“I want to support a bill that revives this industry,” he said, “but I will not support a bill that provides the patient with taxpayer dollars, yet doesn’t (include) the commitment that the patient will change its ways so that future help isn’t needed.”That statement is disturbing. While it signals possible Republican opposition to the auto industry bailout deal, it doesn't come right out and oppose a bailout.
The biggest problem with the modern Republican Party is that it spends all of its rhetorical time playing off of the existing mindset on issues rather than articulating the principles for its positions that would serve to create a coherent understanding of its political, social, and economic stance. Is McConnell's only objection to the deal really that it doesn't do enough to force the auto industry to do what the politicians want it to do?
Leave it to the Republicans to oppose the auto bailout deal because it doesn't impose enough government control of the private sector.
If the Republican Party can't oppose the auto industry bailout because it is against government bailouts on principle, then there really isn't any difference economically between the Republican Party and the Democrat Party other that the latter is enthusiastically insipid and the former is less enthusiastic about its insipidity.
A failure to oppose the bailout on principle will prove--as if it needs further proof--that the Republicans deserved to lose last month--and deserve to continue losing until they rediscover what they are about.