That’s right. Obama is calling the shots in private industry as Rick Wagoner has been forced out by the federal government.

The White House confirmed Wagoner was leaving at the government’s behest after The Associated Press reported his immediate departure, without giving a reason. . . .

“We are anticipating an announcement soon from the Administration regarding the restructuring of the U.S. auto industry. We continue to work closely with members of the Task Force and it would not be appropriate for us to speculate on the content of any announcement,” the company said.

Apparently Obama thinks he can run the auto industry better than the people actually in the business, or anyone who has actual business experience. Unfortunately, the reality is that Obama is keeping union employees’ jobs in place because AFL-CIO members vote largely for Obama and Democrats at a time when GM should simply go out of business. However, Obama will continue to make excuses to explain why we need three automakers in the U.S. and keep GM afloat.

So now that Rick Wagoner has been forced out what is next? When will the government begin dictating production (see example here)? After all, Obama claims Americans are demanding “greener” cars. You know, with all that market research Obama has done on the auto industry. You should just trust the great leader that he knows all.

Once the government’s forced production plans fail, because the government will not force production of what consumers demand, it will force production of what the administration believes consumers should demand, then GM will need a much larger bailout because, remember, Obama would not dare let union workers who largely vote for him lose their jobs. Then the necessary bailout will be so large, Obama will go ahead and nationalize GM through the broad new powers Tim Geithner is working on acquiring for him, because GM is clearly “too big to fail”. Meanwhile, the thousands of union members who voted for him before will continue to be blindly enamored by him.

Governing by populism with the purpose of buying votes rather than governing by principles of right and wrong is the modus operandi of this administration to a degree never before seen in the country. Unfortunately, far too many Americans embrace these policies due to their selfish pride.


  • Polprav

    Hello from Russia!
    Can I quote a post in your blog with the link to you?

  • Troy La Mana

    Obama can give me a Tesla Model S and I’ll be happy.

  • JE

    He is gone. Last i heard he was on suicide watch. Nice fella, neat ideas. But in modern America he became extremely lonely as all the other successful free thinkers sold out and got jobs in the government.

    • JE

      Should have posted under brian question…Who is John Galt? In America we are more interested into turning everyone into John Doe.

  • Brian

    Who is John Galt?

    • Gil Rice

      I guess nobody knows.

    • dw

      Atlas Shrugged…

  • kristen

    I don’t want a greener car. I highly doubt a Prius can drive in the snow like my trailblazer, nor would it protect me very well in a collision. And I don’t know anyone who’s dying to get their hands on one of those ‘environmentally-friendly’ vehicles, either.

    I wish people would wake up and smell the socialism.

    • David Kaiser, Editor

      OK, I agree that government should not interfere with business, but if they do, there should not be an issue with forcing out a guy that during his watch, the company he ran lost $68 billion and over 90% of its stock value.

      I, for one, do not weep for Mr. Wagoner.

      And Kristen, socialism is wanting a better car?

      If we can put a man on the moon, there is no reason why we cannot create a more energy-efficient, earth-friendly car or truck that has the horsepower to plow through the snow like your precious Trailblazer.

      “I don’t want a greener car” is a preposterous statement.

      I am not a believer in the bluster of global warming, but that doesn’t mean we can’t find ways to reduce the garbage we put into the air, ground, and water.

      Do you want to continue to depend on foreign oil? Do you want our foreign policy driven by our nation’s energy needs?

      New technologies that use energy better create a win-win – less dependence on outside energy sources, and a decrease in the amount of toxins we put into the air.

      It’s not about left or right here, it’s just the smart thing to do.

      • Gil Rice

        Mr. Editor, since Jan. 21, nothing smart has been done and there seems to be no end to nothing smart being done. Those of us down here in the Southwest for the most part cannot use a green vehicle. They will not move oil field equipment from one location to another, will not haul cattle and/or horses when you need to, and because of this, some dealers do not even carry them on their car lots. So down here, the statement would read, I can’t use a green car. Besides, I really prefer maroon.

        • East of Eden

          Also here in the southwest, where things are very spread out, a green vehicle will not get you where you need to go. If I wanted to drive the 50 miles into civilization in a green machine, I’d be outta juice before I got there and back home. Not to mention the fact that green machines are rarely family friendly. Have you tried to fit a baby and all of his stuff in a Prius? It does not work. Not to mention, what are we going to do with all the lithitum batteries from the Priuses when they need to be replaced? Is there a way to dispose of these things? Not in my town.

          So, when they can make a green car that can hold a family + all the stuff a family needs to take with them to grandma’s house, and get us more than 60 miles on a battery charge or whateever the technology is, then it might have my attention. Till then, I’m with Kristen and I do not want a green car.

      • Scott A. Robinson


        Though I agree that better cars are more desirable, I believe the market should dictate those decisions, not the government. Is there market research out there showing most people prefer small, more fuel-efficient vehicles to larger, less efficient ones?

        This administration is going down the path of forcing their environmental morality on the rest of us, without regard of its economic sustainability. One of the reasons the administration rejected Wagoner’s plan was because the new Volt electric car was going to be too expensive. What do they expect? Hybrid vehicles were far more expensive at first too, as are most early generation products because the economies of scale have not yet been established and the capital outlay has not been recovered.

        As for foreign oil, maybe the Obama administration should stop canceling oil leases on US soil and refusing to allow further off-shore or ANWR drilling and exploration.

        We have resources in the US. Unfortunately, the leaders in Washington are forcing their environmental morality on us, making us more dependent upon foreign oil so we will want their programs.

        • kristen

          Amen Scott; you hit the nail on the head. Government should NOT be dictating what we drive. If I want a trailblazer, I should be able to have one; just like those who want a hybrid (and pay an arm and a leg to purchase it and replace the $4000 battery) can do so. If they can make a more fuel-efficient 4×4 great; but we are years away from that. And my statement isn’t any more preposterous than our leaders refusing to tap into our vast amounts of resources in this country. Lighten up, DK.

          • David Kaiser, Editor

            Our “vast” resources as you call them, and I assume you mean oil, wouldn’t last 10 years if it was the only oil we used, and it would only last that long if were were able to get every drop from the ground.

            I’ll lighten up just as soon as you get serious!

            • JE

              But we have lots of coal! How about a coal fired SUV. Lots of horsepower. :)
              Seriously, the market would take care of all of this is the government got out of it. Let oil prices go back up, let gas hit $6 a gallon. SUVs were cheap last summer and will be again because people will quit buying them (except the few that really NEED them). And when that happens and stays that way then you will get a breakthrough that is useful. Hybrids are a joke with the potential for a worse environmental impact than what we have now when you dump all those batteries in landfills.

              • David Kaiser, Editor

                Haha. I’m trying to picture an SUV with a big ol’ smokestack.

                We’d all be wearing engineer hats.

              • JE

                If you saw what some of the locals do here to their pickups…i can send you a pic of what it would look like.
                Hey, DK, how do you feel about the fact Obama has announced the government will stand behind GM and Chrysler warranties? Is that appropriate government intervention? Or should i ask, is it OK that your taxes are paying to fix my car? Ahhh, i love the smell of socialism in the morning. :)
                But i will still take the engineer hat! Cool new stylin Obama fashion! :)

          • Scott A. Robinson

            Concerning the more fuel efficient large vehicles, I saw an ad the other day for an Escalade Hybrid. It gets a whopping 20 mpg. I’m just sayin’!

        • David Kaiser, Editor

          Scott, I will agree that canceling domestic drilling is a mistake, but again, if you look at the amount of oil in those reserves and compare that to our consumption levels, there isn’t enough to last.

          The government should not run car companies, just like they shouldn’t run banks.

          But sometimes when there is an impasse, the government needs to step in and protect the people it represents.

          Even Reagan got involved when the situation called for it. Just look at the example of his firing of 11,000 air traffic controllers when they refused to break off their strike in 1981.

          Small government is fine and dandy, but it has to do something when the situation calls for it.

          • Scott A. Robinson


            Your point is well taken regarding the ratio of oil in reserve to the consumption. However, anything that emits carbon is on this administration’s hit list, such as in the case of the exploration of shale technology.

            The point has already been made about disposal of hybrid batteries, but what about the cost of charging electric cars? Granted, they will most likely charge during off-peak times (but can you imagine everyone on the east coast plugging in their cars about 6 pm, or late in the hot California/Nevada/Arizona summer afternoon?). However, the greater issue may be the cost of the power.

            Say we are pushed into electric or electric-hybrid vehicles. Meanwhile, this administration, following the sad example of HW Bush institutes greater cap and trade market limits in combination with attacking known energy sources such as clean coal and nuclear, thereby raising the cost of electricity substantially.

            So now we all have these “green” cars that we can’t afford, let alone transport our families in.

            And that is what’s next, in combination with the types of cars the government says we should drive and government run heathcare, we will be told that it is irresponsible or even illegal to have more than X number of kids.

            Back to the point, what is government protecting us from here? I assume you mean the national security argument of relying so heavily on the Middle East for oil. I’m in complete agreement that this is important. However, I do not agree that the government should pick and choose which sources of energy we tap. Markets should make this determination.

            Small government is fine and dandy and, well, it sure would be nice to have rather than the creation of bureaucracy after bureaucracy, designed to keep those creators in power. If you think the auto companies are poorly run now, just wait until the government bureaucracy is in charge.

            /end ranting, for now

      • Scott A. Robinson

        I should have also mentioned that I agree Wagoner should not be leading GM, he has done very poorly. However, the government should not force him out. The GM Board of Directors should fire him.

        The funny thing to me is that is seems Bob Nardelli is getting a pass, supposedly because he hasn’t been at Chrysler very long. This is the same Nardelli that Home Depot paid $210 million to for him to go away.

      • JE

        Give me an option for a half ton pickup truck that will do everything my truck does and gets 40mpg and it will sell like crazy. The car companies have killed everything that has come down the pike that might lead that way.
        Agreed Wagoner should be gone…but if the government hadnt been propping up GM with tax dollars he probably would have been fired already. That or they would have filed for reorganization that would have allowed them to dump their obscene union contracts and become profitable.
        How many people think part of Obama’s big plan to fix the auto industry will include any cut backs in the union benefits? Lets see, high school education gets you a job on an assembly line making more than most college graduates with a ‘jobs bank’ so you are guaranteed to keep getting paid if you get laid off. With a plan liek that, it sounds like the government already has been running the auto industry.

  • Cordeiro

    I don’t know why you guys are giving Barry such a hard time. I mean, look at the way he’s staffed the government so far!

    Oh. Wait. A SECTREAS who can’t file his own taxes is running Treasury without so much as a secretary to screen his calls.

    Do we have a SEC-COMMERCE yet? Does anybody care?

    Obama knows as much about the auto industry as he does about particle physics. Watch the opening bell on GM stock. GM closed Friday at $3.62. If I had a broker, I’d have him short this stock.

  • Rusty Shackleford

    I still love my suburban. Find me the vehicle socialist drive that can fit my three car seats and still pulls the family RV with my lovely bride and myself and I will show you a POTUS that can think without a tele….oh never mind.

  • Gil Rice

    I guess now we will be driving Obamalets or Baradillacs, but I will flat refuse to even look at a Hussienler 300. That’s just too close to Hiz Dictatorships namesake. OMG, where will it all end? Somebody help me, and us.

    • Scott A. Robinson


      You reminded me that I forgot to add the example of what was coming. The Pelosi GTxi/RT Sport Edition is right around the corner!

      However, it may necessarily be renamed after The One or better yet, in true Obama propagandistic fashion, “the workers car” or “the people’s car”.

      • Brian H

        “The People’s Car.”

        Love It!

        • dw

          I think Volkswagen may have the copyright on the “People’s Car”. That is what Volkswagen means…

      • Brian H

        We already have “The People’s Car”. In Houston we call it the Metro bus.

    • kristen

      Hmmmm. How about ‘The Hope 2000′ or ‘The Changeling’?