Rotating Header Image


250wde_orily I don’t agree with and never have agreed with the various “bailouts” in all their variations.

However, from the AIG bailout, AIG complied with employee contracts that existed prior to their acceptance of the bailout billions and Congress is now feigning outrage (as nearly everyone is aware by now) and Barack Obama and his Treasury Secretary, Timothy Geithner, are preposterously lying about “not knowing about” the AIG employee contractual bonuses, despite evidence since surfaced that it was the White House who insisted that the language remain in the AIG bailout to allow the employee bonuses to be met (and that means, paid by way of taxpayer/bailout dollars).

Since no Republicans wrote nor voted for the bailout that sent billions of dollars to AIG, it’s the Democrats who are completely responsible for this hyper, agitated, manic spending of other people’s money, as it is also the Democrats who made all this possible having not even read the legislation they passed (except, apparently, the employee-bonus language, which Senator Chris Dodd was aware of prior to voting on the passage of this bailout legislation, adequately aware such that he engaged with the Obama White House before passage on discussing the bonus issue, and was pressured by the White House to “put it back in” after Dodd first attempted to strike the language allowing the bonuses to be paid after the bailout).

Obviously, Democrats in Congress AND the Obama White House are playing everyone else for utter fools. They knew the language of the bailout legislation — Nancy Pelosi is said to have written the legislation which Congressional Democrats then voted forward.

Their problem, however, is that everyone else are not fools and their duplicity and nonsensical attempts at feigning ethics are easily discerned by many Americans.

Witness this duplicity: the Democrats are now pushing forward a “punitive taxation on the bonuses AIG employees have received, from the bailout money (or, from what AIG received via the bailout by the taxpayers). Which method, of course, is contrary to our Constitution, yet the Democrats in Congress are impervious to that. Note: every member of Congress AND the President of the United States of America is sworn into office to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States of America.

As if this was not horrible enough (and it is, this “punitive taxation” of income — as was also the Democrats hideous bailout splurge using the taxpayers money irregardless of permission or counsel and the American public was not allowed to review nor criticize the legislation before it was rammed through by the Obama Administration prior to his party-weekend in Chicago and by Nancy Pelosi prior to her frantic-happy-wreck week in Rome), the “OTHER BAILOUT” recipients’ conditions are being tuned out as to similar conditions and excuses by Congress to justify their “punitive taxation” of AIG.

I don’t agree with the bailouts, any of them, as I’ve said. However, since the bailouts passed Congress, recipients have later been reapproached after they accepted the money by a White House via a Congress who is attempting to remake the rules, which is unconscionable behavior by both the White House and Congress.

The “AIG employee bonuses” exist by contract, by pre-existing contract from prior to their receipt of the bailout. That means, by paying these bonuses, AIG is acting to fulfill existing, valid contracts to meet it’s financial obligations.

This is a founding cornerstone of Capitalism and of our democracy as Constitutionally defined. Contracts are respected because they are legally binding, are written agreements prior to some mutually agreed upon acts and conditions that all parties involved agree to fulfill as to the conditions and requirements therein.

So, AIG acted legitimately in paying these employee bonuses, whether offensive to anyone’s sense of fair play or not: it’s what exists in contracts between them, AIG, and other individuals — in this case, employees.

dot-red-sml1 BUT LET’S ALSO LOOK AT THE AUTO MANUFACTURERS: they received and continue to make pleas for more bailout billions/trillions if they get what they are saying is necessary for them to “remain in business.”

They NEED all these billions of taxpayer dollars (“auto bailouts”) BECAUSE they cannot meet, on their own today, the ongoing financial demands of existing contracts with employees: benefits for employees, past and present, including pension funds and existing retirement accounts.

All that money, that huge amount of money, that the U.S. taxpayers (and for many generations to come, regardless of political party — it’s not that Congress just took money from Democrats, they took money from everyone and without any ability by any taxpayer to say “no”) have already seen (mostly all) Democrats’ in Congress use to funnel money to these manufacturers (as also to AIG and other pro-Democrat groups and interests), all that money received by the auto manufacturers was to pay employee (pre-existing, contractual) financial obligations by the manufacturers.

In other words, the auto manufacturers had and still have contracts with unions who represent the employees of those manufacturers. The manufacturers received a huge amount of taxpayer money in bailout-fashion for purposes of paying those contractual, employee obligations. And now they manufacturers are asking for more money, declaring they’ll go bust without more bailout money.

dot-red-sml1 But Congress is only criticizing AIG for that same behavior while, even more significantly, now considering giving several auto manufacturers yet more billions of taxpayer dollars.

And Barack Obama is only tearing-up about AIG employees receiving contractual payments — not one peep (nor tear from Obama) about the employees with the auto manufacturers essentially now enjoying their contractual obligations being met by the manufacturers on the backs of the U.S. taxpayers.

It doesn’t take a neurosurgeon to see that the big difference here is that auto manufacturers are engaged with unions. Unions who represent employees of the auto manufacturers, all of whom are by far majority Democratic Party affiliated and funding.

If AIG employees are being threatened and defamed because they received what they were contractually entitled to — however unrealistic their contractual terms — then so should, also, the auto manufacturers’ employees be so raked over.

Better yet, let none of those take any more taxpayer money and then figure out their own employee and staffing issues themselves and declare bankruptcy if necessary (Mitt Romney’s suggestion many months ago, which was the sound advice, ignored by the Democrats) and reorganize leaner and more efficient afterward.

dot-red-sml1 Congress and the White House’s problems, however, go much deeper than “just” this “trillion dollar horror show” they’ve so far produced by way of these bailouts. They are, literally, refusing to fulfill their oaths of office and violating them instead, and with determination to do so. 57statexx6

Isn’t this an attack on the United States of America by the Democrats in Congress AND the White House? Yes, yes it is.

Courts Unlikely to Strike Down AIG Tax Law, Legal Experts Say

…because of the general tendency of the courts to stay out of tax legislation.”

Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus, a Montana Democrat, said yesterday he believed the legislation would pass constitutional muster. “We’ve pushed the constitutional question pretty hard with constitutional experts and we think it’s okay,” he said.

NOTE that Senator Max Baucus, D/Montana, received campaign funds from AIG, as have also, Barack Obama and Senator Chris Dodd.

“…remember the payouts AIG has made over the years to politicians. In the last 20 years American International Group (AIG) has contributed more than $9 million to federal candidates and parties through PAC and individual contributions. That’s enough to rank AIG on’s Heavy Hitters list, which profiles the top 100 contributors of all time.

Over time, AIG hasn’t shown an especially partisan streak, splitting evenly the $9.3 million it has contributed since 1989. In the last election cycle, though, 68 percent of contributions associated with the company went to Democrats. Two senators who chair committees charged with overseeing AIG and the insurance industry, Sen. Chris Dodd (D-Conn.) and Sen. Max Baucus (D-Mont.), are among the top recipients of AIG contributions. Baucus chairs the Senate Finance Committee and has collected more money from AIG in his congressional career than from any other company–$91,000. And with more than $280,000, AIG has been the fourth largest contributor to Dodd, who chairs the Senate’s banking committee. President Obama and his rival in last year’s election, Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), are also high on the list of top recipients.

AIG has been a personal investment for lawmakers, too. Twenty-eight current members of Congress reported owning stock in AIG in 2007, worth between $2.5 million and $3.3 million. Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.), one of the richest members of Congress, was by far the biggest investor in AIG, with stock valued around $2 million.

Last year AIG and its subsidiaries spent about $9.7 million on federal lobbying, or about $53,000 for every day Congress was in session in 2008. The company’s spending on advocacy last year was down from an all-time high of $11.4 million spent on lobbying in 2007.

Barack Obama, under these strife-filled circumstances, can continue to blame (and is continuing to blame) “Capitalism” and “the greedy” for sending private industry to the wasteland and laying claim on behalf of “the Obama government” to increased union demands of employers and increased employers in service to “the Obama government”.

THAT is the process the world has witnessed numerous times over the years by which dictators and their abhorrent intents gain control over industry, resources and citizens. And this is what our U.S. Constitution exists to prevent. Override the Constitution, demean and ridicule it, and, the road signs are removed and there are no longer any rules: anyone brazen enough to seize control, can and usually does, if Cuba and Venezuela and earlier governments in Europe and China are to be taken seriously, in the gravest sense possible.

dot-red-sml1 GM, Chrysler May Need More Aid Than Requested, Rattner Says

dot-red-sml1 Previous Post, Related:

C O M M E N T S : now closed