Obama Rattled by Donor "Problems"? Prior to Debate? Altitude?

[Centrehalf]

outside that Obama did not pick a CEO...if he had..well he sure picked a better one then they had...since they are actuly not sucking now.

Obama may not have personally picked a CEO but the man representing the federal government certainly did, more than once in fact. Whether it was Obama or Rattner, it's still the government picking and choosing.

 

[pocketfullofshells]

Obama may not have personally picked a CEO but the man representing the federal government certainly did, more than once in fact. Whether it was Obama or Rattner, it's still the government picking and choosing.

when you give a company that much money to save there ass...you get some say...if they knew what they where doing they would not be asking for the money...And still there was not some guy just saying you are the ceo with no say from the company

 

[pocketfullofshells]

He pressured the previous CEO into leaving. Not the roll of president. I should have stated that better. I am not sure how much influence he had in the picking of the replacement, I would guess more than he should.

when you ask for that much money...you get to have some say...GM could have said no and kept there CEO and been dead. Guess what, when you ask for that much money from a bank...they also can put conditions on it.

 

[Centrehalf]

when you give a company that much money to save there ass...you get some say...if they knew what they where doing they would not be asking for the money...And still there was not some guy just saying you are the ceo with no say from the company

I know this isn't an opinion which is widely held, but I don't think we "saved their ass". GM as a whole wasn't in a bad financial position. I also think that GM started our economic downturn, but that's irrelevant here. GM changed CEOs 4 times in 18 months, that's unheard of. The company may have had a say but whether or not their preferences were taken into account is debatable.

 

[Johnny Tremain]

If the mainstream media was not so hideously and traitorously married to David Axelrod and the Obamanators for information--

THIS--would be a RED-HOT story.
Imagine--if this were Republicans...

The Fourth Estate is despicable, left-wing fifth-columnists and utterly worthless today.

http://www.gopusa.com/freshink/2012...dal-follow-the-money-if-you-can/?subscriber=1

 

[Johnny Tremain]

Obama--$181,000,000 in "donations" in September, 2012.
43% (at least) came from foreign sources.
Where is the press--and where is THE LAW!
IT IS ILLEGAL!!!!

Eric Holder--TRAITOR!

Tracing filters are eliminated by Obama, just like 2008.
Romney has the tracing filters.
Ladies and Gentleman:
The democrat party has SOLD THE NATION OUT--knowingly, with full complicity and with malice of forethought.
TRAITORS!

 

[Cruella]

I just saw that Obama has received almost one billion in donations. 43% coming from foreign IP addresses. But no one will do anything about it.

It's Watergate everyday at this White House.

 

[Johnny Tremain]

I just saw that Obama has received almost one billion in donations. 43% coming from foreign IP addresses. But no one will do anything about it.

It's Watergate everyday at this White House.

We knew it in 2008.
We did not act.
They are skirting the law in 2012.
They are determined.

It's a coup d'etat folks.
We are being taken over by a foreign power.
As yet--unknown.
It's as simple as that.
The democrat party is owned by an enemy.
God help us.

And we have "chosen" a blithering idiot to do the burying
of the nation our Forefathers gave us--and died for.

 

[Pandora]

when you ask for that much money...you get to have some say...GM could have said no and kept there CEO and been dead. Guess what, when you ask for that much money from a bank...they also can put conditions on it.

Again that is not the governments roll to pick winners and losers. Had obama used his own money and had GM accepted that I would not be complaining. But he used our money, well our kid's kid's money

 

[Gipper]

when you ask for that much money...you get to have some say...GM could have said no and kept there CEO and been dead. Guess what, when you ask for that much money from a bank...they also can put conditions on it.

Yeah they get their say....and we all know that politicians know how to run an auto company...after all, they run the government so well....you know???

 

[pocketfullofshells]

Again that is not the governments roll to pick winners and losers. Had obama used his own money and had GM accepted that I would not be complaining. But he used our money, well our kid's kid's money

when you loan someone a shit ton on money...you get to put conditions on it to make sure you get the money back...welcome to the real world. And by the way...how is GM doing now pretty good...so enjoy the millions of jobs saved by Obama...

 

[pocketfullofshells]

I know this isn't an opinion which is widely held, but I don't think we "saved their ass". GM as a whole wasn't in a bad financial position. I also think that GM started our economic downturn, but that's irrelevant here. GM changed CEOs 4 times in 18 months, that's unheard of. The company may have had a say but whether or not their preferences were taken into account is debatable.

I think the reason its not widley held is due to the fact its wrong...GM was done with...and the Banks failing and the housing market are the main reason...auto would have just made it worse.

 

[Pandora]

when you loan someone a shit ton on money...you get to put conditions on it to make sure you get the money back...welcome to the real world. And by the way...how is GM doing now pretty good...so enjoy the millions of jobs saved by Obama...

Why do you think obama had the right and athority to do it? You have said he has the right to tell GM what to do because he gave them the money. Actually he gave them our money, so why do you think he had the right to give GM our money. Why do you think he has the right to pick winners and losers? Do you think all presidents have this right?

 

[Johnny Tremain]

"We should be unfaithful to ourselves if we should ever lose sight of the danger to our liberties if anything partial or extraneous should infect the purity of our free, fair, virtuous, and independent elections."
--John Adams, Inaugural Address, 1797

 

[Centrehalf]

I think the reason its not widley held is due to the fact its wrong...GM was done with...and the Banks failing and the housing market are the main reason...auto would have just made it worse.

GM was a global company, and they were in the black. GM's North American division had some labor issues they wanted to deal with. The bailout didn't save GM although I'm sure they didn't mind governments just handing them boatloads of money in order to float NA operations. The bailout also didn't do a thing to bring back the supply chain jobs which were offshored in the late '90s, which was the beginning of the downturn. Depending on the vehicle and the manufacturer there were anywhere between 55-85 jobs in the supply chain for every single job on the factory floor. All the bailout did was soften the blow that was dealt to the UAW by GM. That's all it accomplished. And all of those supply chain jobs are still gone.