Rush hopes for failure

I've been looking for a transcript of the show where he said this:

Quote:

---

"Based on what we've seen with General Motors and the banks, if he fails, America is saved," Limbaugh said. "Barack Obama's policies and their failure is the only hope we've got to maintain the America of our founding."

---

Did he ever give explain what he meant by GM and the banks failing saving America?

Is he saying that the only road to recovery and to the GOP regaining power is a period of economic depression?

Last year Limbaugh signed a contract for $400 million. I'm not sure he understands what that kind of total collapse would mean to me and my family.

I don't get where he's coming from.

BTW--Greta just played a 10 min. portion of the show that contained the above quote, and he never did articulate his point. It wasn't clear at all what his problem was with GM. He said something about these guys need to be making cars and be run by people who understand that. He never really explained exactly how failure would benefit us.

In fairness, I don't listen to him on a regular basis, so maybe someone can fill me in.

Limbaugh is a traitor.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Will Dill

Limbaugh is a traitor.

---

You are an idiot.

Panic 1937

Panic of 1893



Both caused speculation AND PROLONGED by government involvment in the market.

again - the "great" depression - caused by speculation and PROLONGED by government meddling.

Government does not have a good history when it comes to meddling in financial affairs. Rush is right. Let the banks fail - it wil for sure HURT - but it will not destroy us. The longer we put off allowing for correction - the more it's going to hurt in the end.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shannon

You are an idiot.

---

:mad: shannon. For shame. Insulting idiots like that!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PoliCon

Government does not have a good history when it comes to meddling in financial affairs. Rush is right. Let the banks fail - it wil for sure HURT - but it will not destroy us. The longer we put off allowing for correction - the more it's going to hurt in the end.

---

I started asking that question when the Big 3 first showed up with their hands out. Why not let file for chapter 11 and renegotiate their union contracts? Two friends from Detroit took me through the link to parts companies the also supply the non-union Honda, Toyota, and BMW, as well as airplane manufactures. It wouldn't just be auto workers, it would be far reaching and the level of poverty, crime, etc.-- That's how it was explained to me. The too big to fail concept.

And why was this moved? So, if you don't get Limbaugh, then you're a liberal?

How did Ford get back on track and pay back their loan. What do they do differently?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hazlnut

I started asking that question when the Big 3 first showed up with their hands out. Why not let file for chapter 11 and renegotiate their union contracts? Two friends from Detroit took me through the link to parts companies the also supply the non-union Honda, Toyota, and BMW, as well as airplane manufactures. It wouldn't just be auto workers, it would be far reaching and the level of poverty, crime, etc.-- That's how it was explained to me. The too big to fail concept.

And why was this moved? So, if you don't get Limbaugh, then you're a liberal?

How did Ford get back on track and pay back their loan. What do they do differently?

---

some one else would have come along and filled the gap. No such thing as too big to fail.

ford had more capital than did the other two - and they have sold off just about everything they can to stay afloat. GM and Chrysler have nothing to sell really. Remember Mercedes bought them and then kicked them out again. It wasn't worth the debt they have. Just think - if we would have just let them fail in the 80s how much less of a problem we would have now.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PoliCon

some one else would have come along and filled the gap. No such thing as too big to fail.

ford had more capital than did the other two - and they have sold off just about everything they can to stay afloat. GM and Chrysler have nothing to sell really. Remember Mercedes bought them and then kicked them out again. It wasn't worth the debt they have. Just think - if we would have just let them fail in the 80s how much less of a problem we would have now.

---

Here's a question for an economist. Many factors to consider, but how much does it cost us (American Taxpayer) to let GM / Chrysler fail?

What is the $$ amount? Unemployment, temporary aide to unprecedented poverty, crime wave, local banks failures. Do we let the smaller suppliers and support companies fail?

How long would a bankruptcy at that level take? A lawyer friend told me 6mos. I think it would be more like a year and damage to the brand would be considerable. They'd have to re-enter the market with something new.

Also, what is the Political price? Local and State officials will get the brunt of the fallout.

Just think, if we had let GM fail in the 80's, Michael Moore would have never had a career.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hazlnut

Also, what is the Political price? Local and State officials will get the brunt of the fallout.

---

you say that like it's a bad thing!:rolleyes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PoliCon

you say that like it's a bad thing!:rolleyes:

---

Meet the new boss, same as the old boss...

Power vacuums have unintended consequences. (sometimes)