Iraqi Reporter Throws Shoe At President Bush
President George Bush Today dodged two shoes that were thrown at him by an Iraqi reporter. The president displayed some awesome reflexes by quickly dodging the fast moving shoes which were thrown at a close distance. The president quickly joked; “All I can report is that it was a size 10.” Watch the video at here.
Posted on the Huffington post of all places
President-elect Barack Obama’s chief of staff Rahm Emanuel had direct conversations with Gov. Rod Blagojevich about Obama’s replacement in the US Senate, FOX News Chicago reports.
Citing “a source familiar with the investigation,” Fox says that Emanuel had “multiple conversations” with Blagojevich and his chief of staff John Harris, who was also arrested Tuesday on federal corruption charges, about the seat and that they we’re “likely recorded and in FBI possession.”
Fox’s source said that Emanuel gave the governor’s office a list of “candidates that would be acceptable to President-elect Barack Obama” but no “quid pro quo” or “dealmaking” is suspected.
Meanwhile, an angry Emanuel says he won’t go to work because of the media stakeout. He told an ABC News cameraman that has received death threats:
The President-elect’s chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel, said today he won’t go to the Chicago Presidential transition offices in order to avoid reporters seeking to ask him whether he had contact with Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich about the Senate seat vacated by Barack Obama’s election.
Emanuel appeared “beet-red,” according to an ABC News cameraman who was invited inside by Emmanuel to use his bathroom this morning.“I’m getting regular death threats. You’ve put my home address on national television. I’m pissed at the networks. You’ve intruded too much, ” Emanuel said, according to the cameraman.
Emanuel has refused to comment as to whether he is the un-named Presidential advisor cited in the FBI affidavit filed in the Blagojevich case. “You’re wasting your time,” Emanuel told a Chicago Sun-Times reporter yesterday. “I’m not going to say a word to you. I’m going to do this with my children. Don’t do that. I’m a father. I have two kids. I’m not going to do it.”
By ALLAHPUNDIT at HotAir.com.
Ed Rendell conveniently frames The One’s cautious handling of this as an amateur mistake that’s destined to prolong the coverage. Really? Amateurishness isn’t the first quality that springs to mind when I think of someone like Axelrod. Nor does the infamously combative Rahm Emanuel strike me as the type to be cowed into silence by death threats. Here’s a radical alternative theory: Maybe they’re honestly worried that someone on the team’s exposed and don’t want to give the press any new crumbs until they have their story straight.
Obama’s staff has declined to respond to even basic questions, like who is conducting the probe, how long it will take, what issues are being explored and whether they are working with federal investigators. Obama has promised transparency throughout his service and to divulge contacts his staff has had with Blagojevich’s office in the coming days. But his staff has locked down on inquiries in the meantime…
Emanuel is not a target of the probe, according to people who have been briefed on the investigation.
The two people spoke on a condition of anonymity because the criminal investigation is ongoing. One is a person close to Emanuel, who said he has been told by investigators that he’s not a subject of their probe…
Another question that Obama’s staff didn’t answer is how he knows that his office had no involvement if he had yet to gather all the facts about conversations they had with Blagojevich’s office. Speaking on the condition of anonymity, transition officials said they do not want to release any information on the internal review until it is completed.
My hunch is the same as Maguire’s — that someone on the team was approached by Blago to make a deal, that the offer was rejected, but that that person then neglected to tell Fitzgerald about it. Is that illegal, i.e. misprision of felony, or just shady? Such are the questions Team Barry may find itself momentarily consumed by.
In case you’re wondering, no, Obama’s approval rating hasn’t suffered from this at all.
By JIM VANDEHEI & MIKE ALLEN
President-elect Obama made official the worst-kept secret in Washington this morning: that his national security team will be headlined by a bitter political rival (Clinton) and a member of President Bush’s war cabinet (Gates).
Beyond the obvious symbolism, however, Monday’s moves also offer some important evidence on the best-kept secret of the past two years: how will a President Obama actually govern in these troubled times?
The parlor game of who gets what job is largely over, save a few of the less prestigious cabinet gigs. Here is what today’s announcement – combined with the unveiling of his top White House staff and economic team – tell us about the 44th president as he prepares to take over.
• He is an intellectual, who is more impressed by academic and governing credentials than familiarity and loyalty.
New York Times columnist David Brooks nailed it recently when he called the emerging cabinet a “valedictocracy”: a team of the nation’s first-in-class Ivy League elites. He meant it as a compliment. He’s not alone: it’s hard to find Republicans who don’t express admiration (at least in private) for the emerging Obama team.
Of the 18 top appointments announced so far, 12 have degrees from Ivy League institutions, Stanford or MIT. Susan Rice was a Rhodes Scholar; Larry Summers was the youngest tenured professor in Harvard history and Greg Craig, the top White House lawyer, attended Exeter, Harvard, Cambridge and Yale.
Few of the early picks could be considered Obama loyalists. Hillary Rodham Clinton thought she would be banished to the outer reaches of Obama’s world. Now, she’s secretary of state. Robert Gates thought he was headed for retirement. Now, he will run war policy for anti-war Obama. The victor has proved to be anything but vindictive.
There could be a cost to having so many high achievers around the same table. Bush’s war Cabinet was also praised for its experience and gravitas, but wound up being a dysfunctional snake pit.
• He is willing to take big risks.
His economic and national-security teams are getting packed with huge personalities who see themselves as architects, not assembly-line workers. The potential for big clashes in tough times is high. But so is the potential for big results.
Hillary Clinton could be a fabulous world diplomat, considering her familiarity with leaders and global problems. She could also be a disaster if the Clinton family’s penchant for personal and political dramas distract the Obama presidency. Gates could be the perfect man to end the Iraq war: A Bush appointee with strong ties to the GOP establishment. Or he could clash with the new, outsized personalities around him. And don’t forget: Joe Biden is vice president and deference isn’t his specialty.
Ego management will also be a necessity on the economic team. Lawrence Summers, who will be the White House economic adviser, was so harshly critical of colleagues when he was Clinton’s Treasury secretary that the president himself once urged him to stay respectful of colleagues at a cabinet meeting, Democrats recalled. Tim Geithner, the new Treasury secretary, worked under Summers in the Clinton years. Now it’s Geithner who’ll be the public face of the economic team - and former colleagues are imagining a delicate dance between the headstrong mentor and his former protégé. .
He is very focused on governing—and prefers persuasion to force.
Obama inherits what every president dreams of: a Congress controlled by his party and with strong majorities. Unlike Bush, he seems to genuinely care what they think.
Many Republicans resented the way Bush simply dismissed the power and input of Congress. He saw his victories as mandates to implement his agenda and was dismissive of naysayers in either party. Obama seems to making a different calculation: Democrats can win big if they proceed with something resembling a parliamentary approach to governance.
Don’t look right at her! Hillary Clinton was announced as Secretary of Snake. Today, we have launched our Hillusa: Secretary of Snake Campaign. Just as we have and continue to use the Obama Hood Cartoon we will get this to the masses. I encourage anyone with their own blog to download the image and post. Make sure to use tags that say Hillary Clinton Secretary of State + Secretary of Snake. If you don’t have your own blog, you can post it on forums. This campaign will be centered around this image appearing in search results for Hillary as Secretary of State.
“If you would like other sizes of the image, email contact@obamahood.org. “
Obama taps Timothy Geithner to be Treasury Secretary. Geithner is currently the New York Federal Reserve chief.
Read the full Fortune Magazine article here: Obama Treasury pick means small-dose change
Controversial filmmaker blasts free market system for carmakers failure, says federal control would produce mass transit and hybrid cars.
By Jeff Poor
Business & Media Institute
11/21/2008 10:40:59 AM
With President George W. Bush on his way out of office and a Democratic president soon be sworn in, some have wondered where the outspoken voices on the left would direct their anger. Try core American values – like free-market capitalism.
Controversial filmmaker Michael Moore, who once said his religion was affirmed because a hurricane’s landfall was timed to be on the same day as the opening of Republican National Convention, expressed his rage toward the heads of the Big Three automakers on CNN’s Nov. 19 “Larry King Live.”
According to Moore, the best thing for the government to do would be to take over the automakers, similar to actions former President Franklin Delano Roosevelt took during World War II.
“[W]e can’t let all these people lose their jobs because of the bad decisions, the stupid decisions made by the management of these auto companies,” Moore said. “So I think what has to happen here is that Congress needs to pass some legislation, and our president-elect needs to do what Roosevelt did.”
“When Roosevelt came in and when World War II faced the country, Roosevelt said to General Motors and Ford, ‘You”re not going to build cars anymore,’” Moore said. “’You’re going to build airplanes and tanks and guns and the things that we need for this war because we have a national crisis.’ And so General Motors had to do what Roosevelt told them they had to do.”
Moore later expressed his frustration over a parts plant that closed down in his home state of Michigan, showing pictures of the plant’s demolition while attacking the “few people at the top to get filthy rich.”
“Well, these were taken, actually, by The New York Times about a month or so ago,” Moore said. “They’re tearing down the factory, finally, where he worked, where tens of thousands of people worked over the years. And it was kind of an emotional moment just being there and thinking about all that we’ve lost in this country, how we’ve allowed a few people at the top to get filthy rich.”
“And I mean those guys that were testifying today, one of – the Ford chairman is making something like $22 million a year and his company lost $2 billion last year,” Moore said. “The GM chairman is making $15 million a year. His company lost $39 billion last year. And he’s rewarded with a $15 million payout. I mean this is – this is just absolutely insane.”
Moore pronounced the death of capitalism because of what he declared to be the selfish interest of a handful of auto executives.
“But I’ll tell you what it really has proven to me, Larry, is that these guys, after all of that stuff they’ve been telling us all these years about go capitalism, free market, free enterprise, they don’t believe in any of that,” Moore said. “They don’t believe in free enterprise or a free market.”
“They want – they want socialism for themselves,” Moore added. “They want a handout and a net for themselves – to hell with everybody else, but give it to them. And I think, really, what we’re seeing here right now with them, with the banks, we’re seeing the end of capitalism – the end of capitalism as we know it. And I say good riddance – it hasn’t helped the people or the planet.”
Socialism and anti-free market rhetoric have been a persistent theme in Moore’s work. He has been a crusader for socialized health care in the U.S., especially with his 2007 documentary “SiCKO.” Moore depicted the health care systems used in Canada, France, the United Kingdom and the communist nation of Cuba as what the U.S. should have – an expensive taxpayer-funded health care system.
Obama’s tax credits won’t stimulate the economy
By NEWT GINGRICH and PETER FERRARA
President-elect Barack Obama is right: America needs a real and meaningful middle-class tax cut. Unfortunately, despite the rhetoric, that is not what his proposals offer.
Mr. Obama’s tax plan includes creating or expanding nine or more federal income tax credits mostly focused on low- and moderate-income earners, with an estimated cost of $1.3 trillion over 10 years. These tax credits are provided for certain social purposes, such as child care, health care, education, housing and retirement. Buried amid these is Mr. Obama’s purported tax cut for the middle class.
For the bottom 40% of income earners, who pay no federal income taxes on net today, these refundable income tax credits will not reduce tax liability but instead result in new checks from the federal government for the targeted social purposes. That’s not a tax cut. It’s welfare.
These tax credits will do little or nothing to promote economic growth because they do not reduce marginal tax rates — the rate on the next dollar of income — to provide powerful, meaningful incentives for productive activities such as investment, entrepreneurship and work. A tax credit is effectively a cash grant that can only affect incentives up to the amount of the grant. Indeed, such tax credits would likely reduce economic growth because the credits are phased out as income rises, and so effectively impose higher marginal tax rates over those income levels.
For a real middle-class tax cut, we should cut the 25% income tax rate that now applies to single workers earning $32,550 to $78,850, and married couples earning $65,100 to $131,450. We should reduce that rate down to the 15% rate paid by workers below these income levels. That would, in effect, establish a flat-rate tax of 15% for close to 90% of American workers.
Marginal tax rates for middle-income families in the 25% tax bracket are too high. Add in effective payroll tax rates of 15% and state income taxes, and these workers are laboring under marginal tax rates of close to 50%. No wonder middle-income wage growth has slowed sharply. Reducing the marginal tax rates for these middle-income earners would lead to income increases for middle-income workers, just as reducing excessive marginal tax rates for higher-income workers did, going all the way back to the Kennedy tax cuts of the 1960s.
This 40% cut in middle-class income tax rates would provide a powerful boost to the economy, greatly expanding incentives for savings, investment and work. This would be much more effective than Mr. Obama’s tax plan with it’s $1.3 trillion in redistributive tax credits, as well as yet another so-called stimulus package based on another $300 billion or more in increased government spending.
Taxing or borrowing from the economy and then spending hundreds of billions more through government bureaucracies will have zero effect in promoting economic growth, as did the failed stimulus package adopted by the Bush administration this year.
We could add to this alternative tax proposal an increase in the personal exemption from $3,500 to $7,000. The package would then cut taxes for all taxpayers, including those in the lower tax brackets. Of course, reducing the top income tax rates of 28%, 33% and 35%, capital gains tax rates, and the excessive 35% corporate tax rate, would boost the economy even more. But these are the “hate” rates imposed on those who liberals think are too productive, work too hard, and earn too much. Liberals deride these taxpayers as corporate fat cats and “the rich.”
Fine. Leave those rates for a future initiative. For now we should focus on the middle-income tax rates that are attractive to cut in the current political climate. This would continue the tax cuts for low- and moderate-income workers Republicans have been adopting for 30 years now.
Because of the highly beneficial effect of these middle-class rate reductions on our economy, and the freedom they would give workers to spend, save or invest their money as they choose, this proposal would likely enjoy broad public support and present a viable alternative to the liberal social purposes of President-elect Obama’s tax credits.
Mr. Gingrich is the former speaker of the House. Mr. Ferrara is director of entitlement and budget policy for the Institute for Policy Innovation.
By Chloe Albanesius at PC Mag
Several Verizon Wireless employees gained unauthorized access to the cell phone account of President-elect Barack Obama, the provider revealed Thursday.
“This week we learned that a number of Verizon Wireless employees have, without authorization, accessed and viewed President-elect Barack Obama’s personal cell phone account,” Verizon said in a Thursday statement.
Verizon said the account has been inactive for several months and was tied to a flip phone, not a smart phone like the BlackBerry. Obama has been pictured several times talking on a Motorola Razr, a flip phone that is available through Verizon Wireless.
Obama has also been spotted with the BlackBerry and the Apple iPhone.
“All employees who have accessed the account – whether authorized or not – have been put on immediate leave, with pay,” Verizon said. “As the circumstances of each individual employee’s access to the account are determined, the company will take appropriate actions.”
Employees found to have accessed Obama’s account for legitimate reasons will be reinstated while those who did so without cause will “face appropriate disciplinary action,” Verizon said.
“We apologize to President-elect Obama and will work to keep the trust our customers place in us every day,” the company said.
There has been speculation in the past week about whether Obama will be able to keep his BlackBerry after he is sworn into office. For security reasons, U.S. presidents have traditionally surrendered their electronic devices while in office, and Thursday’s Verizon incident highlights why that type of precaution might still be necessary.
Washington: Attorney General Michael Mukasey was hospitalized late last night after he collapsed during a speech and lost consciousness. We wish him and his family the best. Let’s pray for a speedy recovery.
Caution: Here is the video of Attorney General Michael Mukasey collapsing.
By MIKE ALLEN
From Politico:
President-elect Barack Obama is “on track” to name Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) as his secretary of state shortly after Thanksgiving, two senior Obama aides said.
Financial disclosure issues have been worked out, aides said.
The officials said they expect her to accept. Clinton aides had no comment.
The choice unites the two rivals in the most protracted presidential primary in American history, giving Obama the “Team of Rivals” Cabinet he had promised.
Former President Bill Clinton authorized unprecedented disclosures about his finances to Obama’s vetting team, and transition lawyers are satisfied, officials said.
Posted on StarTribune.com
By James Shiffer
The bubble beside Norm Coleman’s name appeared to have both an X and a squiggle in it, but the Al Franken campaign wants the state Canvassing Board to rule on whether it should count. That’s the only challenge in the special envelope in Plymouth so far, according to Sandy Engdahl, the city clerk and the official running the city recount.
The Canada geese milling on the grounds and parking lot of Plymouth City Hall were oblivious to the gaggle of election officials and observers inside. The drone of “Franken” and “Coleman” was accompanied by the swishing of paper in Medicine Lake Room A. Early on, Engdahl had to admonish some candidate representatives from trying to tell her counters how to count. Clearly, she said, the recount watchers are “very passionate,” but she has to remind them of everyone’s roles in this civic drama.
Eight of the 24 precincts had been counted by 1:45 p.m., and the only challenged ballot, in Engdahl’s view, was clearly a vote for Coleman. Nevertheless, the Franken campaign was allowed to seek a second opinion.
The Financial Times report that Iran President Mahmoud Ahmadi-Nejad said on broadcast television that the “US and its major allies wanted to deprive Iran of “honor and independence” by pressuring the country into halting its uranium enrichment work.”
“Now the great powers are disappointed, as they have not the least bit of hope to break the Iranian people down,” he said. “If great powers seek to take over Iran’s rights, Iranian people will slap them so hard that they won’t find their way back home.”
The latest report by the International Atomic Energy Agency reveals that Iran is rapidly increasing its stockpile of enriched uranium, which could be rendered into weapons-grade material should Tehran decide to develop a nuclear device.
The agency says that, as of this month, Tehran had amassed 630kg of low enriched uranium hexafluoride, up from 480kg in late August. Analysts say Iran is enriching uranium at such a pace that, by early next year, it could reach break-out capacity – one step away from producing enough fissile material for a crude nuclear bomb.
This Editorial by Dick Morris. is sad but true. I have been a huge proponent of Bush’s tax cuts and economic policy. Yet, even before Barack Obama takes office, in the past few months we have moved further towards European socialism than ever before.
The results of the G-20 economic summit amount to nothing less than the seamless integration of the United States into the European economy. In one month of legislation and one diplomatic meeting, the United States has unilaterally abdicated all the gains for the concept of free markets won by the Reagan administration and surrendered, in toto, to the Western European model of socialism, stagnation and excessive government regulation. Sovereignty is out the window. Without a vote, we are suddenly members of the European Union. Given the dismal record of those nations at creating jobs and sustaining growth, merger with the Europeans is like a partnership with death.
At the G-20 meeting, Bush agreed to subject the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and our other regulatory agencies to the supervision of a global entity that would critique its regulatory standards and demand changes if it felt they were necessary. Bush agreed to create a College of Supervisors.
According to The Washington Post, it would “examine the books of major financial institutions that operate across national borders so regulators could begin to have a more complete picture of banks’ operations.”
Their scrutiny would extend to hedge funds and to various “exotic” financial instruments. The International Monetary Fund (IMF), a European-dominated operation, would conduct “regular vigorous reviews” of American financial institutions and practices. The European-dominated College of Supervisors would also weigh in on issues like executive compensation and investment practices.
There is nothing wrong with the substance of this regulation. Experience is showing it is needed. But it is very wrong to delegate these powers to unelected, international institutions with no political accountability.
We have a Securities and Exchange Commission appointed by the president and confirmed by the Senate, both of whom are elected by the American people. It is with the SEC, the Treasury and the Federal Reserve that financial accountability must take place.
The European Union achieved this massive subrogation of American sovereignty the way it usually does, by negotiation, gradual bureaucratic encroachment, and without asking the voters if they approve. What’s more, Bush appears to have gone down without a fight, saving his debating time for arguing against the protectionism that France’s Nicolas Sarkozy was pushing. By giving Bush a seeming victory on a moratorium against protectionism for one year, Sarkozy was able to slip over his massive scheme for taking over the supervision of the U.S. economy.
All kinds of political agendas are advancing under the cover of response to the global financial crisis. Where Franklin Roosevelt saved capitalism by regulating it, Bush, to say nothing of Obama, has given the government control over our major financial and insurance institutions. And it isn’t even our government! The power has now been transferred to the international community, led by the socialists in the European Union.
Will Obama govern from the left? He doesn’t have to. George W. Bush has done all the heavy lifting for him. It was under Bush that the government basically took over as the chief stockholder of our financial institutions and under Bush that we ceded our financial controls to the European Union. In doing so, he has done nothing to preserve what differentiates the vibrant American economy from those dying economies in Europe. Why have 80 percent of the jobs that have been created since 1980 in the industrialized world been created in the United States? How has America managed to retain its leading 24 percent share of global manufacturing even in the face of the Chinese surge? How has the U.S. GDP risen so high that it essentially equals that of the European Union, which has 50 percent more population? It has done so by an absence of stifling regulation, a liberation of capital to flow to innovative businesses, low taxes, and by a low level of unionization that has given business the flexibility to grow and prosper. Europe, stagnated by taxation and regulation, has grown by a pittance while we have roared ahead. But now Bush — not Obama — Bush has given that all up and caved in to European socialists.
The Bush legacy? European socialism. Who needs enemies with friends like Bush?
IF General Motors, Ford and Chryslerget the bailout that their chief executives asked for yesterday, you can kiss the American automotive industry goodbye. It won’t go overnight, but its demise will be virtually guaranteed.
Without that bailout, Detroit will need to drastically restructure itself. With it, the automakers will stay the course — the suicidal course of declining market shares, insurmountable labor and retiree burdens, technology atrophy, product inferiority and never-ending job losses. Detroit needs a turnaround, not a check.
I love cars, American cars. I was born in Detroit, the son of an auto chief executive. In 1954, my dad, George Romney, was tapped to run American Motors when its president suddenly died. The company itself was on life support — banks were threatening to deal it a death blow. The stock collapsed. I watched Dad work to turn the company around — and years later at business school, they were still talking about it. From the lessons of that turnaround, and from my own experiences, I have several prescriptions for Detroit’s automakers.
First, their huge disadvantage in costs relative to foreign brands must be eliminated. That means new labor agreements to align pay and benefits to match those of workers at competitors like BMW, Honda, Nissan and Toyota. Furthermore, retiree benefits must be reduced so that the total burden per auto for domestic makers is not higher than that of foreign producers.
That extra burden is estimated to be more than $2,000 per car. Think what that means: Ford, for example, needs to cut $2,000 worth of features and quality out of its Taurus to compete with Toyota’s Avalon. Of course the Avalon feels like a better product — it has $2,000 more put into it. Considering this disadvantage, Detroit has done a remarkable job of designing and engineering its cars. But if this cost penalty persists, any bailout will only delay the inevitable.
Second, management as is must go. New faces should be recruited from unrelated industries — from companies widely respected for excellence in marketing, innovation, creativity and labor relations.
The new management must work with labor leaders to see that the enmity between labor and management comes to an end. This division is a holdover from the early years of the last century, when unions brought workers job security and better wages and benefits. But as Walter Reuther, the former head of the United Automobile Workers, said to my father, “Getting more and more pay for less and less work is a dead-end street.”
You don’t have to look far for industries with unions that went down that road. Companies in the 21st century cannot perpetuate the destructive labor relations of the 20th. This will mean a new direction for the U.A.W., profit sharing or stock grants to all employees and a change in Big Three management culture.
The need for collaboration will mean accepting sanity in salaries and perks. At American Motors, my dad cut his pay and that of his executive team, he bought stock in the company, and he went out to factories to talk to workers directly. Get rid of the planes, the executive dining rooms — all the symbols that breed resentment among the hundreds of thousands who will also be sacrificing to keep the companies afloat.
Investments must be made for the future. No more focus on quarterly earnings or the kind of short-term stock appreciation that means quick riches for executives with options. Manage with an eye on cash flow, balance sheets and long-term appreciation. Invest in truly competitive products and innovative technologies — especially fuel-saving designs — that may not arrive for years. Starving research and development is like eating the seed corn.
Just as important to the future of American carmakers is the sales force. When sales are down, you don’t want to lose the only people who can get them to grow. So don’t fire the best dealers, and don’t crush them with new financial or performance demands they can’t meet.
It is not wrong to ask for government help, but the automakers should come up with a win-win proposition. I believe the federal government should invest substantially more in basic research — on new energy sources, fuel-economy technology, materials science and the like — that will ultimately benefit the automotive industry, along with many others. I believe Washington should raise energy research spending to $20 billion a year, from the $4 billion that is spent today. The research could be done at universities, at research labs and even through public-private collaboration. The federal government should also rectify the imbedded tax penalties that favor foreign carmakers.
But don’t ask Washington to give shareholders and bondholders a free pass — they bet on management and they lost.
The American auto industry is vital to our national interest as an employer and as a hub for manufacturing. A managed bankruptcy may be the only path to the fundamental restructuring the industry needs. It would permit the companies to shed excess labor, pension and real estate costs. The federal government should provide guarantees for post-bankruptcy financing and assure car buyers that their warranties are not at risk.
In a managed bankruptcy, the federal government would propel newly competitive and viable automakers, rather than seal their fate with a bailout check.
