Support BMG PAC!
About BMG PAC
Make a secure credit card contribution using Google Checkout:
$
Or send a check to BMG PAC, PO Box 877, Medford, MA 02155.
View BMG PAC's latest disclosure report


Menu

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?



FREE COPY OF BOB'S BOOK Barack Obama for Beginners to every 50th Facebook Friend!
BMG on Facebook

About
About us
Rules of the road - please read!
Formatting and multimedia tips
Email us
RSS feed

BMG TRAFFIC REPORT
Blue Mass. Swag
Creative Commons License

Event Calendar
February 2010
(view month)
S M T W R F S
* 01 02 03 04 05 06
07 08 09 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 * * * * * *
<< (add event) >>

Active Users
Currently 4 user(s) logged on.

Search




Advanced Search


Blog Roll
Massachusetts Left
.08 Acres
Below Boston
Berkshires Blog
Blue News Tribune
Chimes at Midnight
Eisenthal Report
Granby 01033
Health Care for All
Left in Lowell
MA lefty blogs
Marry in Mass.
Mass Engagement
Massachusetts Liberal
Michael Forbes-Wilcox
My Dedham
Progressive Mass.
Quriltai on the Shore
Ryan's Take
Someday I Will
ShrewsBuried
Talking Stoneham
The Fray
Universal hub

Differently-Winged
John Daley
Mass. Pro-Life
No Looking Backwards
Peter Porcupine
Pundit Review
Red Mass Group
Scaling the Hill 2010

Mass. Media
David S. Bernstein
Cambridge politics
CommonWealth Unbound
Globe bloggers
Herald bloggers
Hub Blog
Jon Keller
MassBeacon
Media Nation (Dan Kennedy)
Open Media Boston
Adam Reilly
Toll Talk (Mary Connaughton)
Weekly Dig Blog

Legal
ACS Blog
Balkinization
Election law
How Appealing
SCOTUSblog
Volokh Conspiracy

General
Accountable Strategies
Billionaires for Bush
Blue Works Better
Crooks and Liars
Daily Howler
Daily Kos
Democracy Arsenal
Eschaton (Atrios)
Glenn Greenwald
Grist (environment blog)
Hullabaloo (Digby)
LiberalOasis
MyDD
Oliver Willis
Pandagon
Political Animal
Political Critic
Political Wire
Poor Man
Progressive Blog Digest
Real Climate
Senate Guru
Swing State Project
Tapped
Talking Points Memo
Think Progress
Truth and Progress
Turn Maine Blue
Wonkette

www.BlueMassGroup.com

Mitt Romney for CEO of General Motors

by: David

Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 00:22:54 AM EST


No, no -- I'm serious.  It's perfect.  GM needs new management; Romney's free; he's a turnaround guy; he's from Detroit; his dad ran a car company; he's already got a national profile, which would really help GM; he's already filthy rich, so he could take the job for a pittance.  It's totally perfect.

Plus, it's a brilliant political move for him.  High risk, sure -- but if he can pull it off, what a feather in his cap.  His political career needs a turnaround of its own, and nothing would be better than jump-starting GM.  (Ha!  Get it?  Jump-starting?)

The current management of GM is surely not long for the job.  After today's debacle over the corporate jets (seriously -- did you hear about this? these idiots flew their corporate jets from Detroit to DC to beg for a bailout), there's no way this Wagoner dude is going to hang on.

What do you say, Mitt?  Put your money and your effort where your mouth is.  If the job opens up (which it surely will, one way or another -- there eventually will be some sort of federal aid, and one of the conditions will almost surely be to force out current management), step up and save the industry you grew up in, and that you say you love.  Wouldn't it be nice to have the whole country rooting for you, for a change?

UPDATE (Friday morning): I was thinking over breakfast about another aspect of this, which I see that several commenters have noted: would Romney take the chairmanship of GM as an opportunity to bust the U.A.W., or at least to needlessly slash jobs?  Actually, I don't think he would.  Why?  Because if (as seems very likely) he wants to run for president in 2012, he must have Michigan, certainly in the primary, and probably in the general as well.  If he is too brutal in restructuring, it will end his presidential chances.  So this is actually another reason it's a good fit -- his own ambition will serve as a check against going too far with job destruction.

David :: Mitt Romney for CEO of General Motors
Tags: , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
question... (6.00 / 6)
... Is this "It's crazy enough that it just might work!"
Or will it turn into "I dunno... it seemed like a good idea at the time."?

"It is not because things are difficult that we do not dare, it is because we do not dare that things are difficult." - Seneca (5 BC - 65 AD)

He could have a better effect on this nation (6.00 / 1)
by helping to turn around GM than he would spending any amount of time rooting for any Republican in the nation like he is now.  

While the moral support he lends candidates is very important, Detroit needs a messiah like Mitt needs a Zion.  I think it's time for him to return to his roots and get back in the reins of a business!


no way (5.00 / 2)
because he was such a great governor? slash and hack + backbone of the American economy + need for good, working class American jobs = someone completely different than mitt romney.

Plus, Mitt would take this as a opportunity to become President, not as a serious longterm project to help a major American company. No doubt he'd slash and hack enough to make them run for a few more years, but they need long term vision even more than a short term plan. Mitt Romney wouldn't care what happened to them beyond 2012.  

---
My thoughts are mine and mine alone. They should not be considered representative of any other organization, group or person - save me.

~Ryan.


I think Ryan's right (0.00 / 0)
The way to anticipate Mitt's performance in a job is to ask "what's he looking for next?" And his "screw the workers" mindset is more than troubling. If the purpose is to kill off GM once and for all, this might do it.

[ Parent ]
Possibly, but -- (0.00 / 0)
see my update in the post.

[ Parent ]
Republicans win MI inspite of the UAW (6.00 / 1)
If you think a UAW member would ever consider voting for their boss for elected office for any reason other than getting them off their backs, you haven't spent much time with union members.

Zebras don't change their stripes, Romney represents the most pro-business, anti worker wing of the republican party.


[ Parent ]
Wait, Republicans win Michigan? (6.00 / 1)
I thought the last time they did that was twenty years ago.

[ Parent ]
If you're looking for a solution to this auto problem (5.50 / 2)
that doesn't involve jobs getting slashed and hacked, you're going to be waiting for a long time.  Probably forever.

[ Parent ]
Not forever (5.00 / 1)
At some point the money will run out, bailout money included, and 100% of the jobs will be lost.

If the goal is to "save American jobs" rather than to "save a company that might one day produce American jobs again, at tiny fraction of what it used to, kind of like the steel industry" then it isn't worth the money.


[ Parent ]
caught up in the moment (0.00 / 0)
Just because people aren't buying cars now doesn't mean they'll stop in the future. Indeed, I'm sure that when the economy turns around, there'll be an extra boost to car sales because folks have waited longer than they'd like to buy new (or longer than they liked because of the credit crunch).

Suffice it to say, if Ford and GM were to make better cars, geared toward what people actually want, they'll be making plenty in the future. Single payer health care alone would go a long way toward evening the odds with other countries. Furthermore, with the incoming generation of plug-in hybrids and a need for major projects like new rail lines and subways, we could be giving these companies a little helping hand toward having major job expansion in the future... just not to build SUVs and big pick-up trucks.  

---
My thoughts are mine and mine alone. They should not be considered representative of any other organization, group or person - save me.

~Ryan.


[ Parent ]
Ryan, you have valid points (0.00 / 0)
But because you suck at one job, it doesn't mean you'll suck at a different job. And as for slash and hack...it worries me, but if no better Romney alternative is found and GM completely tanks, then things will be far worse than slash and hack. If you're correct Ryan, then yeah, I hope the guy gets no where near the auto industry.

Right now I'm filing David's idea under the "Your ideas are intriguing to me and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter" category. Meaning I think David makes sense and I'll decide where I stand when the argument is more fully fleshed out on both sides.

And I sit firmly in the Mr. Lynne category of his astute first comment, lol.



Let me get this straight: Democrats protest war, Republicans protest health care?


[ Parent ]
I just don't trust Romney (0.00 / 0)
and can ya blame me?  

---
My thoughts are mine and mine alone. They should not be considered representative of any other organization, group or person - save me.

~Ryan.


[ Parent ]
Dog racks on every car? (5.25 / 4)


On second thought .... (0.00 / 0)
TP
MITT ROMNEY: Well, government did [cause a lot of this]. There's no question but that the CAFE standards have put an unusual burden on the domestic automobile manufacturers. And our energy policies as a country continue to put burdens on domestic manufacturers. That's just - that's reality. [11/19/08]


Would that matter? (0.00 / 0)
Fortunately, he's not in charge of those standards and policies. It would be his task to work and succeed within those parameters, whether he wanted to or not.

I used to be an engineering student, and you have to learn to tackle design problems under the parameters that you were given, not under the conditions and parameters you wish you had. I imagine business is similar.  Yeah, the union question and Mitt's lay-off past worries me. But Mitt Romney (or any CEO) doesn't have to like the specs of the design problem - to resurrect GM while competing with foreign manufacturers and with CAFE and domestic energy policies - in order to succeed at meeting those requirements.

I don't love Romney, just playing Devil's advocate. But I wonder how many people that would be successful Detroit CEOs also have positions that deviate too far from what Mitt articulated here? I don't know, maybe quite a few, but my first instinct says not many.

Let me get this straight: Democrats protest war, Republicans protest health care?


[ Parent ]
Yeah... but its a red herring. (0.00 / 0)
... the standards are the standards for anyone wanting to sell in the US.  It's the playing field.  It's a non issue and for Romney to 'blame' it is to make a a lame excuse out of a GOP talking point.  Its not reality based and if you are serious about turning a company around you have to be reality based and turn off the politics.

Its a minor point, but its telling that he stumbled into illustrating the reality vs politics problem right out of the gate.

"It is not because things are difficult that we do not dare, it is because we do not dare that things are difficult." - Seneca (5 BC - 65 AD)


[ Parent ]
In addition... (0.00 / 0)
it is very likely that there will be more of a push in push to higher standards.  The problem in the Auto industry was not the CAFE standards.  That is obvious.  We're getting some insight of Willard as a CEO.  

His mindset is that CAFE standards place an undo burden on the auto industry, when moving to those standards sooner might have actually helped the auto industry.

Why not a CEO who wants to surpass those standards and be the first one in the US market with a sedan that competes against the Camry and Accords?  Better fuel economy, features, etc. that entices people?  Instead, we want someone who pushes CAFE standards hurts us CEO.  No thanks.


[ Parent ]
"Why not a CEO who wants to surpass those standards...?" (0.00 / 0)
I agree. I just wonder in my comment above if said CEO exists? Specifically, not just any CEO, but one capable of operating in the auto industry.

My knowledge of CEOs is zero, so it is partly a rhetorical question, but partly asked 'cause I honestly don't know. I think if GM itself says "we want a new CEO who wants to surpass standards and push them higher", then all of a sudden there will be a bunch of CEO talent who see the light and will want the same.

Just anecdotal, but I'm thinking about how many times in job interviews I've said "Of course! I love [customer service/working late/sweeping floors/setting up for trade shows]". And, I know this point is silly and irrelevant, but who is better at phony enthusiasm for stuff his heart clearly isn't in and reversing direction than Willard Mitt?  

Let me get this straight: Democrats protest war, Republicans protest health care?


[ Parent ]
I have the same CEO knowledge... (0.00 / 0)
But in today's climate and where we are heading and the success of other auto makers wouldn't you think it's reasonable to have that mindset?  Willard is pushing the old, not what the auto industry needs.

Maybe he's wearing his political cap during the interview, but back as a businessman he really does assess things differently.  You can't argue his business success.  Plus, he'd be gone (at least in mind) after two years and getting ready for 2012.  I don't see him as a viable CEO.


[ Parent ]
Break the union (0.00 / 0)
I think that if Mitt took over GM, his very first task would be to break the unions. His second task would be to figure out how to shed the pension and medical obligations.

With those two things done, I think he'd have good success at turning them around. Problem is, a lot of people would be hurt in the process. And eventually, with no union support, the jobs would move to Mexico.


Romney running a business directly??? (5.00 / 1)
Well, he would get a chance to do a 'turn-around' twirl in front of the judges.  Never mind he would break the union, get rid of pensions and benefits, shaft retirees.  Send jobs to Mexico.  
But at least he would be clearly out in public running the show, not buried within a hidden office of an anonymous holding company.  He would shine forth for what he is, evidenced by his very public acts with those stakeholders whose interests he sacrificed for the sake of the wealth-holding minority he represents.  And those stakeholders he would have sacrificed would shout from the rooftops who he is, and he would probably never again fool voters into believing him to be a 'public' servant.

Romney is going to "break" the unions? (4.00 / 1)
Well you know what, maybe they need to be broken.  

Everyone here seems to agree that the management failed.  This really isn't a huge point of contention.  However, there seems to be an air of infallibility on the part of the unions.  How can they do no wrong?  Well for one thing, they argue for higher wages and better benefits while business is taking a downturn.  Yes, everyone wants good wages and good benefits and good pensions, but you have to keep it in perspective.  Can a union rise to the same level of idiotic leadership and blame as the CEOs?  Do they hold a level of blame as much as they hold a level of stake depending on the success and failure?

When I watched the Big 3 in front of Congress, the 4th guy at the table was the pres. of UAW.  If this problem is REALLY going to be fixed, its going to be from a bottom-up restructuring and re-tooling of the Big 3.  If the union has to be broken, so be it.  I'm sure they'd rather be UAW workers with lower benefits and wages than unemployed former UAW workers -- and this is increasingly becoming a distinct possibility.  


can you back this up? (5.00 / 1)
Well for one thing, they [the UAW] argue for higher wages and better benefits while business is taking a downturn.

That doesn't seem to jibe with what happened in the 2007 negotiations:

In such evident distress, the Big Three positioned themselves in contract negotiations as helpless to do anything but demand far-reaching givebacks. The UAW did little to offer a contrary narrative.

Doing so required UAW members to accept concessions that made their wages and benefits look like those of non-union auto workers. Though givebacks have become customary for the UAW, the 2007 Big Three contracts were seen by many as a watershed in the erosion of good union jobs. The union reversed long-held positions, opening the door to drastic wage and benefit changes, including a new two-tier wage structure that creates a second-class workforce of new hires.



[ Parent ]
No way it's going to last (0.00 / 0)
They'll demand higher wages in the next contract renegotiation if there is one.  Non-unionized workers in foreign-owned plants in the US are making the same if not more than UAW.  Problem is, is that Toyota isn't on the brink of crashing.  

I just can't see the UAW worker tolerating that kind of wage/benefit discrepancy without demanding better.  It's a union mentality.


[ Parent ]
so in other words, "no I can't back it up" (6.00 / 1)
Your original assertion wasn't correct and you are speculating on the future.

[ Parent ]
Oh christ! His father couldn't run a car company, neither could he. (0.00 / 0)
The only thing Mitty got from pops was hair, teeth, and religion. I'm sorry, but Mittster spinning the "Romney era" as some golden age for Detroit, Michigan, and the auto industry - all because of dear old dad's talents, no less - is crap.

I was there.

American Motors? He did such a good job running them that CHRYSLER bought them out. They were a few years ahead on the first small car wave, with the Rambler. Probably better than the Vega, the Pinto, or the Maverick (not McSame, the car); but still couldn't compete with the imports. Whatever "success" he had running American Motors is PR BS. Like many of Mitty's "successes" (quick name one that didn't involve busting workers, or gobs of federal money).

So was his governorship. This long slow 40 year slide into the muck began under Romney. American market share and industry employment peaked in the mid-60's, and it's been downhill ever since. The  first major disaster was the '67 Detroit riot, which he allowed to balloon from a street fight at an illegal bar into the worst urban riot of the 60's while he sat on his ass, and refused send in the National Guard until after he talked to his insurance industry buddies. Detroit hasn't been the same since.

His fiscal mismanagement sowed the seeds for future state budget problems. All this while being the industry's best friend.

Mitt didn't waste any time getting out of town.

Maybe Mitty could help by getting Republican votes and support for a bailout. But he's never run anything like an auto company, and there is no indication that  he can.



Democrats protest war. Republicans protest healthcare.  


Better To Find Someone Who Wants To Actually Create Something (0.00 / 0)
I get the feeling that Romney will f%$k the unions, steal the pension money, sell the eviscerated carcass to the Carlyle Group, then run around yammering that he created jobs/value/whatever.  This seems to be his SOP.

Better to find someone who has a vision for creating something with enduring value.

- Manny





I support WWF


Political insider ad network Law blog ad network
Advertise Liberally









Powered by: SoapBlox