See what others have said

Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.

Trackbacks

1. Obama Wants Confidence To Revive the Economy: But Hasn’t Earned Any « Peace and Freedom Global Future
2. Obama Seeks Expanded Power to Take Other People’s Stuff « Designated Conservative
3. Wait, Haste Made the Mess: Sen. Kyl Blocks AIG Punishment Bill to Allow Level-Headed Review « Frugal Café Blog Zone
4. Obama Wants To Take Over Companies; Complains Congress Might Take Too Long « Peace and Freedom Global Future
5. AIG–Follow The Money Trail–Bailing Out Business Buddies–Corrupt Crony Radical Socialism « Pronk Palisades
6. Levin: Conservatives Need to Take Over Republican Party | The Great Illuminator

Trackback URL

Comments

1. #657149
   On March 24th, 2009 at 10:56 am, teachem2 said:

   Wow, the senate actually showed some sense. I’m not holding out hope that this will become a trend, although one can dream.

2. #657151
   On March 24th, 2009 at 10:57 am, alexwest said:

   President Obama and Senate Democrats have buried a bill passed last week by the House that would have heavily taxed executive bonuses at bailed-out firms.

   And how, pray tell, did Obama have anything to do with the Senate procedures used to to this? It’s either wrong – or creepy.

3. #657152
   On March 24th, 2009 at 10:57 am, Misscheryl said:

   Congress knew this wasn’t going to fly. It’s pure theatrics to appear as though they are punishing those rich executives. Heck, if the truth be told, they are probably all golfing buddies. Democrats – the party of smoke and mirros pandering to the “minorities and downtrodden.”

   Alrighty!

4. #657159
   On March 24th, 2009 at 11:03 am, b-cat said:

   How can they be trusted not to lose their heads when the next Kabuki outrage comes along? How can they can be counted on to resist
   the next confiscatory scheme down the road(?)

   They can’t. They have shown themselves to be “go along to get along” politicians first and foremost. A pox on both their houses.

5. #657160
   On March 24th, 2009 at 11:04 am, Misscheryl said:

   The senate had no choice but to stop this – it’s unethical and unconstitutional and everyone knows it. Too bad bwany fwank and pelosi et al. can’t be impeached for even suggesting such a tactic. Wasting more time and money on grandstanding.

   Why the heck can’t the gobment divide the 3 trillion in stimulus money to each individual American. I’m thinking if they did, we would pay for our own health care, education, buy homes we could afford and the list goes on. Such a simple remedy for a huge problem and it would sure beat this convoluted crap they keep thowing at us. One reason why they will not do what is the most expedient and common sense remedy? There is no power in that. They want power over institutions and our citizens and this has been happening since the 60s. Until we see the cause of why we are where we are today regarding the control this government has over our every day lives can we fix this monstrosity.

6. #657164
   On March 24th, 2009 at 11:06 am, happy2behere said:

   The tax on the bonuses would be fine if it punished the executives in the AIG financial products division who drove the train off the bridge.

   But it’s not. And the problem is that many divisions in AIG are profitable and had nothing to do with the fiasco at AIG, so why punish those people?

7. #657165
   On March 24th, 2009 at 11:07 am, RedDog said:

   They are clearly afraid of being seen as on the side of Big Wall Street. A reflex move with no spine. These senators really don’t know what they stand for. It looks even worse when signing on to a thing like this CYA business.

8. #657174
   On March 24th, 2009 at 11:11 am, chapoutier said:

   There was some debate on another thread regarding this being a bill of attainder and I brought up Laurence Tribe who had initially felt that such a bill could be drafted constitutionally.

   In all fairness and in the interest of intellectual honesty, I should point out that Tribe has reconsidered everything, and has amended his position.

9. #657178
   On March 24th, 2009 at 11:15 am, cntryjoe said:

   Just wait until Exxon posts a huge quarterly profit after gas/oil prices rise this summer. Chuck Shumer is going to make a bee-line to a microphone and TV camera to propose a bill to tax these profits at 100%. I’m sure there will be spineless republicans going along with him.

10. #657195
    On March 24th, 2009 at 11:29 am, wighttrasch said:

    I hope Chuckie doesn’t make a beeline to a microphone again!—

    There’s likely to be a run on the banks if he does anything.

11. #657218
    On March 24th, 2009 at 11:44 am, kthomas8268 said:

    Actually when the 90% tax and use “IRS as a weapon” came up I was outraged but after a day or two I thought hmmmmmm maybe this will stop the bailouts… the companies wouldn’t want to do business with government if they act this crazy, it doesn’t seem like the government will stop spending anytime soon. So after reading Tom McClintock’s reason for yes I might buy he was thinking along the same line.

12. #657220
    On March 24th, 2009 at 11:45 am, ctmom said:

    Easy to do since most of the bonuses have been given back.

13. #657223
    On March 24th, 2009 at 11:46 am, By Choice said:

    On March 24th, 2009 at 11:11 am, chapoutier said:
    There was some debate on another thread regarding this being a bill of attainder and I brought up Laurence Tribe who had initially felt that such a bill could be drafted constitutionally.

    In all fairness and in the interest of intellectual honesty, I should point out that Tribe has reconsidered everything, and has amended his position.

    Of course this is a “bill of attainder”. What else would you call legislating a specific tax on a specific group of people??? DUH!! You would think that the Constitutional Professor/Messiah would KNOW that. Do we have proof that he EVER really did teach a class on the Constitution?? or is this part of the information that Obama is trying to keep from the public??

14. #657224
    On March 24th, 2009 at 11:46 am, happy2behere said:

    Further, I would like to see the msm report this story more aggressively. Why the rush to punish some executives who were not involved and who were runnning the profitable areas of AIG? Aren’t those the people who should be retained?

15. #657232
    On March 24th, 2009 at 11:48 am, taylork said:

    Aren’t those the people who should be retained?

    The MSM doesn’t understand how capitalism works, which is why they’re hemorrhaging money and slowly dying.

16. #657237
    On March 24th, 2009 at 11:50 am, CWinNY said:

    Chap,

    Thank you for your post about Laurence Tribe. I appreciate honesty in any form. I think it is what sets you apart from some of the “contrarians” who post here.

    I don’t always agree with what you write, but then, I don’t always disagree either.

    As for this topic, I think targeting a group of people (other than politicians; and even then I don’t want to target them, just their policies) and trying to make them the scapegoats for any national difficulties is wrong. It was wrong when the Nazis did it to Jews in the 1930s, it was wrong when Stalinists did it to the Kulaks, it is wrong that Chavez is doing it to the wealthy in his country, and it is wrong here as well. Perhaps Harry Reid realizes this and fears the backlash – let us all hope so.

17. #657240
    On March 24th, 2009 at 11:51 am, richardbo said:

    These fools don’t know what they are doing. Sorry to state the obvious, but if they don’t read anything until after it’s law they have little idea of what they have done. The Republicans are so far out of the loop anything they say or do is BS and CYA.

18. #657244
    On March 24th, 2009 at 11:52 am, California Red said:

    Tom McClintock has earned my trust. I am not going to judge him on this vote.

    1) The bailouts should not have been given in the first place.
    2) The majority of executives have already given the bonuses back willingly.
    3) The Senate is sitting on it.
    4) It is subject to constitutional objections.

    Nobody is perfect, but fiscal conservatives are better off with Tom McClintock in the house.

19. #657252
    On March 24th, 2009 at 11:55 am, happyscrapper said:

    On March 24th, 2009 at 10:56 am, teachem2 said:
    Wow, the senate actually showed some sense. I’m not holding out hope that this will become a trend, although one can dream.

    This rare show of “common sense” is a smoke screen. They want us to let down our guard and be fooled into thinking they actually have the best interests of the Country at heart. The truth is, there are bigger fish for them to fry and they didn’t want to use up all their political capital on this issue. They still need to push through socialized health care, cap and trade, regulation of executive pay in the private sector, the “fairness” doctrine, forced unionization of Wal Mart, etc., etc. Don’t be fooled. These people are still socialist monsters and must be stopped. Our country is going down fast.

20. #657260
    On March 24th, 2009 at 11:59 am, CWinNY said:

    Taylork,

    The MSM may have been slowly dying at first, but the pace seems to be accelerating lately. Whether it is because of their lack of understanding of capitalism or their evident liberal bias causing loss of readership, or just a sign of the changing times, I’m not sure. I am not sorry to see some of them disappear, and would be especially pleased to see the NY Times join the USSR on the scrapheap of history (as a cadet in one of the military academies in the 1970s, I was forced to pay for a subscription for that rag – it was so laden with typos and poorly written articles, I rarely read it, preferring the local paper instead).

    I would also enjoy seeing some cutbacks in broadcast time for some of the more biased TV “news” shows. Although I do not watch any TV news show.

21. #657261
    On March 24th, 2009 at 11:59 am, smfoushee said:

    Joe Barton was just on Mark Davis’ show on WBAP this morning to defend his vote. Last week I had thought his vote was symbolic, in line with the Libertarian Congressman from California that asked members to vote to dissuade companies from coming to the government trough in the future. Alas, I was mistaken.

    My good Republican Congressman simply voted for the 90% retroactive tax because people called and told him to. No joke, thats what he said, then proceeded to mention that he doesn’t like to vote based on public opinion (in an answer when his vote on the Iraq war came up). So Barton is perfectly fine with populism and abandoning his core principles if he feels enough outrageously outraged individuals need him to.

    He even had the gall to say that as a member of the minority he can’t go up to the Speaker and say, “This is a bill that shouldn’t be on the floor.” WTF?! Then to top it all off he wanted to let the good folks here in the sixth district know that if we don’t want this to happen in the future (meaning the Obama budget and bailouts) that we need to elect more people like him.

    Sorry Congressman, but if you’re going to abandon core fiscal conservative principles because some idiots in our district don’t have a clue and call you up demanding you do so, the last thing we need are more spineless representatives like you in Congress.

22. #657281
    On March 24th, 2009 at 12:12 pm, Mach1Duck said:

    Is it not ironic, that thoes who are the guiltiest scream the loudest? Hey, Barney, what’s in your wallet?

23. #657290
    On March 24th, 2009 at 12:15 pm, cheapseat said:

    republicans need to re-evaluate their purpose in life and their core values. if those are very limited government, and very limited taxes to fund the beaurocracy, then welcome back. but when your answer to the problems on the mexican border are to add beaurocratic nosepickers, instead of building the wall and prosecuting felons who hire these illegals. if the answer to the monetary economic plan is to bailout the world’s banks, and transferring the losses these banks are suffering to the taxpayer, they need to switch parties. if these banks were rewarded when times were good, why doesn’t it take the loss when the gamble they made fails. that is capitalising gain and socializing the loss. how do we become banks. bawney, chris, how much do i have to bribe you guys to make me a bank.

24. #657299
    On March 24th, 2009 at 12:20 pm, RedDog said:

    On March 24th, 2009 at 11:44 am, kthomas8268 said:
    ….if they act this crazy, it doesn’t seem like the government will stop spending anytime soon. So after reading Tom McClintock’s reason for yes I might buy he was thinking along the same line.

    This is a risky and sophisticated strategy that, frankly, is beyond most dim-witted legislators. It would amount to dumb luck if it worked out.

25. #657300
    On March 24th, 2009 at 12:21 pm, TimLenox said:

    Once again, too many people are thinking with their emotions instead of their intellect.

    In my last post under the previous article post the 85 Rs, I told all of you why a Republican would vote for it.

    Here it is in a nutshell:

    Because of the salary cap (Obama says nobody can earn more salary than the President) no corporate execs would take government funds because their salaries would be capped.

    The bonus clause was put in by Dodd at Geithner’s request to encourage businesses to take bailouts so the government can take over businesses.

    The 90% tax on those bonuses would discourage corporate execs from selling their companies to the government.

    Half the Reps in Congress hate the idea because they belive in a free market.

    The other half see the free market being purchased by the government and want to stop it.

    Soon as the Senate figured out that this bill would STOP bailouts and fascist takeovers, they killed it.

    Told-You-So, Told-You-So, Told-You-So, Told-You-So,
    See, I TOLD You So !!!

    Now please stop demonizing the Reps in Congress and try to understand them before passing judgement, you FOOLS !!!

26. #657321
    On March 24th, 2009 at 12:35 pm, TimLenox said:

    By The Way,
    I have too many problems with McCain to count,
    but I DO have to give credit where it is due:

    Remember the “Gang of 14″?

    Everyone hated him for it.

    Emotions were running high.

    However, I listened to him when he stated his reasons.

    He warned that the Reps had the majority and could eliminate the filibuster, but there was no guarantee that we would keep the majority forever and there would come a day when we would NOT be in the majority and would THANK him for keeping it.

    Anyone notice who is the majority today?

    Anyone remember supporting Reps to keep the filibuster?

    Anyone out there glad to still have it?

    Anyone? … Anyone? … Beuller?

    Allow me to be the frist.

    Thank you, Senator John McCain, for standing against the popular emotions, using your head, and keeping the filibuster.

    All of you who are riding a wave of emotion need to CHILL OUT and start THINKING instead of just FEELING.

    What are you? DEMOCRATS?

    You are behaving like them. Wake up.

    For the record,
    although I acknowledge McCain’s wisdom regarding the filibuster,
    I STILL have problems with him concerning:

    Global Warming

    Illegal Amnesty for Mexicans

    Campaign Finance Reform

    Guantanamo

    Hyper-reaction to “torture”

    Naming water-boarding as “torture”

    700 billion bailout + 150 billion earmarks = you should have voted NO

    and every single boneheaded move you made to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory and surrender the election to Obama.

27. #657328
    On March 24th, 2009 at 12:39 pm, Pasadena Phil said:

    compare with Rep. John Campbell’s statement on why he voted no.

    Good for Mr. Campbell but he voted “no” on the short first draft of porkulus but the voted “yes” on the larded up version.

    Everyone is partly pregnant.

28. #657367
    On March 24th, 2009 at 12:59 pm, pueblo1032 said:

    Good point PASADENA, we used to say you can’t be a little pregnant… Well, in POLITICS today, you can’t be a little bit REPUBLICAN… We all must remember these WANNABEE REPUBLICANS, and come their respective elections, send them PACKING…

29. #657408
    On March 24th, 2009 at 1:20 pm, DesertLover said:

    These clowns are so gutless they aren’t even definable as RINOs anymore …

    a more apt description would be …

    “FAUX CONSERVATIVES”

30. #657411
    On March 24th, 2009 at 1:22 pm, AlohaGuy said:

    In all fairness and in the interest of intellectual honesty, I should point out that Tribe has reconsidered everything, and has amended his position.

    Hehe. So, my Madison trumped your Tribe after all Professor Moriarity…

    Seriously, we all appreciate the honesty and good intellectual exchanges – to say nothing of the photo links to Russian politicians draped in the Cuban flag.

    It’s sad to see Congress trying to run the economy. May I suggest that law schools require at least one Econ class?

31. #657430
    On March 24th, 2009 at 1:28 pm, Schweggie said:

    Just started this:
    Lamar Smith is a RINO blog. Going to stay active on it as well as get signatures for my petition. (Please sign!!)

    Turning the volume up…

32. #657436
    On March 24th, 2009 at 1:33 pm, rocketman said:

    ***
    TIMLENOX #26 has a good analysis–and a good list of the next items that President O’Bummer (PBUH) will be bringing on next.
    ***
    Only first amendment (free speech / “fairness” radio and internet) and second amendment (firearms rights for citizens) items need to be added to his list to complete the rest of the democratic / liberal / socialist / marxist / communist agenda.
    ***
    As far as “constitutional” problems with the Obama agenda–the Supreme Court is 5 to 4 now. One retiring or dying conservative justice will open the door to all the Messiah’s hearts desires. One crazed assassin could do the trick also–I hope the SCOTUS justices have real Secret Service protection soon–for the survival of our Country and Constitution in the face of the revisionists. Things could change dramatically tomorrow.
    ***
    John Bibb
    ***

33. #657437
    On March 24th, 2009 at 1:33 pm, secondsight said:

    MICHELLE!!!!

    This is the THIRD TIME I have posted this:

    Your list omits Dent!

    As in:
    Dent
    Diaz-Balart, L.
    Diaz-Balart, M.

    In fact if you count your list, it has only 84 names. Dent is your 85th. If you are going to dun with the List of 85 daily, you really really ought to get it right.

34. #657441
    On March 24th, 2009 at 1:37 pm, sfcmac said:

    The bottom line is Congress and Obama had no right to use OUR tax money to bailout the very crisis caused by Democrats to begin with. Their Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac debacle has hurled our ecomony into a bottomless pit.

    In a free market capitalist system, you don’t reward failure.

35. #657445
    On March 24th, 2009 at 1:39 pm, flaming_o said:

    Congressman Tom McClintock “reluctantly supported HR 1586 for a simple and singular reason: it will stop or slow the corporate bailouts that are bankrupting our country.”

    Are you kidding me? A 90% tax will stop a bailout after a bailout is already given? Hey, Tom, if you want bailouts to be stopped, STOP THEM YOURSELF!!!! You’re in a better position than anyone on this blog, a better position than anyone in AIG. Hey, Tom, YOU’RE IN CONGRESS!!!!!! DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT!!!!

36. #657476
    On March 24th, 2009 at 1:53 pm, Schweggie said:

    I called Rep. Smith of Texas. First assistant I talked to was not sure why Smith voted yes. She put me on hold to find an answer. Long hold. Then I was told the legislative director was in a meeting and that I could leave a voicemail with him. I left my piece…

    Verrrry reassuring.

37. #657486
    On March 24th, 2009 at 2:00 pm, T-Bone said:

    I am still looking for the truth here. I heard that some of these bonuses were offered to people to get them to stay at AIG and help unravel some of these credit swap instruments.

    Since AIG was going down, these people were bailing for other jobs while the getting was good. They were persuaded to stay by these bonus offers and because of their expertise, they helped unravel some of these things saving AIG (and the taxpayer) billions of dollars.

    They earned this bonus by making the decision to stay. They risked having to get in the back of the line for other jobs, etc. Now they are told, just kidding, you can’t get the bonus. Ha Ha!

    Now I hear these were executive bonuses paid to reward failure. Is that the truth or more of team Obama’s propaganda lies?

    People got all up in arms over “bonuses” paid but what is the real truth here? This isn’t the USSR yet. Can I get the facts please so I can make an intelligent decision, not a bandwagon decision based on populist propaganda?

38. #657495
    On March 24th, 2009 at 2:05 pm, happyscrapper said:

    On March 24th, 2009 at 2:00 pm, T-Bone said:

    Your take on those “bonuses” is exactly right. They were entitled to them. I received a retention bonus once…I worked my butt off to earn it and I would have sued before giving it back.

39. #657515
    On March 24th, 2009 at 2:18 pm, bluedog said:

    Rep. Pete Hoekstra (R-MI) was questioned by Cavuto last week about this vote. He flat out admitted that this was a political vote for him forced by Pelosi.

    He said would be hard pressed to go back to MI and defend a no vote after many of them, as UAW members, had been asked to make relatively (to AIG bonuses) small concessions before getting TARP funds. He was unapologetic, but admitted that he voted against his preferences because of populism.

40. #657584
    On March 24th, 2009 at 2:51 pm, Virginia Patriot said:

    Eric Cantor is my Rep.
    At one time I had high hopes for him, losing it rapidly. He’s been going weasel of late.

41. #657587
    On March 24th, 2009 at 2:53 pm, PrestoPundit - Greg Ransom said:

    I actually liked McClintock’s argument for voting to steal back the bonuses — this is a war against capitalism, and theses executives are and have been among the greatest enemies of a free society.

    War is war.

42. #657606
    On March 24th, 2009 at 2:59 pm, Pasadena Phil said:

    I’ve been a big fan of McClintock for many years and wish that the CA GOP State Committee had backed him for governor instead of the RINO’s they always back. However, his forte has always been his knowledge of the state budget and his steadfastness in exposing the idiocy in Sacramento.

    Now, having just arrived in DC, he makes an inexcusable bonehead decision and rationalizes it by citing demagogic reasons.

    Come on Tom. You can do better than that.

43. #657615
    On March 24th, 2009 at 3:03 pm, PrestoPundit - Greg Ransom said:

    The Wall Street executives have declared war on a free society — I’m OK with cutting the knees out from under a payola & payoff structure that has these executive working as a part of a theft regime organized against the people.

44. #657620
    On March 24th, 2009 at 3:04 pm, PrestoPundit - Greg Ransom said:

    Make no mistake.

    The Fed + Congress + Wall Street = a theft regime looting the American people

45. #657660
    On March 24th, 2009 at 3:26 pm, allrsn said:

    On March 24th, 2009 at 3:04 pm, PrestoPundit – Greg Ransom said:
    Make no mistake.

    The Fed + Congress + Wall Street = a theft regime looting the American people

    Coup d’état?

46. #657670
    On March 24th, 2009 at 3:31 pm, RabbidSquirrel said:

    Did anyone note in the congressional hearing this morning that when Geithner and Bernanke were asked if we should go along with the Chinese/Russian proposal to move away from the Dollar and to a new global currency…..

    They all said ‘Yes’

    (I dont know if thats a good thing or a bad thing yet. I need to research and evaluate)

47. #657671
    On March 24th, 2009 at 3:32 pm, Red State Skeptic said:

    Our President and Secretary of the Treasure deserve some credit for refusing to buy into the bonus hysteria.

48. #657675
    On March 24th, 2009 at 3:34 pm, MTConservative said:

    FWIW, I called my congressman, Denny Rehberg, and gave him the business about his vote on this stinker. I also called my senators and urged them to vote no. Then I called the White House Comment Line and told the lady there to ask our little boy president to grow up. All in all, a productive morning!

49. #657678
    On March 24th, 2009 at 3:35 pm, happyscrapper said:

    (I dont know if thats a good thing or a bad thing yet. I need to research and evaluate)

    Hey Rabbid…how can you possibly think that could be a “good thing”?

50. #657691
    On March 24th, 2009 at 3:38 pm, flaming_o said:

    these executives are and have been among the greatest enemies of a free society

    The Wall Street executives have declared war on a free society . . . part of a theft regime organized against the people

    Are we channeling blogs from Daily KOS now?

51. #657701
    On March 24th, 2009 at 3:42 pm, FuriousMob said:

    Funny…the bonuses are about 0.1% of the total bailout recieved by AIG. This of course is cause for outrage. But the 4% of pork in the last spendalooza bill, well, that’s just really nothing.

    You see, it’s simple math:
    (160M * BigCorpHateFactor) > (7,700M * HonestMeansWellCongressFactor)

52. #657718
    On March 24th, 2009 at 3:53 pm, RabbidSquirrel said:

    Hey Rabbid…how can you possibly think that could be a “good thing”?

    I cant say its a bad thing yet because I dont work off of emotions. I need to study global reserve currencies and how they relate through the International Monetary Fund.

    I may prefer that the dollar not be used.

    Are you saying that you are against the IMF?

53. #657723
    On March 24th, 2009 at 3:58 pm, Savage24 said:

    The Constitution was written so that even an idiot could understand what it says, that is everyone except the Congress. I guess we shoul be thankful for little accompilishments.

54. #657728
    On March 24th, 2009 at 4:03 pm, sonofdy said:

    Our President and Secretary of the Treasure deserve some credit for refusing to buy into the bonus hysteria.

    Only after they saw the reaction. Note they did and said nothing till after it was over??

    Not exactly a profile in courage to follow the trends.

55. #657732
    On March 24th, 2009 at 4:06 pm, happyscrapper said:

    Are you saying that you are against the IMF?

    I admit I do work off of emotions sometimes and so I did respond to your comment in an emotional moment. I just think that one-world currency is another step to becoming absorbed into the global community and losing our American identity. Obama is trying very hard to accomplish that, and losing our currency would be another step. Are there positives in changing to global? Maybe. But I have a very strong protectionist attitude and I doubt I would ever change that about myself.

56. #657734
    On March 24th, 2009 at 4:08 pm, sonofdy said:

    The Wall Street executives have declared war on a free society

    And you answer is to have the government control wall street?

    How is that freedom again?

57. #657746
    On March 24th, 2009 at 4:18 pm, TimLenox said:

    On March 24th, 2009 at 3:38 pm, flaming_o said:
    these executives are and have been among the greatest enemies of a free society
    The Wall Street executives have declared war on a free society . . . part of a theft regime organized against the people

    Are we channeling blogs from Daily KOS now?

    Glad to see I’m not the only one using intellect instead of emotions.

    While we’re at it, concerning the IMF, etc.,

    What would happen if we switched back to the gold standard?

    Hoping to see a rational discussion here.

58. #657768
    On March 24th, 2009 at 4:38 pm, 24Klady said:

    ‘Bambi only commented ,lightly, about not supporting the bill when he realized the number of lawsuits the gubmint would face from these people and if the gubmint lost, what would that say about a “Constitutional” lawyer’s expertise having signed it? Always looking out for number One. We wasted the term “slick” on Bill Clinton…

59. #657795
    On March 24th, 2009 at 4:50 pm, Red State Skeptic said:

    Our President and Secretary of the Treasure deserve some credit for refusing to buy into the bonus hysteria.

    Only after they saw the reaction. Note they did and said nothing till after it was over??

    What are you talking about? The public overwhelmingly disapproved of the AIG bonuses (and I would assume supported the tax as well). It took Obama and Geithner to give the Senate cover to have sense and reject the populist anger here.

60. #657908
    On March 24th, 2009 at 6:42 pm, Wellsy said:

    I’m a little disheartened Mike Turner voted for this, but he at least got the stimulus vote right, and caught heat from the local SEIU for it. Maybe that factored a bit in his decision as he’s a Republican in a blue-leaning Dayton district.

61. #657914
    On March 24th, 2009 at 6:46 pm, flaming_o said:

    On March 24th, 2009 at 4:50 pm, Red State Skeptic said:

    What are you talking about? The public overwhelmingly disapproved of the AIG bonuses . . .

    What are you talking about? I’m willing to bet that “the public overwhelmingly disapproved of” the AIG bailout to begin with. Considering Congress and the White House approved of the bailout and the bonuses with no transparency and no oversight, the concept of Obama and Geithner providing cover in the face of “populist anger” as driven by ACORN and conveniently orchestrated for cable news while Congress and the White House fully intend to continue doing all the wrong things for all the wrong reasons is laughable.

62. #657920
    On March 24th, 2009 at 6:52 pm, RabbidSquirrel said:

    While we’re at it, concerning the IMF, etc.,

    What would happen if we switched back to the gold standard?

    Hoping to see a rational discussion here.

    Since I wasnt a finance major, I dont know the historical nuances of those type policy issues. But I plan on digging into it all over the next few months while my MBA application is being reviewed.

    Im going to make a wild guess that the gold standard was dissolved because there isnt enough gold in the world (much less Fort Knox) to back currency.

    Thats why we’re on the Hocus Pocus standard.

63. #657926
    On March 24th, 2009 at 6:58 pm, RabbidSquirrel said:

    hmmm, Hocus Pocus Economics?

    HoPoEco….

64. #658050
    On March 24th, 2009 at 8:34 pm, lwssdd said:

    How can you feel anything but shame for the 85 (R)’s. It just confirms my stance on not contributing directly to the party, but only directly to candidates that stand by their principals no matter how difficult it may be.

65. #658422
    On March 25th, 2009 at 3:07 am, WarTip said:

    It is all smoke and mirrors.

    With 20 billion in assets, Microsoft receives 11 million to build a bridge exclusively for the use of Microsoft Employees.

    Where is the outrage?

    Where is the outrage over the Freddy and Fannie coupled bonuses?

    All of this paid for by the American Taxpayer without their knowledge or consent … can you say “Taxation without representation”? I thought you could!

    Where is the outrage over billions of US Taxpayer bonuses going to buy toxic assets overseas?

    The American “Sheeple” are outraged over this because they have been led by the nose to this one cause du jour by a bunch of bloated bureaucrats and a media that is complacent and willing to decry whatever the government tells it to.

    Smoke and mirrors people. The sheeple would not otherwise willingly walk into the chutes to have their proverbial throats cut. We are losing our freedoms and being led like lambs to the slaughter. We are so busy paying attention to what they tell us to that most people cannot see what they are doing with the other hand.

    This is being put on the back burner now simply because the hand has been played and there is nothing more to gain from it. No more Acorn buses packed with a whole thirty people going to the house of some person just trying to do their job. No more faux outrage because they have to move on to the next step in taking over our nation without firing a shot!

66. #658592
    On March 25th, 2009 at 9:58 am, rignerd said:

    Hey Michelle, how about making the list of names a more user friendly. Full name and state to start and a link to their congressional website.