Obama talks tough to Detroit

This is a great article about Barack Obama and how he stuck to his guns when he spoke candidly to automakers in Detroit.

I think he is being fairly conservative in the benchmarks he proposes, in terms of fuel efficiency. The small steps are probably realistic to get compliance though.

Obama Criticizes Auto Makers
For Opposing Tough Fuel Standards
By MIKE SPECTOR and JACKIE CALMES
May 8, 2007; Page A8

Far from playing to his audience, Illinois Sen. Barack Obama told Detroit's business elites during a speech there that auto makers deserve much of the blame for their financial predicament, and called for annual increases in federal mileage standards for their vehicles.


The Democratic presidential contender, in a speech yesterday that drew about 2,000 people to a sold-out Detroit Economic Club luncheon, also proposed what he called a government-industry bargain: Auto makers would get some federal assistance for their crippling retiree health-care costs, in return for producing more fuel-saving hybrid vehicles. And Mr. Obama promoted his new legislation, an idea borrowed from California Republican Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, mandating a low-carbon fuel standard for the oil industry to spur development of alternative fuels.

While the senator acknowledged the auto industry's problems weren't all of its making, his indictments were sharp. Even as foreign rivals developed fuel-efficient models, increasing their sales and market share amid rising gasoline prices, U.S. auto makers kept investing in ever-bigger vehicles -- and in lobbyists who worked in Washington to defeat the fuel-economy changes "that could've saved their industry," Mr. Obama said.

As the companies have shed jobs and profits, he said, "they've continued to reward failure with lucrative bonuses for CEOs."

Mr. Obama's speech, with its focus on energy, the environment and auto makers' place in a changing economy, marked his latest bid to showcase his substantive case for the Democrats' presidential nomination, after critics suggested the charismatic politician is all style. But perhaps more notable was his choice to deliver it in the nation's auto-making capital.

"I don't believe in making a speech like this in California, and giving a different speech in Detroit," Mr. Obama said in an interview afterward. "This was an attempt to lay my cards on the table. I want to help strengthen the industry here in Detroit. I don't see us doing that by maintaining the status quo."

Mr. Obama's comments came as a Senate panel plans today to take up a bill to mandate steady increases in federal fuel-economy rules, known as Corporate Average Fuel Economy, or CAFE, standards. Auto makers would have to achieve a fleetwide average fuel-economy standard for most cars and trucks of 35 miles per gallon by 2020. The bill would require 4% annual fuel-economy increases after that. The fuel standard for passenger cars over the past 20 years has been 27.5 miles per gallon.

Mr. Obama pointed to superior fuel economy as a main reason Toyota Motor Corp. recently replaced General Motors Corp. as the world's best-selling car maker. Many Asian cars, including Toyota's, get better than 35 mpg.

Domestic auto makers oppose such CAFE increases as prohibitively expensive and technologically unfeasible. They cite a Transportation Department estimate that 4% annual increases would cost them $85 billion between 2010 and 2017. But Mr. Obama, in his speech, said "expensive to do is no longer an excuse for failure to do."

The Senate bill's latest version attempts to mollify concerns of some senators, particularly Michigan Democrats Carl Levin and Debbie Stabenow, that the technology costs of meeting higher fuel-efficiency standards would doom U.S. auto makers, notably DaimlerChrysler AG's struggling Chrysler Group. A bipartisan amendment would allow the Transportation Department to lower mileage targets if it finds legislated targets aren't feasible or proves by a "clear and convincing evidence" standard that a target isn't "cost effective." While GM, Ford Motor Co., Chrysler and Toyota have lobbied for letting the DOT set fuel economy standards, there are signs auto makers might oppose the Senate bill.

But Mr. Obama made clear to reporters after his speech he isn't prepared to let auto makers off the hook: "For the last two decades, we've been hearing the same arguments," he said of their complaints about the burden of increasing fuel economy. "And the consequences are here: The Big Three auto makers are hemorrhaging money. The sooner we start [increasing fuel efficiency], the better off we're going to be."

Write to Mike Spector at mike.spector@wsj.com and Jackie Calmes at jackie.calmes@wsj.com

Nebraskan killed in Iraq

This sneak attack was brazen and incredibly disconcerting. It also involved the murder of a Nebraskan stationed in Iraq.

I'm troubled that terrorists somehow obtained military uniforms and were able to sneak through security road blocks.

Bush has had his chance

Random thoughts ...

Hagel has realistic approach

President Bush just wants Americans to give his policy (sending 20,000 more men and women to Iraq) a chance to work. How many years has he been saying we need to give his plan a chance?

At some point you have to say that's enough dead Americans, that's enough money spent, that's enough of something that isn't working. I like this INTERVIEW in GQ with Chuck Hagel. He has what appears to be a realistic approach to Iraq.

Excerpt:

Does being a veteran also make you sensitive to the administration’s approach to interrogation and the use of secret military prisons?

It does, because that’s not who America is. We have always, certainly since World War II, had the moral high ground in the world. But these secret prisons and the treatment at Guantánamo destroy all of that. We ought to shut down Guantánamo. There shouldn’t be any secret prisons. Why do we need those? What are we afraid of? Here we are, the greatest nation the world has ever seen. Why can’t we let the Red Cross into our prisons? Why do we deny they exist? Why do we keep them locked up? What are we afraid of? Why aren’t we dealing with Iran and Syria?

My heart goes out to all the enlisted men and women who are fighting over there. Their sacrifices are honorable.

========
Ford reaps what it sows

It's hard to feel sorry for Ford Motor Co., who reported it lost $5.8 billion (BILLION!?) in the fourth quarter of 2006.

How many years did it ride the gravy train with the Ford Expensive (Explorer, Expedition, etc..) gas guzzlers? It should have seen the trends but it kept putting money into its beheamoths.

READ MORE.

==========
Obama lies being spread

People should know that there is a false e-mail currently circulated that says Obama may be a radical Muslim or have leanings in that direction. The e-mail has many false or exaggerated statements.

READ THIS ARTICLE for the explanation.

Protect free speech

Former House Speaker, Newt Gingrich, recently said that the United States might have to consider restrictions on Americans' freedom of speech if terrorists use free speech and the Internet to recruit members.

I will almost always staunchly object to restrictions to freedom of speech under any circumstances, primarily because I find it hard to trust my basic freedoms to the government in hopes that they will exercise self-control. The Patriot Act is one recent example of Americans' stupefying willingness to give up their rights to privacy and due process.

Gingrich isn't making any friends over his recent statement but I understand where he's coming from - if the Internet and free speech are making it easy for terrorists to target Americans, certain restrictions may need to be put in place.

I think the Patriot Act and the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act give the president a lot of freedom to handle terrorist activity. To suggest that free speech may have to be curtailed, especially from someone like Gingrich, flies in the face of reasonably skeptical Americans.

Leave our basic freedoms alone, many of them have already been usurped.

Ramblings

• After watching other countries build walls and patrol borders, I can't believe we live in a country that is going to build a wall and patrol a border.
• HYPOCRITE ALERT! I also believe our ports and our borders, south AND north, are vulnerable to terrorist activity and should be protected.
• It's hard to believe Karl Rove got by without so much as a slap on the wrist for the CIA agent leak. He's now large and in charge for the GOP's mid-term elections. Things are going to get ugly.
• Saw a clip of President Bush making funny with the press corp. He riffed on some reporter who was wearing sunglasses. "You sure you want to ask that with shades on?" he asked the reporter. The reporter played along and offered to take them off. Bush made another funny about the shades. Turns out the reporter is legally blind. Guess you have to wear the thick-rimmed, blind person sunglasses to avoid being teased.
• UPDATE: Bush apologized to the reporter mentioned above.

Lawmakers take a raise

Washington congressmen and women graciously accepted a pay raise today. So big of them.

It's only a 2 percent cost-of-living raise but it brings their salary to $168,500. This is atrocious.

I contend that our family has been in a recession for months now but the government refuses to acknowledge a problem with the economy.

How out of touch is Washington? Look at their salaries, their retirement plans and their ability to "embrace a $3,300 pay raise" while constituents can't scratch together enough money to pay their doctor bills.

Finding the democratic voice

Jim Wallis has an interesting column in the New York Times today. He offers advice to the Democratic Party about finding its voice and finding a way to resonate with American voters.

It's not the sound bite, it's the message, he says. And Democrats cannot let Republicans claim to be the party of values and faith.

"... first, you must get your message straight. What are your best ideas, and what are you for-as opposed to what you're against in the other party's message? Only when you answer those questions can you figure out how to present your message to the American people."