Big Three CEOs Flew Private Jets to Plead for Public Funds

[strandinthewind]

^^

I agree with you. And, Obama just announced his job creation plan quoted below. Hopefully, it will work. I do think that huge governement projects that rebuild American cities, roads, etc. are a good idea because they solve two goals: (1) creation of jobs and (2) advancement of the public good. Look at the projects that were created in the New Deal Era like the Hoover Dam, the TVA, etc. These projects are still proving a major source of electricity 80 years later

As for the free market theory - history routinely demonstrates that large companies cannot be trusted to totally govern themselves. Greed gets in the way and the boys at the top rarely get punished. True, some go to jail for a year or two, but that hardly compensates the millions of innocent people who are devasted to some degree by the loss of companies like Enron, who went broke directly due to fraud. Moreover, these men at the top hide their assets and are multi millionaires when they get out of Club Fed

But, I agree with you that giving money to these companies in the way they are going it or at least the way the companies have asked for it is absurd and as irresponsible as the companies themselves.
________________________________________________________________________________________________

Remarks of President-elect Barack Obama

(as delivered)

Democratic Radio Address

Friday, November 21st, 2008


Good morning.

The news this week has only reinforced the fact that we are facing an economic crisis of historic proportions. Financial markets faced more turmoil. New home purchases in October were the lowest in half a century. 540,000 more jobless claims were filed last week, the highest in eighteen years. And we now risk falling into a deflationary spiral that could increase our massive debt even further.

While I’m pleased that Congress passed a long-overdue extension of unemployment benefits this week, we must do more to put people back to work and get our economy moving again. We have now lost 1.2 million jobs this year, and if we don’t act swiftly and boldly, most experts now believe that we could lose millions of jobs next year.

There are no quick or easy fixes to this crisis, which has been many years in the making, and it’s likely to get worse before it gets better. But January 20th is our chance to begin anew – with a new direction, new ideas, and new reforms that will create jobs and fuel long-term economic growth.

I have already directed my economic team to come up with an Economic Recovery Plan that will mean 2.5 million more jobs by January of 2011 – a plan big enough to meet the challenges we face that I intend to sign soon after taking office. We’ll be working out the details in the weeks ahead, but it will be a two-year, nationwide effort to jumpstart job creation in America and lay the foundation for a strong and growing economy. We’ll put people back to work rebuilding our crumbling roads and bridges, modernizing schools that are failing our children, and building wind farms and solar panels; fuel-efficient cars and the alternative energy technologies that can free us from our dependence on foreign oil and keep our economy competitive in the years ahead.

These aren’t just steps to pull ourselves out of this immediate crisis; these are the long-term investments in our economic future that have been ignored for far too long. And they represent an early down payment on the type of reform my Administration will bring to Washington – a government that spends wisely, focuses on what works, and puts the public interest ahead of the same special interests that have come to dominate our politics.

I know that passing this plan won’t be easy. I will need and seek support from Republicans and Democrats, and I’ll be welcome to ideas and suggestions from both sides of the aisle.

But what is not negotiable is the need for immediate action. Right now, there are millions of mothers and fathers who are lying awake at night wondering if next week’s paycheck will cover next month’s bills. There are Americans showing up to work in the morning only to have cleared out their desks by the afternoon. Retirees are watching their life savings disappear and students are seeing their college dreams deferred. These Americans need help, and they need it now.

The survival of the American Dream for over two centuries is not only a testament to its enduring power, but to the great effort, sacrifice, and courage of the American people. It has thrived because in our darkest hours, we have risen above the smallness of our divisions to forge a path towards a new and brighter day. We have acted boldly, bravely, and above all, together. That is the chance our new beginning now offers us, and that is the challenge we must rise to in the days to come. It is time to act. As the next President of the United States, I will. Thank you.

http://my.barackobama.com/page/commu...updates/gGxtlN

[cratesok6]

Thank you for Strand, for posting this info.

To me, all this mayhem if you will, is a huge correction to the policies, economics and status quo that have been in place for a long time. Unfortunately, it's the worker bees who get clobbered.

As we all know, Obama and his administration faces some very serious challenges.

I don't doubt his ability. But, I literally pray that he has the fortitude and support from all concerned (congress, the press, corporate America, citizenary, foreign nations) to make major changes. The next few years or next 100 days is going to be very interesting to watch.

I did not vote for Obama, but now he and his staff have my full support!!!

[strandinthewind]

^^

Your welcome and I agree that the next 100 days will be very interesting to watch. As usual, W and the R's are less concentrated on this mess, which they mostly caused or at least hindered the rescue plan for with their borrowing and spending, than they are on preventing abortions, to wit:

Last-minute Bush abortion ruling causes furor

By Robert Pear Published: November 18, 2008

WASHINGTON: A last-minute Bush administration plan to grant sweeping new protections to health care providers who oppose abortion and other procedures on religious or moral grounds has provoked a torrent of objections, including a strenuous protest from the government agency that enforces job-discrimination laws.

The proposed rule would prohibit recipients of federal money from discriminating against doctors, nurses and other health care workers who refuse to perform or to assist in the performance of abortions or sterilization procedures because of their "religious beliefs or moral convictions."

It would also prevent hospitals, clinics, doctors' offices and drugstores from requiring employees with religious or moral objections to "assist in the performance of any part of a health service program or research activity" financed by the Department of Health and Human Services.

But three officials from the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, including its legal counsel, whom President George W. Bush appointed, said the proposal would overturn 40 years of civil rights law prohibiting job discrimination based on religion.

The counsel, Reed Russell, and two Democratic members of the commission, Stuart Ishimaru and Christine Griffin, also said that the rule was unnecessary for the protection of employees and potentially confusing to employers.

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 already prohibits employment discrimination based on religion, Russell said, and the courts have defined "religion" broadly to include "moral or ethical beliefs as to what is right and wrong, which are sincerely held with the strength of traditional religious views."

Ishimaru and senior members of the commission staff said that neither the Department of Health and Human Services nor the White House had consulted their agency before issuing the proposed rule. The White House Office of Management and Budget received the proposal Aug. 21 and cleared it the same day, according to a government Web site that keeps track of the rule-making process.

The protest from the commission comes on the heels of other objections to the rule by doctors, pharmacists, hospitals, state attorneys general and political leaders, including President-elect Barack Obama.

Obama has said the proposal will raise new hurdles to women seeking reproductive health services, like abortion and some contraceptives. Michael Leavitt, the health and human services secretary, said that was not the purpose.

Officials at the Health and Human Services Department said they intended to issue a final version of the rule within days. Aides and advisers to Obama said he would try to rescind it, a process that could take three to six months.

To avoid the usual rush of last-minute rules, the White House said in May that new regulations should be proposed by June 1 and issued by Nov. 1. The "provider conscience" rule missed both deadlines.

Under the White House directive, the deadlines can be waived "in extraordinary circumstances." Administration officials were unable to say immediately why an exception might be justified in this case.

The proposal is supported by the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops and the Catholic Health Association, which represents Catholic hospitals.

Sister Carol Keehan, president of the Catholic Health Association, said that in recent years, "we have seen a variety of efforts to force Catholic and other health care providers to perform or refer for abortions and sterilizations."

But the National Association of Chain Drug Stores, the American Hospital Association, the American Medical Association, 28 senators, more than 110 representatives and the attorneys general of 13 states have urged the Bush administration to withdraw the proposed rule.

Pharmacies said the rule would allow their employees to refuse to fill prescriptions for contraceptives and could "lead to Medicaid patients being turned away." State officials said the rule could void state laws that require insurance plans to cover contraceptives and require hospitals to offer emergency contraception to rape victims.

The Ohio Health Department said the rule "could force family planning providers to hire employees who may refuse to do their jobs" - a concern echoed by Cecile Richards, president of the Planned Parenthood Federation of America.

Under the Civil Rights Act, an employer must make reasonable accommodations for an employee's religious practices, unless the employer can show that doing so would cause "undue hardship on the conduct of its business."

In a letter commenting on the proposed rule, Ishimaru and Griffin, from the employment commission, said that 40 years of court decisions had carefully balanced "employees' rights to religious freedom and employers' business needs." The proposed rule, they said, "would throw this entire body of law into question."

Leavitt, a leading proponent of the rule, said it would increase compliance with laws adopted since 1973 to protect health care workers.

"Federal law," he said, "is explicit and unwavering in protecting federally funded medical practitioners from being coerced into providing treatments they find morally objectionable."As an example of the policies to which they object, Bush administration officials cited a Connecticut law that generally requires hospitals to provide rape victims with timely access to and information about emergency contraception. Governor M. Jodi Rell of Connecticut, a Republican, said the state law represented "an earnest compromise" between the rights of rape victims and the interests of health care practitioners who had moral or religious scruples against emergency contraception. The state attorney general, Richard Blumenthal, a Democrat, said the proposed regulation "would blow apart solutions and compromises that have been reached by people of good will in Connecticut and elsewhere."

http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/11/...rica/abort.php

_________________________________

I mean WTF - it's okay to let people lose their houses, but that crisis isn't so bad that we can take resources away to suddenly address abortion

I mean even if one thinks that abortion should be illegal, etc. - there are far larger and pressing issues right now.

[cratesok6]

I'm betting, since the last days of his administration are drawing nearer, there'll be many attempts by Bush (and the repubs) to get his/their policies pushed through before his/their a##'s get run out of town.

[SuzeQuze]

The fat cats have been "untouchable" for so long but that kind of greed just can't be sustained. It killed a company I used to work for and was very sad. A private jet, a new fancy building we couldn't afford and all kind of sketchy things went on with finances. It's crazy what the guys at the top get away with. And when "fired" they get that golden parachute and another fancy high paying job somewhere else. It's just insane! We had a new CEO who was paid about 4x what the previous CEO was paid. We went through massive layoffs at that time and this guy bought a multi million dollar home on an island. He then proceded to kill what was left of the company.

Also, it's stupid little things like always having meetings catered and stuff like that. The big guys hardly ever pay for their own food. Like they need that $$ break. Then all those fancy dinners and golfing that count as work as they make deals. Etc, etc...

[Macfanforever]

What a joke, I they had a brain they should ride in on bicycles.or better yet the GM ceo drive in with a smoking 1960 chevy pickup truck.the Ford ceo with a beatup 1974 ford van.the Chrysler ceo driving a 1973 Dodge Dart.Congress will be LOL .
how stupid can they get.

[SuzeQuze]

Socialists! So much for capitalism. How dare they look down on people who really need gov't help when they've lost a job and maybe even their home.