No Bonuses for AIG?

I’m watching Fox News and scratching my head. They’re mad, they’re throwing a fit because money the U.S. Government gave to AIG, without strings attached, is going to be used by AIG to give their executives big bonuses. My bewilderment isn’t because I agree with using tax payer money to pad the pockets of big time execs, it’s because Obama is mad that they are wasting our money when we didn’t set any guidelines on its use when we handed them the bailout. What does he expect them to do?

The fiscal irresponsibility on display from these failing banks is nothing compared to the government’s long history of wasteful spending. Bush, Obama and the rest of the goons in congress had to have this bailout. They told us all would be lost if we did not give them billions of tax payer dollars. What happened? They took the money, did not lend it out to the public and went on vacations. They basically wrote them a blank check with no stipulations and are trying to act upset now that they misusing our money. They knew what they were doing and I am not shocked that AIG wants to give more money to the same people that drove the company into the ground in the first place.

… Continue Reading

Big 3 Can’t Sell Cars-Beg for Taxpayer’s Money

Say Goodbye To All Of Obama’s Campaign Promises

The past ten days has radically shifted the entire course of the Presidential campaigns… but seemingly not in the way that most people have caught on to yet.

From Firedoglake

I can’t think of any way to sugar coat this, I’m afraid. It’s a bad bill and it isn’t just that Barack Obama voted for it, it’s that everything I’m hearing from the Hill says that he’s been actively whipping it, not just in the Senate but in the House. Barack didn’t hold his nose and vote for this, he made it his bill as much as it is Paulson’s.

With this bill go your chances of having, say, universal health care, or massive infrastructure development, or really getting the US of its dependence on foreign oil, or really rebuilding America’s school system—or whatever other big, expensive project you thought Obama was promising….

….And it’s Barack Obama who turned to Nancy Pelosi and Reid and said “this bill must pass”. It’s Obama who is whipping votes and bending arms for this despite the fact that it is massively unpopular. This is Obama’s bill.

….That’s Obama’s first real act as the presumptive President and as the Democratic party’s de-facto leader.

I both agree and disagree with this article.

While I do agree that the bill as passed is less than great, I disagree with the author’s reasoning behind why the bill is so bad. As I have said before, the bill is a necessary evil and is better than not acting at all, but the bill as it was passed was terrible because of all the pork.

I do agree with the author that all of the projects that Obama has promised are dead in the water now.

Obama’s proposed projects would cost the United States $1.2 trillion… and he just signed on to a bill that eats about $815 billion out of the budget. It will be virtually impossible to add anything else of any size to the budget, even for the god-like Barack Obama.

It’s no wonder that Obama is getting really vague about what he is actually still going to accomplish… especially during the debates

LEHRER: All right. All right, speaking of things that both of you want, another lead question, and it has to do with the rescue — the financial rescue thing that we started — started asking about.

And what — and the first answer is to you, Senator Obama. As president, as a result of whatever financial rescue plan comes about and the billion, $700 billion, whatever it is it’s going to cost, what are you going to have to give up, in terms of the priorities that you would bring as president of the United States, as a result of having to pay for the financial rescue plan?

OBAMA: Well, there are a range of things that are probably going to have to be delayed. We don’t yet know what our tax revenues are going to be. The economy is slowing down, so it’s hard to anticipate right now what the budget is going to look like next year.

But there’s no doubt that we’re not going to be able to do everything that I think needs to be done.

Lehrer went on to press Obama even further and Obama got even more avoidant. The sidestepping during the debate was really interesting to watch though.

With those few deft phrases, Obama has basically absolved himself of actually having to deliver on any promises what-so-ever if he becomes President.

As the author from Firedoglake said… say good by to “universal health care, or massive infrastructure development, or really getting the US of its dependence on foreign oil, or really rebuilding America’s school system—or whatever other big, expensive project you thought Obama was promising.”

The fact is that, because of the price tag of the bailout bill, Obama cannot fulfill a single promise he has made and has as much as admitted it.

John McCain on the other hand can still deliver on his promises. He wants to cut spending and increase oversight to stimulate the economy, increase job creation and keep industry honest and on track.

And, so I will leave you with this…

Knowing all of the above… what is your answer to Bill Clinton’s question now?

For example, you’re a voter, and you have Candidate X and Candidate Y. Candidate X agrees with you on everything. But you don’t think that person can deliver on anything. Candidate Y disagrees with you on half the issues, but you believe that, on the other half, the candidate will be able to deliver. For whom will you vote?

Warren Buffett: Bailout is the Right Thing to Do…Just Do it NOW…

While lawmakers debate the proposed $700 billion plan to rescue the financial system, Warren Buffett, a powerful investor influence is optimistic. He told CNBC that passing a bailout bill was “the right thing” for Congress to do, calling the current crisis an “economic Pearl Harbor.”

WASHINGTON (CNN) – Billionaire Warren Buffett told congressional negotiators that if they can’t agree on a proposed financial bailout, the nation will face “its biggest financial meltdown in American history,” two sources familiar with the talks said.

 Despite the anger emanating from various investors and taxpayers, Buffet believes that the economy is “everybody’s problem,” according to The New York Times.

Buffett said that in the long-run, the government could make money on the transaction.

Buffet’s comments came shortly after he announced he would invest $5 billion in Goldman Sachs. This move indicates that Buffett holds confidence in the struggling economy.

He noted that he never would have made the investment if he didn’t think lawmakers would pass a bailout bill. As to whether his investment was an attempt to convince Congress to favor the bailout, Buffett said that he simply thought Goldman was a sound investment.

Word of Buffett’s omen came as House Speaker Nancy Pelosi announced “great progress” in reaching a deal on the White House’s proposed $700 billion bailout of the financial system. Buffett, whom Forbes magazine has placed at No. 2 on its 2008 list of richest Americans, was one of several business experts whose opinions were sought, Sen. Kent Conrad, D-North Dakota, told reporters Saturday.

Conrad, who heads the Senate Budget Committee, said he was involved in some of the talks, though he is not on the formal negotiating team, which is made up of Rep. Roy Blunt, R-Missouri; Sen. Judd Gregg, R-New Hampshire; Sen. Chris Dodd, D-Connecticut; and Rep. Barney Frank, D-Massachusetts.

“I’m not brave enough to try to influence the Congress,” he said.

American Taxpayers To Take Another 700 Billion In The Shorts

The US Government is going to spend another 700 billion US taxpayer dollars bailing out financial institutions by buying their bad mortgages.

WASHINGTON (AP) – The Bush administration asked Congress on Saturday for the power to buy $700 billion in toxic assets clogging the financial system and threatening the economy as negotiations began on the largest bailout since the Great Depression.

The rescue plan would give Washington broad authority to purchase bad mortgage-related assets from U.S. financial institutions for the next two years. It does not specify which institutions qualify or what, if anything, the government would get in return for the unprecedented infusion. source

Basically this means that companies holding mortgages from people who can not make their payments will transfer the bad loans to the US Government, you and me. 

Democrats are pressing to require that the plan help more strapped borrowers stay in their homes and to condition the bailout on new limits on executive compensation.

That means that the people who cannot make their payments, many of whom should never have been loaned the money in the first place will get to stay in their homes. If there is any silver lining, now that Barack Obama’s advisors already got their golden parachutes from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, Democrats want to limit future executive excesses.

Folks, we are being sold down the river, again. There should be a Special Prosecutor assigned to investigate any elected officials who stand to make money off this deal.