It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Red Alert: Did anti-Obama campaign contributions dictate which Chrysler dealers were shuttered?

page: 1
19
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:
+1 more 
posted on May, 27 2009 @ 01:46 AM
link   

RED ALERT: Did anti-Obama campaign contributions dictate which Chrysler dealers were shuttered?


directorblue.blogspot.com

I took all dealer owners whose names appeared more than once in the list. And, of those who contributed to political campaigns, every single one had donated almost exclusively to GOP candidates.

Consider the partial list of Chrysler dealership owners, listed below. You'll notice that all were opponents of Barack Obama, most through sponsorship of GOP candidates and organizations, but a handful through Barack's Democrat rivals (Hillary Clinton and John Edwards in 2008, for example).

(visit the link for the full news article)


Related News Links:
www.scribd.com
www.scribd.com
www.freep.com
www.reuters.com

Mod Edit: All Caps – Please Review This Link.

[edit on 28 May 09 by Gools]




posted on May, 27 2009 @ 01:46 AM
link   
I find it inappropriate that the obama administration has become involved to such a great extent in the auto business but this is an unexpected angle.

This article says that there is no cost to Chrysler associated with dealerships, that they just bring in revenue, so why should closing dealerships be part of the bankruptcy, and why indeed should the closed dealership be those who contributed to losing candidates rather than the winning one, apparently making them enemies of this administration.

This does not bode well for any businesses in USA.

directorblue.blogspot.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on May, 27 2009 @ 02:45 AM
link   
I would guess this does not bode well for any of us, if it's true that differing opinions are enemies of the Obama administration.

Childish bullying, or the start of something MUCH WORSE to come?



posted on May, 27 2009 @ 08:37 AM
link   
I think the big problem here is that a company donates money to a campaign. anyone notice that businesses have more weight than citizens? Such bs. these companies have no business donating. infact i think we should file lawsuits for that money. i dont think anyone else will really feel this way but come on... we give coporations too much power over citizens anymore. you cant even talk about your work on facebook without getting fired, which shouldnt be fair. freedom of speech should mean that nothing bad should happen to you for what you say. and it doesnt, and as long as we allow businesses to make donations to parties its gonna get worse and worse. they dont need to become a dictatorship when everyone already works for dictators



posted on May, 27 2009 @ 08:40 AM
link   
So, if you have a different opinion than Obama you'll be put of of a job huh?

Great. I wouldnt be surprised if this is 100% true.

Edit: I am trying for an interview with Doug, the blogger, to get more information on this. If I can expect a ATSnews post with further information in the future.



[edit on 5/27/2009 by Tentickles]



posted on May, 27 2009 @ 08:46 AM
link   
I too am not surprised to hear this. Democrats - the party that fights for free speech. Unless it doesn't agree with their viewpoints.



posted on May, 27 2009 @ 09:09 AM
link   
This is all . . . uncanny.

A man from nowhere beomes president, promising the world. Meanwhile the markets are sabotaged. Now this?

I do believe all this crap is out of the CT realm and into real life.



posted on May, 27 2009 @ 09:13 AM
link   
What disturbs me the most about all of this is that during Obama's press conference a few weeks ago regarding the auto industry he defended his position that he doesn't want to be in the auto business. This came at a time when the US gov't held 40% of Chrysler. The day after the press conference, public opinion was up and the stock market rose.

Now, the US gov't is going to own 70% of GM. Hasn't anyone else noticed that Obama is constantly going out and saying, relax....everything's fine...we have it handled.... and then POW! He manages to get even further entrenched.

I believe the motive is that once the general public gets "calmed down" by his press conferences - the general public stops paying attention. And that's when he seems to take it to the next level.



posted on May, 27 2009 @ 09:16 AM
link   
Very interesting information.
More Obama financial facism coming to light. Kinda makes you wonder what else is going on that we haven't caught wind of yet.



posted on May, 27 2009 @ 09:20 AM
link   
[edit on 093131p://bWednesday2009 by Stormdancer777]



posted on May, 27 2009 @ 10:15 AM
link   
Can someone post the full article?

Those sites are blocked here at work



posted on May, 27 2009 @ 12:09 PM
link   
reply to post by Myendica
 


I agree with your concern about the power of corporations. I think that we really strayed off the path by letting them get so big and allowing them to not be accountable in the way a person is, even though they have many of the same rights as an individual. We were distracted by the economies of scale that allowed them to offer goodies at lower prices but they have created huge problems by not holding them accountable for obnoxious behavior. I'm sure all politicians love corporations, the larger the better, because they have deep pockets and can deliver lots of votes. Now it would seem that the counterpoint is true. Back the wrong candidate and you're in trouble.



posted on May, 27 2009 @ 03:28 PM
link   
Correlation does not mean Causation.

For example, based on the same shallow level of analysis the article provided (correlation) and the fact that the businesses that got closed were the worst business performers, I could conclude that the biggest GOP contributors were the worst at running their businesses. I could (using that false logic) go so far as to say that GOP supporters tend to be poor business people.

Keep in mind, that is the EXACT same logic (correlation = causation) the article is using by saying since Obama is in charge, and these business got the axe, and they were big GOP contributors, that Obama must have made his decisions based on political contributions. It's the same logic.

Point is, both are false. GOP contributions have no effect on poor business performance nor that they got closed.

They got closed because they were the bottom of the barrel.

[edit on 27-5-2009 by harrytuttle]



posted on May, 27 2009 @ 03:42 PM
link   
reply to post by harrytuttle
 



They got closed because they were the bottom of the barrel.


i'm glad someone else see's the world through non-beer goggles.

What this article does not do (very misleading article, mind you) is tell us how many contributors to the GOP did not get shut down.

It's a pretty safe bet that LOTS of businesses in this country contribute to political parties.

Just because some got shut down for having lousy sales and being an all around bad business model, doesn't mean there's any "gotcha" coming from the white house.

It was up to GM to shut down certain places. Not the white house.
Get your facts straight and stop inventing lies to spread to the moronic masses.



posted on May, 27 2009 @ 03:46 PM
link   
reply to post by harrytuttle
 



See I don't entirely believe that. I was listening to Phil Valentine the other day and one of the local dealership owners called in and made the statement that he was getting to keep his GM dealership but that he had to shut down his Chrysler dealership. He even went so far as to say that he looked up his rankings and the Chrysler dealership was listed as 108th in the nation. I don't believe that they are only picking the bottom of the barrell and he didn't either.



posted on May, 27 2009 @ 03:59 PM
link   
Did it even occur to most of you that most Chrysler dealership owners might be disproportionately Republican?

That would mean that no matter what way they axed up the dealerships the majority would *always* have been mostly GOP doners.

Call me crazy but I find it highly likely that *MOST* American-made car dealership owners would be politically conservative, and indeed, most wealthier people tend to be conservative as well. After all, most people don't become conservative until they have something they feel like conserving.

Just something to consider.



posted on May, 27 2009 @ 04:04 PM
link   
Oh for heaven's sake...
Obama is Satan actively punishing his opponents. Clinton was a rapist, drug dealer and murderer and Bush was the next best thing to Jesus.

I suppose next we'll find out that Rush Limbaugh loves minorities, and Larry Craig is just bow-legged.



posted on May, 27 2009 @ 04:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by mysterybee
Did it even occur to most of you that most Chrysler dealership owners might be disproportionately Republican?

That would mean that no matter what way they axed up the dealerships the majority would *always* have been mostly GOP doners.

Call me crazy but I find it highly likely that *MOST* American-made car dealership owners would be politically conservative, and indeed, most wealthier people tend to be conservative as well. After all, most people don't become conservative until they have something they feel like conserving.

Just something to consider.


All it would take are a few businesses with Obama donations to show up on that list to invalidate it. Wanna bet the data was cherry-picked?



posted on May, 27 2009 @ 04:48 PM
link   
Here's a bit from the reuters report, with one dealer's impressions:


Chrysler has argued it needs a smaller dealer network to return to profitability. In 2008, it sold about 1 million new cars at some 3,300 dealers. "They've given me no time to sell off (my inventory)," said Robert Engel, who runs two dealerships in Tenafly and Wyckoff, New Jersey. Both dealerships, which employ about 60 people, are profitable, he said. Engel estimates two-thirds of his dealership revenue comes from service, and said he intends to stay open. "Bankruptcy laws are being manipulated to carry out a marketing plan," he said. "If they're going to terminate dealers, it should only be severely underperforming dealers."

Chrysler wants fewer but bigger dealers in central locations near highways that would carry Dodge, Chrysler and Jeep vehicles under one roof, Engel added, but the decision about who survives was "random" and set a precedent of government interference in free markets.


and another dealer:

"The Fifth Amendment clearly states you cannot take another person's property without due process or compensation. Even in eminent domain, there is an appraised price on the property being taken by the state."

Anderer said he has been in business for 22 years and employs 48 workers. He intends to fight the plan. "My business is being stolen from me under the guise of the bankruptcy laws, given to another dealer down the street," Anderer said.


reuters

It would be interesting to know who the dealer is down the street who is getting the chrysler franchise, or i should say who that dealer supports.

All I can do is listen to the players. I'm not a chrysler dealer so i don't know all the facts, but there are some very strange things going on right now.



posted on May, 27 2009 @ 04:51 PM
link   
Just so you guys know I am currently interviewing Doug Ross, the author of the blog.

Are there any questions you want asked? U2U Me.



new topics

top topics



 
19
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join