Obama's Auto Demands: "It's the age-old Wall Street vs. Main Street smackdown again"

Workers say Obama treated autos worse than Wall St
By JEFF KAROUB
AP Business Writer
March 31, 2009

Many assembly line autoworkers reacted with skepticism and anger Monday to the Obama administration's tough tactics, which stoked long-simmering feelings that the people who put the country on wheels get treated differently than the wizards of Wall Street.

"It's the age-old Wall Street vs. Main Street smackdown again," said Brian Fredline, president of UAW Local 602 at a plant near Lansing. "You have all kinds of funding available to banks that are apparently too big to fail, but they're also too big to be responsible."

"But when it comes to auto manufacturing and middle-class jobs and people that don't matter on Wall Street, there are certainly different standards that we have to meet - higher standards - than the financials. That is a double standard that exists and it's unfair," Fredline said.

To see the very people that drove this economy into the ground be rewarded through bonuses while receiving tax dollars is just galling," said Dan Maloney, a machine repairman at auto supplier Delphi Corp.'s plant in Rochester, N.Y., and a union local president. "In light of that, the administration is taking it out, I believe, on the automotive sector."

http://www.kansascity.com/438/story/1115154.html

This is BS. If Obama was siding against them, he would let them go bankrupt, which was suppose to happen under the Bush terms

Aren't you following the news and didn't you read President Obama's remarks?

President Obama is actually to the right of George W. Bush and his anti-labor demands in this regard.

The auto workers are shocked, they did not expect this from "their friend" in the White House. Or is Obama really "Wall Streets friend" in the White House?

who think they can hold the government hostage.

Seems like this meme has officially jumped the shark.

This is not a minute by minute tit for tat game here. This is serious business.

Beyond that, those treating this like it is a game should be warned that calling the game at the top of the 1st inning are fools.

Obama met with Wagoner back on March 12th.
Obama met with Banking CEOs on March 27th.

Folks and those who follow them like rats following the piper are being juvenile and short sighted in their approach to this country's problems, and I find that sad.

BOTH OF THESE ARTICLES WERE WRITTEN BEFORE THE ONE YOU JUST POSTED!

Wagoner's exit puts BofA CEO Lewis in hotseat

NEW YORK (Reuters) - Bank of America Corp Chief Executive Kenneth Lewis may be the next corporate boss to feel the heat after the administration forced General Motors Corp Chief Executive Rick Wagoner to resign in return for further government assistance.

The second-largest U.S. bank has received $45 billion from the government, making it one of the biggest recipients of government bailout money in the banking system.

Big shareholders have been calling for Lewis to step down since Bank of America announced in January it took a $20 billion government bailout to secure the acquisition of troubled Merrill Lynch & Co, which lost almost $16 billion in the last quarter of 2008.

The government may now add to the pressure from shareholders, analysts said. The sudden departure of Wagoner after nine years in the top job at GM signals the Obama administration is looking for management changes at bailed-out companies.

"His longevity in the job is probably very much in question," said Keith Wirtz, chief investment officer of Fifth Third Asset Management and a former CIO at a Bank of America subsidiary. Fifth Third holds shares in the bank.
http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSTRE52T6DP20090330?pageNumber=1&virtualBrandChannel=10112


and this ....

Inside the Obama-Bank CEO Meeting
By Rob Blackwell
March 30, 2009

As bank chief executives left the White House Friday after a roughly 90-minute meeting with President Obama, they presented a united front to the media horde outside.

But inside the meeting, which was held in the state dining room, it was clear the CEOs took different approaches. The bluntest was from Ken Lewis, the chief executive of Bank of America Corp.

"Mr. President, I am not going to suck up to Larry and Tim like the rest of these guys," Lewis said, according to sources in the meeting. Lewis was referring to Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner, and Lawrence Summers, the head of the National Economic Council, who also attended.

Obama laughed along with the rest of the CEOs, before listening to Lewis get to his point: he wants to pay back Troubled Asset Relief Program funds.

And he was not the only one.

Jamie Dimon, the CEO of JPMorgan Chase & Co., arrived with check in hand to give to Geithner before the meeting started, according to the participant. Geithner took the check briefly to examine it before handing it back. (The check was fake).

Dimon tried again later during the meeting, telling the president he would like to give back his $25 billion in Tarp money.

The overall tone of the meeting was cordial, participants said, with no raised voices or significant tension. Obama's message was essentially one of mutual dependence: we need you, and you need us.

"My administration is the only thing between you and the pitchforks," Obama said.

Still, Lewis complained that all institutions were being tarred with the same brush, saying policymakers should better distinguish between commercial bankers and investment bankers.

But Obama had a rejoinder to that, saying the industry essentially brought that problem upon itself. He offered to call Sen. Byron Dorgan and ask him to re-establish the Glass-Steagall Act, which was repealed a decade ago. The law put barriers between commercial and investment banks.

http://www.bankinvestmentconsultant.com/news/-2661449-1.html

"My administration is the only thing between you and the pitchforks," Obama said.

I understand what that means.

Do you?

In other words, it's a brand new day, and the Bankers better get used to it.
They are no longer in the driver's seat....although they were during the last
administration.

Our President is doing what needs to be done to save this country from a downfall
that would be devastating to millions.

It ain't about retribution or even tit for tat.
It ain't about governing from anger,
or pandering to the misinformed public on the alternatives.

In otherwords, it really isn't a game, and decisions are not to be made
simply due to their popularity with an impatient public who is fed
bullshit by our media 24/7.

Death threads and calling for heads on sticks is not going to help
folks keep their jobs.

If we wanted a bunch of fools that don't give a shit about the American people,
and does what is politically popular,
but unwise in reality, just to placate the mobs,
McCain/Palin would have won.

But you and the reactionaries looking for a revolution
to solve your immediate problems should go right on
attempting to turn the people away from this President.
After all, it appears that you consider it part of your duty;
to misinform by omission, distortion and bias.
Keep it up....cause soon enough more will realize your motive,
which has nothing to do with the long term good of Americans.

In otherwords, you and yours on the one hand, and this President elected by the people on the other, have opposing agendas.

His agenda is to better our situation, without wrecking anymore havoc than already has occured,
and to put us on a better footing to help each American realize the American Dream.

This is certainly a different way of looking at things...

The Wall Street crooks just used our money to gamble with. They contributed nothing to society.

You don't understand the difference between productive workers and derivative traders who create nothing of value?

The auto workers and even incompetent auto industry executives are not responsible for this economic depression.

Bet you don't know who is!

Let me give you a hint.

They don't live on Main Street.

And they work on Wall Street.

Now do you get it?

How "productive" is it to endlessly run a company that doesn't make a profit? That's not very sustainable for itself, nor is it obviously a good situation for its workforce. They were having problems even in boom times. Then we have an even sadder story in Chrysler, which is a private equity gamble (Wall St) that failed.

If we're worried about jobs then I would rather have the Federal Government create positions instead of funneling money into a failing firm like GM that refuses to adjust for a changed economy and consumer.

Finally, nobody is saying GM is responsible for our economic woes and it's absurd to say otherwise.

:rofl:

:spray: