Tuesday, May 5, 2009

Scandal, Lies & Post-Modernism In Full Fury

Several days ago, an attorney and Democratic Party campaign contributor, Thomas Lauria, went public with allegations that the Obama administration was using extortionate threats to convince secured creditors of Chrysler to, in essence, give up their rights in favor of the UAW. It was an incredibly serious charge. The White House immediately denied it and, to the best of my knowledge, only Jack Taper followed up on the charge. The left wing has gone nuclear on Taper for refusing to take the White House denial at face value and following up on Lauria's allegations. Now, more people are going public, confirming Lauria's allegations and adding to the story.

This from the Business Insider:

Creditors to Chrysler describe negotiations with the company and the Obama administration as "a farce," saying the administration was bent on forcing their hands using hardball tactics and threats.

Conversations with administration officials left them expecting that they would be politically targeted, two participants in the negotiations said.

. . . The sources, who represent creditors to Chrysler, say they were taken aback by the hardball tactics that the Obama administration employed to cajole them into acquiescing to plans to restructure Chrysler. One person described the administration as the most shocking "end justifies the means" group they have ever encountered. Another characterized Obama was "the most dangerous smooth talker on the planet- and I knew Kissinger." Both were voters for Obama in the last election.

One participant in negotiations said that the administration's tactic was to present what one described as a "madman theory of the presidency" in which the President is someone to be feared because he was willing to do anything to get his way. The person said this threat was taken very seriously by his firm.

. . . These allegations add to the picture of an administration willing to use intimidation to win over support for its Chrysler plans--and then categorically deny it.

Hope and Change, eh? Has the administraton violated any laws - no. That said, strong arming creditors to forego their constitutional right to property so that the Administration can reward Big Labour is a scandal, as are the White House categorical denials.

And in a clear example of intellectually dishonest post-modernism in action, The Business Insider also reports that the "Left Wing [is] Losing Its Mind . . ." over this story.

When we started writing about the allegation that Steve Rattner had threatened to use the White House press corps to ruin Perella Weinberg if the firm didn't drop its opposition to the Obama administration's Chrysler plan, we never expected it to become a political football. But on the left-wing of the political blogosphere, the story is quickly picking up steam. It's being portraryed as some kind of plot by political conservatives.

Left-wing blogs Think Progress and Media Matters have both attacked ABC News reporter Jake Tapper for picking up the story. Here's Think Progress's complaint::

By reporting the story, Tapper chose to accept the validity of Lauria’s claim that the White House could get 'the full force of the White House press corps' to threaten a private company. Despite the fact that the parties with direct knowledge — the White House and Perella Weinberg — denied to ABC that any threats were made, Tapper still reported Lauria’s false accusation on his 'Political Punch' blog. Drudge and other right-wing outlets are glad he did.

By our count there are at least two important errors in those two sentences.

- Your don't have to accept the validity of the claim that the White House could get the White House press corps to do its bidding to accept the possibility that Steve Rattner would make the threat. . . .

- Perella Weinberg hasn't denied that the threats were made. . . . [To the contrary], it seems that PW went out of its way not to deny that it was threatened. . . .

It boggles the mind to see progressives deciding that because the White House and a corporation deny a charge, that the charge must be false. Imagine, for instance, these folks accepting a version of events simply because it had been put forth by the Bush White House and Halliburton. But this is exactly what Think Progress and Media Matters are doing. It's as if their cognitive critical apparatus had simply stopped functioning sometime in January. . . .

Read the whole article. And welcome to the world of post-modern thought, where you are objectively and knowingly lying if you make a statement at odds with what the far left wants to believe. It is not that their "cognitive critical apparatus" stopped functioning in January, its that intellectual honesty is not a part of their core post-modernist paridigm.

H/T Hot Air. Find more links on this story at Memorandum.


Dinah Lord said...

Now somebody has come down hard on Lauria to STFU. I would imagine it was the management at Case and White.

I don't know if you saw him with Megan Kelly and Neil Cavuto on FNC today, GW.

He folded like a cheap lawn chair and refused to revisit the topic.

This lends even MORE credibility to the charge, in my view.

And really, would it surprise you that Team Obama would resort to this tactic?

It doesn't surprise me in the least.

suek said...

I'm not in any position to be concerned, but if I were...I wouldn't talk to any body any way that I thought was connected with the Administration unless I had a tape recording of some kind going.

The question is: will the pressure from the financial industry on Congress be enough to get Obama in line? My guess is that he has the goods on members of Congress as well...

How far will the rot reach?