« | »

NYT Praises Obama’s Gifts To The UAW

From an awe-struck New York Times:

Obama’s Stand in Auto Crisis Shows Early Resolve

By JIM RUTENBERG, PETER BAKER and BILL VLASIC

April 29, 2009

WASHINGTON — By the time he sat down in the Oval Office to brief Michigan’s Congressional delegation, President Obama had made up his mind. Days earlier, he had decided to oust the head of General Motors and give it and Chrysler weeks to fix themselves. If they could not, he was prepared to let them go bankrupt, a prospect fraught with economic and political repercussions…

For a new president, the automobile industry crisis has tested the boundaries of his activist approach and the acuity of his political instincts. As with so many issues in his action-packed 100 days in office, Mr. Obama confronted choices few of his predecessors encountered. His ongoing intervention in an iconic sector of the economy offers a case study in the education, management and decision-making of a fledgling president.

Tutored by veterans of past administrations, Mr. Obama, often after dinner with his wife and daughters, devoured briefing papers until midnight to master the intricacies of the auto industry. But he had advisers deal directly with the car companies and never spoke with the G.M. chief executive he effectively fired.

Methodical and dispassionate, Mr. Obama aggravated powerful players in Congress and the unions that helped elect him, then moved to assuage them. He encouraged internal debate but was forced to head off tensions as his treasury secretary and White House economic adviser maneuvered for position. In the end, he struggled with the proper balance between government power and market forces, a theme that has defined his first months in office.

“The issues were obvious — balancing his interest in seeing the companies survive and prosper for the benefit of the workers and communities in which they operate and all the offshoot businesses, versus the interests of American taxpayers,” said David Axelrod, the president’s senior adviser

In typical Times fashion, this article continues on for pages with seemingly endlessly verbose details about Mr. Obama’s courageous triumph over capitalism.

It neglects to mention that Mr. Obama never faced even the slightest opposition to his plans.

For a new president, the automobile industry crisis has tested the boundaries of his activist approach and the acuity of his political instincts. As with so many issues in his action-packed 100 days in office, Mr. Obama confronted choices few of his predecessors encountered. His ongoing intervention in an iconic sector of the economy offers a case study in the education, management and decision-making of a fledgling president.

Well, what Mr. Obama did to General Motors and Chrysler is certainly a case study in what any true Marxist would do to any capitalist business if he had the power.

Tutored by veterans of past administrations, Mr. Obama, often after dinner with his wife and daughters, devoured briefing papers until midnight to master the intricacies of the auto industry.

Yes, Mr. Obama certainly has mastered all the intricacies of the auto industry.

In the end, he struggled with the proper balance between government power and market forces, a theme that has defined his first months in office.

What a shock that the ‘proper balance’ turns out to be that the government and the unions own the companies, and the ‘market’ – the owners, the shareholders get shafted.

“The issues were obvious — balancing his interest in seeing the companies survive and prosper for the benefit of the workers and communities in which they operate and all the offshoot businesses, versus the interests of American taxpayers,” said David Axelrod, the president’s senior adviser.

Yes, General Motors and Chrysler – like all businesses – only exist at the sufferage of our new President.

And they are only of interest to him insofar as they benefit ‘the workers’ and ‘the community.’ That is ‘social justice.’

Still, if there is any real justice in the world, the New York Times will also be the beneficiary of such brilliant munificence from Mr. Obama.

Wouldn’t you love to see The Times owned by the union type setters and truck drivers and the extended Sulzberger clan actually having to get jobs and work for a living?

This article was posted by Steve on Wednesday, April 29th, 2009. Comments are currently closed.

26 Responses to “NYT Praises Obama’s Gifts To The UAW”

  1. proreason says:

    Yeh, right.

    The “proper balance” is the boot to your throat.

    and the philosopher king had to interrupt his dinner to make the decision.

    What a hero he is.

  2. texaspsue says:

    Chavez will be so proud!

    Watch out WalMart, you’re next!

  3. pdsand says:

    You got it Steve, the company is only important insomuch as workers and the communities benefit. The goose exists to lay the golden egg. Only in this case the egg-thieves now own 55% of the goose, and are eager that it agree to elective surgery to have its ovaries removed and harvested in a lab somewhere.

  4. U NO HOO says:

    “devoured briefing papers until midnight to master the intricacies of the auto industry.”

    Probably watched Wheels and The Betsy twice. Made him an expert.

  5. Odie44 says:

    “The issues were obvious — balancing his interest in seeing the companies survive and prosper for the benefit of the workers and communities in which they operate and all the offshoot businesses, versus the interests of American taxpayers,” said David Axelrod, the president’s senior adviser…

    This is straight out of Communist Manifesto.

    Notice he didn’t mention “shareholders, bond holders, free market, sales, revenue, etc…”

    i.e. tax payers are SOL, due to the needs of the “workers and communities” – I have a funny feeling those communities that both produce automobiles (its not just Michigan) and those off shoot companies (I believe the dope meant OEM, after market, accesories, etc) are going to suffer dearly when NO ONE IS BUYING A CAR OR FLAT SCREEN PANELS OR $500 RIMS.

    That leads to what the representatives in these states are going to do in the next 12 months. Suck up to the drivel of Dems or actually do something to take care of those actual “communities and workers”. 2010 is far enough out for the economic drought to continue and close enough to make an immediate change in representatives.

    Texas, Alabama, Tenn, NC, Florida, Illinois, Miss, Georgia are all in play. Newt made a great comment last night concerning the manufacturers and right to work states, concerning check card, unions and actual jobs.

    Ripe for a Contract with America II

    (And me thinks Newt will be running in 2012 and will get 100% of my efforts and money)

  6. proreason says:

    The Moron: “survive and prosper for the benefit of the workers and communities in which they operate”

    Great rhetoric, but the philosophy has failed a hundred times.

    Capitalism has improved living contitions more in 200 years than the prior 100 milleniums because businesses only succeed when the CUSTOMER is satisfied.

    Satisfying the WORKERS spells guaranteed failure. Guaranteed. Same thing for the benefit of the community.

    And the head-slapping thing about this is that the auto industry is the perfect CASE STUDY for that principle. The industry failed because the workers got what they wanted: guaranteed jobs, wages and health benefits 40% higher than the competition, work rules that ignore productivity. And the government got what it wanted: CAFE standards that the customers wouldn’t buy, regulations that gave beaurocrat make-work jobs at the expense of profits that could be reinvested in the business.

    It’s like you shoot yourself in the foot, feel the pain, and decide to fix it by shooting off the other foot.

    But they undoubtedly know that. What I’ve described are the facts of history, not opinions.

    So the only conclusion can be that the TMCC (The Moron’s Criminal Cabal) has deliberately chosen to tank the Auto Industry for short-term politic gains that will futher it’s goal of gaining unchecked oligarchical power.

    And this is just one step in their effort to make it impossible for the serfs to ever rise up again.

  7. MinnesotaRush says:

    So now that o-blah-blah has started the destruction of the auto industry, how will union negotiations go in the future? Will the UAW become federal employees?

    The idiocy continues.

    • Colonel1961 says:

      ‘Will the UAW become federal employees?’ Of course. Not ‘if’, but ‘when’…

  8. Confucius says:

    How thoughtless. They forgot to thank Bush. Remember the Harvard MBA started all this.

  9. Anonymoose says:

    It’s kind of like how when people first start commenting on “Obama Time” where he was perpetually late and the excuse was that like all kind Democrats he was taking time out of his schedule to help people……every single time he was late. Now we’re expected to believe he single handedly did all this by his “activist” approach, and “political instincts,” staying up until midnight to read reports as part of his “action packed” 100 days. Yep, that guy’s a razor sharp and honed political wizard, and I have some beachfront property on the moon I’d like to sell you.

    Read between the lines…..no opposition to his plans…letting his advisors do all the talking…….”tutored by veterans of past administrations”……it sounds like Obambi was taking a crash course in trying to sound intelligent while his handlers were doing all the important work.

  10. Reality Bytes says:

    “Don’t be tardy. Be a Schmartie. Come n join the Democrat Pahty”

    It’s “Springtime for Barry in Washington”

  11. DW says:

    So there I was…
    …a few hours ago. Sitting in the cab of a brand new Chevy pickup while the salesman extolled the wonders of the On Star(TM) system to me.
    Amazing thing, that.
    It knows where your vehicle is. All the time. It uses GPS, you see, and your vehicle’s location can be pinpointed at any given time.
    In fact, it can even send commands to your truck. For example, it’ll unlock the doors for you (power door locks required) if you call with the proper code after you’ve locked your keys inside.
    Get in an accident? The truck will send a signal to On Star(TM) who will in turn try to contact you. They can even send people out to check on you.
    Because they know where your vehicle is. All the time.
    And the government is now exercising more and more control of the auto makers.

    This moment of paranoia is brought to you by the White House, General Motors, and the Labatts Brewing Corporation.

    On Star(TM)?
    Bugger that!

    • Gila Monster says:

      “This moment of paranoia is brought to you by the White House, General Motors, and the Labatts Brewing Corporation”

      DW, my moment was courtesy of Miller Brewing but yeah, I understand. It’s bad enough having those GPS trackers in your cell phone (optionally activated I’m told) but in your vehicle too, no thanks, I’ll pass.

    • DW says:

      Yep. There’s more and more to be argued in favour of the horse or the dog team:
      Try and insert a GPS tracker in one of them and you’re liable to be either kicked into the next county or bitten.

    • JohnMG says:

      ….”horse or the dog team….”

      How does this differ from the dog and pony show going on in D C?

    • Douglas says:

      Pfffft, you want paranoia? How about a mandatory GPS device in all cars that can tell the government where you’ve been, how fast you’ve been driving and how long you’ve stayed at various locations?

      Sounds like a bad totalitarian sci fi novel. Or it would if it wasn’t an actual proposal.

      http://www.detnews.com/article/20090429/POLITICS03/904290380/1409/METRO

      Somehow, there’s a penumbra in the constitution that uses a guarantee of privacy to allow abortion. But tracking every movement of citizens is apparently OK.

  12. DW says:

    How does this differ from the dog and pony show going on in D C?

    A) Gila’s quarter horse (or whatever they ride in AZ) and my team of valiant huskies serve a useful purpose.
    B) Our particular modes of transportation don’t scare the hell out of New Yorkers (since they’ve never seen such things before).
    C) A/F mentioned transport is far more environmentally friendly than AF1.
    D) Excreta from A/F mentioned transport become organic fertilizer – not public policy.

    • JohnMG says:

      A. They use the whole horse in Arizona, but I get your point. ;-}
      B. The opposite can’t be said.
      C. And certainly more friendly than the occupant of AF1.
      D. Uhhh…….what can I say?

  13. DW says:

    They use the whole horse in Arizona,

    …sigh

    With that, gentle friends, duty calls in the early morning hours so I must retire to my closet.
    Good night one and all.


« Front Page | To Top
« | »