From Hugo's Lips To Washington's Ear

Well, it is yet another change that we can believe in (or better: can't believe).

Either it is all part of the plan to save us from ourselves, or "O" and crew don't have a clue what they are doing.

Either way, we are all so very, very screwed.

"bankers be tied in sacks filled with snakes and tipped into the Thames"

Finally someone with a reasonable solution to the problem. Now what's their idea for the lawyers?

I'd suggest that if the bankers are tipped into the thames then the politicians (and lawyers) should be staked over the badger hole while the critter is smoked out and claws out the offenders stomach (an effective, if sadistic, medieval punishment.)

On the upside, I can't think of a better way to attract business to Canada than have everyone else on earth lose their minds...

So that's where all the snakes went when they were banished from the Emerald Isle by St. Patrick!

Hans-Christian Georg Rupprecht, Commander in Chief

1st Saint Nicolaas Army
Army Group "True North"

I hope the recipients are all lined up at customs right now, heading to wherever they shipped Fedex boxes loaded with cash.

This legislation still isn't law. The Constitution of the US, Article 1, Section 7 says that "all Bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives but the Senate may propose or concur with Amendments".

So, the Bill arises in the House; then, it goes to Senate. Then, it goes to the President. If he approves it, he signs; if he doesn't, "he shall return it, with his Objections to that House in which it shall have originated"... Then, The House can reconsider it, and IF 2/3 passes it, it goes to the Senate. If 2/s of Senate passes it, it becomes Law. No presidential vote is required.

But, let's say this Bill, with its changes, does become Law.

According to that same Constitution, and frankly, the Constitution is more important to Americans than any narcissistic President, well, this same Constitution, Article 1, section 9 says that "No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed."

What this means is that no law can single out an individual or group and punish them without trial but more importantly for this issue, no law can reference what has already occurred.

The contracts for AIG were made and paid before this new law. They stand. There is no way to tax or hex them. The House, the Senate, the President, didn't READ the original Bill. Or, if they did - and the Treasury concern about lawsuits suggests someone read it - they should have inserted a clause that any institution that took federal funds would have to have those bonuses taxed. By the way - bonuses are, to my knowledge, already taxable.

What might this lead to? Well, I wonder if it will drive executives away from any institution that has even the slighest whiff of federal alignment.

And why doesn't Chris Dodd resign for his lies?

Any payment of bonuses could have been prohibited in the original bailout. Well, the tone of the Obama administration has been set now. Watch for more incompetence plays followed by Chicago-style thug political nastiness. Let's play a new game : Guess who or what group the POTUS and his thugs will pick on next? HINT: It will be a 'privileged' group.

ET:

As an American, I wish I shared your optimistic view of Constitutional law.

You're forgetting that, to liberals, the Constitution is a thing to be ignored when it doesn't suit their agenda (see: their love of the Fairness Doctrine, or their inability to understand free expression of religion) and "reinterpreted" when there's some "right" they want and need a judicial activist to bestow on them (see: abortion or gay "marriage").

The fact the Constitution prohibts this flagrant abuse of AIG means zippo, zilch, nada to the Obama administration.

Ultimately, what this boils down to is that people are jealous THEY don't have the bonuses. If every American did, they'd be singing a different tune at the threat of a 90% tax.

"tax code as a political weapon" this says it all.

I expect if BO had his way companies wouldn't be able to decline or accelerate the repayment of TARP funds.

its amateur hour in Washington.

gradually enough strings will go around everything that the wheels of commerce will grind to a halt.

ET, would that be the same constitution that mentions something about the President being a natural-born citizen?

amy - I think that for Americans, the Constitution is very specific and very real; it grounds the country. We in Canada have nothing comparable.

With regard to the specific references to Article 1, section 7 and the process of legislation of revenue bills and article 9, which forbids post facto law, these are very specific. They aren't open to interpretation.

Therefore, my point is that this bill, proposing 90% taxation of bonuses paid to firms that receive federal funds can't apply to AIG, who have already received their bonuses for the year 2008.

And yes, people are jealous of people with money. By the way, Obama received over 2 million in royalties for his autobiographical books last year; and, signed a contract for a 'teen-age' version of his first autobiography for a 500,000 advance just before he took office. Speaking of wealth..

What should Obama have done about this situation? He could have stepped in immediately and I mean immediately, and calmed the furor down by pointing out the law. He could have admitted that it was HIS administration that had that amendment inserted into the Stimulus Bill. That HIS treasury department had done this because they were worried about lawsuits around Article 1, Section 9 (no post facto Laws). He could have said that he, as President, honours and abides by the Constitution of the US, and that this Constitution is inviolate.

He could have told the public that the amount is less than 0.1% of the amount allotted to AIG. And that he would ensure that an amendment would be inserted that reduced the size of bonuses, in future, to companies that took federal funds, to a lower percentage.

But he didn't do this. Why not? What did he do?

He went public that he was 'outraged'; that he was 'furious and angry'; he accused the banks and executives of 'greed'.

Now wait a minute. He and his administration knew about these bonuses; they had their patsy, the chair of the Committee, Sen. Dodd, put in that amendment that confirmed the acceptance of those AIG bonuses. He knew about them.

He pretended shocked outrage. But he knew about them.
Sen. Dodd at first also played the same game. Shocked outrage - and denial of having any part in it. And then, he had to admit that he knew; that he had inserted the amendment himself. But he blamed 'administration' for making him do it.
But why not admit it all?

Result? What did Obama achieve? He set up a mob vigilantic anger in Congress and among the people. He set up a lynch style mob anger among the people against wealth, against executives, against bankers. He pitted Americans against each other.

He could have played it differently. He could have immediately admitted the truth - that the Constitution required certain agreements to be honoured and that he would ensure that new agreements would have a specific clause against bonuses.

Another result? Any decent executive is going to steer clear of working with any firm that has any hint or taint of federal alignment.

Another result? Yet another denigration of the wealthy and entrepreneurial in the USA.

Obama is pathological.

I'm surprised they stopped at 90%.

Garth

It just occurred to me — mebbe TOTUS thought he needed the final 10% as a tithe.

Garth

Garth:

Is TOTUS an acronym for "Teleprompter of the US"?

Yep.

Garth

The march against free-market capitalism has momentum-and scapegoats are needed. Unfortunately, not until massive wealth is destroyed- through forced economic equality and inflation- leading to unproductive workers/business and stagnation- will the fault be obvious to the current collectivist mob.

In the relationship between TOTUS and POTUS, TOTUS appears to be the dominant partner.

Thank God we have TOTUS.  Hopefully, TOTUS will do most of the foreign affairs stuff as well — if POTUS does it, the Western world is screwed.

Garth

I thought it was Totalitarian of the United States.

I prefer Darth InSidious.

The cracks are beginning to appear in the dyke.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/first100days/2009/03/18/sen-dodd-admits-adding-bonus-provision-stimulus-package/
A bientot, la deluge!

What does the legislature care...they pass the law to calm the hounds then the Courts turn it over....legislature gets to say "I tried".

Old game.

That being said, the AIG bonuses are out of whack, unless they were sales comissions (which they weren't)

The donations need to be looked at and they should be returned, given that it is now taxpayer money and all. Hey Barney, return 100,000 will you to help the taxpayer. Its not like you need it, nor does Obama (his campaign kitty is HUGE)

Anyway, the bonuses shouldnt have been paid, they should at least have been delayed till the money was paid back to the government, thats a retention bonus.

Stephen,

Are you saying that AIG should have violated its own contracts with its employees? And in so doing, are you giving permission for ALL employers to void contracts with employees when business goes bad?

I agree that I wish they hadn't made those bonus contracts and paid them, but I respect a fool with integrity more than a genius without it.

dave in mississauga - right, I agree with you. The integrity of contracts, which are legal agreements, is the basis of a healthy society. Can you imagine a society which can, at will, break legal contracts????

No, those AIG contracts - and they are normal in financial institutions - are legal and must be honoured.

The 90% taxation bill today introduced in the House, applies only to 2009. Not to those bonuses paid out for the 2008 year. It's over.

Again, I blame Obama. He could have defused this situation immediately by pointing out that the constitution required that the nation acknowledge the legal system. That the contracts were legal, and he, the President, is SWORN to uphold the constitution and the law.

But instead, he USED this situation to set up Americans against each other, to set up a 'class' war...of 'us' versus 'anyone who is wealthy'. This is part of Obama's hatred of wealth.

Remember, that amendment in the Stimulus package was inserted by Obama's administration because they knew they had to obey the law and the constitution. Yet, Obama pretended ignorance, he pretended 'outrage', anger...

If I find anything offensive, it's not AIG and the bonuses - which should not have been so large because of their financial failure...but what I find offensive is Obama's blatant lies and his deliberate attempt to pit Americans against each other. That's disgraceful, that's outrageous - he's setting up Americans to hate each other.

First, they came for AIG but I wasn't AIG so I didn't speak out...

Last I heard, the bill's being blocked in the Senate.

I'm a capitalist and I would normally argue the right of people to earn whatever they can. However, without federal money AIG was bankrupt, and therefore unable to pay salaries, let alone bonuses.

Does it make sense that money used to make insured companies whole be used to pay bonuses that AIG would have otherwise been unable to pay at all?

Perhaps the money should not have flowed through AIG at all, but directly to the insured companies. That way AIG wouldn't be able to take their cut.

Companies should not be rewarded for fiscal mismanagement on any scale, though they so often are.

ET

as I don't have your mailing address I can't send you your cheque for all the "classes" you conduct in SDA:-))))))

=================================================

as soon as I heard the 90% "tax" I thought this will go to court, but as ET points out, it's against the constitution, and thusly is only a show and blow political game, and these games Owebama and the demoCRAPs are playing will surely blow up in their face

Watched a long discussion on the CBC on this at the gym with Nancy as the moderator and did not see any mention of Obama or Dodd putting in the provision to allow these bonuses. It may have been mentioned before I started to watch so I can't be sure but knowing the CBC and their love of the left I doubt it was brought up.

Now they are after Bank of America and Wells Fargo, who were shotgun wedded to failing banks, and now, for being in the wrong place at the wrong time with a healthy balance sheet, they are being attacked by an unconstitutional law.

Our country is doomed.

Tim in VT:

Surely not "doomed," but I wouldn't count out another civil war.

The U.S. came out stronger after the last one.

Garth

Rep. Charles Rangel warned that the tax code shouldn't be used as a "political weapon," but that's what's in danger of happening here. The Obama administration is using the fact that public bailout money was used to pay the bonuses in order to justify confiscatory tax rates (D Rep. Gary Peters submitted a bill yesterday to bring in a 60 percent rate on the bonuses.)

It's a circle game -- the more public money Obama dishes out, and the more "connected" large institutions are to such money, the easier it will be for him to justify punitive taxation rates on these institutions. Ultimately, that approach is going to fan out -- earnings will increasingly be viewed as public property, which in Obama's mindset, equals government money.

Ogabe prays for a bailOut?
WhO's next? CastrO?
...-

"Zimbabwe leaders appeal for $5 billion (Too funny.. and sad. Mugabe needs a bail-out!)

HARARE, Zimbabwe – President Robert Mugabe and a longtime opposition leader-turned-finance minister made an unusual joint appeal Thursday for $5 billion (euro3.66 billion) in international aid to revive Zimbabwe's shattered economy."
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2210301/posts

A little off topic but I heard President Hussein Obama is going on the Leno show tonight. Does anyone else find this to be weird. I mean he is the President, unfortunately. Seems beneath the office to appear on Leno. Maybe I'm wrong but it doesn't sit well with me. The United States is becoming a gong show under this...guy.

Both Rush and Beck say this AIG bonus stuff is just a coordinated distraction from what really happened yesterday - Jim Manzi at the corner explains...

Konichiwa!

Yesterday, while Congress and the media were obsessed with the $165 million AIG bonus outrage, the Fed decided to create another $1.2 trillion of U.S. currency. Numbers like this can seem absurd. How much bigger is $1.2 trillion than $165 million? Think about what gaining or losing $1,000 would mean to you. $1.2 trillion is to $165 million as $7 million is to $1,000. That’s how much more important the Fed’s action was.

Financiers have a fancy name for what the Fed did — “quantitative easing”. When you hear some kind of gee-whiz phrase in the finance industry that sounds kind of like something you understand, but somehow isn’t really clear, then it’s a lead pipe cinch that that you’re being had. Quantitative easing means that the Fed creates new currency out of thin air, and then uses it to buy assets. The moment after this happens nothing has changed about the real economy except that there is more currency. What do you think happens then? More dollars + the same assets = more dollars per asset = inflation.

If you’re in a deflationary period, the idea is that this is good because you head off some of the deflation. The hope is that this makes banks more likely to lend, “gets the economy moving again”, etc. Does this sound at all familiar to you?

Welcome to Japan.

Garth Wood:

If Harper goes, were likely to see a civil war here as well. I can't wait to find out what happend in the first tri-cabinate meeting between. Alberta, Saskatchewan, & BC. You can bet they where talking about the real threat of wealth theft
out of the West.
JMO

Storm: 5 days before being sworn in Obozo received $500,000 in advance for another book deal. Not only does he have time to do Leno he can also write a book and do a march madness pool. Unfortunately he doesn't have time to deal with the banking crisis and hire staff for the fed.

Excellent posts et and revnant dream and storm is coming - you stated my thought exactly.

Moe Slong and the UN move in internationally .

http://www.reuters.com/article/environmentNews/idUSTRE52I09T20090319?feedType=RSS&feedName=environmentNews&rpc=22&sp=true

Alberta would be second in line to Saudi Arabia.

Thanks Fritz. I hear you.