PIZZABUSTER1 Tuesday, 03/31/09 06:04:20 AM Re: None Post # of 46 Now Obama has fired and replaced the CEO of General Motors, Rick Wagoner. He says he has good reasons for doing this, but we are not allowed to ask him what those reasons are. Something about how the company has not made any money lately, and maybe the guy at the top is the one who should be held responsible. But what I object to is that the time is not quite right, and the way he fired him was just uncalled for. There were a couple of deals that were not finished, and Rick Wagoner should have been given the time to complete them. No matter that Wagoner had done nothing positive for the company in a few years, he should still be CEO because he was an important guy for General Motors, and just because. Also because we don't quite know how the new guy is. But. When the guy on top is a failure, you replace him. Today. No matter what. Right? Aren't presidents supposed to fire CEOs of major corporations? And, by the way, guarantee all the vehicle warranties while he is at it? That's the twenty eighth amendment, right?