Taxpayers Own Chrysler and GM First

Let's just get it out on the table. Senior debt holders should be grateful to recover even a cent on the dollar. Forget, as if we could, the numerous federal bailouts the debt holders themselves have accepted or benefited from. Chrysler and GM owe the taxpayers first, and they owe far more than those companies are possibly worth. This is sovereign debt, debt to the country, and sovereign always any other financial obligation. Any other intrepretation of this basic fact is a lie by the banks. When the debt holders, banks and pension funds, say that they are entitled to their money first, it is to say that they are entitled to steal money from the taxpayer, as if TARP was not enough.

We should not be manipulated into having our rightful distrust of this Democratic socialist nonsense of a government be used against us. No complaint about President Obama is an excuse to yield freely that which is collectively ours. We would not give up Yellowstone National Park for nothing. It is our money that has floated the banks, and now Chrysler and General Motors. Regardless of whether or not such an investment was wise, we are entitled to be paid back first, and we would like a profitable return. We may not agree with how President Obama disposes of GM and Chrysler, but there is no doubt that the decision is his administration's to make.

We were told that we had to subsidize the failures of our national banking system, because it was "systemic". We wonder if "systemic" really means fractional reserve banking. After all, this is hardly the first banking crisis in the United States and at the heart of every one is two people trying to withdraw one dollar, after the bank had lent it out. We are flabbergasted that American banks could have unmitigated gall to make themselves out to be victims of a government which has lent it 700 billion dollars on our taxpaying dime, received untold trillions from the Federal Reserve printing presses, and are also gifted enumerable financial guarantees and liabilities beyond that. These institutions, and their investors, would be utterly bankrupt, siezed by the FDIC to protect savings depositors, were it not for the generosity of the American people.

We do not understand where the supposedly deep rooted concern for the taxpayer's money among so many conservative pundits has disappeared to. Are conservatives now to believe the interests of a state union worker's pension fund suddenly trump those of the American taxpayer? That's what bankers argue!

Now at the Treatyist our understanding of conservative is very simple. If someone screws up their life and comes to live under your roof, that someone plays by your rules, or they hit the street. We understand the Nation and other liberal rags might have some bleeting and silly thing to say, but that is not at issue here. We know we have plenty of dough to put in their locker. We take exception to the likes of the National Review and the Wall Street Journal. They would have you believe that if a wayward son moved back home, he would have the first claim on your income in order to pay back a friend of his. No, no and no. If the banks and the car companies did not want to have Barrack Obama as their CEO, they should not have crawled to him to begin with.