If you are so interested in Palin family privacy,
Posted By: why do you keep on bringing this up? nm on 2008-09-02
In Reply to: And the left would rather lamblast pregnant 17-year-olds... - sam
nm
Complete Discussion Below:  marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database
I feel very sorry indeed for Sarah Palin and her family, she ran for VP, not her family, she should
on her experience, her political record, etc, period, no attacking children, and no one throwing stones at "sinner" daughters, that is what I mean, the media wants to put people on pedestals and then throw stones at them at they hunt down not just the public figure, but all their loved ones, I think it is disgusting, it is a HUMAN issue, has nothing to do with politics on either side, why twist my post that way?
Palin family...
They looked great to me. Cindy McCain reached for the child, it wasn't handed off to her. Bristol looked anything but terrified. She looked proud of her mother. And well she should be. She is running for VP of the United States. I thought it was especially sweet with the little girl licked her hand to smooth down the baby's cowlick. Circus freaks are the last words I would use to describe this family.
no matter how you feel about her... How beautiful is the Palin family!
Just saw them all at the RNC sitting there, so beautiful! Not sure about Cindy McCain's outfit, but she's also soooo classy, did anyone notice how she sat next to the middle daughter who was holding the baby and Cindy was stroking the baby's head and watching him soooo sweetly.
Real people, I love it :)
PS this isn't meant to be a political post, so hopefully nobody gets distressed... it was just an American Family I was saying was nice looking and it's nice to see in all the crap going around you know...
Which brings us back to the Palin family drama
Parents are not omniscient. You can tell your kids what you expect them to do. You can lead by example. But they will often insist on making their own mistakes, not trusting your having learned those particular lessons for them. How many kids say 'my parents would kill me if they knew' and really mean it? Yet they choose to test the waters anyhow. Kids are immortal, you know. Shouldn't a kid feel that, no matter what, they can go to their parents when they are in big trouble rather than try to hide the fact and make things much worse?
At that point, on the first or second offense, do you go all 'old testament' on them and throw them out? Or do you try to support and guide them from there, helping them learn the lesson in their mistake and make the best of the bad situation they created? And this does not necessarily include 'making it all better' (the abortion, posting bail, blaming the school) but rather allowing them to experience the consequences of their act and letting them know that you hate the act, but still love them.
Obama's response to Palin family baby stories
Here is Obama's response on all the Palin family stories swirling around. He said he would fire any staffer found to be stoking the fires on these stories. I agree with him 100%:
Politico's Carrie Budoff Brown reports: At a press avail in Monroe, Mich., Barack Obama on Palin: "Back off these kinds of stories."
"I have said before and I will repeat again: People's families are off limits," Obama said. "And people's children are especially off-limits. This shouldn't be part of politics. It has no relevance to Gov. Palin's performance as a governor and/or her potential performance as a vice president. So I would strongly urge people to back off these kinds of stories. You know my mother had me when she was 18 and how a family deals with issues and teenage children, that shouldn’t be a topic of our politics."
Yeah and guess what the Bush family has tight ties with the Bin Ladin family....
so give it all a rest would you.
Family values....Obama's family can't even agree
@@
you are right - but it is the privacy laws -
women's bodies are their own - if they are old enough to see a gynecologist they have their privacy. Now, they can go next door and get treated by the general physician and get the same thing done and mommy or daddy can be involved, just not in the gyno's office.
No privacy at all from the Feds.
http://wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=87322
A little-discussed provision in President Obama's economic stimulus plan would demand that every American submit to a government program for electronic medical records
without a choice to opt out, and it has privacy advocates more than a little alarmed.
Patients might be alarmed, too, privacy advocates said, if they realized information such as documentation on abortions, mental health problems, impotence, being labeled as a non-compliant patient, lawsuits against doctors and sexual problems could be shared electronically with, perhaps, millions of people.
Without those protections, Americans' electronic health records could be shared – without their consent – with over 600,000 covered entities through the forthcoming nationally linked electronic health-records network," Blevins said.
There is more in the link.
No privacy at all from the Feds.
http://wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=87322
A little-discussed provision in President Obama's economic stimulus plan would demand that every American submit to a government program for electronic medical records
without a choice to opt out, and it has privacy advocates more than a little alarmed.
Patients might be alarmed, too, privacy advocates said, if they realized information such as documentation on abortions, mental health problems, impotence, being labeled as a non-compliant patient, lawsuits against doctors and sexual problems could be shared electronically with, perhaps, millions of people.
Without those protections, Americans' electronic health records could be shared – without their consent – with over 600,000 covered entities through the forthcoming nationally linked electronic health-records network," Blevins said.
There is more in the link.
What people do in the privacy
of their own homes is spilling over into the schools, daycares and churches. They want support and affirmation of a nasty, immoral behavior. People are not happy that this type of behavior is being promoted to their children. It has NOTHING to do with love, unity and giving your life to another. There are consequences of this lifestyle and none are good. No decent parent wants that for their children. Give it a rest already.
privacy for publicity seeking
nobody, no talent Joe. Where was/is your concern about the government listening in on our military members phone calls home to their loved ones? The government paid listeners who passed the private love messages around the office for entertainment? If you wish to be in the spotlight, you have to stand the scrutiny.
Hillary Clinton Calls for Privacy Bill...sm
Now I agree with Senator Clinton on this and I have said all along wire tapping should have checks and balances, goverment 101.
Also, living in an information society there has to be something in place to protect citizens privacy. This past week I read a blog with pictures of unknowing obese or tacky dressed people posted in the blog with comments about them. These people were enjoying a private day at the pool and this blogger was snapping their pictures. Not only was this downright evil and disrespectful but it should be illegal.
---------------
(AP) Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, drawing on her experiences as a young Watergate lawyer who decades later was investigated as first lady, urged creation of a privacy bill of rights Friday to protect people's personal data.
Modern life makes many things easier and many things easier to know, and yet privacy is somehow caught in the crosshairs of these changes, Clinton said in a speech to a left-leaning legal group.
Clinton's speech on protecting consumers from identity theft and citizens from government snooping was the latest in a series of talks billed as major addresses by aides. Previous speeches were on energy and the economy.
A potential presidential candidate in 2008 whose eight years as first lady were marked by numerous investigations, Clinton noted her work on a House committee investigating the Nixon administration's illegal snooping and other abuses.
And she ruefully called herself an expert in the loss of privacy.
Having lost so much of my own privacy in recent years I have a deep appreciation of its value and a firm commitment to protecting it for all the rest of you, she said, prompting laughter from the audience of the American Constitution Society for Law and Policy.
Clinton wants to create a privacy czar within the White House to guard against recent problems like the theft of personal data from the Department of Veterans Affairs.
She also wants legislation to let consumers know what information companies are keeping about them and how it is used, and create a tiered system of penalties for companies who are not careful with consumer data.
Clinton also waded into the debate over anti-terror eavesdropping. For months Democrats have hammered at the Bush administration over the National Security Agency's program of domestic wiretapping without warrants from judges. The administration insists it is both legal and necessary.
Clinton said any president should have the latest technology to track terrorists, but within laws that provide for oversight by judges.
The administration's refrain has been, Trust us,' said Clinton. That's unacceptable. Their track record doesn't warrant our trust. ... Unchecked mass surveillance without judicial review may sometimes be legal but it is dangerous. Every president should save those powers for limited critical situations.
MMVI The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Interview with Charmaine Neville, family member of the Neville musical family
September 7, 2005
Women were Being Raped, Babies were Being Killed, Alligators were Eating People, But Where the Hell was the National Guard?
How We Survived the Flood
By CHARMAINE NEVILLE
This is a transcription of an interview Charmaine Neville, of New Orleans's legendary Neville family, gave to local media outlets on Monday, September 5.
I was in my house when everything first started. When the hurricane came, it blew all the left side of my house off, and the water was coming in my house in torrents.
I had my neighbor, an elderly man, and myself, in the house with our dogs and cats, and we were trying to stay out of the water. But the water was coming in too fast. So we ended up having to leave the house.
We left the house and we went up on the roof of a school. I took a crowbar and I burst the door on the roof of the school to help people on the roof.
Later on we found a flat boat, and we went around the neighborhood in a flat boat getting people out of their houses and bringing them to the school.
We found all the food that we could and we cooked and we fed people. But then, things started getting really bad.
By the second day, the people that were there, that we were feeding and everything, we had no more food and no water. We had nothing, and other people were coming in our neighborhood. We were watching the helicopters going across the bridge and airlift other people out, but they would hover over us and tell us Hi! and that would be all. They wouldn't drop us any food or any water, or nothing.
Alligators were eating people. They had all kinds of stuff in the water. They had babies floating in the water.
We had to walk over hundreds of bodies of dead people. People that we tried to save from the hospices, from the hospitals and from the old-folks homes. I tried to get the police to help us, but I realized they were in the same straits we were. We rescued a lot of police officers in the flat boat from the 5th district police station. The guy who was in the boat, he rescued a lot of them and brought them to different places so they could be saved.
We understood that the police couldn't help us, but we couldn't understand why the National Guard and them couldn't help us, because we kept seeing them but they never would stop and help us.
Finally it got to be too much, I just took all of the people that I could. I had two old women in wheelchairs with no legs, that I rowed them from down there in that nightmare to the French Quarters, and I went back and got more people.
There were groups of us, there were about 24 of us, and we kept going back and forth and rescuing whoever we could get and bringing them to the French Quarter because we heard that there were phones in the French Quarter, and that there wasn't any water. And they were right, there were phones, but we couldn't get through to anyone.
I found some police officers. I told them that a lot of us women had been raped down there by guys, not from the neighborhood where we were, they were helping us to save people. But other men, and they came and they started raping women and they started killing, and I don't know who these people were. I'm not gonna tell you I know, because I don't.
But what I want people to understand is that, if we hadn't been left down there like the animals that they were treating us like, all of those things wouldn't have happened. People are trying to say that we stayed in that city because we wanted to be rioting and we wanted to do this and, we didn't have resources to get out, we had no way to leave.
When they gave the evacuation order, if we could've left, we would have left.
There are still thousands and thousands of people trapped in their homes in the downtown area. When we finally did get into the 9th ward, and not just in my neighborhood, but in other neighborhoods in the 9th ward, there were a lot of people still trapped down there... old people, young people, babies, pregnant women. I mean, nobody's helping them.
And I want people to realize that we did not stay in the city so we could steal and loot and commit crimes. A lot of those young men lost their minds because the helicopters would fly over us and they wouldn't stop. We would make SOS on the flashlights, we'd do everything, and it really did come to a point, where these young men were so frustrated that they did start shooting. They weren't trying to hit the helicopters, they figured maybe they weren't seeing. Maybe if they hear this gunfire they will stop then. But that didn't help us. Nothing like that helped us.
Finally, I got to Canal St. with all of my people I had saved from back there.
I don't want them arresting nobody else. I broke the window in an RTA bus. I never learned how to drive a bus in my life. I got in that bus. I loaded all of those people in wheelchairs and in everything else into that bus, and we drove and we drove and we drove and millions of people was trying to get me to help them to get on the bus, too.
Charmaine Neville is a member of the third generation of New Orleans's legendary Neville musical family. She fronts the Charmaine Neville Band.
Sarah Palin fans are as whack as Palin.
Even John McCain's top adviser referred to Sarah Palin as a whack job.
I am interested in this
What is a little definition? And how is your definition a big definition. Can you provide sources for this categorization?
I am still waiting for the sources of the claim that a liberal poster(s) has stalked a conservative poster(s) at some point. I find this very very intriguing and eagerly await the details!!!
If you are interested, there is more...
on this on the America's Most Wanted website with some more detail. It does not appear to be biased one way or the other...and there is some food for thought there. They seem to be leaning more toward what I said...that the agents should have been reprimanded but the sentence appears pretty harsh. One of the agents has since been beaten up in prison, AMW contends, by other inmates who recognized him from the show (Hispanics yelling kill the border agent) while they beat him up. I did not try to confirm that part of it. At any rate...I do not think, after reading all of this, it would be wrong for the White House to pardon these two men, even if that pardon included removing them as border patrol agents, if that is what it took. Point being...at most border situations, it is going to be the guards and the illegals and no one else...so there does need to be accountability for border patrol agents...and frankly, illegals, I still say, should have NO legal standing in this country and should understand that if they cross illegally. That does not mean that border patrol should have carte blanche to shoot people, that is not what I am saying. THEY need to be accountable to our legal system. However, the illegals should have no standing and should realize that when they come here illegaly. I know that there are many on the liberal side, and perhaps even on the RINO side but I have not heard of any... who disagree with that and think they should have the same rights as US citizens. I disagree with that strongly.
Ok....certainly your right! Was interested...
in what the kinda judgmental poster who was horrified that she was pregnant and saying that the family had no values because of that...if that poster thought abortion would have been better. Frankly, the fact that the girl elected to marry the father and have the child shows me that her family values are in place. To save the child is also a choice, and I think she made the right one.
Thanks for your answer!
For anyone who is interested...
http://www.tysknews.com/Articles/dnc_corruption.htm
I had no idea there was this much stuff out there.
very interested--thank you! nm
x
Thanks, but no thanks. I'm more interested in
x
Since you are so interested, ...(sm)
I actually did do your research for you, just not in this thread. Try looking under the next thread up about credible sources. That was the point -- the fact that you could not say what you meant, you just spouted out some crap you heard on TV, and then got mad because someone called you on it. Grow up.
P.S. Is this something the ACLU would be interested in?
Thanks again.
I have to say, honestly, I am just not interested.
That is my true feeling on the matter. I am absolutely zero vested in conspiracy theories or ascribing blame. Blame will not bring back anyone and at the same time, I feel there was a long long line of failures leading up to 9/11 that started way before President Bush and continued through many presidencies. I hope, no matter what, in the end they can have peace of mind. I am sure it has to be hard for them.
Interested in knowing...sm
Not to rehash the debate but was it Stephen or another poster who supposedly made threats against the president. I missed that.
the nation really isn't interested
It's just a device used by the neocons to keep the attention of the stifled. They know that the repressed loonies in the county slobber over anything pertaining to sex. Just look at O'Reilly. Nearly every night he has some story about prostitutes, strip clubs, girls gone wild -- he is complaining how horrible it is, yet they always have tapes behind him of half-naked coeds grinding away. If it is so horrible, must we see the tapes over and over?
I'm sure you would have missed it since all you are interested in sm
is your own agenda. You can't even listen to anyone else's point of view and all you can respond with is sarcasm.
For those interested.....here is the blog
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/04/obamas-college.html
I am learning too but interested in
even-sided with obama and dodd's names all over the place?
Not really interested in talking to you. nm
x
What it tells me is that you are interested in
naysaying, innuendo, division, polarization and the like. Sam, what matters to most of us savoring this incredible moment in our history is not what happened in the past. In this way, even the shrub gets a get out of jail card. My interest lies in the future and I see nothing suspicious or scary about Obama despite your best efforts after all these months. I also am not interested in preaching to the choir from either side. What I think matters now is that we try our best to get past this election and on with the business of uniting ourselves behind our leadership and start tackling the very difficult challenges we face on so many fronts. The economy is an equal opportunity crisis. Addressing global warming, the environment and alternative energy offers the promise of benefit for us all, and peace on earth is a goal that we share with the peoples of the world. Those matter to me. Not the implied, possible nefarious ties Rahm Emanuel may or may not have with the boogey man.
but she did not say she is not - I am not worried - just interested - nm
x
The world is interested because -
America has always been a leader in the world and looked up to until the last few years. I don't believe there is anything sinister going on because the world is excited. So much of what goes on in the world revolved around the US for so long. Nobody used to care that everyone looked to us for guidance - what is the problem with it now? I for one am glad that people are beginning to look at us as leaders again and not with the contempt and disdain that they have been feeling!
Another one I would be interested in vetting is
Tom Tancredo of Colorado.
Here's something interested we heard
Last night we were watching the movie Demolition Man. Don't know if you've ever seen it. Sylvester Stallone goes in cryostasis and 70 or so years later he's brought out to hunt down a killer (Wesley Snipes). Anyway...here's what's interesting. He's riding in the car with Sandra Bullock and she tells him Schwartenneger was president. He said something about him being foreign born and she made mention that because he was so popular they changed the ammendment.
DH & I looked at each other and said isn't that interesting.
So pretty much you are interested in
throwing out smears that you are not willing to back up with facts, citations or examples and baiting other posters. You also don't seem to care how ignorant you sound, given the fact that it is patently clear you don't have a clue as to the meaning of racism or bigotry. You also seem quite unwilling to engage in any meaningful debate on the so-called pot-shot issues you fire off in your drive-bys. To top it all off, so far you have shown yourself to have a fairly juvenile, shallow, superficial and limited form of thinking.
Should you decide to step up to the plate and actually post something of substance you are willing to exercise some intellect over, I'll be more than happy to accommodate. In the meantime, I'd rather use my time more productively reading up on the latest news.
So pretty much you are interested in
throwing out smears that you are not willing to back up with facts, citations or examples and baiting other posters. You also don't seem to care how ignorant you sound, given the fact that it is patently clear you don't have a clue as to the meaning of racism or bigotry. You also seem quite unwilling to engage in any meaningful debate on the so-called pot-shot issues you fire off in your drive-bys. To top it all off, so far you have shown yourself to have a fairly juvenile, shallow, superficial and limited form of thinking.
Should you decide to step up to the plate and actually post something of substance you are willing to exercise some intellect over, I'll be more than happy to accommodate. In the meantime, I'd rather use my time more productively reading up on the latest news.
I was more interested in the idea that...(sm)
Alaska is getting hit financially because of the drop in the cost of oil, and yet Palin seems to think this is a perfect time to basically give herself a whopping 20% raise. Sounds some CEOs that I've heard of recently.
You are such a child, interested only in
sake. Do you know what leftie means?
No, I was more interested in what our President had to say
And it was refreshing to here an intelligent, thoughtful speech.
No doubt, that's all he would be interested in doing.
x
You might be interested to know this is the country
Honest to gorblimey, you need to try to blow some of those liberal cobwebs out of your cranium.
Vote McCain and Palin! -oh and why does Palin
nm
Palin over Biden any day. Make fun of Palin all you
nm
Not even interested in the architects of the 9/11 disaster. sm
They either have more lucrative interests in Iraq or are just bent on ridding it of Saddam or all of the above (too much history there), and we all know good and well there were no jihadist extremist there before America invaded that country, so this so-called War on Terror in Iraq was INVENTED.
I am sure the troops in Afghanistan would be interested to know they are not there.
,
I'm really not interested in arguing the point...sm
Of who is worst because you are right they all were wrong. I just don't understand why when someone does something wrong people expect you to not say anything about it because *others* have committed similar crimes in the past and got away with it. And??
I understand being upset about Studd and even Clinton if you feel that strongly about it, but don't expect business as usual when a scandal like this hits the fan. People are going to talk about it. 23 years ago when Studd was having his affair I was in grade school so excuse me for first not knowing what you were talking about (until I researched it) and second not seeing the relevance of it in the case of Foley. I'm sure there was outrage for what Studd did too. Now upon learning about Studd and his (I can't say that here), I even said I do not know how or why the people continued to vote him in and yeah he should have had the decency to step down. Sorry you think I'm being partisan - NO far from it. I am always disgusted with people who prey on children, birth to the day before they turn 18, sexually.
Oh and don't expect me or anyone else to think Foley is some stand up type of guy because he stepped down AFTER GETTING CAUGHT, mind you. Had he not been caught he would still be IM'ing children.
Yeah Clinton was wrong for lying under oath. He should have told the truth and apologized *to his wife*. It's not like it is illegal to have an extramarital affair.
Like you said, they are all morally wrong, but I tend to be more disgusted with child predators. It doesn't matter if you agree with me (there are plenty of people who do). We'll just have to agree to disagree.
One point you didn't bring up was Foley's job responsibility. That makes it a little more eerie. Are people not supposed to be disappointed that this is who we have in charge of protecting our children?
Anyone interested in the candidates houses? SM
On the www.apartmentherapy website, they feature the candidates homes. I love that site. Anway...spoiler alert, if anyone cares.
________________________________
What I found interesting is Mitt Romney lives in a comptemporary home on the water, which is pictured next to Barack Obama's conservative georgian style home.
OK, not of vital interest, I just love looking at homes. 
MasonD, If you are really interested in the truth...
and not bash posting, take a little look at the internet...google Clinton Iraq WMD and see what you get. Clinton thought there were WMD during his administration too. Don't you remember him getting on the TV and telling us all how Iraq had WMD and if they did not comply with the UN and let the inspectors in we might have to use force? I bet I could find that on You Tube or someplace. The CIA director at that time was George Tenet. When Bush was elected, he did not fire Tenet, he kept him on (BAD mistake in hindsight I would say). Tenet told the Congress and everyone else (now this is the head of the CIA mind you, left over from Clinton's Administration) that it was a slam dunk that Iraq had WMD. Soooo...if it is a lie it was one that started during the Clinton administration. So St. Bill believed it too. Even though he seems to have amnesia regarding that fact until a news show confronted him with it. And then it was the stuttering and stammering and "yes I believed it then...but I don't believe it now." Yeah right. Nothing changed between now and then...sheesh. Had that deer in the headlights I did not have sex with that woman MS Lewinsky look.
It really is just amazing to me that you folks cannot see any of the faults in Democrats but EVERY fault in Republicans...lol.
Here are ALL the figures in case anyone is interested...
First---100% of southern Republicans...consisted of ONE senator. When one senator votes against something, yeah, that is 100%. Sheesh. Take a look at ALL the figures.
Martin Luther King, Jr. and Malcolm X at the United States Capitol on March 26, 1964. Both men had come to hear the Senate debate on the bill.Johnson, who wanted the bill passed as soon as possible, ensured that the bill would be quickly considered by the Senate. Normally, the bill would have been referred to the Senate Judiciary Committee, chaired by Senator James O. Eastland, from Mississippi. Under Eastland's care, it seemed impossible that the bill would reach the Senate floor. Senate Majority Leader Mike Mansfield took a novel approach to prevent the bill from being relegated to Judiciary Committee limbo. Having initially waived a second reading of the bill, which would have led to it being immediately referred to Judiciary, Mansfield gave the bill a second reading on February 26, 1964, and then proposed, in the absence of precedent for instances when a second reading did not immediately follow the first, that the bill bypass the Judiciary Committee and immediately be sent to the Senate floor for debate. Although this parliamentary move led to a brief filibuster, the senators eventually let it pass, preferring to concentrate their resistance on passage of the bill itself. The bill came before the full Senate for debate on March 30, 1964.
Shortly thereafter, the bill passed the Senate by a vote of 73-27, and quickly passed through the House-Senate conference committee, which adopted the Senate version of the bill. The conference bill was passed by both houses of Congress, and was signed into law by President Johnson on July 2, 1964. Legend has it that as he put down his pen Johnson told an aide, We have lost the South for a generation.[2]
[edit] Vote totals
Totals are in "Yes-No" format:
The original House version: 290-130 (69%-31%)
The Senate version: 73-27 (73%-27%)
The Senate version, as voted on by the House: 289-126 (70%-30%)
[edit] By party
The original House version:
Democratic Party: 153-96 (64%-39%)
Republican Party: 138-34 (80%-20%)
The Senate version:
Democratic Party: 46-22 (68%-32%)
Republican Party: 27-6 (82%-18%)
The Senate version, voted on by the House:
Democratic Party: 153-91 (63%-37%)
Republican Party: 136-35 (80%-20%)
[edit] By party and region
Note: "Southern", as used in this section, refers to members of Congress from the eleven states that made up the Confederate States of America in the American Civil War. "Northern" refers to members from the other 39 states, regardless of the geographic location of those states.
The original House version:
Southern Democrats: 7-87 (7%-93%)
Southern Republicans: 0-10 (0%-100%)
Northern Democrats: 145-9 (94%-6%)
Northern Republicans: 138-24 (85%-15%)
The Senate version:
Southern Democrats: 1-20 (5%-95%) (only Senator Ralph Yarborough of Texas voted in favor)
Southern Republicans: 0-1 (0%-100%) (this was Senator John Tower of Texas)
Northern Democrats: 45-1 (98%-2%) (only Senator Robert Byrd of West Virginia opposed the measure)
Northern Republicans: 27-5 (84%-16%) (Senators Bourke Hickenlooper of Iowa, Barry Goldwater of Arizona, Edwin L. Mechem of New Mexico, Milward L. Simpson of Wyoming, and Norris H. Cotton of New Hampshire opposed the measure)
Yes, I agree that things change. And the Democratic party got interested in African Americans AFTER they got the vote. Coincidence? I think not.
Not to fear. The Chinese are interested in...
...purchasing these American icons. More selling out of America, right under our noses.
Thank you, Congress. 
Chinese Automakers May Buy GM and Chrysler
By Bertel Schmitt
November 18, 2008 -
Chinese carmakers SAIC and Dongfeng have plans to acquire GM and Chrysler, China's 21st Century Business Herald reports today. [A National Enquirer the paper is not. It is one of China's leading business newspapers, with a daily readership over three million.] The paper cites a senior official of China's Ministry of Industry and Information Technology–– the state regulator of China's auto industry–– who dropped the hint that "the auto manufacturing giants in China, such as Shanghai Automotive Industry Corporation (SAIC) and Dongfeng Motor Corporation, have the capability and intention to buy some assets of the two crisis-plagued American automakers." These hints are very often followed with quick action in the Middle Kingdom. The hints were dropped just a few days after the same Chinese government gave its auto makers the go-ahead to invest abroad. And why would they do that?
A take-over of a large overseas auto maker would fit perfectly into China's plans. As reported before, China has realized that its export chances are slim without unfettered access to foreign technology. The brand cachet of Chinese cars abroad is, shall we say, challenged. The Chinese could easily export Made-in-China VWs, Toyotas, Buicks. If their joint venture partner would let them. The solution: Buy the joint venture partner. Especially, when he's in deep trouble.
At current market valuations (GM is worth less than Mattel) the Chinese government can afford to buy GM with petty cash. Even a hundred billion $ would barely dent China's more than $2t in currency reserves. For nobody in the world would buying GM and (while they are at it) Chrysler make more sense than for the Chinese. Overlap? What overlap? They would gain instant access to the world's markets with accepted brands, and proven technology.
21st Century Business Herald, obviously with input from higher-up, writes that Chinese industry must change and upgrade. China wants their factories to change from low-value-added manufacturing to technically innovative and financially-sound high-value-add industries. Says the paper: "It would be much easier now for strong Chinese automakers to go global by acquiring some assets of their U.S. counterparts in times of crisis."
Deloitte & Touche sees a trend: "Chinese automakers can start with buying out the OEM projects and Chinese ventures of some global carmakers such as GM and Chrysler."
The Chinese appear to have bigger plans than an accounting firm can imagine. 21st Century Business Herald acts and writes as if its already a done deal, and the beginning of more to come. "In the coming two years China is likely to see a few of its large Chinese automakers and other manufacturing enterprises set a precedent for achieving globalization by acquiring global companies, just like SAIC or Dongfeng's possible acquisition of troubled GM or Chrysler."
Just in case you missed it, the Shanghai Automotive Industry Corporation (SAIC) is China's largest auto manufacturer. In 1984, the company entered a joint venture with Volkswagen. A decade later, SAIC entered a joint venture with General Motors. In 2007, SAIC bought the Nanjing Automobile Corporation, which had acquired British MG Rover in 2005.
Dongfeng Motor Corporation is a public company, although 70 percent of their shares are reported to be in government hands. They also are one of China's Big Three. The company has numerous joint venture partners, such as Nissan, Peugeot-Citroen, Honda, and Kia. Dongfeng (which means "East Wind") was founded at the behest of Mao Zedong himself in 1968.
|
