Exactly. It's plain political lying for the companies management to blame unions for their woes. We are in a situation where there is way too much car manufacturing capacity in the world so how bad would it really have been to let union workers strike for a month rather than giving them more and more and more. The financial leaders of a company are supposed to be on top of the industry and the business case. All grunts always want more money, that's a constant as sure as gravity. You can't simply give it to them and hope everything works out ok.
However, he didn't get much chance to expound on this point. The majority of the debate actually became Rush's usual history of how he was a self-made man.
Yes, exactly, and for me it was more irritating than usual. Maybe that's because I got layed off 7 weeks ago.
The caller should have known you never get a well-rounded debate with any radio host. The host controls the time devoted to each side of the issue. He also controls the shut-off switch.
Yup, but Rush is usually surprisingly fair.
I wonder if you notice how Rush was really beating up on the LA Times for it's front page "article" that was really a surreptious commercial ad?
A half hour later I was avidly listening to Rush when he again began to speak about General Motors. I became all ears. A couple minutes into it I realize it was actually a GM commercial woven into the narrative he was delivering. GM is one of his sponsors. Hmmmmm.
Now don't get me wrong. I have listened to Rush almost every day for 20 years and would rather vote for Obama than miss the Maharushi for a minute.
I just like to tweak his tail once in a while.
Only because he wants me to be an independant individual like he is.....and not a robotic part of his listening herd, LOL.
Leni