I'm not trying to make Ford look bad at all, I'm saying being in the same position as GM they would have done the same thing, they were just in better shape... as GM was in better shape than Chrysler.
The differences between the commercial paper and buying stock are pure semantics when it comes to the "moral" BS people are spewing for buying Ford over GM/Chrysler.
I can't speak for everyone, but for me, the issue is, why support a company that can't manage it's way out of a paper bag? Why should we continue to reward failure?
It's asinine that people's homes are being taken from them, but corporations like GM are being rewarded.
Ford? Yeah, they didn't screw up like GM or Chrysler, so that's part of the reason I'm resolute in my support for them.
The actual bailout (that GM and Chrysler received) and the commercial paper buying aren't anywhere near the same thing, and, as I said, the majority-amount of commercial paper bought from Ford isn't indicative of anything more than their popularity and their success at selling cars.
Two completely different situations - the commercial paper buying was a result of banks refusing to buy (after we bailed THEM out), not a consequence of anything any of the automakers did wrong.