I've thought about that too Daiwa, but I don't think BO likes competition.

Besides didn't Ford file Chap 11 not too long ago (2004 ish)?

Now there is news that Ford's suppliers might be going bankrupt.  If Ford survives this it would be a miracle (imo).

Ford went through a major restructuring in 2006 which included closing some plants & Bill Ford stepping down, but don't recall a bankruptcy.

How?

GM doesn't have to take it, neither does Chrysler. I seem to remember them clamoring for gov't money before, they could have easily said no then too.

Geesh, people, take things when it benefits them and their ways, but when it goes the way they don't... *rolls eyes*

Maybe it was just on the 'verge' of bankruptcy?  I didn't pay that close attention back then.  You are probably right, but I do remember some kind of financialy restructuring.

You don't understand... when the government owns you you cannot just say NO. The price of accepting bailout money was their sovereignty. You might recall Obama firing the GM CEO a few weeks ago.

there's that memory problem thing happenin again.  gm's former ceo packed up all his money and left of his own volition several months ago. 

Yeah funny thing memory. You know want else is funny? Revisionist history. Here's a smatering of links from various sources for you, including one from your liberal brother-in-arms, Mikey Moore, to re-educate you.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0309/20625.html

http://consumerist.com/5190240/obama-fires-gms-ceo

http://www.suntimes.com/business/1501561,w-obama-gm-wagoner032909.article

http://obrag.org/?p=5853

http://www.nypost.com/seven/03302009/news/politics/obama_fires_gm_boss_162031.htm

your attempt to establish inaccuracy as fact strikes me as sad instead of anything close to amusing.

firstly, i guess we're to accept in your lil world, 65 or so days is the equivalent of "a few weeks" rather than over 2 months as the rest of the world tracks time.  

more importantly, from your own sources, 

polirxo.xom'a headline was:

GM CEO resigns at Obama's behest

chi sun-times article ends by contradicttng its original claim & premise:

Wagoner said in a statement early Monday that he was asked to "step aside" during a meeting with Obama administration officials on Friday, and he consented.

the ny post did the same thing much more quickly, like in its second paragrah:

Wagoner, who had been at the helm of the automaker for eight years, hit the road after the administration threatened to withhold bailout money from the company if he didn't.

you've never been fired or fired anyone else?

  i can only speak to one having never experienced the former.  perhaps it's just me (although i suspect otherwise) but none whose employment i terminated were "asked" or "threatened" or merely "resigned at my behest".

ask implies a choice by its nature as does threaten (altho not, perhaps, involving so much latitude).  things done at my behest are most likely considered favors  but might include acting on my recommendation all the way to responding agreeably to my serious suggestion.

on the other hand, maybe you're confused about what constitutes being fired because for years when you heard one after another of your former bosses utter something like, "ain't it bout time for you to go home?"  you did.  next day, when he didn't call you with an invitation to return, you considered yourself outta a job and began applying elsewhere.

Contortionist drivel, kb.  (I'm kinda likin' that word, drivel)

Let's see, you want us to believe you've never heard of 'I'll expect your resignation letter on my desk this afternoon'?  By your (seriously twisted) logic, no Cabinet member has ever been fired.

isn't that a passive-aggressive sorta managerial tool (one employed, i gotta note with some irony, by passive-agressive managerial tools themselves) really a last-minute deal sweetener enabling the terminator to avoid having to actually fire the person to whom it's addressed while simultaneously inviting the potential terminee to pretend to quit and thus avoid damaging his resume? 

termination involves no asking, only telling.

Thanks for making/confirming my point about Wagner.

So why didn't he just tell Obama to fuck off? I guess some people just can't say no to this man. Here KB is some practice for you... leave JU and never return.....come on now say it and see how easy it is. What is really sad is your ability to simplify issues when it suits you. Wagner left because the Boss (Obama) wouldn't pay the company if he stayed. Keep talking though you're a funny guy and I like to laugh. True believers...bless their pointy little heads.

soon as your check for $600,000* clears my bank, i'm voluntarily outta here like a cheetah just seen a gazelle after having had 20mg of usp d-desoxyephedrine hcl introduced to its system intravenously.  absent that, we both know there's only one person can effect my non-volitional departure and, based on several years of observation, i don't believe that would be accurately described as merely leaving at his behest.

don't come at all close to being fired by obama (who ain't the boss, btw).  wagoner coulda refused to budge and still be president of gm at this moment.  unless, of course, his real bosses on the board of directors decided to have a couple of those corporate security goons show up, pack up his stuff and strongarm his ass outta the gm building and just beyond the corporation's property line.

*yeah i know 600k ain't nearly enough to compromise my principles and i hope i'm not too greatly disappointing anyone.  if it's any consolation, i'm hoping to collect at least that much from every other forum to which i belong--except,  of course, for ex-corporate executive slatterns and trollops dot org.

You can call it any pretty name you want, or give any reason. Bottom line, the admonition wanted Wagner gone, plain and simple, it's really not important who handed him his pink slip. I'm not disputing whether that move was right or wrong, just that the presidents fingerprints are all over it.

Wagner was planning on stepping down after the restructuring anyway.  Why would a company want to be lead by a guy who's about to jump ship?