Congress and the Bush administration are currently considering whether to spend $25 billion to rescue Detroit automakers. The proposal has generally been met with stiff resistance from conservatives, who have increasingly been pinning all the blame for the crisis in Detroit on labor unions:

Sen. Jim DeMint: “Some auto manufacturers are struggling because of a bad business structure with high unionized labor costs and burdensome federal regulations. Taxpayers did not create these problems and they should not be forced to pay for them.”

Sen. Jon Kyl: “For years they’ve been sick. They have a bad business model. They have contracts negotiated with the United Auto Workers that impose huge costs.The average hourly cost per worker in this country is about $28.48. For these auto makers, it’s $73. And for the Japanese auto companies working here in the United States, it’s $48.”

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger: “You know, if you pay the auto workers or the benefits and all of those things, are maybe too high. … We have, like, in America, you sell a car, and you have $2,000 of each car just goes to benefits. So I think that there’s a way of reducing all of that, make them more fiscally responsible.”

Watch a compilation:

Unions do not deserve the blame placed on them by the right wing. In fact, unions have repeatedly made concessions to auto executives over recent years. Contrary to Kyl’s claim, new auto employees earn $25.65 an hour.

Big Three automaker CEOs and executives based their business model on a future of cheap oil, fighting fuel efficiency standards despite warnings against such a strategy. Detroit manufactured, as Tom Friedman pointed out, oversized gas-guzzling SUVs that reduced their competitive edge.

Financial firms AIG, Merrill Lynch, and Bear Stearns did not have unionized workers but still suffered economic collapses. Frozen credit markets and a spiraling recession were major contributors to Detroit’s current state. Today, the Center for American Progress urged Congress “to support legislation to grant a $25 billion bridge loan to the U.S. auto companies to ensure that they avoid bankruptcy” provided the automakers provide health and retirement security and invest in clean technology.

On Sunday, Iraq’s cabinet “overwhelmingly approved a proposed security agreement that calls for a full withdrawal of American forces from the country by the end of 2011.” Earlier today, the Wonk Room’s Matt Duss spoke to CNN’s Michael Ware, who said that the agreement is testament to Iran’s influence in Iraqi politics:

WARE: Iran has a whip hand, or a key hand at least, within the political framework there. So during these negotiations between Baghdad and Washington, Tehran — whether we like it or not — was in the room. Tehran, in some ways, in some fashion, is a party to this agreement. And you’ll see that some of the sticking points and some of the nuances within the negotiations were issues that were very close to the heart of Tehran.

Watch it:

Read Ware’s full interview here.

Colorado Independent reports that Focus on the Family “is poised to announce major layoffs to its Colorado Springs-based ministry and media empire today.” The layoffs come after the right-wing group spent more than $600,000 to defeat marriage equality in California. Praising the passage of Prop. 8, the group said that the measure “helps protect millions of children from radical indoctrination in the homosexual lifestyle.” The group also touted its involvement collecting signatures and gathering donations, patting itself on the back for being “integrally involved” in the fight against marriage equality.

Roll Call reports that when Senate Democrats meet tomorrow to discuss Sen. Joe Lieberman’s (I-CT) future, the Democratic leadership is “expected to propose that he keep his gavel at the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee but lose his Environment and Public Works subcommittee chairmanship.” The paper describes the proposal as only a “slap on the wrist” for Lieberman since Lieberman “may not lose much” if his subcommittee chairmanship is stripped:

Taking the subcommittee on global warming away from Lieberman may be seen as a stinging rebuke, given that he used the panel to push himself to the forefront of the climate change debate in the Senate earlier this year. However, Environment and Public Works Chairman Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) plans to deal with climate change legislation at the full committee level next year, which means Lieberman may not lose much even if his colleagues vote to strip him of that plum assignment.

Kos calls the plan “not acceptable,” quipping that “given the Senate Democrats’ history of capitulations, expect Lieberman to come out of that meeting as majority leader.” CNN’s Dana Bash reports that Lieberman “is not happy about” the plan, but will accept it. Watch it:

Check out ThinkProgress’s report, “Joe Lieberman: The Progressive Who Lost His Way.”

The Obama transition team is requiring that all potential hires for high-ranking positions fill out a seven-page questionnaire with questions about the applicant’s financial history, affiliations, professional background, legal history, and domestic help. Question #59 deals with gun ownership:

This question has raised the ire of gun-rights groups and their allies, who are charging that Obama plans to revoke the second amendment and has a “distaste for firearm owners”:

National Rifle Association: This week, it became clear that the new administration’s anti-gun agenda even infects the process of staffing the administration. … One thing is for sure: If the Obama team thinks these are good questions to ask job applicants, it’s only a matter of time before they’ll want to ask the rest of us, too.

Illinois State Rifle Association: “Question 59 provides clear insight into how Obama and his people perceive firearm owners,” said ISRA Executive Director Richard Pearson. The questionnaire poses a number of questions asking the applicant to reveal any unethical activities, or embarrassing Internet chats, then wraps up by asking if anyone in the applicant’s family owns a firearm. Obviously, Obama feels that owning a firearm is akin to talking dirty in Internet chat rooms.”

Sen. Jim DeMint (R-SC): “Millions of law-abiding Americans own firearms and they should not be discriminated against. The questionnaire already seeks information about illegal activity so there is no reason to ask this question unless the Obama Administration plans to use it to discriminate based on lawful activity. For this reason, I will seek to enact legislation to prohibit this type of discrimination.”

The point of the question was not to weed out gun owners, but rather “to ensure proper registration,” as transition spokeswoman Stephanie Cutter has explained. ABC’s Jake Tapper further notes that “the question is not meant to be any different in scope than the one about whether the Obama Administration candidate has run afoul of any law or regulation, ever gotten a traffic ticket of more than $50 in fines, and so on.”

The NRA is doing all it can to profit off its fearmongering about the Obama administration. Nationwide, gun stores are holding “Obama Sale” events to take advantage of their customers’ misinformed fears. A gun show ad in yesterday’s Washington Post also warned that the “new administration will attempt to make changes to firearms regulations! GET YOUR GUNS WHILE YOU STILL CAN!!!” Naturally, people who signed up or renewed their NRA membership were promised free admission to the show.

Vice President-elect Joe Biden, by the way, is also a gun owner. He has called the NRA’s fearmongering “malarkey.”