It wasn't long ago that this great Country of ours had a Legislative, Executive and Judicial branch that controlled the way we lived. The Legislative branch made the laws, declared war when needed, and appropriated the money needed to run the government.
The Executive branch was the Commander in Chief of the Military and had veto power over any Bills that the Legislative body sent to his desk, and the Judicial branch was lead by the Supreme Court. This body was the Court of last resort for redress of individuals and groups who felt they were either cheated by the other two branches of government or thought a law that was in force was wrong and harmful.
This oversimplifies the duties and powers of the three branches of government, but it illustrates that OUR Country was ruled in an orderly and lawful manner up until now!


The Obama administration is making choices that not only favor some and hurt others. President Obama is making decisions that, in my opinion and more learned scholars than I, think are exceeding the powers granted to the president by the Constitution!
It appears that the politically well connected tend to get the favors.( aka:Unions and Acornto mention a few).
Banks were forced to take government money due not slightly to having to loan money for housing to minority groups without their ability to pay the loan payments, as crafted by the likes of Barney Frank and Christopher Dodd. Now they are blocked from paying the money back.
In the meantime, the banks must direct funds where the government wants them to go.This is a direct assault on the Free Enterprise Private Banking industry!

Chrysler and General Motors bond holders had their property(their investment in $) redistributed to the United Auto Worker retiree health-care fund (how the retirees help the companies make cars profitably is left unclear). Stimulus funds go to state governments with lavish contracts with public employee unions. And out of every dollar that goes to a union, a certain number of cents make their way back to the Democratic Party.
And now it appears that Obama's Auto Bankruptcy CZARS are selecting Chrysler dealerships for closure based upon whether they were political supporters of the Democrats or Republicans. A review of the dealerships that have already been notified that they will not have their contracts renewed shows that over 95% of those selected supported Republicans!

And now, without the prior approval of Congress or any legislation authorizing the act, President Obama plans to announce on today(Monday) that the federal government will take a 60-percent ownership stake in General Motors as part of a bankruptcy and reorganization plan for the company.

The White House on Sunday night announced that the plan will require the federal government to provide another $30 billion of taxpayer money to General Motors, on top of the $20 billion in aid the federal government already has given the company.
Source: CNSNews.com

In December, Congress failed to pass legislation authorizing a federal bailout of the auto industry. Analysts James Gattuso and Andrew Grossman of the Heritage Foundation argued at the time that this was “legally wrong” because Bush took the money from the $700-billion Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) that was authorized specifically for purchasing assets from “financial institutions” such as banks, savings and loans, credit unions, brokerages and insurance companies. The Heritage analysts argued that auto manufacturers are not “financial institutions” as envisioned by Congress under the law.

Robert Reich, who served as labor secretary under President Clinton, argued that Bush’s move was unconstitutional because of the limits the Constitution places on the president’s power to spend public money. Specifically, the Constitution says, “No money shall be drawn from the treasury, but in consequence of appropriations made by law.” Why is Mr. Reich so silent now that Obama is compounding Bush's misappropriation of Power?

When asked, House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, where Obama derived the legal authority to do what he was doing. Hoyer candidly said he did not know.

“The administration clearly believes it does have the authority to use some of the remaining TARP funds for the automobile industry,” Hoyer told Fred Lucas of CNSNews.com.

“I don't know, technically, but my own view is that if it is perceived they don't have that authority and it is perceived by the Congress they need to have that authority, the Congress would probably be willing to give that authority. But I don't know technically the answer to that question.” I know the answer! The Senate could not muster the 60 votes necessary to stop a filibuster that would kill any authorization giving extra-Constitutional powers to Obama, and Hoyer knows that!
Undoubtedly the House of Representative with so many Liberal members who are in the pockets of the Union movement would pass the authorization, but as I said. It would fail in the Senate. So here we are with a president who apparently thinks he is above the Constitution taking the right away from those who should have them, the bondholders, and taking them for himself and his Union supporters. Can anything be more brazen than this? Only time will tell!

A wise signer of the Constitution once said: "A strong an stable rule of law and governance, and a history of paying our debts. Fosters growth and expansion which keeps foreign and domestic investors investing their money in the public coffers".

Unfortunately, the monetary base of this once great country has increased by 13 times under the last year of the Bush administration, but exponentially since Obama took office. This is the highest in our history, and I predict that prime interest rates will become double digit in three to four years. Reminiscent of the Carter years, only worse.Yet there is no clarion cry, not even a peep from the Obama adoring media!

No where can you read or see any warning news that the Obama administration is spending to much money that is the result not of tax income, but by keeping the Treasury printing presses on full bore.

Not only is Obama spending billions that are supposed to be for shovel ready projects, but are in reality to pay back groups that put him in the Oval Office.
His handling of the Chrysler debacle is an example of Obama's pragmatic approach to the rule of law and our Constitution.

Congress gave President Bush the Sarbanes/Oxley law in 2002. This law has A provision called Section 363(b) that relates to the bankruptcy laws, that has allowed Obama to make an end run around Chapter 11 of the bankruptcy laws. He used this to rig the Chrysler "fast track" bankruptcy IN favor of the auto workers union despite the fact that normal chapter 11 dictates that secured lenders are entitled to first consideration.
Instead Obama gave the unsecured creditors, the union,!0 billion dollars and almost half of the new Chrysler stock.
This violation of a fundamental principle of our Constitutional government gives less than a quarter of a dollar on a dollar invested by teachers' pension funds and other retirement funds. The UAW, while it has made some sacrifices in wages and benefits, will be given more than half ownership of the firm(New Chrysler) - a far larger share than it deserves under Chapter 11.

This lawness began with "The Emergency Economic stabilization Act". This law gave the constitutional powers reserved to the legislative branch to the executive branch. This resultED in TARP, and the avalanche that followed that effectively became a "slush fund" to pay off Obama's friends and allies!

This type of bankruptcy tramples on the constitutional provisions that have governed bankruptcy for decades, and will have a devastating effect on our economy if allowed by Congress, that can stop it, because this "new" bankruptcy deprecates the investor who would buy stocks and bonds normally. But if it is possible to give superior rights to unions or other unsecured participants. What will be the incentive to invest in companies? The lending and capital investment all across our economy will be adversely affected if the Congress allows Obama to strike down contractual rights!

And it is not over by any means. The Gm deadline is June 1st. They cannot possibly make the drastic changes to their administrative and union problems in a few days. I believe they will be handled by the Obama administration the same way Chrysler was . If Congress doesn't stop the trampling of Constitutional rights of Contracts. The Federal government will first take over GM, and then a rapid bankruptcy with secured investors getting 28 cents on a dollar invested, and the UAW will receive $10 billion of the tax payers money besides getting up to 39% OF THE "New GM" for their unsecured 20 billion. Source for information: The Heritage Foundation

Readers remember that "unbridled discretion, brings unbridled power" and we are well on our way to tyranny!

The intrigue surrounding the "rapid" bankruptcy of Chrysler and the pending financial disaster of General Motors on June 1st appears to be never ending.
A story you will not read in the New York Times or see on the main scream media is the progress in Germany and Italy between Opel, Fiat and the German government regarding both Chrysler and GM.

Though the decision on who gets Opel will be up to GM, or the U.S. goverment, the German government will also play a big role because it would likely have to supply billions of euros in financing guarantees to the eventual buyer.

This has made the Opel tender a political hot potato as the German chancellor is just four months away from a general election and must decide how to save jobs and tax-payers money without losing votes.

Fiat chief executive Sergio Marchionne is looking to create the world's second biggest carmaker, after Japan's Toyota, by adding the assets of Opel and Vauxhall to Fiat's own brands and those of US carmaker Chrysler.This information will not sit well with our government and the Chrysler union.

German media reports, however, said the Fiat plan would involve total job cuts of about 18,000, compared to about 10,000 each for Magna and RHJ. Fiat is also seeking some 7 billion euros ($9.7 billion) in government support, about 2 billion more than Magna and RHJ require.
My question is will Obama offer the same amount of money or more if Fiat goes through with the deal?

Addressing growing media speculation, German government spokesman Thomas Steg called for calm, saying that any premature speculation on a political comment on Opel could affect a government negotiating position. He said the government would be looking at three key factors: a deal for carmaker Opel that secures the most jobs and sites in Germany and does not burden taxpayers.

Steg went on to say that until the government had met with industry experts and the federal state representatives no preference could be drawn.

Steg also reiterated that the primary decision lay with the GM/US, which still has to announce whether it is selling GM Europe, thus offering up Opel( a company that is part pf GM) for tender.

The US government has given GM until June 1 to restructure its operations and prove it can be viable without state aid, or face probable bankruptcy.That deadline is fast approaching!

Marchionne said we want to build a real European car company that will achieve worldwide success. We want to combine Fiat, Opel and Chrysler. If we achieve this we will be the second biggest car company behind Toyota and it will provide jobs not just in Germany, but around the world.
I wonder how this will sit with the Union at the new Chrysler if the deal does go through? And where is the U.S.news on the potential deal between Gm and Fiat for Opel?

Government’s view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it.” —Ronald Reagan

One of the stories that you will not hear or read from the "Propaganda" arm of the Obama administration(MSN), except the denial that is found on the ABC News Net site as reported by Jake Tapper. It is the claim that Obama operatives used extortion type pressure to force the main opponent of the Chrysler bankruptcy settlement to agree to Obama's plan. The story is that, "A leading bankruptcy attorney representing hedge funds and money managers told ABC News Saturday that Steve Rattner, the leader of the Obama administration's Auto Industry Task Force, threatened one of the firms, an investment bank, that if it continued to oppose the administration's Chrysler bankruptcy plan, the White House would use the White House press corps to destroy its reputation.
Thoms Luria , Global Practice Head of the Financial Restructuring and Insolvency Group at White & Case, told ABC News that Rattner suggested to an official of the boutique investment bank Perella Weinberg Partners that officials of the Obama White House would embarrass the firm for opposing the Obama administration plan, which President Obama announced Thursday, and which requires creditors to accept roughly 29 cents on the dollar for an estimated $6.8 billion owed by Chrysler.
Perella Weinberg Partners, Lauria said, "was directly threatened by the White House and in essence compelled to withdraw its opposition to the deal under the threat that the full force of the White House press corps would destroy its reputation if it continued to fight. That’s how hard it is to stand on this side of the fence."

This story, if true, would be an illustration of the fact that Obama learned well the theories outlined by his mentor in Chicago, Saul Alinsky.
The president made the charge in his press conference that the Perella Weinberg firm was selfish because they opposed his structured "rapid bankruptcy" of Chrysler. He showed not only that he was willing to take sides in a pending court case. The first time any president did this! But was willing to demonize any one who opposed him!
His statement illustrates he is willing to lie and mis-represent the facts to accomplish his desired end as this quote will illustrate. ""While many stakeholders made sacrifices and worked constructively, I have to tell you some did not," the president said. "In particular, a group of investment firms and hedge funds decided to hold out for the prospect of an unjustified taxpayer-funded bailout. They were hoping that everybody else would make sacrifices, and they would have to make none."
Actually they were willing to settle for 50 cents on the dollar, whereas, they were offered only 29 cents!


I have included some quotes from various sources that describe the philosophy and rules for engagement as taught to his students and are found in his "Rules For Radicals". These qoutes illustrate that
Alinsky advises his followers that the poor have no power and that the real target is the middle class: "Organization for action will now and in the decade ahead center upon America's white middle class. That is where the power is. ... Our rebels have contemptuously rejected the values and the way of life of the middle class. They have stigmatized it as materialistic, decadent, bourgeois, degenerate, imperialistic, war-mongering, brutalized and corrupt. They are right; but we must begin from where we are if we are to build power for change, and the power and the people are in the middle class majority."Obama has made the middle class think he is there "savior"!

"Only two kinds of people can afford the luxury of acting on principle, those with absolute power and those with none and no desire to get any...everyone else who wants to be effective in politics has to learn to be ‘unprincipled’ enough to compromise in order to see their principles succeed.
The Radical may resort to the sword but when he does he is not filled with hatred against those individuals whom he attacks. He hates these individuals not as persons but as symbols representing ideas or interests which he believes to be inimical to the welfare of the people". (Alinsky 1946: 23)

Perhaps this quote from Alinsky's "Rules for Radicals", best explains the mode of operation that Obama is using to "extort", threaten and coerce those who oppose his plans.
" Saul Alinsky points out, is that eight months after securing independence, the Indian National Congress outlawed passive resistance, making it a crime. In conclusion on the subject of the morality of means and ends, as Alinsky writes: 'Means and ends are so qualitatively interrelated that the true question has never been the proverbial one, 'Does the End justify the Means?' but always has been 'Does this particular end justify this particular means?" (Alinsky 1972: 47).
And the one rule that Obama has learned well and is using daily is this:"13) Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it (Alinsky 1972: 130).Alinsky would find out who the CEO is in a company that he wanted to "CHANGE", and hound that person. In the organophosphates debate it is one scientist that he targets and the validity of his findings. Obama uses this to demonize those who opposed his Chrysler deal, and you can be sure this will not be the last time he uses this tactic!

Government’s view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it.” —Ronald Reagan

DESPITE THE FACT THAT THE AUTO WORKERS UNION MADE LITTLE OR NO CONCESSIONS TO HELP AVOID THE IMPENDING CHRYSLER BANKRUPTCY. THE "LITTLE GUY", THE SMALL SHARE HOLDER IS GOING TO BE THE ONE WHO CAUSED CHRYSLER TO FALL INTO BANKRUPTCY!

Government mandates that were put in place to placate environmentalists, that put a strain on the design and manufacture a competitive car to bring to the world market will not be mentioned. And thee outrageous demands on Chrysler by it's union will not be mentioned by the President when he speaks at noon today. After all the UAW spent millions to get him elected!
The bad guy is the stock holder who did not want to accept pennies on the dollar for the stocks and bonds. While the Union and Obama get to run their company.
Big banks and foreign lenders would be protected, but the share holders would be left out in the cold. Sooo! The stockholders choose to take their chances before a bankruptcy judge, like any other company not involved with political fat cats or big unions would normally do if a company failed.

From Times Online April 30, 2009 we learn this about the impending bankruptcy

"White House confirms Chrysler will go bankrupt
Christine Seib in New York and Robin Pagnamenta (Source)
"Chrysler will declare itself bankrupt today, White House officials confirmed, after last minute talks with the carmaker’s smaller lenders broke down late last night.

President Barack Obama, accompanied by members of his car taskforce, will make a statement on the issue at noon today.

White House officials said that the carmaker had the full support of its stakeholders, including its largest lenders and union.

An Administration official accused Chrysler's smaller lenders of "failing to act in either their own economic interest or the national interest" but added that Chrysler now had an opportunity to restructure and "emerge stronger going forward".

He said: "After a month of tireless negotiations, the Administration went into yesterday afternoon with the full support of Chrysler's key stakeholders, including the United Auto Workers (UAW) and the largest creditors. That support remains."

The bankruptcy filing comes after the breakdown of talks with Chrysler's smaller lenders. They had refused to write off their share of Chrysler's $6.9 billion debt. Chrysler had offered $2 billion in cash in return for the debt being written off, which was accepted by the four largest lenders — JP Morgan Chase, Citigroup, Morgan Stanley and Goldman Sachs.

The US Treasury last night sweetened the offer to $2.25 million, but some of Chrysler's 42 smaller lenders, including a number of hedge funds, refused the deal.

A group of 20 renegade lenders, which control about $1 billion of Chrysler's debt, said today that they were forced to conduct negotiations with Chrysler and the Treasury though the four big banks, which the smaller lenders described as "obviously conflicted" because the banks had taken billions of dollars in Government bailouts. My comment is why are these people called "renegade". All they want is a fair return on their investment!

The lenders, who said that they had not taken a dime in bailout cash, said that they had been willing to write off 40 per cent of their debt, accepting considerably less than was being offered by the company to more junior creditors.

"Our offer has been flatly rejected or ignored," the lender group said. "The Government has risked overturning the rule of law and practices that have governed our world-leading bankruptcy code for decades."

But senior Administration officials described the lenders' claims as completely untrue. All lenders received direct communications and were able to participate in the same repayment offer, officials said. My comment on this; Is why should we believe Obama's spinmasters on this subject when we have been lied to so many times in the last one hundred days?

The Treasury has prepared for Chrysler to enter a brief “surgical” bankruptcy that avoids liquidating the company. They never wantr to give up their strangle hold on the auto makers in Michigan, so they can dictate that they make "green type" cars!

Details of Chrysler's tie-up with Fiat, the Italian carmaker, are expected to be outlined today .

A quick bankruptcy would allow Fiat to pick and choose the assets it wanted from Chrysler without taking on some of the company's liabilities and underperforming businesses. These will once again be assumed by the Obama administration for the "RUBE" taxpayers whom already have a 13 trillion dollar debt oppressing them!