Restitutor Orbis

Politico is reporting that Obama has demanded that the chairman and CEO of GM, Rick Wagoner, resign. And according to Politico, he has.

Why?

Because GM wants more government money. Accusations of socialism aside, fears of government encroachment into industry aside, this should have happened at the outset of the stimulus crisis, while Bush was still in office. The fact that these people ran their businesses into the ground, the fact that it is OUR tax dollars that are being tossed at them, led me to the early conclusion that the management of any corporation that accepted our money should have to go. CEO, Board, all of them. Go. Replace them with competent people.

Everything that has followed that initial bailout has convinced me I was right. Unbridled greed, corruption and a refusal to change an entrenched philosophy that panders to further enriching the already grotesquely overpaid executives, have demonstrated that these people have not made and will not make the necessary changes for their companies to survive. They cannot continue to suck up our tax dollars and bankrupt our nation in the process while continuing with the same failed policies. Somebody had to do this. Since they wouldn't do it themselves, the government has.

It's unfortunate that it had to be, but that's the way it goes, sometimes. Nobody wanted it. Doesn't mean we don't have to do it. Today,

President Barack Obama is to unveil his plans for the auto industry, including a response to a request for additional funds by GM and Chrysler. The plan is based on recommendations from the Presidential Task Force on the Auto Industry, headed by the Treasury Department.

The White House confirmed Wagoner was leaving at the government's behest after The Associated Press reported his immediate departure, without giving a reason.

Here is a history of the auto industries failings:

• GM and Chrysler first requested billions in federal aid in November, warning that they could run out of cash in a matter of months if they didn't receive it.


• In December, President Bush agreed to loan $9.4 billion to GM and $4 billion to Chrysler.


• Last month, GM asked for $16.6 billion more and Chrysler requested an additional $5 billion.


• Earlier this month, Obama agreed to loan $5 billion to American auto parts manufacturers to help them weather the steep drop in new vehicle orders and the financial uncertainty at the Big Three.

Why Waggoner? Politico offers two reasons:

1. First, his company is asking for the most in total federal aid: $26 billion, a figure administration officials fear could grow even larger.


2. Second, the GM chief was tied more directly to the ill-fated decisions that that brought much of the American auto industry to the brink of collapse.

According to the New York Times the government "has also instructed Chrysler to form a partnership with the Italian automaker Fiat within 30 days as conditions for receiving another much-needed round of government aid...If a deal is reached between Chrysler and Fiat, the administration says it would consider another loan of $6 billion to Chrysler."

Deregulation was an important cause in the Bush Administration. Deregulation and the safety of the environment and of the public be damned. It cost the big businesses a lot of money to actually have to worry about what they put into circulation, after all, and nobody was a friend to the wealthy big business owners like Dubya. Obama is changing that.

On Saturday, according to Reuters, President Barack Obama chose public health and biological threat expert Dr. Margaret Hamburg to run the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. "He also announced a Cabinet-level food safety group. He selected Baltimore Health Commissioner Dr. Joshua Sharfstein to serve as Hamburg's principal deputy."

Obama also outlined measures to keep diseased cows from entering the food supply and promised to increase the number of FDA food inspectors and modernize food safety labs.

This is an important move and I am certain it is something many people are happy to see. The news of the day remains the economy, but there are many other problems that need to be addressed, many areas in which Bush's attack on the American people need to be turned back. As Reuters reports,

If confirmed by the Senate, Hamburg will take over an agency battered by a string of often deadly food poisoning and drug safety issues, including an ongoing outbreak of salmonella in peanut products that forced the largest food recall in U.S. history.

The choice signals the FDA's priority under the Obama administration will be safety and not necessarily speeding through drug approvals.

The salmonella outbreak has made 683 people in 46 states sick, killed as many as nine and forced the recall of more than 3,000 products.

Obama said outdated food safety laws were in part to blame. "Inspection and enforcement is spread out so widely among so many people that it's difficult for different parts of our government to share information, work together, and solve problems," he said.

The FDA "has been underfunded and understaffed in recent years, leaving the agency with the resources to inspect just 7,000 of our 150,000 food-processing plants and warehouses each year. That means roughly 95 percent of them go uninspected."

On an unrelated note, Obama expressed outrage at the use of stimulus funds by AIG to provide bonuses:

"This is a corporation that finds itself in financial distress due to recklessness and greed," Obama told politicians and reporters in the Roosevelt Room of the White House, where he and Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner were unveiling a package to aid the nation's small businesses.

The president expressed dismay and anger over the bonuses to executives at AIG, which has received $173 billion in U.S. government bailouts over the past six months.

"Under these circumstances, it's hard to understand how derivative traders at AIG warranted any bonuses, much less $165 million in extra pay. I mean, how do they justify this outrage to the taxpayers who are keeping the company afloat?"

Great news, obviously. AIG doesn't get it. They seem unaware that the mob is preparing to storm the Bastille. "Let them eat cake" doesn't come close to describing their arrogance. But Obama, fortunately, does. He has asked Geithner to "pursue every single legal avenue to block these bonuses and make the American taxpayers whole." He also said he would work with Congress to change the laws so that such a situation cannot recur.

It is not at all surprising that the economy remains the single most important issue in the minds of Americans. Unemployment is higher than at any other time in a quarter century, and CNN, not necessarily the most balanced media outlet, suggests that there is a rift in Democratic ranks as to how the crisis should be addressed. Clearly, the myth of a "liberal media elite" touted by McCain and Palin is just that, a myth, and the media is not particularly friendly to Obama. The hate groups are out in force, and Republicans are still lining up behind Rush Limbaugh, who refuses compromise, who's motto is "stay the course". Republicans are blaming everybody for the economic crisis but themselves. Inexplicably, Bush is innocent and the blame falls squarely on a man who has been president for less than two months.

AP echoes CNN, saying

Confronting misgivings, even in his own party, President Barack Obama mounted a stout defense of his blueprint to overhaul the economy Thursday, declaring the national crisis is "not as bad as we think" and his plans will speed recovery.

Obama has gone on record as saying that the recent stimulus package would not be the last, that more would be needed. But according to AP, Nancy Pelosi refuses to make any commitment:

Meanwhile, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., played down talk that Democrats would consider a second economic stimulus bill.

"I know that people have made suggestions that we should be ready to do something, but I really would like to see this stimulus package play out," Pelosi said. "It's just not something that, right now, is in the cards," she added later.

The Republicans are feeding fears about mounting deficits, and the burden placed on our children and on their children. Roosevelt famously said "the only thing to fear is fear itself" and I am afraid his words are still accurate. It is this fear that may prevent our government from doing what it takes to pull us out of the depression we find ourselves in.

On top of that, Obama wants to overhaul health care, reduce greenhouse-gas pollution and undertake major changes in energy policy. He's projecting a federal deficit of $1.75 trillion this year, by far the largest in history, but says he can get it down to $533 billion by 2013.

"I am not choosing to address these additional challenges just because I feel like it, or because I'm a glutton for punishment," Obama told the Business Roundtable, a group of top business executives. "I am doing so because they are fundamental to our economic growth, and to ensuring that we don't have more crises like this in the future."

I believe Obama is right. I agree with Paul Krugman that we need to be more pro-active, more aggressive, not less so, and that to date our response has been too tame, too cautious. If you start fighting a fire by pissing on it, you will soon discover that it is too late to put it out even with a firehouse, because while you were pissing, it was burning out of control.

The Administration has made clear that the stimulus already voted will be spent appropriately, and dire threats have been uttered:

Vice President Joe Biden opened the meeting by warning state officials that if they misuse money from the stimulus package, they should not expect more help from the federal government for a long time.

"If we don't get this right, folks, this is the end of the ability to convince Congress that anything should go to the states," Biden said.

Added Obama: "If we see money being misspent, we're going to put a stop to it."

I hope they are good at their word. I hope that we do not keep throwing money at Wall Street CEOs who horde it or spend it on expensive trips or to redecorate their offices. I do not think the people will put up with this for long. And I think it is quite possible that populist rage has not yet peaked.

Lets get informed and rational about this stimulus plan!

read more | digg story

Full transcript here

Here is a great new site, further evidence that Obama is returning transparency to government. Despite repeated GOP claims that things are being hidden, Obama is making unprecedented efforts to put information in front of the readers and viewers. There is no reason in the world any American must remain ignorant about what the government is doing. It's not his fault Rush Limbaugh can't figure out how to search a pdf file! As Media Matters reported on February 13th:

Summary: Rush Limbaugh falsely claimed that Democrats "have reformatted the [economic recovery] bill -- they've made it a PDF file when they posted it. ... And, so, you can read every page, but you cannot keyword search it. It's not a text file as legislation normally is as posted on these public websites. They don't want anybody knowing what's in this." In fact, as Adobe Systems notes of PDFs: "You can run a search using either the Search window or the Find toolbar. In either case, Reader searches the PDF body text, layers, form fields, and digital signatures."

Yes...incredible, isn't it? The voice of the GOP can't use a pdf file. No surprise given how anti-science and anti-intellectual both Rush and his party are. But on to the great site I mentioned above: Recovery.gov. The site, we are told, will offer:

• Education: Explain the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act;


• Transparency: Show how, when, and where the money is spent;


• Accountability: Provide data that will allow citizens to evaluate the Act’s progress and provide feedback.

The site tells us:

The site will include information about Federal grant awards and contracts as well as formula grant allocations. Federal agencies will provide data on how they are using the money, and eventually, prime recipients of Federal funding will provide information on how they are using their Federal funds. On our end, we will use interactive graphics to illustrate where the money is going, as well as estimates of how many jobs are being created, and where they are located. And there will be search capability to make it easier for you to track the funds.

The first incarnation of Recovery.gov features projections for how, when, and where the funds will be spent -- which states and sectors of the economy are due to receive what proportion of the funds. As money starts to flow, far more data will become available.

I look forward to more information being posted on this site. I wish Bush had thought to put some controls in place before he left office instead of finding new and interesting ways to screw Obama and booby trap his administration. At least there is some accountability now as well as transparency! This is a positive step. It's not that the plan is perfect, it's not that Obama and his team haven't slipped up. But they're under such pressure and the GOP is applying a magnifying glass to every little action, making a stink about everything and lying abundantly about it at the same time.

The news continues to be filled with Republican attempts to discredit Obama's stimulus plan. They've even tried to claim that FDR's New Deal did not work, though it can be statistically proven. But facts never get in the way when you're an ideologue, and the Republicans have proven that they will not cooperate, will not compromise, and will not even try to work with Obama. They would rather see the country ruined than see a Democrat succeed. I hope Obama wakes up to this fact sooner rather than later.

Still, the stimulus package should pass both houses of Congress. There is enough support for it now that it's been watered down. Of course, the Republicans, having pretty much eliminated, or at least greatly reduced, the possibility that it will help, will then claim that it's Obama's fault and call for a change in Washington. I do not believe their tactic will work. They are discredited after eight years of Bush and it will take more than this to unseat Obama and the Democrat majorities in Congress.

Reuters reports that

Democratic leaders in the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives on Thursday wrapped up a last minute tax cut and spending details in the $789 billion economic stimulus bill, setting votes for Friday by both chambers.

The House is scheduled to vote Friday morning and the Senate plans to follow in the evening, but that vote could take a few hours to accommodate a Democratic senator who has to return home after the death of a family member.

Both chambers are expected to approve it which would meet a deadline set by President Barack Obama to approve the emergency spending and tax cut package before the end of the upcoming holiday weekend.

Another sign that Republicans will not work with Obama is that Senator Judd Gregg (R-NH) has withdrawn his nomination to be Commerce Secretary - he says because of disagreements over the stimulus plan. Disgusting, but not at all surprising. And three Republicans who voted for the plan have been vilified by their own party and a call has been made to unseat them.

Reuters also released a "Factbox" detailing the provisions of the stimulus package.

FOR WORKERS, CONSUMERS AND RETIREES

* A "making work pay" refundable tax credit championed by President Barack Obama of up to $400 per individual and $800 for couples in 2009 and 2010. It is calculated at a rate of 6.2 percent of earned income and is phased out for individuals with adjusted incomes over $75,000 and couples with incomes over $150,000.

* A one-time payment of $250 to Social Security beneficiaries, railroad retirees and veterans receiving benefits from the Veterans Affairs department. State government retirees not eligible for Social Security would also get the $250 payment.

* Increases the earned income tax credit for low-income workers with three or more children.

* Increases eligibility for the refundable child tax credit to more low-income workers. The bill reduces the income floor to $3,000 in 2009 and 2010 from the current floor of $8,500.

* Provides a new $2,500 tax credit for college education expenses. The credit phases out for individuals earning more than $80,000 and couples with incomes over $160,000.

* Provides an $8,000 tax credit for first-time home buyers for homes purchased between January 1 and December 1, 2009. The tax credit phases out for individuals earning more than $75,000 and couples earning more than $150,000.

* Provides temporary relief from the alternative minimum tax for millions of middle-class taxpayers who otherwise would be ensnared by the tax originally meant for the very wealthy.

The bill provides for $282 billion in tax cuts. This is far less than the Democrats wanted but much more than the country can bear. I'm worried. And I'm far from alone.

Sarah Robinson of Campaign for America's Future writes about the effect of the tax cuts so loved by Republicans. I agree with her 100%:

The past 20 years has taught us two hard new truths about tax cuts that conservatives have yet to internalize. The first one is: Tax cuts directed at the wealthy don't create new wealth. Larry Beinert has run the numbers that show that, going all the way back to the 1920s, economic growth correlates absolutely perfectly with high marginal tax rates on the rich. The higher the top tax bracket, the better the U.S economy does. This happens so reliably that we probably need to consider it a bit of settled economic wisdom.

The second truth is: What tax cuts do create—better than anything else you can name—is economic bubbles. It doesn't take long before you've got too many rich people with too much capital chasing too few real investment opportunities. When they can't find places to park their excess cash, they start gambling with it. In the 1630s, it was tulips. In the 1990s, it was dot-com stocks. In this decade, they turned to flipping houses and stashing it in hedge funds.

Of course, con men and scam artists (paging Bernie Madoff) thrive in the overheated, gravity-free, anything-goes casino atmosphere that follows. Worse, a whole lot of paper "wealth" gets created that doesn't have any real-world basis of value. Eventually, the bubble overinflates and pops, taking that phony "wealth" with it. And this happens every single time we cut taxes on the rich below the 50 percent threshold.

Tax breaks were one of the main reasons we got into this pit. More tax breaks will not get us out of it. And the conservatives need to let go of that shattered fantasy, and move on.

The war between Rush Limbaugh and President Obama seems to be heating up and it is possible there is more to it than meets the eye. Our new president is clearly no intellectual slouch and he has already shown a great capacity to plan ahead, to be prepared for every contingency. We may be seeing more of that now. I just saw this in the Huffington Post:
Media critic Michael Wolff thinks Limbaugh is just being played by Obama:

Right now Rush is being played. The Obama dinner with conservative columnists, shortly before his inauguration, was as much about excluding Rush as coddling the columnists. Not only did the conservatives fawn, but Rush fumed. It got under his skin. Indeed, the rumor that he might in fact be there (likely coming from the Obama camp), and then his evident lack of an invitation, highlighted the slight. He's tried to make it out to be a political point ever since, but mostly he sounds like a guy who's hurt he didn't get invited to the hot party.

HuffPo also reports that Politico reports (why do they do this, it drives me mad) that "Republican House member Phil Gingrey has a message for Limbaugh: back off.

"I think that our leadership, Mitch McConnell and John Boehner, are taking the right approach," Gingrey said. "I mean, it's easy if you're Sean Hannity or Rush Limbaugh or even sometimes Newt Gingrich to stand back and throw bricks. You don't have to try to do what's best for your people and your party. You know you're just on these talk shows and you're living well and plus you stir up a bit of controversy and gin the base and that sort of that thing. But when it comes to true leadership, not that these people couldn't be or wouldn't be good leaders, they're not in that position of John Boehner or Mitch McConnell."

This seems to be a shared sentiment. On the radio Monday, Limbaugh said Obama wished the same for him (to fail).

"He's obviously more frightened of me than he is Mitch McConnell. He's more frightened of me, then he is of say, John Boehner, which doesn't say much about our party," Limbaugh said.

The HuffPo headline Obama Allies use Limbaugh to Hammer GOP on Stimulus seems to be right on and it would appear that Rush has Obama right where Obama wants him. He has certainly played into Democrat hands. While some liberals oppose giving Rush any air-time at all (even to refute him) I applaud the strategy (along with the petition hosted by the Democratic National Committee). If you let the other party control the terms of the debate, you also let them control its outcome. Rush has gone unanswered for too many years, spreading too much propaganda, for it to go unanswered. This is what HuffPo had to say yesterday:

Key Democratic groups are launching a series of radio advertisements on Friday designed to tie Republicans to Rush Limbaugh and put pressure on GOP Senators to support the stimulus package.

MoveOn, Americans United for Change, AFSCME and SEIU are releasing the spots in three states with Senate Republicans who could potentially switch party lines on the stimulus vote: George Voinovich in Ohio, John Ensign in Nevada, and Arlen Specter in Pennsylvania. The ads are designed to drum up support for the president's economic recovery package. But they do so in somewhat of a round-about manner, not just touting the jobs that could be created from the bill but tying Republicans to some of Limbaugh's most caustic and controversial anti-Obama comments.

Finally, I'd like to point to a great Op-Ed piece in the New York Times, by Paul Krugman, Health Care Now. Krugman asks a very critical question, one for which there is no answer at this point:

Why has the Obama administration been silent, at least so far, about one of President Obama’s key promises during last year’s campaign — the promise of guaranteed health care for all Americans?

If anything ever proves the old adage that a picture is worth 10,000 words it is this piece, by PunditKitchen.com:


see Sarah Palin pictures

Who doesn't want a president with an inner Samuel L. Jackson?