"A government big enough to give you everything you want, is big enough to take away everything you have"
Thomas Jefferson

Saturday, March 21, 2009

'Atta Boy Johnny Mac

Congressman John McHugh took a bi-partisan vote the other day to go after the greedy bastards on Wall St and in particular AIG. Keep fighting John even though you are up against the likes of people like Geithner and company.

He voted to support the measure (HR 1586) which would impose an additional tax on bonuses for companies who are receiving taxpayer money. This applies only to companies who receive $5 billion or more of taxpayer money. The measure was supported by 243 Democrats and 85 Republicans.

Secretary Tim Geithner is a central figure in the latest debacle in Washington. Geithner, who clearly has a problem with numbers; such as taxes and dates, knew about these bonuses and along with Geithner, Senator Chris Dodd and the rest of the Obama Administration allowed this by removing a provision in the stimulus bill that would have prevented this from happening.

If you need more proof that TurboTax Tim is misleading people read and watch here, which demonstrates he knew about the bonuses on March 3 and yet claimed a week after this hearing to know nothing about them.




Here is the key part; House Ways And Means Committee Hearing, 3/3/09:

Rep. Joseph Crowley (D-NY): "For example, just last month, AIG paid 343 employees of AIG FP -- their Financial Products division that created the financial hole that AIG is in, and in turn a multibillion-dollar bill for American taxpayers -- $56 million in bonuses and are slated to pay an additional $162 million in bonuses to 393 participants in the coming weeks. And there's more. Further bonus payments totaling approximately 230 million (dollars) are due to 407 participants at AIG's Financial Products division in March 2010."

And the Geithner response (in part)

"Now, it's very important that we make sure that we're providing exceptional assistance to these firms, that that assistance is going, again, to achieve the objectives of these programs, not to reward the kind of executives that got us in this mess. I'm deeply committed to that objective."

33 comments:

Dan Francis said...

"Atta boy, John?" Give me a break ...

As bad and awful as the AIG bonus scandal is, when will the next big bonus paid out with taxpayers' money, say like to the new Xe (old: BLACKWATER), or Halliburton (and their old: KB&R), et al be relooked at and our tax dollars recouped for things like their murderous ways (faulty wiring that killed soldiers in their showers in Iraq, for example)?

Will Rep. McHugh vote to tax them at 90% or 100%, too?

"Read my lips" GOPers will tax when it benefits them ... otherwise, it's open season the DEMS ... and of course, GOPers don't call it taxes (i.e., revenue enhancements like Raygun called them)...

Maybe we need an "Atta Boy" tax?

Dan Francis said...

Let me be clear on one point, period: If I were in elected office, I would never vote for a tax hike or "fee increase," or revenue enhancement, or some other fancy label...

* There are too many ways to reduce spending and waste than the easy poliitcal way out: taxing.

The U.S. taxcode: An incumbent's first weapon of choice.

Anonymous said...

Dan you are all over the place on your positions here.

Anonymous said...

The Congressman should not have voted for the bailout in the first place.

Dan Francis said...

I'm not all over the place, but McHugh is.

He voted against the original bailout bills twice as did every GOPer in the House, but he voted for the heavily pork-laden Omnibus spending bill -- and now he votes to tax bonuses at 90% or more?

Here send him this link and see how that sets with him and you The World Hates the U.S. Bonus Tax Bill

Please note: not just the AIG outrage, but all bonuses are underfire and in the crosshairs ... think about that carefully.

How about military bonuses? Or foreign doctor bonuses? Or any other critical job shortage bonuses?

bruce krug said...

The fact is nobody wanted to allow these bonuses. Treasury's lawywers felt that the government would be sued if they tried to block the contracts and this led to the provision being taken out. It was a responsible legal position- if unpopular. If you want to play the blame game, then why did the Bush Administration not act to change the contracts last October when they had plenty of time to do so? This mess is not about politcal favors to AIG, but rather about a government agency, Treasury, following the advice of its attorneys. You can argue that they should have ignored that advice, but more government agencies have gotten into trouble ignoring their attornies than by following their advice. This is a crisis situation with highly unusual circumstances created by the lack of regulation and the "greed is good" mentality going back to the Reagan Administration. With hindsight, my 20/20 vision says that the goverment should have let the greedy bastards sue over their undeserved bonuses, but this mess was set up before Obama was elected and was under the Bush/Paulson oversight. Everything that I have stated has been reported in the media, but it gets drowned out by the no-position Republican opposition attempts to blame their mess on the new President. It seems that they would rather play politics with the most dangerous crisis this country has faced since the Civil War. All out bank failure could cause not just our economy but our government to collapse. Where are the "country first " Republicans now? I believe we must find a way to get the bonuses back, but I don't think this selective tax idea will be found to be Constitutional. Beyond that, the real magnitude of this problem will show this bonus issue to be mostly a symbol of the greed that has underpinned our phony money economy. The real problem is the Trillions of dollars that have returned to the same vapor that they were created from.

bruce krug said...

The fact is nobody wanted to allow these bonuses. Treasury's lawywers felt that the government would be sued if they tried to block the contracts and this led to the provision being taken out. It was a responsible legal position- if unpopular. If you want to play the blame game, then why did the Bush Administration not act to change the contracts last October when they had plenty of time to do so? This mess is not about politcal favors to AIG, but rather about a government agency, Treasury, following the advice of its attorneys. You can argue that they should have ignored that advice, but more government agencies have gotten into trouble ignoring their attornies than by following their advice. This is a crisis situation with highly unusual circumstances created by the lack of regulation and the "greed is good" mentality going back to the Reagan Administration. With hindsight, my 20/20 vision says that the goverment should have let the greedy bastards sue over their undeserved bonuses, but this mess was set up before Obama was elected and was under the Bush/Paulson oversight. Everything that I have stated has been reported in the media, but it gets drowned out by the no-position Republican opposition attempts to blame their mess on the new President. It seems that they would rather play politics with the most dangerous crisis this country has faced since the Civil War. All out bank failure could cause not just our economy but our government to collapse. Where are the "country first " Republicans now? I believe we must find a way to get the bonuses back, but I don't think this selective tax idea will be found to be Constitutional. Beyond that, the real magnitude of this problem will show this bonus issue to be mostly a symbol of the greed that has underpinned our phony money economy. The real problem is the Trillions of dollars that have returned to the same vapor that they were created from.

Anonymous said...

Bruce, we got it the first time. You messages are always simple and easy to understand. Blame Bush and the Republicans.

A couple quick questions. What's your take on Barney Frank telling us that the Mac's were doing just fine right before they crashed? What's your take on Chris Dodd getting the special mortgage deals with the banks he was supposed to be regulating? Then they fold too, requiring our bail out. How do you feel about a tax cheat running the IRS? Bruce, how's about that earmark promise your Chosen One lied about?

I know. All this dishonesty is about George Bush. Well Sir, you are an expert on dishonesty. You know better than we do.

Anonymous said...

I don't think Blackwater will cost the taxpayer nearly as much as Frank/Dodds failed bank oversight Dan.

Bad wiring in the shower vs bank failures,,hm. Not on the same level to me. Stuff happens. I'll bet people got killed in the shower over here too. Let's not go too far off the deep end to make a point.

Dan, you gotta stop hating John McHugh so much.

bruce krug said...

Ah brave anonymous one, the last eight years never happened. History began on January 21, 2009.
The mess left by the previous White House occupants will take more than 60 days to clean up. At least the First Lady will have a lot of fertilzer to use on her new garden.
As for the double message- sorry about that. I thought the first one didn't work.

Dan Francis said...

Anon 11:50 -- You posted that "I hate John McHugh."

How dare you. I do not hate John McHugh, and in fact we have a very cordial relationship and I have posted about that before ...

I take issue with him on many things, and have for years ... but, Anon 11:50; that is NOT hate.

Shame on you for hiding behind that pissy "Anon" label to attack me in those harsh terms - come out and reveal yourself publicly and say that to me.

I don't hide behind labels or "Anon" monikers -- but, you sir, I presume you are a man, are dead wrong with your libelous statement (it's your opinion) but you are flat out wrong.


This is my approach to Mr. McHugh and his voting record.

I assure you there is nothing about hate in there McHugh's 90% Tax Vote

I stand on the issues, right and wrong, and leadership to solve tough problems -- something quite frankly I doubt you can even spell.

~ dmf

JIM said...

It seems the timeline here is a bit blurry.Was'nt the bonus $$ in question in the stimulus that was just rammed down our throtes?That many repubs were bitching they did'nt get to read? Bush's stimulus last fall also had bonus's in it but it was to late to remove them.It was not to late to remove them this time if our beloved pres would have let someone read the dam thing. That was the point I think this was a political payback annd your gonna have a hard time convincing me otherwise.To many fingers pointing at obama,dodd,taxcheat geitner and I'm sure more will slither out shortly.Why would'nt mchugh change his mind after finally learning what was in the stimul package.This is only one issue there are thousands more we will learn about in the future.We the people were dooped on this stimulus package and if all we catch is 165mil in bonus payments obama,pelosi and prince harry will be pleased.

Political IV said...

Johnny Curmudgeon

I rejected your comment about Dan Francis. It is ok to disagree with him and let him know that. Although Dan is welcome here all the time, he is civil and thoughtful to which you can take issue with if you choose.

Thank you.

Dan Francis said...

iv: I appreciate that, but if he / she were not hiding behind an Anon moniker, I wouldn't fire back the way I do; although in that case it was warranted I think.

Dan Francis said...

Update from Newzjunky and TV 7 news:

Story Here

The numbers are huge for Fort Drum [in line to get tens of millions of dollars]:

- $10.7 million for a child development center

- $1.6 million for solar energy related projects

- more than $72 million in repairs and upgrades to the base.

- 58 separate repair projects are listed for Drum, ranging from $4.8 million to repair sewer mains to millions in barracks renovation to fixing an air conditioning system to the tune of $250,000.

The $1.6 million for solar energy is to install solar walls and make other improvements.

Actually the Child Dev. Center work has already begun (I see it frequently while on post)... so the stimulus money may expand that further?

* So, since Mr. McHugh voted "No" twice for the stimulus bill, can he now claim credit in more press release announcements, I wonder?

These things have a tendency to come back and haunt you, don't they, when you least expect it?

LOL

Anonymous said...

Mr Francis, there is no reason to get mad. You are fixated on John McHugh. He just puts you in a tailspin, every time. Balanced you are, but not when McHugh is mentioned. You never barf out the Halliburton/Blackwater/Raygun stuff, unless McHugh is the topic. Then, you're off the deep end, again. As far as "hating McHugh", I have no other explanation for it. I think he has the job that you envision for yourself. You just happen to live in the wrong district, Dan.

Matters not who I am.

Bruce. All that matters to you is donkey vs elephant. You are a donkey. We know where you stand, every time. No matter the subject, when we see Brucie, we know what we are going to read. Same old stuff. It isn't a problem. Don't get so defensive. It's just what you are. Lots of people feel the same way.

Dan Francis said...

Anon 6:02: My last word on this...

I take pot shots at a variety of other people in government all levels of government; not just McHugh. I consider it my civic duty and quite fankly, an honor.

As it happens, John McHugh is my Rep., yes, my representative... and he is fair game as long as he is my representative and I don't like the way he votes on issues while in office.

You sir, need to grow up. What would please you more - for me ride a Rep. say, from Utah as hard as I do McHugh? FYI: I used to ride a certain former Rep. Helen Chenoweth (R-UT) when she was in office under Gingrich, now may she rest in peace (she died in 2001).

If I were your Rep., I'd expect you to track and ride me, too, when I deserved it. Trouble is between us, I can take the criticism and dish it out.

Apparently my dishing it out is what upsets you?

bruce krug said...

Another brave, personal attack post by "anonymous". When you have the guts to put your name to your accusations then it might matter.
In the meantime my reasoned, informed analysis will stand in contrast to your low brow sniping.

hermit thrush said...

anon 6:02,
i'm sorry to be so blunt but that's a pretty obnoxious response. if you happen to disagree with dan or bruce, then why not just say why -- i'm sure we'd all benefit from hearing your actual reasons; or maybe you'd benefit by discovering that you don't actually have any good reasons for disagreeing with them. instead, all you've managed to do is to make things bizarrely personal by calling dan a mindless hater and bruce a mindless partisan. surely you can do better than that.

Anonymous said...

Oh c'mon Klemlet. Keep a little honesty in your words. Now and then anyway.


First off. Danny was not called a "mindless" anything. I have agreed with him on most all of his posts of late. I simply pointed out that he has a problem with McHugh. That is how I see it. Otherwise, I view his posts as balanced. I do not see that balance when McHugh is involved in the discussion. Simple. I think his response shows I've hit a nerve. Perhaps I shouldn't have mentioned it. But this isn't the first time this has happened. Dan hates McHugh like you (and maybe Krug) hate GW. Things do get irrational at times.

On to Krug. He, like you, is predictable. Danny can reason on many sides of issues because he demonstrates an ability to think independently. Klug, and you (as illustrated by this post) go into hate mode. And again, you lie. I didn't call Kurg "mindless", you did. Why you feel the need to splatter out that agenda is beyond me. Is this a confidence problem? Being partisan and predictable is not mindless. Lately, it's pretty much American mainstream. Hold your head high and be proud.

You guys must not have done well in your NCAA brackets. I know USC lost, so that explains Dan.

What's your excuse, Boys?
It is tax time, but I thought you guys LIKED taxes.

hermit thrush said...

sorry to see you've decided to get creative with names again, but since i'm the one who called you out, i'll keep playing.

what i wrote is perfectly honest. yes, very good, you never used the actual word "mindless." so let's look at what you wrote instead. about dan, you said

He just puts you in a tailspin, every time

and

Then, you're off the deep end, again

and

As far as "hating McHugh", I have no other explanation for it.

about bruce, you said

You are a donkey. We know where you stand, every time. No matter the subject, when we see Brucie, we know what we are going to read.

in both cases, the content of what you wrote is to accuse of mindlessness. it's plain as day.

Dan Francis said...

Yepper, USC lost (my old Alma Mater), but I'm also a huge SU fan ... worked down there (and yes, drove it every single day for 12 years, too) ... so, break out the "Orange" whatever, and let's get it on!!!

FN on Bruce Krug: I know Bruce and I'll tell you this: he is one of the smartest men in Lewis county and in NYS DEM circles that I know. I don't pander to or kiss up to anyone, but Bruce is a real sharp guy, partisan, sure, why not; aren't we all sometimes? But, level-headed is what counts, and he is.

Anonymous said...

You are reaching, badly, my dear Frog. I did try using better name spelling techniques as well as toned down verbage, but see where it got me.

If you view being partisan as the equivalent of being mindless then perhaps YOU should do something about it.

The rest of your post is too weak to concern me.

hermit thrush said...

please, don't blame me for "where it got [you]." you wrote that obnoxiously personal comment about dan and bruce all by yourself. i can take it just fine when you pull that crap with me, but dan and bruce both deserve much better. what bruce said is dead right, and you know it: his (and dan's too) reasoned, informed analysis completely stands in contrast to your low brow sniping. as for this:

The rest of your post is too weak to concern me,

keep on running, my friend!

Anonymous said...

Klermit, it was a simple statement that you overreacted to, again.

Are you having problems at home?

What is going on with you? If you're going to go nuts at being labeled a partisan, maybe it's time to take a break, or hire a housekeeper. Start taking walks or something.

Dan, as far as Klrug being smart, it really has nothing to do with anything. Lots of smart folks are hopelessly mired in party line loyalty. But then again I guess it goes right to your definition of smart. I question how intelligent a person can be when they see things one way every time. But that's what we have come to. If a person's special interests link them to donkey/elephant they tend not to budge. And when called on it, they tend to throw tantrums.

Now Dan, you say you know Klrug. You admit to knowing him through Dem "circles". I called him partisan. Now Frog. Does ya think a guy who hangs out in DEM CIRCLES would tend to be PARTISAN? That's what I called him, PARTISAN. This is not rocket science. Dan, would you please explain it to Klermit. I think Burce knows what I'm talking about. He just got mad. Typical.

Why is this so complicated for the Boyz to understand?

hermit thrush said...

i'm afraid it's very telling (at least to me) that, here we are again, you've been pressed on something, and your only recourse is to launch into more bizarrely personal trash talking. if you think that makes you look good, if you think that endears you to other readers, then by all means please continue! but i happen to think otherwise. and it only makes your original comment about dan and bruce all the more contemptible. both bruce and dan are valued members of the community (both on- and offline). i've found both of them to argue civilly, though often passionately, and always in good faith.

but look at your reaction to dan. rather than take his points at face value, rather than address the content of what he's saying as a concerned constituent, rather than trying to disagree with him on matters of substance like an adult, your response is to slime his motives! it's a little hard to believe, but you honestly wrote

As far as "hating McHugh", I have no other explanation for it. I think he has the job that you envision for yourself. You just happen to live in the wrong district, Dan.

no sir, it can't be that dan has legitimate policy gripes with mchugh -- it's just that he wants his job, and all the rest of his thinking is clouded by that! like i said, contemptible.

and look at your reaction to bruce. do you not think he means and believes what he says? yet your response is to again completely dodge the content of what he wrote and just cast him away as a partisan and be done with it, nice and tidy. i don't think there's anything wrong with calling someone a partisan, but when that plus a little trash talking makes up the entirety of your response, well, it's a bit pathetic.

on a final note, have you ever criticized w once on this blog? for as much as you cry about partisanship and balance, i'm sure you've been all over him about a number of things (lord knows there's been plenty of opportunity). and as an olive branch, here's this: clinton lied! and i have really serious misgivings about geithner and summers!

Anonymous said...

I didn't have time to read all your verbage, Klerm. I did get the drift, again.

I forgot to add one last suggestion in addition to the exercise. Change the diet. Something has to help. Try to calm down.

I never understood lock step thinkers. I'm not closer to understanding them now.

hermit thrush said...

wow, i gotta admit, i did try pretty hard, but you just made my point much better than i ever could have. thanks!

Anonymous said...

That's is exactly the difference between you and me, Kerm. When it comes to our little discussions, you try so very hard, while I give it no effort at all.

Never heard it put any better.

hermit thrush said...

then why do you bother? you obviously don't care about what you're actually writing. is it just too much fun to take potshots at people and try to be a pain in the rear?

Anonymous said...

That is a fair question, Frogger. Why do I bother?

NY is pretty well washed up, mostly because of folks like you who love government, and question not much of anything. You must have an interest in screwing kids too. The current tax and spend thought has been good to me, so maybe we're together on this.

The other thing is the national status we're in. Spend away seems to have taken over the mindset, while most don't care. I don't see that changing either.

So locally, and nationally, there doesn't seem to be much reason for me to say much of anything. This is a view I will consider.

But then again I do get under your skin. Not too many others, but yours. That balances it out a bit.

But you might be right. Maybe I should just limit myself to that Hahahahaha thing that one guy does. It kind of works for most political arguments.

hermit thrush said...

please don't flatter yourself into thinking you get under my skin. otherwise, thanks for the candor, my little troll friend!

Anonymous said...

hermit thrust whoever you are, did you fall off the turnip truck when you was a little boy?

Live Blogging