Simple Question for the GM Cheerleaders in the MSM

GM selling at a loss should tell you something | The Daily Caller - Breaking News, Opinion, Research, and Entertainment: "If the federal government wanted to recoup its investment in GM, then the GM stock price should be much higher than the $33 initial price. In order to break even, as the Deal Journal reports, the stock price would have to rise to around $50 per share. So why is the Treasury Department selling off the company at a loss?"

Yes, how is this $33 IPO in the taxpayer's best interest if GM is such a successful turnaround story? Don't tell me the answer is that the government wants to allow GM to return expeditiously to private control. Post-IPO, GM is still the statists' automotive hobby horse.

Good Crises Make For Good Shake-downs

Holman W. Jenkins, Jr.: Meet the New-Old GM - WSJ.com: "What would the pre-crash GM have been worth if relieved of $80 billion in IOUs? Assume a 5% yield on GM debt and nine-to-one price-earnings ratio on the stock. The answer (for sake of argument) is $61 billion. This shouldn't be surprising. GM's progress on labor costs, quality and new models were all in the pipeline before its Chapter 11 filing. The main achievement of bankruptcy was a redistribution of rights from GM's creditors to a worrisome and conflicted new set of equity owners, namely the U.S. and Canadian governments and the United Auto Workers."

This shouldn't be surprising. GM's progress on labor costs, quality and new models were all in the pipeline before its Chapter 11 filing. The main achievement of bankruptcy was a redistribution of rights from GM's creditors to a worrisome and conflicted new set of equity owners, namely the U.S. and Canadian governments and the United Auto Workers

.

Great article. Explains how, at the end of the day, the GM bailout, via government-orchestrated bankruptcy, had only one distinguishing feature from a traditional bankruptcy - it allowed the Dems to steal billions of dollars in equity from private parties and hand it to the UAW. Crony capitalism. Kleptocracy. Did I mention that the orchestrator, Rattner, has pled no contest and agreed to pay a multi-million dollar fine related to an influence peddling charge from the SEC?

This Scandal Will Be Investigated

Findings from the Inspector General (IG) inquiry into the administration's handling of the Gulf oil drilling ban:

Review & Outlook: Science and the Drilling Ban - WSJ.com: "The IG findings include no evidence the decision to shut down an entire industry—at a huge cost to jobs and long-term drilling safety—was done with input from engineers, scientists, economists or anyone with day-to-day oversight of U.S. drilling. S. Elizabeth Birnbaum, former head of the Minerals Management Service, which oversees offshore drilling, said she learned about the ban from a deputy, and only after the fact. Preparation for the Interior drilling report was tasked to Steve Black, a lawyer who is officially the Counselor to Mr. Salazar. Yet Mr. Black told the IG the ban was 'a policy decision made by Secretary Salazar and President Obama.' Though Mr. Salazar issued the report, the IG says final edits to the summary were done by Ms. Browner's office."

Callous, reckless, ideological, indefensible. Injurious to our energy security. But who cares? The area impacted didn't vote for Obama. Browner is going to finally have to answer some questions when the new Congress is in session.

Obama's Singular Focus - Jobs, Jobs, Jobs

Offshore drilling still on hold - Nov. 12, 2010: "NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- President Obama lifted his moratorium on deepwater oil drilling nearly a month ago, but the government still hasn't issued any new permits in the Gulf of Mexico.

And most analysts say permits will be slow in coming through 2011."

Thank goodness the "special interests" aren't getting in the way of employment and energy security in the Gulf!

This Is An Ingenious Plan

Jenkins, Jr.: The GOP Can Outsmart ObamaCare - WSJ.com

I think this plan really has promise for "infecting" Obamacare with free market innovations. Read it. Send it to your representatives with your endorsement.

In battle for Senate control, could GOP win by losing? - Washington Times

In battle for Senate control, could GOP win by losing? - Washington Times

This is exactly what I have been saying. "winning" the Senate by a one vote margin buys you virtually nothing, except expectations that are impossible to meet.