From the outside looking in, it is hard to see why people operating on common sense would support a $15 Billion bailout of the Auto Industry. Also, it is hard that the same people would vote for a gentleman who believes that a handfull of workers have the right to hold a bank hostage, because the bank did not loan their bankrupt business money to pay their payroll. Again, it is even more difficult to believe that the American people would vote a for a man who says one thing one day, and then the next denies he said it or says that those speaking for him "misspoke". Yet, if one looks at American history, one will find example after example of the American people being duped all in the name of "hope" and "change".
In the 1960's the people believed a megalomaniacal man who promised "hope" and "change" in Vietnam policy, and in the end was discovered to be a "win at all cost" politician and had to resign his presidency. This opened the door for another prophet of "change", and he led the country into near financial ruin, and the weakest foreign policy ever. But a glimmer of hope came in the 1980's, and it looked like the American people finally got it figured out, and for 12 years they had peace and prosperity. Unfortunate, another "snake oil" salesman from the South showed weaving words of "hope" and "change". His lies regarding the economy resonated because it played to the basest of all human emotions "envy", and his charge that "hope was on the way" led millions of Americans to vote for him. Now, we are faced another Ivy league trained lawyer, with smooth rhetoric and ability to use the catch phrase that wins elections, "change", and before he is even sworn into office he is on the precipice of a confidence risking scandal. Yet, this is nothing new.
The last smooth talking Ivy league trained lawyer to grace the office could not even get out of the election without scandal, and his presidency was one scandal after another, which eventually led to his impeachment. President-elect Obama is already involved in a cover up involving his governor. The Illinois governor has been recorded saying that Obama told him who he wanted to fill his spot, and yet today Obama is quoted as saying that he and the governor have not discussed the matter. Even Obama's campaign manager, has been quoted as saying that Obama and the governor discussed the matter. Yet, today an unknown Obama staffer has been quoted as saying that, "Axelrod misspoke". This is the M.O. of Mr. Obama. He is close with people and has them as "advisers" or "mentors", and discusses many issues with them. Obama even brags about their relationship, until these people do something that is politically inconvenient or damaging. Then these "were not [the people] he knew", or they "misspoke" or were "mistaken". Is this kind of side stepping the kind of presidency we will have from a President Obama? Is this kind of presidency what 52% of Americans voted for?
No one can know for sure what kind of presidency we will have the next four years. Many on the right have been warning the American people about the allegiances of Obama, but no one listened. The media chose to ignore the Ayers, Wright, Salinski, Retzco relationships, and now it appears the Blago relationship, or "lack there of" may mire this presidency. This begs the question, what other relationships will call into question our president's character during the next four years? Time will only tell.
I don't know if anyone has been paying attention, but have you noticed that since the $700 Billion dollar bailout more and more companies and entities have put their hands out? The Auto industry was first, but now States and Mayors are asking for their piece of the pie.
The U.S. has a policy with negotiating with terrorists. We don't do it! Perhaps we should develop a policy to deal with "freeloaders" looking for a handout. JUST SAY NO!!!
Failure builds character, and if we allow large businesses to fail it has more positive benefits than negative. Business leaders learn from the mistakes of others and don't repeat them, workers learn that if they demand too much from their company they can destroy it from the inside, and investors learn to diversify. How are any of these lessons bad? Sure people might be out of a job, but maybe that is the quick kick in the butt they need to go back to school and learn a more modern trade, and maybe younger generations will see the importance of a good education. Again, how is this bad?