Of course I agree that Govt shouldn't dictate what a company does, but technically, all the President did was ask him to step down [according the post above, I haven't had a chance to read any of the articles yet]. That's certainly not his place, and Wagoner/the board could have said **** off, but if the Govt is giving our money away, shouldn't they/we have a say in who should get the money an why? [our say, obviously came when the majority of us decided the Pres Obama was a better fit for the office than any of his competitors]. I'm certainly not saying it's right, and I personally I think anyone who used an ARM or the like to buy a house, normally beyond their means, should have to stand up for the choice they made...but I also understand that when that many loans go unpaid, that it's going to affect the US economy, and that something needs to be done.

If this means that the current unions get disbanded, then I think I'm okay with Govt overstepping it's bounds, 'cause that's probably the only way that the way that unions work will change significantly. [I don't know what kinds of changes the unions have recently made to help the car companies in their times of trouble, so maybe I'm being overly harsh...if there is anyone on here that is pro-union, I'd certainly be willing to hear you out on the subject].

my 2 cents,

dh