Comments on: Obama, Geithner, and Dodd: The Three-Headed AIG Circus

By: nagasama

nagasama — Thu, 19 Mar 2009 22:27:08 +0000

yes, they are apparently. although to a lesser degree it seems. who needs a contract when the gub’ment can come in and tell you “your’re contract is null because it makes us look bad…so what if it is legal and binding”. this administration consists of little more than con-men, thieves and most of all…liars.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Thu, 19 Mar 2009 14:40:53 +0000

Fannie Mae & Fannie Mac are also giving bonuses. Are they going to go after them, too?

By: gnduke

gnduke — Wed, 18 Mar 2009 03:42:17 +0000

Does no one see the other option? They were well aware of the issue and how the population would react, and allowed it to happen so they could pass precedent setting legislation to fully tax bonus payments after the fact. Something they could use later in other less obvious situations to increase tax revenues.

It just smells of a manufactured crisis to enable legislation that would never stand a chance of passing otherwise.

By: Scott

Scott — Wed, 18 Mar 2009 00:35:16 +0000

When responding to how to hndle the AIG bonuses/retention paymens this is what Summers had to say. “He recognized that you can’t just abrogate contracts willy-nilly, but he moved to do what could be done,” Larry Summers, Obama’s chief economic adviser, told The Associated Press in an interview Tuesday. But what about rewriting the contracts for benefits and and pay in regards to the UAW and GM or Chrysler. There didn’t seem to be a problem with forcing a rewriting of those contracts. Those men and women of the UAW aren’t making 6 and 7 figure bnuses or more and yet they get new deals forced on them. AIG and their people don’t have to suffer anything…jst the little people/ Change doesn’t seem to have come to Washington….change is just happening out in the real world.

By: BBB

BBB — Wed, 18 Mar 2009 00:05:44 +0000

Give me a friggin’ break. Does the administration really think that we are all that stupid? Apparently so.

No…he knows the news media will not do anything. What should be a really good “gotcha” news story will be either totally ignored or spun the way the administration wants. Remember: modern journalism=public relations.

But maybe Obama should quit judging the 48% that did not vote for him by the mental capacity of those that did.

That’s perfect! I’m stealing that and using it elsewhere!

By: armybrat

armybrat — Tue, 17 Mar 2009 21:23:55 +0000

Obama’s and Dodd’s “anger” is nothing more than CYA. The money they got from AIG was a bribe and those two scum delivered in the form of exemptions specifically written into the original POS legislation to protect those bonuses. Politics the Chicago way.

By: retire05

retire05 — Tue, 17 Mar 2009 20:36:50 +0000

Robbie, Obama, in his best feigned surprise mode, is shocked, shocked I tell ,you, that there is gambling going on at Ricks. Or should I say Timothy’s place.

Last November, the NYSlimes reported how Geithner worked his little tail off on the AIG bailout. It was actually Geithner’s baby, not Paulson’s. But today, the administration is claiming that although those at Treasury and the Fed knew about the bonuses last fall, poor little Timothy had no clue. Wait a minute, wasn’t Geithner, the co-author of TARP, (along with his buddy Patrick Kennedy), in charge of the NY Fed last fall?

So we are to believe that Geithner, author of TARP, godfather to the AIG bailout christening, did not know that Chris Dodd had permitted for the bonuses? And we are to believe that the Porkulus Bill, that directly involved the Treasury Department, was never read by the brilliant Mr. Geithner that the nation could not do without as Treasury Secretary?

Give me a friggin’ break. Does the administration really think that we are all that stupid? Apparently so.

But maybe Obama should quit judging the 48% that did not vote for him by the mental capacity of those that did.

It is rumored that Tom Hanks will earn a sweet $42 million for his next movie. Considering that Americans are having a hard time finding the funds for a few hours of escape from their daily problems, I am sure the Obama administration will soon also feign shock over Hank’s current income. After all, we are all in this together (as Obama throws not one, but two, taxpayer funded parties today, claiming his Irish heritage as a reason why) and I am sure that Obama doesn’t think that Mr. Hanks should be getting such a salary on the backs of movie goers.

Oh, wait, Hanks is a Democrat.

Never mind.