Well that's good news. Does this mean we can expect limited government and less taxes?
And if he's got a problem with the auto execs, he should teach them a lesson with NO BAILOUT.
Prepare to be sick or to gloat.
The UAW is the problem. Obama is showing he is a tyrant already.
Are they not heeding his advice to keep their tires inflated?
He obviously suffers from a deep inferiority complex, evidenced by his continuous desire to put down others.
“Obama: Auto Executives ‘Tone Deaf’ to Concerns of Ordinary Americans”
####
Sure.
And what about the entitlement, pigs-at-the-trough unions?
Yes, including the “humble” rank and file union members.
I wouldn’t get too comfortable if I were you. Liberals don’t consider taxes “other people’s money”. Remember how tax cuts had to be paid for?
wait, he voted to bail out wall street but it’s the auto execs that he has a problem with?
and what of the UAW hussien???
Kettle . . . . meet Pot!!!
It will not surprise me if, after car-pooling to D.C., the Dimocratz accuse the three CEO’s of getting together to conspire to fix prices.
The last thing the RATS want is the auto makers to file for bankruptcy. A judge would oversee a corporate re-structure plan that would gut the UAW’s strangle hold on the industry. The RATS will give in to a bail out, probably more than once.
Dear Obama (who currently hold “The Office of the President Elect”:
If you think car executives are tone deaf, their hearing is perfect when compared to government at all levels. Because government only seems to care about rewarding the irresponsible.
“We’re sort of focused on them. But I think it’s been a problem for the captains of industry generally,” Obama told Walters in the interview, to air Wednesday. “When people are pulling down hundred million dollar bonuses on Wall Street, and taking enormous risks with other people’s money, that indicates a sense that you don’t have any perspective on what’s happening to ordinary Americans.”
As usual, BO spends a lot of time saying nothing.
Awesome! Obama is gonna “Pimp my Ride”
By 'taking enormous risks with other people's money', is he referring to Fannie and Freddie's actions? Is he referring to the way banks have made loans under the force of the CRA and the threat of civil suits (from ACORN, no less)? Or, is he referring to the way the government has stolen $700+ billion of the taxpayer's money to bolster those banks that caved to the legal onslaught and have since collapsed?