Here is what I don’t understand about the freak-out (which I predicted, btw) over the government refusing to give GM money unless they get rid of Wagoner. Sully provides a brief comment that serves to summarize much of the commentary from the right:
I get the heebie-jeebies any time a politician makes a business decision.
My reliably conservative relative called me last night and asked me if I was not upset about this, and then got mad at me and told me I was just blinded by love for Obama when I said I couldn’t care less. Why would I? Few on the right have any problem telling welfare recipients what to do. I doubt Andrew has ever seen a welfare reform bill he didn’t like. Other than Josh Trevino, I don’t remember any opposition from the right about the Bankruptcy Bill and all the draconian demands placed on individuals.
This isn’t the government going to Microsoft and telling Bill gates what to do. This isn’t the government coming to your profitable small business and telling you who to hire and fire. Hell, this isn’t even the government telling GM what to do in the daily operation of their business. These are companies who have made decades of bad decisions coming to the government for yet another bailout, and as a requirement, the Obama team is demanding some leadership shake-up. Not only does it make sense to get rid of the guy who has been there for the last ten years as things went down the drain, but it would be politically impossible to bail these guys out unless some changes were made.
If GM wants Wagoner to stay, they can go without federal money. It is that simple. Hell, if I had my way, we would have leadership turn-over at every bank or institution receiving TARP money.