This shouldn't be so difficult
Your response to Bowser: "What's good for GM is good for the country?" and "MyGawd, Bowser has become a 50s Republican",
seemed to imply that you misunderstood his post. It seemed as if you thought he was saying that bad news for GM was a cause of bad news for the country.
I tried to point out, in a humorous quote, that Bowser seemed to be saying that bad news for GM is a sign of bad things in the economy. (cause and effect reversed from what you seemed to say)
Now I could have been wrong in my impressions of either one or both of you. And I promise never to try and help out again.
(still don't get why GM tanking is "positive news")
