As "Big Three" Plea for Aid, Re-Watch Roger and Me

According to today's Wall Street Journal:

"Senate Democrats introduced legislation that would set aside $25 billion to help the [auto] industry, drawing from the $700 billion fund created to stabilize financial markets. The legislation would allow the auto companies and parts suppliers to receive 'bridge loans' of at least ten years with favorable interest rates. But there is resistance among many senior Republicans and the White House. If no decision is made this week, the issue will be kicked over to the new 111th Congress."

However, there is Senatorial resistance to approving the loans, and for good reason. The auto industry's problems literally span my life. In the late 1940s (I was born in '54) Peter Drucker wrote Concept of the Corporation in which he was mostly complimentary about the firm but raised questions about its labor relations and social responsibility practices. In the mid 1960s Ralph Nader wrote Unsafe at Any Speed, which was critical of the Pinto and the Corvair, and GM's response was to try to frame Nader with a hooker. In 1972 John Z. De Lorean and J. Patrick Wright published On a Clear Day You Can See General Motors, which mocked GM's incompetent and manipulative management. By the late 1970s, the Big Three had failed to respond to the lean manufacturing and quality management initiatives of Toyota and other Japanese manufacturers. In 1980 Congress bailed out Chrysler with a loan guarantee. In the 1980s, the "Big Three" made some quality gains, but soon fell back on the strategy, which seemed bizarre and lame to me at the time, of manufacturing huge SUVs and ignoring quality. In the late 1980s, C Jackson Grayson and Carla Grayson O'Dell wrote American Business: A Two Minute Warning in which they described GM robots painting themselves instead of the cars, and hugely expensive robotized plants that were too inflexible to be competitive. In the late 1980s Michael Moore came out with Roger and Me. One of the themes of Roger and Me is GM's insistence that it is a private corporation and owes no special allegiance to the public or to its employees. In the film as elsewhere the firm opines that the moving of a large percentage of its plants to Mexico is a private, profit-maximizing decision and the public has no right to criticize its use of plant relocations or layoffs. But if plant relocation and layoffs are private decisions, why should the public be concerned about GM's bankruptcy risk?

In contrast to GM, Toyota provides lifetime employment to its employees and has moved a number of plants to the US. Toyota does not complain about labor or fixed costs, but has been criticized for the inflexibility of lifetime employment. GM has laid off workers throughout its history yet now complains about pension and health insurance costs.

Most readers of my blog are not probably fans of Michael Moore. I too disagree with his dream of imposing a Cuban-style $250 per year health program on Americans, or a French-style program that WOULD NOT provide for sewing any of the fingers back on (if you saw Sicko you know what I'm talking about).

Nevertheless, Roger and Me is a good movie, and it should be mandatory for all the Democrats eager to provide subsidies to firms that have insisted on the importance private property rights.

The following is Siskel and Eberts's review of Roger and Me from 1989. General Motors went bankrupt in the 1910's, and the DuPonts took it over in the 1920s and ejected the CEO, Willy Durant. Is GM a firm that has looked out for Americans? Is it a firm that you or I really want to support out of our hard earned money? And why can't they build cars that Americans want to buy?

Meeting of Republican Liberty Caucus and Libertarians of Mid Hudson Valley

Several members of New York's Republican Liberty Caucus met with about 15 Town of New Paltz and Westchester County Libertarians this evening (Tuesday) at the College Diner in New Paltz, New York. Carl Svensson, founder of the New York Libertarian Caucus organized the meeting, and I felt the meeting was a success. The attendants ranged from college students at SUNY New Paltz who have organized a campus Libertarian Club to a retired math professor and a recent candidate for mayor of Peekskill, New York who lost by only two percent. The meeting focused on strategy rather than ideology and the attendees are thinking of ways to get involved in Republican politics and to potentially run for office in several cases. The dynamic and lovely Raquel Okyay was in attendance. Carl Svensson is doing an excellent job, and we anticipate that the meetings will continue next month. I am on the state board of the RLC. As long as the ideological discussion can be minimized and the focus remain on action toward a few well defined goals, the group can potentially make a dent.

Obama Follower Threatens Atlas With Censorship

Pamela Geller of Atlas Shrugs reports (h/t Larwyn) that she has received the following threat from an Obama supporter who calls himself "GuyInGothamX":

"I am monitoring your site---if you or any of your hate- filled followers even make a passing joke about violence toward Barack Obama or his family, I am going straight to the FBI. I don't put anything past you or your racist followers----everything you do is an incitement to violence... additionally, i have reported your site to the Wiesenthal Center for Tolerance, the ADL, the ADC and the NAACP... you may think race-baiting and religious bigotry are entertaining, but i'm not sure those organizations will."

I have followed Pamela's site for the past year and have never once seen any race bating on her site. In fact, I am an occasional contributor to Wiesenthal, the ADL and the Southern Poverty Law Center and reject racism of any kind. I have never sensed any racism or hint of violence on Pamela's site, which won an attack from MSNBC's Keith Olberman a few weeks ago.

It seems to me that the prejudice is on this anonymous e-mailer's part. Once again we see the left attempting to censor anyone who disagrees with its views. Keep up the good work, Pamela!

Nancy Razik Lets Fox News Have It

I just received the following e-mail from Nancy Razik:

>Fox News - A big old F-U to you. When it looked like B. O. would be coronated, you dropped all pretense of fair and balanced and turned into a clone of MSNBC. When will Olbermann get his own show on your network? He could join Shep Smith and they could fly off the handle together (or whatever sordid little things they like to do).Those throwing Sarah Palin under the bus can kiss my big old white ass. I can't decide if it's insecurity due to a woman with power or if it's just pure jealousy that a woman can look good, raise a family and be a governor but there would not have been 1/3 of the votes for McCain without Palin on the ticket.I don't want to hear another peep about racism or affirmative action. We've got our first affirmative action president. White guilt? Take your white guilt and shove it where the sun don't shine. Don't want to hear no bitching when the New Black Panthers become part of an Obama administration - after all they helped him out in Philly so he owes the brothers. All race cards have expired and are no longer valid in this country.I look forward to watching the koolaid effect wear off over the next 4 years. It's hard to believe in hope and change when you're standing in the unemployment line. Free college education? Handouts? Help with your mortgage? Dream on - you'll be lucky to still have a pot to piss in when the Dems get through with
you. But don't complain or Rahm "ballerina" Emmanuel will send you a dead fish... Gracious Loser - no damn way. Not at the cost of my Country and the Constitution. Taking a cue from the new "first lady"For the first time in my adult life, I'm ashamed of my country.