Maybe "Stupid" Will Work

Geithner has proposed an utterly nonsensical method of recapturing the controversial AIG bonuses and protecting the US taxpayer - AIG will have to pay them back to the Treasury!  Right - and since the ability of AIG to meet its payment obligations depends entirely on Treasury loans, a fool can see Treasury will have to lend them the $165 million to do it.  Geithner is pretty bold to insult the intelligence of Congress this way.

But I am here to help!  Allow me to suggest an enhancement to the Geithner plan - as AIG collects payments, for example on insurance premiums, it should take those payments to the bank and ask for $100 dollar bills stamped "Non-fungible currency".  When they have accumulated $165 million of non-fungible notes they can pay the amount of the bonus pool back to the Treasury.  That will prove that the taxpayer has been protected, right?  (Please ignore the fact that while AIG directs that specific cash flow to Treasury they will have additional shortfalls requiring an additional $165 million elsewhere.)

Could anyone be dumb enough to fall for this?  Actually, yes - here is Joan Walsh of Salon absolving Barack of all sins of ommission:

I felt most of Tuesday that I'd rather see AIG break the bonus contracts, under Treasury duress, and let the penalized execs sue. Wouldn't it be great to get to depose some of these brainiacs under oath?

But now none of that may be necessary. It seems that AIG has been publicly shamed into giving the money back, as the firm's name became nearly synonymous with "Madoff" as shorthand for greedy, amoral business behavior. Will this be enough for Obama to regain the moral and political upper hand in this crisis? I hope so, because he doesn't deserve the fallout from the Bush administration's bungling first of the economy, and then of the TARP plan to save it. Will it be enough to rescue Geithner from mounting criticism that he's been too close to the economy's bad guys to reform them? Stay tuned.

Ms. Walsh is not my first read on financial matters but she is a featured Salon writer - go figure.

OH DEAR, MY BAD:  Perhaps Mr. Geithner proposes to tack the controversial bonuses onto the loan principal owed by AIG so that we get it back that way.  Let's see - instead of owing us $170 billion, AIG will owe us $170.165 billion.  Yup, that ought to do it, especially since we are sure of getting back every lastr dime. 

WHO BROKE AIG:  The fact that AIG has required $44 billion of government support to cover its tedious losses in securities lending (ostensibly overseen by state insurance regulators) while absorbing a lesser $27 billion slightly greater $54 billion in support of its credit derivatives activity continues to be widely overlooked by everyone who would prefer to blame the derivatives traders.  Clearly there is far too much reality for the reality-based community to process.  My view - regulators and those who reflexively favor more regulation would prefer to point the finger at unregulated credit derivatives as the root of all evil.  As a bonus, advertising the fact that state insurance commissioners watched AIGs assets dwindle precipitously wouldn't be good for public confidence in the insurance industry.

MORE:  Good point that derivatives concentrated credit risk in AIG rather than spread it worldwide.  More integrated reporting would have been helpful.

And Megan M puts a toe in in defense of the AIG bonus payments.

My next question - if Congress whoops through the AIG confiscatory tax, thereby demonstrating that a deal is not a deal and a contract can be subjected to ex-post revision by Congress, what impact will that have on any TARP firm trying to retain talent through 2009 and beyond?

And since I ask, there is no way Merrill could have paid bonuses without its government supported merger and without the government money it got via the AIG conduit.  They were also a prime purveyor of these CDos.  Why do they get a pass?

FIRE IT UP, BABY!  Here we go:

This cockamamie populism in Washington really hit its stride when Iowa Republican Sen. Charles Grassley suggested that AIG execs who earned bonuses should "follow the Japanese example and come before the American people and take that deep bow and say, I'm sorry, and then either do one of two things: resign or go commit suicide."

C'mon. If suicide were a proper penalty for piddling away taxpayer dollars, the National Mall would look just like Jonestown after refreshments.

...

President Barack Obama, meanwhile, has asked Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner "to use that leverage and pursue every single legal avenue to block these bonuses and make the American taxpayers whole," claiming it was all about "fundamental values."

You know what's a super useful value? A guarantee that contracts entered into by individuals or parties are respected. Or is the state ready to throw that fundamental value out and bend to the will of the angry mob?

That's what I'm sayin'!  In fact, I'll say it again - Grassley is the ranking Republican on the Senate Finance Committee with oversight for Medicare, so when it goes bust he'll know what to do.

Comments

[pagar]

Anyone else tried to get the opensecrets website to come up this morning? It's not coming up for me.

Senator Barack Obama received a $101,332 bonus from American International Group in the form of political contributions according to Opensecrets.org. The two biggest Congressional recipients of bonuses from the A.I.G. are - Senators Chris Dodd and Senator Barack Obama.

[Ranger]

Hmmm... I seem to recall both of them were up at the top of the list of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac donations as well. What is it about Dodd and Obama that makes them so attractive to institutions that pay "excessive" bonuses?

[narciso]

Total amorality, with the progressive willingness to deny reality. What was that line, that Coolidge when asked about European involvement in the Great War, 'well they rented the money didn't they' I forget the exact phrase. Joan Walsh, 'credentialed moron' per excellence
probably in on the JournoList talking points
distribution network.

[Fresh Air]

This is really rich stuff. These same Wall Streeters making loads of money before the election and giving it to Democrats was perfectly fine. I think they're going to learn the parable about the frog and the scorpion very soon.

[hit and run]

Maureen Dowd: "Barack Obama even needs a teleprompter to get mad."

That's the opening of her column today.

But I didn't read the rest of it. I'm sure that from there it went down hill faster than the stock market under Obama.

But, that was a good opening line.

[narciso]

By the way, this was the D.C. Examiner piece about Palin, that Clarice tipped me off about and the blindness of the
'credentialed moron' class, that brought to this brave new world. The triumph of "Hope
over Experience"

[narciso]

These Wall Street analysts, handling the financial equivalent of 'depleted uranium'
trading worthless paper, in relative terms at least, as if it meant something. Well they funded this disaster to the hilt, they
torpedoed their own boat, as Dennis Miller
used to say, 'stop me before I subreference
again' or Taranto flags me for metaphorical overdose. sadly the likes of Megan McArdle, who I really used to respect, ignored their instincts and apparently their education, in their choice and in their role as early adopters. Wonder how Dan Drezner feels now, no I don't give a 'flipping farthing' for what they say, now, it's too late.
a

[Jim Ryan]

Tom, you're hitting 'em out of the park these days.

[Ranger]

Obama leadership in action:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090318/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/whither_geithner_analysis>Analysis: AIG bonuses new cloud over Treasury boss

If not distancing itself from Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, the White House is placing firmly on his shoulders responsibility for how the government handled the $165 million in bonuses paid to about 400 executives and traders at American International Group Inc.

In Obama's White House, the buck stops somewhere else.

[Charlie (Colorado)]

Uh, Narciso, what was?

[Pofarmer]

Just heard a clip saying that Geinther will skim the 165 million of the next multi BILLION dollar bailout to AIG. Nothing like missing the point, I suppose. I sure hope we're getting our monies worth for a couple hundred Billion.

[Rick Ballard]

I'd like to second Jim Ryan's comment. Mr. Maguire has a better grip on this than any of the credentialed morons bloviating like manure spreaders set to Warp 9.

The subject really separates the wheat from the chaff among the credentialed moron set and there sure is a lot of chaff.

[Pofarmer]

Oh, and is anybody else watching the U.S. Dollar index? It seems that folks are starting to vote on Obama's budget proposals.

[Rick Ballard]

Charlie,

It's the LUN - Narciso does that regularly. (Can I keep my decoder ring, Narciso?)

[kim]

Seen Noemie Emory on Palin, yet, narciso? The Audacity of Type.
========================================

[MayBee]

When do we get to start describing the Dow or unemployment figures as a "Grim Milestone"?

[MayBee]

Just heard a clip saying that Geinther will skim the 165 million of the next multi BILLION dollar bailout to AIG. Nothing like missing the point, I suppose. I sure hope we're getting our monies worth for a couple hundred Billion.

Of course he'll do that. How hilarious.
It was less than .1% of what they're getting. It will be a tiny blip to withhold it now.

[hit and run]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/03/17/AR2009031703019.html>Edward Liddy, CEO of AIG in the Washington Post today

[Ranger]

When do we get to start describing the Dow or unemployment figures as a "Grim Milestone"?

Posted by: MayBee | March 18, 2009 at 10:30 AM

I would say that every 500,000 jobs lost should be a "grim milestone" in Obama's War on Prosperity.

[Paul Zrimsek]

I thought the idea was that AIG would pay back ALL the bailout money eventually. Do you suppose Geithner's softening us up for something?

[narciso]

Well we can start now, Maybee, the rest of the 'credentialled moron' class, 2011, I think. I was LUning the Emery piece, you folks have to upgrade decoder rings. This is too much like a Charles McCarry novel I stepped into here, the Journolist, sounds
exactly like the secret network in
"Shelley's Heart" and every moonbat seems to be on it. Klein, Yglesias, Bartels (the lefty economist which Obama was touting along on his campaign trips. Olbermann was trying to deny it, by bringing on Mr. Kos
(Psst, the one thing about Fight Club is you don't talk about Fight Club)

[Pofarmer]

When do we get to start describing the Dow or unemployment figures as a "Grim Milestone"?

I like it.

[Paul Zrimsek]

As long as we're doing Stupid Finance Tricks, it would be kind of cool if there were some way we could put the $165 million in Al Gore's lockbox for a while.

[kim]

Touche, narciso.
================

[Ranger]

If people were angry about $165 million taxpayer dollars to AIG execs, just wait until this gets wide publicity:

http://www.reuters.com/article/ousivMolt/idUSTRE52H11Y20090318>Hedge funds may benefit from government cash to AIG: report

Some of the billions of dollars the U.S. government paid to bail out American International Group Inc stand to benefit hedge funds that bet on a falling housing market, the Wall Street Journal said, citing people familiar with the matter and reviewed documents.

[Appalled]

narcisco:

I have been struck by the incompetence of the Obama administration. Nevertheless, do you really, really think the McCain administration would have done better? Gawd, if the AIG matter had come up and he were president, I think he would be signing on to the Grassley position, and sending bank executives to Guantanamo for a little toughening up.

How quickly we forget what the choice was in the general election, and how poorly McCain aquitted himself at the onset of the financial crisis.

[Foo Bar]

The fact that AIG has required $44 billion of government support to cover its tedious losses in securities lending (ostensibly overseen by state insurance regulators) while absorbing a lesser $27 billion in support of its credit derivatives activity continues to be widely overlooked by everyone who would prefer to blame the derivatives traders

I think this is wrong. You're leaving out the $22 billion in collateral postings to CDS counterparties (Attachment A, page 3). That's definitely also "in support of its credit derivatives activity". They also had to put up $5 billion for equity in this Maiden Lane III entity (see pie chart). So that's 27 + 22 + 5 =$54 billion, or more than the $44 billion in support of securities lending.

Finally, there's also the $12 billion in payments to states related to guaranteed investment agreement contracts. I'm not sure, but these guaranteed investment agreements sound like something that's probably nouveau and relatively unregulated, as well.

[TM RESPONDS: Total support of AIG FP has been $52 billion, which exceeds the $44 billion of support for securities lending. That is one reason I try hard to say "credit derivative related losses" or some variant thereof - those losses appear to be $22 billion of CDS related collateral plus $5 billion for Maiden Lane. Throw in $12 billion for Municipal Investment Agreements (presumably AIG FP reinvested the cash somewhat foolishly) and $13 billion for maturing debt, and that totals to $52 billion in support of that unit. Hope that helps - I have a cool table in some other post.]

[kim]

Appalled, McCain would surely have done better at Treasury than has Obama. Surely. And there wouldn't have been a half a trillion porkulus bill that no one but lobbyists read.

We are talking hypotheticals, but you aren't even talking sense.
===================================================

[kim]

What's the line, now? Can't blame Bush anymore, so compare with the ghost of McCain? Appalled, I'm appalled.
================================

[kim]

You are struck by the incompetence of the Obama administration and console yourself with imagining an incompetent McCain administration? Just pitiful, Appalled. I suppose you think the Bush Administration was incompetent? Think again, honey.
================================

[kim]

Where is the real Appalled, and what have you done with him? Smiley Face, here.
=======================================

[Jane]

do you really, really think the McCain administration would have done better?

Let's see: Tax cuts v a trillion bucks of spending to get democrats re-elected?

In a word: Yes

[Pofarmer]

I thought the idea was that AIG would pay back ALL the bailout money eventually.

If that ever happens, then I owe Charlie an apology. I figure that this is throwing money down a rathole, just like GM and Chrysler. That money is gone, gone, gone.

Great Glen Campbell tune, BTW.

[narciso]

What made you think there wouldn't be incompetence, his long record of managing
complicated projects to completion, no wait. His sterling set of advisors, who have been right on every major policy, no that can't be it. His academic history and c.v. that shows a solid understanding of American history and economics. I'm stumped.

This character's moniker, reminds me of that line in A Few Good Men, where Nicolson's character has been apprised of the activities of the soon to be deceased Private Santiago, and his X.O, the late J.T. Walsh, saids he's appalled.

Short answer, McCaim may have made some of the same mistakes, but you had a 50/50 chance that some advisors in his entourage, would clue him in when he was making a complete jackass of himself

[cathyf]

Some of the billions of dollars the U.S. government paid to bail out American International Group Inc stand to benefit hedge funds that bet on a falling housing market, the Wall Street Journal said, citing people familiar with the matter and reviewed documents.

This quote is simply amazing. Ok, let's try this in words of one or two syllables:

-- AIG bet that house prices would not crash;

-- house prices crashed;

-- AIG can not afford to pay off all of their bets;

-- if AIG welshes on their bets, the whole world's finance system will crash;

-- therefore the taxpayers are paying the part of AIG's bets that AIG can't afford to pay;

-- this means that the people on the other (winning) side of AIG's (losing) bets are getting the money that the government is giving AIG;

-- this is the only reason that we are giving money to AIG: so that they can pay off their losing bets (i.e. give money to the winners of the bets) and prevent a global financial collapse.

People are just amazingly clueless...

[Appalled]

kim:

Honestly, I worry that the Obama administration has really failed to understand the appropriate political and economic response to our ongoing bank panic. One, for the simple reason that a global depression is not something we need right now. The second is that the Republicans are in serious need of time in the wilderness to go rethink some things -- and at the rate we're going, they'll be back in four years with some abomination like a President Huckabee.

[narciso]

No, that's the first sober thing you've said in six months, although the idea
of President Huckabee might drive me to tequila. Why would being in the wilderness be better, using your own standard; these folks in power now, have a negative learning
curve, they're repeating every mistake, we should have learned from in the 70s, with a few new ones thrown in, next up some trade starving tax regime right around the corner,
ah cap n trade

[kim]

Eh, don't worry, Appy, Huckabee's a silver tongued charlatan like Obama. Oh, wait a minute.
======================================

[Appalled]

Jane:

You can argue appropriate policy all day. The best argument about tax cuts is what you and I would have done with it. Mine would have gone to the mortgage, rather than the department store. What about yours? This is perhaps the one time when a genuine spend money on stuff stimulus was the right idea. (The problem with Obama's stimulus is it deferred the sending into years when we were supposed to be recovering, and retained the anti-stimulus expiration of the Bush tax cuts.)

narcisco:

Please, no more name cracks. Puhleeeez...

To your point, I think that an administration's problems are usually the fault of the president. McCain, during the campaign, demonstrated a shoot from the hip approach to the financial mess that was profoundly frightening, and would have frightened the markets into fear
about "what's this guy going to do next?" I'm afraid, his administration would have been a lot of noisy flailing about, while Nancy, Harry and Barney kibbitzed from the sidelines.

Obama has used a two different approaches to mismanage this crisis. One has been to exaggerate its extent for what appears to be a Bushian attempt to use a crisis mentality to push through essentially unrelated nostrums. The second has been his unwillingness to actually deal directly with the problem quickly. It's 55 days, and we don't have a plan to solve the basic bank crisis yet. FDR would be ashamed.

[Charlie (Colorado)]

Cathyf, I was just saying the same thing up on the front thread. What the fuck did they think AIG was going to do with the money? Polish it?

[Charlie (Colorado)]

Appalled, your argument is somewhat undermined by the fact that the original credit crisis, a lack of short-term commercial paper, is the area in which McCain was pushing for the action that was eventually taken, is the one area that seems to have gotten significantly better. (Have a look at LIBOR and T rates.)

[kim]

We don't even have a Treasury Department making plans to solve the basic bank crisis yet, except for Geithner sitting in a lonely closet trying to spin spider webs into gold. McCain would have shot a few managers out of his hip to deal with it while jawboned the press. It would probably have been much more confidence building than Obama's socialist schemes.

And that's another thing you miss. His 'stuff stimulus' was socialism thinly veiled, which has stampeded capital. McCain wouldn't have done that.

We are talking hypotheticals, but your hypotheticals about McCain are illusions based on a biased view of McCain. I grant you he doesn't have much executive experience, but would likely have designated to competent people. Who does Obama have? Media manipulator Axelrod, and evil spirit Emmanuel. And dunce Geithner.
=================================

[narciso]

All right, but that line from A Few Good Men actually underestimated the problem. In the middle of a financial crisis, instead of reassuring the people, he did induce a panic, and through his minions in the media, caricatured those who had the audacity to do the job; that their 'pay grade' entailed. Of course explaining it to Letterman and Couric was a complete waste of time, like teaching 'French to a pig'
Most of the people who took a good look at his plans, voted with their feet, the rest
were valuing 'hope over experience'. After he won, he still continued to talk down the market, His inaugural speech was more like
a eulogy for America and capitalism, and he's been rhetorically 'shorting the market'
for two months now. They were repaying his campaign contributors back in December, and they did what got them in this mess in the first place, reward incompetent staff. He appoints someone to Treasury, whose very presence indicates we're floating bad checks. Really tell me how McCain could have been worse

[kim]

Not to mention confused physicist Chu, one-world autocrat Holdren, and whack job Browner.
=======================================

[Ranger]

This whole thing really is on the verge of blowing up in the Dems faces. Capt. Ed Morrissey dug into the Freddie Mac annual report, and discovered.... http://hotair.com/archives/2009/03/18/hey-guess-who-else-has-an-executive-retention-bonus-plan/>Retention bonuses!

And, as he points out:

Since Freddie Mac and her sister Fannie Mae got over $200 billion in a pre-TARP bailout, more than the private AIG got (at least in the aggregate), one might ask why Freddie Mac built in retention bonuses in this Novermber filing — two months after the taxpayer bailout.

[kim]

This administration is the left fringe's dream. Surely you are appalled, and surely you don't believe McCain would be worse. Who could possibly be worse? OK, maybe Huckabee. Except he has governed, and he has spoken effectively sans teleprompter and speech writer.
==========================================

[hit and run]

narciso:
might drive me to tequila

Don't worry, you're covered. I'll drive.

[Ignatz Ratzkywatzky]

McCain, during the campaign, demonstrated a shoot from the hip approach to the financial mess that was profoundly frightening, and would have frightened the markets into fear
about "what's this guy going to do next?" I'm afraid, his administration would have been a lot of noisy flailing about, while Nancy, Harry and Barney kibbitzed from the sidelines.

It's difficult to imagine a person capable of writing such a statement and apparently not realizing that what he imagines McCain's administration would have been is precisely what Obama's is, squared.

[clarice]

You don;t know how reassuring that is, Hit.
*pinching his cute cheeks*

[Jane]

Appalled,

I thought you asked if McCain would be better, now you are telling me what you would do. McCain would not have allowed a kajillion dollars in pork. That alone carries the day.

[Old Lurker]

Nobody ever says it more clearly than CathyF.

Or accurately.

11:25 is the latest example.

[clarice]

You can say that again, old lurker..

[Cecil Turner]

(The problem with Obama's stimulus is it deferred the sending into years when we were supposed to be recovering, and retained the anti-stimulus expiration of the Bush tax cuts.)

The way I see it, the real problem is that he spent >$1 trillion on something that the CBO thinks will actually delay the recovery. And is piling on that an even more irresponsible budget, and jamming other impediments to growth (like expanded health care and the cap-and-trade scheme) onto an already faltering economy.

It's not just bad (like failing to do something useful about the financial crisis), it's counterproductive. Like many of his allies in Congress, I'm convinced things would get better if they just went on a long vacation.

[kim]

That's great Iggy. I could smell it in there, but couldn't articulate it so well. What, Appalled, to have to say about the magnificent irony of your statement?
=========================================

[kim]

Right, Cecil, send him on vacation to Hawaii for as long as it takes him to find a birth certificate.

I blame the Supreme Court. They woulda, coulda, shoulda.
===============================

[Appalled]

Iggy & kim:

Actually, on the central problem, Obama and Geithner have been alarmingly silent rather than noisy, and Braney, Nancy and Harry have most definitely NOT been on the sidelines. This AIG bs about the bonuses is a distraction -- typical of sort of garbage our political system generates when there's a big issue to be avoided.

With McCain as President, there would have been a trifying partisan wranagle -- gridlock cubed. (Imagine the TARP battle going on for weeks and months). I agree there would have been no pork. But there also would have been no TARP bill, or stimulus of any kind.

[MayBee]

McCain, during the campaign, demonstrated a shoot from the hip approach to the financial mess that was profoundly frightening, and would have frightened the markets into fear
about "what's this guy going to do next?"

Shoot from the hip:
Say Chris Cox needed to go from the SEC (turned out to be true! Madoff anyone?)
Say Andrew Cuomo may be good at investigating this = jury's still out
Left the campaign trail to work on the first TARP when Obama wanted to hide= turned out to be better choice

Yeah. McCain would have been DANGER MAN.

[bgates]

But there also would have been no TARP bill, or stimulus of any kind.

Because the imaginary McCain inside your head could never work with Congressional Republicans and Blue Dog Democrats to bypass nominal Democratic leadership.

No tax cheats at Treasury, all the deputy spots filled, no slights to our allies, no rolling over for our enemies, a deficit smaller than the last one instead of a budget twice as big, a $900 billion military modernization package supported by Deputy Defense Secretary Shinseki and John "I'm getting a biiiig cut of that" Murtha - yeah. McCain would have destroyed the republic.

[Caro]

I have been saving cathyf's comments. They are so great. I see a place for her in the Press Sec's office to do all the economic releases starting in 2012.

[Jane]

I agree there would have been no pork. But there also would have been no TARP bill, or stimulus of any kind.

Since the initial TARP funds were released during the Bush administration, I find that a little hard to believe.

And what bgates said.

[MayBee]

Blue Dog Democrats to bypass nominal Democratic leadership.

Exactly. The Blue Dog Dems led by Evan Bayh to announce just this very day they will work together to fight the size of Obama's budget.

[boris]

trifying partisan wranagle -- gridlock cubed

Why would a free hand to do the wrong things preferable to bipartisan constraint? ISTM that Jane and Charlie are correct that everything after Bush's first 1/2 of the original TARP has been counterproductive.

McCain would have had at least the 2nd half of the original TARP to work with.

If one is going to speculate on hypotheticals shouldn't the starting point at least be credibly based on reality?

[Appalled]

Jane:

TARP II bill is what I meant. That was done at Obama's behest...

MayBee:

it's nice to see the blue doags again. They were kind of absent the last couple of years. But do you really think these guys would have helped McCain, without the stimulus of 2 trillion dollar deficits?

[Ignatz Ratzkywatzky]

Actually, on the central problem, Obama and Geithner have been alarmingly silent rather than noisy....

Not sure how you define the 'central problem' but Obama has not shut up about any aspect of the economy or his admin's role in it since Jan 20th, usually taking positions 180 degrees opposite of his prior day's pronouncement. Geithner has been somewhat more discreet, reserving his speaking engagements soley to saying precisely the wrong thing at precisely the wrong time.

Point taken on the kibitzing, however. Let me rephrase what I said;
It's difficult to imagine a person capable of thinking Larry, Moe and Curly kibitzing ineffectually on the sidelines as a bad thing.

But there also would have been no TARP bill, or stimulus of any kind.

From your mouth to God's ear.
The US pulled out of the depression of 1917-20 by cutting taxes and government. Australia pulled out of the Great Depression far sooner than the US by the same method. FDR extended the depression by a decade with his idiot policies. And somehow the lesson taken away from all of this, even by relatively sensible folks like Appalled, is FDR was right.

[clarice]

Ignatz, just asking, but do you suppose you might have a chat with bad's,Jane's and my mother?

[MayBee]

But do you really think these guys would have helped McCain, without the stimulus of 2 trillion dollar deficits?

They were elected on the outrage of Bush's deficits. Remember when we'd spent too much the past 8 years? I remember that being the big motivator to vote against Republicans and for Blue Dogs. Of course, that was way back in November.

[Marcia Coan]

And NOW we have the "just released" news that Fannie and Freddie, still at the trough for more money, are getting ready to issue THEIR bonuses. When will this all end?

[Ignatz Ratzkywatzky]

Ignatz, just asking, but do you suppose you might have a chat with bad's,Jane's and my mother?

Do I get a free dinner?

[bgates]

But do you really think these guys would have helped McCain, without the stimulus of 2 trillion dollar deficits?

Yes. And even if they would only help McCain if he agreed to $1.5 trillion deficits, that's a $500 billion improvement. Improve a Bush budget by that much and you get a surplus.

[Jane]

Do I get a free dinner?

WEll if dinner with a democrat at the old age home sounds appealing - sure. I'll even throw in a bottle of wine.

[clarice]

I'll cook it--you don't want my mom's cooking..She's something of a spartan--

[Appalled]

Jane & clarice:

if Ignatz is anything like his doppelganger in the Miracle of Morgan's Creek, he is neither memorable or a gentleman.

[Ignatz Ratzkywatzky]

WEll if dinner with a democrat at the old age home sounds appealing - sure. I'll even throw in a bottle of wine.

Was hoping for a summit in clarice's dining room or at the very least, and I do mean least, a conference call from my local Denny's.

[hit and run]

Appalled:
I have been struck by the incompetence of the Obama administration. Nevertheless, do you really, really think the McCain administration would have done better?

Your willingness to concede Obama's incompetence notwithstanding, a person who hypothetically speculated that Obama would be competent is probably not the best person to hypothetically speculate that someone else would not be competent.

And who, on top of that, argued that Geithner should be confirmed because he was too big to fail.

You are welcome to speculate, and I don't discount completely your viewpoint.

And past performance is no guarantee of future results.

But...

[Appalled]

hit:

If you go back to the TARP I follies, we actually do have a leadership event that seems to have been predictive. Obama, during that whole episode, was fairly passive, allowed Barney and Nancy to do all the talking, and was emphasizing his ability to do other things. In the first 55 days of his administration, Obama has delegated this particular crisis to others, while he has done other things.

What's motivating me in these comments was McCain's performance during the TARP I follies. he was loud. He was ineffective. He seemed to make a bad situation worse with unecessary dramatics. And then he caved.

I'l admit Geithner has been a pretty big failure up to now, but I will also say that this failure has nothing to do with his tax issues, and everything to do with his failure to do the job everyone assumed he was selected to do. I recall most of the concern being about having the TurboTax challenged heading up the IRS.

[Extraneus]

If I had the inclination, I would have a difficult time defending John McCain against Apalled's charges. I also think Obama is purposely steering us into a socialist, crypto-facist disaster, and not with the best of intentions, so I'd take McCain's lack of coherence and demonstrated patriotism over the alternative any day.

[boris]

I'd say Obama is steering the economy toward a social justice distopia on a road paved with "good intentions". From his point of view a lot of the people getting hurt the worst deserve it the most.

No way McCain gets anywhere close to that level of destructive malpractice.

[Jane]

I'l admit Geithner has been a pretty big failure up to now, but I will also say that this failure has nothing to do with his tax issues, and everything to do with his failure to do the job everyone assumed he was selected to do. I recall most of the concern being about having the TurboTax challenged heading up the IRS.

I dunno seems to me it all boils down to integrity or competence. Take your pick.

[MayBee]

I'd say Obama is steering the economy toward a social justice distopia on a road paved with "good intentions". From his point of view a lot of the people getting hurt the worst deserve it the most.

Yes.
Also, to him the result of him getting it wrong is not being re-elected.
As if that is the concern of the nation.

[hit and run]

Appalled:
he was loud. He was ineffective. He seemed to make a bad situation worse with unecessary dramatics. And then he caved.

That would be predictive of Obama's role in the stimulus.

Well, apart from "ineffective", obviously. He was completely effective in getting it passed -- but then again that was by throwing hope, change, a new era bipartisanship, transparency and ending the old way of doing business in DC under the bus. That is, on those things, he caved.

But don't tell me that Obama wasn't loud, that he didn't make a bad situation worse with unnecessary dramatics (congress must this bill or the world will end! wait, i have time for some valentines r&r with michelle before i sign it).

[MayBee]

He seemed to make a bad situation worse with unecessary dramatics.

What bad situation did he make worse?

I for one will always be grateful he got Obama to Washington so he had to put his pro-TARP vote on record.

[Appalled]

h&r:

You are talking stimulus, while I am talking bank crisis.

[hit and run]

I'm talking analysis of predictive behavior. You said that your prediction was that McCain would have been no better than Obama.

I am calling your predictive abilities into question.

[daddy]

Since it's a hypothetical, how about we turn the question around and instead ask what are the most probable good things about not electing McCain and instead electing Obama. On November 3rd those answers would have been simple:

1) The whole world will now love and respect America and no longer hate and despise us.

2) The Dems and the MSM will finally quit blaming Bush and Republican's for everything.

3) We'll get to see the unquestioned competence and undeniable brilliance of Obama and his cabinet choices on full display on a daily basis.

So, how's that working out?

[bad]

Ignatz, just asking, but do you suppose you might have a chat with bad's,Jane's and my mother?

Update on my mom. She is terrified and hiding from the news except for that about Octomom and Madoff. (don't ask)

She is soooo done with O and his crew. Her crowd is expecting crazy inflation as a result of the insane spending.

[bad]

Ignatz, my mom is a fabulous cook. Pick your pie.

[JM Hanes]

Appalled:

As I recall the beef against McCain was that he made a lot of self-serving noise about going back to Washington, and then spent his time trying to get his Kumbayah mojo going instead of actually taking a position. As Prez, he'd probably be asking himself "What would Jack Kemp do?" Obama sat on the sidelines figuring the angles and still thinks he can campaign his way out of responsibility for any ill and into credit for any positive development he decides to claim as his own.

Frankly, I don't see how McCain could possibly have made things worse than Obama has -- on virtually every front.

Obama has blown off allies in Colombia, Mexico, Brazil, the UK and eastern Europe, along with shafting a potential ally in Iraq. He's insulted Karzai in Kabul, while sucking up to Syria & making a fool of himself with not-so-secret secret letters to Russia and Iran. His campaign shtick about promoting democracy in Pakistan was off the wall. The Russians are grandstanding on basing bombers in Venezuela and announcing that they've just dedicated a chunk of money to nuclear re-armament, despite cratering oil revenues, while he and Clinton were busy pissing off our very nervous Chinese creditors and letting the global economy stew in its own juices.

I've never even liked McCain, and took a dim view of a lot of his proposals, but he would have sent the "Recovery Act" back to Congress and told them to give him a real stimulus package, he'd have vetoed the pork, and he wouldn't have proposed a budget that sent debt spiraling into the stratosphere in order to federalize everything in sight. I think he'd be an improvement on Obama in almost every way, and even that's a back handed compliment at best.

[JM Hanes]

"Also, to him the result of him getting it wrong is not being re-elected. As if that is the concern of the nation."

You hit that nail dead on the head, MayBee. Life is a campaign, my friend.

[clarice]

What jmh said.

[hit and run]

JMH:
announcing that they've just dedicated a chunk of money to nuclear re-armament

Well, Obama and Republican Senator Dick Lugar will have something! to say about that. Did I mention that Lugar is a Republican?