My point about the stockholders and bondholders not benefiting is a reference to your definition of corporatism which you still haven't really defined and probably won't. Were the auto bailouts "corporatism" or not? Since you want to apply the "corporatism" tag to Republicans, I have to think you would say not, otherwise you'll get even more confused than you already are.
I didn't want a bailout period. It didn't matter who benefited. As the overwhelming majority of Republicans didn't.
"There was stupidity everywhere you looked with the auto bailout fiasco... on both sides of the aisle."
What do you mean by "both sides of the aisle"? You mean management and unions? Or Dems and Republicans? Are you returning to your retarded "management = Republicans" formulation that you learned 50 years ago? Since unions are so closely identified with the Democrat party, I guess there has to be some kind of symmetry there based on the understanding of the world you developed 50 years ago from your Democrat mommy and daddy. If management asked for taxpayer funds, therefore the Republicans wanted taxpayer funds to GM and Chrysler. Therefore John Boehner wanted it, Eric Cantor wanted it, John McCain wanted it, Rush Limbaugh wanted it, I wanted it etc. Something really retarded like that?