Madman Across The Table

They told me that if I voted for McCain we'd have an unpredictable madman in the White House who would do anything to get his way.  And they are still telling me that!

One participant in [the Chrylser negotiations] said that the administration's tactic was to present what one described as a  "madman theory of the presidency" in which the President is someone to be feared because he was willing to do anything to get his way. The person said this threat was taken very seriously by his firm.

C'mon, Obama is the only guy standing between them and the pitchforks.

Business Insider has more.  I especially like their airing of the non-denial denial from Perella Weinberg that they were waterboarded coerced by Team Obama.  This is also good:

It boggles the mind to see progressives deciding that because the White House and a corporation deny a charge, that the charge must be false. Imagine, for instance, these folks accepting a version of events simply because it had been put forth by the Bush White House and Halliburton. But this is exactly what Think Progress and Media Matters are doing. It's as if their cognitive critical apparatus had simply stopped functioning sometime in January.

Why is the White House denying the obvious - they took a hard line with the Chrysler creditors and threatened to bully them from the bully pulpit, which is just what Obama did when he announced the Chrysler bankruptcy? 

So why lie now?  It is not as if the poll numbers for hedge fund operators are looking up; this is a popularity contest, or shouting contest, that Obama will win easily.

A possible explanation - the original accusation was that "the full force of the White House Press Corps would destroy" the reputations of the holdouts.  It is not a secret that most of the press will credulously report anything Obama utters, but maybe the White House is a bit embarrassed to be caught trumpeting their awareness of, and willingness to exploit, that fact.

Comments

[Charlie (Colorado)]

To use any alternative means to bring down this administration is to bring down along with it the system we wish to preserve.

What he said.

[PeterUK]

"To use any alternative means to bring down this administration is to bring down along with it the system we wish to preserve."

What if the administration is also trying to bring down that system.The Chrysler swindle would seem a good indicator.

[Ignatz]

-What if the administration is also trying to bring down that system.The Chrysler swindle would seem a good indicator.-

What he said.

[GMax]

Someone asked about deunionizing Ford. Michigan is not a right to work state, so if a union exists, you must join ( unlike Texas). While there is a process to decertify a union, do not hold your breath on that happening. It has happened a few times in the past for smaller unions, but I dont see it happening with the UAW.

[MayBee]

Michigan is not a right to work state, so if a union exists, you must join ( unlike Texas). While there is a process to decertify a union, do not hold your breath on that happening. It has happened a few times in the past for smaller unions, but I dont see it happening with the UAW.

Right, gmax.
Sometimes I think this is why it is so vital for Obama to preserve the US automakers in Detroit. It's a combination of union support + realization no other manufacturer is going to set up there because of the unions.

[sbw]

What if the administration is also trying to bring down that system.

Then recommend impeachment.

Not that Congress is going to buy it. If the substance is there, show where. But so far I think that being stupid has been no bar to high office.