Limbaugh Defends AIG from "Lynch Mob....Ginned Up By Obama"

[Member2019]

Well ...

I'm in agreement...but the fake outrage is not real or justified.

I'll give you one thing.

If left-wingers were as upset about pork as they were about AIG bonuses, then I'd say Limbaugh was completely wrong. But since they didn't, I'll concede some of that.

All companies...including Freddie/Fanny...bailed out by the Fed are bankruptcies in all but name. No bonuses should be paid, and though we should never be bailing out every failed corporate behemouth, keep it real and stop these lame smokescreens that only fool the foolish.

Okay, we're in agreement on the bonuses.

Still, CNBC tries to defend bonuses and other things, saying they are contractually obligated. Bullshit. No private enterprise would have never touched them and they would have gone into bankruptcy.

The UAW needs to remember that with regard to the Big 3 as well.

 

[Jagger69]

Re: Sorry, the right-wingers are WRONG ...

Although you are often misguided (usually where you disagree with me ) you absolutely have nailed this situation.
Gee, I wonder why the usual method is to take a few days to discuss a bill, work out some details here and there, etc? Do you think the Dem Congress is in such a hurry to pass everything because they don't want any light shining on the provisions they are putting in? And as we all know...haste makes waste. Like Trillions of Dollars worth...
Is anyone swallowing this shit from Dodd? And Geitner?

Thanks for the accolades (being a Texan has its advantages I guess! ) but, again, the bailout mess is not a partisan issue so there is no correlation as it applies to this thread. Spin the clock back to September and you'll recall that Bush, Obama, McCain and a lot of reps and senators both right and left were pissing all over themselves to hand over the money to the Wall Street pirates....and before you can say "stick 'em up!", the American taxpayers got robbed.

I don't know how more simple I can make it. And I say this as a hardcore capitalist myself! CNBC, Limbaugh and so many others keep arguing that this is about "contracts" and "you have to compensate to keep good people" and what not.

WRONG!

AIG is a public entity now. It serves the public interest. It was saved from bankruptcy. Yes, you'll probably lose some good people as a result of changes. But in reality, where did they take us? No one was checking the mortgage-based securities.

For the same reason I get pissed at left-wingers on "entitlements," the fucking right-wingers who argue "contract-obligated bonuses" really piss me the fuck off. I mean, the government could have easily let AIG go into bankruptcy and then there would be absolutely no compensation at all!

AIG is a new company, one accountable to the tax payer, largely a public entity. All contracts are now breakable and must be re-negotiated. Period. All bonuses are suspended.

I cannot add to that. From your keyboard to God's hard drive. :thumbsup:

 

[Facial_King]

Originally Posted by Baill Inneraora
^^ But, I thought the Republican creed comes from Gordon Gecko saying “Greed is Good”

You are seriously confused...that's the Dem Creed, silly.
I get my information from observation...like Chris Dodd, Maxine Waters, Charles Wrangel, Barney Frank, Franklin Raine, Timothy Geitner...wow, there are so many I need to rest my fingers a bit.:rofl:

I think it's more the creed of the Free Markets Faithful. They exist in both parties, but the hardcore Ayn Rand-style capitalist tend to gravitate much more to the GOP and, increasingly, to third party libertarianism. Often, on economics, conservative Republicans and libertarians overlap.

Case in point, here's John Stossel on the right-wing conservative site Townhall.com (home to Ann Coulter and the like), pushing his 20/20 special (on ABC News, part of the "liberally-biased" mainstream media!) called....drumroll please......"Greed is Good" !!

http://townhall.com/columnists/JohnStossel/2006/04/26/greed_is_good

Lucianne Goldberg's son, Jonah - who got his start talking about what his mom knew from Linda Tripp about Lewinsky's jizz-stained dress - also fits neatly into this category of "thinker" who pushes the "Greed is good" idea and is also largely a water-carrier for the right-wing of the GOP.

 

[E-Ann-Hilden]

You are naturally confused...bonuses are paid for performance, not for strategy...no matter how high up in the structure, the direction to take a strategy is determined by the top echelon of management...if you do what you are told and produce, the agreed upon bonus is due.
Later saying the "company" has failed, you are responsible and don't get your bonus, is bullshit. If that were the case, Congress owes us a lot of back pay and perks cash value.
I don't follow what you meant...what few did I forget? You don't really think Rush is a Congressman, now do you?

I noted that they are paid on performance, not strategy. If your company goes bankrupt under normal circumstances, I sincerley doubt the bankruptcy courts or unpaid vendors would ever allow payments like this.

So you are saying employees under top management have no role in AIG's downfall? That they are due bonuses regardless of the dire circumstances to the U.S. economy that have unfolded and you agree your tax dollars should reward them for a job well done?

Hey I would not like it either! Most people just lose their job in other industries, but you are game to reward the Wall Street boys.

Well regardless, things have changed:

In fact, as Media Matters for America documented, the relevant provision in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act actually restricted the ability of companies receiving funds under the act to award bonuses in the future; it did not create a right for executives at AIG -- or anywhere else -- to receive bonuses.

 

[Facetious]

republicans are full of greed.

Sure, twenty years ago that was true, not today.

Increased taxes wouldn't be so bad if only the states could actually show something for the revenues that they receive. Why pay higher taxes to a fiscally irresponsibility government that only knows best how to squander it away on junky special interests kickback programs ?

I think that most of you guys who wish for higher taxes don't really care about what the government does with the money, or doesn't do, for that matter, you just want to penalize those who may have more money than you think that they should have.

I like a world in which people have diversified net incomes. Why should I feel like less of a man when another is wealthier ? Chances are that he's got other problems that I don't have.
In fact, most if not all of the "wealthy" people that I have come to know are so fucked up in so many ways, I'd never trade places with 'em.

 

[E-Ann-Hilden]

These were not performance bonuses (too bad! wish they had been!!) They were employee retention bonuses....basically bribes to keep key employees (and their knowledge of what body is buried where) from walking to a competitor (considering their performance, maybe they should have been paid a bonus to leave). Someone (from government) should have examined these bonuses and made their elimination a part of the vetting process before the bail-out money was so eagerly handed over by the "ready, shoot, aim" method of reacting to all the Wall Street bandits screaming "The sky is falling! The sky is falling!" that our illustrious political leaders all genuflected to in unison last September. So, in essence, what Philbert says is true....the employees stayed, so they got paid. And now these assholes in congress are "outraged"! You guys should have done your fucking homework before you handed over the god-damned money.....fucking idiots.

It kills me that ANYONE is trying to make this a partisan issue (not speaking directly about you, Philbert). There is PLENTY of greed, stupidity, ignorance, selfishness and blame to go around for everyone on both sides of the aisle.

And, as always, the American taxpayer pays the price for it all.

I agree a well thought out point.

The retention packages are pretty much payments for them to sift through the fiery and widespread wreckage while being on the taxpayer dime. They are the only ones that make heads or tails of this monumental disaster they created. Pretty much a dog cleaning up his own shit, while being fed treats.

 

[Facial_King]

I think that most of you guys who wish for higher taxes don't really care about what the government does with the money, or doesn't do, for that matter, you just want to penalize those who may have more money than you think that they should have.

Wrong. The couple trillion dollars that are being blown in Iraq came out of our tax dollars, and that has bothered me greatly from day one, for a wide variety of reasons.

As for penalizing those who have more than me - well, that's not exactly it, but yes, if someone like Madoff or his ilk is bathing in money, then he has (pretty much from the first dollar of income) more than he should have. Am I alone in thinking that he's got more money than he should have?

And as for the CEOs and upper-management dudes in corporate America who rake it in even when they drive their companies into the ground - yeah, I think they have more than they should have.

What people earn and deserve to earn is pretty arbitrary, really, and I'm hardly convinced that The Invisible Hand is a good and reliable arbiter of the value of work done.

 

[Facetious]

Is it legal / constitutional for the governments' intervention with all of their bail out schemes ?

Aren't there anti trust laws in place that were supposed to prevent corporations / LLCs from "getting too big to bail out in the first place ? WTF ? Why are we even here debating something (corporate bailouts) that isn't legal to begin with ?
Bankruptcy is the only real honest answer to these problems.

It must be nice to run your business into the ground via internal corruption knowing that the gumment . . the taxpayers would be there to bail you out after you stole the money.

Why hasn't Chris Cox been idicted ?

:flame:

 

[Magnet]

republicans are full of greed. lower taxes so i can be richer, de-regulation, screw the poor etc.

Uhh....Clintion and Dems had hand a huge fucking hand in this mess with de-regulation, not the republicans.

 

[feller469]

They are all crooked. there might be some members of the House who have not been seduced by the Dark Side. Pelosi and her ilk are just as careless, out-of-touch, and corrupt as any of her predecessors. At this point, it doesn't matter. We are screwed because they are not being held accountable. Ultimately, it is our fault because we trusted our elected officials to uphold the Constitution. They have decided to uphold the Corporation.

 

[ChefChiTown]

I think Rush Limbaugh needs to sit on a rubber cock.

 

[feller469]

Is it just me or is he simply getting physically larger? He looks like the Kingpin from the Spiderman comics.

 

[titsrock]

Well, I do, and many millions of Americans do as well. He doesn't have to be 100% right, just right about the fuckups you won't hear on the MSM as long as they're still sucking on Obamas dick.

And Fox has been sucking Bush/Cheney dick for 8 years...so what's your point? I'm guessing Fox news didn't remind their viewers that today was the 6th year anniversary for the Iraq War and that we've basically pissed away hundreds of billions for years because the Republicans wanted us to. Wasn't Fox finally declaring victory last week:dunno:

And thanks to the Democrat Party and Obama's Krewe the Republicans are looking forward to excellent election results in a couple of years, since relevance isn't the issue in an election, it's whatever the popular hysteria is at the time.

This is very problematic thinking but if you sleep betterr at night, go ahead and think it. So far the Republicans have bitched, moaned, hid behind Rush's fat ass and let him *RAGE* for ratings, all the while framing themselves as the party of obstruction. So, if/when the economy turns around by the 2010 elections, perhaps they will rally up some bullshit social agenda to try to mask the fact that they've got no record of accomplishing anything? Is that the strategy? The Economy is the Republicans' Fault. Nobody is going to want to sit back and let the world crumble just so Republicans can feel better about themselves and elect them.

Don't pretend that Obama was elected by a vast majority of the country, it was just by a few percent more of the American voters.

Hmm. I seem to remember that whole thing about needing the Supreme Court to decide Bush's first election...in which he didn't win the popular vote but somehow came away a winner? I seem to think Obama might've won by a larger margin that that. :dunno: Bush/Cheney/Rove feared their way to reelection and smeared an actual war hero to get reelected. Cheney is a fucking coward and Bush used his daddy and grandaddy's name to spend his "war service" getting drunk in Alabama I seem to think that Obama still won by a larger margin than Bush did his second go around. Do you remember a national groundswell of popularity fo Bush/Cheney '04?

I remember when people actually thought about Republican positions at one time. It's either sad or ludicrous that the Republican Party worships a fat talking head with no track record of doing anything except getting fired off of ABC Monday Night Football for being a racist.

Is Racism all that the Republicans have left? Well, I guess so. Those Sarah Palin rallies look like something out of Berlin 1937.

 

[Facetious]

Wrong. The couple trillion dollars that are being blown in Iraq came out of our tax dollars, and that has bothered me greatly from day one, for a wide variety of reasons.

Me too, but I think that we believe in different accounts with respect to how it all went down. The way in which the president sold the war was crap ! Not a word about U.N. 1441. If we (America) didn't have the will to enforce the provisions of said u.n. 1441, who would ? BTW, how many tons of yellow cake was removed from Iraq and shipped to Canada ? Yellow Cake shows intent, IMO. Oh well, at least we agree in sentiment anyway.

As for penalizing those who have more than me - well, that's not exactly it, but yes, if someone like Madoff or his ilk is bathing in money, then he has (pretty much from the first dollar of income) more than he should have. Am I alone in thinking that he's got more money than he should have?

I detest the snake in the grass investor rip off artists as much as the next guy, indict them ! For those who have earned their wealth the old fashioned way " :hatsoff: "
Careful what you wish for - I think that Warren Buffett as well as Gyorgy Schwartz have been very influential in Democratic policies What are you talking about "earnings cap" ?

What about members of the government that aren't held accountable for their actions ? i.e. - Why is there no outcry in the direction of former SEC chair Christopher Cox (republican) ? Not a peep about Madeoff ! In fact, madeoff was giving seminars to members of the federal govt. I'm sure that you can get details on your fave search engine).
So yeah, the SEC was an absentee office with cox sucker at the helm, had to have been.
How about Hank Paulson (democrat) who'd freaked the bejesus out of everybody when he stated that "Wall Street was going to collapse by Friday'' if he didn't receive the first installment ($350 Billion) ? To this day, they will not disclose details about the whereabouts of these revenues. $350 Billion freaking dollars on credit with nothing to show for it ! Personally, I believe that this incident was the biggest heist in world history and nobody is talking about it ! Oh well, if the main stream media isn't talking about it didn't happen. :dunno:

And as for the CEOs and upper-management dudes in corporate America who rake it in even when they drive their companies into the ground - yeah, I think they have more than they should have.

Agree completely except for the ''more money than they should have'' part. There's no way to enforce salary caps, the CEOs would laugh as these elite corporate types, democrats and republicans included, can pull payroll anywhere around the globe.
These guys don't get to become CEOs on their good looks, they understand finance inside out and backwards, they have associations worldwide and they have an endless number of tricks under their sleeve. Almost forgot, They even have connections in the government so long as the price is right :shocked:

Gotta go - Good Post, King !:hatsoff:

 

[lovejoy]

They are all crooked. there might be some members of the House who have not been seduced by the Dark Side. Pelosi and her ilk are just as careless, out-of-touch, and corrupt as any of her predecessors. At this point, it doesn't matter. We are screwed because they are not being held accountable. Ultimately, it is our fault because we trusted our elected officials to uphold the Constitution. They have decided to uphold the Corporation.

Mr. Pelosi is a well-connected "BANKER" in the banking business and made hundreds of millions of dollars so "Ms. Pelosi" can run the country.

I am glad an average citizen can now open his/her eye that it is corporate America's greeds, hungry for power, money that causes the collapse of the America.

It is Wall Street's greed, corporate America's greed that causes the collapse of the economy and drives millions and millions out of work. In the next 6-12 months, there will be 30 millions out of work including those working part-time, underwork, contract work, etc.

But the "sorrow" is they are still "playing" games against the workers. When I got up this morning, my newspaper (e-newspaper) sunshine girls page is gone, how could it is justified when we are in a national (global) crisis, companies/country still spend millions to attack workers !

It is the end of western civilization and we will enter into the Dark Age for next 300 years !

 

[lovejoy]

The corporate world with their senior executives are still playing games with our money, life and our children's future and without knowing across the ocean, another superpower is emerging and will dominate the world. It is our fault that we let this to happen !

Russia and the rest of the gangs including China and Iran, Syria could not do what they want to do is : The Decline of western civilization. Now they reach their goal without firing a shot with the collapse of the West. It is all because of the greed of corporate America starting 12 months ago when the price of oil shot up 140 bucks a barrel!

 

[Red Spyder]

republicans are full of greed. lower taxes so i can be richer, de-regulation, screw the poor etc.

It's not about greed, it's about CHOICE, as you all should know choice does not just mean abortion. It's about giving people the choice of what they want to do with their own hard earned money, regardless of how much they make. Now people who earned it illegally (tax cheats, drug traffickers/dealers, people like Bernie Maddoff) by all means, tax them 100%.

Now, many liberals say "I wouldn't mind paying extra taxes to (help the poor, have universal health care, save the environment, etc.)" well, I do mind. If you don't mind paying extra, by all means, elect a guy who keeps taxes low and then if you CHOOSE to do so, you can always send some extra cash to the government, which is what a tax is if you didn't know. I mean, what kind of people are you to "help the poor" ONLY if you are forced to do so through higher taxes? I thought liberals were generous. Believe me, if I had the extra cash, I would definetely help the poor WITHOUT being forced to do so.

That way those of us who do mind for our own personal reasons (paying child support, paying a (gasp) mortgage, supporting a sick relative or own health reasons, etc.) don't get forced to pay for you to assuage your guilty conscience and by you sending your extra share to the government or to charity you can pay to assuage your guilty conscience yourself.

And remember, income taxes are not the only tax we pay, you got federal income taxes, state income taxes (thankfully not in Texas), property taxes, sales taxes, gasoline taxes, inheritance taxes, capital gains taxes, payroll taxes, social security taxes, medicaid/medicare taxes, excise taxes, school taxes... did I forget any? I mean, how much of our money is enough?

Not only that, but also when the government decides to regulate some industry (when "cap and trade" goes into effect and utility companies are taxed extra for carbon emissions, mark my words, get ready to pay more for your electric bill) the cost gets passed on to us so that could be considered an indirect tax.

And lastly, fine, let's get the money back from those assholes, I have no problem with that, but how much of that money will you personally see in your own wallet? Do you think your life is going to be any better just because we'll be getting even with those bonus guys? $160 million from those bonuses divided by 300 million people is.....do the math.

 

[Member2019]

Congress acts swiftly, most Republicans on-board ...

If you haven't read the details, the House passed a 90% levy on employee bonuses at companies receiving more than $5B TARP funds who make over $250K/year. Given the AIG $165M and that it was handed out to only 400 people, that's going to hit almost all of those 400.

Related story:
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=a5JHdEyAaec4&refer=home

A lot of politics is out there saying various things, that the Democrats are moving fast and the Republicans are signing out of fear of looking like "defending the bad guys." I disagree. Although one Republican Senator is making it an issue in the Senate, for the most part, even die-hard Capitalists like myself are saying, "you take the public funds, you are an employee of a public company and a public servant now."

Now some of these AIG employees have already voluntarily given back some of the funds, and those people won't be taxed. But the fact that it took public outrage and there was a huge "excuse machine" on bonuses really pisses me off. Simple, capitalist reality: AIG would have gone into bankruptcy and no private entity would have saved them. Only the government did, and that means terms of compensation are up for renewal.

Some in AIG and others didn't want to play, and want to stand behind alleged principles on contracts, even though their contracts would have been toasted by a bankruptcy with their jobs. CNBC and other organizations keep spouting that same non-sense too. Frankly, I'm glad even the comical analysts over on Comedy Central aren't letting them off-the-hook, and it says something with even Lou Dobbs praises Jon Stewart for doing what a lot of the media won't.

Public servants should know better.

Now, as I joked quite seriously, if only people were this serious focusing on other public servants in other local, state and federal agencies that make $250K+/year, waste massive tax payer dollars on non-sense, and otherwise play the pork game, misapporpriating funds (especially educational dollars for non-sense), etc... Maybe, just maybe, people would get the point we capitalists make.

That the government is great on spending money without ensuring accountability. AIG is just one small part of that non-sense. People think the politicians matter. They don't. The only solution is that you don't give them enough money in the first place to waste it. Let alone I constantly question the left-wingers who want to send money only to the federal (giving them more power, control, etc...), the same entity that can start wars. But that's another story.

 

[D-rock]

It's not about greed, it's about CHOICE, as you all should know choice does not just mean abortion. It's about giving people the choice of what they want to do with their own hard earned money, regardless of how much they make. Now people who earned it illegally (tax cheats, drug traffickers/dealers, people like Bernie Maddoff) by all means, tax them 100%.

Now, many liberals say "I wouldn't mind paying extra taxes to (help the poor, have universal health care, save the environment, etc.)" well, I do mind. If you don't mind paying extra, by all means, elect a guy who keeps taxes low and then if you CHOOSE to do so, you can always send some extra cash to the government, which is what a tax is if you didn't know. I mean, what kind of people are you to "help the poor" ONLY if you are forced to do so through higher taxes? I thought liberals were generous. Believe me, if I had the extra cash, I would definetely help the poor WITHOUT being forced to do so.

That way those of us who do mind for our own personal reasons (paying child support, paying a (gasp) mortgage, supporting a sick relative or own health reasons, etc.) don't get forced to pay for you to assuage your guilty conscience and by you sending your extra share to the government or to charity you can pay to assuage your guilty conscience yourself.

And remember, income taxes are not the only tax we pay, you got federal income taxes, state income taxes (thankfully not in Texas), property taxes, sales taxes, gasoline taxes, inheritance taxes, capital gains taxes, payroll taxes, social security taxes, medicaid/medicare taxes, excise taxes, school taxes... did I forget any? I mean, how much of our money is enough?

Not only that, but also when the government decides to regulate some industry (when "cap and trade" goes into effect and utility companies are taxed extra for carbon emissions, mark my words, get ready to pay more for your electric bill) the cost gets passed on to us so that could be considered an indirect tax.

And lastly, fine, let's get the money back from those assholes, I have no problem with that, but how much of that money will you personally see in your own wallet? Do you think your life is going to be any better just because we'll be getting even with those bonus guys? $160 million from those bonuses divided by 300 million people is.....do the math.

Taking your way of thinking to it's ultimate conclusion we could also give a choice if people want to pay for education and having a fire or police department that others might use. After all by your way of thinking that should be unfair also if you just wanted to protect your own home or just have your own children educated. Is it that hard to realize that it's not about choice, but about each citizen's DUTY to the society and country they live in? Or are you one of those people that doesn't think you have to give anything back as long as you got what you want and came out ahead? We can't always be a "what can I get out of it", and "where's mine" type of society. Yes, I consider taking care of the environment, and making sure every citizen of where you live is reasonably taken care of as long as they at least try to be a productive part of it as part of everybody duty, just like educating our young and providing a means to put a house fire out before it destroys the neighborhood are. It's just that the richer people are the ones who are less burdened and can much more easily pay in comparison to other people without it adversely effecting a decent quality of life for them. (Not to mention that the rich are the biggest reason the people poorer than them have gotten screwed over in the first place either by direct exploitation of people and the world or them using their heightened influence of elected officials or others in power to get policies that suit and benefit them the most.) It's similar to the reason we won't draft 70 year old grandmothers if there's a war and people are invading and instead will go with young healthy men.

 

[Member2019]

This non-sense of ...

This non-sense of "Republicans full of greed, de-regualation, etc..." gets rather old, and is utterly missing the reality. That's why we keeping falling into these same messes. Instead of looking at the problem and contributing factors, people try to make it about party politics.

Over the last dozen years, people have "re-written history" as ...
- The Republicans were for NAFTA, and Democrats against it
- The Republicans passed deregulation, and Democrats were against it
- The Republicans did this, that, and the Democrats were against it

NAFTA continues to be my favorite. Anyone who was around the mid-'90s know who was championing that more than any one (Gore), and who was against it rather loudly (Perot).

Furthermore, even Bill Clinton was defending deregulation policies he was very much apart of in the '90s. If you want to say various things about the Republicans being "greedy," then the same principals that Clinton himself defends should make him "greedy" as well.

In all honesty, it's the partisan party non-sense that people over-state and then "look past reality" that causes us to keep making the same mistakes. People don't want to face up to the fact that sometimes the Democrats and Republicans aren't that different. And vote the same take the same stances on many things.

And that includes during the mid-'90s. The same alleged "poor decisions" that also led to the .COM boom and a major market rally. You know what? That was stupid, but it was hardly one party.

And we're still paying for it, only a bit delayed because of the false housing wealth after the false stock wealth. In any case, we keep fucking ourselves harder after each recession with false wealth.

Whether it was 1996-1999, with the first negative reports in late 1999, or 2004-2007, with the first negative reports in 2007. We get into this groove where we are worried something is wrong, but most people ignore it. And yet we have all ourselves to blame in the end when it does happen.