Bailout Watch 548: WaPo Carmudgeon's Departing Salvo

Robert Farago
by Robert Farago

Regular readers will know that we’ve taken Washington Post carmudgeon Warren Brown to task for his shameless Motown cheerleading up to and through the federal bailout. You may have also noticed a huge disconnect between Warren’s blind bailout boosterism and his paper’s entirely skeptical stance on federal intervention in the U.S. automotive industry. In an ironic twist of fate, Warren’s decided to take the WaPo’s latest buyout offer—and do so with all of the grace displayed by his bailout boosting pals in The Motor City. He leaves the paper spilling vitriol all over his colleague’s rejection of Uncle Sam’s “investment” in Government Motors.

I’ll begin [my endless swan song] by arguing against the often inane analyses of the challenges facing the domestic automobile industry, sometimes served up on the editorial and opposite-editorial pages of this otherwise fine journal.

Was that really necessary? Anyway, first, Warren regurgitates all his own pro-dole pro-GM arguments.

We owned General Motors in World War II and in the Korean conflict when we needed it to build tanks and other weapons of limited destruction.

We owned it when we needed it to help build what once was the free world’s strongest middle class . . .

And we owned it after the devastating 9/11 attack on our nation, when it was GM that pulled us from the economic brink and got consumers buying again through a savvy marketing campaign.

I know! Let’s set that to the Lemonheads’ version of Mrs. Robinson! Anyway, Warren sets ’em up . . .

In commenting on the new GM’s future, Robinson writes: “In truth, I don’t see much more than a temporary reprieve [from ultimate failure] for General Motors and a somewhat easier landing for GM workers. Obama said he plans to leave management of the company to the professionals. At this point, I have to wonder why.”

And Warren knocks ’em down . . .

The “bad management” that trapped GM and Toyota in their current unhappy states occurred at the federal level, where politicians repeatedly failed to come up with a sensible national energy policy, balanced to require participation, however painful, from automobile manufacturers, politicians and consumers.

The bad management that slowed sales of new domestic and foreign vehicles to a barely sustainable trickle occurred among federal regulators who were supposed to regulate the banking industry, but who apparently failed to regulate anything of any kind.

So GM’s meltdown is the government’s fault? And now the government will save GM? Yeah, that makes sense.

As for placing bets on future longevity: Here’s betting that GM will be around a lot longer than many of the traditional news outlets — print and broadcast — covering GM today.

On this, we agree. Bt first we should come up with a timeline for the death of traditional news outlets. Judging from this piece and Warren’s departure, it’s not going to take long.

Robert Farago
Robert Farago

More by Robert Farago

Comments
Join the conversation
2 of 13 comments
  • AG AG on Jun 08, 2009

    Wow, I had no idea Debbie Stabenow was so huge.

  • Nevets248 Nevets248 on Jun 08, 2009

    yep, when she sits around the house, she sits AROUND the house. Oh,and here from the not-so-great state of Michigan, we refer to her as "stab-and blow"!

  • Bkojote Allright, actual person who knows trucks here, the article gets it a bit wrong.First off, the Maverick is not at all comparable to a Tacoma just because they're both Hybrids. Or lemme be blunt, the butch-est non-hybrid Maverick Tremor is suitable for 2/10 difficulty trails, a Trailhunter is for about 5/10 or maybe 6/10, just about the upper end of any stock vehicle you're buying from the factory. Aside from a Sasquatch Bronco or Rubicon Jeep Wrangler you're looking at something you're towing back if you want more capability (or perhaps something you /wish/ you were towing back.)Now, where the real world difference should play out is on the trail, where a lot of low speed crawling usually saps efficiency, especially when loaded to the gills. Real world MPG from a 4Runner is about 12-13mpg, So if this loaded-with-overlander-catalog Trailhunter is still pulling in the 20's - or even 18-19, that's a massive improvement.
  • Lou_BC "That’s expensive for a midsize pickup" All of the "offroad" midsize trucks fall in that 65k USD range. The ZR2 is probably the cheapest ( without Bison option).
  • Lou_BC There are a few in my town. They come out on sunny days. I'd rather spend $29k on a square body Chevy
  • Lou_BC I had a 2010 Ford F150 and 2010 Toyota Sienna. The F150 went through 3 sets of brakes and Sienna 2 sets. Similar mileage and 10 year span.4 sets tires on F150. Truck needed a set of rear shocks and front axle seals. The solenoid in the T-case was replaced under warranty. I replaced a "blend door motor" on heater. Sienna needed a water pump and heater blower both on warranty. One TSB then recall on spare tire cable. Has a limp mode due to an engine sensor failure. At 11 years old I had to replace clutch pack in rear diff F150. My ZR2 diesel at 55,000 km. Needs new tires. Duratrac's worn and chewed up. Needed front end alignment (1st time ever on any truck I've owned).Rear brakes worn out. Left pads were to metal. Chevy rear brakes don't like offroad. Weird "inside out" dents in a few spots rear fenders. Typically GM can't really build an offroad truck issue. They won't warranty. Has fender-well liners. Tore off one rear shock protector. Was cheaper to order from GM warehouse through parts supplier than through Chevy dealer. Lots of squeaks and rattles. Infotainment has crashed a few times. Seat heater modual was on recall. One of those post sale retrofit.Local dealer is horrific. If my son can't service or repair it, I'll drive 120 km to the next town. 1st and last Chevy. Love the drivetrain and suspension. Fit and finish mediocre. Dealer sucks.
  • MaintenanceCosts You expect everything on Amazon and eBay to be fake, but it's a shame to see fake stuff on Summit Racing. Glad they pulled it.
Next