What the heck is our county coming to

[39mto39g]

Congress men and women today are calling for a tax on the so called Bonus's for AGI people . First these are not any kind of a bonus. AGI execs had a retainer contract with several employees, That stated the employee would stay with the company from -----Date, to -----Date and if they did they would receive a "Bonus" for doing so. The contract were to be paid on the 15th of March, Those that had fulfilled their contract got paid. Some (Dems and Rep alike) are calling for a special tax to be levied against these individuals. Apparently The constitution is not required reading for some in congress. HAYYY. ever hear of "Bill of Atender" congress people? You can't do what your talking about , and thank God for that. One lady said she would tax them 1000%, Huaa! WTF. They had a contract, lady, they had a contract lady. I and you may not like to pay the contract but, THEY HAD A CONTRACT. And when contracts are not binding, just what's the point in having one?

I can't believe that someone in the treasury sectary position can't read or decipher numbers or have a basic understanding of law and constitution. Just why is he there?

What should have happened is let AIG, GM, Chrysler fail, Let them file for bankruptcy, The minute they did that then the money should be handed over. At that time, ALLLLL contracts with anyone would be Null. And we taxpayers would not have to pay for "Bonus's. But no. A treasury sectary in his infonaut wisdom sees it fit to fill the checking account and leave all contracts in effect????????????????????????
So we as taxpayers are stuck. We get on the band wagon and call for the people that get "Bonus's to be taxed or we stand up for contracts and the constitution? Take your pick.

Ron

[39mto39g]

Today Polociy said our Immigration laws are Un-American? And un-announced raids on Business's should stop.
You know what is really frightening? If Obama and Biden got into a fight and killed each other. She would be president.

Nancy. These people are here ILLEGALLY. That's against the law. We are a country of laws. Not a country of do what Nancy wants.

I can imagine the conversation her (Brain?) cells have with each other.
I am speaker
I am all powerful
I am OZ , no wait, that's different
Don't kill the swamp mice.
No off shore drilling
California needs federal bail out money
I am speaker
I am all powerful
I need Illegals to get re-elected
I am speaker
Obama needs me
I need him
Michelle who
OZ needs me



Ron

[39mto39g]

Some Cuban prisoners will be tried in American courts.

WTF

I would sure like to be a defense attorney.

Ahhh, Mohamed, did they read you Miranda rights, NO
Mohamed, did they charge you with a crime, NO
Mohamed, did you get a speedy trial , guarantied by our constitution, NO

Your honor, just what are we here for, again?


Next case

Oh yea, Mohamed, you are realeased.

Ron

[SuperScout]

We are being confronted with WTF occasions now on a daily basis, and sometimes more frequently than that.

1. There are some stupid Democrats - er, excuse me, I'm being redundant - who are bitching about the bonuses being paid, when it was the stupid Democrats, and that party alone, who WROTE THE WHOLE FOOKIN BAILOUT BILL. There was no Republican input into that piece of trash passing for legislation, so if the stupid Democrats passed the bill without even reading it, they are stupider than I thought. What they are about to do is start their own circular firing squad.

2. Nancy Pelosi is the very epitome of stupid Democrat. Sucking up to the wetbacks in San Francisco, whing about the "illegality" of raids on employees that hire wetbacks is just another example of stupidity and is a breach of her oath of office.

3. Now comes Eric Holder, the very same Stupid Democrat who pushed the presidential pardon for Eric Holder, one of the biggest thugs in american corporte history, and now wants to release some Gitmo residents into America? WTF in spades!! The fear factor in America just racked up another several points.

4. And the latest WTF is the sudden presence of a bunch of US Army troops from Ft. Rucker into that town in Alabama, in what clearly is a violation of the Posse Comitatus law. Somebody ordered the MP's to go to that little town, and that somebody needs to be prosecuted and sent to jail. Doubtless, another stupid Democrat ordered them there.

[Packo]

What did Obama and his cronies know about the bonuses, and when did they know it?

Arresting Illegal's is un-American....

You know, I didn't think it was possible for people to be this dumb. I stand corrected.

Ron, your outrage noted and agreed with.

Notice that Obama's bailing out again and going to about the only state that still likes him, California. How can he take a vacation already?????? Doesn't he know there is a crisis going on? He's also got 2 wars we're fighting, Millions in bailout TAXPAYER MONEY is going to AIG execs.... How can he take a vacation??????

Class Act: When that dumb stupid Bush was asked about Obama and his first, what 50+, (seems like 50 years), days. Well that classless, stupid, dumbest of all Presidents, until now, said that it wouldn't be right for him to comment. CLINTON AND CARTER gotta a whole lot of class....too bad it's all 2nd. Funny how those two bozo's are mute now.

Payback is a bitch....

Pack

[39mto39g]

Boy doesn't it feel good to vent.

If only it were not for the fact that this administration is less than 2 months old and 1/2 the people are buying guns to protect themselves against the other half.
The news media can't get a simple story correct, and Brittany is in the news again.


Packo
If you worked for a company and that company was going under. Your talents are such that many other companies are wanting YOU.
Your company signs a contract with you for you to stay with the company for a period, (in the contract), That contract says if you stay you will not only get your regular salary, but you will also receive a bonus for fulfilling the contract. You sign and stay, The contract is coming to an end. The company you work for does not have the money to pay your bonus. Now along comes the American taxpayer and piles money into your company with little or no restrictions.
Question, Does your company, that now has money, still owe you your contractual bonus for staying that period of time. or should your company not pay your contract and then we go to court and you win in the end anyway and your company pays all legal fees????

Ron

[reconeil]

On only that one WTF Nonsense of Bonuses Paid to Swindlers being taxed & with all the MANY BILLION$ of MY/YOUR/OUR Monies being thrown-around as if at some Greek Wedding, don't believe for a second that Brown Big Brother Obama won't ever not try to get: "A Piece of The Action" for His Worship, Idiot Queen Pelosi & Rest of Gang,...by taxing.

Neil

[39mto39g]

Neil
Our constitution prohibits actions like taxing the people that got a bonus, unless they tax all people in the US if they got any kind of bonus, and at the same rate. It's called 'Bill of Atender'. Just think if congress could pick a choose individuals to be taxed at a certain rate.
What do you think Nancy would put on Exxon? Biden would shirley put a huge tax on Chaney just because he can.

people are blaiming AIG for our governments stupidity. And in the end, all the congress people had to do was read the 1100 page stimules bill and they would find the bonuses are in there. And after they read it they could just not sign it.

Or
Slip the bill in, nobody reads it, all Dems sign it and now Dems and Rep are blaiming AIG because AIG had to fullfil it's CONTRACT.

Amazing.

Ron

[Packo]

I would expect to get paid my bonus and would take the company to court to get it. It's a contract and binding. Now, with the current circumstances I might feel a bit guilty taking the taxpayers money, but when I think so are all those bozo's in Washington taking taypayer money and squandering it, I'd take the money. My approval rating is probably higher than congress and they still get paid.

Pack

[darrels joy]

In AIG flap, it's not just about bonuses anymore

Scrutiny of bailout terms expands as critics question federal officials' longtime ties to aid recipients.
By Tom Hamburger and Janet Hook
March 19, 2009

Reporting from Washington -- The firestorm over American International Group is spreading beyond executive bonuses, with lawmakers and policy experts now questioning virtually all aspects of the taxpayer-financed rescue package for the insurance giant.

Among other issues, critics are asking why AIG was allowed to use federal bailout money to repay $13 billion in debt obligations to Wall Street powerhouse Goldman Sachs, as well as debts to foreign banks.

Prominent Republicans, joined by some Democrats, suggested that the answer could be found in longtime ties linking Washington to Wall Street.

Former Treasury Secretary Henry M. Paulson was once chief executive of Goldman Sachs, for example, while AIG's chief executive, Edward M. Liddy, was a member of Goldman's board. The Treasury official who is in charge of the bailout, Neel Kashkari, is a former Goldman executive.

"Look at where the money went: Goldman Sachs, Paulson's firm, foreign banks," Sen. Jim Webb (D-Va.) said Wednesday. "AIG gave more money to foreign banks than we gave in loans to the auto industry."

"The real outrage over the AIG bailout isn't executive bonuses, it's that billions in taxpayer funds intended for AIG have been passed through to benefit foreign banks and Wall Street behemoths like Goldman Sachs," former House Speaker Newt Gingrich wrote in an e-mail letter to conservatives Wednesday morning.

Gingrich and Republicans on Capitol Hill unleashed their anger on the current Treasury Secretary, Timothy F. Geithner, saying he bore responsibility for being overly generous in providing aid to failed companies like AIG.

Two outspoken House Republicans -- Darrell Issa of California and Connie Mack of Florida -- called for Geithner's resignation, saying the AIG bonus controversy on top of existing doubts about the bailout made such a move necessary.

Other Republicans, including the ranking member of the Senate Banking Committee, Alabama's Richard C. Shelby, offered caustic criticism of Geithner but stopped short of calling for his resignation.

In his weekly e-mail, Gingrich accused Geithner of being disingenuous in saying he inherited the current mess.

"The truth is that Secretary Geithner didn't inherit the policy of throwing billions of taxpayer dollars at failing companies -- he helped create it," Gingrich wrote. "Even before he was Treasury secretary -- when he was still head of the New York Federal Reserve -- Geithner was so deeply involved in the government's bailout of Bear Stearns, its takeover of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and its bailout of AIG."

Too connected?

Democrats, meanwhile, heaped the blame on decisions made during the Bush administration. With Geithner at his side Wednesday, before boarding his Marine One helicopter to start a trip to California, President Obama told reporters at the White House, "I have complete confidence in Tim Geithner and my entire economic team. . . . You know, he is making the right moves in terms of playing a bad hand."

Still, some critics on the left -- including organized labor officials and prominent House Democrats -- suggested that bailout decision-making to date had been sullied by a Wall Street bias afflicting both the current Treasury secretary and his predecessor.

"AIG was too well-connected to fail," said Rep. Brad Sherman (D-Sherman Oaks) during a contentious House hearing in which AIG's Liddy was grilled by lawmakers.

Goldman Sachs became the subject of controversy this week when AIG revealed that it had given the company $13 billion in taxpayer bailout money to repay its collateralized debt obligations.

Goldman spokesman Michael DuVally says that figure is too high and that the correct number is closer to $8 billion. He dismissed suggestions that Goldman played a role in designing the bailout terms, or its bonus provisions.

While Goldman is healthy and has said it does not need bailout funds, it did accept taxpayer-funded payments from AIG.

"The government made a policy decision to support AIG as a way to contain systemic risk," DuVally said. "We were entitled to additional collateral under the trading agreements that we had with AIG."

Since the bailout for AIG was authorized in September, the once-successful insurance giant has passed along about 30% of the $170 billion it received from taxpayers to Goldman, Deutsche Bank, Merrill Lynch and other entities, including municipalities.

One of the largest amounts -- $11 billion -- went to the Societe Generale Group, a Paris banking and financial services company. The funds paid to those firms were released to make whole the buyers of AIG credit insurance.

The decision to make the across-the-board payments at 100% of the original value has drawn criticism since Sunday, when AIG reluctantly released the list of companies that had received taxpayer aid.

One prominent economist said he thought the Wall Street pedigree of decision makers in the Bush and Obama administration had hampered their judgment.

"They were far too sympathetic to the needs of the bankers and in the process have not accomplished the cleanup that needed to be effected," said Peter Morici, an economist at the University of Maryland who is an outspoken critic of the bailout. "That is why we are in the mess that we are in."

Morici suggested that the taxpayer obligations to AIG could have been limited had the Treasury split off the company's poorly performing units from those parts of the insurance conglomerate that were profitable, selling the profitable divisions and providing taxpayer support to the problem parts of the firm.

No 'haircut'

On Capitol Hill, lawmakers talked boundlessly Wednesday about the bonuses and the outrage they created. But some were beginning to look beyond the controversy over bonuses to broader questions about the AIG bailout and how it got structured.

"It's not just about the bonuses," said Sen. John Ensign (R-Nev.). "It's that so much money went overseas. Why did money go out the door without a haircut?"

"The bonuses are just a tiny percentage of the money. It's the easiest things to get people outraged about."

Republicans made a point of bashing Geithner and his role, including meetings that he had with AIG and Goldman before he was Treasury secretary. Democrats laid responsibility on Paulson, President Bush's Treasury secretary.

The furor over the AIG bonus payments -- including questions about why Geithner didn't know about them earlier -- could create trouble for the Treasury secretary as he prepares for the rollout in the next week or so of an ambitious public-private partnership to buy $1 trillion of toxic assets from banks.

Asked where he thought Geithner would be a year from now, Webb declined to comment. But he did say that the Obama administration's hands were not entirely clean. "They have to accept some responsibility," Webb said.

Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) said it was hard to judge the motives of the architects of the AIG deal because the proceedings and decision making were cloaked in secrecy.

"It could be self dealing of the good-old-boy system," Cornyn said. "It may have been on the up-and-up. But we don't know because it wasn't transparent."

tom.hamburger@latimes.com

janet.hook@latimes.com

Times staff writer Ralph Vartabedian contributed to this report.

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-f...466,full.story