Obama is showing how his political ties can influence his decisions more so than sound policies. Being a Chicago politician, it's very difficult not to succeed without your bread being buttered by unions. Additionally, the Democrats have such historic and deep ties it's probably difficult for Obama to make a clean policy decision on the Big Three automakers and the Republic Windows & Doors situations.
I still don't believe he's opposed to the Big Three going through bankruptcy. This really seems to be a political decision more so than an economic one. If the Big Three go bankrupt, then their companies are restructured with the hope that they can be rebuilt to truly compete. But if they are also restructured, the unions and their members will have a very small seat at the table or possibly none. Politics as usual. Change is coming? Please.
Also how naive is Obama's response to the Republic Windows & Doors situation in Chicago?
“They’re absolutely right,” Obama, who gave up his U.S. Senate seat from Illinois last month, said over the weekend. “These workers, if they have earned these benefits and their pay, then these companies need to follow through on those commitments.”
Bank of America's response is reasonable:
Bank of America isn’t empowered to tell a company how to manage its business, spokeswoman Julie Westermann said yesterday. Republic is unable to operate profitably in the current economy, she said.
So why would you force a bank to conduct poor lending practices? Poor business decisions? Isn't this what got us into this mess in the first place? I heard Obama as a community activist was working to "encourage" banks in Hyde Park (Chicago) to lower their lending standards so that low-income families could purchase homes that they couldn't afford. Sounds similar, huh? But on who's dollar does this eventually come from? Doesn't sound like change is going to happen.