White House Considers Auto Bailout After Senate Rejects Deal - FOXNews.com Transition Tracker
The White House said Friday it is considering using part of the $700 billion Wall Street rescue fund to prevent the domestic auto industry from failing.
Dana Perino, a spokeswoman for President Bush, said it would be “irresponsible” to further weaken the economy by letting Detroit’s Big Three automakers fail. Perino said the White House normally would prefer to let the financial markets determine the companies’ fate.
Figures. RINO Bush to the big-spending rescue of the UAW.
The Republicans in congress who tried to deep-six the UAW bailout must really regret having to fight a Democrat in the White House.
Submit to Stumbled Upon!
But apparently using force to transfer money from the productive to the parasitical is going to strengthen the economy? Does this doddering ninnyhammer even listen to the words that come out of his mouth when his lips move?
What they should be regretting is not starting to fight the current Democrat President years ago. But late is better than never.
I did. I was reviled for it.
No biggie. I’m often reviled for being right. I’m used to it.
Actually, Bill, in this case, I’ll be happy to join you in throwing the rotten tomatoes.
My chief point of disagreement with you on Bush is that you seem to think he has a lot more power to act unilaterally in many situations than I think he actually does (without causing a real Constitutional crisis), and I won’t assign responsibility where there isn’t equal authority.
However, in this case, the bastard does have the power to unilaterally do something: Just.Say.No! Hell, the Senate Republicans actually listened to the complaints and did the right thing, and now this asshole is going to cut them off at the knees!
Tar. Feathers. Grrrr!
Yes, I understand your position, and we just flat disagree. You are correct in that Bush doesn’t have much power, but my point is that he squandered it, and the potential for it.
You seem to think that no President could have done any better than Bush. I contend that you are entirely wrong about that.
Picture an “unconditional surrender” FDR with an enemy like the Islamofascist states and approval ratings in the high 80s after the 9/11 attacks. Sure, Bush is no FDR. The problem is, he’s barely a Jimmy Carter.
He gets no pass from me for the massive incompetence he brought to his “leadership” role.
If they need a bailout, the automakers have already failed. The only question is whose money goes where. Bush would rather redirect the pain from where it is deserved to where it is not, because that’s “compassionate.” Feh. Real compassion is about helping those you care about get straight. When a friend is flushing their life away on drugs or booze, and they show up at your door filthy, strung out and needing a fix, you don’t offer them a new, stronger drug. You offer to help them get clean. You have compassion for their pain, but you don’t go adding to it.
That’s all the bailout will be for Detroit - a new fix of a new, more potent drug. The city of Detroit is already broke and addicted along with the auto-makers, and they’re spending all of Michigan’s money, metaphorically but sometimes literally, on crack and hookers. Unless it’s tied to major reforms with serious enforcement, the bailout will just be more crack and more hookers until the money’s gone, followed by more screaming tantrums and withdrawal to get yet more money for drugs.
It’s a vicious cycle, Mr. President, and if you weren’t a damned weasel of a fake conservative you’d understand that. You’re worse than any actual Democrat weasel could ever be, because the GOP is not organized in such a way that it can oppose you effectively. You’re the traitor within the walls, and you’re giving the whole city away rather than stand and fight the good fight.