Yeah GOP!

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: Dari

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Dari
The GOP would rather waste American resources on useless wars and killing American soldiers than spend a few billions to save American jobs. Their priorities are ass-backwards.

What has stopped the democrats who hold more seats in the house than the republicans ever did under Bush from witholding funding? How much longer can you pretend this war is on the shoulders of republicans? I really want to see how you try to spin this when Obama and his near super majorities in both chambers continues to fund the war.

It will be a remarkable feat that republicans are still able to push their war with the democrats controlling so much power.

Because Republicans will cry "Hussein" "terrorism" "Israel" "heroes" should they withold funds. Besides, the war is in the closing stages so there is little need for more drama on that side. But, to think that, we wasted hundreds and hundreds of billions of dollars in Iraq for NOTHING, yet you have a problem with saving American jobs for 14 billion? How stupid can you be?

If this was the Japanese or Germans, there would not even be a debate. Case in point, look at Mitsubishi Motors.

Because republicans will cry you can justify Democrats continuing to spend on the war and thus blame republicans for the spending? Makes perfect sense. If you live in an upside down world.

And who said the war is almost over? Have you not listened to Obama at all?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?

 

[nobodyknows]

Originally posted by: JS80
Finally GOP restoring faith.

But since when do the poor pay taxes?

LOL, what are they supposed to pay with, there first born??

Meanwhile people like Leona Hemsley leave millions to their pets?

 

[Dari]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Dari

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Dari
The GOP would rather waste American resources on useless wars and killing American soldiers than spend a few billions to save American jobs. Their priorities are ass-backwards.

What has stopped the democrats who hold more seats in the house than the republicans ever did under Bush from witholding funding? How much longer can you pretend this war is on the shoulders of republicans? I really want to see how you try to spin this when Obama and his near super majorities in both chambers continues to fund the war.

It will be a remarkable feat that republicans are still able to push their war with the democrats controlling so much power.

Because Republicans will cry "Hussein" "terrorism" "Israel" "heroes" should they withold funds. Besides, the war is in the closing stages so there is little need for more drama on that side. But, to think that, we wasted hundreds and hundreds of billions of dollars in Iraq for NOTHING, yet you have a problem with saving American jobs for 14 billion? How stupid can you be?

If this was the Japanese or Germans, there would not even be a debate. Case in point, look at Mitsubishi Motors.

Because republicans will cry you can justify Democrats continuing to spend on the war and thus blame republicans for the spending? Makes perfect sense. If you live in an upside down world.

And who said the war is almost over? Have you not listened to Obama at all?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?

No, idiot. But the point is completely lost to you. "Conservative" fools like you stood by and watched hundreds of billions pissed away on a useless war but have an issue with helping an American company with a heavy American manufacturing presence? You would prefer to see them go out of business according to your principals but had no problem fighting a war of choice? The Republican Party really is stuck on stupid. I won't be surprised if Senate Democrats increase their majority to 66 in two years.

 

[sactoking]

I support the R senators who are trying to stop this nonsense. I do not support the D House and the R White House that are in favor.

I support the R Senators who tried to kill the first bailout bill.

I support the R(were there many? Any?) and D Congressmen who did not support the war.

It's simple:
Money to bail out auto manufacturers = fail
Money to bail out financial institutions = fail
Money to pursue "freedom" in Iraq = fail

 

[Vic]

Bye bye GOP

 

[First]

And when Dems have 59 seats how is this going to matter?

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: Dari

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Dari

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Dari
The GOP would rather waste American resources on useless wars and killing American soldiers than spend a few billions to save American jobs. Their priorities are ass-backwards.

What has stopped the democrats who hold more seats in the house than the republicans ever did under Bush from witholding funding? How much longer can you pretend this war is on the shoulders of republicans? I really want to see how you try to spin this when Obama and his near super majorities in both chambers continues to fund the war.

It will be a remarkable feat that republicans are still able to push their war with the democrats controlling so much power.

Because Republicans will cry "Hussein" "terrorism" "Israel" "heroes" should they withold funds. Besides, the war is in the closing stages so there is little need for more drama on that side. But, to think that, we wasted hundreds and hundreds of billions of dollars in Iraq for NOTHING, yet you have a problem with saving American jobs for 14 billion? How stupid can you be?

If this was the Japanese or Germans, there would not even be a debate. Case in point, look at Mitsubishi Motors.

Because republicans will cry you can justify Democrats continuing to spend on the war and thus blame republicans for the spending? Makes perfect sense. If you live in an upside down world.

And who said the war is almost over? Have you not listened to Obama at all?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?

No, idiot. But the point is completely lost to you. "Conservative" fools like you stood by and watched hundreds of billions pissed away on a useless war but have an issue with helping an American company with a heavy American manufacturing presence? You would prefer to see them go out of business according to your principals but had no problem fighting a war of choice? The Republican Party really is stuck on stupid. I won't be surprised if Senate Democrats increase their majority to 66 in two years.

I think perhaps it is you that is completely missing the boat on this. Right now and for the past 2 years it has been democrats who controlled both chambers and introduced legislation to fund this war. In the next 2 years it will be democrats who continue to fund this war. The question I proposed and you completely failed to answer in any meaningful way is "How much longer can you continue to blame republicans for democrats funding the war?". When democrats increase their leads to 66 you will most likely still be blaming republicans for continued funding of the war. So who exactly is stuck on stupid?

The big 3 have had problems for decades. Let them fail, restructure, be bought out. It isnt govts job to ensure bad business models succeed.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: Evan
And when Dems have 59 seats how is this going to matter?

It wont

 

[MovingTarget]

Wow...sure are a lot of people here wanting the bailout to fail just because of a hate-on for the UAW. Seems to me that killing the bailout and letting the big 3 fail to break the union (which is the goal of many of these R's, including my own state's senators) is a severe case of cutting off your nose to spite your face, or throwing the baby out with the bathwater. Pure FAIL. I can take the position of wanting them to fail in order to get more jobs/plants from the foreign automakers in my state, but overall I know that such a move would be disasterous for this country.

Maybe some sort of compromise will be reached so we can save them in the short term, at least until a new congress convenes. However, I should be careful what I wish for.

 

[Dari]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Dari

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Dari

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Dari
The GOP would rather waste American resources on useless wars and killing American soldiers than spend a few billions to save American jobs. Their priorities are ass-backwards.

What has stopped the democrats who hold more seats in the house than the republicans ever did under Bush from witholding funding? How much longer can you pretend this war is on the shoulders of republicans? I really want to see how you try to spin this when Obama and his near super majorities in both chambers continues to fund the war.

It will be a remarkable feat that republicans are still able to push their war with the democrats controlling so much power.

Because Republicans will cry "Hussein" "terrorism" "Israel" "heroes" should they withold funds. Besides, the war is in the closing stages so there is little need for more drama on that side. But, to think that, we wasted hundreds and hundreds of billions of dollars in Iraq for NOTHING, yet you have a problem with saving American jobs for 14 billion? How stupid can you be?

If this was the Japanese or Germans, there would not even be a debate. Case in point, look at Mitsubishi Motors.

Because republicans will cry you can justify Democrats continuing to spend on the war and thus blame republicans for the spending? Makes perfect sense. If you live in an upside down world.

And who said the war is almost over? Have you not listened to Obama at all?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?

No, idiot. But the point is completely lost to you. "Conservative" fools like you stood by and watched hundreds of billions pissed away on a useless war but have an issue with helping an American company with a heavy American manufacturing presence? You would prefer to see them go out of business according to your principals but had no problem fighting a war of choice? The Republican Party really is stuck on stupid. I won't be surprised if Senate Democrats increase their majority to 66 in two years.

I think perhaps it is you that is completely missing the boat on this. Right now and for the past 2 years it has been democrats who funded this war. In the next 2 years it will be democrats who continue to fund this war. The question I proposed and you completely failed to answer in any meaningful way is "How much longer can you continue to blame republicans for democrats funding the war?". When democrats increase their leads to 66 you will most likely still be blaming republicans for continued funding of the war. So who exactly is stuck on stupid?

The big 3 have had problems for decades. Let them fail, restructure, be bought out. It isnt govts job to ensure bad business models succeed.

Yet you keep ignoring my point. Your "conservative" principals are decrepit and worse than stupid. You are a giant idiot if you think a car company can simply go into bankruptcy and not lose most, if not all, their business. I can't believe "business" Republicans have come to resemble their ideological socially conservative cousins than the pragmatists they were known for.

 

[StageLeft]

The $14B is just a farce. I'm hope it dies. If Gov REALLY wants to save the Big 3 It will write a check for 5-10X+ that $14B. It's paltry and meaningless in the grand scheme.

Maybe some sort of compromise will be reached so we can save them in the short term, at least until a new congress convenes. However, I should be careful of what I wish for.

All a new congress could possibly do would be to give them more money. In their current form or anything even remotely resembling it they cannot go on. The piper is here and wants his money. As I understand it, Ford is willing to man up. Give them help if they need it, you don't throw good money after bad time and time again. The big THREE just represent a bad investment. At least let chrysler die.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: Dari

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Dari

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Dari

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Dari
The GOP would rather waste American resources on useless wars and killing American soldiers than spend a few billions to save American jobs. Their priorities are ass-backwards.

What has stopped the democrats who hold more seats in the house than the republicans ever did under Bush from witholding funding? How much longer can you pretend this war is on the shoulders of republicans? I really want to see how you try to spin this when Obama and his near super majorities in both chambers continues to fund the war.

It will be a remarkable feat that republicans are still able to push their war with the democrats controlling so much power.

Because Republicans will cry "Hussein" "terrorism" "Israel" "heroes" should they withold funds. Besides, the war is in the closing stages so there is little need for more drama on that side. But, to think that, we wasted hundreds and hundreds of billions of dollars in Iraq for NOTHING, yet you have a problem with saving American jobs for 14 billion? How stupid can you be?

If this was the Japanese or Germans, there would not even be a debate. Case in point, look at Mitsubishi Motors.

Because republicans will cry you can justify Democrats continuing to spend on the war and thus blame republicans for the spending? Makes perfect sense. If you live in an upside down world.

And who said the war is almost over? Have you not listened to Obama at all?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?

No, idiot. But the point is completely lost to you. "Conservative" fools like you stood by and watched hundreds of billions pissed away on a useless war but have an issue with helping an American company with a heavy American manufacturing presence? You would prefer to see them go out of business according to your principals but had no problem fighting a war of choice? The Republican Party really is stuck on stupid. I won't be surprised if Senate Democrats increase their majority to 66 in two years.

I think perhaps it is you that is completely missing the boat on this. Right now and for the past 2 years it has been democrats who funded this war. In the next 2 years it will be democrats who continue to fund this war. The question I proposed and you completely failed to answer in any meaningful way is "How much longer can you continue to blame republicans for democrats funding the war?". When democrats increase their leads to 66 you will most likely still be blaming republicans for continued funding of the war. So who exactly is stuck on stupid?

The big 3 have had problems for decades. Let them fail, restructure, be bought out. It isnt govts job to ensure bad business models succeed.

Yet you keep ignoring my point. Your "conservative" principals are decrepit and worse than stupid. You are a giant idiot if you think a car company can simply go into bankruptcy and not lose most, if not all, their business. I can't believe "business" Republicans have come to resemble their ideological socially conservative cousins than the pragmatists they were known for.

My principles are fine. Business goes bankrupt daily and people continue to work with them. You however seem to be under some magical notion that govt intervention for a failed business is a good idea and will end in wonderful results. The big 3 have a failed business model. You think having a politician directing the show is going to improve that situation?

lol

But please answer my question about how you are going to blame republicans even after the democrats get a super majority.

 

[First]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Evan
And when Dems have 59 seats how is this going to matter?

It wont

Right, cause they're going to pass it anyway.

 

[boomerang]

Originally posted by: JS80

Yup. to me, this bailout is a bailout of the unions. letting the big 3 go bk would effectively bankrupt the uaw, and make this a much better country.

So the UAW is so powerful that putting them out of business would be better for the country? Interesting notion.

Please explain the myriad of benefits if the Detroit 3 file bankruptcy.

 

[Thump553]

The GOP senators opposing this have two basic goals: (1) protect their home state's foreign car manufacturers-manufacturers that were lured to those states with oddles of public cash and (2) a chance to bust the UAW and thus strike at a support base of the Democratic Party.

I suspect this is mostly grandstanding and they will come to their senses. If not, they will when the home state auto dealers start folding up en masse.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: boomerang

Originally posted by: JS80

Yup. to me, this bailout is a bailout of the unions. letting the big 3 go bk would effectively bankrupt the uaw, and make this a much better country.

So the UAW is so powerful that putting them out of business would be better for the country? Interesting notion.

Please explain the myriad of benefits if the Detroit 3 file bankruptcy.

The company will have the protection to fix the business and not be hampered by a union. It may be they end up selling divisions to competitiors or outright be bought out. Either way what comes out on the other side should be in better shape to actually prosper in a world of higher energy prices. Not be required to come begging for tax payer handouts everytime the economy dips.

The airline industry went through this a few years ago.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: Thump553
The GOP senators opposing this have two basic goals: (1) protect their home state's foreign car manufacturers-manufacturers that were lured to those states with oddles of public cash and (2) a chance to bust the UAW and thus strike at a support base of the Democratic Party.

I suspect this is mostly grandstanding and they will come to their senses. If not, they will when the home state auto dealers start folding up en masse.

It's the North Vs the South in a whole new light.

So far it's looking like "the South will rise again."

 

[MovingTarget]

Originally posted by: Skoorb
The $14B is just a farce. I'm hope it dies. If Gov REALLY wants to save the Big 3 It will write a check for 5-10X+ that $14B. It's paltry and meaningless in the grand scheme.

Maybe some sort of compromise will be reached so we can save them in the short term, at least until a new congress convenes. However, I should be careful of what I wish for.

All a new congress could possibly do would be to give them more money. In their current form or anything even remotely resembling it they cannot go on. The piper is here and wants his money. As I understand it, Ford is willing to man up. Give them help if they need it, you don't throw good money after bad time and time again. The big THREE just represent a bad investment. At least let chrysler die.

I agree that $14B is not really going to do much but tide them over for a while. Short term patch is all it amounts to. We should probably start out with a much smaller amount as Ford is doing alright at the moment. It really doesn't solve anything, but it does buy time. I'm really proud of how Ford has handled things lately as they seem to really be turning things around. GM is doing mediocre in terms of their business, but their cars have improved greatly over the past few years. We should at least give them (and our industrial economy) a fighting chance...

However, we shouldn't be spending too much right now until we are showed a comprehensive plan to turn things around at GM and Chrysler. Either one of them could become profitable again if they (and unfortunately the government) can take bold enough steps. It can be done. Hell, there is precedent for it with Chrysler. Don't count them out just yet. "Throwing good money after bad time and time again" doesn't quite apply to the auto industry iirc (have we bailed out Ford or GM in a similar manner before?), but it does within the financial sector. (Savings and Loan, anyone? I had flashbacks to this when the TARP was created and then used for other purposes than what it was designed for...) Apples, oranges, and kiwis.... no direct comparison exists here...

 

[boomerang]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: boomerang

Originally posted by: JS80

Yup. to me, this bailout is a bailout of the unions. letting the big 3 go bk would effectively bankrupt the uaw, and make this a much better country.

So the UAW is so powerful that putting them out of business would be better for the country? Interesting notion.

Please explain the myriad of benefits if the Detroit 3 file bankruptcy.

The company will have the protection to fix the business and not be hampered by a union. It may be they end up selling divisions to competitiors or outright be bought out. Either way what comes out on the other side should be in better shape to actually prosper in a world of higher energy prices. Not be required to come begging for tax payer handouts everytime the economy dips.

The airline industry went through this a few years ago.

Thanks for the answer, but my question was directed to JS80.

 

[Dari]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Dari

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Dari

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Dari

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Dari
The GOP would rather waste American resources on useless wars and killing American soldiers than spend a few billions to save American jobs. Their priorities are ass-backwards.

What has stopped the democrats who hold more seats in the house than the republicans ever did under Bush from witholding funding? How much longer can you pretend this war is on the shoulders of republicans? I really want to see how you try to spin this when Obama and his near super majorities in both chambers continues to fund the war.

It will be a remarkable feat that republicans are still able to push their war with the democrats controlling so much power.

Because Republicans will cry "Hussein" "terrorism" "Israel" "heroes" should they withold funds. Besides, the war is in the closing stages so there is little need for more drama on that side. But, to think that, we wasted hundreds and hundreds of billions of dollars in Iraq for NOTHING, yet you have a problem with saving American jobs for 14 billion? How stupid can you be?

If this was the Japanese or Germans, there would not even be a debate. Case in point, look at Mitsubishi Motors.

Because republicans will cry you can justify Democrats continuing to spend on the war and thus blame republicans for the spending? Makes perfect sense. If you live in an upside down world.

And who said the war is almost over? Have you not listened to Obama at all?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?

No, idiot. But the point is completely lost to you. "Conservative" fools like you stood by and watched hundreds of billions pissed away on a useless war but have an issue with helping an American company with a heavy American manufacturing presence? You would prefer to see them go out of business according to your principals but had no problem fighting a war of choice? The Republican Party really is stuck on stupid. I won't be surprised if Senate Democrats increase their majority to 66 in two years.

I think perhaps it is you that is completely missing the boat on this. Right now and for the past 2 years it has been democrats who funded this war. In the next 2 years it will be democrats who continue to fund this war. The question I proposed and you completely failed to answer in any meaningful way is "How much longer can you continue to blame republicans for democrats funding the war?". When democrats increase their leads to 66 you will most likely still be blaming republicans for continued funding of the war. So who exactly is stuck on stupid?

The big 3 have had problems for decades. Let them fail, restructure, be bought out. It isnt govts job to ensure bad business models succeed.

Yet you keep ignoring my point. Your "conservative" principals are decrepit and worse than stupid. You are a giant idiot if you think a car company can simply go into bankruptcy and not lose most, if not all, their business. I can't believe "business" Republicans have come to resemble their ideological socially conservative cousins than the pragmatists they were known for.

My principles are fine. Business goes bankrupt daily and people continue to work with them. You however seem to be under some magical notion that govt intervention for a failed business is a good idea and will end in wonderful results. The big 3 have a failed business model. You think having a politician directing the show is going to improve that situation?

lol

But please answer my question about how you are going to blame republicans even after the democrats get a super majority.

lol indeed.

 

[Genx87]

So that is it huh Dari? Cant explain your logic for when democrats continue to fund the war and you keep blaming republicans?

 

[Dari]

Originally posted by: Genx87
So that is it huh Dari? Cant explain your logic for when democrats continue to fund the war and you keep blaming republicans?

The Iraq war was supported by most Republicans, even though it has given us nothing and protected us from nothing. Besides, I laid out my points on this war early on. You must be slow. But I used the war mainly because you supported it and still support it. Yet you don't support helping your fellow americans, because of your morose principals. With intelligent men such as yourself in the Republican Party, I can definitely see it going regional.

 

[JS80]

Originally posted by: boomerang

Originally posted by: JS80

Yup. to me, this bailout is a bailout of the unions. letting the big 3 go bk would effectively bankrupt the uaw, and make this a much better country.

So the UAW is so powerful that putting them out of business would be better for the country? Interesting notion.

Please explain the myriad of benefits if the Detroit 3 file bankruptcy.

The company will have the protection to fix the business and not be hampered by a union. It may be they end up selling divisions to competitiors or outright be bought out. Either way what comes out on the other side should be in better shape to actually prosper in a world of higher energy prices. Not be required to come begging for tax payer handouts everytime the economy dips.

The airline industry went through this a few years ago.

 

[Dari]

Originally posted by: JS80

Originally posted by: boomerang

Originally posted by: JS80

Yup. to me, this bailout is a bailout of the unions. letting the big 3 go bk would effectively bankrupt the uaw, and make this a much better country.

So the UAW is so powerful that putting them out of business would be better for the country? Interesting notion.

Please explain the myriad of benefits if the Detroit 3 file bankruptcy.

The company will have the protection to fix the business and not be hampered by a union. It may be they end up selling divisions to competitiors or outright be bought out. Either way what comes out on the other side should be in better shape to actually prosper in a world of higher energy prices. Not be required to come begging for tax payer handouts everytime the economy dips.

The airline industry went through this a few years ago.

Would you buy a car from a company that's in bankruptcy? Maintenance, warranty, parts, service, etc...? A big question mark would hang over all that. I wouldn't. Furthermore, for a lot of people, a car is the most expensive purchase they'll ever make. Tell me WTF would buy something like that from a company in bankruptcy?

 

[boomerang]

Originally posted by: JS80

Originally posted by: boomerang

Originally posted by: JS80

Yup. to me, this bailout is a bailout of the unions. letting the big 3 go bk would effectively bankrupt the uaw, and make this a much better country.

So the UAW is so powerful that putting them out of business would be better for the country? Interesting notion.

Please explain the myriad of benefits if the Detroit 3 file bankruptcy.

The company will have the protection to fix the business and not be hampered by a union. It may be they end up selling divisions to competitiors or outright be bought out. Either way what comes out on the other side should be in better shape to actually prosper in a world of higher energy prices. Not be required to come begging for tax payer handouts everytime the economy dips.

The airline industry went through this a few years ago.

Cute. I thought you'd explain how this would be better for the country, instead you use someone else's previous reply that didn't address the question. Your answer confims my suspicions, but it's okay, I understand.