Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Obama to auto-workers: If GOP had had its way, your jobs would be gone

President Obama just delivered a rousing speech at an auto plant in Detroit, and it gave us a glimpse of how the fall elections could go for Dems if things start trending their way.

The tanking economy has left the public highly skeptical of Obama's larger goal of restoring faith in government as an effective agent for reform and a necessary corrective to the excesses of free enterprise. Indeed, a CNN poll out today finds that a whopping 61% thinks the government is doing too much that should be left to private individuals and businesses.

But today, Obama gets to claim that on one front, at least, he was absolutely right about the need for government intervention in the economy -- and that his critics were absolutely wrong. Last year, Republicans derided Obama's auto industry bailout as a dire threat to capitalism as we know it, but today, the auto industry is once again turning a profit and adding jobs in key communities.

And Obama, in his speech, made this point explicitly:

So here's the bottom line. We've got a long way to go. But we're beginning to see some of these tough decisions pay off. We are moving foward.

I want you to remember, though, if some folks had their way, none of this would have been happening. Just want to point that out. This plant, and your jobs, might not exist. There were leaders of the `just say no' crowd in Washington, they were saying, standing by the auto industry would guarantee failure. One of them called it `the worst investment you could possibly make.' They said we should just walk away and let those jobs go.

I wish they were standing here today. I wish they could see what I'm seeing in this plant, and talk to the workers who are here taking pride in building a world-class vehicle.

I don't think they'd be willing to look you in the eye and say that you were a bad investment. They might just come around if they were standing here and admit that by standing by a great American industry, and the good people who work for it, that we did the right thing. It's hard for them to say that. They don't like admitting when I do the right thing.

It's worth noting that the public record is chock full of examples of this. When Obama pushed out GM CEO Rick Wagoner, Senator Bob Corker declared that it "should send a chill through all Americans who believe in free enterprise."

Senator Lamar Alexander proclaimed: "The sooner the politicians get out of the way, the sooner auto jobs and taxpayer dollars will be secure."

The emerging White House line is this: Yes, it's tough out there, but some of the tough decisions Obama and Dems took early on -- in the face of staunch GOP opposition -- are beginning to show results. So be patient, and bear with us. The auto bailout is a good example of this. So is health reform: Though there's still a long way to go, the public is slowly warming to it as the provisions of the new law kick in.

The question is whether this argument will be enough to offset public anxiety and impatience over the overall state of the economy and get people to stay the course. A few more moments like Obama had today would go a long way towards helping make the larger argument stick.

By Greg Sargent  |  July 30, 2010; 1:29 PM ET
Categories:  2010 elections , economy  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: ADL: Some opponents of Ground Zero mosque are bigots, but we should let them win anyway
Next: Losing faith in the Federal gov't on immigration

Comments

KISS

Why Do The Republicans Hate Working Class Americans, And Want To Turn Over All Of America's Production Needs To Other Nations?!

Posted by: Liam-still | July 30, 2010 1:38 PM | Report abuse

this is why i think weiner's remarks were effective. combined with *much* more of the same, across a broad front most definitely including the wh an obama himself, the argument that republicans are cynically obstructing everything to make the economy worse in an attempt to sabotage the dems can start to really get traction.

Posted by: blahgblogwordpresscom | July 30, 2010 1:41 PM | Report abuse

Yes yes. More of this! Obama was right!

Liam, agree 1000% on KISS, but my elevator message is a little different:

"Obama was right, Republicans were wrong. Who do you trust to move the country forward?"

Posted by: Ethan2010 | July 30, 2010 1:43 PM | Report abuse

what liam and blahg said, with a bullet.

The case for many of the stimulus provisions and other actions that the Obama administration needs to be made. I hope that in September we see a lot more of this when people are actually paying attention to elections. It's a sad commentary on our political culture that no one really seems to care about policies until a month before we vote.

Posted by: srw3 | July 30, 2010 1:45 PM | Report abuse

The emerging White House line is this: It might be bad but it would've been far worse with the other guys.

It may work (and I hope it does) but it's still a bunch of lemons.

Posted by: leoklein | July 30, 2010 1:45 PM | Report abuse

This is two success stories in my home state inside of a month. The battery factory in Muskegon (where Obama called out GOP obstruction in the face of Pete Hoekstra), and now the revival of the domestic auto industry. This is terrific. And Obama is point-on. WTG!

Posted by: suekzoo1 | July 30, 2010 1:47 PM | Report abuse

Krugman said it very well this morning:

Just to be clear, progressives would be foolish to sit out this election: Mr. Obama may not be the politician of their dreams, but his enemies are definitely the stuff of their nightmares.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/30/opinion/30krugman.html?_r=1&ref=opinion

Posted by: cmccauley60 | July 30, 2010 1:48 PM | Report abuse

If Pres. Obama can get other Dems in Congress to start pushing messaging along these lines, it would be very good.

It has to come from lots of Dems, because the media does a great job of limiting the amount of Democratic message that gets out...

Posted by: TheBBQChickenMadness | July 30, 2010 1:49 PM | Report abuse

O/T

Anthony Weiner and Peter King got into a shoutfest on FOX over the 9/11 workers health bill.

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/07/peter-king-and-anthony-weiner-shout-their-way-through-a-fox-news-interview-video.php?ref=fpb

Posted by: suekzoo1 | July 30, 2010 1:53 PM | Report abuse

leo, but the point is that the polices the republicans want to reinsate are what gave us those lemons.

sue, speaking of hoekstra, what's become of him lately? he was getting national attention with his lunacy but has been out of the spotlight for a while.

Posted by: blahgblogwordpresscom | July 30, 2010 1:54 PM | Report abuse

blahg, god help us, Hoekstra is running in the GOP primary for Governor of Michigan. I think he is currently narrowly in the lead. Primary vote is next week Tuesday.

Posted by: suekzoo1 | July 30, 2010 1:57 PM | Report abuse

Republicans Are The Arsonists Who Burned Down Your Homes.

American Voters:Why Would You Trust Them To Rebuild Them For You?

Posted by: Liam-still | July 30, 2010 1:58 PM | Report abuse

Wow, I have a lot of stuff to sell anyone who believes this.

To the point of the story, without the bailout, demand for 5 million autos would have gone up in flames, and everyone would be riding around in bicycles?

Ever think the demand (and work, jobs, etc.) would have been picked up by a company that was actually competitive?

Oh, but those union jobs and votes . . . .

Posted by: island1 | July 30, 2010 2:03 PM | Report abuse

OH!

blagh, I take that back...from Benen's lunchtime post:

We're just days away from Michigan's GOP gubernatorial primary, and a new EPIC/MRA poll shows a very competitive three-way contest. Rick Snyder is ahead in the poll with 26% support, followed by Mike Cox at 24%, and Pete Hoekstra at 23%. Among Democrats, Virg Bernero leads Andy Dillon by eight, 40% to 32%.


Posted by: suekzoo1 | July 30, 2010 2:08 PM | Report abuse

Republicans Love Foreign Owned Industries, and seek to eradicate all American owned companies, and eradicate The Middle Class. They have almost succeeded.

Look at how Republicans Rushed To Form A Human Shield Around BP.

Posted by: Liam-still | July 30, 2010 2:13 PM | Report abuse

sue,

what chance do you think he has of winning the general if he wins the primary?

Posted by: blahgblogwordpresscom | July 30, 2010 2:13 PM | Report abuse

Now Liam, that is more like it! Stick it to the folks actually doing the evil....

Posted by: srw3 | July 30, 2010 2:15 PM | Report abuse

This would explain the "I" in iPad:

"iPad owners 'are rich http://voices.washingtonpost.com/plum-line/economyunemployment/and self-centred'

http://www.independent.ie/

"Friday July 30 2010

iPad owners are rich, self-centred and unkind, a survey has suggested.

A poll of 20,000 consumers has found that the typical owner of the Apple device is power-hungry and has little time for the concerns of others.

According to those polled the image of someone who owns an iPad is of a selfish workaholic businessman between 30 and 50 who has an unhealthy interest in making lots of money.

Owners of the €499 device, which was launched in Ireland this month, were perceived to be uncaring and ambitious who at not time would consider helping other people.

Tim Koelekebeck, of MyType, which carried out the survey of Americans, said iPad owners were six times more likely to be "wealthy, well-educated, power-hungry, overachieving, sophisticated, unkind and non-altruistic 30 to 50-year-olds".

He added: "As a mainstream, closed platform device whose major claim to fame is ease of use and sex appeal, the iPad is everything they are not."

However, those who own an iPad were not alone in being criticised. The people who were questioned dismissed critics of the Apple gadget as "independent geeks"."

Posted by: Liam-still | July 30, 2010 2:18 PM | Report abuse

SRW3

You stick to writing what you wish to write, and I will stick to what I want to write. I answered your critical comment of me, on the previous thread, and pointed out where you are all wet on that subject.

Posted by: Liam-still | July 30, 2010 2:21 PM | Report abuse

As one of the little people, I'm just not as skeered of "gubmint intervention" as the harrumphing corporate overlords and their tea-partying stooges would like me to be. Straight up, folks: if an organization is big enough to take down society when it fails, it should either be busted up by solid anti-trust laws, or it ought to have some government ownership. Duh.

Posted by: olharl | July 30, 2010 2:23 PM | Report abuse

Phony Elitist Product Loyalty;

You have all heard about all the massive defects and recent recalls of Toyota Vehicles. Apparently it has not made a dent in the customer loyalty of those Toyota Cult Owners. They are still swearing by Toyota products, and purchasing from them again, at a far higher rate than previous owners of American vehicles are.

It is phony self delusional snob appeal.

In 2005 Toyota USA recalled more cars in the USA, than they sold in that model year. How come that never made the headlines. If it were an American Company, it would have been shouted from the Roof Tops, by The MSM.

Toyotas products were never as good as their snobbish fan base claimed that they were.

We all know that now, and yet the snobbish fan base, is still swearing by the brand.

Buy American cars. They are great products, and it keeps the engineering know how, and production jobs, where they are most needed.

What happens if we ever have a falling out with Japan, or Germany again; or if China decides to embargo all shipments to us; how will we survive that, if we do not have a strong domestic manufacturing base, to design and manufacture our consumer product needs?

Think about that. Now that all the factories, etc have been shipped overseas; how will we be able to make our own textiles, clothing, shoes, consumer electronics, etc; if China becomes hostile, and blockades all shipments from that region.

That is the Achilles Heel In Our National Security Posture, and The Republicans Have Decided To Slit It.

Posted by: Liam-still | July 30, 2010 2:41 PM | Report abuse

"...a CNN poll out today finds that a whopping 61% thinks the government is doing too much that should be left to private individuals and businesses..."


I wonder what went through peoples minds when this question was asked since the PO consistently polled high. So does SS.

Posted by: soapm | July 30, 2010 2:46 PM | Report abuse

@liam: since you left that thread let me reprint my response. I have no interest in a flame war with you as we agree on most substantive issues, in all probability, but threadjacking to bash a teenager ought to be below thinking people like you. And I am not a concern troll.

@Liam-still: The title of this thread is:

"ADL: Some opponents of Ground Zero mosque are bigots, but we should let them win anyway"

Its not a thread about Palin's book, sexual abstinence training, or teen pregnancy.

I agree that it is both humorous and ironic that Bristol is now the poster child for abstinence as she carries her out of wedlock child around, but this isn't the topic of the thread, so technically its thread-jacking (even an O/T tag would have kept me from saying anything). You were the one to bring up the book and Bristol's behavior. Aside from the lack of taste, which is debatable, it is totally off subject. Reporting that Palin is against the community center is one thing (not what your brought up, BTW). Spinning off on Palin's supposed child rearing miscues that allowed her daughter to be doing the nasty when not married is simply not germaine to this thread. As I said, on a parenting or abstinence thread, while I might not agree that it is tasteful, it is on topic. Here it is both off topic and gratuitous. I just expect better from someone as smart as you.

Posted by: srw3 | July 30, 2010 2:46 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: srw3 | July 30, 2010 2:54 PM | Report abuse

Great speech Obama gave. I hope this isn't the only time we hear this tone...

Posted by: soapm | July 30, 2010 2:56 PM | Report abuse

@Ethan: "Liam, agree 1000% on KISS, but my elevator message is a little different: 'Obama was right, Republicans were wrong. Who do you trust to move the country forward?'"

I think you may both be keeping it a little too simple, in that your argument already pre-supposed a near lockstep agreement in the listener. I.e., it may motivate people already won over, but is not likely to be compelling to independents and right-of-center folks.

@Liam-still: "Republicans Are The Arsonists Who Burned Down Your Homes. American Voters:Why Would You Trust Them To Rebuild Them For You?"

Wow. That's an awesome campaign. I hope they go for it.

@cmccauley60: "Mr. Obama may not be the politician of their dreams, but his enemies are definitely the stuff of their nightmares."

I often disagree with Krugman, but I think he's exactly right, there. More Republicans in congress will just do more to hamstring Obama, and a future Republican president will be much less liberal. While imperfect, I don't see how progressives can do better by sitting things out.

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | July 30, 2010 3:00 PM | Report abuse

@Liam:Think about that. Now that all the factories, etc have been shipped overseas; how will we be able to make our own textiles, clothing, shoes, consumer electronics, etc; if China becomes hostile, and blockades all shipments from that region.

That is the Achilles Heel In Our National Security Posture, and The Republicans Have Decided To Slit It.
=====
While I think it is highly unlikely that China would go that route, since if they did we would cancel all of the debt we owe them, maintaining a manufacturing base in the US is in fact a good thing from a national security standpoint. It makes a lot more sense than spending billions of nuclear weapons that will hopefully never be used. In fact, I could find any number of "homeland security" and "defense" expenditures that are less effective in maintaining our national security (national economic security may not be as important as military security, but still very important) than maintaining and nurturing a solid manufacturing base here in the US. I am not worried about bluray players and ipods as much as the technology that goes into our hi tech weapons systems and communication infrastructure.

Posted by: srw3 | July 30, 2010 3:05 PM | Report abuse

What happens if we ever have a falling out with Japan, or Germany again; or if China decides to embargo all shipments to us; how will we survive that,

what did we do in 1942 ???

all of those rich suckers will have to do without the new car every year

OMG

we might have to repair some of the stuff we just throw away now

what will we tell the chilrens ???

Posted by: nada85484 | July 30, 2010 3:06 PM | Report abuse

Hey - Obama cheeleaders!

Do you ever think about the other side of government intervention? Bailing out the auto industry cost about $1 million per job. If the government just gave that money directly to each autoworker who lost their job in a normal bankruptcy reorganization, there would have been a lot of small business start-ups, that in the long run would likely generate more tax revenue than GM, whose car sales would quickly be replaced by Ford or other automakers.

I can give you 20 more alternatives - but just because Omama claims it, doesn't mean it's right.

Posted by: pilsener | July 30, 2010 3:09 PM | Report abuse

SRW3

Since you have decided to continue to behave as our Plumline Church Lady, then I am going to return fire.

I despise self appointed editors and critics. If Greg has an objection to what I write, and where I write it, I will listen to what he has to say, but not to you. I buried you on your first silly complaint, so you resorted to the dreary self appointed blog monitor tactic.

I thought far more highly of you before today. Now I view you as just another one of those people who loves to get offended; over imaginary things.

If my remarks do not lacerate, then they are just mere Hallmark Shite.

I do not have an editor. I do not compose and rewrite. I comment on the fly. What you get from me is all an improvisational stream of thought.

If you can not handle it, then do not read it.

In The Words Of Van Morrison: I had: No Poet, No Guru, No Teacher;

So stop your silly whinging; I am not going to let you dictate how I speak.

Some lines from Dylan Thomas


"In My Craft or Sullen Art

In my craft or sullen art
Exercised in the still night
When only the moon rages
And the lovers lie abed
With all their griefs in their arms,
I labor by singing light
Not for ambition or bread
Or the strut and trade of charms
On the ivory stages
But for the common wages
Of their most secret heart.

Not for the proud man apart
From the raging moon I write
On these spindrift pages
Nor for the towering dead
With their nightingales and psalms
But for the lovers, their arms
Round the griefs of the ages,
Who pay no praise or wages
Nor heed my craft or art."


Posted by: Liam-still | July 30, 2010 3:09 PM | Report abuse

I suppose this works for true believers, but I think, as far as making the point, Obama would do better to stop when the point is made. I.e.:

"I don't think they'd be willing to look you in the eye and say that you were a bad investment. They might just come around if they were standing here and admit that by standing by a great American industry, and the good people who work for it, that we did the right thing." Stop. Applause.

Oh, but he's not done.

"It's hard for them to say that." Uh, okay. Well, stop. Applause! Oh, wait, still not done.

"They don't like admitting when I do the right thing."

Um, okay. Yay.

I may be wrong, but I don't think those addenda resonate, except perhaps with the base.

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | July 30, 2010 3:14 PM | Report abuse

"what chance do you think he has of winning the general if he wins the primary?"

Well, I'd like to say not much, but....with the economy in Michigan and coming off 8 years of a Democratic governonr,Jennifer Granholm, who was obstructed quite a bit by our GOP state Senate and therefore, not as effective as she could have been, the conventional wisdom has been that the GOP had the wind at their back. And that still might be the case.

I think Hoekstra would be the weakest Repub in the general, mostly because he is far too conservative. For the Repubs to win, they have to attact the Reagan democrats from the Detroit suburbs...those would be the auto workers Obama visited today. I think Hoekstra made a tactical error in joining Bachmann's Tea Party Caucus. That is not playing well among the moderates where I live, so I'm sure it's not popular in Detroit.

If Rick Synder wins the GOP nod, I think he's got a good shot. He is a smart guy, and a moderate.

If Virg Bernaro wins for the Dems, he will make the race interesting. He is currently the mayor of Lansing, and a bit of a firebrand in the same way that Anthony Weiner is.

Posted by: suekzoo1 | July 30, 2010 3:15 PM | Report abuse

Good post Greg.

When we kvetch about Obama's incrementalism, and there are times we should, this is a good example of how getting things done adds up over time. Those GOP quote look pretty stupid at this point, and there are many more that are going to come to bear this fall.

More of this "consequences of the GOP getting their hands on gov't" talk, please.

Posted by: BGinCHI | July 30, 2010 3:16 PM | Report abuse

@Liam: OK I give up, you win. Thread jack to beat up on teen mothers all you want. It is small, mean, unworthy of your intellect and understanding, and off topic but its just not worth the 1s and 0s to debate it with you. If you had read my post, you would see that I do see the irony and hypocrisy of Bristol being the poster child for abstinence (sex is dirty, save it for the one you love), I just didn't think that had anything to do with building a community center a couple blocks from ground zero. But I surrender to your clearly superior reasoning that you get to write whatever you want no matter what the topic at hand. end of story.

Posted by: srw3 | July 30, 2010 3:19 PM | Report abuse

Oh and BTW, I respected your stand on bilgy's right to spew gratuitous insults to everyone he disagrees with on the thread, even though I found it to be somewhat distracting.

Posted by: srw3 | July 30, 2010 3:21 PM | Report abuse

To the point of the story, without the bailout, demand for 5 million autos would have gone up in flames, and everyone would be riding around in bicycles?

Posted by: island1

----------------------------------

you must be a little bit stupid to come up with that outcome

if GM went bankrupt, there would be no effect on the demand for cars

Toyota Nissan and every other foreign manufacturer would fill the demand for cars

and the millions of Americans who work for GM would be unemployed

there might be a slight decline in demand, due to the fact that GM workers could no longer afford a new car

there would also be an increase in the numbers of unemployeed, a related increase in tax shortfalls. It would destroy entire communities and send America spiraling further downward

but that is about the worst case the repuglootarded terrorist teabaggers could hope for

you, uhm, ain't a repuglootarded terrorist teabagger who hopes America fails, are you ???

I don't know how you could spin the demise of a single manufacturer into the demise of the whole industry. But the fact that you did reach that stupid conclusion shows that you clearly don't understand this topic

maybe this thinkin thingy ain't for you

Posted by: nada85484 | July 30, 2010 3:30 PM | Report abuse

From the Detroit Free Press:

"The Chevy Volt, President Obama and Rush Limbaugh"

Electric cars are a boondoggle according to Rush Limbaugh – “nothing more than an expensive way to promote the environmentalist agenda,” as Politico.com summarized Limbaugh’s views on such vehicles. Rush has singled out the Chevy Volt, a car he claims has limited technology and a steep price tag. Limbaugh seems unable to grasp the fact that over time technology improves and becomes far more affordable. The first cell phone, for example, cost $4,000, weighed two pounds and could only go 30 minutes on a charge, according to msnbc.com. Nowadays, cell phones weigh just ounces and are given out for free by service providers.

I’ll bet that back in the 1980s, before he was famous, Rush probably marveled at the brick-sized cell phone used by Michael Douglas’ character Gordon Geckko in the movie “Wall Street." Rush probably pulled out his three-pound, first-generation handheld calculator, did the math, and concluded that only rich Wall St. titans like Gekko could ever hope to afford big, cumbersome cell phone technology.

On the way home, Rush likely bemoaned the fact that he’ll have to shell out money for movie tickets for the rest of his life since devices that allow people to watch movies at home were rather expensive and would always be that way. Good thing it was a short trip, because his bulky Walkman only stored a single cassette tape - not that portable music devices could ever be capable of storing thousands of songs and fit in the palm of your hand or anything.

Once home, Rush no doubt sat down to play Pong on his TV, thinking how unfortunate it is that video games will never catch on because the graphics would always be so crummy. But, hey, it beat watching television since it could never be possible for a TV to get more than just the same four old channels.

Rush would have played on his computer, but computers had, and would always have, so little memory, which makes them kinda boring. “ If only there were a way to get news and entertainment over a computer,” Rush undoubtedly mused. “Nah, it could never happen.”

http://www.freep.com/article/20100730/BLOG24/100730003/The-Chevy-Volt-President-Obama-and-Rush-Limbaugh

Posted by: suekzoo1 | July 30, 2010 3:36 PM | Report abuse

Depressing numbers on immigration:

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/plum-line/2010/07/losing_faith_in_the_federal_go.html

Posted by: Greg Sargent | July 30, 2010 3:39 PM | Report abuse

Here's the key element from the blog post: Republicans were more worried about the GM CEO losing his job than all of those workers.
btw, I've been hearing great economic and job search discussions on www.jobtalkamerica.com

Posted by: kcsam215 | July 30, 2010 3:40 PM | Report abuse

Liam: OK I give up, you win. Thread jack to beat up on teen mothers all you want. It is small, mean, unworthy of your intellect and understanding, and off topic but its just not worth the 1s and 0s to debate it with you. If you had read my post, you would see that I do see the irony and hypocrisy of Bristol being the poster child for abstinence (sex is dirty, save it for the one you love), I just didn't think that had anything to do with building a community center a couple blocks from ground zero. But I surrender to your clearly superior reasoning that you get to write whatever you want no matter what the topic at hand. end of story.

Posted by: srw3 | July 30, 2010 3:19 PM | Report ab

.............

Nice Strawman you set up.

I never used her name. You did.

For the record; the person you think you need to shelter is trying to develop a TV reality Show, featuring her and her babies father. They are living together now; at the same time that she is asking for up to 30K per appearance, to lecture other teens about not doing what she is doing.

Are you for real. She is living with the guy, and if you think that there is not; to paraphrase "The Killer" A Whole Lotg Of Shaggin' Going On" while she wants to lecture all other teens against such behavior, then you are the biggest sucker that Plumline has ever encountered.

Posted by: Liam-still | July 30, 2010 3:41 PM | Report abuse

@pilsener: Bailing out the auto industry cost about $1 million per job. If the government just gave that money directly to each autoworker who lost their job in a normal bankruptcy

I guess you never heard of a supply chain. What would happen to the 100s of thousands of jobs that the parts manufacturers, service personel, etc. that would also have been out of a job? In fact, Ford said that it would also have probably gone out of business if the other two failed because the parts suppliers would be gone so even though Ford didn't get any bailout money, it benefitted just like the supply chain.

Posted by: srw3 | July 30, 2010 3:44 PM | Report abuse

@ liam: I yield to your superiority in all things. I didn't know that teen pregnancy and reality tv stars were so intricately intertwined with a community center being built near ground zero, but you have shown me the error of my wanton desire to stay on thread. Write all you want about anything on any thread, regardless of its relevance to the thread topic. You are the all and great one. I pray that I might follow meekly behind your awesome string of 1s and 0s.

Posted by: srw3 | July 30, 2010 3:52 PM | Report abuse

You are really growing more pathetic by the moment.

I wrote a satirical title to lampoon The Grizzly Moma's Book Title, and you got your Church Lady Knickers all in a bunch.

What the hell is the matter with you. You are the one who hijacked this thread, to offer your snide comment about how my newest comment met far more with your Superior Approval Sensibilities, than my previous one.

Your comment had nothing to do with this thread's topic, but that did not stop you from posting it, even thought you later on started complaining about me not sticking to the thread topic. Several other people did not either; but yet you only singled me out.

Now you have resorted to the passive aggressive mode. Poor Baby. Well; Isn't That Special!!!

Posted by: Liam-still | July 30, 2010 4:08 PM | Report abuse

I yield O great and true one...

Posted by: srw3 | July 30, 2010 4:10 PM | Report abuse

More journolist blather.

Remember as you read, the jourolist write to advance their agenda.

Posted by: TECWRITE | July 30, 2010 4:12 PM | Report abuse

Obama has lied so much to the American people that his credibility is shot. Only the socialists and the ignorant even listen to him anymore.

The American people reject his "progressive" (socialist) policies and agenda by a 2 to 1 margin. That's precisely why conservatives are so revved up to vote in November, to stop this foolishness.

Posted by: samadams25 | July 30, 2010 4:25 PM | Report abuse

Sure, shaft the stock holders and get a Volt out of it!!!!

There aren't too many people who don't believe GM and Chrysler would have been better off if they had filed bankruptcy. The fact that they didn't and they received tarp funds doesn't make them any better.

Designing an electric car that costs $41,000 and needs a government $7500 rebate to sell isn't really going to turn things around. Of course when you can print money, I guess that's a good deal, but if you have to convince stockholders this is a good deal, well you might have a hard time once that rebate disappears.

Had these companies been allowed to file bankruptcy, the vast majority of these workers still would have had a job. The companies would have been more viable because they would have renegotiated their union contracts, which is why Obama did what he did.

Take a step back, Washington Post, and really do a serious analysis of this.

Posted by: bflat879 | July 30, 2010 4:32 PM | Report abuse

I Guess You Clowns Did not see Your Big Fat Pillbilly Idol drive an electric test vehicle on the Jay Leno show, and when he got out of it; immediately state: "Wow; this is how an electric car performs; I had no idea; I want one". That is what your big air windbag Idol said; on the tonight show.

So get back on the short bus, you Dittohead brainwashed simpletons.

Posted by: Liam-still | July 30, 2010 4:39 PM | Report abuse

How much did Obama spend to save each of those auto-worker's jobs? $1 million, $2 million? You can be sure that it would have been cheaper if he'd just given each of them $1 million in cash and let them retire to a beach. Its like his so called Green jobs where he spends hudreds of thousands of dollars for each job he creates. However, the real record is at least a trillion with the corrupt stimulous bill, and a few hundreds of billions more with some other bills and UNEMPLOYMENT is hovering around 10% and likely to stay there for years. Mr President let us spell it out for you: F A I L U R E!!!!! The rest of the nation can only be envious had the tens of billions lavised on the auto unions? When do the rest of us get a job?

Posted by: valwayne | July 30, 2010 4:40 PM | Report abuse

How much did Obama spend to save each of those auto-worker's jobs? $1 million, $2 million? You can be sure that it would have been cheaper if he'd just given each of them $1 million in cash and let them retire to a beach. Its like his so called Green jobs where he spends hudreds of thousands of dollars for each job he creates. However, the real record is at least a trillion with the corrupt stimulous bill, and a few hundreds of billions more with some other bills and UNEMPLOYMENT is hovering around 10% and likely to stay there for years. Mr President let us spell it out for you: F A I L U R E!!!!! The rest of the nation can only be envious had the tens of billions lavished on the auto unions? When do the rest of us get a job?

Posted by: valwayne | July 30, 2010 4:40 PM | Report abuse

@samadams25 : Sorry but the rupubs already have a virtual monopoly on the ignorant. As for the socialists, its clear that you don't understand the word's meaning if you associate Obama's policies with socialism. HCR looks pretty much like the repub alternative to the Clinton HCR approach and tracks fairly closely to the plan put out by those noted socialists, Dole, Baker, and Daschle. But carry on with the Obama is a socialist meme. It merely isolates you from all but the ignorant. BTW, are you or someone you love on social security and/or medicare? They are the real socialists because those programs are more socialist than anything Obama has proposed or enacted.

Posted by: srw3 | July 30, 2010 4:41 PM | Report abuse

Obama's preaching to the choir. UAW thugs will vote for him anyway. I will never buy a UAW car again. My father was UAW back when they had integrity, but now they are supporting a communist takeover. It's bad enough that the price of a UAW car includes $1000s in contributions to Democrats, but now we have taxpayers also directly subsidizing the Democrat party through the bailout. This is the only way that the blood sucking socialists can survive.

Posted by: doctorfixit | July 30, 2010 4:43 PM | Report abuse

@b789: The companies would have been more viable because they would have renegotiated their union contracts, which is why Obama did what he did.

Hey you did a Kinsley, accidentally telling the truth. The unions did renegotiate their contracts in order to get government support for the companies. Fine work!

Posted by: srw3 | July 30, 2010 4:44 PM | Report abuse

Wow! What s simplistic and naive opinion. I guess Greg is entitled to write this, but holy cow, please take some economics classes before writing things like this.

What did we do with the auto bailouts? We ensured sub-optimal use of capital, we propped up an non-competitive mode of operations in GM and Chrysler, and we made sure that Obama's labor buddies were made whole and the investors took a bath. We have not solved the problems of the American AUto industry by redirecting billions of dollars of capital into them. Rather we have helped extend the life of organizations that haev not earned the right to continue in their current forms.

Sorry to rain on the parade, but this column was beyond silly.

Posted by: dmray | July 30, 2010 4:50 PM | Report abuse

@doctorfixit : I suggest you buy a car from German or Japanese company, where they have socialized medicine, strong unions (in the case of Germany), and high tax rates for CEO level salaries. Sounds like capitalist heaven.

That's patriotism in spades...

Posted by: srw3 | July 30, 2010 4:50 PM | Report abuse

srw3-

good point re: auto parts suppliers, etc.

Posted by: ChuckinDenton | July 30, 2010 4:51 PM | Report abuse

How come; Right Wing Republicand only object to helping Domestic Car Workers keep their jobs.

None of them ever complain about the amount of tax breaks and subsides that Red States have been shelling out to Foreign Car Companies, to get them to set up plants in those Union Busting States.

By the way; almost all those Southern States, are Welfare States that get back far more money from Washington, than they ever send to the Federal Government.

They Are A Confederacy Of Ignorant Beggars; Complaining about Government Spending, while they are the ones who are taking far more of it, than they contribute.

Posted by: Liam-still | July 30, 2010 4:54 PM | Report abuse

He does realize that the first huge chunk of the auto bailouts happened under Bush, right? Remember TARP? If indeed the auto industry is doing well now, which it isn't if you look behind the curtain, surely Obama isn't wholly responsible for it.

But even with billions in taxpayer bailouts, GM and Chrysler still BOTH went bankrupt, laid off thousands of workers, and shuttered hundreds of dealerships.

And they still aren't competitive with foreign manufacturers, or even with Ford (which received no federal money and stayed solvent all on its own).

And the Volt, which was supposed to be GM's savior, has languished in development so long that it has already been trounced (in cost, looks, and range [if you don't count the gas-powered 'range extender']) by Nissan's Leaf, which comes out around the same time.

Shall I go on? I'm not sure how we can call this a success story at all, let alone one to be attributed to President Obama.

Posted by: scott_bradford | July 30, 2010 4:55 PM | Report abuse

Lets break it down: man works for a local auto parts store, which supplies parts for different makes, he has to pay his bills, and local taxes. Communities that have a large auto industry employment base keep the damned roads paved and the police paid by way of local taxes. I guess Uncle Sam could've waited to do a king-hell bailout *later*...

Posted by: ChuckinDenton | July 30, 2010 4:57 PM | Report abuse

More drivel from the fawning Obama Cheerleading Club laughably referred to as the Mainstream Media.

The American auto industry IS showing improvement, but the bulk of it is coming from Ford, who REFUSED the bailout money that the union boys at Obama Motors so eagerly accepted. Meantime, the administration asserted recently that GM and Chrysler have "paid back every penny of their loans", which in truth was merely a shell game that shifted money from one spot to another.

Then, in another demonstration of this administration's proclivity for throwing good money after bad, they yesterday trumpeted the debut of the vaunted Chevy Volt, a car today's New York Times auto writer heralds as "GM's Lemon". This marvel of technology will go all of 40 miles on a single charge. Wow! And it only costs $41,000. (Never mind that Nissan has produced a comparable - likely better - vehicle called the Leaf that costs $8000 less.) Yeah, I can see people leaving their houses right NOW to be first in line to get one of these babies. Just in case they're not that eager, however, the U.S. taxpayer will give them $7500 for each one they buy.
This will no doubt be even more successful than CashForClunkers, in which 60% of the vehicles purchased were imports.

If you really want to get upset, check out that NYT article and see just how much of your money these guys spent to build a car that virtually nobody will buy. Astonishing.

Within the next few weeks, the "new and improved" General Motors will announce its IPO. That should offer a clear indication of whether or not this electorate will buy another installment of this artifice known as the "Recovery Summer."

Posted by: Rocks66 | July 30, 2010 5:01 PM | Report abuse

When the entire Confederacy was still living in the Stone Age; Detroit became a mecca for Southern Whites fleeing their vast southern wasteland, to go earn a living wage, as union members, in Detroit.

The dimwits that were too stupid to leave, have passed on their moron genes to the current crop of southern imbeciles; who keep whining about Federal Spending; while their home states take far more of it, than they ever contribute to Washington.

Posted by: Liam-still | July 30, 2010 5:05 PM | Report abuse

re: bailouts..

Lets forget whatever political ramifications there are vis-a-vis the Parties.
The sobering fact is that *human* cost of the auto industry failing is too large and devastating to contemplate. High crime, poverty, breakdown of families, etc, etc. Maybe it just bought us enough time to keep certain areas of the country from seeing the kind of human pain that no-one wants to experience, regardless of political party.

Posted by: ChuckinDenton | July 30, 2010 5:09 PM | Report abuse

So then, with all this gushing about Obama and the Government Auto Company, how come Ford did quite well without the Government running the show? Also, if the Government didn't ace out the stock holders in favor of the unions, what might have happened? How about the companies go bankrupt, scrap all these high priced union contracts instead of protecting their union buddies, and get pay scales back to realistic levels.Then maybe,we really could keep jobs here in the states...

Posted by: ctyank69 | July 30, 2010 5:15 PM | Report abuse

Ford has a huge Debt on it's books, that the GM does not, so do not start to crow about how Ford has come out of this much better; just yet.

Their net earnings will all go to servicing their massive debt, for many years to come.

Posted by: Liam-still | July 30, 2010 5:35 PM | Report abuse

For those of you who are SICK of the kool0aid crowd STILL propagating the fallacy that it's "Bush's/GOP's Fault", think about this:

Remember the day...
January 3rd, 2007 was the day the Democrats took over the Senate and the Congress:

At the time:

The DOW Jones closed at 12,621.77

The GDP for the previous quarter was 3.5%

The Unemployment rate was 4.6%

George Bush's Economic policies SET A RECORD of 52 STRAIGHT MONTHS of JOB CREATION!


Remember the day...
January 3rd, 2007 was the day that Barney Frank took over the House Financial Services Committee and Chris Dodd took over the Senate Banking Committee.

The economic meltdown that happened 15 months later was in what part of the economy?
BANKING AND FINANCIAL SERVICES!!!


THANK YOU DEMOCRATS for taking us from 13,000 DOW, 3.5 GDP and 4.6% Unemployment... to this CRISIS by (among MANY other things) dumping 5-6 TRILLION Dollars of toxic loans on the economy from YOUR Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac FIASCOS! (BTW: Bush asked Congress 17 TIMES to stop Fannie & Freddie - starting in 2001 because it was Financially risky for the US economy):
http://www.sportstalkworld.com/showthread.php?1682 ...

And who took the THIRD highest pay-off from Fannie Mae AND Freddie Mac????

OBAMA (unprecedented for a FRESHMAN Senator)

And who fought against reform of Fannie and Freddie???

The HYPOCRITE in Chief Obama

So when DemoIdiots try to blame Bush and the GOP...

REMEMBER JANUARY 3rd, 2007.... THE DAY THE DEMOCRATS TOOK OVER!

Posted by: TboneMalone | July 30, 2010 5:39 PM | Report abuse

Hey Liberal/Socialist Dufuses,

Yes conservatives wanted to see GM and Chrysler go bankrupt as they and their UAW partners so richly deserve. They don't deserve any taxpayer money to stay afloat with their crappy management and bloated, non-competitive union contracts. Some points to consider:

1. Bankruptcy would not have meant shuttering all of their factories. It would have meant that they would receive protection from their creditors while they restructure their company into something that resembles a competitive 21st centry automobile manufacturer.

2. This was not a bailout of GM, this was a bailout of Chairman Mao-bama's union cronies at the UAW. Obama fired the CEO of GM, why didn't the head of the UAW get fired also??? His union went hand-in-hand right over the cliff with GM and Chrysler.

3. The government run takeover of GM and Chrysler was something Vladimir Putin would have been proud of as they flagrantly violated the law by putting SECURED bond holders at the end of the line and the UAW at the front. Gangster capitalism if there ever was.

4. Conservatives are all for the working man but when a giant union (UAW) helps run a company into the ground with thousands of pages of work rules, "jobs banks," Cadillac health plans and the rest, they deserve to go under and not be subsidized by the other taxpayers who don't enjoy their protected status by the Democrat Socialist Party.

5. President "Mr. I had to abandon my free market principles in order to save the free market" Bush started this whole fiasco with using TARP money as a slush fund to keep GM and Chrysler limping along until Obama finished the government takeover so he is also responsible.

The whole thing is a pitiful sad tale which shows exactly why the more govt gets involved in the private sector the more corrupt and inefficient the product. Chevy Volt exhibit A. Nancy Pelosi's dream car. A $41,000 compact car, fully taxpayer subsidized and an eco-friendly POS that nobody will want to buy.

Get ready for November kiddies and watch your socialist dreams founder on the rocks of liberty loving Americans voting to throw out the socialist Obama-Reid-Pelosi wealth redistributors/job and freedom killers.

Posted by: phewall | July 30, 2010 5:48 PM | Report abuse

"don't know how you could spin the demise of a single manufacturer into the demise of the whole industry. But the fact that you did reach that stupid conclusion shows that you clearly don't understand this topic"

nada85484:

The funny thing is almost everyone who read my post probably understood that I was being sarcastic . . . well except for you. I'll let you make the determination on who's stupid.

Posted by: island1 | July 30, 2010 5:51 PM | Report abuse

Why is it a virtue to use taxpayers money to save the job of a union hacks building inferior cars? If they closed, the same number of cars would be built but they would be built by southern workers who have similar incomes but are not unionized.

The only job casualties would be the fat cats running the UAW who created the problem of non-competitiveness in the first place.

Posted by: Xdem | July 30, 2010 6:10 PM | Report abuse

The Right Wing Nut Jobs want us to believe that George W. Bush's second term expired in January of 2007. It actually expired a full two years later, which gave him plenty of time to destroy the economy, which he did.

Not a single net job was created in the USA during Bush's two full terms, even though he had all the same policies in place, that the Republicans are now trying to sell the people on again.

Does anyone still recall Bush sending up Henry Paulson to Capitol Hill, to get down on his knees, and plead for the TARP bailout money, to rescue The Wall St. Casino Banks Robber Barons.

Bush did that, so all you Right Wing Nut Jobs can stop lying about who destroyed the economy. Bush did not add a single net job, during a full eight years in The White House.

Republicans create Depressions, with their policies, and kick working class people to the curb. That is their history from Hoover to Bush 2.

Give them another chance, and they will do it again.

Americans; when are you going to stop electing Republicans, and expecting better results. They keep telling you, they want to follow the same policies that they always have, and yet you are willing to give them another chance. Well if you do, then you deserve to lose your jobs and your homes, and not be able to provide an education for your kids.

Either stop enabling Republicans, to destroy the working class, or you will destroy America for ever.

Posted by: Liam-still | July 30, 2010 6:20 PM | Report abuse

When Bill Clinton left office;

Many millions of new jobs added; and a large annual budget Surplus.

After eight years of George W. Bush;

Not one additional job created, from when Bill Clinton left office, even though the work forced had grown by millions;

And a massive annual budget deficit created.

Compare and contrast;

Democrats restore the economy after Republicans wreck it, again and again. That is their history from Hoover through Bush 2.

A working class person who votes for any Republican has a death wish.

Posted by: Liam-still | July 30, 2010 6:26 PM | Report abuse


The UAW basically destroyed GM and Chrysler. And they are basically go through the 60 billion that Obama handed to the companies. Of course the Dems would get hundreds of millions in campaign donations before then, that's all the Dems care about adding billions to the deficit if it will get them thousands in campaign donations for each candidate.

Boycott Government Motors and Chrysler, they are no longer American companies.

Posted by: jamesd1234 | July 30, 2010 6:29 PM | Report abuse

Boy the trolls must have traveled in mass from farrightwingnutistan to post on this thread...Are they immigrating to the reality based community without papers? ;-)

"The only job casualties would be the fat cats running the UAW who created the problem of non-competitiveness in the first place."

Gee I thought is was management who made the decisions to continue to build gas guzzlers while the rest of the world was building smaller more efficient cars. Actually, its mostly health care that makes US built cars less competitive. It costs and average of $1200 more to build the same car in the US than in a union shop in Canada because in the US the employers provide subsidized health care here but don't have to in Canada.

And those southern foreign owned car factories probably wouldn't be near as profitable if they weren't given massive multiyear subsidies to build there. Meanwhile, those states still have higher poverty rates, worse schools, crappier infrastructure, even with the economic miracle that subsidized foreign plants bring. Race to the bottom anyone?

Posted by: srw3 | July 30, 2010 6:31 PM | Report abuse

Obama and the democrats are raising taxes on the main source of job creation in the country - small business.

The health bill increases taxes on everyone and everything.

Two thirds of the "evil" rich people that will be hit by the soon to expire Bush tax cuts, are actually small business owners.

Higher taxes equals fewer jobs.

Posted by: Parker1227 | July 30, 2010 6:37 PM | Report abuse

Obama the King of the Straw Man. He sets up the premise that if nothing was done the whole system would collapse.

Without Obama help. GM and Chrysler could have filed bankruptcy and reorganized. The only difference would have been retirees who lent GM money to spend on union benefits would have been the owners of GM not Obama supporting unions and taxpayers wouldn't be paying interest on the 56 billion it burrowed to lend to GM.

I hope this is the Democrat re-election plan. Hype--We burrowed billions to prop up failing businesses which laid off their excess employees anyway and gave you billions to pay in interest each year for the rest of your lives!!!

LOL!! Good Luck with that!!! Unemployment is still going to be around 10% because OBAMA failed.

Posted by: kellogg2 | July 30, 2010 6:56 PM | Report abuse

Then why were there no jobs created under the eight year Bush/Cheney reign of terror. None, even thought they had all their fiscal policies in place.

Bill Clinton created Twenty Million new jobs, and left a very large annual budget surplus.

Republicans destroyed all that within eight years, and caused a second economic depression. They did it their way again, and killed the economy, and jobs market again.

Only a working class person with a death wish, would ever vote to give Republicans another shot at finishing off the working class, and turning them into homeless beggars.

Republicans destroyed the jobs of many millions, and have now tried to keep them from even getting unemployment compensation, just so they might retain a little dignity, and feed their children.

What sort of sick sadistic political party would torture the very people that they threw out of work? Republicans get their sick kicks at the expensive of those who's jobs were destroyed by Republican Voodoo Economics.

Posted by: Liam-still | July 30, 2010 7:03 PM | Report abuse

Before Bush Tax Cuts; Bill Clinton created Twenty Million New Jobs.

Bush Cut Taxes for The Top One Percent, and he ended up creating not a single job.

The truth shall set you free. Bush got his Tax Cuts, and they failed to stimulate the economy and produce jobs.

He created no jobs, and he turned a large annual budget surplus into a large annual deficit. That is how much those tax cuts failed. They destroyed jobs, and ballooned the national debt.

Idiot Republicans and their Idiot supporters, with their insane belief in Vodoo Economics.

The Tax Cuts For The Rich did not work, and did not create jobs.

That is the cold hard truth. Deal with it.

Posted by: Liam-still | July 30, 2010 7:10 PM | Report abuse

Who listens to Obama at all anymore? I know of no one. The dolts that do, might catch of glimpse of him on the View, while they are absorbing the nothingness of it all.

Posted by: notbuyingit | July 30, 2010 7:46 PM | Report abuse

Success in business is not made up of sound-bites. Anyone - even politicians - pumping several billion dollars into a business can make it look good in the short term. The sad fact is, the UAW makes the US auto industry unsustainable. US autoworkers cannot compete in the global market, they are grossly overpriced. And after the way creditors were treated in the last "reorgaization", what rational lender would ever lend a single dime to any of these companies?

Posted by: DogtorObvious | July 30, 2010 8:21 PM | Report abuse

Unionized labor destroyed Detroit. BMW, Mercedes, Toyota, KIA, Hyundai, VW are all making cars in the USA better, smarter, leaner, cheaper than GM; AND with no insane pension liability tied to its neck. Yet our President wants to continue feed these dead-man-walking UAW goons with American tax dollars.

I simply cannot believe this is happening.

Posted by: runner121 | July 30, 2010 8:33 PM | Report abuse

Greg,
The Administration did what it did to save Union jobs. Thet have done NOTHING to save non-union jobs or create non-union jobs. I know, I am an unemployed engineer.
Also, don't say the US auto industry is profitable. They are not, and have only paid back what could again be borrowed from the feds at a lower rate.
If GM and Chrysler were allowed to fail and reorganize, they would have been more successful, particularly WITHOUT the UAW.
Obama may be loved by teachers and Union workers, but he has betrayed the rest of us.

Posted by: SirWinstonChurchill | July 30, 2010 8:42 PM | Report abuse

Obama is such a demagogue - especially when he has an audience. Wake up people: these are union jobs!!! His base!!!! He has to keep them dependent on him. How has he helped restore the millions of non-union jobs that has been lost. He has not done anything and you all are fools to believe his demagoguery of Republicans, which by the way is very unbecoming of a President. Sooner or later you Obama fans are going to realize that you have been duped by the soft tyranny that has occurred the last 18 months. You are a disgusting bunch in your co-dependency with Obama in bringing down this nation. 95 days and counting!

Posted by: bethmack | July 30, 2010 8:46 PM | Report abuse

Well, GM has paid back 10B of a 65B federal loan. The US govt owns a substantial part of GM. GM jobs were "saved" by Govt underwriting so that GM and Chrysler employees essentially became public employees. Thats not something Obama should be bragging about.

Capitalism has always accrued a superior living standard than has socialism. Until GM once more becomes a private company, Obama should rightfully be ashamed of what he did.

Posted by: rodhug | July 30, 2010 8:59 PM | Report abuse

If the UNIONS didn't contribute MILLIONS to BO and the DIMS then the auto jobs would NEVER have been saved. UNION UNION UNION is all BO cares about, because they vote for all DIMS regardless of qualifications.

Posted by: morphy | July 30, 2010 9:00 PM | Report abuse

Um. I'm going to call B.S. The auto industry may be selling cars again but it destroyed a lot of wealth along the way. I don't think that maintaining a couple thousand factory jobs offsets the loss of confidence from foreign investors by wiping out their investments. I don't think this is a strong argument. It reminds me of the housing crisis. Sure it was an unsustainable debt pyramid, but some people got to live in some nice houses for a couple years. So what that the car companies ruined faith in investor rights, some people got to make some nice cars for a couple years.

Also, on the volt. I want it to work but it won't. I don't currently have an electric car but I do have a cell phone and laptop computer, both of which are electric, and run on batteries. What I know is that after two years, regardless of how I treat them, the batteries' are useless. The cell phone battery is so useless that my cellphone company actually agreed beforehand to give me a new phone every two years to compensate for this problem. I'm not so sure I want a car that is useless after two years. Sorry, but chemistry is stubborn, and battery tech is old.

I just don't have that kind of money to buy a new car every two years. I would rather drive a dirty gas powered Japanese car that despite 150,000 miles and running into some fairly solid objects still runs really well. Which is more than I can say for the relatively new Chevrolet I mistakenly bought. The thing breaks in the driveway.

Posted by: champion1 | July 30, 2010 9:17 PM | Report abuse

Um. I'm going to call B.S. The auto industry may be selling cars again but it destroyed a lot of wealth along the way. I don't think that maintaining a couple thousand factory jobs offsets the loss of confidence from foreign investors by wiping out their investments. I don't think this is a strong argument. It reminds me of the housing crisis. Sure it was an unsustainable debt pyramid, but some people got to live in some nice houses for a couple years. So what that the car companies ruined faith in investor rights, some people got to make some nice cars for a couple years.

Also, on the volt. I want it to work but it won't. I don't currently have an electric car but I do have a cell phone and laptop computer, both of which are electric, and run on batteries. What I know is that after two years, regardless of how I treat them, the batteries' are useless. The cell phone battery is so useless that my cellphone company actually agreed beforehand to give me a new phone every two years to compensate for this problem. I'm not so sure I want a car that is useless after two years. Sorry, but chemistry is stubborn, and battery tech is old.

I just don't have that kind of money to buy a new car every two years. I would rather drive a dirty gas powered Japanese car that despite 150,000 miles and running into some fairly solid objects still runs really well. Which is more than I can say for the relatively new Chevrolet I mistakenly bought. The thing breaks in the driveway.

Posted by: champion1 | July 30, 2010 9:18 PM | Report abuse

sorry, for the double post.

Posted by: champion1 | July 30, 2010 9:21 PM | Report abuse

For a more realistic view of the administrations view of economics, see:
http://www.forbes.com/2010/07/29/macroeconomics-business-keynes-opinions-columnists-warren-meyer.html?boxes=opinionschannellatest

Posted by: SirWinstonChurchill | July 30, 2010 9:28 PM | Report abuse

If you want to buy great cars from a great American company, then buy a Ford.

My next car purchase which will be in 2013 when Obama is out of office and it will be a Ford.

Posted by: Washington13 | July 30, 2010 9:47 PM | Report abuse

I am a Conservative yet I reluctantly supported the decision to help out GM and Chrysler. What I did not like about the process was the heavy handed way the administration ignored the investors and gave the UAW a priveldged position. Having said that if Chrysler and GM do not turn their business around we need to let them fail. I am not encouraged by the Volt. It is outrageously expensive and heavilly subsidized by taxpayer funds that may have been better invested in a more productive enterprise. The Feds need to divest themselves of their ownership of the auto companies soon. When Congress was investigating Toyota it smacked of a conflict of intersest.

Posted by: jkk1943 | July 30, 2010 9:47 PM | Report abuse

Liam-still wrote: "Why Do The Republicans Hate Working Class Americans, And Want To Turn Over All Of America's Production Needs To Other Nations?!"

It is the U.S. Congress that allows the exportation of capital an creation of manufacturing outside the U.S. Since 2006 we have had a Democratic Congress. So, where are the policies that will bring back manufacturing to the U.S. It is not that just business goes to Asia and Mexico for production. It is the Congress ( yes, this one as we can't live in the past ) that will not pass any laws to disturb that business approach and really help us in the unemployment situation. Only through U.S. factories and jobs will we survive an asymptotic decrease in our wealth and national esteem.

Posted by: HarGru | July 30, 2010 10:49 PM | Report abuse

"Why Do The Republicans Hate Working Class Americans, And Want To Turn Over All Of America's Production Needs To Other Nations?!"

Posted by: Liam-still

Hey Liam, why are you such hateful lying twerp?

It's obvious. The same reason Obama is a lying fecal head and a sniveling failure.

But hey, keep up the good work. You perpetrate the democrat perpetual fraud very well. It makes for good comedy since Americans are awake and well aware of it and no longer buying it. The treasonous democrat criminals have exposed themselves and and continue to do so for all to see.

You and your little friends keep playing make believe. Eventually you will grow up and realize the sad truth about the party of democrats just like the tooth fairy and Santa Claus.


"this is why i think weiner's remarks were effective. combined with *much* more of the same, across a broad front most definitely including the wh an obama himself, the argument that republicans are cynically obstructing everything to make the economy worse in an attempt to sabotage the dems can start to really get traction."

Poor deluded soul. The truth is democrats were the ones who obstructed, undermined and sabotaged President Bush , our Soldiers, the war effort and the economy and guess what? It worked. Proving my point that democrats cannot win on merit or honesty. It's a fact that democrats are incapable off running honest elections. Democrat are incapable of honesty period.

That is why dumbo obama is telling lies like a little girl. democrats cannot tell the truth and are incapable of honesty and that's just the tip of the iceberg of reasons why democrats can never measure up to republicans/Conservatives and why they hate AMERICANS in general.

We AMERICANS do not need democrats for anything and they know it. They are irrelevant and inconsequential.

November is coming real soon.

Posted by: RobLACa | July 30, 2010 11:29 PM | Report abuse

45 billion for 204k employees.
215k per worker.

I understand why the guy is testy about his union babies.

It works out to just a 150 bucks for every american. We get to pitch in, to help save a political organ of the democrat party.

Seriously...timing this style of speech in the same week he appears on the view, would suggest he is trolling for support. Makes the sherrod disaster earlier in the week look like a guy falling over when he heard the starter's pistol.

Posted by: owenmagoo | July 31, 2010 12:24 AM | Report abuse

788 of the 789 dealerships that were shut down by the Federal Government had donated money exclusively to republican political causes!

http://www.ourchangingglobe.com/who-decided-which-chrysler-dealerships-to-close-and-why/

On May 27, 2009, The Washington Examiner and Newsmax broke the story that of the 789 dealerships slated to be closed by the federal government, that 788 of them had donated money, exclusively to Republican political causes.

The only "Democratic" dealership on the closure list was said to have donated $7,700 to Hillary Clinton’s campaign, and a little over $2,000 to John Edwards. This same dealership, reportedly, also gave $200.00 to Obama’s campaign.

Posted by: redmike | July 31, 2010 12:33 AM | Report abuse

How many unions they got in China? Or Mexico?

Personally, I *want* some kind of middleman between large corps. and workers: be it gov't or a union or both. I don't trust large corps but I trust gov't more because (hopefully...and that is another can of worms) an entity that is answerable to the body politic might just think about the general welfare/big picture.

Posted by: ChuckinDenton | July 31, 2010 12:41 AM | Report abuse

hey redmike:

from the article you linked:
"Is It All True?
I can’t guarantee that everything here is accurate because many of the actions took place behind closed doors, but if you know why something should be changed then just give me the proof and I’ll change it, and any similar information about GM closures would be great too!"

One wonders just how reliable his info is, eh?
Although I have to "admire" his candor, admitting that he doesn't have all the facts. He asks for "proof" but doesn't seem so concerned about it in his piece. Just sayin'...

Posted by: ChuckinDenton | July 31, 2010 12:50 AM | Report abuse


This is from an article right here on WaPo from July 19, 2010:

The Obama administration's request that General Motors and Chrysler Group accelerate the closing of U.S. dealerships probably was unnecessary and may have added to unemployment, a government watchdog said.

The United States "should have at least considered" whether the benefits of speeding up the closings outweighed costs from a potential loss of tens of thousands of jobs, according to the report by Neil Barofsky, , special inspector general for the Troubled Assets Relief Program. The Treasury Department rejected the automakers' reorganization plans in March 2009, in part citing GM's "slow pace" in scaling back its dealer network.

"Such dramatic and accelerated dealership closings may not have been necessary and underscores the need for Treasury to tread very carefully when considering such decisions in the future," Barofsky said."

And since WaPo won't print the parts negative to Obama's agenda, this was the outcome according to the TARP Special Auditor:

Some "Dealerships were retained because they were ... minority- or woman-owned dealerships";

Thousands of jobs were lost, unnecessarily, due specifically to Obama's "mandate for shared sacrifice";

A disproportionate number of Obama-forced closings were of rural dealerships, even though such closures could "jeopardize the return to profitability" for GM and Chrysler.

So today Obama is taking his Mission Accomplished Tour of Detroit when in reality he messed this Bailout up royally.

He unnecessarily lost tens of thousands of jobs, closed profitable Dealerships and based some closings on minority or gender status. I think he called it a shared sacrifice.

Rewarding those Dealerships who may not be as profitable as those Obama closed.

A GM spokesman said that it did NOT make a difference to the Bailout whether the Dealerships stayed open. The Dealerships did not effect the problems at the parent company.

So thousands of jobs were lost needlessly.

Way to go Brownie, I mean, Obama!

Posted by: janet8 | July 31, 2010 1:04 AM | Report abuse

I'm just so amazed that such a biased leftist propagandist would dare call his column "The Plum Line." It's laughable.

Posted by: DRLMSC | July 31, 2010 2:46 AM | Report abuse

What a beautiful comment Robert Gibbs made about Rush Limbaugh at his presser, "I bet he doesn't drive an F-150" ! Uh, F-150's are made by Ford, which , by the way, did NOT accept a bailout, and seem to be doing quite well. If GM can't compete, then why don't the workers go work for Ford, instead of mooching off the taxpayers.

Posted by: TampaSooner | July 31, 2010 2:55 AM | Report abuse

Gosh, Janet, why did you leave out the part of the report that states that several of the dealership terminations were rescinded? As a matter of fact, 666 at GM and 50 at Chrysler. And that an arbitration process was set up for other dealers to have their cancellation reversed? Why do you also leave out that it was GM and Chrysler who drew up the lists of dealerships to close, and developed the criteria to be used in the evaluation for closure, not the administration? I guess those facts don't fit your narrative, do they?

I must say, you learned well from Evelyn Pringle. Just leave out the facts that don't paint the picture black.

Posted by: suekzoo1 | July 31, 2010 3:15 AM | Report abuse

Janet, you also might consider that 55,000 auto manufacturing jobs - many of them right here in my home state of Michigan - have been added in the last year, and that a Detroit-area Chrysler planted slated to close in 2012 will stay open and will add a second shift employing another 900 people. Michigan is also opening 16 advanced battery plants because the auto industry was ultimately saved. Oh, and all of the BIG 3 are turning profits now, a first in 6 years.

So while the actions taken to save domestic manufacturing may have been somewhat imperfect, the results are positive. Here where I live, and where my family has made their living for 3 generations, that's called a win.

Posted by: suekzoo1 | July 31, 2010 3:32 AM | Report abuse

sue.

yeah.

Posted by: ChuckinDenton | July 31, 2010 5:30 AM | Report abuse

Greg Sargent (whoever this idiot kid is) is a partisan tool. Just call this what it is Greg, a white house press release. To say that the auto industry is "turning a profit" or that it has repaid its loans is just a lie. Not a distortion of fact. Just a flat out lie. So Greg and all the loons on this board, we'll see you in November, and the truth will be told. Until then, just keep lying to us, and yourselves...

Posted by: subframer | July 31, 2010 8:32 AM | Report abuse

You wrote: And Obama, in his speech, made this point explicitly.

Yet he did not mention the party of no by name. So not THAT explicitly.

Posted by: seattlechemfem | August 1, 2010 6:05 PM | Report abuse

Post a Comment

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.




characters remaining

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company