AIG & This Joke of an Administration

[quote]katzenjammer wrote:
Will Americans wake up to the nature of this administration in time to prevent irreversible damage to civil society, the Constitution, and the (relatively) free market?[/quote]

No.

[quote]CDM wrote:

Still no video released. This is the third Obama gaffe with no video. First the wrong door incident at the White House, then the helicopter head bump and now this. A dangerous precedent is being set here. If any other politician made this kind of blunder it would be everywhere.

http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/jromano/2009/03/18/hotflash-obama-as-ron-burgundy/
[/quote]

why do you even give a shit about these kinds of things?

[quote]PB-Crawl wrote:
CDM wrote:

Still no video released. This is the third Obama gaffe with no video. First the wrong door incident at the White House, then the helicopter head bump and now this. A dangerous precedent is being set here. If any other politician made this kind of blunder it would be everywhere.

http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/jromano/2009/03/18/hotflash-obama-as-ron-burgundy/

why do you even give a shit about these kinds of things?
[/quote]

Undeniable and unapologetic bias in mainstream media is the cousin of propaganda. How can you not be concerned with media outlets purposely shaping public opinion?

This is not the best example but I beleive it was the intent.

it’s very entertaining watching this story unfold.

First Dodd says he has absolutly no idea how the bonus protection clause ended up in the stimulous bill.

Today he admits “we” did agree to the changes but didn’t know about the AIG bonuses specifically. If they didn’t think any bonuses would be paid, why would we need the protection clause?

The administration new about the protections and won’t admit it.

The same people that voted the bill in are lambasting the current CEO of AIG. A guy that is working for a dollar a year and came in after the bailout and the retension bonus contracts.

This is all so ridiculous. Obama talks about the bonuses being a sympton of an underlying problem with capitalism or “the system”.

They gave them the money. They are going to give them more money. They wrote, voted for and signed the legislation that protected these bonuses.

These are the people regulating our entire economy. Some want these same people to be more involved in our economy and assert more control. It seems almost certain that will take as much control as they see fit.

Anyone not incredibly concerned about the direction we are heading has no interest in the world they live in and should not be voting.

[quote]pat wrote:
archiewhittaker wrote:
Oh, Obama will kick some AIG ass. However, he will do so AFTER the damage has been done, and the ass-kicking will be more like a light kick to the shin. Yeah. So my point is that Obama kicks like a weak old woman with accuracy issues.

What a bunch of morons. Obama can whine all he wants but it is my understanding that his administration apporved these bonuses ahead of time. All bonuses that were contractually obligated were to be paid…All AIG is going to get is a good tongue lashing. Which is posturing on that administrations part. The administration let it happen, so they really cannot recoup the money. If they try I am afraid they will be further embarrassed in court. The fucking stimulus was signed into law.

http://campaignspot.nationalreview.com/post/?q=MjM0YTg5ZWVhZTk1NTFmMjI4NGFmZTMzMTEwMTk5MzM

[i]“'(iii) The prohibition required under clause (i) shall not be construed to prohibit any bonus payment required to be paid pursuant to a written employment contract executed on or before February 11, 2009, as such valid employment contracts are determined by the Secretary or the designee of the Secretary.”

This amendment provides an exception for contractually obligated bonuses agreed on before Feb. 11, 2009, which exempts the very AIG bonuses Obama is condemning every single chance he gets. The amendment is in the final version and is law.

That’s the amendment that Dodd got placed in the Obama stimulus bill. You know, the one that passed with no House Republican votes, and only three Senate Republican votes." [/i]

Don’t get me wrong I think there should be no bonuses for execs, because their performance ran the company into the ground, but this adminstration allowed it and signed it into law…They can’t do shit about it, it’s their own fault…I double-dare them to go to court over it.
Maybe the fuck-sticks should have read the stimulus package?[/quote]

To be verified?:

"Dodd is so knee deep in it that he went so far as to draft, propose and submit an amendment which Dodd added to the $787 billion stimulus bill last month. The amendment created a roadblock that would keep AIG from being forced to give the money back.

The amendment, meant to restrict executive pay for bailed-out banks, also included an exception for ?contractually obligated bonuses agreed on before Feb. 11, 2009.?

The Dodd amendment creates a ?prohibition on what the president is now talking about,? said Virginia Rep. Eric Cantor, the House minority whip. He also accused the administration of being in ?disarray.?

In addition, lawmakers dropped an amendment during negotiations on the stimulus last month that would have mandated companies paying bonuses over $100,000 face either a 35 percent excise tax on the money or return the cash. The amendment was drafted by Sen. Olympia Snowe, R-Maine, and Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore. Snowe?s staff estimates this would have recovered about $58 million from AIG ? an aide could not say why the provision was dropped last month. "

Dodd denies his fathership of this bastard amendment.
He is also the biggest recipient of AIG political donations for 2008. (Obama was #2 senator on AIG’s list.)

[quote]DrSkeptix wrote:

Dodd denies his fathership of this bastard amendment.
He is also the biggest recipient of AIG political donations for 2008. (Obama was #2 senator on AIG’s list.)[/quote]

Maybe in the future we just need to see who is in the top two or three, again and again, on the political donations list from outfits like Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and AIG to be able to predict who the media will fawn over as the Messiah, Man of the New Century, and Best Next President.

Would have worked with predicting Obama’s treatment and election, anyway.

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/gerald_warner/blog/2009/03/18/president_barack_obama_should_serve_the_taxpayers_not_goldman_sachs_and_liquidate_aig

[quote]dhickey wrote:
it’s very entertaining watching this story unfold.

First Dodd says he has absolutly no idea how the bonus protection clause ended up in the stimulous bill.

Today he admits “we” did agree to the changes but didn’t know about the AIG bonuses specifically. If they didn’t think any bonuses would be paid, why would we need the protection clause?

The administration new about the protections and won’t admit it.

The same people that voted the bill in are lambasting the current CEO of AIG. A guy that is working for a dollar a year and came in after the bailout and the retension bonus contracts.

This is all so ridiculous. Obama talks about the bonuses being a sympton of an underlying problem with capitalism or “the system”.

They gave them the money. They are going to give them more money. They wrote, voted for and signed the legislation that protected these bonuses.

These are the people regulating our entire economy. Some want these same people to be more involved in our economy and assert more control. It seems almost certain that will take as much control as they see fit.

Anyone not incredibly concerned about the direction we are heading has no interest in the world they live in and should not be voting.
[/quote]

Yep, these guys are beyonf incompetent.

I am still waiting on obama to take responsibility for making these bonuses a LAW of the United States…This could not and would not have happened if he did not sign the stimulus.

It won’t happen, of course, as he decides beforehand who will be called on at his press conferences, and I’m pretty sure he doesn’t call on anyone he isn’t quite confident is his lapdog.

But if he were pressed on this at this time, my prediction would be you’d see the odd, extreme head-tilting phenomenon. The one where his head is practically laying on his shoulder as he speaks, such as he did in the Major Garrett interview promptly after the Rev Wright videos breaking and he had to, like the Grinch, think up a lie and think it up quick.

Anytime he has his head in that bizarre position, he is telling a lie that he has not fully programmed himself with. Personal opinion only, I cannot prove it.

The latest is that Dodd says that the Obama Adminstration had him put that amendment in there: it was not his idea at all.

So I don’t think Obama is going to come clean on it. If he says anything now, he may well be unable to avoid the extreme head tilt while explaining it.

I fully expect Obama to keep changing the issue - for example, via the charm offensive on Leno; or, by hiding behind “the culture of greed” demagoguery that he was spouting last night - until the American people/press move on to something else.

Anyone here wonder why “Fanny” Frank isn’t making such a big deal about the bonuses being paid out at Fannie/Freddie??? He’ll probably argue that we cannot go around abrogating contracts - and he’ll do it with perfect aplomb too.

Bill, I’ll look out for that tic - it may be a conscious way of our “neuro-linguistic programmer” in chief to make his interlocutor nervous??

[quote]dhickey wrote:
PB-Crawl wrote:
CDM wrote:

Still no video released. This is the third Obama gaffe with no video. First the wrong door incident at the White House, then the helicopter head bump and now this. A dangerous precedent is being set here. If any other politician made this kind of blunder it would be everywhere.

http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/jromano/2009/03/18/hotflash-obama-as-ron-burgundy/

why do you even give a shit about these kinds of things?

Undeniable and unapologetic bias in mainstream media is the cousin of propaganda. How can you not be concerned with media outlets purposely shaping public opinion?

This is not the best example but I beleive it was the intent.[/quote]

Exactly.

Since watching and hearing more than I cared to on this over the past couple of day, two thing struck me.

  1. It’s a shame that some of the people in this division of AIG got paid, but in the grand scheme this is a miniscule amount to worry about.

How much time has this now taken and who is watching the rest of the trillions of dollars that out there being spent on god knows what?

To me this certainly a fleecing of the american taxpayer, but it inconsequential in the grand fleecing sceme.

  1. Who in their right mind would go work for or buy from AIG if they had a choice? It’s a shame that we own 80% of AIG, but now that we do wouldn’t we want them to succeed? Or atleast burn the least amount of money until we pull the plug?

Knowing that at any moment your compensation could be the sourse of a public congressional version of the Salem witch trials, has to be a real selling point in the interview process. How many good people still at AIG do you think are now looking for another job?

Congress is going to run what’s left of this company into the ground. They will soon be left with only those that no one else will hire. Much like congress. All on our dime.

Oh c’mon, the government has always been the very bestest at running businesses!

The problem is just not enough government control. Congress is itching to get more hands-on and that will really shape everything up to super number one, extra pronto.

Now I think AIG are giant assholes and nobody but the common worker who had nothing to do with killing the company would deserve bonuses, but I have real issues on how this is being handled.

First, congress passed the bonus provision as a law, and Obama signed it (which, I get the suspicion somebody reminded him as he is now trying to move pass this and change the topic as quickly as possible).

So as a result of the stimulus, it would have been illegal for them not to give them the bonuses that was written in there contracts, right?

The congress should be blaming themselves (unlikely), but they are scape goating the CEO, who may be a complete asshole, but had no choice. Congress MADE him pay those bonuses by making it illegal for him to deny them the bonuses.

My biggest issue now is the whole “Tax as a punishment” thing. I am pretty sure that is unconstitutional as hell and I hope that these AIG folks take it to court. If they do that, the embarrassment congress and the administration would get, would be epic…Even the friendly lap dog media would have to report it.

[quote]pat wrote:
Now I think AIG are giant assholes and nobody but the common worker who had nothing to do with killing the company would deserve bonuses, but I have real issues on how this is being handled.

First, congress passed the bonus provision as a law, and Obama signed it (which, I get the suspicion somebody reminded him as he is now trying to move pass this and change the topic as quickly as possible).

So as a result of the stimulus, it would have been illegal for them not to give them the bonuses that was written in there contracts, right?

The congress should be blaming themselves (unlikely), but they are scape goating the CEO, who may be a complete asshole, but had no choice. Congress MADE him pay those bonuses by making it illegal for him to deny them the bonuses.

My biggest issue now is the whole “Tax as a punishment” thing. I am pretty sure that is unconstitutional as hell and I hope that these AIG folks take it to court. If they do that, the embarrassment congress and the administration would get, would be epic…Even the friendly lap dog media would have to report it.
[/quote]

Pat,

A couple of points: 1st: this is entirely a democratic issue (minus the THREE pseduo-Republicans). They cannot blame George Bush (the standard refrain for eight years. They inserted the language regarding the bonuses, crafted the spending bill, and loaned $30,000,000,000 several weeks ago to AIG.

  1. The public can see what the “change” mantra really means: nepotism, corruption, and spending on an unprecedented scale. All the pent-up frustrations and pet projects of a party out of power have now been unleashed on a suffering economy.

No checks. No balances.

  1. I hope AIG takes this all the way to the Court.

JeffR

The hits keep coming. Dodd took the blame for the bonus screw-up and then passed it on.

March 19 (Bloomberg) – Senate Banking Committee Chairman Christopher Dodd said the Obama administration asked him to insert a provision in last month?s $787 billion economic- stimulus legislation that had the effect of authorizing American International Group Inc.?s bonuses.

Dodd, a Connecticut Democrat, said yesterday he agreed to modify restrictions on executive pay at companies receiving taxpayer assistance to exempt bonuses already agreed upon in contracts. He said he did so without realizing the change would benefit AIG, whose recent $165 million payment to employees has sparked a public furor.

?I did not want to make any changes to my original Senate-passed amendment? to the stimulus bill, ?but I did so at the request of administration officials, who gave us no indication that this was in any way related to AIG,? Dodd said in a statement released last night.

?Let me be clear – I was completely unaware of these AIG bonuses until I learned of them last week.? He didn?t name the administration officials who made the request.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=washingtonstory&sid=aT_tMXRy2vDs

[quote]CDM wrote:
The hits keep coming. Dodd took the blame for the bonus screw-up and then passed it on.

March 19 (Bloomberg) – Senate Banking Committee Chairman Christopher Dodd said the Obama administration asked him to insert a provision in last month?s $787 billion economic- stimulus legislation that had the effect of authorizing American International Group Inc.?s bonuses.

Dodd, a Connecticut Democrat, said yesterday he agreed to modify restrictions on executive pay at companies receiving taxpayer assistance to exempt bonuses already agreed upon in contracts.

He said he did so without realizing the change would benefit AIG, whose recent $165 million payment to employees has sparked a public furor.

?I did not want to make any changes to my original Senate-passed amendment? to the stimulus bill, ?but I did so at the request of administration officials, who gave us no indication that this was in any way related to AIG,? Dodd said in a statement released last night.

?Let me be clear – I was completely unaware of these AIG bonuses until I learned of them last week.? He didn?t name the administration officials who made the request.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=washingtonstory&sid=aT_tMXRy2vDs[/quote]

Wait, didn’t tTeleprompter just say that he takes responsibility even if this wasn’t a crisis of his making?

Next time, people, don’t let the media choose your leaders.

JeffR

[quote]CDM wrote:
The hits keep coming. Dodd took the blame for the bonus screw-up and then passed it on.

March 19 (Bloomberg) – Senate Banking Committee Chairman Christopher Dodd said the Obama administration asked him to insert a provision in last month?s $787 billion economic- stimulus legislation that had the effect of authorizing American International Group Inc.?s bonuses.

Dodd, a Connecticut Democrat, said yesterday he agreed to modify restrictions on executive pay at companies receiving taxpayer assistance to exempt bonuses already agreed upon in contracts. He said he did so without realizing the change would benefit AIG, whose recent $165 million payment to employees has sparked a public furor.

?I did not want to make any changes to my original Senate-passed amendment? to the stimulus bill, ?but I did so at the request of administration officials, who gave us no indication that this was in any way related to AIG,? Dodd said in a statement released last night.

?Let me be clear – I was completely unaware of these AIG bonuses until I learned of them last week.? He didn?t name the administration officials who made the request.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=washingtonstory&sid=aT_tMXRy2vDs[/quote]

Heh.

I don’t like the idea of them targeting taxes against these bonuses. Sorry, but too damn bad. Shouldn’t have bailed them out in the first place. And now, to tax a specific group, in such a specific manner?

How constitutional is that? I’d fight the hell out of it. Somebody needs to swat the federal government on the nose and remind them that we’re supposed to have a limited government.