Henry Blodgett explains one consequence of the new confiscatory tax on TARP recipient bonuses:
But that's not the really distressing part. The really distressing part is what this tax will do to the corporations that we now own and are supposedly trying to save.
(Remember? That's the reason we bailed Citigroup, AIG, GM, and the rest of them out--to save them. Because we convinced ourselves that civilization would end if we didn't.)
Thanks to our stupidity bailouts, we now own major stakes in these firms--at mind-boggling expense. So it's not clear why we want to destroy them. But that's what we seem determined to do.
Believe it or not, hidden inside these companies are thousands of decent, competent people whose households bring in more than $250,000 a year. Many of these folks had NOTHING to do with the gambling addiction that bankrupted their firms. Many of them still have a choice where to work. And now that they've learned that their family's pay will be capped at $250,000 indefinitely, many of them will quickly decide that now is a good time to pursue their careers elsewhere. (That is, unless their firm takes the easy and obvious step of just paying them a fatter salary, which just renders the whole thing a farce.)
Will everyone leave these firms? No. The folks whose households don't have the education, desire, ambition, skill, or time to make more than $250,000 a year won't. But a lot of the rest will. And however little our massive investments in these companies are worth now, they will soon be worth a lot less.
That is not the end of it. The Treasury and Fed keep mooting their plans for public-private partnerships to reopen credit markets, with TALF and other ventures yet to come. But what venture capital firm or hedge fund is going to parnter with the government now that COngres has demonstrated a willingness to retroactively change the terms of a deal? Remember, the initial TARP bailout had few restrictions on compensation; Congress just unilaterally re-negotiates the terms as fits of pique pass over them.
So we will blow up the firms in which we are invested and scare off any potential new government "partners". Would this be happening of the teleprompter were in charge?
MORE:
Noam Scheiber of TNR is against:
This makes me pretty uncomfortable, partly because of the perverse consequences we can foresee, and partly because of those we can't....There are third-world juntas that would think twice before doing this.
Josh Marshall of H&R Block is against:
Paul Krugman firmly straddles:
Preliminary thoughts on the tax bill:
1. It’s not the way you should make policy — it’s clumsy, and it will punish some innocent parties while letting the most guilty off scot-free
That wins Krugman our Profile in Gutlessness award - as an economist he knows this is awful, but as a populist author he has his base to whom he must play. Smart - book royalties will be safe from Congress for a while.
My question - which Senate hero will allow that august body to play its historical role of deliberating while passions cool? Dodd? Kidding. McCain? Maybe.
Or does the Senate kick this "feels good 'til it's enacted" mess to Obama in the hope that whomever is in charge that day will do the right thing and veto it? Geez, what are the odds of this bill being Obama's first veto?
OK, here is the answer - the Senate passes a slightly different Feel the Rage bill and then the whole effort collapses over irreconcilable differences in the House-Senate conference. That way every Congressfool can vote for an Angry Bill without actually doing anything stupid, and blame Someone Else for its failure. There is no problem with Kabuki that can't be solved by more Kabuki.
STILL MORE: Michael Lewis is insightful as usual. Charles Krauthammer's "Bonfire of the Trivialities" is excellent, and David Brooks makes a similar point about our lack of focus:
You’d think if some tiger were lunging at your neck, your attention would be riveted on the tiger. But that’s apparently not how it works in the age of global A.D.D. As a tiger sinks its teeth into the world’s neck, we focus on the dust bunnies under the bed and the floorboards that need replacing on the deck. We live in the world of Perverse Cosmic Myopia, an inability to focus attention on the most perilous matter at hand.
...
In times like these, you’d expect prudent leaders to prepare for the worst. After all, the pessimists have recently been vindicated by events. But that’s apparently too painful to think about. In normal times, leaders like to focus on the short term at the expense of the long term. But now the short term is really confusing, so leaders take refuge in projects that are years or decades away.
My question - which Senate hero will allow that august body to play its historical role of deliberating while passions cool? Dodd? Kidding. McCain? Maybe.
Jon Kyl. He already refused unanimous consent to allow it to be fast-tracked.
Posted by: Charlie (Colorado) | March 20, 2009 at 11:52 AM
Here's the thing, Blodget is right on the other hand, much like Spitzer, he's one of these vermin that never goes away, I do recall he was one of those who were talking
up stocks at Merrill Lynch right, that he knew were overvalued.Well almost all of them voted, and frankly became 'early adopters' for this trainwreck. On the other hand, Obama's policies are finally causing the brain slugs to wither if not die, for a while at least.
Posted by: narciso | March 20, 2009 at 11:54 AM
Posted by: Neo | March 20, 2009 at 11:54 AM
Here's a citation:
Posted by: Charlie (Colorado) | March 20, 2009 at 11:55 AM
According to Grassley--the D's in both houses in conference wrote/whatever--the legislation on the stimulus bill and the R's had about nineteen hours to read and no input whatsoever--what had been cooked up and voted on.
Posted by: glasater | March 20, 2009 at 11:56 AM
Well, given that we now have visual evidence that Both G-man and Congress knew this was coming weeks before they admitted knowing, I think its time to call them out to explain. No special tax bill unitl the Dems have been humiliated for dishonesty, or incompetence, or both.
http://hotair.com/archives/2009/03/20/video-congress-geithner-knew-about-bonuses-on-march-3rd/>Video: Congress, Geithner knew about bonuses on March 3rd
Posted by: Ranger | March 20, 2009 at 12:03 PM
Sen. Judd Gregg thinks it's">http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aJElYIOG3f7Y&refer=homeunconstitutional">it's unconstitutional. Will the constitutional law "prof" sign it?
Posted by: DebinNC | March 20, 2009 at 12:04 PM
Just read at NRO that a bunch of executives and others at AIG have just resigned giving their reason: fear for their safety. (George Stephanopolous posted it on his ABC blog. Also, read the story posted on-line right now at NYTimes about the situation in Fairfield Connecticut where execs who had little to do with what happened at AIG are being threatened and fear for their children's safety. What country do I live in?
Posted by: bio mom | March 20, 2009 at 12:05 PM
I'd bet serious money -- $5, writing doesn't pay as well as geeking -- that the bill never makes it to Obama.
Posted by: Charlie (Colorado) | March 20, 2009 at 12:22 PM
"There is no problem with Kabuki that can't be solved by more Kabuki"
I'm needlepointing this for my children.
I think for every action there is an equal and positive reaction and the news of the resignations and the fear of decent folks just doing their jobs is about to stick like bullseyes on some Congressional assholes.
Posted by: clarice | March 20, 2009 at 12:24 PM
I agree with Gregg. Using the IRS as a weapon against private citizens is dangerous ground. And who is more to blame? Those who TOOK the money, or those who GAVE it to them?
The real solution is to punish the elected yahoos who allowed this to happen at the ballot box.
As for AIG execs resigning--Obama has just officially instituted his first "enemies of the people." Who is next? Walmart? The oil industry? Gun Owners? Bloggers who oppose his administration?
Dangerous times my dears.
Posted by: verner | March 20, 2009 at 12:24 PM
Bernanke is speaking in Phoenix.
He opened his remarks with "I'm glad to be back in America".
Am assuming that Washington DC is not?
If I'm right, this is the most political statement Bernanke has ever made. Amazing.
Posted by: glasater | March 20, 2009 at 12:24 PM
Demagoguery is great campaigning and poor governance. Who, here is surprised? The question is; Do they have any other arrows in their quiver? I think not. And the three C's, Climate, Capitol, and China will not demagogue.
=============================================
Posted by: kim | March 20, 2009 at 12:29 PM
I am starting to get the feeling I had about the time the Republicans were digging a hole over the Terri Schiavo "thing" and lost the confidence of the voters.
I wonder if Speaker Pelosi has a clue what she is about to unleash.
Posted by: Neo | March 20, 2009 at 12:32 PM
stick like bullseyes on some Congressional assholes.
An image I didn't need this morning.
Posted by: Charlie (Colorado) | March 20, 2009 at 12:33 PM
I wonder if Speaker Pelosi has a clue what she is about to unleash.
That sentence could be considerably shorter and still make sense.
Posted by: Charlie (Colorado) | March 20, 2009 at 12:34 PM
I'd bet serious money -- $5, writing doesn't pay as well as geeking -- that the bill never makes it to Obama.
I'd take the bet, but I agree.
Obama can't possibly sign this bill- he wrote in the protections! And he can't not sign it- he created the outrage!
Furthermore, I think it gets killed before Dodd has to humiliate himself by voting on it.
Posted by: MayBee | March 20, 2009 at 12:35 PM
I find it very interesting that twice now when there are serious events taking place inn Washington that our Commander-in-Chief leaves and goes to Ohio and now California...interesting!!
Posted by: Dave | March 20, 2009 at 12:43 PM
Actually, the way to fix the situation would be to tie the excise tax to executives who are subject to IRC 162(m). It allows Congress to continue posturing, while accomplishing absolutely nothing. (162(m) denys deductibility of comp over a million of executives of publicly traded companies.)
The alternative is that people start calling out by name the leaders of the lynch mob, and make it clear what they have done to individuals who made the mistake of not quitting when they had the opportunity.
Posted by: Appalled | March 20, 2009 at 12:48 PM
Obama has dispelled his mystical (and entirely unproven) aura of competence with breathtaking rapidity.
Beldar is good today. No surprise, I know, but still.
Posted by: Charlie (Colorado) | March 20, 2009 at 12:48 PM
Furthermore, I think it gets killed before Dodd has to humiliate himself by voting on it.
I think the notion that Dodd has a sense of shame on anything assumes facts not in evidence.
Posted by: Charlie (Colorado) | March 20, 2009 at 12:50 PM
Dave, the next serious event he goes to Cuba, and the one after that to Venezuela.
To stay.
(We can hope.)
Posted by: Kevin B | March 20, 2009 at 12:52 PM
Chaco:'An image I didn't need this morning'
Don't get me started.
Appalled, calling out by name the leaders of the lynch mob? Isn't it Pelosi and Frank and Obama? Of course there were others, but these were the highest ranking and most outrageous.
If only Corn were working on our side, there'd be a big feature about innocent children in Fairfield hiding behind barricades because the nasty president and hie men and women unfairly outed them.
It's long past time for a reprise of the Welch-McCarthy hearing "Have you no shame, " moment.
Posted by: clarice | March 20, 2009 at 12:59 PM
So we all wondered how bad the Mediacrats could behave, given unlimited running room, their own private echo chamber and Zero in the White House. I guess we know now. The bottomless depravity and quantum stupidity of these people is off the charts. Smoot & Hawley should sleep more soundly this evening.
Posted by: Fresh Air | March 20, 2009 at 01:03 PM
How would you like to find these folks in your driveway? The accompanying NYT story is about AIG suing its majority owner (us) likely with public money supplied by us. I fear we may soon become inured to shock, and absurdity now will seem normal then. That's scary.
Posted by: DebinNC | March 20, 2009 at 01:06 PM
Ha!
Obama on tv promising if any member of his administration meets with a(n evil) lobbyist about TARP projects, the information will be on the web.
Not mentioned: Tom Balanoff of SEIU and Blagojevich fame, was at the WH St Patrick's day party.
The best way to hide is behind transparency.
Posted by: MayBee | March 20, 2009 at 01:07 PM
I think the notion that Dodd has a sense of shame on anything assumes facts not in evidence.
Perhaps he has a sense of what will get him re-elected in Connecticut. Also, what will get him campaign donations.
I don't know. This situation is absurd to me.
Posted by: MayBee | March 20, 2009 at 01:08 PM
clarice:
I was thinking Frank and Obama. Missed Pelosi's comments.
If one of te AIG folks would actually step from the shadows and speak (unfortunatlely, that's likely dangerous), it would help. The lynch modb thinks these people are Masters of the Universe, rather than the folks left to clean up the mess after the Masters of the Universe were done with their party.
Bringing the coercive power of the US government on the head of private citizens just to make a mob happy is the worst thing an elected official can do, and it does deserve a big fat "Have you no decency."
Also, I wish for too much, but I wish people would make an effort to understand what a retention bonus is. Most of the stuff I have seen on this simply misrepresent it.
Posted by: Appalled | March 20, 2009 at 01:09 PM
Greetings from Telluride.
I think Gregg is wrong re bills of attainder--the prohibition against them only applies to criminal penalties.
Good news from Ras today. Approval at new low of 55%; index at +4. Repubs lead for congress, 42-40.
Very lovely here.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | March 20, 2009 at 01:13 PM
Hey DoT, hope you are having a great time.
Posted by: bad | March 20, 2009 at 01:14 PM
Chaco - you have been on fire for days. What a pleasure to watch!
Posted by: Jane | March 20, 2009 at 01:20 PM
via TOTUS:
Literally, killing me, literally....
Posted by: bad | March 20, 2009 at 01:20 PM
The best way to hide is behind transparency.
The WH is hiding who it was that Dodd deferred to in axing the Snowe-Widen amendment in favor of the WH alternative. I think it's Larry Summers. In fact, I saw video several days ago of a beleagured Dodd mentioning working with Summers on the revision.
Posted by: DebinNC | March 20, 2009 at 01:22 PM
Chaco - you have been on fire for days. What a pleasure to watch!
Thanks. I've had another visit from the black dog, feeling some better now.
Posted by: Charlie (Colorado) | March 20, 2009 at 01:24 PM
Oh, btw, DoT, I was born just east of there. nice area, isn't it?
Posted by: Charlie (Colorado) | March 20, 2009 at 01:25 PM
Greetings to Telluride.
The JOM tradition is to go streaking through Telluride, DoT. We look forward to your report.
Posted by: hit and run | March 20, 2009 at 01:33 PM
Hello DoT! Hope you're having a blast.
Can't wait to see what Ras has for us tomorrow, post-Special Olympics gaffe...
Posted by: Porchlight | March 20, 2009 at 01:44 PM
But what venture capital firm or hedge fund is going to parnter with the government now that COngres has demonstrated a willingness to retroactively change the terms of a deal?
If the number is ZERO, then it all worked out for the best.
Posted by: Pofarmer | March 20, 2009 at 01:44 PM
To paraphrase candidate Obama: America cannot afford the same failed policies of the past eight
yearsweeks.Posted by: hit and run | March 20, 2009 at 01:46 PM
Also via Rasmussen, we have a new low - "Strongly Approve" (read: true believers) at 35%.
Posted by: Porchlight | March 20, 2009 at 01:47 PM
I wonder if Obama will refuse to sign this bill. It is patently unfair. I simply cannot believe that our legislators have become so vindictive. And wrong headed.
Posted by: matt | March 20, 2009 at 01:48 PM
XKCD is pretty good today. I'm not sure I think it's dishonesty -- I honestly don't think that the newsies understand the difference between a million, a billion, and a trillion -- but it's good.
Posted by: Charlie (Colorado) | March 20, 2009 at 01:48 PM
Greetings from Telluride.
I was there in 1980. My guess is that it has changed a bit since then.
Posted by: Jane | March 20, 2009 at 01:51 PM
For alleged intellectuals who love France, Obama and the Dems failed to remember French history in their desire to incite a class civil war here in America:
After liberating the masses from the oppression of the French aristocracy, the French Revolution devolved into the orgy of chaos, tyranny, and brutal bloodshed known as "Le Terreur".
Or perhaps they didn't forget .... perhaps they are counting on it.
For out of the ashes of this kind of upheaval, despots and authoritarian regimes often emerge.
Posted by: fdcol63 | March 20, 2009 at 01:55 PM
Friends of Angelo:
An AIG board member through the stupid years AND a friend of Angelo. What's next?
LUN
Posted by: bad | March 20, 2009 at 01:57 PM
I hate all psychobabble and healing speech..It appears that Obama called Maria Shriver from AF1 immediately after the Leno taping to apologize for his gaffe and Maria says it's a treachable moment..BARF..I don't need to be taught anything about what is bad manners--the president does...And it isn't Maria who's covering for him that'll be the teacher.
http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2009/03/20/shriver-obamas-special-olympics-quip-is-teachable-moment/>Obama and the "teachable moment"
Posted by: clarice | March 20, 2009 at 01:58 PM
It's been 60 mistake-riddled days since The Special Olympics Presidency began.
Posted by: DebinNC | March 20, 2009 at 02:01 PM
clarice:
If all this results in more donations to the Special Olympics, that's probably to the good. Though I do feel your BARF.
Posted by: Appalled | March 20, 2009 at 02:09 PM
Lifestyles of the Rich and Infamous bus tour in CT. I hope they swing by Dodd's house too.
Posted by: DebinNC | March 20, 2009 at 02:10 PM
It's been 60 mistake-riddled days since The Special Olympics Presidency began.
Better news: 1401 days left.
Posted by: Charlie (Colorado) | March 20, 2009 at 02:10 PM
Clarice,
Why would anyone believe that the TOTUS is capable of being taught? He's easily trained and indoctrinated but there is no evidence that he was ever capable of being educated.
The RAS Trend indicates the need for a new Enemy of the State. I wonder who will be next?
Perhaps the
mobcitizenry need to be called to the Capitol? Maybe a Potomac Tea Party is in order. I wonder how much the EPA pollution fines would come to for throwing legislators into the Potomac? Speaking of "toxic"...Posted by: Rick Ballard | March 20, 2009 at 02:12 PM
Clarice, we all need to work through the psychological distortions implanted in us by the capitalist system. It's a process. Nobody has gone undamaged by these economic forces and everyone needs the therapy. We need more teach-ins and a bill funding government-paid psycho-economic therapy would be welcome. --BARF!--
Posted by: Jim Ryan | March 20, 2009 at 02:13 PM
IMPEACH NOW!
Just getting warmed up for the April 15 Tea Party.
Posted by: Fresh Air | March 20, 2009 at 02:14 PM
Michael Lewis, one of my favorite writers, has an excellent op/ed on the AIG lynch party on Bloomberg, and I I had any idea how to LUN i would....
Don't forget Grassley and the rest of the asses calling for their heads. Another example of Congress trying to get us to focus on the shiny object over there while they plunder our country.
Posted by: matt | March 20, 2009 at 02:19 PM
Unbelievably, there is even going to be a Tea Party here in Charlottesville. The pinkos will pelt us with rocks and garbage, no doubt.
Posted by: Jim Ryan | March 20, 2009 at 02:19 PM
WASHINGTON — A top White House official threatened Tuesday to use a congressional rule to force some controversial proposals through the Senate by eliminating Republicans' power to block legislation.
Peter Orszag, director of the White House Office of Management and Budget, said the Obama administration would prefer not to use the budget "reconciliation" process that allows measures to pass the Senate on simple majority votes.
However, Orszag said he wouldn't rule it out. The legislative tactic is being considered to push through Obama's global warming and health care programs, and perhaps his proposals to raise taxes on the wealthy.
Posted by: Neo | March 20, 2009 at 02:20 PM
I still think the special olympics kids should challenge him to a bowling match.
And did we hear, as I just did on Fox, that even Maxine Waters doesn't think Obama is "up to speed."
Good golly miss Molly.
Combine that with the projected 9 trillion dollars of debt that his proposed utopian social engineering will incur.
I would say impeach him, but jeez, then we'd have Biden!
Posted by: verner | March 20, 2009 at 02:21 PM
Obama, the Super-Hero, has turned into a parody of Handi-Man:
http://www.stickergiant.com/Merchant2/imgs/450/him2082_450.jpeg
Posted by: fdcol63 | March 20, 2009 at 02:28 PM
A Potomac Tea Party's a great idea if the muddle could only remember who they are supposed to be protesting. As you know that dear Mr. PUK and I have the corner on the sharpened pike business here in D.C> and are moving to expand into pitchforks.
Posted by: clarice | March 20, 2009 at 02:33 PM
View from Canada on Drudge with scary graphic.
Posted by: DebinNC | March 20, 2009 at 02:34 PM
Will BO send swarms of get-in-their-face "pledgees" to counter protest some of the tea parties? Yes, he will.
Posted by: DebinNC | March 20, 2009 at 02:37 PM
Hee Hee, it seems thare is a special olympian who has bowled three perfect 300 games--and has challenged Obama to a match!
LUN
Just like the O man, overselling himself yet again.
Posted by: verner | March 20, 2009 at 02:42 PM
Clarice, Appalled, et.al.:
As a bowler, a bowling coach, a SA volunteer, and a generally human being, I chuck my metaphorical shoe at this pompous frat boy ass, and his smirking apology.
But...you are correct Appalled.
The silver lining is that this will likely generate a great deal of vengeance donations from the ever growing list of people who CAN'T STAND THIS MAN. And that's all good.
As an aside, I'd wager a year's pay that any one of the athletes I've met over the course of my involvement has more character, heart, and grit than Barack Obama.
Posted by: Soylent Red | March 20, 2009 at 02:43 PM
I'd never take that bet, Soylent.
Posted by: clarice | March 20, 2009 at 02:46 PM
" ... As an aside, I'd wager a year's pay that any one of the athletes I've met over the course of my involvement has more character, heart, and grit than Barack Obama. ..."
Soylent - and more ability to govern, too.
Obama can't govern ... thus he has reverted to what he does best:
CAMPAIGN
Posted by: fdcol63 | March 20, 2009 at 02:47 PM
Jim, I know you're kidding but could we just have -um- closure on that?
Posted by: clarice | March 20, 2009 at 02:47 PM
"Will BO send swarms of get-in-their-face "pledgees" to counter protest some of the tea parties? Yes, he will."
Then we'll just have to have Tea Parties in celebration of the 2nd Amendment with a focus on open carry. If I worked for AIG in CT, I'd show up with a visible holstered weapon today. I would also say that any action taken by an AIG employee in response to physical intimidation should be considered to have been taken "in fear for my life". I favor the "judged by 12 rather than carried by 6" approach to responding to dirty socialist street trash.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | March 20, 2009 at 02:51 PM
verner, I do so hope we all get to watch that match. No matter how it's resolved..and I'd bet on the challenger--Obama loses.
Posted by: clarice | March 20, 2009 at 02:51 PM
DebinDC-
No, Zero is sending out his brownshirt army to knock on doors (this weekend I believe) to collect names and information of supporters of his budget bill. Should be an interesting weekend if a few of them try to "get in people's faces" while trespassing.
Posted by: RichatUF | March 20, 2009 at 02:53 PM
Every one of them, Soylent, has been challenged far more than Obama ever has been.
=============================================
Posted by: kim | March 20, 2009 at 02:54 PM
-um- closure on that?
Heh.
Posted by: Jim Ryan | March 20, 2009 at 02:56 PM
Hugo Chavez is most certainly laughing outloud. The US is following his lead! Contracts mean nothing, the sovereign will do what the sovereign does. Why should I pay you anything when I am the King?
Everyone should buy themselves a gun, as it appears we are back to reliance only upon yourself to protect your property. A court can not be relied upon to adjudicate a contract if the contract can be annulled by the sovereign for any old interest.
I am appalled ( although I am sure a certain poster with that moniker is not).
Posted by: GMax | March 20, 2009 at 03:06 PM
that even Maxine Waters doesn't think Obama is "up to speed."
aye Carumba. I don't even know how to parody that.
Posted by: Pofarmer | March 20, 2009 at 03:07 PM
Rick-
As far as a new enemy of the state, the banks that were AIG's counterparties. Goldman had a conference call today to clear up the relationship-haven't delved into it and haven't seen anything posted up on their website yet.
For the Obama Team to be the smartest people in the room, they sure didn't handle this well. The took over AIG to prevent its collapse, now uncorked a bunch of rage directed at the clean up crew, who are now all leaving, so AIG is in danger of collapsing again. I know that the Fed and Treasury are worried about "systemic risk" but after shoveling in over a hundered billion dollars into AIG and then leaving the work half done would seem to be the worst of both worlds.
Wonder what market action will look like once AIGs books become exposed to every raider in every financial district in the world?
Posted by: RichatUF | March 20, 2009 at 03:11 PM
Let's pretend that America comes to its senses and demands that Congress repeal the Porkulus bill. And then let's pretend that Congress which knows it is heading toward complete unelection next term and realizes they better comply. So how would that work? Would they just have to pass a law nullifying it?
(Is this something I should know?)
Posted by: Jane | March 20, 2009 at 03:13 PM
"Also via Rasmussen, we have a new low - "Strongly Approve" (read: true believers) at 35%."
Wow, getting down pretty close to the number that even Hugo Chavez would get running as a Democrat.
Posted by: ben | March 20, 2009 at 03:16 PM
Soylent:
I'd wager a year's pay that any one of the athletes I've met over the course of my involvement has more character, heart, and grit than Barack Obama.
I'll take that bet!
Oh, kidding, my annual salary right now is $0, so go ahead, forget the bet, here, you can have it all right now.
Oh, look at the time! I have a phone interview in 15 minutes...gotta run.
Posted by: hit and run | March 20, 2009 at 03:16 PM
"and brutal bloodshed known as "Le Terreur"... For out of the ashes of this kind of upheaval, despots and authoritarian regimes often emerge."
...or, gasp, France!
Pick your poison.
Posted by: Old Lurker | March 20, 2009 at 03:16 PM
Hit, remember, a call to a 900 number is not a JOB interview...
Posted by: bad | March 20, 2009 at 03:17 PM
gmax:
No, actually, I am pretty appalled.
Posted by: Appalled | March 20, 2009 at 03:37 PM
Rich,
I wonder what the reaction will be when they find that Citi is right in there next to GS wrt counterparty exposure and collateral "received"? The list has to be JPM, C, GS, BAC, HSBC and WFC (because of Wachovia). Plus the tottering EU and Asian banks, of course.
I'm still waiting for someone to report that all this counterparty stuff has a temporal parameter. If AIG hangs on to the end of the contract without an "event" being declared then I believe that their collateral comes home. I'm not positive about that by any means, so don't take it to the
banker..insurance companyno, I meanstock brokerdamn... - pawn broker.Posted by: Rick Ballard | March 20, 2009 at 03:37 PM
uncorked a bunch of rage directed at the clean up crew, who are now all leaving
I bet they would argue with the placement of the firetrucks trying to put out a fire.
Posted by: Neo | March 20, 2009 at 03:38 PM
I am not going to buy a gun, though. I'd end up shooting my dog, my wife, or my foot.
Posted by: Appalled | March 20, 2009 at 03:38 PM
Thanks to our
stupiditybailouts, we now own major stakes in these firms--at mind-boggling expense. So it's not clear why we want to destroy them. But that's what we seem determined to do.No, it's not 100% clear, but that doesn't mean it isn't the plan.
From the Leno transcript:
Not only does the great man continue to attack the financial sector, he's already trying to choose our children's careers.
Posted by: Extraneus | March 20, 2009 at 03:40 PM
Drudge is interesting: three links above the photo.
Posted by: Charlie (Colorado) | March 20, 2009 at 03:48 PM
An ungrammatically at that, extraneus.
Posted by: clarice | March 20, 2009 at 03:49 PM
I'm still torn between O screwing us by design and screwing us by incompetence.
Or is he straddling this question as well...screwing us incompetently by design.
Posted by: bad | March 20, 2009 at 03:49 PM
Bad--
I'm convinced it's 70 percent evil, only 30 percent incompetence. This guy is as close to Satan's Spawn as we've seen in the White House.
Posted by: Fresh Air | March 20, 2009 at 03:51 PM
Jane, I can't imagine why Congress could not repeal the Act.
Posted by: clarice | March 20, 2009 at 03:55 PM
Didnt we listen to a whole bunch of nonsense about an authoritarian state and being a nation of laws when Bush was in office. He did not attempt to ever usurp existing contracts.
We need to man the ramparts, they are not going to get mine unless I run out of ammo.
Posted by: GMax | March 20, 2009 at 03:55 PM
Wonder how The Won will manage to read off the teleprompter and bowl at the same time..Maybe he could bowl sideways.
Posted by: clarice | March 20, 2009 at 03:56 PM
As for AIG execs resigning--Obama has just officially instituted his first "enemies of the people." Who is next? Walmart? The oil industry? Gun Owners? Bloggers who oppose his administration?
Oh, definitely Walmart, in retaliation for this:
While I've never held Congress, nor most of its members, in particularly high regard, I've come to actually despise both them and the sway they hold over the lives of ordinary Americans. They're revolting and should be run out of town on the prongs of a pitchfork along with the clowns across the way in the West Wing. A pox on all three houses.
Posted by: SukieTawdry | March 20, 2009 at 03:57 PM
Obama: " ... Well, now what we're finding out is a lot of that growth wasn't real. It was paper money, paper profits on the books, but it could be easily wiped out. ..."
Ummm, yeah ... just like the vaunted Clinton surplus that Dems still tout that were based on projections made during the Dot-Com Tulipmania (TM) that never materialized.
Posted by: fdcol63 | March 20, 2009 at 03:59 PM
a smart kid coming out of school, instead of wanting to be an investment banker, we need them to decide they want to be an engineer, they want to be a scientist, they want to be a doctor or a teacher.
Or an author, a politician, or a talk-show host.
I understand those are very lucrative careers. But not greedy.
Posted by: MayBee | March 20, 2009 at 04:07 PM
Sukie: I am so with you on the despise front!!!!
Posted by: centralcal | March 20, 2009 at 04:11 PM
Maybe he could bowl sideways.
He'll throw the ball in the lane to the left, then in the lane to the right, but never in the lane right in front of him.
Posted by: Porchlight | March 20, 2009 at 04:12 PM
LOL Porch
Posted by: bad | March 20, 2009 at 04:15 PM
"We need them to decide"? How about the kids just find work that interests them? It used to be a free country, after all.
Posted by: Porchlight | March 20, 2009 at 04:15 PM
I understand O's lust for innovation. Imagine how much better his life would be if someone could figure out how to put TOTUS's words in his mouth without the physical presence of TOTUS.
Posted by: bad | March 20, 2009 at 04:25 PM
Everyone should buy themselves a gun, as it appears we are back to reliance only upon yourself to protect your property
I've always believed in gun owners rights but never owned a gun myself.
Over a lot of soul searching yesterday I went to my buddy the pawnbroker and ordered two guns and have to say it breaks my heart to have to resort to this action.
Posted by: glasater | March 20, 2009 at 04:26 PM