Archive for May, 2009

Word on the street is that the Federal Government will now own General Motors.

General Motors Corp’s (GM.N) plan for a bankruptcy filing involves a quick sale of the company’s healthy assets to a new company initially owned by the U.S. government, a source familiar with the situation said on Tuesday.

The source, who would not be named because he was not cleared to speak with the media, did not specify a purchase price. The new company is expected to honor the claims of secured lenders, possibly in full, according to the source.

Mussolini would be proud.

Rich Galen says:

On the very day that Barack Obama announced new fuel efficiency and emissions limits for American cars, Reuters reported that when General Motors goes bankrupt it would be selling its best asset to … Barack Obama. 
Fair is fair. 
If Obama owns GM he can tell them what kinds of cars to build, at what prices they should be sold, how many seats the UAW should have on their board of directors, and just about anything else he thinks of while eating his morning bran flakes. 


Read Full Post »

Instead, start listening for the term “our deteriorating atmosphere”.

What makes you more likely to conserve energy: being asked to be “energy efficient”, or being reminded about “saving money for a more prosperous future.”?

Do you just hate it when people keep harping about “the environment”?  Prepare to hear, then, at lot less about “the environment”, and a lot more about “the air we breathe” and “the water our children drink”.

Someone apparently spilled the beans about new enviro-speak that will likely shepherd a lot more us into supporting the reduction in freedoms that would come with controlling “global warming”.  The New York Times reports that:

The problem with global warming, some environmentalists believe, is “global warming.”

The term turns people off, fostering images of shaggy-haired liberals, economic sacrifice and complex scientific disputes, according to extensive polling and focus group sessions conducted by ecoAmerica, a nonprofit environmental marketing and messaging firm in Washington.

Instead of grim warnings about global warming, the firm advises, talk about “our deteriorating atmosphere.” Drop discussions of carbon dioxide and bring up “moving away from the dirty fuels of the past.” Don’t confuse people with cap and trade; use terms like “cap and cash back” or “pollution reduction refund.”

But apparently we weren’t supposed to know yet:

A summary of the group’s latest findings and recommendations was accidentally sent by e-mail to a number of news organizations by someone who sat in this week on a briefing intended for government officials and environmental leaders.

Do you really think we weren’t supposed to know?  Or was the “accident” just part of the attempt to get people conditioned to reacting to the new words when they see them in print?

Read Full Post »