First the banks, then the auto industry, what area of American business is next? In the previous post, I talked about Obama's alleged bullying of investment firms who didn't want to go along with his strong-armed tactics to force acceptance of certain aspects of the Chrysler bankruptcy that would violate their fiduciary responsibility to their investors.
It's always easy to see the justification for the President's actions if you demonize financial people as "selfish, and not willing to sacrifice" like the rest of the investors. That's not an honest read on what is going on here. The others accepted his terms BECAUSE THEY HAD TO. THEY HAD ACCEPTED TARP MONEY. Some accepted because they needed it, others because they were told "take it, or else." But the hedge funds and other investment entities had followed the rules and bought Chrysler bonds expecting that the US Government would follow the law.
I'll say it right now. Barack Obama has violated his Constitutional oath. He is NOT following the law of the land. He is making his own. "I won" is his response to the financial people he "negotiated" with and now investors will pay the price. Because his goal all along was NOT to save GM or Chrysler, but to protect the United Auto Workers, who had worked hard to get him elected, and their pensioners. Now, you can expect more federal money to "bailout" GM and Chrysler over the next months and years. But only if those companies produce more unprofitable "green" cars and give up their profitable "ungreen" cars like SUVs and muscle cars.
Who died and made him king? He was elected president, but I don't see in http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.articleii.html where he gets this kind of power over business. This story continues to percolate today, but it will get nowhere because his personal popularity remains high as does his fawning treatment from the star-struck press. The public is unaware of what the president is up to. So sad. Fixing this is going to be expensive.
At least some states are willing to take on the federal juggernaut. First, you had some governors who were willing to say, "thanks, but we don't like the strings attached" to some of the stimulus money. Now, aware that acquiescence will lead to subservience, Oklahoma's legislature has taken a position that it will not give up it's sovereignty to the US government. Tennessee has taken a similar action.
What are they talking about?
This is why it is SOOO important that Americans understand the rule book for this country that governs ALL men, including the president.
The 10th Amendment to the Constitution, ratified in 1790, and written by James Madison says this:
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
As I have said often on this blog, over the last 70 years, since the American people gave unprecedented power to the federal government, FDR, and the Congress during the Great Depression, the federal government has taken powers away from the people and the states and exercised that power in the way they see fit. Here is a website formed by some who are watching this state sovereignty movement. Amity Shlaes, author of a much praised book reassessing the government's actions during the Great Depression, catalogs the jihad against those critical of Obama's power grab here.
Now you have a government in Washington completely controlled by one party. Republicans are spectators, not even allowed in certain key meetings to formulate laws, and Obama feels protected from scrutiny and criticism by the press, and thus the public. When polls ask people if they like the president, a strong majority says "yes!" When they are polled about his policies, without attaching them to him, they reject them. So why does he remain popular? BECAUSE THE MEDIA HAS KEPT THE PUBLIC IGNORANT
And you had better not attack him or them. Or they will "Palin" you...like we "Palined" Limbaugh, Joe the Plumber, Governor Sanford, Governor Jindal, and Miss California. Who said the Republicans had the monopoly on McCarthyism. Or the president will sic the White House Press Corps on you, as alleged in the Chrysler case.
So, what happens next? In a truly two-party system, with a truly "watchdog" press, this would the subject of hot debate. Instead, we will be told, "hey, we are tough on Obama, look at what we said about his wife's expensive tennis shoes!"
Meanwhile, new restrictions on banks that took TARP money is designed to keep them from paying it back, thereby staying under the federal gov'ts thumb. If you pay it back, then you can't be covered by FDIC insurance. Wait a minute! These banks paid into the federal government's FDIC fund with payment of insurance premiums! Do you think any private insurance company would be allowed to get away with that kind of bait and switch? Why should the USG be allowed to do that?!
Frankly, I don't think that the Obama administration will allow even that concession to stand. THEY DON'T WANT TO LET THE BANKS GO BACK TO FINANCIAL INDEPENDENCE. They would not have been able to get the Chrysler deal go forward except they had the banks in their control. And they still have to do the SAME KIND OF DEAL with GM. You watch. So, in the end, I think they won't let them off that easily.
The internet has changed things more than even the internet-savvy left-wing blogs realize.
It won't happen, because it is a political act, but abuse of power is an impeachable offense. Obama should be very careful about going forward with his war on American capitalism.
No comments:
Post a Comment