Audio: Rush Limbaugh parodies Clint Eastwood ad; Update: Reason TV parody added

posted at 8:55 pm on February 7, 2012 by Tina Korbe

Clint Eastwood might say that, because he has no political affiliation with Barack Obama, his ad on behalf of Chrysler couldn’t possibly be political — but that doesn’t mean Rush Limbaugh can’t mock the ad with all his usual hilarity. Luckily for us, he did. The parody aired on El Rushbo’s radio show today, and it fills in the gaps of the original ad for those who aren’t able to read between the lines for themselves:

Here’s a clue for Chrysler and Clint Eastwood: If the White House is delighted, Democrats are gleeful and Republicans suspicious, your $14-million-or-so ad probably wasn’t perfectly on the up-and-up. True, Clint Eastwood is a registered Republican and an original opponent of the auto bailouts and, yes, Chrysler has already paid back most of the money it received in the bailout, but a truly great — and apolitical — ad is one that makes viewers on both sides of the aisle laugh, cry or shiver with goosebumps — and, ultimately, buy the product. This was not that.

Update (Allahpundit): This one’s much truer to Clint’s political instincts than the original ad, I’d bet.

Update (Tina): This post originally suggested that Chrysler had repaid all of the money it received from taxpayers. Actually, U.S. taxpayers lost about $1.3 billion in the Chrysler bailout; Chrysler won’t ever have to pay that money back. I assumed, because Chrysler had paid back all the federal government had required of it, that taxpayers had been fully reimbursed. Silly me!

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Loved it.

Electrongod on February 7, 2012 at 7:12 PM

Allah -

Please tell the Remy folks to remove the Ford Mustang at the :25 second mark

Odie1941 on February 7, 2012 at 8:58 PM

and, yes, Chrysler has already paid back all the money it received in the bailout,

NEW YORK (CNNMoney) — U.S. taxpayers likely lost $1.3 billion in the government bailout of Chrysler, the Treasury Department announced Thursday.

So, which is it?

Goody2Shoes on February 7, 2012 at 9:06 PM

Eastwood, a lifelong idol of mine. Burning all memorabilia and cd’s and not going to mention his name or his movies ever again. He cannot be that gullible. Hollywood Hack.

screwauger on February 7, 2012 at 9:07 PM

Typical hollywood reeker

Good bye and remain unforgiven…

RAGIN CAJUN on February 7, 2012 at 9:09 PM

I want Obama kicked to the curb selling NTY papers at a discount in front of Mooche’s Tamale Stand somewhere in the south side of Chicago. They’ll always be known as the White House Crashers.

It will happen.

Key West Reader on February 7, 2012 at 9:09 PM

Please tell the Remy folks to remove the Ford Mustang at the :25 second mark

Odie1941 on February 7, 2012 at 8:58 PM

Barry, is that you in that beautiful car? Geez, what a waste of machinery!

50sGuy on February 7, 2012 at 9:09 PM

Allah -

Please tell the Remy folks to remove the Ford Mustang at the :25 second mark

Odie1941 on February 7, 2012 at 8:58 PM

I think it works better than putting a GM or Chrysler product there. After bailing out 2 companies, you see the CEO of them sitting in someone elses car.

Kelligan on February 7, 2012 at 9:10 PM

Eastwood’s brain is over eight decades old.

carbon_footprint on February 7, 2012 at 9:10 PM

Being from Detroit, I thought some of the ad was good, but I saw some double entendre.
I like the Rush parody better.

KOOLAID2 on February 7, 2012 at 9:11 PM

Those are great.

Roymunson on February 7, 2012 at 9:12 PM

screwauger on February 7, 2012 at 9:07 PM

Eh, I’d hold back and give him a chance to respond in a formal manner. I think he got Obamadooped.

Give Eastwood a chance to respond.

Key West Reader on February 7, 2012 at 9:12 PM

screwauger on February 7, 2012 at 9:07 PM

Clint’s what-82?
Blame it on his age.

annoyinglittletwerp on February 7, 2012 at 9:13 PM

sounds a little shady , but ill have to take him at his word.

jammlbts on February 7, 2012 at 9:13 PM

Sorry, Rushbo, but ReasonTV one was spot on.

John the Libertarian on February 7, 2012 at 9:16 PM

“..a man’s gotta know his limitations..”

or

“..well, how’d I know the punk was gonna vapor lock on me?”

The War Planner on February 7, 2012 at 9:16 PM

I want Obama kicked to the curb selling NTY papers at a discount in front of Mooche’s Tamale Stand somewhere in the south side of Chicago. They’ll always be known as the White House Crashers.

It will happen.

Key West Reader on February 7, 2012 at 9:09 PM

That place is called Heaven.

arnold ziffel on February 7, 2012 at 9:16 PM

Sorry, Rushbo, but ReasonTV one was spot on.

John the Libertarian on February 7, 2012 at 9:16 PM

+ Remy’s Hawt!
What?

annoyinglittletwerp on February 7, 2012 at 9:18 PM

It was bad enough having Obama forced upon me before the game. Then as soon as this ad started up, I thought here we go again. Just like 2008, none of the channels are a safe place without being bombarded with Obama propaganda.

HellCat on February 7, 2012 at 9:18 PM

Key West Reader on February 7, 2012 at 9:12 PM

i have heard his no spin zone explanation. Perhaps he was dooped by the state run media but my god man, don’t stand there and tell us it had nothing to do with politics, the wording was nearly identical to campaign jargon used by obowmao. Just sickens me to think clint’s a rino at best.

screwauger on February 7, 2012 at 9:19 PM

..if only because it offers up such a fantastic template for parody.

Betcha $10,000 Eastwood wants to RECALL that one!

The War Planner on February 7, 2012 at 9:19 PM

So, which is it?

Goody2Shoes on February 7, 2012 at 9:06 PM

I was under the impression we lost money on the deal

DHChron on February 7, 2012 at 9:20 PM

I want that to be my recurring dream instead of that damn cliff I always wake up on.

screwauger on February 7, 2012 at 9:20 PM

I want Obama kicked to the curb selling NTY papers at a discount in front of Mooche’s Tamale Stand somewhere in the south side of Chicago. They’ll always be known as the White House Crashers.

It will happen.

Key West Reader on February 7, 2012 at 9:09 PM

That place is called Heaven.

arnold ziffel on February 7, 2012 at 9:16 PM

I want that to be my recurring dream instead of that damn cliff I always wake up on. oops

screwauger on February 7, 2012 at 9:21 PM

Eastwood’s brain is over eight decades old.

carbon_footprint on February 7, 2012 at 9:10 PM

..yours ain’t. Sharp as a tack, my friend! Huge Totoro smile here! (Congrats on your Giants, by the way!)

The War Planner on February 7, 2012 at 9:23 PM

I was under the impression we lost money on the deal

DHChron on February 7, 2012 at 9:20 PM

As was I.

Goody2Shoes on February 7, 2012 at 9:23 PM

Clint Eastwood apparently did not understand that the Chrysler bondholders were fascistized (sic) by Obama and Ginsburg? How Clint Eastwood Got PWND By Obama

Basilsbest on February 7, 2012 at 9:28 PM

The BHO stooges came out with their approvals way to early for this not to have been coordinated to some degree…

d1carter on February 7, 2012 at 9:28 PM

Tina…. Chrysler paid back the money?

What about all the SECURED bond holders who got screwed so Obama could keep the unions fully paid and their pensions fully funded.

You are an idiot and have a selective memory.

PhilipJames on February 7, 2012 at 9:30 PM

Just sickens me to think clint’s a rino at best.

screwauger on February 7, 2012 at 9:19 PM

Nah, he’s just a squish. The tuff guy thing is an act.

Cleombrotus on February 7, 2012 at 9:32 PM

As was I.

Goody2Shoes on February 7, 2012 at 9:23 PM

the Leftys played with the math. Chrysler technically repaid the Obama money, but not the Bush money from his last month in office.

we come out down 1.3 billion

DHChron on February 7, 2012 at 9:33 PM

“Let’s kick [Obama's] skinny butt back to Chicago.”

Who says Chicago wants him back? I mean, except maybe for Mayor tiny dancer Rahmbo and the Hyde Park intellectuals, the rest of us don’t want him around here. DC can keep him–just build a statue of him, he’ll move right in and never leave cuz he’ll be worshiping it hourly.

stukinIL4now on February 7, 2012 at 9:36 PM

I was under the impression we lost money on the deal

DHChron on February 7, 2012 at 9:20 PM

As was I.

Goody2Shoes on February 7, 2012 at 9:23 PM

Yes it cost taxpayers a few billion at the end of the day, if you fail to perform even the most conservative analysis of future cash flow value of income tax, sales tax, excise tax, and other revenue that resulted from saving jobs across the automotive industry’s supply chain. No, there was no other industry waiting in the wings to hire the rust belt’s unemployed.

As for bond holders being forced to roll over, that’s one of the most dishonest arguments presented. If the auto companies had failed, the bondholders would have realized full ownership of the company’s brands and capital assets. No one actually believed there were any buyers for shuttered auto plants, warehouses, and related assets- or even the companies’ downtown offices. In a sale scenario, bondholders would have realized maybe 20 cents on the dollar for the factories, machinery, and other plant assets- and not much more for other auto industry holdings.

bayam on February 7, 2012 at 9:37 PM

More on the lack of payback from this week: Treasury Announces U.S. Taxpayers Lost $1.3 Billion In Chrysler Bailout, Then Hails It As “Major Accomplishment”

Still, I have to admit that $1.3B is peanuts compared to the diarrhea of cash that Government Motors went through, likely around $50B.

slickwillie2001 on February 7, 2012 at 9:47 PM

You are an idiot and have a selective memory.

PhilipJames on February 7, 2012 at 9:30 PM

..whoa there, old son. That’s a bit harsh. The preferable term would be “dewy-eyed ingenue” I should think.

;-)

The War Planner on February 7, 2012 at 9:47 PM

Yes it cost taxpayers a few billion at the end of the day,
bayam on February 7, 2012 at 9:37 PM

So, to put it simply, we made sure that no one had to learn some hard lessons? And we get to foot the bill for this, to boot?

*sigh*

Goody2Shoes on February 7, 2012 at 9:47 PM

I thought Rush’s parady was hilarious. It needs to go viral.

And Jay Leno had a quip about the bailout, too.

I wrote that quip in the headlines article. It was hilarious.

karenhasfreedom on February 7, 2012 at 9:50 PM

Or as Mark Stein put it, “What could offer more hope for America than that an Italian car company could be successful selling cars made in Mexico and Canada.”

Hobbes on February 7, 2012 at 9:51 PM

Being from Detroit, I thought some of the ad was good, but I saw some double entendre.
I like the Rush parody better.

KOOLAID2 on February 7, 2012 at 9:11 PM

You do know it was filmed in LA and New Orleans with just some old clips from Detroit, right?

Deanna on February 7, 2012 at 9:54 PM

Just sickens me to think clint’s a rino at best.

screwauger on February 7, 2012 at 9:19 PM
Nah, he’s just a squish. The tuff guy thing is an act.

Cleombrotus on February 7, 2012 at 9:32 PM

Not true! Mr. St.Clint is a good guy trough and trough. In 2008 was holding fundraisers with rich people for that stupid McCain here in California.
But of course, he is a gentle man, and a great artist, not some sort of thug.

magone on February 7, 2012 at 9:55 PM

Clint Eastwood might say that, because he has no political affiliation with Barack Obama, his ad on behalf of Chrysler couldn’t possibly be political

He can say that but no rational person can believe it. The ad may have been paid for by Chrysler as pay off to Obama, but the ad was clearly for Obama. Eastwood can’t be that stupid.

VorDaj on February 7, 2012 at 9:57 PM

Tuco would never have been fooled.

VorDaj on February 7, 2012 at 9:58 PM

The Good, the Bad and the Tools.

VorDaj on February 7, 2012 at 9:59 PM

Or as Mark Stein put it, “What could offer more hope for America than that an Italian car company could be successful selling cars made in Mexico and Canada.”

Hobbes on February 7, 2012 at 9:51 PM

Not much, certainly Toyota or VW opening a new plant to take advantage of cheap American labor isn’t any more exciting. The US is undoubtedly losing its industrial might to China and other rising power. Keeping those jobs in the US was no minor feat.

Other than the Fiat, no one else had any interest in even touching Chrysler. At the time, I thought that Fiat had lost its mind- but you have to give the Italians credit for focusing on the long-term opportunity.

bayam on February 7, 2012 at 9:59 PM

Both parodies beat the original by a landslide (like the one I hope Obama loses by in November).

Bitter Clinger on February 7, 2012 at 10:01 PM

and, yes, Chrysler has already paid back all the money it received in the bailout,

NEW YORK (CNNMoney) — U.S. taxpayers likely lost $1.3 billion in the government bailout of Chrysler, the Treasury Department announced Thursday.

So, which is it?

Goody2Shoes on February 7, 2012 at 9:06 PM

A billion here, and a billion there, pretty soon you are talking about real money…

Difficultas_Est_Imperium on February 7, 2012 at 10:07 PM

Rush’s sucked…it was missing the hilarity and such.

DHChron on February 7, 2012 at 10:08 PM

A billion here, and a billion there, pretty soon you are talking about real money…

Difficultas_Est_Imperium on February 7, 2012 at 10:07 PM

Yes, a couple billion lost if you fail to take into account the billion plus in taxes paid by the company and its US employees last year, this year, and every year going forward. Let’s see, $10 bil in tax revenue over a decade- in the US government losing money? It might take a Phd to solve this riddle.

bayam on February 7, 2012 at 10:10 PM

The War Planner on February 7, 2012 at 9:47 PM

yup…that was a little harsh

what up planner?

DHChron on February 7, 2012 at 10:10 PM

“Let’s kick [Obama's] skinny butt back to Chicago … and then spike the football and dance in his end zone, our end zone, and all across the fruited playing field!”

FIFR.

Dusty on February 7, 2012 at 10:11 PM

Ben Roethlisberger in the bathroom, door being guarded by a loyal friend – are you happy, Steelers fans?

ExpressoBold on February 7, 2012 at 10:15 PM

allegedly

DHChron on February 7, 2012 at 10:19 PM

Loved it.
Electrongod on February 7, 2012 at 7:12 PM

DITTOS ! : )

I heard most of Rush today . . . . . FANTASTIC.

listens2glenn on February 7, 2012 at 10:21 PM

But of course, he is a gentle man, and a great artist, not some sort of thug.

magone on February 7, 2012 at 9:55 PM

I have no doubt but now is not the time to go gentle. The country’s future is at stake. He could at least show a little discernment, don’t you think?

Cleombrotus on February 7, 2012 at 10:24 PM

They paid off one loan with another loan, its three card Molly Washington style. For all the talk of Foreign competition, poor quality and generous union contracts…the real problem was that all three had (and still have) a business modal that is based on being in debt to their eyeballs. The only reason Ford made it was because they refinanced before the credit crunch.

For 50 years every business school in America has taught that the way to succeed is to use other peoples money, Firms that have been around for 100 years routinely borrow money for operating expenses. Companies that have had Trillions of dollars in cash flow over the years without ever writing a bad check, are brought down by credit agencies?

Our Governments inability to manage debt is mirrored throughout the business sector and in the family finances of millions of Americans. I don’t know if it’s half time in America, but I do know we have to find an entirely different way to play the game.

halfbaked on February 7, 2012 at 10:26 PM

“..a man’s gotta know his limitations..”

or

“..well, how’d I know the punk was gonna vapor lock on me?”

The War Planner on February 7, 2012 at 9:16 PM

Favorite quote from The Enforcer:
(responding to Ms Gray)

“Well, that sounds very stylish.”

listens2glenn on February 7, 2012 at 10:28 PM

halfbaked on February 7, 2012 at 10:26 PM

Excellent post. More of the same, please.

Cleombrotus on February 7, 2012 at 10:29 PM

Not much, certainly Toyota or VW opening a new plant to take advantage of cheap American labor isn’t any more exciting. The US is undoubtedly losing its industrial might to China and other rising power. Keeping those jobs in the US was no minor feat.

Other than the Fiat, no one else had any interest in even touching Chrysler. At the time, I thought that Fiat had lost its mind- but you have to give the Italians credit for focusing on the long-term opportunity.

bayam on February 7, 2012 at 9:59 PM

You want to know how I know you are stupid?

UAW wages were so ABSURDLY overpriced…you had HS graduates incapable of arithmetic earning $140,000+/yr plus benefits and a pension. The UAW is a JOKE. They are the fundraising arm of the democrat party…who care nothing of manufacturing output, or the common worker’s plight.

Fiat is the worst car company in the world…that a moronic leftist like you would laud them is only satisfying in it’s own inevitable destiny.

tom daschle concerned on February 7, 2012 at 10:30 PM

Rush’s sucked…it was missing the hilarity and such.

DHChron on February 7, 2012 at 10:08 PM

Exactly!

magone on February 7, 2012 at 10:30 PM

And I am in the UAW, so piss off you stalinist ignoramus.

tom daschle concerned on February 7, 2012 at 10:31 PM

Bravo Rush.

Dingbat63 on February 7, 2012 at 10:33 PM

haha tom daschle

DHChron on February 7, 2012 at 10:35 PM

I have to say, as someone who lives in the Detroit area, the whole premise that the bailout was necessary to save all the jobs in the GM and Chrysler workforce is pretty unfathomable. Am I to believe taht if both entities had gone into bankruptcy that both would have gone the route of liquidation AND there would have been no one interested in buying up manufacturing capacity? Remember, the other manufacturers would have sold A TON more cars if GM and to a much lesser extent Chrysler disappeared. Unfortunately for them, heavy manufacturing capacity is a finite resource in the short to medium term and I find it hard to believe that no automaker would have been interested in expanding their ability to service the market. Remember we are talking number one and number four in terms of sales in January of this year, totally disappearing. 269,000 vehicles sold (including 603 Volts!!!) in January, 2012. You don’t get that capacity by adding a third shift in Biloxi.

oconp88 on February 7, 2012 at 10:36 PM

Bravo Rush.

Dingbat63 on February 7, 2012 at 10:33 PM

for being boring and stupid?

magone on February 7, 2012 at 10:40 PM

magone on February 7, 2012 at 10:40 PM

tee hee

DHChron on February 7, 2012 at 10:45 PM

From EIB to Clint’s ears!

petefrt on February 7, 2012 at 10:47 PM

Rush is no good…he does obvious stuff with strained humor.

DHChron on February 7, 2012 at 10:50 PM

You want to know how I know you are stupid? UAW wages were so ABSURDLY overpriced…you had HS graduates incapable of arithmetic earning $140,000+/yr plus benefits and a pension

Fiat is the worst car company in the world…that a moronic leftist like you would laud them is only satisfying in it’s own inevitable destiny.

tom daschle concerned on February 7, 2012 at 10:30 PM

You can whine all day about the unions… but Chrysler is seeing strong sales growth and turning a profit in the new decade. I never defended the UAW and agree with you that the auto industry would be far better positioned if the UAW was no longer in the picture. You’re confusing my statement about long-term taxpayer benefit with support for the UAW. At the same time, there’s no question that the company was run by idiots (even more so at GM).

As for Fiat, it was a brilliant move that proved everyone wrong. Yes, the US government could have sunk more money into Chrysler to keep it completely US owned, but wasn’t it better to allow free enterprise to dictate part of the outcome? (And at the time no one believed that the company could survive without a parent company supporting it.)

bayam on February 7, 2012 at 10:55 PM

I have to say, as someone who lives in the Detroit area, the whole premise that the bailout was necessary to save all the jobs in the GM and Chrysler workforce is pretty unfathomable.

In the deepest hour of the financial crisis, there were no buyers at the table- although perhaps the Chinese would have made a move if given the signal to proceed (supported by massive Chinese government money and direction as always). It may seem hard to believe but the entire industry would have collapsed. Bondholders were planning to try and recover their assets through liquidation- there was never any question of that. Ford expressed its full support for the bailout because so many of its suppliers would have entered into bankruptcy that the company didn’t see a way to continue manufacturing most of its vehicles.

Am I to believe taht if both entities had gone into bankruptcy that both would have gone the route of liquidation AND there would have been no one interested in buying up manufacturing capacity?

I guess that’s the million dollar question- who? There’s no way a foreign auto manufacturer would open a plant in a union state like Michigan or Ohio and the Japanese always build new plans from the ground up.

bayam on February 7, 2012 at 11:03 PM

“Let’s kick [Obama's] skinny butt back to Chicago.”

Who says Chicago wants him back?

stukinIL4now on February 7, 2012 at 9:36 PM

Speaking of being unwelcome, I’m told Øbama has become so unpopular that even the Kenyans say he was born in the USA.

petefrt on February 7, 2012 at 11:08 PM

hahahahahahahahahaha

DHChron on February 7, 2012 at 11:09 PM

Remy. Is. The. Man.

http://www.goremy.com/Site/Home.html

itsnotaboutme on February 7, 2012 at 11:28 PM

Rush is no good…he does obvious stuff with strained humor.

DHChron on February 7, 2012 at 10:50 PM

Right. That must be why his audience is so small. /

Christian Conservative on February 8, 2012 at 12:07 AM

KOOLAID2 on February 7, 2012 at 9:11 PM
You do know it was filmed in LA and New Orleans with just some old clips from Detroit, right?

Deanna on February 7, 2012 at 9:54 PM

Oh yeah. Some of the message related to here…not all of it IMO.

KOOLAID2 on February 8, 2012 at 12:33 AM

“..a man’s gotta know his limitations..”

or

“..well, how’d I know the punk was gonna vapor lock on me?”

The War Planner on February 7, 2012 at 9:16 PM

Favorite quote from The Enforcer:
(responding to Ms Gray)

“Well, that sounds very stylish.”

listens2glenn on February 7, 2012 at 10:28 PM

Ha Ha, those are pretty good, I think these Clint quotes might work too:

“nothing like a good piece of hickery”—-from Pale Rider
“you’re sh*t out of luck”——-from The Dead Pool

Dollayo on February 8, 2012 at 12:40 AM

Digestive Yogurt?

Why does that conjur up images of Barney Frank’s engagement party?

Tim_CA on February 8, 2012 at 2:19 AM

Sigh.

I think I’ve had enough of Korbe and Shaw. Won’t be reading their contributions any more.

Wolfmoon on February 8, 2012 at 2:40 AM

You know it’s bad when Obama is NOT a lock even in Michigan–the state the bailouts apparently “saved”.

And the Dem congress critters are in even bigger trouble here.

Grace_is_sufficient on February 8, 2012 at 5:46 AM

Halftime in America?
Too bad the game seems to be hockey!

freedomfirst on February 8, 2012 at 7:26 AM

Yes, a couple billion lost if you fail to take into account the billion plus in taxes paid by the company and its US employees last year, this year, and every year going forward. Let’s see, $10 bil in tax revenue over a decade- in the US government losing money? It might take a Phd to solve this riddle.

bayam on February 7, 2012 at 10:10 PM

Pump it in so you can suck it out. A concept only a PhD could love.

Finbar on February 8, 2012 at 8:18 AM

First, I have no sympathy for Detroit or car companies. They dug their own hole over the years with the unions. We didn’t bail them out with our money, we dug them out. There are a whole lot of us out here who keep the country afloat every day by working our butts off. We don’t sit around waiting for a check from the govt (us). We keep the country fed, energized, warm or cool, safe, healthy, etc, etc. It’s our halftime every day. If Clint wants to make another commercial for the everyday working Americans who really would like to roar in Nov. he could do that.

Kissmygrits on February 8, 2012 at 8:28 AM

Do you think Fiat runs the same ad in Italy at the half-time of Soccer games?

Deafdog on February 8, 2012 at 8:43 AM

Ok, so I am a girl, and I could see hostility in men where there isn’t any, but I see Barach Obama as having a hostility streak. Maybe I see phantoms, its just sometimes he appears to do things because of hostility, like blaming Bush is one of those things.

I think that plays out in his willingness to mis use the TARP, which was for Troubled Assets at banks, who would get loans and pay them back, for bailing out car companies.

The difference between a bailout, and a loan, to me is huge. People keep saying that the banks were bailed out, but actually, the place they usually went to to borrow money did not have enough cash on hand, and therefore the TARP allowed the FED to have cash to loan, and then as George Bush advertised, the FED would get it back and give it to the Treasury.

I have also heard the expression, AIG TOOK money, when AIG was LOANED money. AIG what is that? A private Insurance Company that offers a private deposit insurance like the FDIC except, usually, the public does not have to vouch for these policies when things work right. People, do you want private money insurance or do you want Public money insurance? You better say Private. So, complex,I know, but you don’t want the federal government on the hook for private risk, not really.

TARP bailed out foreign companies!!! Well, not really, TARP funds were loaned to American Companies that did global business, regardless of the location of their customers. A company cannot choose to only pay out on insurance policies that are made with Americans. The government might be able to do that directly, but not a company, they have contracts.

And that is what I think Obama did with some of the TARP money, giving it to car companies. Got it?

Fleuries on February 8, 2012 at 9:00 AM

Heh…..Guarded like Ben Rothlisburger’s friend guards a bathroom door.

Classic.

Sponge on February 8, 2012 at 11:34 AM

The sad thing is, no one mentions that Chrysler was bailed out by the taxpayer once before.

The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.

LET. IT. DIE.

The private sector will take over and do it better. The union free plants in the south west appear to be doing just fine, and building better quality equipment.

Sponge on February 8, 2012 at 11:42 AM

Speaking of being unwelcome, I’m told Øbama has become so unpopular that even the Kenyans say he was born in the USA.

petefrt on February 7, 2012 at 11:08 PM

Thank you and goodnight! Don’t forget to tip the waitresses!

(always end with a strong one – lol)

Tim_CA on February 8, 2012 at 12:37 PM

I thought the ReasonTV one was good, right up until:

Ben Roethlisberger in the bathroom, door being guarded by a loyal friend

WTH is that about?

GWB on February 8, 2012 at 12:57 PM

And, where is *this* from?

“..well, how’d I know the punk was gonna vapor lock on me?”

I can’t find it using Google.

GWB on February 8, 2012 at 1:12 PM

I know what you’re thinking. “Did the American taxpayers lose 1.3 billion dollars or did Chrysler pay us back?” Well, to tell you the truth, between making “Invictus” and “J. Edgar” I kind of lost track myself. But being as this is a $14 million Superbowl ad for the most expensive bailout in US history, and would blow the principles of the free market economy clean off, you’ve got to ask yourself one question: Do I feel hope & change? Well, do ya, punk?

Clint Eastwood was born the same year as Mickey Rooney and Helen Thomas. He probably did the spot for extra pudding or something.

Crusty on February 8, 2012 at 1:37 PM

i have heard his no spin zone explanation. Perhaps he was dooped by the state run media but my god man, don’t stand there and tell us it had nothing to do with politics, the wording was nearly identical to campaign jargon used by obowmao. Just sickens me to think clint’s a rino at best.

screwauger on February 7, 2012 at 9:19 PM

Yeh. Well I like Clint Eastwood, he’s a great actor- but he’s just an actor. Well he was a Mayor too, I guess. My point is I don’t look to him for political affirmation- or anyone else in Hollywood.

kg598301 on February 8, 2012 at 2:03 PM

I’m going off memory here as I don’t have time to relocate the story, but as I recall when Chrysler was attempting to borrow $8 billion to repay the bailout, the lenders placed a requirement on the loan that they raise a substantial amount of new capital from outside sources. They were having no luck at all doing so, but at the last moment the Obama administration came through with a “green jobs” grant that almost exactly matched the requirement,allowing the loan to be secured. Purely a coincidence I’m sure.

djaces on February 8, 2012 at 2:51 PM