The current crisis among the big three American car companies places liberals in a bit of a quandry. On the one hand, liberals are the biggest phoney environmentalists around. They lie to us, claiming CO2 is a pollutant and will destroy the planet, that we must abandon our cars, and that we must drive idiotic hybrids to save mother Earth. The high priest of the eco-religionist movement, Al Gore, called for a ban on the internal combustion engine. In short, liberals loathe the car. Nothing should make them happier that to see the collective bankruptcy of the American auto industry. But, on the other hand, liberals need labor unions like fish need water. So, do craven liberals stick to their eco-principles and rejoice at the demise of the auto industry, thus abandoning their union over-lords, or do they keep their campaign promises to the thug unions and abandon their eco-conscience? What's a dumb lib to do?
The answer is easy. They go with whichever group forks over the most campaign cash and guarantees the most democrat votes....the union thugs of course. Liberals support environmental causes only when it's politically expedient to do so. But, when it comes right down to it, they'll go with the money every time.
2 comments:
Just as a wildfire checks and then rejuvenates a forest so should the bankruptcy protection laws be used to restructure the auto industry. At the expense of the companies and shareholders.
It's so clear to me. Too big to fail, give me a break. Even if they could have sustained the status quo, we'd all be driving Chinese cars within 15 years. Read Darwin's oft forgotten "Origin of Motorcars".
Adapt, or meet your demise.
Again, I drive two Fords. Who's to blame?
Dave, there's nothing wrong with driving the car of your choice, regardless of the appauling ineptitude of it's manufacturer. But you are correct, a controlled bankruptcy would allow the necessary restructuring, and force the abandonment of the union contracts which are albatrosses around car companies' necks.
Post a Comment