Obama and the media still can’t tell the truth about Ford taking bailout money

One would think that Dear Leader would have his staff consider the optics a bit more before they decided upon a campaign stop at a Ford auto assembly plant in Wayne, MI today – http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2015-01-07/obama-previews-state-of-the-union-at-idle-ford-plant-in-michigan.html

After all, wasn’t Ford the only automaker to not take Obama’s gift of taxpayer dollars to bail out their years of mis-management and mal-investment? I mean, why not a Chrysler plant? Oh, that’s right, Chrysler is now a foreign owned company since Fiat took advantage of Obama’s good graces and swooped in to buy up the failing automaker. Sorry, no big success story there for America’s resurgence.

“America’s resurgence is real,” Obama told a crowd of about 750 autoworkers and executives at a Ford Motor Co. (F)plant in Wayne, Michigan.

So perhaps Ford was a better choice since they’re still American owned. Oops. He must have forgot that Ford actually did take a bailout despite the mis-information spread by the media.

Obama used a Ford assembly line as the backdrop for his message that the U.S. economy has improved under his watch in part because of the auto industry rescue. Ford, based in nearby Dearborn, was the only one of the three largest U.S. automakers that didn’t get a government bailout in 2009.

But Ford Motor Corporation is actually comprised of several different branches including Ford Motor Credit which actually did take a bailout – https://spellchek.wordpress.com/2014/01/17/biden-thanks-ford-for-saving-our-ass-yet-he-and-the-media-continue-with-the-lie-that-ford-didnt-get-a-bailout/.

President Obama may be a bit perturbed that his criminal legal team wasn’t able to change existing bankruptcy law as they did with GM and Chrysler and force Ford’s automaking division into compliance. Regardless, he is right there front and center today to remind us he saved the entire industry which Ford benefited from anyway.

Ford took full advantage of a low cost $5.9 billion lifeline loan which was only possible due to the bailout package on the table for their competitors.

On top of the Ford Motor Credit bailout and the DOE $5.9 billion re-tooling loan, Ford also received a $7 billion loan through the Commercial Paper Funding Facility (CPFF). Yes, that is a part of TARP so yes, that is bailout money.

Perhaps the least well-known of all is the credit swaps Ford exercised through a program the Fed set up that was run through the European Central Bank. $8 trillion of the $10 trillion authorized was utilized by the ECB and Ford was a player. Again, more bailout money that never had to be accounted for in the U.S. media.

Look, the spinsters can try to do some wordsmithing and make it appear as if Ford just sat by and never took part in the bailout games, but it doesn’t pass the smell test. The numbers back it up. Ford took a bailout, period.

Can we put a price on the American dream?

A good friend of the Spellchek blog is Asylum Watch. Today the post was about the U.S. officially ending the armed conflict in Afghanistan. This point was made.

It is not at all clear what, if anything, of lasting value was achieved from all the death and destruction after thirteen years.

That depends upon one’s interpretation of lasting value. Our 13 year presence in Afghanistan was sold to the public as a response to eradicate the Taliban in the aftermath of the 9/11 terrorist attacks. In that respect, it was clearly a complete failure and that will become more than obvious as time passes and the Taliban quickly reestablish control.

However, to the skeptical observer who never bought the sales pitch to begin with, eradicating the Taliban was never the goal to begin with. As is so often the case, the U.S. engages in global conflicts under false pretenses in order to promote ulterior motives. This is not to say all of these ulterior motives are somehow sinister. In fact, many times our foreign policy agenda items are intended to improve U.S. economic interests for one example. The problem arises when our blood and treasure are expended in the course of accomplishing these goals and that simply isn’t palatable to the public.

An example of a conflict fitting an agenda item is Afghanistan. Take a look at the Silk Road Strategy Act of 1999. Yes, 1999, two years prior to the 9/11 tragedy. And yes, I realize this was only the House version of the bill which passed but never was by the Senate. The U.S. operates everyday under policies which aren’t official law. Simply look no further than the hundreds of undeclared conflicts we have engaged in since our last ‘officially’ declared war, WWII.


It shall be the policy of the United States in the countries of the South Caucasus and Central Asia–

(1) to promote and strengthen independence, sovereignty, democratic government, and respect for human rights;

(2) to promote tolerance, pluralism, and understanding and counter racism and anti-Semitism;

(3) to assist actively in the resolution of regional conflicts and to facilitate the removal of impediments to cross-border commerce;

(4) to promote friendly relations and economic cooperation;

(5) to help promote market-oriented principles and practices;

(6) to assist in the development of the infrastructure necessary for communications, transportation, education, health, and energy and trade on an East-West axis in order to build strong international relations and commerce between those countries and the stable, democratic, and market-oriented countries of the Euro-Atlantic Community; and

(7) to support United States business interests and investments in the region.

Does this state that the U.S. will engage in covert actions to promote commerce under the auspice of making the Taliban pay for their involvement in 9/11? Of course not. Stated policies never deal in such specifics, they are written in generalities. Particularly when they involve such politically unpalatable outcomes as the one Asylum Watch is questioning.

By the way, this proposed act that never made it out of Congress is merely one in a long line of examples which illustrate the fact that natural resources and commerce play a very pivotal role in U.S. policy around the world. The news media may play up the talking points of protecting human rights, freedom and democracy all around the world but many times there are other factors motivating our actions.

I considered adding the laundry list of links to sources that support the idea that the military-industrial-corporate complex is the global driver of conflicts over natural resources and economics as a primary national security initiative. I usually find that non-believers won’t bother to do the research anyway. So today I’ll just add one if you’re interested – http://mycatbirdseat.com/2015/01/the-year-us-led-capitalism-became-exposed-as-root-of-global-conflict/

Placing a value upon the outcome of such events as the 13 year Afghanistan ‘unofficial’ war is probably impossible. There are lots of winners and losers depending upon your stake. One thing is for sure. The conflicts will go on and so will the loss of life. All in the name of progress and national security. What is keeping the American dream alive worth to you?