Economic Disrespect: The Auto Industry Failure

Hello readers my name is James and I'm guest blogging for The Daily Wood today.

Perhaps in the future I'll be able to share more of my views with you all.

I'm a college graduate in the study of Ornamental Horticulture, a resident of Metro Detroit, and

a Cherokee Native American. As my field of study, and state are affected by current sociopolitical

issues, I feel this is a perfect oppertunity to share my thoughts and my personal recollection of what

I've experienced and learned.

For as long as anyone can remember, Detroit and for the most part Michigan as a whole has been

known for one huge industry, Automobiles. The city gained monikers such as "The Motor City."

Hot Rod cars dubbed as "Detroit Muscle." The story of Detroit really is the story of the "Big 3."

Where the auto industry goes, Detroit goes, this is an undeniable truth. As a one trick pony

everything depends for the most part on the success of these three companies. When they had

the huge blowout, the city sunk hard. You really don't get a feel for it until you see former

business professionals collecting job applications from fast food places. The modern city was

built for two million people, however at this time there's less than 800,000.

The bailout is and will always be seen by Michiganders as a double edge sword. It was entirely

essential to keep Gm/Chrysler/Ford afloat, however nobody denies that the companies deserve to

fall under. The raging fire of approving people for vehicles they could not afford was just a common practice.

The city and it's auto companies were for so long under the illusion that the industry was its golden goose egg.

However when stocks started diving, people were buying less, saving more. It only adds to the irony that when it came time to collect the money for the loands they handed out, they were met with pockets that were already slim, but were now empty. This spelled the downfall of the former Auto Industry, it was soon a realization to themselves that things were bad, very bad. People were laid off en mass. Then later on during the bailout, an enormous amount of more hourly workers were sent home. A huge chunk considering just citizens working at auto factories, but often left out are other companies that entirely depend on those workers. Not third party parts manufacturers, we're talking resturants, grocers, movie theaters, you name it. So many people worked in auto factories that when the layoffs came, so did layoffs at the aforementioned places, and in many cases companies had to shut down. Their customers now had no income.

Unemployment was already strapped before all of this happened, so it came as no surprise that when the city

office buildings were flooded to apply unemployment, there was little to nothing to give. This has triggered an ongoing exodus from the state. A large amount of people have left the state entirely for places that are doing much better, in hopes of finding work again. the interesting thing is that long ago when the auto companies needed a very large amount of workers, many of their future workers came from the south. Here we are today, people leaving Michigan to live down south where prospects are better.

The Documentary "Requiem For Detroit" (The Documentary), shows how this was decades in the making and the result of the lack of respect the companies had for the economy. The big question here is an obvious one that's been asked before. "What do we have to do, to ensure something like this doesn't happen again?" In my opinon, it's accountability. Now, the "Big Three" have obviously changed a lot around, and are behaving much more responsibly and with the watchful eye of the government,

behaving with much more accountability. But, this isn't the only industry that could have something like this happen. What sort of measures should be taken? Many folks felt that the government shouldn't of touched the auto crysis, some people feel that they shouldn't have a failsafe for companies that fall for bad habits. Others feel that its a necessity, to ensure that community's or whole states even, are able to continue on without striking families into severe proverty. Is there a right decision? Should the government have tighter measures put in place to keep companies in line? Should they bail them out if they do deviate from the guidelines set?

This is truly an issue that strikes the heart of many people, this in my mind will no doubt grow to be a bigger issue in society's mind.

I'm interested in hearing opinions from others about this topic, feel free to leave a comment.

Restoring Honor in a Post-Racial Society

Everyone with a pair of ears or eyes heard and or saw that this weekend that Glenn Beck was holding his "Restoring Honor" Rally at the Lincoln Memorial in D.C. It just happened to fall on the same day as Martin Luther King Jr's famous " I Have a Dream Speech". I will take Glenn at his word when he said he did not know it was the same day and that it was "Divine providence".

Now the goal of the rally was to support a scholarship fund for Wounded Warriors it was not to be politically based or racially based, though that is what it has been turned and twisted into. The rally had been declared for months as a religious event and attendees were encouraged not to bring signs but their children.

As Barack Obama was celebrating his victory of the White House the Main Stream Media ( MSM) was declaring a post racial society and America. With these claims though, it does not stop them from calling Tea Parties or the "Restoring Honor" Rally mainly white. This maybe true but the question I have is WHY fuel flames or start arguements that should not even matter or are not really there?

Huffington Post ( or as I like their name the HuffPo ) said this in the first sentence to set the stage, "Conservative commentator Glenn Beck and tea party champion Sarah Palin appealed Saturday to a vast, predominantly white crowd on the National Mall to help restore traditional American values..."

The New York Times: "The overwhelmingly white and largely middle-aged crowd Saturday was a mix of groups that have come together under the Tea Party umbrella."

The two statements are a just two selected from the MSM it give us a picture of how race is still used on the side of the fence which is supposed to be NON RACIAL. It is so hard to wrap your head around why race is still a issue in this country but when you really look into the issue it is not hard to find the truth. Marin Luther King said "It is not a issue of Black and White. It is a issue of justice for all people."
Throw us your thoughts and feedback

-Jake at the D.W.

Pittsburgh Pirates vs. American Government-Who has the least accountability

If you're from the Pittsburgh area or are a fan of baseball you are probably aware of the city of Pittsburgh's redheaded stepchild-the Pittsburgh Pirates. For the 18th consecutive season the "Buccos" have failed to produce a winning record and in a city that prides itself on it's athletic prowess this is an embarrassment.

The problem with the Pirates lays with the ownership group and their lack of motivation to produce a winning team but I can't say I blame them. Because of major league baseball's profit sharing program the Pirate organization will never suffer a loss of profits if they do not succeed on the field and therefore the logic behind maintaining the status quo is not flawed. It is good business to not take unnecessary risks, such as investing big money into the players, when you can continue to profit from business as usual. There is no accountability for the Bob Nutting (that really is his name) and the other owners of the Pirates.

The owners don't answer to anyone and therefore they will never change their practices. Unless the fans stop supporting the Pirates when they play at home there is no cause for alarm and I don't think that this will ever happen because Pirate games are a lot of fun to attend. They aren't fun because anyone likes to see their team get hammered every night but because the owners offer just enough incentive to the fans in order to keep them coming back. Fireworks after the game, all you can eat seats and concerts; just some examples of the promotions that are regularly offered throughout the season, and these are just enough to keep the fans coming back for more.

There are a lot of parallels that can be drawn between the owners of the Pittsburgh Pirates and the politicians and bureaucrats who people our government system. The similar profit sharing system and lack of accountability among the different agencies and organizations of our government has made it easy for the people who oversee those groups to fall into the same trap as the Pirate's ownership has. Our tax dollars have been grossly mismanaged and misused and as a result we as Americans find ourselves in a whole heap of debt, and there is no sign that government spending will cease. Politicians see the huge slush funds and stimulus funds as a way to, not necessarily line their own pockets, but ensure themselves reelection by securing a portion of that money for their district. Just like the owners of the Pirates, these people think that they can give us just enough handouts in order to keep us coming back for more. And the truly sad thing is that, up until now, this method has worked extremely effectively.

I think that it is time for Americans to understand and hold politicians accountable for their disturbing abuse of power and funds. We face a debt crisis that was started by President Bush, has been sped up drastically by President Obama and has reached a point where every American man woman or child, in order for American debt to reach zero, owes 44,000 dollars. This is unacceptable and unsustainable. I don't assume to know how to reduce our debt and fix the economy but November is coming and anyone running for office needs to have a well thought out plan for fixing this mess if they want to have a chance at election.

-Jim at the D.W.

The Ground Zero 'Mosque' and the First Amendment

Hello everyone this is my first post on the Daily Wood and I hope to be around to share more of my views. My name is Alex and I am currently studying Journalism with an interest in both Public Relations and Law. With my experience in Journalism I believe I can speak with some authority on the issue of the First Amendment and how it relates to a hot topic this year with the ground zero 'Mosque'.

I will say as I have said before on this blog that while the building known as Park51 will be housing a place of worship for Muslims known as a Mosque, it will also have many other facilities for use by any New Yorker, no matter their creed or religion. It will have a swimming pool as well as a basketball court, and be more akin to a YMCA then a tower Minaret Monument to some Muslim victory. Another misnomer is that this building will be built on Ground Zero. In reality it will be built two blocks away from Ground Zero, with no line of site to the former place of the Twin Towers. To put this in perspective three blocks away from Ground Zero is a real mosque that has been there for 25 years, longer then the twin towers. What also resides so close to this sacred and hallowed ground? Strip joints and betting parlors. Despite all this I will refer to the commonly held name the Park51 building has, a Mosque, for the sake of simplicity and so this post is easier to write and understand.

Let us focus on one issue for today. The First Amendment and how it relates to the Mosque. I will break my post down into three sections. First, how the First Amendment relates to the Mosque. Second, why we should defend the First Amendment to the death, and how this Mosque is the perfect issue to do so with. Third and last, why people wrongly oppose the Mosque, while at the same time saying they want to uphold the First Amendment.

--

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

What this breaks down to is the Freedom of Religion, the Freedom of Speech, and the Freedom to peaceably assemble and protest.

The Freedom of Religion allows people to practice their religion, whatever it may be, without fear of persecution or restrictions. If you wish to worship Satan or little green goblins you are free to do so in the United States of America. This means not only clasping your hands and saying prayers but also building a place where you and those of your faith can worship in peace. It is one of the very foundations of what our country was built on, people came here to escape the persecution of other countries so they could worship freely.

The developers of the Park51 Mosque have bought private property 2 blocks away from Ground Zero, and as far as the First Amendment is concerned, they can build whatever they want there. (Of course zoning codes can say 'No you may not build this type of building here'. But from what I understand that issue has been settled already.)

--

Now as I said before the First Amendment, specifically the Freedom of Religion is one of the Foundations of our country. You can not chip away at the foundation less you want the entire country to fall apart. "Oh they do not need the Freedom of Religion. Oh you do not need Due Process. Oh there is no reason we can't hold him in a prison for a few decades for no reason." Once you start where does it stop?

I've heard several pundits and those of the Right say, "They won't let us build a Church in Saudi Arabia, why should we let them build a Mosque here?"

Simply put, to show that we are better. To show that we hold our ideals and value true. To show that when we say you have the freedom to worship whatever and however you wish, we truly mean it. We mean it for everyone, be you Christian, Muslim, Jewish or Ewok.

--

Speaking of Ewoks I want to tell a little story: Today I was leaving the HUB, a central building on the Campus I go to. Outside was a massive sign that said 'Jesus Christ said, if you love me, obey me.' Next to that sign were three kids, covered by a rainbow colored blanket, members of a Gay Pride club. By them were a dozen or so students holding signs that said 'You Mad?' and 'Words on a Sign!' And by them was a man clad in a brown robe, spouting off the merits of Jedisim. This is a true story. This is all possible because of one thing, the First Amendment.

While this may seem insane and stupid, how many other places in the world can you have such an absurd scene and not have any fights break out, or people being killed?

--

Finally I want to address why so many people are opposed to this Mosque, and in turn opposed to the First Amendment.

I believe we need to get over the idea that the entire Muslim world is after us, that it was the Muslim world that attacked us on 9/11 and killed those 4000 some people. On September 11th, 2001, radical and hateful people crashed four planes into the heart of America. While they worshipped Allah and revered Mohammad, they were not the same as the nearly 1 billion other Muslims in the world. They were not like you or I, but if we so easily discard the First Amendment because of fear and hatred, how long before we look into the mirror and see something we hated?

People continue to perpetuate this cycle of fear and hate for political gain. At the end of the day this Ground Zero Mosque will just be another political dividing line that politicians can use on election day to say "Look! Look! I am Different then him! I am better then him! Vote for me!"

--

There are almost 2 million Muslims in America, but if you see them you should not see them as a Muslim, but as an American, just like you.

And a few years ago there was a saying going around the political world, "If we do this, or if we do that, the Terroists have won."

Well guess what folks, if we ignore the First Amendment, the Terroists have won.

Note: Alex considers himself a Deist, one of the common religions of the Founding Fathers. He has no relation with Muslims, Christians, Jews, Ewoks, or Jedi.

Liberation/Emerging Church Theology

Glenn Beck: talk show/radio personality, recovering alcoholic, Mormon. Love him or hate him I want to take some time to analyze something he said today and what implications it may have for the Christian faith and belief system. It is my understanding that Mormonism isn't scripturally sound which is to say that it doesn't necessarily follow the teachings of Jesus as found in the new testament and therefore it is a manipulation of Christian ideology. That being said, Glenn made a comment on Fox News Sunday about the fact that he believes President Obama is a follower of another sect of Christianity that, it may be said, is not founded completely on biblically sound theology either. I am talking about Liberation Theology or it's more contemporary counterpart the Emerging Church movement. For those of you all who don't what either of those are you can click the links above taking you to a Wikipedia.org page describing each belief.

Liberation theology is described very succinctly as the belief that Jesus came to earth to save humanity and especially the poor and that it is our duty as believers to understand and try to remedy the plight of the poor. Practioners of this belief system also espouse that Jesus said we should do our best to become poor ourselves and they sight examples of paribles that Jesus tells in which it is the poor who benefit and the rich who come away empty. A good article describing these beliefs is "Glenn Beck vs. Christ the Liberator" by a Rev. James Martin.

Now the problem that I have with these theologies is that they fail to see the big picture of Jesus' sacrafice for humanity. Some of you out there may not be Christian or know anything about the bible so briefly; Jesus came and died for all of us in order that we may go to heaven when we die. Where Liberation and Emerging church theology falls short is that they miss the point of the Christian belief that, Jesus didn't die specifically or especially for one group of people but rather humanity as a whole. Each group of people has it's own unique problems but Jesus' sacrafice covers them all. The bible has a few occasions where Jesus says that in order for someone to be saved they have to give up all their possessions or so on but the point of these stories is not that the people have to give up their possessions for poverty's sake but instead give them up in order to rely completely on God for survival and salvation. The point of the gospel is that we can do nothing to save ourselves or others from sin, only God has that power.

So, I have to say that I disagree with Liberation theology and if President Obama is indeed a follower of this belief system then I have to wonder how it has affected his formation as a man and as our president. I can also say that, because he is a mormon, I do not think that Mr. Beck has any right to speak for the Christian community as a whole or lecture anyone on the teachings of the bible when he himself follows an unsound doctrine.

-Jim at the D.W.

PS-anyone who has questions about what it means to be a Christian or anything else about my beliefs please feel free to email me jed19@students.pti.edu