stewiez wishes to apologize to the world for our moronic electorate that gave the world our daily embarrassment, Jackazzsays:
I’d like to see you BOTH step down.
Actually, there’s only one fact. It’s not my opinion that he wasn’t fired. Unless you have some contrary evidence or some definition of “fire” that is not commonly used, the truth is: Wagoner wasn’t fired.
daniel: you’re being a bit disingenuous here. Wagoner stepped down because otherwise GM would receive no further government help. Technically, he “chose” to step down, but if he didn’t bankruptcy would be the next step. In practice, when a top executive gets fired, they often say that they “resigned” or “stepped down” to avoid nastiness afterwards. I think it’s safe to say that government money meant more to GM than Wagoner. Which doesn’t mean Obama fired him, of course. If anything, GM decided to let him go, based on dealing with government pressure.
Sorry if I was unclear. What I meant to say (though I guess my implication was lost – darned text-only media!) was that no one in the Obama Administration fired him. I guess I should’ve said “Wagoner wasn’t fired by Obama.” I thought that’s what I was implying, but, apparently, I was mistaken. I apologize for the misunderstanding.
I agree with you 100% motivemagus. GM wanted government money more than they wanted Wagoner.
stewiez, an american can’t be unamerican, it’s nonsense, a paradox.
I know, I know, I am canadian but I could change it to “a canadian can’t be anti-canadian” and the same logic would apply. Someone can’t hate his own nation. It can hate the political entities that lead it, it’s government, its policies but a nation is more than a government.
Definition of an unamerican;
Someone hating americans or against american’s interests.
If somebody is american, he is, by definition, part of America therefore, his interests are also part of america’s interests. Someone can’t be against his own interests.
Someone can dislike your conception of america (part of the interests of America), doesn’t mean they hate america and americans. They are america, too so they’d have to hate themselves, too.
Being against a government doesn’t mean being agains the country or nation it leads. That’s why nobody on the left (well, less people than after 9/11 can before Iraq) said brought up the#8220;you hate Obama, than you’re unamerican” arguement, even though we heard it a lot from the right a few years back when Bush was in power.
Even all those people, they hate a specific part of America (the non-whites, wars, the government), not the united States themselves. They really think America has better things to do than going into war.
By the way, your separation of America (US) and America (the continent) is pretty interesting. In french, some conspiracy theorists use the word “États-Uniens” (rough tralslation; United-States’ers) instead of the broader “Américain”.
Well, we taxpayers have to figure a way out of our financial messes, so should big corporations and financial institutions. If they can’t, then just like in our case, oh well!
Anyways, those american citizens often labelled as “Anti-American” want what they think is best for America. They don’t really want America to be in trouble or wiped from the face of the Earth and its citizens killed (THAT would be anti-american), they try to avoid america (or some americans) some trouble. They just don’t agree with you on what is best for the country.
In other word, Anti-American, applied to an american citizen, is a nonsense and childish namecalling the American equivalent of what “Traitor to the Revolution” means or meant in many communist dictatorships.
CF, Palin’s “Real Americans” references showed how honest, informed discourse was anathema to her intellect-challenged thinking. Kind of like the Hairdo Hannity’s of the world screaming DO YOU WANT AMERICA TO FAIL? when someone would ask what winning in Iraq meant.
WillBerry about 15 years ago
Actually the Great Impostor did not do the firing face-to-face. He had someone else call Wagoner and tell him. Now that is really brave!
danielsangeo about 15 years ago
WillBerry: Actually, Obama didn’t fire him at all. He doesn’t have that authority.
danielsangeo about 15 years ago
“You’re right. Jackazz shouldn’t have that authority to do that, and yet…”
…he doesn’t. Wagoner wasn’t fired.
danielsangeo about 15 years ago
No one fired Wagoner, regardless of what the news media says.
oneoldhat about 15 years ago
stewiez wishes to apologize to the world for our moronic electorate that gave the world our daily embarrassment, Jackazzsays: I’d like to see you BOTH step down.
i agree
danielsangeo about 15 years ago
Actually, there’s only one fact. It’s not my opinion that he wasn’t fired. Unless you have some contrary evidence or some definition of “fire” that is not commonly used, the truth is: Wagoner wasn’t fired.
Motivemagus about 15 years ago
daniel: you’re being a bit disingenuous here. Wagoner stepped down because otherwise GM would receive no further government help. Technically, he “chose” to step down, but if he didn’t bankruptcy would be the next step. In practice, when a top executive gets fired, they often say that they “resigned” or “stepped down” to avoid nastiness afterwards. I think it’s safe to say that government money meant more to GM than Wagoner. Which doesn’t mean Obama fired him, of course. If anything, GM decided to let him go, based on dealing with government pressure.
danielsangeo about 15 years ago
Sorry if I was unclear. What I meant to say (though I guess my implication was lost – darned text-only media!) was that no one in the Obama Administration fired him. I guess I should’ve said “Wagoner wasn’t fired by Obama.” I thought that’s what I was implying, but, apparently, I was mistaken. I apologize for the misunderstanding.
I agree with you 100% motivemagus. GM wanted government money more than they wanted Wagoner.
CorosiveFrog Premium Member about 15 years ago
stewiez, an american can’t be unamerican, it’s nonsense, a paradox.
I know, I know, I am canadian but I could change it to “a canadian can’t be anti-canadian” and the same logic would apply. Someone can’t hate his own nation. It can hate the political entities that lead it, it’s government, its policies but a nation is more than a government.
Definition of an unamerican; Someone hating americans or against american’s interests.
If somebody is american, he is, by definition, part of America therefore, his interests are also part of america’s interests. Someone can’t be against his own interests.
Someone can dislike your conception of america (part of the interests of America), doesn’t mean they hate america and americans. They are america, too so they’d have to hate themselves, too.
Being against a government doesn’t mean being agains the country or nation it leads. That’s why nobody on the left (well, less people than after 9/11 can before Iraq) said brought up the#8220;you hate Obama, than you’re unamerican” arguement, even though we heard it a lot from the right a few years back when Bush was in power.
CorosiveFrog Premium Member about 15 years ago
Even all those people, they hate a specific part of America (the non-whites, wars, the government), not the united States themselves. They really think America has better things to do than going into war.
By the way, your separation of America (US) and America (the continent) is pretty interesting. In french, some conspiracy theorists use the word “États-Uniens” (rough tralslation; United-States’ers) instead of the broader “Américain”.
Michigander about 15 years ago
Well, we taxpayers have to figure a way out of our financial messes, so should big corporations and financial institutions. If they can’t, then just like in our case, oh well!
CorosiveFrog Premium Member about 15 years ago
Anyways, those american citizens often labelled as “Anti-American” want what they think is best for America. They don’t really want America to be in trouble or wiped from the face of the Earth and its citizens killed (THAT would be anti-american), they try to avoid america (or some americans) some trouble. They just don’t agree with you on what is best for the country.
In other word, Anti-American, applied to an american citizen, is a nonsense and childish namecalling the American equivalent of what “Traitor to the Revolution” means or meant in many communist dictatorships.
It’s like Palin’s “Real America”.
believecommonsense about 15 years ago
CF, Palin’s “Real Americans” references showed how honest, informed discourse was anathema to her intellect-challenged thinking. Kind of like the Hairdo Hannity’s of the world screaming DO YOU WANT AMERICA TO FAIL? when someone would ask what winning in Iraq meant.