Ron Morley's Freedom Blog : politics

Liberty died in America today

Ronald D. Morley — Wed, 03 Nov 2010 06:43:00 GMT

I'm watching the results of the mid-term election as I write this and I am afraid that freedom died in America tonight. There have simply not been enough incumbents defeated to make an impression upon the entrenched elites who control the Big Government party which runs this nation. Yes, the House of Representatives has gone over to the Republicans, but those of us who were looking for the majority of that body to be composed of new people are disappointed. Yes, some of what the liberal mainstream media has taken to calling the “Tea Party” candidates have won their races. But their numbers are few, miniscule really in comparison to the total of 435 seats that were up for grabs. In order for those of us who believe in the principles of the Founding Fathers to claim victory at least two-thirds of the incumbents in the House and Senate, regardless of party, would have had to lose their campaigns for re-election. As it is, not enough true believers in the principles held so dear by the men who founded this nation have been elected to matter. It is apparent that the majority of the American sheeple do not care about personal liberty; do not care about reducing the role of the Federal government in their lives; do not want to make the hard choices that will be needed in the next few years if this nation is to avoid bankruptcy; and do not care about the gross violations of this nation's Constitution which those who rule us from Washington, D.C. make every day.

Liberty died tonight in America and the nation will be the worse off for it. The leaders of the Republican party will make noises about how the American people have demonstrated their desire for smaller government and a return to so-called “conservative principles”. However, those in the leadership positions of that party have not changed and those leaders have shown themselves incapable and/or unwilling to fight for those principles when they had control of the Congress and G.W. Bush was openly gutting the Constitution and spending this country into an amount of debt that was unbelievable until President Barak Obama spent nearly three trillion dollars to surpass it. These men will not change their course, because not enough incumbents, of both parties, lost their seats today. Only the loss of more than half, at least, of incumbents, regardless of party, would have sent a loud enough message to the entrenched power-mongers of Washington that the American people are tired of the course this nation has been on for most of the last century. I have no confidence that those who have spent their lives accruing power to themselves and to the Federal government will change their way of doing business because a few “radicals” were elected. If nothing else, at least four or five of the Republicans who won seats in the House tonight are merely returning to their former seats. They will resume business as usual, because they will see their return to office as vindication of their previous policies.

Liberty died tonight in America and the world will be worse off for it. The American Empire will carry on as it has for the last half-century. Our military presence in over one hundred countries around the globe will continue. Our many treaty obligations will continue to threaten to engulf us in wars across the world, in areas ranging from the former Soviet republic of Georgia, to the Baltic states of Latvia, Estonia, and Lithuania, and the Asian nations of Japan and South Korea. Wars in any of these areas do not pose an existential threat to the United States, but our leaders have seen fit to ignore George Washington's advice to avoid entangling foreign alliances and have put the lives of this nation's citizens, the accumulated treasure of our nation, and the very principles upon which this nation was founded at risk – simply to prop up countries and regimes that have no strategic significance for this country. Our military and its associated budget will continue to expand. People around the world will continue to see the United States as militaristic, expansionistic, and willing to take unilateral military action whenever its leaders sense some threat to their position of power. It is this perception of a United States which solves its foreign relations problems by throwing its military weight around, which makes our nation so unpopular with many people and nations around the world. This will not change because the American people showed today that they have no real interest in changing the destructive course this nation is on.

Liberty died in America tonight and most Americans don't care. The results of this election clearly show that the majority of the American people have no desire to preserve their civil liberties. By returning a majority of the House of Representatives to their seats the American people showed that they approve of the course that has been set for this nation by both the “Republican” and “Democratic” wings of the Big Government party which controls this nation. Americans had an opportunity to “throw the bums out” tonight and they failed to take advantage of it. There can be no clearer demonstration that the average American, in spite of the hopes of patriots, is not interested in forcing the Federal government to return to governing by the rules set down in the Constitution. The American people have shown themselves to be uninterested in removing the larcenous fingers of the Federal government from around their wallets; or removing the ears of the many secret Federal police agencies from their phone conversations; or removing the eyes of those same police from their emails; or removing the ability of the multitude of Federal regulatory agencies to put in place new regulations which result in the loss of millions of jobs and millions of dollars; or repealing Obamacare; or putting education back in the hands of local people who know best what the needs of their children are; or doing away with any of the multitude of Federal programs and policies which have no constitutional validity. Instead, Americans showed today that they will happily go along with continued growth of the monster of the Federal government; with all of its abuses of civil liberties. The American people have shown today that they have no interest in reducing the role the Federal government plays in their lives: no interest in reducing the confiscatory taxes imposed by the Federal government;no interest in taking responsibility for their lives; no interest in ensuring that their children will live in a free country. The American people supinely surrendered their birthright of freedom today and we are all losers because of it.

Corporations bow to Federal power

Ronald D. Morley — Thu, 24 Sep 2009 19:59:00 GMT

The Federal government has now grown so powerful that some in this nation are taking its slightest wish to be a command. The announcement on Monday by a group of major American corporation, including Hewlett-Packard, AT&T, Tyco and others, that they will be adopting new executive compensation guidelines is a sign of this. The corporations have said that they will develop new rules regarding the compensation of top executives based on a report from the Conference Board that was also announced on Monday. Some will maintain that this is nothing new, that businesses have many times tried to get out in front of possible new regulations by adopting some sort of voluntary self-regulatory scheme on their own. While that is true, it's never been a good sign, but this move is much more significant. To my knowledge American corporations have never subscribed to the idea that the State has any power in the area of setting the compensation that corporate employees, particularly those at the upper end of management, may receive. To my way of thinking this is yet another example of the expansion of the powers of the Federal government far beyond anything allowed by the Constitution or envisioned by the nation's Founding Fathers.

The companies are making this move in an obvious attempt to head off yet more regulation by the anti-business Obama regime. President Obama has repeatedly stated that he believes that corporate executives' pay is too high and is not properly linked to the actual performance of the executives or the companies. According to the new guidelines executive pay is to be more transparently linked to performance and the compensation packages are to be “more affordable”, eliminate “golden parachutes”, and be subject to more oversight by company boards of directors. None of these things can be measured objectively: one man's excessive pay is another's reasonable reward for effort made and results obtained. Likewise, the amount of gold in one's parachute is a matter of interpretation, not solid fact. That means that any regulations based on these ideas will be open to interpretation and companies will be left to wonder if they've overstepped the limits until they're reprimanded by some Washington-based bureaucrat. About the only thing missing is a requirement that the executives bow daily in the direction of Washington and give thanks to President Obama that they have a job. Given this administration's propensity for exacting arbitrary ex post facto punishments for corporations and executives which it thinks have crossed the boundary of what is “reasonable” (just look at the recently announced prosecution of Bank of America for fulfilling the contractual requirements that it inherited when it took over Merrill Lynch – at the State's insistence it should be noted see: http://www.ncbusinesslitigationreport.com/2009/04/articles/fiduciary-duty/threats-and-secret-promises-bank-of-americas-merger-with-merrill-lynch/). How long will it be before executive pay is held in escrow until the State determines whether or not it is “excessive”?

This is the sort of corporate kowtowing that demonstrates how tight the link is between regulation by the State and corporate well-being. Left unsaid in this announcement is the realization that the socialists in Washington have it within their power to simply regulate executive pay in any manner they may wish. The fact that such regulations would be unconstitutional no longer even comes up for discussion. It's as though American businesses have lost their backbone. A generation ago the very idea that the Federal government has the power to place limits on how much money the top employees in a business may make would have been considered laughable. Furthermore, businesses of yesteryear, faced with such an extension of the power of the State would have stood up for their rights and filed suit in court to prevent any such regulations from being put into effect. How the mighty have fallen.

Some will argue that the new rules (a version of which are already in effect for any financial institution that submitted to the State's blackmail and accepted TARP money) aren't any different than other Federal rules that corporations already abide by. What they overlook is that the State has never before (except during WWII and a short time during the Nixon years) set limits on how much money a person is able to earn in the course of legal employment. What is more troubling in some ways, than the restrictions themselves, is the general reaction by the public that “those scoundrels had it coming to them”. The Obama regime is deliberately making this change as a populist act of class warfare. And Americans are falling for it because they fail to realize two things: there is considerable mobility between classes in the U.S. and those who are in the lower ranks of earners today generally move up the ladder to higher paying jobs in the future; and once the State is allowed to regulate compensation in one area or for one class the precedent will be used to gradually lower the limit at which such regulation kicks in. President Obama has already defined $250 thousand dollars as the amount of income which delimits the “wealthy” from everyone else. By using class envy to drive his new regulations President Obama is deliberately pandering to one of the worst emotions of man: envy. This emotion has been considered to be a sin by many as it makes it all too easy to justify shackling those of whom one is envious. President Obama has been at pains to point out that racism has no place in American society and he is to be applauded for that. However, he is deliberately acting to substitute class-envy for racism so as to set the stage for ever more onerous burdens to be placed on the supposed “wealthy” of this nation. Not only is the President introducing a darker, more vindictive tone into the debate over compensation, but he is also greatly extending the extra-constitutional reach of the Federal government. This is yet another example of how little constitutional limitations on Federal power matter to this man whom we are told is a “constitutional law expert”. Once again the powers that be are able to act as they please because they know that the vast majority of the American populace has no idea what is actually written in the Constitution. Because of this ignorance the Obama regime is able to more-or-less make up the rules as it goes along and change the interpretation of existing rules to fit its conception of how things should work.

There are many Americans who think that strict limits should be placed on executive pay. They cite supposed gaps between performance and compensation, a lack of oversight of pay packages by corporate boards of directors, and how “unfair” it is that some executives make millions of dollars a year while other employees work for far less. According to the thinking of such people all of these “problems” are best addressed by extending the power of the State over business activities. What they overlook is that the corporations themselves do not seem to view the situation with alarm – something which would be happening if any of these businesses felt endangered by the levels of executive compensation they are dispensing.

It is entirely possible for boards of directors to discuss in great detail the amount of money to be paid to a member of upper management and reduce the amount if they feel that it is out of line with the benefits that they anticipate the new employee will bring to the company. The pay scales of upper management in American businesses are high because the amounts of money which these people can make for their employers is also high. It is not unreasonable to pay a manager who brings in $700 million dollars of new business or introduces similar operational savings to the bottom line of a company $300 million. From the standpoint of the company they've gotten a bargain and it should not be anyone else's view which prevails in the setting of the wage – outsiders are not privy to all of the information available to a corporate board, nor are they affected by the amount of compensation given out. Once again Americans are falling victim to the liberal credo that outside third parties know what is the best course of action for other to take. Once again the State is usurping power which rightfully belongs to others. And once again Americans are being suckered into giving up yet more liberty – this time by the promise that they'll get to watch as greedy corporate executives “get theirs”. In the end the only certainty is that the Federal government will have further expanded its powers at the expense of the American public.

Pushing the "Reset" button

Ronald D. Morley — Tue, 22 Sep 2009 22:47:00 GMT

“We can mandate whatever we want to in America. We can mandate that Coca-Cola® come out of the cold water tap.” So said Senator Ron Wyden (D-OR) in an interview on NPR's Weekend Edition on Sunday morning, September 20, 2009. This is but one example of the sort of hubris which has seized the Democratic lawmakers in Washington, D.C. It is also indicative of a dangerous trend in American politics; one which has been going on for some time, unfortunately. If Senator Wyden's comment is to be taken at face value, and I know of no reason why it shouldn't be, he seems to feel that the Constitution and the rule of law no longer to him and his fellow legislators. This applies to legislators of both parties, though with the Democrats in control of both the legislative and the executive branches of the government they seem to have a particularly virulent case of the condition right now.

This is a natural result of the rigging of American national politics so that legislators are practically guaranteed a seat for life unless they caught with their hand too deeply into the cookie jar. The turnover in seats in both the House and Senate is pathetically small in any given election cycle. Given the precision with which Congressional districts can be drawn legislators know that, except in roughly 10% of the districts across the nation, they will hold their seat for as long as they want it. Even those which are so-called “swing” districts tend to stay with one party or the other for several years between swings. This is certainly not the outcome that our Founding Fathers were expecting when they put together the Constitution over two hundred years ago. It is one of the results of the various election “reform” laws passed in the last twenty years or so; rather than opening up the field to newcomers the effect has been to rig elections so that incumbents have nearly insurmountable advantages in an election. The tendency has become more noticeable since the passage of the McCain/Feingold election reforms that limited the speech of outside organizations by denying them the ability to make direct reference to any candidate in an election. This has effectively acted to muzzle opposition that is not directly a part of either major party.

The Democratic wing of the “Big Government” party which rules this country feels that it can ignore the growing Tea Party movement simply because that movement is almost entirely outside of the areas from which the they draw their support. The Tea Party movement is strongest in the West and Midwest, areas dominated, except around big cities like Chicago, by the Republicans. Unless the dissatisfaction with the way things are currently done in Washington grows to encompass areas that the Democratic party controls nothing will change. The Democrats will continue to belittle the Tea Party movement as the squawkings of a few disaffected, and probably racist, middle-class white men: hardly a group to which they feel the need to pay attention. The result will be that our arguments will not be heard above the rantings of those who dismiss us as members of a radical fringe movement that will go away if simply ignored.

And that is one of the problems with the current Tea Party movement, though I agree with their goal of rolling back Federal power and forcing our elected officials to abide by the Constitution as it is written, there is nothing in it to attract those who get everything they want from the State. Unless the recipients of Federal largess come to understand that they are simply being used by the rich and powerful men in Washington this nation will continue down the path to socialism and, eventually, totalitarianism. To that end those of us who want to return this nation to one which is ruled by law rather than executive fiat must find some message which appeals to those who are the beneficiaries of the Federal government's wealth redistribution schemes. Judging by the response thus far, simply pointing out the evils of the current system will not be enough. We must develop some sort of blueprint for getting us from where we are – trodden under the heel of an increasingly arrogant government – to where we want to be – living in a land in which each individual is truly free to seek his or her own destiny without the interference of government bureaucrats.

What that blueprint looks like exactly, I don't know. However, coming up with a way of getting this nation back on the right track, without causing damaging upheavals in the economy or simply tossing those who currently receive welfare and other types of support from the State on the garbage heap – which will only lead to damaging social disorder – is not going to be easy. Yet, I think that the time has come for those of us who want to live the life of freedom which the Founding Fathers bequeathed to us to develop such a plan. As a friend of mine said, “We've got to come up with a Giant Fricking Reset Button”, and convince people that we need to collectively push that button and get rid of those in Washington who think that they “can mandate whatever [they] want...”. This will not be an easy task, yet we must undertake it if we want to be taken seriously and force real change on our government.

Facts, distortions, and the coming auto company bailout

Ronald D. Morley — Mon, 24 Nov 2008 00:31:00 GMT

The debate continues, among the economically illiterate lawmakers in Washington, D.C. About whether or not the Federal government should make some $25 billion available to the Detroit automakers to, supposedly, enable them to remain in business. As part of the theater surrounding this debate the Senate Finance Committee held a hearing today, 11/18/2008, at which the various Senators on the panel questioned executives of the GM, Ford, and Chrysler. During this process Connecticut Senator Chris Dodd, a supporter of wasting the taxpayer's money, trotted out what has become an all to familiar litany of Detroit's supposed sins and bad business decisions.

These bad business decisions include: not building cars that American want to buy; not “looking to the future” for their supposed failure to develop high mileage autos; resisting the imposition of Federal regulations such as higher CAFE mileage requirements, air bags, and ABS; and, of course, paying their executives “too much.” These canards have been repeated so frequently that they have become part of American folklore and few people stop to think about the truthfulness of the statements. On the whole the wide-spread acceptance of these so-called “facts” is further proof that Joseph Goebbels was correct; repeat a big enough lie often enough and people come to accept it as the truth.

Few of the charges against the Detroit automakers hold water when one really looks at them. Take the oft-repeated assertion that Detroit has failed to “build cars that Americans want to buy.” Until gasoline prices spiked this last summer that statement was, on its face, untrue. If Americans did not want to buy SUVs and large fuel-inefficient pickup trucks, why were so many of them being sold? And they were being sold not only by the Big Three. Honda, Toyota, Nissan, and other companies were also busily cranking out this type of vehicle by the tens and hundreds of thousands. And guess what? The fuel efficient cars that Americans supposedly wanted so badly to purchase sat on dealer's lots. Even Toyota's ballyhooed Prius failed to set sales records because Americans wanted to, and did, purchase larger vehicles that they perceived as being better able to meet their day to day transportation requirements.

Only when gasoline prices went above $4 per gallon did Americans suddenly begin to demand that large numbers of small, fuel-efficient vehicles be available for them to purchase. Guess what? It's not possible for the automakers to instantly re-tool their production facilities and begin turning out the much larger numbers, of the now popular small cars, required to meet all of the market's demand. It's unfortunate that the State-inspired housing bubble burst at the same time that Detroit, and other automakers, faced large re-tooling costs, but that is not a sign that the management of the Detroit car companies are incompetent. One has only to look at the inventories of Honda, Toyota, Nissan, etc. to see that those companies also have large numbers of unsold SUVs and pickups on their books.

The main reason that Detroit companies are facing dissolution and the foreign companies are not, does not lie entirely with management incompetence, but with the cost structures of the companies. And here is where Detroit has problems that cannot be resolved short of allowing the Big Three to go bankrupt if necessary. The simple fact is that Detroit's labor casts are far out of line with what the auto market will support. The inflated wages demanded, and won, by the UAW over the last fifty years of contract negotiations are no longer supportable in a global automobile marketplace. Detroit's labor costs are two to three times that of their foreign competitors and American workers are no longer productive enough, nor are profit margins high enough, to allow that state of affairs to continue.

Of course, it's much more palatable for our so-called “leaders” in Washington, D.C. to upbraid the management of the Detroit automakers, and they are not blameless in this mess, than it is for them to tell the American people the truth about UAW wage rates. Given UAW President Ron Gettelfinger's statements in the last several days that “it would be unfair” to ask “the workers” to make any more sacrifices to keep the American auto industry intact, it is unlikely that any of our lawmakers will make wage and benefit concessions any part of the new regulatory regime that the Detroit manufacturers will face when the bailout is finally approved, as it will be when Barak Obama assumes power at the latest. Rather, the State will require that the Detroit companies manufacture small fuel-efficient vehicles, which are already going back out of style with the reduction of fuel prices in the last few weeks. There will be more regulations regarding such things as executive pay and benefits, research and development efforts, and whatever else any given lawmaker's favorite hobby-horse is. None of that will help Detroit's balance sheets at all.

Until the Big Three are allowed to go bankrupt, as it appears certain they will so long as the State is kept from “rescuing” them, they will continue to be uncompetitive, primarily, because of their labor costs. If nothing else is accepted as an argument against a Federal bailout of the Detroit automakers it is this: until the industry's cost structure is brought into line with the realities of global competition any money which the taxpayers of the United States give to the Detroit companies will simply be wasted. This is because the “loans” would only put off the inevitable day of reckoning and will end up being a classic case of throwing good money after bad. Of course, once the Obama regime makes the bailout a fact, further losses will be used as a reason for sending yet further money to the companies, since it will be seen as senseless to have wasted the $25 billion currently being discussed. Lawmakers will find it easier to continue shoveling money into the pockets of overpaid U.S. autoworkers than they will to either stand up to the UAW and insist that it lower its wage demands, or to admit that the initial bailout made no economic sense in the first place. It will be easier to continue to heap opprobrium on the management of the car companies and to increase the control the Federal government will exercise over yet another section of the American economy than it will be for of leaders to admit that they were wrong and the marketplace was right.

Paulson Declares victory, sets stage for next economic crisis

Ronald D. Morley — Fri, 14 Nov 2008 00:15:00 GMT

The latest word from Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson is that he believes “we have stabilized the major financial firms” and that he does not anticipate any more failures of large companies. He has effectively declared victory in the so-called economic crisis that this nation is facing, a crisis largely the result of the overextension of credit. So what is his next goal? Why, to make sure that consumers begin borrowing again, because the economy needs to get moving again. So, he's decided that the $700 billion which were supposed to be used for the purchase of so-called “toxic mortgage-based assets” from troubled banks, will instead be used to encourage banks and other financial institutions to begin making more loans to consumers. In other words, he wants to start another round of loaning money to people who cannot afford to borrow it, simply to avoid something loosely defined as “turmoil in the markets”; which is evidently something to fear, at least for the entrenched political/economic power brokers in Washington, D.C. and on Wall Street.

We are being told that consumers must start spending in order to prevent the economy from falling into a depression. The truth of the matter is that the Federal government has made such a hash of the marketplace that it is impossible for anyone to be able to predict what is apt to happen next. And that is why banks are being so reluctant to resume their practice of lending to those on the fringe of economic viability as they don't want to pile up a bunch of potentially bad loans. Unlike the mortgage crisis, in which the banks are at least able to take possession of a physical asset, the house, of someone who defaults on their mortgage, they cannot do that with credit card-based debt. Those loans are what are known as unsecured loans, there are no assets at risk for the borrower should she default on her credit card payments. When a bank has to write off a credit card account as non-performing they have no way of recovering any of the money which they loaned the consumer. They cannot seize the flat screen TVs, the vacations, the PCs, etc.. that were purchased with the now worthless credit card.

Once again, the Federal government is acting in a way which will simply exacerbate the current economic difficulties that we find ourselves in. Rather than allow the market to take its natural course, go through a period of re-adjustment (known as a recession), and emerge with assets better distributed, to companies and individuals better able to use them than were the previous owners, the Feds insist that all troubles must be resolved in an extraordinarily short period of time. Thus, the State will put in place some sort of “program” to encourage the accumulation of yet more consumer debt, at a time when the economy cannot afford it. Rather than encourage savings, which will act in the long-term as an economic stimulus by providing a solid foundation for the economy to grow on, the State insists that “market turmoil” can only be avoided if consumers act now to continue to pile up their credit card debt. I would not be surprised to see Secretary Paulson propose that interest on credit card debt be made deductible from Federal income taxes, in the same way that mortgage interest payments are. After all, if such encouragement works for overly stimulating the housing market, there's no reason why it shouldn't work for credit cards. Remember, the goal of the State is to avoid “market turmoil” which could result in those currently feeding at the public trough being displaced. Thus, it is imperative, in the eyes of the State, that consumers continue to spend themselves into such debt that they will forever be in thrall to the banks, even if that enslavement results in yet another financial crisis in the near future.

Yet another Federal "bailout" in the works

Ronald D. Morley — Wed, 12 Nov 2008 10:29:00 GMT

The Federal government is about to stage yet another “bail-out” of a business which is “too important to fail.” This time the target will be Detroit's Big Three automakers, beginning with General Motors. We are hearing the now familiar drumbeat of predictions of horrible economic repercussions if any of the U.S.-based automakers are allowed to fail. The American people are being told that millions of jobs are at risk of disappearing and that it is essential to our economy that there be a U.S. automobile industry. Finally, we are being told that allowing these companies to go through the traditional and legal process of seeking chapter eleven bankruptcy protection is inappropriate given the turmoil our economy would supposedly be thrown into should one or more of General Motors, Ford, or Chrysler to go out of business.

President-elect Barak Obama has stated that he is in favor of “loaning” the Detroit automakers at least $25 billion. Nancy Pelosi, the Speaker of the House, is in favor of calling a lame-duck session of Congress specifically to consider just how much more taxpayer money is to be given to yet another set of special interests. President Bush has said that he would consider signing a bill giving the obviously incompetent management of a major industry more money. Michigan Senator Carl Levin is proposing that the Paulson Wall Street bail-out bill be amended in order to allow the automakers access to their share of the $700 billion that was originally intended to go solely to Wall Streeters.. Finally, the leaders of the United Auto Workers is campaigning hard for government assistance in order to save high paid manufacturing jobs, which are supposedly fundamental to our nation's economy.

None of this makes any economic sense, though it makes a lot of sense when one considers the politics of the situation. Once again, a set of special interests is to be allowed to feed at the public trough because they were incompetent and drove their companies into financial ruin. Incompetence, greed, and unwillingness to change are going to be rewarded on a scale that would have been unthinkable prior to September of this year. And, again, the Constitution is to be ignored; apparently it no longer matters what the Constitution says if the “emergency” is grave enough – the power of the State to deal with the situation is to be expanded at all costs, and issues of Constitutionality are simply ignored in the rush to feed Leviathan's ever-increasing appetite for power.

The incompetence is present in management, labor, and government. Management has had over thirty years in which to take steps to manufacture small, high quality, fuel-efficient vehicles, yet it has failed to do so, repeatedly. Likewise, the UAW has done its best to maintain pay rates that are simply unsustainable in the face of more efficient, less costly overseas labor. The Federal government is also not blameless in this as its ever-growing list of regulations governing everything from safety, to fuel efficiency, to the type of materials that may be used in the interior of vehicles has helped drive up Detroit's cost to a level that has made an entire industry uncompetitive on a global scale. Yet, all three of these groups are about to be rewarded for their incompetence and, worse, the bail-out will do no good as it will not address the underlying problems of the industry, though the parties involved will loudly trumpet the minor changes that will be made as major breakthroughs that will save the businesses, and the jobs, and will result in the Statist Utopia that the Federal government has been promising ever since the implementation of the New Deal in the 1930s.

What is going unsaid in all of this is that the bailout is going to be done by the upcoming Obama regime in partial repayment of its political debt to the United Auto Workers for its support during the recent presidential election campaign. It is more important to Barak Obama and the rest of the “Social Justice” wing of the Big State Party, known colloquially as the Democratic Party, to pay their political debt than it is to allow the market to function as it should. Rather than allowing these inefficient companies to go bankrupt and make their assets available to other business that could make better uses of them, yet another large chunk of the American economy will be nationalized. Another sector will be taken over by State bureaucrats who will dictate the details of its operation in a manner reminiscent of the central planning done in the former Soviet Union. The State will gain yet more power over the lives of its subjects and the Constitution will fade further into the background, a document supposedly revered by our political leaders, but, in reality a piece of paper that is increasingly viewed by them as an impediment to the further expansion of Leviathan's power and reach. It is particularly ironic that the Federal takeover will be done almost immediately following Senator Barak Obama swears to “preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution.”