…or at least he should. Like the way I drew you in with that headline? 
But seriously folks, as we enter another day of auto bailout coverage (including way too many stories aboot the Big 3 driving to Washington), one consistent opinion is that the auto industry needs new leadership. You can’t force the shareholders to appoint a new CEO, but the President can appoint a “Czar” whose sole job it is to make this work. Mitt Romney would be my first choice, but since he’s planning on running against BAM in two years, I don’t see him taking it. So my second choice is…Jack Welsh.
I know the words “new” and “seventy-three years old” don’t usually work in the same sentence, but he’s already turned around one major company (that would be GE) and he’s the one guy I think has the knowledge and experience to do it again.
Personally, and just as a side note, he would have been my pick for Treasury Secretary or Fed Chair. The government needs someone whose first order of business will be to fire the bottom ten percent.
UPDATE: Hugh Hewitt had an interesting thought:
“If the UAW and industry supporters are going to succeed in opening a fiscal lifeline to Detroit, couldn’t the GOP at least demand that all of Michigan and Ohio provide a demonstration of what a lower corporate tax rate can mean for an economy. Call them Irish Zones, after the tax policy of the Republic of Ireland, and declare that companies headquartered in Michigan or Ohio will pay 12.5% corporate tax, as all corporations do in Ireland.”
UPDATE DEUX: Apparently I’m on to something here. Though Nancy Pelosi dissents…
As for a car-industry “czar,” note how quickly House Speaker Nancy Pelosi rejected the idea of former General Electric CEO Jack Welch for the job. She wants a “public sector” type who will impose the decisions that Congress wants. A bankruptcy judge would have a much more independent hand. It’s also becoming increasingly clear that the real goal of Democrats isn’t to save jobs per se, but to tell Detroit what cars to make and how to make them.
Of course, because why would we appoint someone who knows what they’re talking aboot?
