The Obama-GM Debacle

Obama says he wants to, “get G.M. back on its feet, take a hands-off approach and get out quickly.”

Problem: No plan.
Obama wants to build affordable green cars and save the mega company yet, he’s presented no product plan, no manufacturing plan and no plan for appeasing creditors, not to mention the fact that no one on his staff has experience turning around a large, complex, flailing company.


Problem: Get in and get out? More like get in and duck.
Obama and his diaper, er dapper clad youngings claim that they can get GM out of debt quickly and help them turn a profit after investing tax-payer dollars to the tune of $50billion. Really? That’s an arrogant notion considering GM’s been stuck in the non-profit quagmire for decades (and again, no one on Obama's staff has any experience dealing with billion dollar instant makeovers).

Obama wants GM to focus on building small, energy efficient cars for the future, yet GM's most profitable and most popular cars are the gas-guzzling SUVs and its monster Cadillac Escalade. What’s more, automotive economists have pointed out that sales of small-engine, green cars account for only 17 % of total automotive sales in the US and that it's a very competitve sector.

More arrogance. I'll miss those tax-payer dollars....


Problem: UAW, UAW, UAW
Management and the UAW have had a bad marriage for the last 30 years which has dragged down the entire company. Why neither party has ever filed for divorce befuddles me. Today's UAW is like some pesky virus that plagues every sector of the business until it's no longer functioning, and now they have even more stake in the company. Brill.

The UAW doesn’t approve of sending production off-shore, and while I agree that we need to keep jobs here, what the UAW doesn’t understand, or chooses to ignore, is that the UAW is the reason many U.S. automakers have turned to foreign production. Not only has the UAW priced itself out of the market with its incredulous wages, benefits and union dues, but they've gone greedy with their business dealings. Like I always say, they don't do squat but they sure do pay people well to take an 8-hour lunch break cleverly disguised as an 8-hour work day.

This UAW situation motto was pulled from the 'about us' page of their website:

"Wake-up, wake-up [yawn, stretch, yawn]...that bolt in the production line
needs to be replaced. Stop production. Go to maintenance and fill out a requisition to get the bolt guy to come down here and replace it. As soon as maintenance approves that other requisition to fill that open management position, hopefully we'll have the bolt guy down here sometime next month. In the meantime, here's
your paycheck for the next 4 weeks, plus bonus. Have a nice lunch."

Ok, so it didn't come from their website... Very amusing though is the thought of government getting into bed with the UAW. *chuckle, chuckle* That's likely to have explosive outcomes.


Problem: American car company + European car company = Disaster
Obama has given Chrysler 30 days to come-up with a game-plan for the newly proposed "ChryslerFiat", with a promise to provide $6billion in financial backing.

Flashback: Past attempts to merge failing US automakers with European automakers (American Motors and Renault, Daimler-Chrysler etc.) has resulted in poor quality, managment fumble-bumbles, revenue nose-dives, and expensive products that people just don't want. And apparently, neither do the automakers that produced them since even GM and Ford are dumping their still fairly new European divisions faster than you can say SAAB.


Problem: Any business + Government = Disaster
The government holds a 60% stake in GM. Does anyone really think this is a good thing?

Let’s consider…
City transportation: Loses millions every year. [FAIL.]

AMTRAK – has lost over $500 Million during the whole of its government-run lifespan with debts totaling more than $3Billion. [FAIL.]

Social and Welfare programs – [FAIL.]

Medicare – I read somewhere that Medicare was so lax in its oversight that they were approving orthopedic shoes for leg amputees. [FAIL.]

Federal deficit before Obama – [FAIL.]

Federal deficit after Obama – Obama has nearly tripled the deficit. Who knew one could expound even more on failure. [FAIL.]

The government-run Government - [FAIL.]

All, at the end of the day, private enterprise is the best there is at alleviating suffering and maximizing wealth to the most people most effectively and efficiently.

'Nuff said.

Keeping Guantanamo Open

A controversial topic...but those are always more fun to talk about.

Closing Guantanamo is a symbolic move, but it's not the right move. Of course, saying that out loud doesn’t yield popular votes or help make new friends; you’re more likely to come across as an insensitive swine. *I can feel the e-tomatoes flying already* In any case, popular sentiment doesn’t change reality.

First: when you consider the purpose for it, the environment, the people in it, and the security, etc... Guantanamo is clearly a unique facility. Fact is...even closed, a facility of this kind will have to exist somewhere. The entire facility is guarded by military personnel, guards are armed to the hilt, and doctors have to wear heavy armor when treating prisoners to protect themselves against violent attacks like stabbings. All of these elements ((plus interrogation and national security) go beyond what we would consider standard prison environment. Given the nature of the detainees and the primary function of the facility, the location seems to me to be an ideal one.

“An effective counterterrorism policy would segregate terrorists from society, gain intelligence about their activities and organization by lawful means, hold them criminally responsible for their crimes, and discourage the spread of their numbers and ideology.”

As far as I'm concerned, successfully achieving the first three goals is quite enough for me to validate keeping Guantanamo open. Few will deny that there have been abuses in the interrogation process - perhaps even gross atrocities. That said, the existence of these abuses does not and should not discredit the benefits of the facility or the necessity for keeping it open. If the detention facilities at Guantanamo are closed, the United States will still have legal and moral obligations to safeguard the prisoners, collect intelligence, and try war criminals. In fact, there are many who agree that meeting those obligations in accordance with national security concerns will require procedures and facilities that look an awful lot like Guantanamo.

Second: looking at our own domestic prisons I'm not ignorant enough to believe that similar abuses aren’t occurring. I know abuses happen; I watch 20/20 and Dateline! ;-) Prisoners may not be chained for days without food or use of bathroom facilities (that's the nicest way to put that), but are prisoners who are beaten by guards, gang-raped and demoralized considered to be receiving better treatment? How do we distinguish? On one hand we have Guantanamo and public outcry over the treatment of terrorists who live and die to kill Americans (meaning they could give a squats ass about you) and on the other hand the public doesn't say boo about the treatment of American prisoners within our own domestic detention facilities. I find the obvious contradiction extremely disturbing and I believe this one consideration alone renders the whole argument of prisoner treatment at Guantanamo moot.

In any case, before we even consider closing Guantanamo, it needs to be stated very clearly how the government intends to collect intelligence, interrogate detainees and safeguard prisoners more effectively and humanely than the current detention operations at Guantanamo. Following that, the government needs to address how they intend to monitor all of those operations to ensure the proper processes are being followed (or being followed any differently than the current operations at Guantanamo). I've heard nothing; I've read nothing that addresses these important questions. Arguing that the United States should close the facilities merely to placate criticisms of its detention policies is not enough (unless of course you're Obama or part of his idiot administration).

*I find this whole Guantanamo business eerily similar to the administration's handling of Healthcare - let's not identify the issues and try to fix the problem, let's appease public opinion by making stupid decisions to take focus away from the issue, and hope the issue resolves itself*

moving on...

If we close Guantanamo…where do the prisoners go?
A friend posted a video on Facebook recently and the message of the youtube video was basically: Terrorist..Coming Soon to Your Neighborhood. Extreme? Probably not by much. One possibility under consideration is to send detainees to local prisons; another option is to send them to Camp Pendleton. I suggest another alternative...if GITMO does close, cut a hole in the fence and let them loose in Cuba. Castro was nice enough to empty his prisons and send them to us in the 70's, let's return the favor! And by the by, sending suspected terrorists to a prison facility filled with militarly prisoners - isn't on par with creating a more humane environment; in fact I would argue that it's more akin to putting sheep in the lion's den. Putting suspected terrorists at the mercy of American prisoners and guards - military or otherwise - also seems to render the whole argument of prisoner treatment at Guantanamo moot. On second thought, this option does have some appeal...

Next idiot move.....

A Sinking GOP

Just a few years ago, I was telling college students that the problem with the Democratic party is that…there is no true party. Eight years ago, the Democratic party brand was in shambles. It had no solid ideology to spout, no real platform, dissent ran amuck throughout the party, and there was no strength in leadership.

Suddenly, today’s Republican Party has landed itself where the democrats were 8 years ago: lacking a coherent vision that resonates with ordinary voters and weighed down by ideological bankruptcy. States are turning blue, pulpit religion seems to be finding its way into a lot of party conversations, the party as a whole feels demoralized and beaten, and strong party leaders are non-existent. I’m not sure I could even name a solid top 5. And if I could, no folks, Sarah Palin would not be on that list.

Briefly on Sarah Palin: let’s face it; Palin energized the Party base – no joke. But here’s the reality: we were so desperate to reinvigorate a lifeless party, to bring youth to our ideas and our image, that we blinded ourselves to what can be classically characterized as a woman who is just plain air-headed. We scorn Obama for his down–right idiot behavior in recent months (as well we should), but can we honestly say Palin would have given a better representation – as VP or possibly as President. EH. No. And yet we wanted that November win so badly (and just as badly we wanted the Democrats to fall with a thunderous THUMP), that we ignored the obvious to get there.

Many of us know what it means to live, breathe and “be” Republican, but there seem to be a lot more who just don’t get it. What has happened to our party since the Reagan days? Republican politicians tout Reagan's name to invigorate skeptical voters *and we within the party love hearing his name*, but Reagan was last President in 1989. What does that say about our party when the last great conservative leader we quote was leading twenty years ago??? Are we even still the same party that Reagan loved so much? Certainly not; we just use his name.

George W. Bush's popularity pretty much tanked our overall image, but there’s no denying the fact that there’s a lot more going on in the GOP that is responsible for its decline. Anyone who says otherwise would probably vote Palin for President in 2012. *you know who you are*

What we need to do
We need to rebuild the Republican brand. We need to rebuild from the local level and let the revolution spread upward and outward. I’ve seen it start here in the Springs – a lot of togetherness and discussion. Let’s spread the passion and renew the party.

The party has to do a better job of communicating, in plain English, what our policies mean to the people here at home. The awesomeness of our ideals hasn’t changed, but younger generations don’t seem to get us. We need to do a better job of saying: This is what we believe, this is why we believe it, and this is what it means to you; for reasons a, b, and c…this is how our “vision” impacts you. Simply saying what you believe and pointing at the other guy isn’t enough – not today. The future of the party isn’t the older generation who remember what the party used to be, but the young folks coming out of college who will make it what it needs to become. And from young to old, left to right, people need to understand the connection between policy and personal impact.

And finally,

The party has to be above bitterness and anger. It seems that so many conservatives these days are more interested in spewing pure hatred for leftist ideologies that they refuse to engage in real intellectual conversations on the issues. And I’m not saying the left doesn’t do this either but who cares what they’re doing. Whatever it is…they’re doing it better than we are. And if there’s something to really be angry about, let’s start there.

It’s a Hospital, Stupid

Yesterday, I had the unfortunate experience of hitching a ride to the ER in the front of an ambulance (don’t worry, aches and pains aside…everyone is OK). But on the way to the ER, we didn’t nedessarily know that things would be okay. There was only concern and a need to get in front of the ER doctor. *Insert unhappy rant*

The hospital we went to was St. Francis Medical Center, a new facility under Penrose-St. Francis (see pretty picture)

It’s a nice looking hospital no doubt; the fact that it’s brand new doesn’t hurt either. And the food is pretty decent for hospital food. The only question I have is: Who’s the idiot architect that designed the parking layout?? Ok two questions: And which moronic suit approved it??

*If you agree that it should be a straight shot from the road to the ambulance drop-off, raise your hand*

Now, the picture above was taken when the building and parking lots were completed but the layout from the main entrance to the parking lot was still in progress. Notice the distance? Yea, that’s not for fear of hospitals, that’s because between the main entrance and the hospital there is a long (out of the way) road that very slowly meanders towards the hospital before it leads you into 3, count ‘em 3(!) ridiculous round-abouts. If you’ve ever had the pleasure of experiencing a round-about, I’m sure you can empathize without me having to say anything. After the three, count ‘em 3(!) ridiculous round-abouts, you have a few more twists and sharp turns before you finally see the emergency entrance. Alas, there's one final sharp turn to get to the actual ambulance entrance.

Heh? Are you kidding me??!!?!

The layout is worse than the worst airport I’ve been to and yes, this is the only way to get in or out. The ambulance driver almost took the wrong exit on the second round-about during daylight and we did take a wrong exit on the very first round-about leaving at night. Imagine the poor patient strapped to a gurney in the back, having to endure all that crap. *Ouch* Imagine a patient bleeding to death or suffering a heart attack and it takes 20 minutes to get to the hospital and another 15 just to get from the main entrance to the ER.

Doctor: The patient died on the way?*

Driver: He would have been fine, but, we took a wrong turn on the second round-about, ended up by some apartment complex in who knows where before we could turn around, then exited on the third round-about in front of the wrong ER entrance. Btw: Where IS the ambulance entrance?? We never did find it....

Pffft. Morons.

Top 10 Favorite Movies of All Time

So after I posted the best action films of the last 30 years, someone asked me if any of those would qualify as my favorite movies of all time. My answer: some, yes but for the most part, not really.

Here's my list of my all-time favorite movies in no particular order because that would be TOO difficult I think. These all qualify as #1 depending on the day and my mood! There were only two criteria for this list:
1. Which movies do I tend to watch over and over again, and
2. Which movies, in my opinion, stand the test of time.

1. Aliens [best action flick and just such a fantastic movie! In all honesty, I've probably seen this movie 50+ times throughout the years....]

2. Frequency [I love movies that have a unique story line, surprising twists and turns, and in the end all the pieces seem to fit together perfectly. This is one of those movies. If you haven't seen it, I highly recommend it - it will quickly move up in your list of favorites - I promise!]

3. the Usual Suspects [This is another one of those nicely constructed movies with a unique story, great cast and a wow of a finish. Kevin Spacey is tops in this movie]

4. Gone With the Wind [A classic. How can this movie not be on my list. I adore Rhett Butler! And as selfish, pig-headed and spoiled as she may be, I also adore Scarlett O'hara. My grandmother introduced this movie to me when I was in 5th grade and I've never stopped loving it]

5. Eight Below [This is a relatively new movie released by Disney; and it is fantastic! Both heartbreaking and uplifting]

6. Star Wars: the second trilogy: IV, V, VI [No words necessary. I'll just say this: if you're not a Star Wars fan then I really just have no words... This is the ultimate fantasy, feel-good movie of all time.]

7. Back to the Future [You made a time machine....out of a DeLorean?!?!?!, Helloooo McFly!, I've never seen purple underwear before Calvin, You're my muh- my muh-...., Dad-da-daddio, now why don't you make like a tree and get outta here (i laugh every time I hear this because I'm pretty sure it's make like a tree and leave). All together great lines and memorable scenes. One of my favorites is the opener and the "mega amp" blowout]

8. Apollo 13 [I have a thing for movies that are based on true events and have a certain documentary type quality to them; and this is just a great one start to finish. Outstanding cast and great directing. It's just a good Sunday evening-type movie. The extended addition is also terrific]

9. Terminator ["I'll be back." Another movie that hit my list of top 10 action movies and it's one of my favorite movies to watch when I'm sick. In all honesty, I've probably seen this movie 100+ times over the years. I also had a crush a Michael Biehn too so that helps - although Arnie's naked tusche seemed to get a little more screen time.]

10. Miracle [another one of those Disney feel-good movies. I think this is one of Kurt's best performances. Personally, it doesn't hurt having to watch 2 hours of hot hockey players tussle on the ice either!]

Have any recommendations? Share 'em if you got 'em!

Obama's Staffing Wage-freeze

So I still haven’t heard Obama’s inauguration speech and I probably won’t bother to check it out. I heard it was very glib - intended to alleviate some of the pressure of expectation I'm sure. The day after his speech though, I did hear some clap-clap-hoorahs in and around the office over his “firm-footed” decision making after promising a wage-freeze on White House staffers making over $100k. According to an article published in the Washington Post, the freeze is expected to save the government ~$440k next year. Note: I only have a hard copy but I’m sure you can find the article on their website at washingtonpost.com

A savings of $440k…Whoop, whoop!

*more like clap-clap-clap THUD*.

Obviously Obama is trying to set a tone at the start of his administration by making an example of his own staff. Clap-clap-clap for Obama’s PR skills, but we already knew he led smoothly in that category anyway. What exactly does this accomplish? Nothing. Absolutely nothing. Nothing good anyway. I’m not balking over a government wage freeze, but hailing this move as a bold stroke from our new, fearless leader seems egregiously underserved, especially considering Bush already increased salaries via executive order on December 18th. DOH!

Did Obama forget to mention that? * Obama says, “My bad.” *

During Obama’s campaign, his economic plan for getting the country out of a recession was essentially government supply side economics. When private enterprise isn't able to stimulate the economy, the government steps in with new spending and government programs to keep money afloat and people in jobs until the country is out of recession. When that happens, government spending takes a backseat while the free market economy flourishes.

And so when government steps in with all these great things, where does the money come from? Tax payers..duh. And this of course, leads us to the conservative argument that increasing taxes during an economic recession is well, stupid.

To stimulate the economy, you want people to spend.

Nevertheless…I guess that just means that the extra taxes off the $440k we might have otherwise received to help pay for Obama’s spending programs, will not be coming from his high-seat government staffers – just everyone else.

Lobbying is Democracy in Action

Oh here we go…

As many know, my blog posting has been in hiatus for nearly three months now. **What can I say, I’ve been in mourning since the dismal outcome of the elections** And I suspect the next two weeks will be nearly as painful as I’ve already started receiving “woot-woot all hail the mighty ‘Bama” messages from many of my liberal friends and family – folks who, if they aren't already, are quickly moving to my “adoringly disillusioned” friends list ;-)

We love them, despite their objectionable political leanings. :-)

So, I’ve been idling my time the last two weeks trying to avoid thinking about the upcoming inauguration, and I started playing catch-up with the pileup of Newsweek issues blocking my doorway (not really). I hit the December 22nd edition on Sunday and came upon this beauty of an article: Lobbying is Democracy in Action.

The underlying premise of the article is, “If people can’t organize to influence the government, then Democracy is dead.” Everybody get that? Ergo, without the lobbyist environment, Democracy is dead. If the author’s intent was to induce a physical reaction, then bravo, it worked. There are so many things wrong with this article; I’m not even sure where to begin but my fingers are twitching violently even as I type.

First: The definition of a Democracy does not hedge on one point. In short, a democracy encompasses all of the following attributes: a form of government that supports free and fair elections, active participation of the people in government and civic life, rule of law that applies equally to all citizens, and protection of human rights for all citizens.

Second: Given that our form of government is not a Democracy, which hinges on a controlling government predicated on ‘majority rules’, how is this article even relevant? Fact: we are a Republic, and yes, there is a distinct difference. **If you didn’t know this, well….** That said, I’d expect a Newsweek author to know better. People frequently mis-apply the term Democracy when talking about our government but it is just that – misapplied.

Third: even if we were a Democracy (which, again – we’re not), since when do lobbyists ever represent the majority? Assuming their intentions are always on the side of ‘the people’ (which - they aren’t), lobbying is the only way to influence government? Really?

And finally: how much success has the lobbyist environment ever really had on “influencing” government anyway – campaign contributions and political briberies aside. On the last two points, I’m sure those are talking points best swept under the rug anyway.

The author must think that the majority of Americans, or those who read Newsweek, are infinitely stupid or just plain ignorant. <>

There’s a reason why lobbyists have a bad rap – and no, it’s not because they represent the 'will of the people' and are therefore every politicians worst nightmare. Sleezy influence merchants who block traffic, clog intersections, pollute the street with useless road signs, spew annoying rhetoric and and touch on your every last nerve? You betcha! Ok, sleezy - not always. But the rest - absolutely!