No need to take my word for it. Watch this short video (from a traffic camera) to get an idea of just how many people were there (and again, thanks to Logistics Monster, who was THERE, for this video link):

The thing that bugged me about the MSM reporting is that they consistently copied each other – oh, no wait – it just LOOKED that way (check out their opening lines in the articles above and you’ll see what I mean). No, it is that they consistently claimed the marchers were all Conservatives. Apparently, this was their way to dismiss the real anger and frustration people have toward this Congress, whose approval rating is LOW, something else these writers could have looked up easily, and this President, whose ratings continue to decline. They just write them off as some right-wing whackos (1.5 million or so of them), and pay no attention to their actual concerns.

And they have plenty of them. You know, concerns like the fact that the US Government now owning 61% of GM (hey, anyone want to buy a Cadillac?); or that the Obama Administration is adding $3 MILLION to the National Debt EVERY MINUTE; or maybe it’s the 32 czars – oops, make that 31 czars (see ya, Van) Obama is appointing left and right; or the Health Care Bill; or I could go on and on and on. These aren’t just Conservative concerns – these are AMERICAN concerns. But they won’t report it that way, because it doesn’t suit the meme they have created. Had they bothered to talk to some more people on the ground, they would have found out they were Democrats, Independents, and Republicans, all coming together to protest the out of control spending of this Congress and this Administration. To put it in perspective, we are $1 TRILLION more in debt since Obama took office. $ONE TRILLION. Once again, that’s not just an issue for Conservatives. That is an issue for ALL Americans.

Here are some photos of signs at the march – they came via Barbara Espinosa who sent them to Pajamas Media at THIS site. You can see more there:

This video from – of all places – MSNBC – is a fairly good synopsis (though they still couldn’t refrain from painting this as a wholly conservative movement – until the very, very end, when the reporter actually spoke the truth). I saw it at Michelle Malkin’s site while looking for an awesome photo I saw last night, which I have not been able to find again. The sign said, “We Are Not Wee Weed Up: We are PISSED!” If I find it, I’ll add it. Here’s the video:

This is but a snapshot of the day. There is so, so much more to the events of the day, the numbers of people, the calls for accountability in our government.

For those people who aren’t upset about the added $Trillion to our deficit, the takeover of GM, the unvetted czars, the $Trillion Health Care Plan, etc., etc., those people who are downplaying the size of this march, who blow it off as just some group of conservatives going off half cocked, my question is, Why the hell are you NOT upset at what our government is doing??? Bill Clinton downsized our government tremendously, Bush increased it, and now Obama is bankrupting it. Why AREN’T they upset??

Uh, yeah. I’m kinda wondering what’s taken that Ethics Committee so long, too. That was my major field of study, and I’m pretty sure that it would not take me almost a year to come to a determination about this man’s lack of ethical behavior (hypocrisy aside, just the ethical issues alone). Sheesh. This is not the first time Rangel has had “ethical” problems while in office. You might recall that he paid his parking tickets out of his campaign funds. Tsk, tsk – that’s not allowed. You’d think he’d learn.

And speaking of not learning one’s lessons, how about Obama appointing ANOTHER czar after his Commie 9/11 Truther guy had to resign (though through no pressure from Obama, who seemed A-Okay with keeping Van Jones close in the West Wing)? Yep – he wasted no time in thumbing his nose at Congress, and us, by elevating Ron Bloom to the position of Czar of Manufacturing Policy (so he uses the term, “Senior Counselor,” but same difference). I might add, once again, it wasn’t just Republicans who thought it was inappropriate to have a Communist working in the West Wing with the ear of the President, either. That’s just a smokescreen to try to blame it on anyone else but Obama. But I digress.

You may remember Bloom from his previous job on the Task Force for the US takeover ofGM. Oops – I mean, Bloom was a member of the Auto Task Force. Again, same difference. And, Bloom was formerly with the United Steel Workers. I guess it shouldn’t be a surprise that Obama decided to make his announcement before the AFL-CIO at a picnic, right? Didn’t think so.

And I guess none of us should be surprised when Obama continues to thumb his nose at the process, at Congress, and more importantly, US. I suppose I should be grateful that Bloom isn’t a Marxist Name Calling Fruit Loop, but still – this defiance, no, make that insouciance, by Obama is just a tad irritating, isn’t it? I wonder what position he’ll give Charlie?

President Obama should just join the cast of “I’m a Celebrity, Get Me Out of Here!” It’s not that farfetched; he’s been on everything else….(snip) …there’s a fine line between being transparent and being overexposed. Every time you turn on the TV, there’s Obama. He’s getting a puppy! He’s eating a cheeseburger with Joe Biden! …(snip) I get it: You love being on TV. I love my bong, but I take it out of my mouth every once in a while. The other day, I caught myself saying to a friend, “Don’t tell me if he’s fixed the economy yet, I’m Tivo-ing it.”
(snip)
You’re the president, not a rerun of “Law and Order.” Save some charisma for a rainy day. Taking strangers from a TV show on a tour of your house? We have that show; it’s called “Cribs.” And letting reporters ask you questions like “You like to be the one who picks out the shaving cream, don’t you?” Or as it’s called today, “journalism.” I was willing to give the guy the benefit of the doubt until I saw him take Brian Williams into his bedroom, and at the end of the bed there was a teleprompter and it said, “Who’s your daddy?”

…we see your name in the paper a lot, but we’re kind of wondering when you’re actually going to do something.

Are ya’ kiddin’ me, Bill? We’ve been saying this for two years! But it took YOU two years of idol worship to finally find a halfway coherent moment? Mr. Maher, snarky as ever, states:

Remember during the campaign when John McCain attacked Obama for acting like a celebrity and we all laughed at the grumpy old shellshocked fool? Well, it turns out he was right. Sorry, senator. I’m sending a nice gift basket of high-fiber muffins your way.

Well, no, Bill. WE didn’t laugh at Senator McCain because WE didn’t find him grumpy, old or shell-shocked. YOU did. WE knew he was spot on the money. And Hillary Clinton was also spot on the money when she said:

“Senator McCain and I bring a lifetime of service, Senator Obama has a speech he gave in 2002.”

But you were so busy trashing her on your show every week, it never once occurred to you to appreciate the work she had actually done in her career standing up for those who needed help. And the list is long. As much bashing as Secretary Clinton took during the grueling eighteen month campaign, and as happy as you were to chime in, did you not for once admire her toughness in being able to handle it all with such grace, class and fortitude. She’s a fighter. Don’t you think that quality would have been nice to have, particularly in light of your next comments about President Obama:

“…[W]hen I read about how you sat on the sidelines while bailed-out banks used the money we gave them to hire lobbyists who got Congress to stop homeowners from getting renegotiated loans, or how Congress is already giving up on healthcare reform, or how scientists say it’s essential to reduce CO2 by 40% in 10 years, but your own bill calls for 4%, I say, enough with the character development, let’s get on with the plot.

And let’s stop worrying so much about doing anything that might tarnish the brand. See, this is why I don’t want my president to be a TV star: Because TV stars are too worried about being popular — and too concerned with getting renewed.
(snip)
Obama needs to start putting it on the line in fights against the banks, the energy companies and the healthcare industry. I never thought I’d say this, but he needs to be more like George W. Bush. Bush was all about, “You’re with us or against us.”
Obama’s more like, “You’re either with us, or you obviously need to see another picture of this adorable puppy!”

Bush had horrible ideas, …[t]he point is, he didn’t care if it made him unpopular with every human on the planet not named Cletus or Fred Barnes. Which it did.
And we need to marry the good ideas Obama really believes in with that Bush attitude and Bush certitude.”

I’m afraid you’re missing the point, Mr. Maher, as are most of his die hard supporters. President Obama doesn’t have moral certitude about anything but popularity polls and his TelePrompTer. How would you like the man to attack a problem with certitude? He has never exhibited any throughout his entire career. Believe me, this is not about insulting the President. Frankly I am beyond it, or worrying about it. This is about logic and common sense. So, for the one thousandth time: You can’t know what you don’t know.

Throughout President Obama’s career as a State Senator, with 130 “present” votes and six “wrong” votes, his missing over 40% of his votes in the U.S. Senate, dodging politically risky votes, or voting several times to fund Bush’s war, he has shown a proclivity NOT to lose. His career is no accident. Every move is deliberately and painstakingly plotted out to piss off as few people as possible before actually winning the office of the Presidency.

We never saw him willing to go to the mat for anything. He promised to use public financing and reneged. Moreover, there was no principle or legislation for which he was willing to “go down fighting.” He promised a filibuster on FISA and reneged. Believe me, had he staged that filibuster, it would have been the Senate session heard ‘round the world. Imagine him, sans teleprompter, fighting the good fight till he ran out of spit. You know what, Hillary would have taken over for him and helped out while he caught his wind – because she voted correctly on that bill. That’s the difference between a leader with guts and a “reader.”

If the man’s forte has always been giving speeches, without any governing and precious little legislative experience, if he had not heretofore exhibited leadership on any cause, except talking about it, what potion did you imagine he could ingest on Inauguration Day that would magically endow him with powers he had never previously exhibited? I always appreciated SoS Clinton and Senator McCain because we have the empirical evidence to indicate they had the courage to stand alone and fight. I knew they were both capable of it. Sir, from what mysterious inner reserve did you think Barack Obama would draw this strong character you are so vehemently exhorting him to show now?

You conclude with:

I’m glad that Obama is president, but the “Audacity of Hope” part is over. Right now, I’m hoping for a little more audacity.

Even in your diatribe, you pepper your article with how much you like him and how glad you are that he is in office, as if to apologize for the fact that you dare to criticize “The One.” Frankly, Mr. Maher, this is the first time in two years when you should NOT be apologizing because your criticisms are the first sensible words I’ve heard from you in regards to President Obama.

Door #1: A Revitalized and Profitable General Motors

Behind this door, for GM to be a viable entity they need to address the deeply embedded culture and values within the organization. In order to effect change, the people of GM need to understand dramatically different expectations, define and live a new value structure, and execute.

Why do losing teams in professional sports change general managers and coaches? Culture. GM has a culture that allowed a failed financial framework to gain a foothold and ultimately crush the organization.

Without new management at the senior level and throughout the organization, how does the new culture – predicated on total discipline – get established?

Some may argue that Chrysler came out of bankruptcy with no cost to the taxpayer. That is a fair point. Time will tell, though, if the same can happen with GM.

In my opinion, Chrysler benefitted from the growth of the shadow banking system in the mid 1980s which increased leverage throughout the economy. Currently our economy and culture are headed in an opposite direction, that is, consumers and corporations are delevering and will likely continue to delever going forward. As such, I do not envision vehicle sales rebounding as strongly as GM needs to prosper.

Sense on Cents handicaps a vibrant General Motors as a longshot.

Door #2: A Bureaucratic “Government Motors”

Behind this door, I see an entity burdened by red tape, sluggish proceedings, and social agendas. Why?

Any organization is ultimately a reflection of the people and its ability to attract dynamic, entrepreneurial, intelligent leaders at all levels. With all due respect to those currently working at GM, I have a hard time believing this organiztion will be able to attract sufficient numbers of these leaders going forward. Why?

Leaders of that ilk do not tend to enjoy and thrive within an environment burdened by systems, processes, and hurdles inhibiting its success. With government ownership, those hurdles just got much higher.

What are the hurdles?

– How will success be measured? Will it be bottom line profitability? Market share? New vehicles? Social goals, such as environmentally efficient vehicles?

– Is it better to survive than thrive? Organizations in the private sector take prudent risks to drive growth. Will GM be risk averse in an attempt to maintain stability rather than pushing ahead in the spirit of venture capitalists?

Sense on Cents handicaps a bureaucratic Government Motors as a better than even money bet over the next 5 years.

Door #3: A “Going, Going, Gone Motors”

Behind this door, I see an entity that will ultimately utilize the $60 billion (and potentially more) government injection of equity capital as nothing more than an interim bridge loan.

Is the new GM on the other side of the bridge? No. Behind this door, GM will have been flushed down the river and out to sea unable to compete in the Brave New World.

The equity injection of government funds will actually be utilized as more of a stopgap to prevent the immediate dissolution of the company.

Robert Reich addresses this likelihood at Wall Street Pit.

Reich flies in the face of his Democratic Party leaders in asserting that the true motive of the government takeover of GM is ultimately:

The only practical purpose I can imagine for the bail-out is to slow the decline of GM to create enough time for its workers, suppliers, dealers and communities to adjust to its eventual demise.

Reich views the GM situation from a macro standpoint and in the context of a shift in our economy and the world to new technologies. GM is not well positioned currently to adapt and thrive in that environment. Over and above that, GM will be downsizing and not in a position to invest the necessary human and financial capital to lead the company and the industry.

Although Reich’s assessment is not exactly a rosy picture, I give him credit for voicing his opinion and looking beyond the immediate landscape. While Reich sits in the comforts of academia, where are the political leaders who are willing to take these risks in making these statements. As Reich asserts:

US politicians dare not talk openly about industrial adjustment because the public does not want to hear about it. A strong constituency wants to preserve jobs and communities as they are, regardless of the public cost. Another equally powerful group wants to let markets work their will, regardless of the short-term social costs. Polls show most Americans are against bailing out GM, but if their own jobs were at stake I am sure they would have a different view.

So the Obama administration is, in effect, paying $60 billion to buy off both constituencies. It is telling the first group that jobs and communities dependent on GM will be better preserved because of the bail-out, and the second that taxpayers and creditors will be rewarded by it. But it is not telling anyone the complete truth: GM will disappear, eventually. The bail-out is designed to give the economy time to reduce the social costs of the blow.

So once again the American public is forced to deal with a correction based
upon the lapse of time. What do we know about time?

“Can you teach me about tomorrow
and all the pain and sorrow running free?
Cause tomorrow’s just another day
and I don’t believe in time
Time, why you punish me?”

– Hootie & the Blowfish

LD

Have you ever walked away from a discussion with a person–be it a boss, a business associate, a prospective partner–in which you wondered why they felt the need to make that statement? In regard to trust, I feel much more comfortable when others assert, “you can trust him” rather than an individual asserting, “trust me.” Why? Very simply, trust is a virtue. As such, it is not given like a cheap bauble. Trust is earned. The foundation of our capitalist system is trust. When a basic trust is violated, regulators are compelled to act to rectify that violation.

Let’s enter the Brave New World of the Uncle Sam economy and address the credibility of this virtue known as trust. CNBC recently aired a fabulous roundtable discussion, “The Future of Capitalism,” which touched on many of the economic issues currently debated. In the midst of the discussion, Mohamed El-Erian of Pimco strongly asserted that capitalism is ultimately a system based upon trust. Without trust, investors will not willingly commit capital to drive future economic growth.

As with any virtue, trust is not a one way street. While trust is earned, it needs to be rewarded so as to promote even greater trust. In so doing, the model of trust is displayed as the shining beacon for personal and professional relationships, whether between two people or amongst three hundred million.

Let’s get more specific. Investors who committed capital to General Motors in the form of equity took the greatest risk. In so doing, they positioned themselves to reap the greatest reward were the company to prosper. The company entered bankruptcy; the shareholders got wiped out. That is the way capitalism works. Or does it?

Investors who committed capital to General Motors in the form of senior debt took lesser risk. In so doing, they positioned themselves to receive a lower fixed return knowing if the company failed they would be first in line. They made this investment based upon trust in longstanding rules of bankruptcy proceedings. These investors include large institutions and thousands of individuals. Their trust was violated in the GM bankruptcy proceedings. They were not first in line. Junior creditors, specifically the UAW, received substantially better treatment. What happened? Uncle Sam rationalized this “violation of trust” as being in the common good of our country. Regrettably, this violation received no real debate in our court system and limited debate within our general media.

Uncle Sam, in the persons of Barack Obama and Tim Geithner, have put forth that the automotive situation is a special case; standard bankruptcy proceedings will continue to be practiced elsewhere. I would counter that we have a responsibility to future generations of investors to challenge Obama and team on this point. The future of capitalism itself rests on this debate.

The true costs of this violation will be borne by future iterations of unionized companies that can not easily access the capital markets. I personally would only commit capital to such an entity at a much higher rate of return knowing full well the risks I am taking are now greater given the precedent set via the Chrysler and GM bankruptcies.

Analysts, government officials, and others will continue to rationalize this violation of trust. In my opinion, this rationalization is akin to “the ends justifying the means.” That is a dangerous weapon.

This “question of trust” will certainly be an ongoing theme as we venture further into the Brave New World of the Uncle Sam economy. In the process of making investment decisions, we now need to more aggressively question just how much we trust our counterparties, especially Uncle Sam.

Please share your insights and thoughts so we can collectively be more diligent in navigating the economic landscape.

LD

Basically, the Germans wanted an adult in the room as opposed to the adolescent they got:

Hillary Clinton has intervened in talks over the future of Opel and Vauxhall at the request of German ministers as the American Government unveiled plans to sink more taxpayers’ funds into the European carmakers’ US parent, General Motors (GM).

Frank-Walter Steinmeier, the German Finance Minister, spoke by telephone today with Mrs Clinton to seek “support in the search for a solution,” his spokesman said. Mrs Clinton pledged to intervene to demand “the greatest possible American support” from Timothy Geithner, the Treasury Secretary, the spokesman added.

Karl-Theodor zu Guttenberg, the Economics Minister, also denounced the US Treasury for dispatching a junior official who had to consult Washington through a video link at regular intervals during the night.

Mr Guttenberg said the talks had been “absurd in parts” and demanded “more seriousness and a greater willingness to compromise on the part of the US.”

It is also hoped that developments today in the US could pave the way for smoother negotiations with the two preferred bidders – Fiat, the Italian car group, and Magna, the Canadian components maker.

Nothing like insulting one of our big allies and business partners by sending some flunky to do a woman’s job. Ahem.

As for the rest of the article, some of this may have changed – who knows? I guess it depends on whatever mood Obama is in today and just how much control he is handing over to the union that bought him, but here it is:

GM’s biggest bondholders have agreed to a new offer to wipe out the automaker’s debt, raising hopes that the carmaker will make a quick exit from the now inevitable move into bankruptcy.

Bondholders that own about 20 per cent of GM’s $27.2 billion of unsecured debt agreed to wipe out the borrowings in return for a 10 per cent stake in the company and warrants to buy a further 15 per cent of the equity in the new business.

They had previously rejected an offer of a flat 10 per cent because the United Auto Workers (UAW) union had been promised more equity – 17.5 per cent – for a smaller $20 billion debt.

The remainder of GM’s debt investors, which include individuals and pension funds, have until Saturday afternoon to agree to the new offer.

If they do not support the offer, forcing GM into a contentious bankruptcy, the Government has warned that bondholders will be all but wiped out.

In exchange for the improved payout, creditors must agree not to oppose a move to sell GM’s profitable assets to a new company funded by the Government in a fast-track bankruptcy process.

Just a teensy weensy little reminder – when they talk about wiping out GM’s debt, that’s all the money WE paid to bail them out because they were “to big to fail.” So, all those BILLIONS of dollars of OUR money that Obama was handing out like candy to them? Poof – GONE!!!!

And then, add to that, the government going into the automobile business – as if it knows ANYTHING about it:

GM’s filing also revealed that the Government’s stake in the restructured company would be 72.5 per cent, much larger than the 50 per cent it was expected to be handed in return for forgiving some of the bailout cash it has provided the company.

The bigger stake is likely to increase the cost of GM’s bankruptcy to taxpayers, which is estimated to reach as high as $50 billion.

Overnight negotiations over the future of the US carmaker’s European operation broke down when GM sought more funding for Opel despite Germany’s pledge to provide billions of euros in state guarantees as well as a €1.5 billion bridging loan.

Lord Mandelson, the Business Secretary today reiterated the British government’s support for Vauxhall but said it was too early to comment on what funding the UK may provide since talks over Opel needed to be resolved first.

He also said that unlike Opel, Vauxhall was not in desperate need of funding.

Lord Mandelson has extracted promises from both Fiat and Opel over the future of Vauxhall and British jobs.

Although the Business Secretary has conceded that GM Europe suffers from excess costs and is selling vehicles into a depressed market, he has made clear that the amount of money that Britain will commit will depend on the level of job guarantees in the medium term and the long term.

“Each of the bids envisages government support, but we are some way off from a discussion about government’s role in any commercial outcome to these discussions,” he said.

The assurances represent a significant victory for Lord Mandelson, who has been desperate to make sure that the German Government does not give in to election-year pressure with a pledge to protect domestic jobs at the expense of those in the UK. Berlin’s view is crucial because it is being asked to stump up billions of euros in loan guarantees as part of any deal.

Magna calculates job losses of 9,000 across Europe – 2,500 of them in Germany. However, before a Chancellery meeting last night, Magna hinted that it could shift the production of the Opel Astra from Antwerp, Belgium, to Bochum, Germany. Under that scenario, job losses in Germany would total only 300.

Fiat has promised to cut fewer than 10,000 jobs in GM Europe. That could entail closing an engine factory in Kaiserslautern, Germany. Unions fear that overlapping of Fiat’s products with those of Opel and Vauxhall will mean that redundancies could be much higher than promised.

Whew. This is really a pickle, isn’t it? We have taken over, no – check that – OBAMA and the UAW have taken over a private business in this country, about which Obama, anyway, knows NOTHING. He is not a businessman, you know. The UAW is certainly a business – some might say a racket – which has ensured ITS pensions at the expense of ours. How is it that some Americans deserve to have one and others don’t?

That’s just one of those pesky little questions I am certain Obama would label as “Un-American,” just like he did the secured creditors to GM – you know, the Teachers Retirement Fund and State Police of Indiana, for example:

Maybe Obama should follow Germany’s example, and ask Secretary Clinton to figure this out for everyone – GM, the taxpayers, the UAW, everyone. Heck, she could probably design a more aerodynamic, fuel efficient vehicle, change the oil in everyone’s car, AND not rip off the taxpayers for billions of dollars all at the same time! Oh c’mon, you know she could!! In any event, it is sure worth a try.

I mean, really, if it is good enough for Germany to have her step in, it is surely good enough for us! No doubt she would do far better at this than Obama and the UAW are doing now. I say, bring her on!!

Remember those Black Panthers who were arrested in Philly for voter intimidation? Well, guess who’s got a friend in the White House? That would be the three men charged – amazingly, the charges have been DROPPED by the Justice Department! Oh, you know I’m not making this up:

Charges brought against three members of the New Black Panther Party for Self-Defense under the Bush administration have been dropped by the Obama Justice Department, FOX News has learned.

The charges stemmed from an incident at a Philadelphia polling place on Election Day 2008 when three members of the party were accused of trying to threaten voters and block poll and campaign workers by the threat of force — one even brandishing what prosecutors call a deadly weapon.

The three black panthers, Minister King Samir Shabazz, Malik Zulu Shabazz and Jerry Jackson were charged in a civil complaint in the final days of the Bush administration with violating the voter rights act by using coercion, threats and intimidation. Shabazz allegedly held a nightstick or baton that prosecutors said he pointed at people and menacingly tapped it. Prosecutors also say he “supports racially motivated violence against non-blacks and Jews.”

The Obama administration won the case last month, but moved to dismiss the charges on May 15.

Click here to see FOX News video from the scene on election day.

Click to watch the incident on YouTube.

The complaint says the men hurled racial slurs at both blacks and whites.

A poll watcher who provided an affidavit to prosecutors in the case noted that Bartle Bull, who worked as a civil rights lawyer in the south in the 1960’s and is a former campaign manager for Robert Kennedy, said it was the most blatant form of voter intimidation he had ever seen. (Emphasis mine.)

In his affidavit, obtained by FOX News, Bull wrote “I watched the two uniformed men confront voters and attempt to intimidate voters. They were positioned in a location that forced every voter to pass in close proximity to them. The weapon was openly displayed and brandished in plain sight of voters.”

He also said they tried to “interfere with the work of other poll observers … whom the uniformed men apparently believed did not share their preferences politically,” noting that one of the panthers turned toward the white poll observers and said “you are about to be ruled by the black man, cracker.”

A spokesman for the Department of Justice told FOX News, “The Justice Department was successful in obtaining an injunction that prohibits the defendant who brandished a weapon outside a Philadelphia polling place from doing so again. Claims were dismissed against the other defendants based on a careful assessment of the facts and the law. The department is committed to the vigorous prosecution of those who intimidate, threaten or coerce anyone exercising his or her sacred right to vote.”

Golly, I am just SO surprised, aren’t you? I just never expected that Obama’s Justice Department would let these three men who were engaging in extreme voter intimidation off!! Ahem. Who am I kidding? Of course I did. I’m just surprised it didn’t happen sooner…

One last note – as a follow-up to all of the GM news, including the closing of plants about which I just wrote, I recommend this post by Uppity Woman, “Congratulations, Comrades and Comradesses! You Are Proud Owners Of Government Motors“! That pretty much says it all! What’s next? California?

Congratulations, Comrades and Comradesses!!

Your government is about to become the proud owner of a company that can’t make any money!

Aren’t you happpppppyyyyyy?

And our government is experienced! Look at Amtrak and the Post Office! How can we go wrong???

There is great joy!

Of course, GM could have gone bankrupt last year and saved you about 20 billion in payroll money, but not to worry. It’s just borrowed money. You and your children and grandchildren will have plenty of time to pay it back to China. Don’t be a stick in the mud!

A General Motors Corp. bankruptcy filing seemed inevitable after a rebellion by its bondholders forced it to withdraw on Wednesday a plan to swap bond debt for company stock.

GM has until Monday to complete a government-ordered restructuring that includes debt reduction, labor cost cuts and plant closures. But a Chapter 11 reorganization is likely after the company said its offer to exchange $27 billion in unsecured debt for 10 percent of the company’s stock had failed. GM has received $19.4 billion in federal loans.

GM shares lost 16 cents, or 11.1 percent, at $1.28 in premarket trading.

You will buy shares, yes?

John Pottow, a professor at the University of Michigan who specializes in bankruptcy, said GM evading bankruptcy now is almost impossible.

“They said no. That’s it. They tried. That’s why they’re going to have to file for bankruptcy,” Pottow said.

See? They tried. Isn’t that nice? They “tried” to shake down those unpatriotic capitalist bondholders who wouldn’t go in a hole themselves for The Cause, not good Comrades at all, the unpatriotic SOBs. They “tried” to keep operating on the people’s money, putting our national debt into further peril for decades, but they tried. What more do you want, you Imperialist Pigs?

But don’t worry. Your government is going to run Government Motors into the ground the rest of the way really well. In fact, the same people who have been involved with the bailouts and those Auto Task Force appointees who own no cars themselves except for that guy with the foreign car are going to help out too. I know you feel better about that.

Wilkinson would not say why GM didn’t make the offer to bondholders more attractive.

Because the bondholder deal did not go through, the equity freed by the UAW deal now apparently will go to the U.S. government, which may have to commit billions more for GM’s restructuring in court.

Imagine those bondholders. The nerve of them not being as stupid as our government is. Where’s the sacrifice of these capitalistic pigs?

Here’s the best part, Citizens: After the billions of borrowed money, America now is about to own nearly 70% of on of its most unsuccessful companies. All for the Glorious Cause! Besides, we are saving money because we don’t even have to change the GM logo.

The government’s stake in the company originally was to be 50 percent, according to GM’s regulatory filings. But it now could be as high as 69 percent. The Canadian government also could get equity for up to $8 billion in aid for the automaker.

But take heart, Citizens. Your glorious government is about to own the company that is excited about building the PUMA.

You will buy one, yes, Comrade?

Don’t let the fact that your dog is bigger than this car deter you, silly citizens. This is good transportation to and from potato fields and the first 100 buyers will get a Free Whole Chicken for the family! And when you get tired of driving, you can just pick it up and carry it while you walk! The PUMA is good for Global warming too, especially in North East winters, where Government Motors will guarantee that the earth won’t feel warm to you at all.

Citizens, your government wants you to know it is about choices. So if you don’t like that PUMA, Government Motors might even offer you the Pelosi GTXIi Sport Edition named for one of our most glorious leaders. Wouldn’t that be nice? We could name all the vehicles after helpful and beloved leaders such as The Barack! (with exclamation!), The Reid, or even The Frank. Maybe they could even take a trip down memory lane and name vehicles after other equally great and honest leaders. Like the DeLay, for example. Or how about The Ashcroft. How cool is that? They had better name one The Newt too, else they will never shut him up and he will go one and on and on and ……and on……and on. And on.

You will buy one, yes? You won’t mind towing it a hundred miles to the nearest dealer when it won’t start, right? I didn’t think so.

And just to make you feel even happier, look who we have to make our new Government Motors commercials for us!

And that is this: Political payback. That’s right, targeting all those people through the takeover of the corporation, and screwing them to the wall. In this case, the title says it all: Furor Grows Over Partisan Car Dealer Closings. From the get-go, this doesn’t sound good. Here’s what’s happening:

Evidence appears to be mounting that the Obama administration has systematically targeted for closing Chrysler dealers who contributed to Repubicans. What started earlier this week as mainly a rumbling on the Right side of the Blogosphere has gathered some steam today with revelations that among the dealers being shut down are a GOP congressman and closing of competitors to a dealership chain partly owned by former Clinton White House chief of staff Mack McLarty.

The basic issue raised here is this: How do we account for the fact millions of dollars were contributed to GOP candidates by Chrysler who are being closed by the government, but only one has been found so far that is being closed that contributed to the Obama campaign in 2008?

Florida Rep. Vern Buchanan learned from a House colleague that his Venice, Florida, dealership is on the hit list. Buchanan also has a Nissan franchise paired with the Chrysler facility in Venice.

“It’s an outrage. It’s not about me. I’m going to be fine,” said Buchanan, the dealership’s majority owner. “You’re talking over 100,000 jobs. We’re supposed to be in the business of creating jobs, not killing jobs,” Buchanan told News 10, a local Florida television station.

Buchanan, who succeeded former Rep. Katharine Harris in 2006, reportedly learned of his dealership’s termination from Rep.Candace Miller, R-MI. Buchanan owns a total of 23 dealerships in Florida and North Carolina.

Well, gee – what could POSSIBLY be wrong about government taking over corporations? So much for that bi-partisanship of which Obama spoke. Uh huh. Oh, but wait – it gets better:

Also fueling the controversy is the fact the RLJ-McCarty-Landers chain of Arkansas and Missouri dealerships aren’t being closed, but many of their local competitors are being eliminated. Go here for a detailed look at this situation. McClarty is the former Clinton senior aide. The “J” is Robert Johnson, founder of the Black Entertainment Television, a heavy Democratic contributor.

A lawyer representing a group of Chrysler dealers who are on the hit list deposed senior Chrysler executives and later told Reuters that he believes the closings have been forced on the company by the White House.

“It became clear to us that Chrysler does not see the wisdom of terminating 25 percent of its dealers. It really wasn’t Chrysler’s decision. They are under enormous pressure from the President’s automotive task force,” said attorney Leonard Bellavia.

RedState.com’s Josh Painter has a useful roundup of what has been found so far by a growing number of bloggers digging into what could be a very big story indeed. Also, see my column on this issue and how it fits into the larger context dubbed by the Examiner’s Michael Barone as “gangster government.”

As part of Chrysler’s bankruptcy agreement with the White House, the company plans to close roughly a quarter of its 3,200 dealerships. Lists of the dealerships being cut and those retaining their Chrysler franchises can be found here in pdf format. Many dealers contend the criteria being used to determine which dealerships survive is not clear and that many of those that are being closed in fact are profitable businesses, despite the current recession.

Mark Tapscott, author of the above article, does have an update available at the link above, but basically stands by his point here.

Tapscott’s point is a mighty frightening one. Remember when we thought BUSH was the most vindictive president we had ever seen? Obama is making him look like freakin’ Mother Theresa by comparison. THIS is exactly the problem with the White House taking over private companies, with OUR money, I might add. That mean-spirited, childish, churlish, arrogant vindictiveness toward anyone who didn’t support HIM. This isn’t a president, this is a dictator.

And THAT is un-Constitutional. Just add it to the list…

Someone PLEASE tell me how, in just FOUR SHORT MONTHS, Obama has managed to take over the banks, kick out the CEO of a private company, hand over a private company, financed with OUR money, to a union? Oh, and let’s not forget his handing over CA to another union, SEIU? How?? How has this happened???

Oh, wait – and how about those of us who pay back our credit card bills regularly now being saddled with having to support the losers who act in bad faith? Why do we have to constantly bail out, and ENABLE, those people who go over their means, be it credit cards or mortgages or car loans? And the Senate can stop acting like they give a crap about this issue – Obama VOTED to enable the credit card companies while a senator, along with many other Democrats. So just stop the charade – and stop laying the burden of irresponsible behavior on those of us who have good credit, or else WE might not have that any longer, either.

If you have not already read it, I recommend to you the following post by my good friend, SusanUnPC, “A Personal Note Only For Those Who Voted For Obama.” And I would add, not only “ditto,” but in the most pastoral way possible to those who did vote for Obama, you can just bite me for what you have unleashed on this country. If only there was a way to make only those people support the UAW/GM, pay the ne’er-do-wells’ credit card bills, etc.

Hmm – that’s a thought – let’s figure out how to do just that – let them pay for Obama’s taking over private companies, banks, and kowtowing to the unions (again – I am not anti-union in general, just when they try to take over states or private companies). A pipe dream, I know, but for this moment, it helps to keep my head from exploding…

See the UPDATE at end of story.

*You’re Ahead In A Ford All The Way – Ford Ad slogan 1950s-60s.

Ford, the American carmaker most likely to survive the auto implosion without going bankrupt or taking government aid, deserves credit for making prescient decisions before the meltdown. – The Street

“We’ve been trying to engage with some automobile manufacturer, and let’s face it, a couple have had other things on their mind,” said Don Clevenger, vice president of external affairs for Oncor, a Texas Utility.

UPDATE. The shareholders meeting is over and the Ford family still controls 40% of the vote. Some quotes from the meeting:

“At last year’s meeting, talk was of profitability in 2009. Now, there is talk of profitability in 2011,” said William Thrower, of Katy, Texas, who introduced a proposal seeking limits on executive pay and an elimination of bonuses until Ford reports a profit. “As stockholders, we must insist that all available capital be used for …restructuring.”

My comment: You still own a car company. Be happy.

Ford Executive Chairman Bill Ford Jr. acknowledged the company’s challenges.

“In all my years with the company, I have never seen market conditions as difficult as they are now,” Ford said. “However, I have never been more excited about the prospects for our future.”

Ford’s stock price, now trading at more than $5 per share, has more than tripled since Feb. 20 when it was at $1.58, while GM’s stock hovering around $1.20 per share.

“I’m glad to see the stock price has come up, and I’m glad they did not take Obama dollars,” said Melody Schools, a nurse from Richwood, N.J., who occasionally attends Ford’s annual meeting. “Compared to some of the other companies, they are doing pretty good.”

Agreed.

Disclosure statement:   My first car was a 1964 ½ Ford Mustang.

I think we all deserve a break, don’t you? For your viewing and listening pleasure, I have three selections from Loreena McKennitt, the Canadian singer. The videos below were shot a the Alhambra. Sit back, relax, and prepare to be transported to a different time…

The Mystic’s Dream:

The Lady of Shalott:

The Mummer’s Dance:

And may you be well this day, and the days to follow.

Just three days ago, No Quarter, a handful of blogs and a thimbleful of major media caught on to the Chrysler holdout firms’ attorney, Tom Lauria, and his accusations that Obama’s auto czar, Steven Rattner, threated to destroy P-W’s reputation if they continued to oppose the government orchestrated sell out of Chrysler to Fiat SpA.

Perella-Weinberg has a stake in Chrysler via their Xerion [Capital] Fund. Chrysler, itself, is currently owned by Cerberus Capital Management LP. Try to keep all these names straight… these players are going to continue to reappear, along with some others you may not know about.

Per Law Shucks, and via Andrew Sorkin at the NYTs Dealbook, Lauria added more detail to that threat in a follow up interview with Jake Tapper.

In a follow-up interview with ABC News’s Jake Tapper, [Lauria] identified Mr. Rattner, the head of the auto task force, as having told a Perella Weinberg official that the White House “would embarrass the firm.”

It’s no surprise that the WH denied the event ever took place. And yesterday Perella-Weinberg issued their carefully parsed statement as well.

Suggestions have been made that the Perella Weinberg Partners Xerion Fund changed its stance on the Chrysler restructuring due to pressure from White House officials. This is incorrect. The decision to accept and support the proposed deal was made by the Xerion Fund after reflecting carefully on the statement of the President when announcing Chrysler’s bankruptcy filing. In considering the President’s words and exercising our best investment judgment, we concluded that the risks of potentially severe capital loss that could arise from fighting this in bankruptcy court far outweighed any realistic potential upside.

We have a very specific mandate from our investors, and that is to carefully weigh investment risks and rewards. It is not our investment mandate to pursue political or risky legal campaigns with our investors’ money. This was our assessment of investment risk and reward, nothing else.

While we did and still do believe that the lenders would be justified in pressing their objections under conventional bankruptcy law principles, we believe a settlement would now be in the best interests of all parties in the context of avoiding a drawn out contested bankruptcy litigation proceeding, and we encourage our colleagues in the loan syndicate to pursue this immediately.

Note very carefully, Perella-Weinberg spokespersons have not denied the charges of White House strong arming. Instead, in no uncertain terms, P-W has chosen to use the promise of heavy litigation costs …. with a questionable outcome… as their reason for a change of heart. Surely they would have known this before signing on to the lawsuit. Could they be this under-informed at the onset?

History… plus their choice of legal representation, belies this possibility. Lauria has been in this same spot for his clientele before with a previous decision in Adelphia Communications.

Here the bankruptcy judge refused requests by Lauria, representing first lien holders, to appoint a trustee to oversee disputes, and to disqualify a chief Adelphia bankruptcy counsel. The bench considered this a “nuclear war button” threatening obliteration of a crucial $17.6 billion deal, selling Adelphia’s assets to cable rivals, Time Warner and Comcast.

Key to the judge’s decision was that a failed sale due to delays could incur higher costs in penalties to Adelphi, and that the assets could be sold prior to the creditor challenges to the planned reorganization by using Section 363 of the US Bankruptcy Code under Chapter 11.

In the same vein, Obama’s orchestrating a forced asset sale to what will be a government and union owned company, [55% to UAW, 10% to government/secured lenders] known as Fiat SpA, prior to Lauria’s Chrysler claims being heard.

But there’s way too much crony’ism going on with Rattner as Obama’s auto czar. As the ever astute Missy pointed out at the end of March, Rattner’s conflicts of interest in oversight are tenacled.

Rattner is co-founder and senior executive of the Quadrangle Group, under investigation for it’s alleged roll in a kickback scheme in concert with Henry “Hank” Morris, and former New York deputy comptroller, David Loglisci, and involving the New York State Common Retirement Fund. Both Morris and Loglisci were arrested in March of this year, charged with 123-count state criminal indictment that included money-laundering, enterprise-corruption and bribery charges.

So far, the most indepth round up of the doin’s between Rattner’s Quadrangle, and Rattner himself with documented meetings with Morris, and Loglisci comes from The New Republic’s Marty Peretz.

I’ll let you read thru the whole unsavory story itself, but it appears that Mr. Loglisci co-produced one loser of a flick called “Chooch” which lost about $700K after a brief run in three theatres. Rattner’s Quadrangle Group decided to do a quid pro quo, and avoided crucial reporting requirements by using a subsidiary to buy the DVD rights to this movie for $88K. Shortly thereafter, magically, Loglisci… in charge of managing some of the NY pension funds… slide $100K from the fund to Rattners Quadrangle Group for investment purposes.

AKA… pay to play.

Andrew Ross Sorkin’s article also adds more fodder to the story, saying Rattner turned to Morris for his specific placement services for the NY pension funds after meeting the then managing director of private markets for the New York City comptroller, Josh Wolf-Powers. Mr. Powers informed Rattner that “he could not think of any investment firm that had persuaded the city’s pension fund to invest without using a placement agent.” [Mata note: remember this statement...]

Thus the relationship between Rattner, and the now charged Morris, began.

As if the pay to play investigation weren’t enough on it’s own, there’s the incestuous relationship between Quadrangle Group and Cerberus – Chrysler owner. Again, back to Law Shucks brief summary on the situation, Quadrangle received a loan from Cerberus in which they are now technically in default.

Cerberus Capital Management LP, the current owner of Chrysler LLC, lent Rattner’s Quadrangle $125 million as part of the financing for the buyout of Maxim magazine and music publication Blender. As both titles limp through the drop in advertising revenue, Cerberus wants more capital invested to cover the debt levels, a request that Quadrangle has balked at. The two remain at loggerheads over the issue with Cerberus claiming the loans are technically in default.

As one source told the New York Post (NWS 9.85 ↑6.37%), “Cerberus is about to foreclose on the loan to Quadrangle, and now Steve Rattner is going to be the boss of Cerberus.”

Rattner is, of course, the “boss” of Cerberus via his Obama appointment as auto czar to Chrysler… aka Cerberus.

Simple translation? Rattner’s Quadrangle Group is one of Chrysler/Cerberus creditors in default… and he’s in charge of structuring their asset sell off.

Yeah. No conflict there…

Okay… I told you all the above so I could get to this moment. Just what is it the Obama admin (via his) auto czar have on P-W, aka Xerion Capital as the Chrysler first lien investor, to “embarrass” or “ruin their reputation”?

One’s first thoughts turn to Rahm’bo. And while there are, again, the tenacles of connection, that doesn’t pan out as planned. As Timothy Carney at the Washington Examiner reports today, Obama’s Chief of Staff and ballet-dancing tough guy has his own ties to Perella-Weinberg… taking in over $16 mil in his two-and-a-half years between the Clinton White House and Congress. Other publications, such as ProPublica.org and CNN actually put that figure at $18 million.

If one thinks that Rahm’bo was pulling strings with a former employer, I consider it unlikely. A quick look at Joseph Perella’s campaign contributions show he is anything but on Rahm’bo’s side of the political aisle. Records show Mr. Perella contributing a total of $29,600 to Obama’s rival, John McCain. But this would also explain why Rahm’bo also wouldn’t necessarily harbor any feelings to protect his former financial benefactor.

But then I ran across one of Tyler Durden’s (Zero Hedge) late February articles, examining just where the New York State Common Retirement System’s pension money was being invested. And among them are some very common names…

What is more curious is an often missed page in the Office Of The State Comptroller’s website (link here) in which the New York State Common Retirement Fund discloses its monthly indirect investment in other asset managers, be they private, public equity or real estate focused. Compiling the publicly available data from February 2007 yields some curious results. Turns out in 2007 the New York Common Fund invested over $5.9 billion directly into a plethora of other hedge and private equity funds, and a total of $7.3 billion net invested over the past 2 years. Some curious names that stand out:

Guggenheim, which received $100 million in May 2007 and a total of $500 million, and which has since shuttered;

Bear Stearns, which received $20 million in June 2007, after the blow up, only to see a the entire investment (including previous installments) of $490 redeemed in August, likely at a great loss;
The investment of $415 million in 24 assorted office properties in October 2007 (peak of the commercial real estate market) through a JV with Liberty Washington;

Apollo’s latest Investment Fund (VII), which received $350 million in August 2007, which somehow closed in late January with $15 billion in total commitments. Looks like New York ignored the stellar performance of the prior fund, in which most leveraged buyouts are currently bankrupt or on the verge;

BlackStone Real Estate Partners VI, in which the fund invested $800 million, and which closed in March 2008 with total commitments of $10.9 billion. Blackstone Real Estate became famous for its bidding war for the Equity Office Properties REIT which it won at the peak of the market with a final purchase price of $39 billion, and in which it invested almost $4 billion in equity, only to flip most of it to pay down the associated debt; they are likely stuck with the balance at a significantly underwater valuation.

Harbinger Capital Partners, which received a $71 million investment from the fund in 2007, and which is likely worth roughly 60 cents on the dollar;

Cerberus, which received $50 million in May 2007, and which might very well have been immediately funneled into such sterling investments as Chrysler and Aozora bank;

GoldenTree, which received $35 million in 2007, and is now running dutch auctions to offload all its illiquid holdings;

Xerion, which received $13 million in 2008, months after it was acquired by Perella Weinberg. As we have written, Joe Perella is probably the most important financial advisor in the country currently, advising the FDIC on its assorted activities (with very little information on how the process is compensated). If New York is invested in a fund which is run by a firm compensated by the FDIC, the potential conflict of interest here, absent further disclosure, could have massive proportions.

Is Rattner… who must be intimate to just what “placement agent” was used to gain access to NY pension funds… dragging Perella Weinberg via Xerion into the Henry Morris/David Loglisci investigation as a “threat”?

And then there’s the appearance of Cerberus on that same list…

Naturally, there can be instances where the NY Common Retirement Fund may indeed choose investments for their employees pension funds that are legitimate. But it does raise the question… are they tainted by the same contact? And is Rattner so absolutely sure of a common bond… ala running a possible P-W/Xerion pay to play scheme… that it would be an effective bully tactic to use as government blackmail?

Hopefully the really stellar guys at this… ala Naked Capitalism and Zero Hedge… will get to the bottom of it. But it’s food for thought.

Originally published at Flopping Aces.

Without even commenting as to any possible First Amendment breach by virtue of news organizations being beholden to a government for the ability to keep its doors open, my concern is this…Many of us stopped purchasing various newspapers and news magazines in order to punish those organizations for biased reporting and a lack of journalistic ethics. I am exercising the power of the purse – and my decision is not arbitrary, nor is it negotiable.

How I spend my consumer dollars is up to me. Not the government. They do not get to tell me when it is time to buy a new dining table or a sofa. They do not get to tell me when it is time to go to the movies. Nor should they get to tell me when to buy a newspaper. If I decide that the New York Times is no longer the paper of record, but rather a biased rag that was cheerleading and running interference for one candidate while actively working to bury another, then I am entitled to the decision not to support that newspaper with my hard earned dollars.

If Congress makes a decision to bail out this organization with my taxpayer dollars, then they are, in essence, not only telling me how to spend my money, they are spending it for me, against my will.

And where is the accountability? If these media organizations cannot be counted on now to be honest watchdogs, digging for the truth and presenting it fairly, what do you think will happen when they are beholden to a government bailout to keep their doors open?

American Girl in Italy’s excellent article, newspapers are dying because journalism is a joke, agreed with Dan Gainor’s testimony before a Congressional subcommittee that while technology is one reason print media is faltering, the bigger reason is that true journalism is a dying art. Likewise, newspapers are not the only medium to suffer. MSNBC and CNN’s ratings are tanking as well. Why? Because many disgusted consumers have stopped watching certain news programs altogether. If they wanted to watch cheerleaders rather than journalists, they could turn on a football game.

Some concerned citizens have actually gone so far as to contact their cable companies and block these stations from view altogether; deservedly so. We don’t need infotainment and baseless opinion 24/7. We need the whole truth – no matter where it leads.

We need the facts, not propaganda, press releases or Pravda.

I am not getting good value for my dollar with media outlets such as Time or Newsweek, therefore, I no longer choose to give them my hard earned money.

There is a reason why certain businesses die. Pardon this seeming unrelated example, but as something of a frozen yoghurt freak, I decided to check out both the new yoghurt joints that recently opened in my neighborhood. One looks pretty festive from the outside, but when you walk in, the interior is dank, not particularly clean, and the employees’ attitude is don’t bug me, get your stuff and get out. And while I tried to enjoy my cup of grasshopper non-fat, I was treated to smell and taste the cigarette smoke of said employee while he was on a break at the table next to me. As to the other shop – it’s all lit up like a Christmas tree – and the employees have an attitude to match! That place is a gold mine with non stop business day and night. Why? Good value for the dollar and the consumer is treated with respect. Gee. I wonder why that business is doing well.

The news media is not treating the consumer with respect. They are acting like we are a bunch of mindless sheep that can be led around by the nose and distracted by meaningless celebrity pabulum and White House puppy searches.

By the way, how is this Administration’s decision to bail out GM any different? Perhaps the company faltered because it does not make a good product. Perhaps it faltered because it does not have a good business model and is not well run. If something fails, perhaps it is because a message is being sent by consumers – no good value for the dollar. Yet we are being forced to use our hard earned money to support what we obviously do not consider to be a worthwhile or competitive product.

Objecting to this reckless bailout behavior is not a partisan concern, no matter how the folks over at MSNBC et al would like to paint it as such. This is a practical concern. In a recent interview with Fareed Zakaria, former Treasury Secretary Paul O’Neill pointed to the folly of the government pretending it is a magic entity that can get away doing what no smart investor would do: namely, throwing good money after bad.

If our government is able to arbitrarily take our taxpayer dollars and say yes to an organization we say no to, they are taking away our power of the purse. Boycotts have no meaning. Free will is over.

Let news organizations rediscover journalistic ethics. The evolution of technology may dictate we move forward and get our news in a different manner. If that is the case, all the bailouts in the world won’t force people to go out and buy a newspaper. Regardless of the medium, those who are honest enough to offer a good value for the dollar will find a way to stay in business.

Congress should not take our money to bail out whomever they please for reasons of their own.

How come Ralph Nader doesn’t spend more time doing what he was actually good at instead of running for President? There was a time when Ole Ralph would have had a stroke if he saw something like this rolling off an assembly line. This baby makes the Pinto look like an armoured tank and the Corvair look front-heavy.

One would almost have to put a call in to the Scooter Store 800 number to match this. Actually, the Scooter Store is a better deal because they have figured out a way to bilk Medicare for their wheels. “It didn’t cost me a thing!”.

Looks for sure like something Congressional Motors would design.

I envision the guy in this photo murmuring, “Dear Jesus. Please don’t let anyone back up.”.

Now I ask you, why bother paying for a “vehicle” such as this when you can just lie in the middle of the street during rush hour and become road pizza for free? Then they could just roll you up and cart you off, and your carbon footprint would be really small, let me tell you.

Who in his right mind without a Death Wish would expose himself to traffic while moving at 35MPH in this thing? My dog is bigger than this “vehicle”. This would also go over really well in a North East winter, don’t you think? I bet they come out with a little plow attachment (optional).

No wonder GM is circling the drain.

General Motors Corp. is teaming with Segway Inc., maker of the upright, self-balancing scooters, to build a new type of two-wheeled vehicle designed to move easily through congested urban streets.

Yes, I would say one could move very easily in this thing. Stuck to the grill of an SUV.

According to GM, though, this thing will be smart enough to move out of the way of 4×4’s. Of course, we won’t know whether or not that idea is defective until the April Consumer Reports Auto Issue comes out in the following year. As I fondly remember my last GM car, the one whose heated windshield shattered like a spider’s web on the first day of winter, the one whose electronic suspension sunk to the ground, and the one whose heated seats began to smoke, it’s pretty safe to say that there will be plenty of road kill before that ’smart feature’ is debugged in the field.

The Project P.U.M.A. (Personal Urban Mobility and Accessibility) prototype is shown in Brooklyn April 4. GM and Segway say the vehicle could allow people to travel around cities more quickly, safely, quietly and cleanly, and at a lower total cost.

God. They named this POS after PUMAs.

The Segway Personal Transporter was launched with considerable hype eight years ago but practical issues prevented the scooter from becoming a mass-market product, including its relatively high cost and restrictions on its use in many jurisdictions.

I don’t suppose the thought that nobody in his or her right mind would allow a loved one to enter traffic in that thing had anything to do with it, did it?

The struggling auto maker, surviving on a government lifeline, is looking to generate enthusiasm for its increasingly uncertain future ahead of the New York auto show this week.

Generate enthusiasm. Oh yeah. This will do it. I’m rolling my eyes here.

Produce this vehicle, GM, and your future will definitely be certain. Your future non-existence, that is.

GM didn’t say how much the machines would cost,

Whatever the price is, it’s too much.

“Dem newfangled environmentally friendly GM machines must be biodegradable, Claude. I hear they never found his.”

**Thanks for the link, DE. I think.