[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

"The 2nd Impeachment: Trump’s Popularity Still Scares Them to Death" "President Badass" "Jasmine Crockett's Train Wreck Interview Was a Disaster" "How Israel Used Spies, Smuggled Drones and AI to Stun and Hobble Iran" There hasn’T been ... a single updaTe To This siTe --- since I joined. "This Is Not What Authoritarianism Looks Like" America Erupts… ICE Raids Takeover The Streets AC/DC- Riff Raff + Go Down [VH1 Uncut, July 5, 1996] Why is Peter Schiff calling Bitcoin a ‘giant cult’ and how does this impact market sentiment? Esso Your Butt Buddy Horseshit jacks off to that shit "The Addled Activist Mind" "Don’t Stop with Harvard" "Does the Biden Cover-Up Have Two Layers?" "Pete Rose, 'Shoeless' Joe Reinstated by MLB, Eligible for HOF" "'Major Breakthrough': Here Are the Details on the China Trade Deal" Freepers Still Love war Parody ... Jump / Trump --- van Halen jump "The Democrat Meltdown Continues" "Yes, We Need Deportations Without Due Process" "Trump's Tariff Play Smart, Strategic, Working" "Leftists Make Desperate Attempt to Discredit Photo of Abrego Garcia's MS-13 Tattoos. Here Are Receipts" "Trump Administration Freezes $2 Billion After Harvard Refuses to Meet Demands"on After Harvard Refuses to Meet Demands "Doctors Committing Insurance Fraud to Conceal Trans Procedures, Texas Children’s Whistleblower Testifies" "Left Using '8647' Symbol for Violence Against Trump, Musk" KawasakiÂ’s new rideable robohorse is straight out of a sci-fi novel "Trade should work for America, not rule it" "The Stakes Couldn’t Be Higher in Wisconsin’s Supreme Court Race – What’s at Risk for the GOP" "How Trump caught big-government fans in their own trap" ‘Are You Prepared for Violence?’ Greek Orthodox Archbishop gives President Trump a Cross, tells him "Make America Invincible" "Trump signs executive order eliminating the Department of Education!!!" "If AOC Is the Democratic Future, the Party Is Even Worse Off Than We Think" "Ending EPA Overreach" Closest Look Ever at How Pyramids Were Built Moment the SpaceX crew Meets Stranded ISS Crew The Exodus Pharaoh EXPLAINED! Did the Israelites Really Cross the Red Sea? Stunning Evidence of the Location of Red Sea Crossing! Are we experiencing a Triumph of Orthodoxy? Judge Napolitano with Konstantin Malofeev (Moscow, Russia) "Trump Administration Cancels Most USAID Programs, Folds Others into State Department" Introducing Manus: The General AI Agent "Chinese Spies in Our Military? Straight to Jail" Any suggestion that the USA and NATO are "Helping" or have ever helped Ukraine needs to be shot down instantly "Real problem with the Palestinians: Nobody wants them" ACDC & The Rolling Stones - Rock Me Baby Magnus Carlsen gives a London System lesson! "The Democrats Are Suffering Through a Drought of Generational Talent" 7 Tactics Of The Enemy To Weaken Your Faith Strange And Biblical Events Are Happening Every year ... BusiesT casino gambling day -- in Las Vegas Status: Not Logged In; Sign In politics and politicians See other politics and politicians Articles Title: Romney, GOP Groups Pull Ads From Michigan and Pennsylvania Source: TPM URL Source: http://2012.talkingpointsmemo.com/2 ... igan-pennsylvania-pull-out.php Published: Sep 6, 2012 Author: TPM Post Date: 2012-09-06 13:21:38 by Brian S Keywords: None Views: 2276 Comments: 8 Republicans signaled this week that they might have given up hope in two important swing states. The Romney campaign and conservative groups like Crossroads GPS have pulled TV ads in Michigan, Romney’s home state, according to the Detroit News. Nor are the campaign and super PACs running advertising in Pennsylvania, after unleashing a barrage there over the past five months. It is still possible for groups to purchase TV advertising in either state at a later date. The PollTracker Averages show President Obama ahead 48.9 percent to 45.4 percent in Michigan, and in Pennsylvania, where he leads 49.9 percent to 41.4 percent. Subscribe to *Elections 2012* Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread   Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest #1. To: Brian S (#0) hope in two important swing states. Why bother, he's ahead every where else. In fact, the Rasmussen tracking poll in swing states now shows Romney at a +4, 47/43. calcon  posted on  2012-09-06   13:33:11 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #2. To: Brian S (#0) The PollTracker Averages show President Obama ahead 48.9 percent to 45.4 percent in Michigan, and in Pennsylvania, where he leads 49.9 percent to 41.4 percent. A mistake. Obama not polling at 50 or above in each state is an indicator. "Thine eyes did see my substance, yet being unperfect; and in thy book all my members were written, which in continuance were fashioned, when as yet there was none of them.) Psalm 139:16 redleghunter  posted on  2012-09-06   14:25:36 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #3. To: redleghunter (#2) A mistake. Obama not polling at 50 or above in each state is an indicator. I agree. I grew up in Michigan. I still have family and friends there. In 2008, most of them voted for Obama. This year, they are all supporting Romney. In 2010, Michigan voted in a Republican Governor. There is no reason why Obama should have a lock on the state, even with the GM bailout. "we must as a species go into a period of shrinkage that we have not experienced since the Dark Ages and the Black Plague" -- lucysmom jwpegler  posted on  2012-09-06   14:36:43 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #4. To: jwpegler (#3) even with the GM bailout. How many there actually profited from the bailout?? Around here it did nothing, all the plants that were open before the bailout closed afterward... I think the only "GM related" parts plant still open is one that makes diesel engines.. Choosing and voting for a presidential candidate is like picking which STD you want to suffer from…. CZ82  posted on  2012-09-06   14:43:18 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #5. To: CZ82 (#4) How many there actually profited from the bailout?? It's a great question. Democrat politicians were suppose to prosper, but a lot of them got booted out of office. Sure, some people are working today that would have been on unemployment insurance. That cost us a net $53 billion. The societal cost of temporarily saving each job was astronomical. In reality, the auto companies could have went through a standard chapter 11 process in the courts and would up in better long term shape than they are today. Unfortunately, the average Joe or Jane is too busy watching "Real Housewives" or "Monday Night Football" to pay attention, so they defer to power hungry politicians to make these big decisions for them. "we must as a species go into a period of shrinkage that we have not experienced since the Dark Ages and the Black Plague" -- lucysmom jwpegler  posted on  2012-09-06   15:42:31 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #6. To: jwpegler (#5) In reality, the auto companies could have went through a standard chapter 11 process in the courts and would up in better long term shape than they are today. That's true, but the reason I've heard as to why that didn't happen is because the primary asset holders of GM got threatened by the regime to not interfere and that's how the unions got control.. Choosing and voting for a presidential candidate is like picking which STD you want to suffer from…. CZ82  posted on  2012-09-06   16:39:56 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #7. To: CZ82 (#6) That's true, but the reason I've heard as to why that didn't happen is because the primary asset holders of GM got threatened by the regime to not interfere and that's how the unions got control.. ROTFMAO... Your 'sources" say that the the GM stockholders WANTED to the UAW in control of the company??? LOL. Please don't listen to the kooks. There is almost NO ONE who owned GM stock that wanted the UAW in charge of the company. Please... Why do I post on this nutter board? That's a question that I have to answer myself. "we must as a species go into a period of shrinkage that we have not experienced since the Dark Ages and the Black Plague" -- lucysmom jwpegler  posted on  2012-09-06   20:02:20 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #8. To: jwpegler (#7) Below is an excerpt from this: www.nationalaffairs.com/p...the-auto-bailout-and-the- rule-of-law The is the publicly acceptable version and I have heard it was actually worse than this... The government told the investors that if they didn't shut up and forget about their money that the whole weight of the Judicial Branch would be brought down on them... Me personally I'm not into CTs but I've been hearing pretty much the same story since this all went down, so take it for what you will.... BTW nobody knows the absolute truth about everything, I learned that during my time in the government... THE BANKRUPTCY After the bailouts came the arranged bankruptcies. At first, when the government announced that Chrysler and General Motors would be filing for Chapter 11, the news was received with relief by the market, the companies' creditors, and everyone concerned for the rule of law. The mess created by the bailout could finally begin to move from the political arena to the legal arena, and so regain some semblance of legitimacy and order. But it wasn't long before these hopes were dashed by the government's management of the process. Instead of a regular bankruptcy proceeding, the Obama administration, working with the automakers, patched together a process without precedent — a bankruptcy combined with a bailout, incorporating the worst elements of both. Of the two proceedings, Chrysler's was clearly the more egregious. In the years leading up to the economic crisis, Chrysler had been unable to acquire routine financing and so had been forced to turn to so-called secured debt in order to fund its operations. Secured debt takes first priority in payment; it is also typically preserved during bankruptcy under what is referred to as the "absolute priority" rule — since the lender of secured debt offers a loan to a troubled borrower only because he is guaranteed first repayment when the loan is up. In the Chrysler case, however, creditors who held the company's secured bonds were steamrolled into accepting 29 cents on the dollar for their loans. Meanwhile, the underfunded pension plans of the United Auto Workers — unsecured creditors, but possessed of better political connections — received more than 40 cents on the dollar. Moreover, in a typical bankruptcy case in which a secured creditor is not paid in full, he is entitled to a "deficiency claim" — the terms of which keep the bankrupt company liable for a portion of the unpaid debt. In both the Chrysler and GM bankruptcies, however, no deficiency claims were awarded to the wronged creditors. Were bankruptcy experts to comb through American history, they would be hard-pressed to identify any bankruptcy case with similar terms. To make matters worse, both bankruptcies were orchestrated as so- called "section 363" sales. This meant that essentially all the assets of "old Chrysler" were sold to "new Chrysler" (and "old GM" to "new GM"), and were pushed through in a rush. These sales violated the longstanding bankruptcy principle that an asset sale should not be functionally equivalent to a plan of re-organization for an entire company — what bankruptcy lawyers call a "sub rosa plan." The reason is that the re-organization process offers all creditors the right to vote on the proposed plan as well as a chance to offer competing re-organization plans, while an asset sale can be carried out without such a vote. In the cases of GM and Chrysler, however, the government essentially pushed through a re-organization disguised as a sale, and so denied the creditors their rights. As the University of Pennsylvania's David Skeel observed last year, "selling" an entire company of GM or Chrysler's size and complexity in this manner was unprecedented. Even on a smaller scale, it would have been highly irregular: While rush bankruptcy sales of much smaller companies were once common, the bankruptcy laws were overhauled in 1978 precisely to eliminate this practice. At first, the fact that the companies' creditors (and especially Chrysler's creditors, who were so badly mistreated) put up with such terms and waived their property rights seems astonishing. But it becomes less so — and sheds more light on how this entire process imperils the rule of law — when one considers the enormous leverage the federal government had over most of these creditors. Many of Chrysler's secured-bond holders were large financial institutions — several of which had previously been saved from failure by TARP. Though there is no explicit evidence that support from TARP funds bought these bond holders' acquiescence in the Chrysler case, their silence in the face of a massive financial haircut is otherwise very difficult to explain. Indeed, those secured-bond holders who were not supported by TARP did not go nearly as quietly. A group of hedge funds that were among Chrysler's creditors initially objected to the bailout plan that preferred the UAW at their expense. In a now-infamous speech in April 2009, President Obama publicly attacked these investors — who were merely standing up for their contract and property rights — as profiteers, criticizing them for their unwillingness to make the same sacrifices as other investors (but not, of course, UAW members, who received a windfall). In response to this public browbeating from the president of the United States, the hedge funds caved and agreed to the terms. In the end, only one group of Chrysler bond holders — the Indiana state teacher and police pension funds — continued to object. Indeed, they objected at every stage of the process, but the Supreme Court declined to hear their case. General Motors, too, had issued secured debt during its years of financial turmoil, but these bonds made up a far smaller fraction of the company's total outstanding debt. And in striking contrast with the Chrysler case, General Motors's bankruptcy plan left the secured creditors intact, paying them the full value of their claims. From the perspective of bankruptcy law and contract rights, this development was encouraging: The Obama administration did not seek to plunder GM's secured creditors as it had Chrysler's. From the perspective of the rule of law, however, this differential treatment might have been even more troubling. On the matter of secured-bond holders, the cases of GM and Chrysler were functionally indistinguishable — and yet GM's secured creditors were treated far better than Chrysler's. The administration offered no public justification for this differential treatment, and to an outside observer, there was only one key difference between the cases: The amount of GM's secured debt was relatively small compared to Chrysler's. The obvious conclusion, then, is that the difference in how the government treated the automakers' creditors was purely a matter of expediency — hardly a justifiable rationale. Choosing and voting for a presidential candidate is like picking which STD you want to suffer from…. CZ82  posted on  2012-09-06   21:57:09 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest

[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register]  Please report web page problems, questions and comments to webmaster@libertysflame.com