Tuesday, November 25, 2008

GOPUSA ILLINOIS Daily Clips - November 25, 2008

GOPUSA ILLINOIS November 25, 2008

-- Disclosures that U.S. Representatives and U.S. Senators should make before voting on any legislation that affects American's automotive industry - Dave Diersen
-- Statement of which of America's industries you consider to be vital to America's national security and why, and if America's automotive industry is not on that list, why not
-- Statement of all campaign contributions ever received from any individual, any organization, or any country involved in the automotive industry
-- Statement of direct or indirect ownership interest or other interest that you or any close relative has in any company involved in the automotive industry
-- Statement of your attitude toward unions in general, toward union members in general, toward the UAW, and toward UAW members
-- Statement of your attitude toward people who own American nameplate vehicles
-- Statement of your attitude toward people who own foreign nameplate vehicles
-- Statement of your attitude toward General Motors, toward Ford, and toward Chrysler
-- Statement of your attitude toward General Motors executives and managers, toward Ford executives and managers, and toward Chrysler executives and managers
-- Statement of your attitude toward General Motors retirees, toward Ford retirees, and toward Chrysler retirees
-- Statement of your attitude toward General Motors shareholders, toward Ford shareholders, and toward Chrysler shareholders
-- Statement of your attitude toward General Motors suppliers, toward Ford suppliers, and toward Chrysler suppliers
-- Statement of your attitude toward General Motors creditors, toward Ford creditors, and toward Chrysler creditors
-- Statement of your attitude toward General Motors dealerships and their employees, toward Ford dealerships and their employees, and toward Chrysler dealerships and their employees
-- Statement of your knowledge of the automotive industry and how you acquired that knowledge
-- Statement of the make, model, and year of all vehicles you own, when you bought them, and why you bought them
-- Statement of your attitude toward the prime target of anti-Americans, the Chevrolet Corvette
-- Statement of all items of any significance that you purchased from companies after they filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy
-- Statement of anything else that affects your attitude toward the American automotive industry

-- DIERSEN HEADLINE: Nissan suddenly decides to pull out of the Chicago Auto Show -- what if Nissan had already gained total control of America's automotive industry and had suddenly decided to pull out of America? General Motors no longer able to pay Tiger Woods $7 million a year.
-- Bankruptcy to save GM - Joshua Rauh and Luigi Zingales
-- DIERSEN HEADLINE: Democrat "Rev. Jeremiah Wright" should acknowledge that if some Democrat members of the "media" had not wanted Hillary Clinton to win the Democrat presidential primary, no one would know who "Rev. Jeremiah Wright" is.
-- Stroger's scare tactics - Editorial
-- Illinois' bad economic joke - Dennis Byrne
-- Governor: I'm Senate Santa Blagojevich says he'll deliver seat as Christmas gift - Monique Garcia and Hal Dardick
(Not posted as of 7:30 AM)

-- Jobs, help for homeowners top remedies at business panel - Joseph Ryan (FROM THE ARTICLE: As lawmakers ponder an auto industry bailout, participants also stressed what a Ford or GM collapse could mean for the Chicago area. "At this point in time, it would be a terrible thing," said Edward Wehmer, president of Wintrust Financial. "Just think of all the car dealerships here.")
-- Economy weighs heavily on DuPage County budget plan - Christy Gutowski
-- Stick to the basics of the Constitution - Phil Collins, Northfield
-- DIERSEN HEADLINE: Demand at food pantries increases -- who does the Daily Herald routinely blame? ANSWER: Old White male conservatives who drive American nameplate vehicles and who pay lots of real estate taxes and income taxes. Who will the Daily Herald blame poverty on when all the old White male conservatives who drive American nameplate vehicles and who pay lots of real estate taxes and income taxes are dead?
-- DIERSEN HEADLINE: If encouraging children to have sex is not illegal, it should be

-- DIERSEN HEADLINE: Nissan suddenly decides to pull out of the Chicago Auto Show -- what if Nissan had already gained total control of America's automotive industry and had suddenly decided to pull out of America?

-- Bashing Big Three is a lemon of an idea - Scott Catino, Arlington Heights
-- Save our auto jobs - Gary Harris, Skokie

-- Who killed Detroit? - Patrick Buchanan
(THE COMMENTARY: Who killed the U.S. auto industry? To hear the media tell it, arrogant corporate chiefs failed to foresee the demand for small, fuel-efficient cars and made gas-guzzling road-hog SUVs no one wanted, while the clever, far-sighted Japanese, Germans and Koreans prepared and built for the future. I dissent. What killed Detroit was Washington, the government of the United States, politicians, journalists and muckrakers who have long harbored a deep animus against the manufacturing class that ran the smokestack industries that won World War II. As far back as the 1950s, an intellectual elite that produces mostly methane had its knives out for the auto industry of which Ike’s treasury secretary, ex-GM chief Charles Wilson, had boasted, “What’s good for America is good for General Motors, and vice versa.” “Engine Charlie” was relentlessly mocked, even in Al Capp’s L’il Abner cartoon strip, where a bloviating “General Bullmoose” had as his motto, “What’s good for Bullmoose is good for America!” How did Big Government do in the U.S. auto industry? Washington imposed a minimum wage higher than the average wage in war-devastated Germany and Japan. The Feds ordered that U.S. plants be made the healthiest and safest work sites in the world, creating OSHA to see to it. It enacted civil rights laws to ensure the labor force reflected our diversity. Environmental laws came next, to ensure U.S. factories became the most pollution-free on Earth. It then clamped fuel efficiency standards on the entire U.S. car fleet. Next, Washington imposed a corporate tax rate of 35 percent, raking off another 15 percent of autoworkers’ wages in Social Security payroll taxes. The United Auto Workers struck repeatedly to win the highest wages and most generous benefits on Earth - vacations, holidays, work breaks, health care, pensions - for workers and their families, and retirees. Now there is nothing wrong with making U.S. plants the cleanest and safest on Earth or having U.S. autoworkers the highest-paid wage earners. That is the dream, what we all wanted for America. And under the 14th Amendment, GM, Ford and Chrysler had to obey the same U.S. laws and pay at the same tax rates. Outside the United States, however, there was and is no equality of standards or taxes. Thus, when America was thrust into the global economy, GM and Ford had to compete with cars made overseas in factories in postwar Japan and Germany, then Korea, where health and safety standards were much lower, wages were a fraction of those paid U.S. workers, and taxes were and are often forgiven on exports to the United States. All three nations built “export-driven” economies. The Beetle and early Japanese imports were made in factories where wages were far beneath U.S. wages and working conditions would have gotten U.S. auto executives sent to prison. The competition was manifestly unfair, like forcing Secretariat to carry 100 pounds in his saddlebags in the Derby. While we think the global economy is about what is best for the consumer, they think about what is best for the nation. How has this global economy profited or prospered America? In the 1950s, we made all our own toys, clothes, shoes, bikes, furniture, motorcycles, cars, cameras, telephones, TVs, etc. You name it. We made it. Are we better off now that these things are made by foreigners? Are we better off now that we have ceased to be self-sufficient? We no longer build commercial ships. We have but one airplane company, and it outsources. China produces our computers. And if GM goes Chapter 11, America will soon be out of the auto business. Our politicians and pundits may not understand what is going on. Historians will have no problem explaining the decline and fall of the Americans.)

DIERSEN HEADLINE: America's automotive industry is vital to America's national security. To turn over America's automotive industry to foreigners is to turn over America's national security to foreigners. Nevertheless, outrageously, many Democrat and Republican politicians outrageously talk and act like they disagree with that, like they do not care about that, or like they own stock in foreign companies that manufacture vehicles. If they had been around in the 1930s, they would not have had any problem with America selling scrap metal to Japan and they provably would have owned stock in companies that were making money doing that. Americans should not support any politician who does not put America's national security first.
(THE ARTICLE: Auto Makers Settle for Tough Love - Gerald F. Seib It was a dose of tough love that President-elect Barack Obama offered the American auto industry Monday. America shouldn't let the auto makers "vanish," he said at a news conference. But the auto companies should get help, he added, only when they show a better plan for pulling out of their downward slide. It seems the only love auto makers can get from Washington these days is of the tough variety -- and from some quarters they can't get even that. All told, the auto industry is seeing its political support crumple like a badly rusted fender. The auto makers have themselves to blame for some of that problem. The Big Three's leaders showed up in town last week seeking help, without offering a coordinated recovery plan or many of those mea culpas for past sins that Washington loves to hear at times like this. But there also are two big, bipartisan forces at work eroding political support for the auto makers -- forces not really within the control of the Big Three. On the Democratic side, the auto industry's traditional political strength has been undercut by the rise of Western, environmentally minded leaders who don't see the auto companies as particularly important to their region, or friendly to their green causes. And on the Republican side, the industry's support has been compromised by the rise of foreign-owned auto plants concentrated in Republican-leaning states in the South, which actually stand to benefit if the Big Three American companies go down. Taken together, those two factors help explain why AIG -- a company that doesn't even make anything shiny a lawmaker can lay a hand upon -- is getting more than $100 billion in bailout money from Washington, and Citigroup just got $306 billion of its troubled assets guaranteed by the feds, while an effort to provide a simple $25 billion bridge loan to America's iconic Big Three auto makers collapsed late last week. It is, in many ways, a bizarre anomaly. That loan money still might come, of course, perhaps when lawmakers return next month for one last gasp before year's end. But there was a time when Democratic control of Congress would have created a lot more sympathy for the industry and the auto workers that power it. Nowadays, though, the Democratic contingent in Congress is dominated less by lawmakers from the Rust Belt of the upper Midwest, and more by those from the West Coast, where the car of choice is no longer a Corvette powered by a Chevrolet V-8 engine, but a Prius powered by a Toyota hybrid engine. California's Nancy Pelosi is House speaker. A fellow Californian, Henry Waxman, just last week ousted the auto industry's primary champion in Congress, John Dingell of Michigan, as chairman of the powerful Energy and Commerce Committee. At the same time, a third Californian, Xavier Becerra of Los Angeles, was named vice chairman of the party's House Caucus, a slot that opened up when Rep. Rahm Emanuel, from the industrial Midwest state of Illinois, became President-elect Obama's chief of staff. On the Senate side, the Democrats' leader is Harry Reid, from California's next-door neighbor, Nevada. He helped head off at the pass Michigan's senators late last week when they tried to rush through that $25 billion loan to Detroit. In short, politics for the car companies have grown shakier on the Democratic side. On the Republican side, meantime, the auto companies that seem most in favor these days don't have their headquarters in Detroit at all, but rather in Japan, Germany and South Korea. Toyota, Honda, Kia, Mitsubishi, BMW and Daimler AG -- all have established auto assembly plants in the U.S. in recent years, and those plants are disproportionately situated in the low-cost, little-unionized states of the South. That means many of those auto plants now are enriching states dominated by Republicans. Of the 11 states that have or are planning foreign-owned auto assembly plants, seven were carried by Republican Sen. John McCain in this year's presidential campaign. An eighth state, Indiana, was carried by Mr. Obama, but has traditionally been Republican-leaning as well. That has built a natural bond between the foreign auto makers with their highly competitive plans and pro-business Republican leaders. "The foreign auto companies are very wise in how they deal with lawmakers," says Ron Bonjean, a Republican political consultant who was a top aide to former GOP House Speaker Dennis Hastert. As a result, Republicans often sound as if they simply don't see Detroit in heavily Democratic Michigan, as the heart of the new American auto industry. "Both management and labor at the Big Three have pay and wage scales that are substantially higher than their competitors," declared Rep. Spencer Bachus of Alabama, home to three foreign auto assembly plants, at last week's hearing with American auto executives. "That's not being anti-management or anti-union. It's just being truthful." The silver lining for the auto companies is that Mr. Obama does sound like somebody who really wants to be on their list of friends. That would be good for the Big Three, because otherwise that list has grown shorter.)

-- Detroit Three caravan? - Joseph Szczesny

SAGINAW NEWS-- Believe it or not, there are myths about the Big Three that people need to know - Greg Mancina


-- Rosemont Antes up $435 Million in Casino License Bid - AP

-- Remaking Senate will be no easy task for Cullerton - Rich Miller

-- Gridlock may be resolved by new leadership in the Illinois Statehouse - Kurt Erickson

-- DuPage County weighs budget cuts - Paige Winfield
-- Schillerstrom firm's tab tops $1 million (THE ARTICLE: A lawsuit in which DuPage County Board Chairman Robert Schillerstrom's law firm represents a county agency is turning into a million-dollar payday for the firm. The case dates to 2003, when the DuPage Housing Authority sued Oak Brook, which had rejected the agency's plans to remodel the closed St. Paschal's Priory into 93 assisted-living units for seniors. The cost so far for attorney's fees and costs for the county agency: $1,085,973. Schillerstrom's law firm - Ice Miller - inherited the case through a merger. Schillerstrom now benefits, as a partner in the firm, from attorney's fees in the case and is also responsible for containing those costs.)
-- Retiring DuPage County Board member Bob Schroeder describes himself as "disadvantaged," promotes big government, blasts conservatives
-- DIERSEN: Taxpayers have every right to give money to whichever charities they select. But government entities should not have the right to take money away from taxpayers to give that money to charities that those government entities select.

-- Legislators save tough decisions for another day - Doug Finke

-- Casinos forced to fund horse racing? - Bob Okon

-- Officials fear impact of 10th casino - David Gialanella

-- DuPage County: Chairman Schillerstrom changes budget plan to account for economy - Dan Petrella

-- Bill Brady the Expedient? Archbishop Raymond Burke's Engrossing Interview.
(FROM THE ARTICLE: Some supporters of Kirk Dillard who lost the Senate minority leadership to Christine Radogno have a lingering suspicion that Bill Brady tried to have it both ways in the caucus. One of the issues dealt with abortion. Dillard is pro-life; Radogno is not only a pro-abort but pro-gay rights and is thisclose (as Sneed would say) to Terry Cosgrove of Personal PAC (who may well have promised money to reward a newly pro-abort-led Republican contingent in the senate). Brady is once again running for governor in 2010 leaning toward the stance of Goldilocks - not too hot - not too cold - just right: a moderate pro-lifer but friend of everyone. So, Dillard people say, to Dillard people he gave a thumbs up indicating he was on their side. To Radogno supporters he gave a slow, knowing wink which they interpreted was favorable to them. Dillard people say he voted “present” in the caucus via supposedly secret ballot (which they say wasn’t very), then hustled up to the desk to make the motion that the caucus solidify itself by voting unanimously for Radogno. “He’s very, very slick,” said one Republican operative who has watched him closely. “But of course, being slick only takes you so far. He views himself as his own best expert on shaping his public image.” If the Radogno deal is true, Brady had outfoxed himself with some social conservatives. They remember his strange, anti-self interest conduct in the 2006 Republican gubernatorial primary. Liberal pro-abort, pro-gay rights Judy Baar Topinka who was thought to have made a private deal with Dems for a tax increase (for whom tireless tax hiker Ralph Martire, godfather of the tax “swap,” put her lawn sign in front of his Riverside house) was in the lead, followed by pro-lifer Jim Oberweis and then Brady. The logical wisdom would be for Brady to chip away at Topinka, the front-runner. Not so. Brady repeatedly kept zinging conservative Oberweis which from a strategy standpoint didn’t make much sense (Ron Gidwitz, in contrast kept a steady steam of commercial fire on Topinka as could logically be expected). Topinka won the nomination and at the unity conference was rewarded with a Brady kiss-called “the Judas Kiss” by some observers. Earlier this year, when he ran the Fred Thompson campaign here - which died aborning - he worked closely with Nancy Kimme, the top Topinka aide who supposedly (or was it Topinka herself?) made the crack to the media that if George Bush came here to raise money for Topinka’s candidacy, the president of the United States would have to bunker down in a secure, undisclosed location because of the Iraq war. Typical slur from the anti-conservative Topinka-Big Jim Thompson-George Ryan faction that blocked Reaganism in Illinois for decades. Now comes this case, if confirmed. At least one top social conservative leader has signified he has had enough and will under no circumstances support Brady’s gubernatorial bid. Others say they have more personal reasons to withhold a Brady endorsement. Stay tuned. It’s up to Brady to clear himself on how he voted-with demonstrable proof - or the center-right coalition he seeks to build-social conservatives plus Jim Edgar-style moderates-will lose its right front wheel. As some say, it’s better to deal with a out-front pro-choice candidate whom you can believe than a supposed pro-lifer you can’t trust.)

-- Zion’s reactor site deserves a second look - Nancy Thorner
-- School Boards mostly shirk their duty to demand reform - John Biver

-- I Have Seen GOP Future - Don Rose

-- Wright looks back - Ben Smith

-- Fed Bails Out Rich Arabs in Citigroup Deal - Cliff Kincaid

-- What about liberal bigots? Richard Viguerie and Mark Fitzgibbons
-- Obama's urban America - Editorial

-- Republican congressmen Roskam and Kirk offer ideas on the economy - Mike Robinson

-- Workouts, not worship, drawing Obama on Sundays

-- DIERSEN HEADLINE: Associated Press argues that everyone who voted for McCain is a racist who caused all the past, present, and future problems that minorities have

-- In DuPage County Milton Township, McCain beats Obama in 42 of its 109 precincts; Roskam beats Morgenthaler in 103 - Dave Diersen
-- In DuPage County Milton Township, McCain received more votes than Obama in 42 of its 109 precincts -- 463 voted for McCain in Gary Muehlfelt's Precinct 106, 460 voted for McCain in Cuchetto-Livergood's Precinct 102, 437 voted for McCain in Chris Levan's Precinct 61, 435 voted for McCain in Pam Mitroff's Precinct 100, and 433 voted McCain in Tina Connelly's Precinct 90. Roskam received more votes than Morgenthaler in 103 of the 109 precincts -- 593 voted for Roskam in Cuchetto-Livergood's Precinct 102, 573 voted for Roskam in Gary Muehlfelt's Precinct 106, 535 voted Roskam in Tina Connelly's Precinct 90, 533 voted for Roskam in Chris Levan's Precinct 61, and 515 in Sal Falbo's Precinct 73. As a percent of registered voters who voted for Roskam, Bill Opal's Precinct 25 was first with 61.3%, Heather Barilla's Precinct 57 was second with 61.1%, Joseph Caruso's Precinct 71 was third with 58.9%, Gary Muehlfelt's Precinct 106 was fourth with 58.9%, and Barbara Intihar's Precinct 109 was fifth with 58.9%.

  © Blogger template The Professional Template by Ourblogtemplates.com 2008

Back to TOP