I think Pawlenty should change from calling himself a "Buick" to calling himself a "Honda".

BEEP- BEEP-BEEP BEEP-BEEPEEEE. That's Detroit, Obamamotorcare.

One of O numerous achievement in 2 1/2 yrs.

Feisty:

Agreed. Our President has done a remarkable job when you consider he has gotten not one iota of help from the right. Nothing at all but they continue to want to take the credit for what he does and deny what they did.

That really is amazing Chrysler repaid it's loan 6 years ahead of schedule.

Yes!!! This is a truly amazing event!!!

(But, um, wasn't it President Bush that signed the bill to provide the funds for the bailout???)

Chris, Cranbury, NJ.

Yes!!! This is a truly amazing event!!!

(But, um, wasn't it President Bush that signed the bill to provide the funds for the bailout???)

No it wasn't, so what's your point? Do you have one at all? Are you being disingenuous and making a snide remark cause you can't stand the fact the the President is doing a good job?

No it wasn't, so what's your point? Do you have one at all? Are you being disingenuous and making a snide remark cause you can't stand the fact the the President is doing a good job?___________________________________________________________________________________

Well, actually;

Falling sales resulted in the Big Three's plants operating below capacity. GM's plants were operating at 85% in November 2005, well below the plants of its Asian competitors, and was only maintained by relying on cash incentives and subsidized leases.^[80] Rebates, employee pricing, and 0% financing boosted sales but drained the automaker's cash reserves. The subprime mortgage crisis and high oil prices of 2008 caused the popularity of once best-selling trucks and SUVs to plummet. Automakers were forced to continue offering heavy incentives to help clear excess inventory.^[81] Due to the declining residual value of their vehicles, Chrysler and GM stopped offering leases on a most of their vehicles in 2008.^[82]

In September, 2008 the Big Three asked for $50 billion to pay for health care expenses and avoid bankruptcy and ensuing layoffs, and Congress worked out a 25$ billion loan.^[83]

By December, President Bush had agreed to an emergency bailout of $17.4 billion to be distributed by the next administration in January and February.^[84] In early 2009, the prospect of avoiding bankruptcy by General Motors and Chrysler continued to wane as new financial information about the scale of the 2008 losses came in. Ultimately, poor management and business practices forced Chrysler and General Motors into bankruptcy. Chrysler filed for chapter 11 bankruptcy protection on May 1, 2009 ^[85] followed by General Motors a month later.^[86]

To reiterate;

By December, President Bush had agreed to an emergency bailout of $17.4 billion to be distributed by the next administration in January and February.^[84]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automotive_industry_crisis_of_2008%E2%80%932010

GM was the only company I know of to emerge from bankruptsy with a 45 billion dollar tax loss carry forward. we bail them out, aloow them hugh tax write offs (subsidy), then they paid us back with our own money. Wow what a concept! ca I get some of that!

Hi, Rick!!!

Um, yes, it was President Bush who signed the whole bailout ball of wax into law!!! Please feel free to look that up!!! All that President Obama did was basically hand out the checks!!! (Kind of like that guy from the mailroom that goes around the office handing out the paystubs every week!!!)

Thanks!!!

Have a great day!

dangerfield it was Obama that got it into law against the Repubs out cry that they didn't want it so again what was the point as Obama gets all the credit not Bush or the Repubs

Chris, Cranbury, NJ.

In the Republican version of truth, Bush was responsible for the bailout when it's good news. When talking about the deficit, President Obama nearly bankrupted the country and cost our "freedom."

The truth is Bush signed a bill to provide initial funds, President Obama added to it.

Let's get in the way back machine for a trip to 2008:

http://abcnews.go.com/Business/Economy/story?id=6502577&page=1

Chris, Cranbury, NJ.

Been sipping the Cranberry juice a little to much.You are totally wrong and you need to look it up. Nice try though but pretty typical. And the same to you my friend.

Chris, Cranbury, NJ.

Bush only approved 17.4 Billion for 3 months. Obama pushed through much more that the Repubs didn't want him to loan the car makers.

Amy B. Portland, ME

Thanks Amy! I was interrupted by a client and couldn't get out to Google but you made my point :-)

Thanks so much for backing me up, dangerfield and Amy!!!

It's nice to know that someone on here is capable of doing a little bit of research!!! You would think that, given the caliber of journalists that a prestigious site like First Read has (i.e., anyone that can string two coherent sentences together), a mention of President Bush's involvement would be warrented!!!

And, Rick, you should try the cranberry juice!!! It is so good for you, full of vitamins and anti-oxidents!!! Yes, we all love the cranberry juice here in the Garden State!!!

Thanks!!!

I am a white collar, Union-represented Chrysler employee. I am living proof that experiment has worked. I am also a 3rd-generation Detroit autoworker.

The ceremony at work today was held to commemorate the handover of the check to the Federal government.

We are grateful for the 3rd chance that America and the Canadians have given us. Bush and Obama loaned (and I hasten to emphasize LOANED [not bailout]) the domestic auto industry the money needed to survive.

Our government gives more handouts to foreign car transplant companies down South than they do in Detroit for our own Big 3.

The foreign transplants enjoy a lot of advantages over us:

• their governments subsidize them,...every year
• the US provides defense support to Korea and Japan
• their currency manipulation lets them artificially manipulate a supposedly "free" market
• their autoworkers are honored as a vital part of their economy

Senate Republicans wanted us dead. This charge was led by Tennessee Sen. Corker and Alabama Sen. Shelby. True Blue Americans both.

I called them to share what I thought of them.

Greg, thank you for the facts. And thank you for calling Corker and Shelby.

You are welcome Steve.

Thank you for caring.

But, Salt Grass! Don't you read these posts? There was a tornado! Kids are starving in Africa! The dog ate my homework! HOW can Obama stop and enjoy some GOOD news? He muste be a FAILURE!! (er....EPIC failure- sorry NoJo)

There is a tragedy every minute. An emergency every day. Most of man kind still has to live and work.

drive-by-observer

But, Salt Grass! Don't you read these posts? There was a tornado! Kids are starving in Africa! The dog ate my homework! HOW can Obama stop and enjoy some GOOD news? He muste be a FAILURE!! (er....EPIC failure- sorry NoJo)

Speaking of tornadoes, I just found out Cantor Says Congress Won’t Pay For Missouri Disaster Unless Spending Is Cut Elsewhere.”

http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog/inside-politics/2011/may/23/cantor-learns-delays-lesson-disaster-spending/

Well, I'm sure Fox Noise will have something to say about that.

Bev - Speaking of tornadoes, I just found out Cantor Says Congress Won’t Pay For Missouri Disaster Unless Spending Is Cut Elsewhere.”

Actually, Congress, by law, cannot add to the debt since we have passed our debt ceiling. In order to pay for anything, including the Missouri disaster, congress must take the money from somewhere. This is just another way that the liberal rag Think Progress spins things. You ask any Democrat Congressman, they will tell you the same thing.

Good post, Salt Grass, except that bailing out the auto industry WAS conventional wisdom from all of the economic bean counters and, of course, it worked.

It was the R'pubs who were unconventional in their thinking and they (and fox noise) worked double shifts to convince the American people that it was "SOCIALISM"!

What a joke. As for wisdom they only have that for the wealthy 2% and megacorp's.

In one breath they condemn individuals for filing bankruptcy whlie applauding corporations for using the same tactic

I've been screaming this for over a year now, Salt. You are so right on!

I love the way the banks will boldly demand tax payers to foot their gambling debts and then flay home owners alive with hate filled commentary saying they are unpatriotic, lazy slobs for asking for mortgage help!

And 99% of the homeowners would have never had to ask for help if it weren't for the gambling of the bankers with the people's money..!

Good thing for GM that Obama had the faith in them. Of course you don't expect the Rep's to give him any credit for their success.....No, no, no. Lies will follow.....

Now isn't this interesting.

"SwampFox6Actual" is a handle based first on Revolutionary War guerrilla leader Frences Marion, nicknamed by British Tory cavalry commander Benastre Tarleton as "the old swamp fox." The "6" is usually the radio call sign of a military unit commander, while "actual" is used to ensure the actual commander is on the air rather than a radio operator or aide to the commander. The screen name certainly has a subtext of code for other persons with military experience and an admiration for a famous Carolinian.

The assertion that he (in all likelihood) is new here is borne out by the fact the person registered this month, and has only posted three times, all today. The posts made so far seem a bit disingenuous.

Interestingly, two rather strident and unpleasant posters were banned from these boards last night - safecracker and TAGD. They have shown their resourcefulness in setting up new accounts after previously being banned.

Fox, until I learn otherwise I am not nor did I assert that your statements were offensive. You probably read "D I S I N G E N U O U S" incorrectly - something of a characterization of a minor quality of the three posts I read, that's all. Nothing really judgemental about your comments. Nor do I wish to stifle your expression.

Please note, that we do tend to be at times a tad touchy here about certain folk who have gotten themselves banned, then come back, so my note was certainly a small flag to regulars to see which way your particular track goes. Again, only an observation, more about others than you, OK?

And yeah, figuring out your screen name is child's play for anyone who knows history and military usage.

Update:

Mitt proved my point.

Fox -

Hackles down, man. I am going to a TON of trouble to answer you tonight. My old Mac does NOT get along with the current software of FR/FT.

It's exceptionally easy to mis-communicate here. A simple turn of phrase can inflame others to the point of e-mail bombs.

How could you think I was being condesencding to aver that de-coding your screen name was "child's play." It is, after all. I am an extremely widely-read person who from hundreds of sources recognized "6actual," for example. There are bazillions on the web who would recognize that call sign, too. And as for Frances Marion, for chrissakes, the guy was the hero of TV shows and movies, books, and more. My favorite stop on I-95 when I go to Virginia is the Swamp Fox cafe! (The owners' granddaughter by now is in college, and I BET she's kicking butt, grade-wise.)

We are all perhaps a tad too touchy here. Those of us who are regulars for a long time have been burned by poseurs. When I remarked on the "disingenuous" nature of your posts, I meant that they seem and still do to be far too "innocent" of basic knowledge about political issues. Some folk use similar posts to set us up for a wild, frenzied attack. If that wasn't your purpose, and you truly are innocent of the information about which you spoke, then I will personally be glad to apologize for any implied or perceived slur, and inform you in gentle detail of that which you wish to know.

On the other hand, we have been slicked here before, and I for one am no longer willing to take anyone on their unvarnished word.

I vividly remember all those GOP types running around talking about wat a disaster the "Government Motors Bailout" would turn out to be.

I think the Networks should run a loop of videos with them talking that trash.

I'm sure some Research Analyst at DCCC or the DNC is working on an ad for next year that will hammer the point home that these people are beyond ignorant!

Thank you President Obama! And yes, President Bush for getting the ball rolling on saving the American auto industry.

Prestige is more important than supporting American businesses.

Great Job Mr. President.

John, Tucson, AZ

Bev - Speaking of tornadoes, I just found out Cantor Says Congress Won’t Pay For Missouri Disaster Unless Spending Is Cut Elsewhere.”

Actually, Congress, by law, cannot add to the debt since we have passed our debt ceiling. In order to pay for anything, including the Missouri disaster, congress must take the money from somewhere. This is just another way that the liberal rag Think Progress spins things. You ask any Democrat Congressman, they will tell you the same thing.

I don't suppose you you know it's already been done?

Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner on Monday extended the deadline for raising the national debt limit to August 2

Read more: http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20059268-503544.html#ixzz1NIr2baPy

But, why do you care if it's not you dying or somebody in your family needing to survive?

My response to you got cut off; I guess that is a bad sign like your message.

John, Tucson, AZ

Bev - Speaking of tornadoes, I just found out

You know Cantor could cut funds for Virginia? How is that pro life thing going for you insane t-bagger hypocrites and terror suspects? There are dead bodies in Joplin.

All Geithner did was accounting tricks that allow the US to keep operating on our current budget...again...no new money can be added to the budget. I'm all for help Joplin, it just needs to be done right.

The Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 is an Act of Congress concerning the energy policy of the United States. On December 19, 2007^, President Bush signed it into law.

From Nader.org:

"Last December, Congress approved a $25 billion loan to automakers and their suppliers under the Energy Independence and Security Act."

See, not all Obama. Thats $25 billion under Bush Bush. No small chunk of change.

Let it begin...1...2....3..

The Act provided a vehicle for making the auto industry bailout money - it was not originally intended for any such purpose.

The bailout might not have taken place if then-President-elect Obama hadn't thrown his support behind it soon after the elections in 2008. Well before year's end, Bush had practically abdicated his office and allowed Obama and his transition team to handle a great deal of the work and planning for rapid Congressional action on attacking the continuing collapse of the American economy and workplace.

Almost the first screams of protest aimed at President Obama after his inauguration were cries of "government takeovers," and "socialism" because of both TARP and the auto industry bailout.

The creeps and liars on the right want to have their cake and eat it, too.

John A.-400474..

It was passed by Congress under Bush. Signed by Bush. Enacted under Bush.

Yet you find someway to make it all Obama's achievement.

This isn't about the creeps and liars on the right as you said. It's about $25 billion allocated under Bush. What's the freaking harm in saying that?

So now you claim it as your own! You have been beating Obama over the head with this until his bailout, which the Republcans in Congress wanted to scuttle, until it is politically expediente for you to claim the credit. Southern Republicans thought it a great idea to sink GM, Chrysler and Ford so that the Toyota plants and other foriegn car builders with plants in the south line their pockets while domestic auto companies failed, putting tens of thousands out of work. Please don't take credit for something you fought against tooth and nail. It's time for the GOP to take their lumps on this one. We're not buying it!

So I suppose everyone will concede that Bush wrecked the economy, that caused the high unemployment and spent us into oblivion, while not adding it to the debt.

I remember how Obama was accused of taking over car companies. Because of Obama we are now in the car building and dealership business. Every nasty and condescending comments and criticism they could come up with, was said about him.

You guys are the same ones who who screamed "why is he bringing up Bush. When is he going to take responsibility?

Seems as if it was really important that Obama took responsibility for all of Bush's mistakes and bad results. It seems equally important that everything good should be credited to Bush, whether he was responsible or not.

It just proves that this President is hated for no legitimate reasons, so people will do and say whatever they can to make him look like a failure.

President Regan was a nice man, but only a so-so President.

yet republicans today do not resemble republicans of eisenhower or reagan's time.

Agreed. The story here is not which President signed the bill.

The story here that lefties should latch on to (if they didn't suck so hard at messaging - and I say this as a progressive) is that it's a point on the board for Keynesianism.

Of course, they will squander it for quick points now, because the Left never thinks about the long game.

You're right, Mike...

Just politicos here. It's my understanding that even supply-side(ism) calls for government investment during economic downturns.

Couldn't agree more. Basically the government made a massive intervention in the market to support the UAW at the expense of profitable and more efficient car makers. It will be interesting to see how much this intervention has cost in jobs in other states at other companies. Consumers are also affected because of the subsidized loans (at 0%) that GM can offer using taxpayer backed funds. Although some buyers will have bought cars at lowers prices/loans, overall taxpayers are paying more to support these investments in an inefficient company. Instead of large expansions at the other car companies due to increased demand instead they would have to cut back on investments to fight the unfair advantages GM had by being backed by the US treasury. How many jobs were destroyed, how much were wages depressed,by this investment, made for political purposes, in states other than Michigan.

And now they want to repeat this exercise for high-speed rail. BTW, when, not if, GM comes back for more money do they get it? Go read the history of the UK car industry in 1970's and 80's.

not to mention southern workers make less than their detroit brothers and are not unionized.  slavery still flourishes in the south!

don't get me wrong, i love me a nessan, but if it meant really american, i'll buy a gm, ford, or chrysler anyday!

Guess you were busy when the economy collapsed. Mebbe out selling some lovely mortgage derivatives, eh?

Chrysler's main problem was being over-leveraged and in debt while at the same time turning ouot mainly inferior products. The company had been losing market share for years. The executive suite and design department, along with quality control administration, set this company up.

Over at GM, the company was overextended financially and unable to sustain itself when the entire auto industry market collapsed. Again, the culprits in GM's problems were found in suit-land, not on the shop floors.

Nope, the unions DID NOT cause the problems. The unions, as they had several times in prior years when the companies got in trouble, instead stepped in to help. And just as in the past, the thanks they got came pasted on the end of an extended middle finger.

I won't say that Republicans caused the auto companies' problems - but the Republican-sponsored Bush Recession sure did.

Well, the auto industries success had a lot to do with the Democrats. Lets blame them.

Guess you were busy when the economy collapsed. Mebbe out selling some lovely mortgage derivatives, eh?

So how many companies were bailed out? GM and Chrysler. Don't remember Ford, BMW, Mercedes, Nissan, Honda, Toyota, VW, Volvo, Mazda getting government money. I guess in their case the recession was something that happened to other car companies?

And one of the funniest ironies of all this is that GM is being allowed to carry over losses from their bankruptcy, something that was not done before. So, when they claim to be making net profits, their tax liability will be zero for years because of the carryover. Nothing like preferential treatment for a company so that they can avoid paying their fair share?

The recession was caused mainly by the collapse of the Housing market. You can thank Liberal Freddie and Fannie for that. Also, Dems controlled congress in 2007, 2008, 2009 and 2010.

Lynchmob

The recession was caused mainly by the collapse of the Housing market. You can thank Liberal Freddie and Fannie for that. Also, Dems controlled congress in 2007, 2008, 2009 and 2010.

Geez how many times does this have to be repeated:

1- Dems were in control 07 and 08 but Bush vetoed everthing they tried to pass so nice try.

2- Fannie and Freddie were revamped by Repubs like Phil Grahm and Clinton unfortunately signed the bill into law. So thanks and play again sometime .

Lynchmob, the only years that makes any difference in that string are 07 and 08 (as far as the dem's go) and by that time the republican president AND republican congress of the previous 6 years had already sold the farm.

They could have stopped it but they didn't because they were too busy starting wars. Ironically, they are all now staunchly frugal. HA! What a bunch of liars and thieves!

M.Fisher

You nailed it on the head. Just like the lies that they were going to create jobs if they were elected in 2010. As you can see they haven't passed one bill to do that. They sure have been busy with women's issues and trying to slow/stop the recovery but other then that no problem.

I thought we shouldn't mention Bush since he is no longer President. It's now Obama's to run and there is no need to refer to Bush. He asked for the job so why don't he just man up. It's his wars, his economy, his unemployment and hiss deficits, he is the one who spent out of control with tarp and stimulus, why is he still mentioning Bush?

Until something good happens. It's all Bush's doing, he caused this to happen, why do you refuse to give him credit, he is the one who spent the money,why don't you want to mention his name?

Do we even know what a republican is.

Republicans don't know who they are anymore. Bush needs to stay in the equation because of the fact that he did severe damage to this country and had eight years to do it, and he did a heck of a job. No man could fix W's damage in two and a half years, particularly with an obstructive, bullying, job killing Republican party to contend with.

Does it matter? Jobs and a company were saved with no net cost to taxpayers.

That's a good deal no matter how much you try to say it isn't.

One product line is doing poorly and that outweighs saving two companies and tens of thousands of jobs, not to mention putting us on the spiraling path of malaise?

I read an article that said Fiat borrowed the money to pay off the loan in order to be in a better position for a Department of Energy Loan of 3.5 billion. They will also up the number of shares they own and puts them in position to offer an IPO. True? I don't know but intend to check back as things are very rarely what they seem.

Bond holders took that risk, so did shareholders and other institutional debt-holders.

I don't feel bad for them.

Thanks Rush, oh I meant Silas, for today's talking point. (The regime thing kinda gave you away)

That wasn't the risk a bond holder took. A bond holder takes the risk of non payment but in a priority position superior to shareholders. Their debt should have converted to equity. Their debt holdings were prior in right to those of the unions. Not disputing the government loans or their seeming effectiveness just the method of the restructure.

The market bonds of companies that are on the verge of bankruptcy have little if any value, for obvious reasons.

You can always find someting wrong with any deal, but the main objectives were accomplished.

As should the claims of the unions. Bond holder claims were prior in right to those of unions. The restructure ran contrary to accepted principles of contract law. The end result doesn't justify a union buyout. Same result could have been achieved with payment to bond holders in the form of equity. When these companies fail in the future, which they will, the market for corporate debt will be dry because what bond holder will risk the loss of its superior position to the whim of the administration in power.

One measure of the state of the economy is the profit/loss of companies. During the great depression, companies lost millions/billions and many closed. I don't see that happening today. In fact, it's just the opposite.

It's hard to say if Roosevelt lengthened the depression. Without WWII, we may have pulled out of it. Yes, there was lots of government money being spent, but people who had lost jobs were able to find work and provide for their families.

And given that we had thousands of returning vets hit the job market, just why didn't they return to a depressed job market? Just what was it that enabled this country to put so many men back to work and begin one of the most dynamic job growths and consumer spending in American history? The war was over, we didn't need the factories running 24/7. Just what was it?

So government spending before, during and after the war brought us out of a depression and spurned the greatest economic growth ever.

You might read this, you might not.

There is no need to respond. I see where you're going with this and it is pointless. You cannot admit that spending the money was better than the alternative. I believe it has helped the economy.

Take the car companies for example.

I thought we were paying the lowest taxes in years. Since Fox has consistently claimed how Obama will raise taxes, people believe their taxes has been raised. The are not looking at their paychecks, just absorbing lies.

Jimi, take your paycheck s to an accountant and have them show you why and how much reduction you are getting.

I like the part "it won't happen overnight". Putting that phrase into his remarks means he can never be wrong, which he was, because it could happen 20 or 50 years from now.