You mean to tell me that one man owns the busiest international border crossing in the entire United States? One that carries about 25 percent of all trade between the US and Canada? Ha! With apologies to George C. Parker, if you believe that, I've got a bridge to sell you.

Wait. This is for real, as in, a real bridge? Apparently so. The Ambassador Bridge, which connects Detroit, Michigan with Windsor, Ontario, Canada is in fact owned by a billionaire Grosse Pointe, Michigan resident named Manuel "Matty" Moroun. Moroun is none too pleased with the prospect of a new bridge, proposed years ago and backed by the US and Canadian governments, competing with his own. The billionaire went so far as to fund a multi-million-dollar campaign seeking to create a constitutional amendment that would require a statewide vote to fund such a project. The proposition was voted down, meaning the bridge project could proceed.

We haven't yet explained the best part: Canada plans to pay for the entire bridge. That's right. The Canadian government has agreed to pay for the construction of the bridge, the land in Michigan that would need to be acquired and the construction of necessary on-ramps to Detroit's I-75 highway. Which would leave Michigan and its residents with, well, absolutely zero financial obligation.

Here's where we point out that a huge amount of automotive trade is carried over the Ambassador bridge. In fact, according to the New International Trade Crossing website, Chrysler has estimated that "delays at the Detroit-Windsor crossing adds more than $600 to the average car manufactured in the Michigan-Ontario region."

Leave it up to The Daily Show to turn such an oddly controversial topic into a hilarious video segment. We suggest you check it out below, and pay special attention to the parody of Chrysler's well-known "Born in Detroit" marketing campaign.
The Daily Show with Jon Stewart Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c
Bridge to Canada
www.thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes Political Humor & Satire Blog The Daily Show on Facebook


I'm reporting this comment as:

Reported comments and users are reviewed by Autoblog staff 24 hours a day, seven days a week to determine whether they violate Community Guideline. Accounts are penalized for Community Guidelines violations and serious or repeated violations can lead to account termination.


    • 1 Second Ago
  • 103 Comments
      UN4GTBL
      • 1 Year Ago
      "Born in Detroit" should be "Imported from Detroit" #corrections
        fuzzyfish6
        • 1 Year Ago
        @UN4GTBL
        #realcorrections Born of Fire.
        alistair.dillingham
        • 1 Year Ago
        @UN4GTBL
        The only thing the rest of Michigan imports from the City of Detroit is GRIEF, ie, bills and corruption. No wonder its former Mayor, Democrat Kirkpatrick, is a 100% proven CROOK who is doing hard time as he goes from one corruption trial to another every week or so.
      Drakkon
      • 1 Year Ago
      I believe every word of it. American government is repeatedly for sale to the highest bidder and this is one of those rare cases (increasingly rare) when the billionaire lost. The Regressive Party in Missouri has been trying to make I-70 across our state a toll road since I was a kid. 25 years later they are still trying. About 10 years ago, they drew up plans for a new I-70 bridge across the Mississippi at St Louis. The Regressives demanded Missouri wouldn't give a dime unless the bridge was a toll bridge. It would become the camel nose that would allow them to privitize the rest of the highway out to Kansas City. See how that works? Illinois called thier bluff. Illinois agreed to pay 100% of MIssouri's share. The Regressives still wouldn't budge. Then the elections loomed. Then they capitulated. They will have to look for some other excuse now.
      Army Casualty
      • 1 Year Ago
      http://www.michiganradio.org/post/will-new-bridge-canada-cost-michigan-taxpayers-we-ask-law-professor
      • 1 Year Ago
      [blocked]
        iamzombie
        • 1 Year Ago
        Yes, the Daily show clearly faked a proposition bill, and coerced the Canadian government into paying for a billion dollar bridge to make that clip. Don't worry, I'm sure Fox News has already done a dozen "legitimate" news pieces outlining how Canada is trying to buy the USA, starting with Michigan.
        Thomas E.
        • 1 Year Ago
        What shocks me the most is that conservatives are so dumb they actually think that Fox News is real news.
        delsolo1
        • 1 Year Ago
        And Fox News is not a joke? Just today Fox's Eric Bolling cries "Liberal Bias" at the fact even the Bush Administration admitted it found no WMDs in Iraq. This is Daily Show material. Bet the anti bridge forty one percent are loyal Fox News viewers with tin hats.
        Kuro Houou
        • 1 Year Ago
        It's true, it's mainly just entertainment. Just like Fox News, they are both on comedy networks, I watch both for a laugh sometimes. Although I think I've laughed more watching some of the comedians on shows like The Five, Jon Stewart better watch out.
        noahbalboa
        • 1 Year Ago
        Lol, funny guy.
        Klep
        • 1 Year Ago
        A news program can be comedic without being "fake". Being fake would be if a network deliberately distorted, repeated, and even falsified facts in order to suit their agenda. (But no network that is "Fair and Balanced" would do that, of course.)
        JeremyABG
        • 1 Year Ago
        I'm really not sure what you mean. Honestly.
      rdaex1
      • 1 Year Ago
      Still never ceases to amaze that a supposed comedian brings up more real information, news, and questions than any socalled news show would ever attempt to.
        Klep
        • 1 Year Ago
        @rdaex1
        Exactly. Colbert does it much less frequently, but when he does it is often really quite good, such as his multiple attempts to make people see how ludicrous super PACs are.
      Dr. Aquafresh
      • 1 Year Ago
      I don't really like a person owing the bridge, but you have to ask yourself.......why would Canada want to pay for another bridge?? It's most likely so it's easier to send more US jobs to Canada. One factor in not sending more jobs to Canada, is concern over the border crossing, and the possible delays. I'm in favor of anything that keeps jobs in the US......which in this case would be not building another bridge.
        iamzombie
        • 1 Year Ago
        @Dr. Aquafresh
        No offense, but you're a moron. "Jobs" don't travel by road (or by bridge). Jobs travel by email/phone/memo. The US economy is in the toilet, but it's not because all of the jobs are being sent to Canada, lol.
          Dr. Aquafresh
          • 1 Year Ago
          @iamzombie
          Wow, you are pretty stupid. Jobs sure can travel by roads and bridges. I worked for an American automotive manufacturer for many years. They would love nothing more than to buy parts from the cheapest supplier available, be it domestic or foreign.....but they have to maintain a "just in time" supply chain, which means that they have to avoid supply delays whenever possible. One concern with going with cheaper Canadian suppliers, over American suppliers, was possible huge delays with the border crossing. Another bridge would really reduce those concerns, and allow domestic buyers to source many more cheaper Canadian parts, over American parts. That's an increase in well paying Canadian manufacturing jobs, and a decrease in well paying American manufacturing jobs. The trade does not flow equally. Why do you think Canada wants to take all the financial burden? THEY WIN!! Also, for the person who said they would gain the money back, with people paying $4.50 a car. You have to consider that with competition from another bridge (and tunnel), that price will fall a bit.......and the current number of vehicles that are crossing the bridge with be almost cut in half. It will probably take over 50 years before anybody gets any money back from this new bridge, and with adding maintenance and upkeep to the initial 2.1 billion construction price, probably around 70 years, or more. Michigan will probably never make any actual money on this bridge either......just like the current one. Plus, they lose big time on more of their manufacturing jobs going to Canada.
        th0mb0ne
        • 1 Year Ago
        @Dr. Aquafresh
        Let me guess....you're not a real Doctor.
        Skicat
        • 1 Year Ago
        @Dr. Aquafresh
        @HealthyChap: The Sarnia Bridge is @ capacity. Trucks can't use the Detroit Tunnel. I have been stuck for hours waiting to return to the U.S. from Canada. The auto industry (in which I work) and the majority of sensible people in MI know we need another crossing to keep the business strong in MI. There WILL be another crossing built because Canada wants it and business wants it. The only question is: Will MI be smart enough to get it done before Canada throws their incredible generous offer @ Buffalo, NY?
          mmmfloorpie
          • 1 Year Ago
          @Skicat
          If only you knew... Back in the 90s a new bridge was ALMOST built between Canada and Buffalo. All the permits had be filed, the design had been picked, shovels were ready to hit the ground... Then, a group of wealthy Americans that live in a neighborhood near where the current bridge already lands sued and blocked construction. The bridge company kept winning appeals that took YEARS to conclude but these STUPID Americans kept blocking it by using an unending barrage of environmental impact studies. In fact, the original "signature bridge" was cancelled because of claims that too many birds would crash into it. So they went to plan B. Just twinning the existing 90 year old bridge. And that's currently where the project sits, with no construction having yet begun. The entire project has essentially been mothballed and they have been trying to increase capacity at Customs instead. They even spent a boat load of money investigating an option of placing US Customs on Canadian soil! This is why America is in decline. No one can ever compromise and do something that would actually benefit both countries. Since when has infrastructure been so controversial?? I'll harken back to an old slogan we used to use here... "BUILD THE DAMN BRIDGE!"
        jlukas79
        • 1 Year Ago
        @Dr. Aquafresh
        Canada's primary reason for the bridge is that it is affecting downtown Windsor businesses. The bridge access is right downtown in the business district. Businesses and the people complain about all the semis, and other trucks either waiting to cross, or have crossed over creating more traffic on short streets and driving people away from the area the city makes the most money on. The goal of the bridge is to get that traffic out of downtown, hence why ontario is paying for the bridge up front. On the US side it is about ease of access to freeways as well as faster crossing due to better enter and exits on BOTH sides of the border.
        SpikedLemon
        • 1 Year Ago
        @Dr. Aquafresh
        It's so that both Michigan AND Ontario can trade back and forth between each other more efficiently. It's about jobs on both sides of the border and, ultimately, we, the consumer, benefit on both sides. I avoid the Detroit-Windsor crossling like the plague. The Port Huron-Sarnia crossing is substantially better.
          fuzzyfish6
          • 1 Year Ago
          @SpikedLemon
          Me too, the Ambassador Bridge is a disaster. I usually travel a longer distance to the Port Huron-Sarnia crossing because it's so much faster.
        ctsmith1066
        • 1 Year Ago
        @Dr. Aquafresh
        Because unlike us, Canadians realize that money spent on infrastructure that will increase cross-border commerce is money well-spent.
        OptimusPrimeRib
        • 1 Year Ago
        @Dr. Aquafresh
        So people won't have to pay a massive amount which could lead to more trade or business?
      • 1 Year Ago
      [blocked]
      Thipps
      • 1 Year Ago
      so privatized building projects are horrible? this class warfare is disgusting
        Rob J
        • 1 Year Ago
        @Thipps
        So an owner who actively tries to block the improvement of infrastructure is a good thing? This isn't about "class warfare", this is about improving a trade route.
        noahbalboa
        • 1 Year Ago
        @Thipps
        You sir, are HILARIOUS! I love it; privatized building projects are not even the issue, and you are taking it to the extreme right off the bat! Nicely done.
          Thipps
          • 1 Year Ago
          @noahbalboa
          Well if you watched the video. a big BIG deal was made of a 85 year old white billionaire. They didnt come out and say it but thats what this was about
          jz78817
          • 1 Year Ago
          @noahbalboa
          @Thipps it IS about an 85 year old billionaire, because he's the one who attempted to twist law into protecting his financial interests.
          Michael
          • 1 Year Ago
          @noahbalboa
          @ Thipps You should stop acting like a Black Panther, trying to stoke up racial tensions. This country doesn't need people like you.
        Michael
        • 1 Year Ago
        @Thipps
        So free market competition is bad? What are you, a socialist? A communist? Another entity wants to build a bridge to compete with the Ambassador Bridge. This is good for the marketplace, and good for capitalism.
        Shanti
        • 1 Year Ago
        @Thipps
        Class warfare? This is one man looking out for himself. If Warren Buffet was the one trying to build the other bridge, he would still be trying to stop it, and he would still be wrong.
      KAG
      • 1 Year Ago
      re reporting from a fake news channel on Comedy Central?
        Klep
        • 1 Year Ago
        @KAG
        No, it's real news. This is actually happening. Satirical doesn't (always) mean it's not real.
        Fixitfixitstop
        • 1 Year Ago
        @KAG
        What's on The Daily Show and Colbert Report is more accurate than any of the news networks.
          TrueDat
          • 1 Year Ago
          @Fixitfixitstop
          That's what I tell people! They report the facts, then laugh at them because 9/10, the facts are ridiculous!!!
      michigan
      • 1 Year Ago
      This is supposed to be auto blog, not city politics blog
      icemilkcoffee
      • 1 Year Ago
      Once again a reminder that infrastructures should never be owned by profiteers.
      nassau
      • 1 Year Ago
      AB's version of "you didn't build that." Nothing like a little smear campaign to liven up "reporting."
        ChrisTT
        • 1 Year Ago
        @nassau
        Oh, really? Care to enlighten us? Tell us why the people should keep being ripped off by a billionaire with a piece of monopoly infrastructure. Don't tell us you like monopolies. Because monopolies aren't what our beloved capitalism is about, is it? It's about innovation, competition, the best service and the best price. Tell us, why won't the billionaire do the honorable thing and send flowers to his competitors and wish them well? At least in market economies competition is good for business, isn't it? And this isn't a real competitor now, is it? It's the hyper-incompetent government after all. Surely a business man of Matty's stature will laugh at that and dish out high quality service at rock bottom prices that the government can never beat.
    • Load More Comments