Monday, June 8, 2009

From the last post...

I'm revisiting my last post referencing star wars, but taking it beyond just posting a link to the article. lol, I am actually going to be posting quotes and stuff with a link you can visit if you want context or more information. A warning though, when I post quotes, I will be leaving out bracketed sections which is the reporter's INTERPRETATION of what the speaker meant by a pronoun or ambiguity. I want to post it just as it is, so you can read it with same amount of offense, patriotism, or stupidity that the speaker said it with, not some spin put on it by the media.

-------------------------------------------------------

"What I have no interest in doing is running GM," Obama said. His only goal, he said, was to get GM back on its feet and then "to get out quickly."

Yet, the U.S. could end up holding the shares for some time.

Neither Obama nor his spokesman offered an indication of how long the government's involvement with GM would last. "I don't know that there is a timeline," said Robert Gibbs, the White House press secretary.

This is intresting. So Star Wars! I'm thinking of Epsiode 2 when the senate votes emergency powers to the chancellor, and he runs things "reluctantly" and with prmoises of "turning power back over to the proper authority" as soon as the crisis has been averted. This while covertly doing everything to make sure that the crisis continues. Obama = Palpatine.

Why do I say that he is ensuring the crisis continues? Well, Obama just sold GM's Hummer line of vehicles to China. Godbye jobs, goodbye income for GM. GM can't make money, financial insecurity and more gov. control! Grats Obama, stage one is successful!

Stage 2: Enact tax policies that will either slash profits of major companies (forcing them into "bankruptcy protection" and government control) or force them to ship jobs over seas, causing further economic slumps and bankrupt companies to take over.

Stage 3: Declare regret at this and demand re-election on the grounds that any other candidate is just hungry for all the power over commerce that the office now holds. Oh, and be assured that future Presidents will have this power. Remember according to Liberals, "no timeline" means "forever." Just look at how they handled Bush and McCain's lack of timeline. They declared that "not timeline" meant "forever" and used it as grounds not to elect him. (Oh, btw, I want an Afghanistan timeline! Our soldiers still aren't home, they're just a couple countries east)


Alright, so future speculation asside, lets look at the here and now.

What are Obama's credentials that he should be running one of the largest and once the strongest companies in the U.S.?

-Law Schoold Grad. I don't care where it was. (but I do know, its just not a relevant fact in this post) Law degrees do not teach you economics or business managment, and no law school grad with ZERO company experience has what it takes to go right to the top and determine what is healthy for that company.

-Community Organizer. Basically a person with an agenda (not necessarily one that is beneficial to a large group of people) who gathers other people to his/her cause and makes a fuss about some issue or another. In short? a lobbyist who organizes other lobbyists who are demanding resolution to a local need or want, whether it harms others or not. Lobbyists were a huge part of the campaigns, with both parties declaring that they would not be run by lobbyists. Oops! Our mistake, we elected one of them! Ok, so lobbyist... not really qualified to be running major business in our country.

-Civil Rights Attorney. A lawyer is a person who ignores the facts or manipulates them for money. Most politicians were once lawyers. Yah, society has made a few election mistakes. However, In my opinion, Civil Rights Attornies are the worst of these. They are racists who get paid to be so and manipulate the facts so that other people look racist instead of them. Civil Rights attornies once had their beneficial place in our society, but not anymore, when the public lives in fear of being sued for all they're worth or losing their jobs, because someone called them a name they didn't like after being sworn at and degraded by the "victim." Damaging to the desirablitiy as president? Yes. But whether desirable or not, does this experience make him qualified for running a country or a big business like GM? ABSOLUTELY NOT!

- One Term not completed in U.S. Senate. (because of election he only filled four years) CEO stands for Senior Executive Office. Obama was for four years a LEGISTLATOR, not an EXECUTIVE. If he had been a governor, that would be ok, he would have had experience being in the role of a person making that kind of decisions, but not a legistlator! Sarah Palin would be more qualified to run GM than Obama (Her crdentials were equal in weight to Obama's, but somehow the VP needs more qualifications to be "a heartbeat away" than it does to actually be in the spot. She was also in an executive role as Governor for several years). Several sources site the margin that he was elected by to senate as a credential, as if it carries some kind of weight, but it is merely a testimony to the weakness of the other politicians that Illinois turns out, and the gullability of citizens of Illinois. It merely makes a statement about the constituency, no the qualifications of the man. FAIL! Not quite enough to make it acceptable for him to run GM.

"He has a strong obligation to ensure that there is a management structure in place that is making smart business decisions," Gibbs said. "Is the president going to thumb through engineering reports and each page of the annual report? No."

Now his secretary says that "oh, yes this is a responsibility, but its really not a big deal. Even if he does have a strong obligation (which he doesn't) to this company, as the CEO of GM, Obama does not have the obligation to fulfill those responsibilities of reading through the reports so as to know what is going on in the company. Then maybe he might actually be able to make informed decisions. Who knows? Give it a year, and we may see Oprah running the place, and turning out the latest cars instead of unfounded advice and feel good destruction.

Alright, so I've said my piece on this issue. I've thrown in my opinions, but there is a large amount of objectivity in them. If you disagree, I'd really like to know and read your comments, but please do not swear, call me names (or call me or my posts close-minded or bigotted). <--- these are grounds for deletion of your comment.


Here is the link to the article again if you would like to read the whole thing.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090601/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_obama_gm;_ylt=AnWf9Hi51QTZgOT4L6flM0ADW7oF

3 comments:

Q said...

LET THE STUPID COMPANY FAIL.

jeanz said...

I agree with Q.

Lady Brainsample said...

I LOVE the Star Wars analogy, and I totally agree. We think a similar thing about how Obama's going to try to enact gun control: the government will know about some terrorist attack and will let it happen. Then when they've whipped everyone into a panic, they'll manipulate everyone into giving up their guns.

Music Console

Hit counter