
Originally Posted by
joecoolfreak
I read both and besides saying that Obama was involved and mentioning the dispersal to creditors, you haven't shown one ounce of evidence that says if obama wasn't involved, that this dealership would still get to keep his franchise. It's just as likely that if Obama didn't get involved that none of the current dealerships would have been allowed to keep their franchises. For all we know, he was the one pushing for some of them to be kept. I still don't see how any of what was mentioned in the article has to do with this dealership and his problems. What he is dealing with is the results of a free market situation. What the debtors that loaned money to chrysler while it was failing are going to receive is a completely different situation. That is a perfect example of government budding into private business, but there isn't any evidence that it is to the detriment of anyone except creditors yet.