fill a room 10x10x8.

By and large, anti-smoking zealot is a weak willed sheep that hasn't had an original thought in 10 years. They think they are enlightened as they say second hand smoke kills people, then slam back 4 martinis and jump in the Beemer to drive home. Go figure!

The Medical Profession:
I love this next part 'cause it pisses people off. Back in the mid 1960's the United States Surgeon General came out with the statement that smoking cigarettes appears to promote lung cancer. Since that time the medical profession has taken this simple statement and given it a life of it's own. If you smoke and go to the doctor with a problem, more often than not you will hear the statement "well, you know you smoke." It doesn't matter if it's a sore throat, a hangnail, a hemorrhoid, or dandruff, you know you smoke? That has to be the reason!

When I grew up in the 60's, you're never going to believe this, but do you know what women did when they were pregnant? That sat around smoking and drinking all afternoon. Yep they didn't work and once the house was clean what else was there? So they got together and partied. Do you also know that as a kid I wasn't medicated? I didn't have behavior issues? I played outside? Those things all changed when pregnant women stopped smoking and drinking. After they stopped we became a society of ADHD and medicated babies. Oh well that's another topic....

Doctors have been shoveling this tripe about smoking causing cancer and much more for the last 40 years and the public has bought into it. First, let me say to the zealots, you do know that Medicine is not an exact science, right? That is why doctors say they "practice" medicine, it's a discipline not a science.

The second question I'll ask is, you know that there is no conclusive test for what causes cancer, right? No place in the journals of medicine will you find a single doctor or research scientist on record saying they have a conclusive test and proof that smoking causes cancer. What you will find is a lot of comments like: "Indications are, leads to the conclusion, all tests indicate, our testing suggests, and so on" No place have you found the words "The (blank) in smoke has been proven to cause cancer in every instance."

So you see all of the fussing is based upon suppositions, not facts. Now, I'll be the first one to say that smoking is a dirty, nasty habit. It does cause COPD, asthma, and other maladies of the lungs and respiratory system, no doubt but cancer? I'm still a skeptic. Then you say, "oh yeah well what about second hand smoke?" Second hand smoke is the answer to the question the medical profession could never answer, so they made one up. That question being: If smoking causes lung cancer how to you account for the fact that 40% of all lung cancer patients are non-smokers? To which for years they replied: Hmmmmm good question! Now the answer is second hand smoke.

See zealots here's the deal, most disease is caused due to genetics, DNA, that sort of thing. My Dad had prostate cancer so it's in the family, and I would not be shocked if someday I or my brother might be inflicted with it. It's in our DNA! Most disease occur because you have a predisposition for the disease not because of some outside stimulus. If this wasn't the case why would we have this raging debate over "stem-cell" research? The medical profession knows that more often than not Cancer, Diabetes, MS, MD, Parkinson's are all genetic based maladies.

Now I'm not so stupid to deny that cancer can be caused sometimes by foreign objects like asbestos, and yes cigarette smoke but it is not the leading cause. The leading cause is the genes that have been passed down generation to generation.

As with anything, sometimes a little information is a dangerous thing and most of the anti-smoking zealots are poorly armed. The interesting thing is they think they are the only ones that wield any weight. They don't think that the day will come where you can't bath in Channel or Old Spice, but if you started the ball rolling you only have control for a moment. Because just like you I can say if I can smell it, I must be ingesting it.

In closing, smokers quit if you can but quit when it is on your terms. Until then smoke 'em if you got 'em......