Right Minded Online

Chrysler Closures, From a Car Dealer’s Point of View – Greta Van Susteren | On The Record With Greta – FOXNews.com.

Socialists will be socialists. I’m not surprised at all to learn that the White House threatened an investment firm that opposed the Obama administration’s Chrysler bankruptcy plan that screws investors while rewarding the UAW.

In an interview of momentous importance, WJR’s Frank Beckmann interviews Tom Lauria, the Head of Restructuring at top five law firm White & Case, in which the lawyer, who represents Chrysler hold-out hedge funds Stairway Capital and Oppenheimer Funds, discusses on the record the amazing treatment by the White House of Perella Weinberg, which initially had been a transaction hold out but after threats by the White House (not my words) was forced to drop their objection and go with the administration. Says Lauria:

“One of my clients was directly threatened by the White House and in essence compelled to withdraw its opposition to the deal under threat that the full force of the White House press corps would destroy its reputation if it continued to fight…That was Perella Weinberg.”

Michelle Malkin » Chrysler and coercion.

It’s not a coincidence that Chrysler is declaring bankruptcy soon after turning to the government for “help.” But this is what you get when government crosses the line and begins meddling in the private sector. (I may have to merge my “Business” and “Government” categories into “Business/Government.”) As long as the two intermingle, we’ll see more stories like this.

Four banks holding 70 percent of the debt agreed to a deal that would give the lenders 29 cents on the dollar. But a collection of hedge funds refused to budge, saying the deal was unfair because they deserve to recover more than other creditors like the United Auto Workers.

President Barack Obama on Thursday chastised the funds for seeking an “unjustified taxpayer-funded bailout” after Chrysler and his auto task force cleared the company’s other hurdles, including the Fiat deal and a cost-cutting pact that the UAW ratified this week.

Chrysler’s bankruptcy filing is the latest step in a drastic reordering of the American auto industry, which has been crushed by higher fuel prices, the recession and customer tastes that are moving away from the gas-guzzling SUVs that were once big money makers.

The government already has sunk about $25 billion in aid into Chrysler and rival General Motors.

Chrysler to close 5 more plants; court case begins.

Whatever happened to all the hope and change? Judging by the recent performance of the Government Motors Corporation, I don’t think President Obama would have made it as a big-time CEO. The Community Organizer in Chief, who currently serves as the de facto CEO of Government Motors, is overseeing that company’s restructuring while it sheds 21,000 jobs. I thought President Obama was going to turn the economy around. Maybe he’s too busy lowering the sea levels. Who knows? At any rate, this is what happens when government crosses the line and begins to micromanage the private sector, which it has no constitutional authority to do. But what’s the Constitution to a bunch of busybody, power-hungry leftists? Indeed, you get government trying to run a company which it has no experience doing. And that can only result in disaster.

If both are successful, the government and UAW health care trust would own 89 percent of GM stock, with the government holding more than a 50 percent stake, CEO Fritz Henderson said in a news conference at GM’s Detroit headquarters.

President Barack Obama’s administration said in a statement that the bond exchange filing is an important step in GM’s restructuring but the administration has not made a final decision about taking stock for part of its loans.

“The interim plan that GM laid out in this filing reflects the work GM has done since March 30 to chart a new path to financial viability. We will continue to work with GM’s management as it refines and finalizes this plan and with all of GM’s stakeholders to help GM restructure consistent with the presidents commitment to a strong, vibrant American auto industry,” the statement said.

GM to cut 21,000 US factory jobs, shed Pontiac.

By now you’ve been treated to the outrage over bonuses that executives at AIG were supposed to have received as part of their compensation. AIG was one of those companies that was bailed out by the federal government under the guise of economic stimulus. Democrats (and some Republicans, too, unfortunately) are outraged that a company that was bailed out by taxpayer dollars would shell out $165 million worth of bonuses to its employees.

To set the table, the AIG Bonus Crisis of 2009 began when the financial giant received $170 billion in federal bailout money. As a result, the federal government now owns 80% of AIG. When it was recently made public that AIG was in the process of sending out bonus checks, Democrats in Congress and President Obama pretended to be outraged that taxpayer money was being used for fat cat bonuses.

Well, here are the facts: AIG disclosed its retention bonuses more than a year ago, and the amount of the bonuses had already been widely reported. This was before the bailout money was ever made available. In other words, Democrats are expressing outrage over private sector bonuses that were to be paid with private sector earnings. The taxpayers were never on the hook for these bonuses.

Fact #2: One of the leading critics of the AIG bonuses is Senator Christopher Dodd. On March 16, Senator Dodd floated the idea of taxing the bonuses at 90% so Congress could recoup as much of that money as possible on behalf of us beleaguered taxpayers. But it turns out that Senator Dodd was for the bonuses before he was against them. You see, Senator Dodd successfully inserted an amendment into last month’s trillion-dollar economic stimulus package that provided for an “exception for contractually obligated bonuses agreed on before Feb. 11, 2009,” which exempted the very AIG bonuses Senator Dodd now wants to tax into oblivion.

Fact #3: The AIG bonuses amount to less than 0.1% of the AIG bailout, which, in turn, is just a small fraction of the amount spent by Congress to bail out other companies and “stimulate the economy.” Why all the focus on $165 million in bonuses that were not paid for by the taxpayers, when Congress is throwing trillions of dollars to the wind expanding government to supposedly “stimulate the economy?” It’s simple. Congress and President Obama are desperate to get the spotlight off themselves and their irrational fiscal recklessness.

To illustrate just how classless our elected leaders have become, Iowa Senator Charles Grassley (a Republican, no less) crassly remarked “I suggest, you know, obviously, maybe [AIG executives] ought to be removed, but I would suggest the first thing that would make me feel a little bit better toward them if they’d follow the Japanese example and come before the American people and take that deep bow and say, I’m sorry, and then either do one of two things: resign or go commit suicide.”

Our elected leaders aren’t the only ones who are targeting AIG employees, however. One executive, James Haas, found the media camped outside his home in Fairfield, Connecticut soon after news of the bonuses broke. He said he had even received death threats. It has gotten so bad that AIG told its employees to avoid wearing anything that says “AIG,” among several security measures. When AIG CEO Edward Liddy was dragged before Congress as part of the Democrats’ charade, he was confronted by leftists who were demanding jail time for Mr. Liddy.

While the Obama administration and Democrats hammer AIG for giving out large bonuses to its employees, they don’t have a problem with AIG giving out large bonuses to politicians. President Obama received $101,332 from AIG  in the form of political contributions. Senator Dodd tops even that, having received $281,400 in campaign contributions from AIG. Where’s the outrage over that?

Going back to Fannie Mae and Freddic Mac, Democrats have tinkered with the private sector just enough to produce chaos, and they then have stepped in to increase the role of government to ostensibly quell the chaos. By proclaiming, “See, the free market doesn’t work,” they have fabricated the excuse they need to do things like take over 80% of AIG.

When it became time for the AIG bonuses to actually be paid out, it made the news, and the Democrats, in order to save face, siezed the opportunity to excoriate the private sector. They portrayed themselves as the noble champions of the little guy, stepping in at the last second to prevent AIG executives from pilfering taxpayer dollars and lining their own pockets.

The entire drama stirred up by Democrats has been a lie from the very beginning. They are playing the American public for fools, all the while making scapegoats out of private citizens, maligning their reputations, and confiscating what they have rightfully earned.

What does it say about the left’s view of the free market when bank CEO’s have to hold “peace talks” with the President of the United States? I thought you only held peace talks with your enemies, sort of like the nuclear missile negotiations we used to have with the USSR.

Top bank chief executives held peace talks with President Barack Obama at the White House on Friday as the administration sought to soothe tensions over lavish Wall Street bonus payments.

The meeting came at the end of a week in which in which Mr Obama pushed back against efforts by Congress to slap hefty tax penalties on bonuses and warned people not to “demonise” investors and entrepreneurs.

FT.com / World – Bank chiefs hold peace talks with Obama.

Once again, we’re watching Atlas Shrugged played out in real life.

General Motors Corp. Chairman and CEO Rick Wagoner will step down immediately at the request of the White House, administration officials said Sunday. The news comes as President Barack Obama prepares to unveil additional restructuring efforts designed to save the domestic auto industry.

GM CEO Wagoner to step down at White House request.

As numerous U.S. corporations have stooped to groveling before the Democrats (AIG, car manufacturers), it’s refreshing to see a major corporation playing hardball with the establishment.

FedEx could cancel contracts for $6.7 billion in American-made planes if Congress makes it easier for unions to organize the delivery giant’s workers.

In a Securities and Exchange Commission filing on Friday, the Memphis-based delivery company disclosed that future commitments to buy Boeing 777s are contingent on FedEx Express’ continued coverage by the Railway Labor Act.

The disclosure serves as a warning to lawmakers seeking to put FedEx Express workers under the National Labor Relations Act, a move seen as helping the International Brotherhood of Teamsters and rival UPS.

$6.7 billion threat: FedEx warns lawmakers over union legislation : fdx : Memphis Commercial Appeal.

One of those evil, greedy, fat-cat AIG executives who took bailout money from the taxpayers has turned in his resignation, and his resignation letter has been made public. Here’s the gold nugget:

After 12 months of hard work dismantling the company — during which A.I.G. reassured us many times we would be rewarded in March 2009 — we in the financial products unit have been betrayed by A.I.G. and are being unfairly persecuted by elected officials. In response to this, I will now leave the company and donate my entire post-tax retention payment to those suffering from the global economic downturn. My intent is to keep none of the money myself.

I take this action after 11 years of dedicated, honorable service to A.I.G. I can no longer effectively perform my duties in this dysfunctional environment, nor am I being paid to do so. Like you, I was asked to work for an annual salary of $1, and I agreed out of a sense of duty to the company and to the public officials who have come to its aid. Having now been let down by both, I can no longer justify spending 10, 12, 14 hours a day away from my family for the benefit of those who have let me down.

Op-Ed Contributor – Dear A.I.G., I Quit! – NYTimes.com.

Wal-Mart, the corporation that liberals love to hate, has done more for the U.S. economy, done more for poor people, and done more to lower drug costs than any liberal government program ever has. Which, I am sure, makes liberals hate Wal-Mart even more.

Wal-Mart Stores Inc is awarding approximately $2 billion to its U.S. hourly employees through financial incentives, including handing out $933.6 million in bonuses on Thursday, after the world’s largest retailer gained market share amid a recession.

In a memo to Wal-Mart employees obtained by Reuters, Wal-Mart CEO Mike Duke said the retailer is awarding roughly $2 billion to U.S. hourly employees, which includes $933.6 million in bonuses, $788.8 million in profit sharing and 401(k) contributions, millions of dollars in merchandise discounts, and contributions to its employee stock purchase plan.

Finance – Wal-Mart awards $2 billion to U.S. hourly employees.

The prospect of the Democrats’ card check legislation has send the price of Wal-Mart stocks tumbling. The left hates Wal-Mart, so they’ll be dancing in the streets over that news. But liberals also claim to love the poor, and Wal-Mart has done more for poor people in the U.S. than any government program has ever come close to doing. Liberals also claim to be about health care, and Wal-Mart has also done more to lower drug costs than any liberal ever has. Believe me, the left hates this.

Michelle Malkin » Threat of card check legislation sends Wal-Mart stock rating down.

Michelle Malkin highlights what she calls the letter of the day. It begins:

I have employed about 50 people during the last 20 years, and my family’s taxable income is about $300,000. In order to avoid paying a higher percentage of taxes on all of my income, I will decrease output, lay off some staff and still end up keeping the same amount.

Michelle Malkin » Letter of the day: Disgusted in Diamond Bar.

The impending bankruptcy filing by Sirius XM is being averted by a massive infusion of PRIVATE money.

Liberty Media Corp. will invest $530 million in Sirius XM Radio Inc., fending off a likely bankruptcy for the satellite radio company and blocking a bid by a rival, Dish Network Corp. CEO Charlie Ergen, to take control of Sirius.

Sirius had warned it could file for bankruptcy as early as Tuesday if it could not successfully negotiate with its debt holders. Sirius XM Radio has 20 million subscribers who use the service to listen to sports, music and talk, including Howard Sterns show.

Liberty Media deal staves off Sirius bankruptcy.

I own three of these things. I hate to hear this.

Satellite mogul Charles Ergen has offered to boost the capital and restructure the debt of Sirius XM Radio Inc, which has been preparing for a possible bankruptcy filing, newspapers reported.

Ergen has offered to inject several hundred million dollars of capital into the satellite radio company, though his plan does not involve buying out existing shareholders, the Wall Street Journal said, citing people familiar with the matter.

On its website, the New York Times cited people close to the company as saying Sirius has been working with advisors on a possible Chapter 11 filing, which could put pressure on satellite TV company EchoStar Corp, which is headed by Ergen and reportedly holds a substantial amount of Sirius XM debt.

Ergen offers troubled Sirius a lifeline: reports.

Once again, I’d normally say that it’s none of government’s business how large private sector salaries are, but when those companies receive taxpayer money, for any reason, this is what they subject themselves to:

The Obama administration is tackling the bailout of the battered financial sector on two tracks: overhauling how the government spends the money while devising new executive compensation restrictions for banks that get it.

Administration officials said the pay limits could be announced this week, but said the more complicated task of setting up a new framework for rescuing the nation’s ailing banks would have to wait until early next week.

President Barack Obama, in a grim assessment of the financial industry, said Monday he would probably need more money to bail out troubled institutions to ease a suffocating credit crunch. Still, he added, “some banks won’t make it.”

The Treasury Department is expected to announce new rules that limit executive pay for companies that receive “exceptional assistance” under the bailout program.

Feds may limit execs’ pay at banks that get aid – Yahoo! News.

Last Wednesday, the House of Representatives passed a trillion-dollar pork bill disguised as an economic stimulus package. Unfortunately, it has nothing to do with stimulating an economy that is officially in recession for the first time in nearly 17 years.

This is entirely the Democrats’ bill. President Obama and the Democrats dearly wanted this to be a bipartisan piece of legislation. Of course, the Democrats’ idea of bipartisanship is that the GOP acquiesces to whatever the Democrats want. (Really, if bipartisanship is more important than ideology, why don’t we ever see Democrats come over to our side to pass legislation?)

Fortunately, House Republicans would have none of it. Not one, single Republican voted for this behemoth. Not one. The GOP even managed to peel off 11 Democrats to vote against it. But it was not enough. The bill still passed, and is headed over to the Senate.

Since Democrats control the White House and both chambers of Congress, they don’t need any Republican support to pass whatever they want. So why is it important for bills to receive bipartisan support? Because they know their “stimulus” package is nothing more than a monolithic pork bill that does very little to stimulate the economy, and does a great deal to grow government. Democrats therefore want Republicans to sign on so that when it does fail, they can pull the GOP into the circle of blame. But the House GOP was wise enough to oppose the pork bill, also known as the Generational Theft Act of 2009, in lock-step harmony. Good for them.

The national debt currently stands at $10.7 trillion. (That’s $10,700,000,000,000.) It’s difficult to pinpoint an exact figure, because the thing grows at about $6 million per minute. Owing primarily to the bailouts already given away by the Democrat Congress, the current fiscal year deficit stands at more than $1 trillion WITHOUT adding in their latest trillion-dollar shopping spree. Ironically, Democrats railed against deficit spending during the Bush presidency, blaming the War on Terrorism for unnecessarily running up the debt. But Democrats have since re-written the how-to book on deficit spending, dwarfing any deficit that was incurred during the previous administration.

Apparently, it is taboo to incur deficits when defending the nation, but it’s just dandy to incur deficits to grow government.

Every dollar that Congress spends is a dollar that has yet to be collected in taxes. Keep in mind that the government does not create wealth. The private sector does. Government, by its nature, is incapable of creating wealth. Government only taxes wealth that is created by others. Therefore, Congress is spending enormous sums of money that don’t even exist yet, and won’t exist until years from now. Our elected representatives are already spending the tax money of workers who aren’t even working yet. Our kids better start earning a paycheck pronto.

Aside from their fiscal recklessness, the “stimulus” bill does little to actually stimulate the economy. The best way to stimulate an economy is to a) cut taxes, and b) get out of the way of the private sector. The Democrats’ plan does neither. One of the major components to their version of economic stimulus is infrastructure: building bridges and roads. The problem is, a bill passed today doesn’t translate to a bridge tomorrow. These things takes months, even years to plan and build. We need economic stimulus today. That money would be far better used to simply cut taxes immediately, income taxes, capital gains taxes, business and corporate taxes. Heck, you could suspend payroll taxes for a few months, and it would immediately put more money in the pocket of every single American who earns a paycheck, as well as every business, by simply not collecting the FICA tax. Every person, rich, poor, and middle class, would immediately have more money to spend, and President Obama would also be able to make good on his campaign promise of cutting the taxes of 95% of Americans.

But tax cuts simply aren’t part of the Democrats’ plan. They’d rather use the force of the law to transfer wealth and grow government, neither of which will spark economic growth. If government spending stimulated the economy, we’d never have recessions, because government spending increases every year.

On another note, business and corporations that do receive bailout money from the taxpayers leave themselves open to scrutiny, as bailouts create an improper alliance between government and business.

For example, just within the past week, we learned that Merrill Lynch Chief Executive John Thain came under fire for spending $1.2 million to renovate his office a year ago, even before his company received bailout money from the taxpayers. Normally, it’s none of anyone’s business what a private company does with its earnings. But when that company accepts bailout money from the taxpayers, it opens itself up to such scrutiny, and puts itself in a position to have government tell it what it can and cannot spend its money on.

Citigroup, another recipient of bailout money, recently chose not to accept delivery of a corporate jet that it planned to purchase before the credit crisis. President Obama remarked that such jets are not “the best use of money at this point,” calling them “outrageous” spending for a company getting taxpayer dollars.

And when it became known that Wall Street executives received more than $18 billion in bonuses, President Obama remarked, “It is shameful. And part of what we’re going to need is for the folks on Wall Street who are asking for help to show some restraint, and show some discipline, and show some sense of responsibility.”

It’s none of government’s business what private sector executives take home in compensation. None whatsoever. But, once again, when said businesses accept bailout money from the government, then those companies set themselves up for this kind of interference.

At any rate, it’s hard not to laugh when President Obama lectures the private sector on showing restraint, discipline, and a sense of responsibility, when it is he and his fellow Democrats in Congress who have shown no restraint, no discipline, and no sense of responsibility in running up trillions of dollars in deficits with no actual economic stimulus to show for it.

President Obama and the Democrats are starting to sound like a broken record in telling the private sector what to do with its money. The latest target is Wall Street executives who took home large bonuses. It’s none of government’s business what private sector executives take home in compensation. None whatsoever. But when said businesses accept bailout money from the government, then those companies set themselves up for this kind of scrutiny, and it suddenly becomes the business of taxpayers what they do with their money.

President Barack Obama, who has ordered a pay freeze on six-figure White House aides, wants to talk to Wall Street executives about a report indicating payments of over $18 billion in bonuses as the economy was in virtual free fall.

“It is shameful,” Obama said from the Oval Office Thursday. “And part of what we’re going to need is for the folks on Wall Street who are asking for help to show some restraint, and show some discipline, and show some sense of responsibility.”

Obama slams Wall Street for rich executive bonuses – Yahoo! News.

Once again, when a private sector company accepts public money disguised as a bailout, that company opens itself up to having government telling it what it should and should not spend its money on. It’s better not to accept public money, because that way it’s none of the government’s business what that company does with its money. But this is what you get when politicians meddle with the economy.

Citigroup wont be getting a new corporate jet after all. Under pressure from President Barack Obama, one of the nation’s largest banks reversed course, announcing that it will not take delivery of the jet it had planned to purchase before the credit crisis unfolded.

The canceled deal came as many politicians voiced concern about how banks are spending government bailout money.

The White House reached out to Citigroup on Monday to reiterate Obama’s position that such jets are not “the best use of money at this point,” calling them “outrageous” spending for a company getting taxpayer dollars, said a White House official who spoke on condition of anonymity because the official was describing private conversations.

Citigroup will not take possession of new aircraft – Yahoo News.

Normally, it’s none of anyone’s business what a privte sector company does with its own money. But when that private sector company accepts taxpayer money disguised as a bailout, it suddenly opens itself up to scrutiny, and it, unfortunately, becomes our business what that company does with its money. This is one of many reasons why private sector companies should never be bailed out with taxpayer money.

Former Merrill Lynch Chief Executive John Thain defended the acquisition of the brokerage by Bank of America Corp BAC.N and said the bank knew of Merrill’s losses and bonuses before the merger closed.

In a memo to Merrill employees, Thain also said he plans to reimburse Bank of America for $1.2 million spent to renovate his office a year ago, including $35,115 reportedly spent on commode and $1,405 reportedly paid for a trash can. He called the expenses “a mistake in the light of the world we live in today.”

Thain says hid nothing from BofA – Yahoo News.

That’s Governor Bredesen, who wants to close a tax loophole that would affect about 2,700 state businesses registered as family-owned noncorporate entities, or FONCE’s. These small businesses are shielded from paying corporate taxes on about $5 billion worth of property and $500 million in profits.

Jim Brown, Tennessee director for the National Federation of Independent Businesses, said his members are concerned that changes could affect small operations.

“There are a lot of mom-and-pops out there,” he said. “More than 50 percent of our members have five employees or fewer – these aren’t entrepreneurs investing in skyscrapers.”

The Revenue Department has sent out follow-up letters to about 2,000 businesses that didn’t respond to the first survey with the threat of having their exemption canceled if they don’t reply.

The exemption for the 0.25 percent franchise tax on property values and 6.5 percent excise tax on income means the state is doing without $45 million it would be collecting if those businesses were not claiming an exemption.

So the Bredesen wants to soak mom-and-pop businesses with an additional $45 million in taxes, this coming as President-elect Obama has promised to raise federal taxes on businesses, and as the unemployment rate is rising. And so the Revenue Department is threatening to cancel the exemptions of businesses who refuse to fill out their silly surveys. But even more sinful is the governor’s assertion that it would be sinful to lay off state employees while keeping this exemption in place. For some reason, liberals believe they can raise taxes on businesses (and individuals, too) with no negative consequences for the businesses (and individuals). So soaking businesses with an additional $45 million taxes will keep the state government from laying people off, but wouldn’t raising business taxes force some businesses to lay people off, too?