It has nothing to do with a 'mistake'.. my example is dead on, you're just caught being foolish and you're incapable of moving your radical position forward. This whole nonsense started out because you thought you were being obtuse and cute by bringing 'the King of GM". You were comparing Obama's single restructure with Romney's 10 years of of gobbling up companies and selling the bits and pieces. My example highlights the ridiculousness of that position.. it matters not whether Obama was right and Romney was wrong.. those black and white, hard-line positions are in you, not me. You think neither is wrong,you think both are equal.
answer this question. just the question as it's asked.. not as seen through 'lil mike's radical filter'.. I smoked pot.. even sold a joint once.. Does that me Pablo Escobar?
yes or no, it's a simple question.
No. And it's a dumb question, and you know it.
But that's nothing compared to you saying that, "it matters not whether Obama was right and Romney was wrong." You keep dodging the issue. Purposefully. That's why you would rather talk about selling a joint then whether it was better to cut those jobs and save the the company than not. I get it.
you know full-well that I supported the bailout.. that is not the issue at hand right now so stop trying to change the subject on this line of discussion.
and btw, your rose-colored glasses are foggy if you really feel that in all Romney's time not even 21,000 people lost their jobs.. here's just one example of what Bain did..
He fucked up the lives of 750 people in one fell swoop and then had the gov't bail him out while his company still pocketed millions of tax payer's money when he was bailed out. That's just a single transaction in his 10,000 transactions and 750 investments.. Bain Capital wasn't a 'job-creating' venture, it was a capital venture, they were out to make massive profits, not job creation..
face it, your pick is a shyster plain and simple... but like the Weekly Standard says..
too bad you're in lock-step with the 1st paragraph instead of the 2nd.. but you're not really a conservative and you always follow the establishment don't you.
What is the mechanism for saving those 750 jobs? Your excerpt seemed to make clear that the company wasn't salvageable. So what should have been done? Just like there wasn't a path that would allow those 21,000 jobs to be saved at GM, there wasn't a path to to save those 750. There have been a lot of job losses in the steel industry since the 70's. In fact, the US steel industry is in good shape now, in spite of government help. I'll link this for you, not that it will matter.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/23/business/worldbusiness/23iht-steel.1.18064775.html?pagewanted=all