Isn't there a saying "As General Motors Goes, So Goes The Nation" ??

Not only do I agree with the first post in this thread, that a domino effect will occur if GM goes bankrupt.

There's also a fat chance that the emotional and psychological  reactions will effect many businesses, not only the ones with ties, directly or indirectly, to GM. GM has a symbolic value which is not to be underestimated.

The comment, from the CEO of GM in the 1950's was: "What's good for GM is good for America".  The remark was in relation to some discussion among senators that GM should be broken up, ie. it was getting too big and powerful in the US car industry.  How times have changed.
Thanks for clearing that one.
My recollection of what "Engine Charlie" Wilson said is:

"What's good for America is good for General Motors, and vice versa."

Then his remarks were twisted for politcal purposes to suggest that what he said was:
"What is good for GM is good for America!"

But he never said that.

Does anyone have access to a transcript of the exact words?

Whatever the wording, it's not even true. What's good for G.M. is lax CAFE standards, tax loopholes that encourage SUV ownership and high-ridership streetcars replaced with GM buses. What's good for America is the opposite of all that.
There's an article on GM in today's New York Times.  Highlights: GM makes about $1500 profit on an SUV, and loses over $1000 on a standard automobile.  They decided that since only SUVs are profitable, that they just have to make more attractive SUVs that everyone will want to buy.  This is the new lineup they're gambling on now.  (Sort of like the story about the drunk who lost his keys, and is searching around under the lamppost even though he thinks he lost them 30 feet away, somewhere in the dark; under the light is the only place he can see well enough to find them ... if they were there).

GMAC wants to spin off from GM because, the way it's currently structured, GM's crappy credit rating applies blanket-like to GMAC and that will kill the profitability of that division eventually.  So they have to separate to sufficient arm's length that they can command an independent credit rating.

GM is doing some dumb things.  You probably remember the Fortune magazine article, almost a year ago, about GM's billion $ investment in hydrogen fuel cells and research.  The last line of the article was a rather pessimistic guess that GM was gambling on a very risky adventure and I agree with that assessment.  To do the fuel-cell thing (with gov't assistance I'm sure) they and Ford walked away from a program to develop high-MPG car technology.  Now their hydrogen / fuel cell gamble is probably $1.5B and it's money down the toilet.  The so-called "hydrogen economy" will not happen.  Imagine if they had put the same money into hybrids, or even better a super-clean-burning diesel engine technology - which could be combined with hybrid / batteries and get a really attractive fuel-efficient vehicle.  Too late now.

That tsunami you see on the horizon right now, looking west from California, is the Chinese auto industry.  They are coming, they will be cheap, fuel-efficient, good-looking, and they will put the final nail in GM's coffin.