Five Foxes in the Hen House

We have all heard the phrase about the fox in the hen house. It now appears the not only does Ford Motor Company have five foxes in the hen house, but they had the audacity to fly to Washington DC and stand with their had in their hands asking for a hand-out, I mean bail-out.

CEO, Alan Mulally, when asked if he would drop to one million dollars a year in salary to help the situation, replied that "I understand the point of the symbol, I think I am okay where I am." He may understand the point of the symbol, but what he doesn't understand is how his remarks smack of the selfish, narcissistic attitude that had contributed to the economic chaos we now enjoy.

If he was humble enough to receive only a million dollars a year in salary, Ford would be able to keep over 400 employees. If you look at the other four top executives at Ford, the facts become overwhelming.

Top executive salaries of Ford Motor Company:
Alan Mulally, Ford President and CEO - Salary$21,670,674
Don Leclair, Ford Executive Vice President - $11,703,127
Mark Fields, Ford Executive Vice President, The Americas - $8,389,898
Lewis Booth, Executive Vice President, Ford of Europe and Premier Automotive Group - $10,264,463
Mike Bannister, Ford Executive Vice President and CEO, Ford Motor Credit Company- $8,677,747
Total Salaries of top Five Executives - $60,705,909

If the top Five Executives each took only $1,000,000/yr, it would free up $55,705,909 each year! This would keep 700 employees at $80,000 fully employed.

The other US auto makers are in the same boat.
General Motors, top five executives - $38,954,972
Chrysler's executive salaries could not be found but the CEO did receive a $210 million golden boot from Home Depot in 2000.

The auto industry doesn't need a bail-out, it needs a reallocation of funds, (as well as a lesson from Toyota on how to build a reliable car). It is time for the top executives to "spread the wealth around". As a matter of fact, it wouldn't hurt it if that attitude spread throughout the NEC, (Narcissistic Executive Club).

Not With My Paycheck You Don't

"We want to spread around the wealth." - Barrack Obama, the Socialist

$700 million or even $700 billion will not fix the financial crisis if we don't understand what caused it. The meltdown of our economy was not a natural result of the failure of Capitalism. It did not happen because greed came home to roost. It occurred because the first law of Capitalism was broken and then ignored while the greedy cashed in.

The basic rule of Capitalism, never loan money to someone who can't pay it back.

The Democratically controlled Congress of 1992, forced into law the Socialistic concept that every person, regardless of income, had the right to own a home. Ann Coulter, in her column on September 24, 2008, reported the following:

Before the Democrats' affirmative action lending policies became an embarrassment, the Los Angeles Times reported that, starting in 1992, a majority-Democratic Congress "mandated that Fannie and Freddie increase their purchases of mortgages for low-income and medium-income borrowers. Operating under that requirement, Fannie Mae, in particular, has been aggressive and creative in stimulating minority gains."

Under Clinton, the entire federal government put massive pressure on banks to grant more mortgages to the poor and minorities. Clinton's secretary of Housing and Urban Development, Andrew Cuomo, investigated Fannie Mae for racial discrimination and proposed that 50 percent of Fannie Mae's and Freddie Mac's portfolio be made up of loans to low- to moderate-income borrowers by the year 2001.

She goes on to state:

Threatening lawsuits, Clinton's Federal Reserve demanded that banks treat welfare payments and unemployment benefits as valid income sources to qualify for a mortgage. That isn't a joke -- it's a fact.

When Democrats controlled both the executive and legislative branches, political correctness was given a veto over sound business practices.

These loans were known as "sub-prime mortgages" because the standards for qualification were below the prime or normal requirements. Adjustable rates, interest only and other anomaly instruments of lending were invented to satisfy the need. The rational used was that because of inflating prices in the housing market, an owner could hold on to the house at the reduced payment rate, sell it before the terms changed and cash in on the appreciation. It was nothing more than a government sponsored pyramid scheme.

What was the basic rule? Never loan money to someone who can't pay it back. If you do, you are just giving the money away. Reality is coming back to bite us in the behind. Over the past 16 years we have given away millions of houses, now they are giving them back.

The Democratic (Socialist) Party created this mess by tinkering with the universal laws of economics. Now Obama is suggesting that he wants to take my paycheck, spread it around and fix the problem. Has he talked with Matt Damon, Barbara Streisand, Whoopi Goldberg, Sean Penn and the Dixie Chicks about spreading their money around? I'm sure he would leave them with about $50,000 each, like the rest of middle America.

I think not.

Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice and I must be a Democrat.

Rev. Wright, Say What. . .?

The controversy surrounding Rev. Jeremiah Wright and his inflammatory statements about the United States, Jews and AIDS have subsided to the point that they may no longer cripple Barak Obama in his bid for the Democratic Party Nomination for President. That said, there is still a bad taste left from his remarks in trying to make amends.

In defense of his position and statements, Rev. Wright said that the attacks on him were an attack on the Black Church.

Wright said the black church tradition is not bombastic or controversial. It is simply different — and misunderstood by the dominant culture in the United States

Was he actually saying that members of black churches can make blasphemous, inflammatory statements and they are not bombastic or controversial? They can implore damnation on America, claim that the CIA developed the AIDS virus to destroy the black race and state that the U.S. Government supports the genocide of Palestinians and black South Africans; and we should just chuckle?

What would happen if Billy Graham said that Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton were divisive elements that prolonged the self-imposed oppression of black people and prevented them from achieving and realizing their full potential and status as citizens of the United States of America? I'm not sure, but maybe Don Immus' time in the penalty box is a foreshadowing.

I guess that his logic goes something like this: it is okay for a black person to call a distasteful black person a nigger or a white person a honky, cracker or bigot, but it is not okay for a white person to think or say nigger, let alone apply it as a moniker to a black person because . . . sorry, that doesn't work. Let's try it again.

It is okay for a member of the Black Churches to damn America but a white person can not publicly say that they wish for President Bush or Vice-President Cheney to be shot, . . . no, wait a minute, Rosey O'Donnell can say that.

This is all so confusing. How's a middle-class, middle-aged white boy in the dominate culture going to deal with the complicated social interactions of different races? I think I need more time to evaluate this.

. . . Okay, I think the only way I can survive in a multi-cultural environment is to revert back to the things my mother taught me:

1. Only say nice things about others, even when they say nasty things about you
2. Protect the weak and innocent then, let the stupid take responsibly for their own actions