March 19, 2009

Messiah-worshiping News Journal also has faux outrage

A News Journal editorial from yesterday expresses the phony self-righteous anger that way too many politicians are showing these days:

In a year when the insurance giant American International Group almost toppled and came close to bringing down the entire economy with it, AIG’s leaders believe the financial geniuses behind those developments earned generous bonuses for outstanding performance. Fortunately, no else does.

In the same year, said geniuses also destroyed an estimated $100 billion in shareholder value and accepted $170 billion in taxpayers’ money.

Yet the company’s leaders want to hand them $165 million in bonuses.
It’s outrageous and insulting.

President Barack Obama has ordered the Treasury Department to see if there is a legal way to stop this travesty.

That's mighty big of Barack. Especially since it was HIS ADMINISTRATION that 1) ordered that language allowing the bonuses to remain be kept in the recent stimulus bill, or 2) flat out acted irresponsibly by insisting that said stimulus bill be passed IMMEDIATELY so that hardly anyone could take the time to read the freakin' bill and realize that language allowing the bonuses was in there!

This episode has angered a lot of voters, and that anger could interfere with any new plans the Obama administration wants to enact to stem further deterioration in the economy.

The president is right. Every legal step must be taken to prevent this latest outrage before it is allowed to happen.

Oh please. Again, it was the very administration that allowed AIG to give out these bonuses!! Voters' anger should be directed at those idiots now running the country a hell of a lot more than at AIG.

As for "every legal step," the government ought to be mighty careful here. Since it was it that f***ed up in the first place, passing an ex post facto law to attempt to remedy their asininity -- a blatantly unconstitutional act -- sure won't help matters. Those in charge of upholding the Constitution might wanna read the following part of it:

No bill of attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed.

That's from Article I, Section 9. And I'll repeat what I wrote two days ago, from Madison's Federalist 44:

"Bills of attainder, ex post facto laws, and laws impairing the obligations of contracts, are contrary to the first principles of the social compact, and to every principle of sound legislation. ... The sober people of America are weary of the fluctuating policy which has directed the public councils. They have seen with regret and indignation that sudden changes and legislative interferences, in cases affecting personal rights, become jobs in the hands of enterprising and influential speculators, and snares to the more-industrious and less-informed part of the community."

Despise the AIG a-holes all you wish. They deserve it. But your politicians deserve it more. The AIG bonuses were a contract which, via fluctuating policy and sudden change and legislative interefence the Congress is attempting to undo -- that which it allowed in the first place.

Posted by Hube at March 19, 2009 04:37 PM | TrackBack

Comments  (We reserve the right to edit and/or delete any comments. If your comment is blocked or won't post, e-mail us and we'll post it for you.)

Hube proclaims: "Again, it was the very administration that allowed AIG to give out these bonuses!! Voters' anger should be directed at those idiots now running the country a hell of a lot more than at AIG."

I find it ironic that the very people who clamor for accountability and responsibility would blame the government when it is clearly the responsibility of the culprits, AIG, who should rightly be blamed, not only for playing a significant role in bringing down the entire global economy with their overblown risk taking by insuring valueless credit default swaps, but also with their flaunting their greedy culture in the faces of their victims. The reality of the Wall Street culture of greed is now apparent for all to see, and detest!

What Hube forgets to mention, is that the AIG bonus contracts are over a year old, signed before the depth of this recession had become apparent. Context is important, Hube! There were no federal bailouts then!

Hube needs to review his values!

I also find it ironic that the Right has no problem having the AIG bonus contract honored, but when it comes to the auto workers union contract with the auto makers, the Right has no problem with renegotiating them.

So Hube, just where is YOUR consistency? Sounds like situational morality to me, you too?

Posted by: Perry at March 20, 2009 01:03 PM

PS: That said, I do agree with your Article I Section 9 argument!

Posted by: Perry at March 20, 2009 01:08 PM

"I find it ironic that the very people who clamor for accountability and responsibility would blame the government when it is clearly the responsibility of the culprits, AIG"

Um, not only does the gov. have regulatory responsibility, it is THEY who negotiated keeping their bonuses alive -- which they now are so self-righteously denouncing!

"What Hube forgets to mention, is that the AIG bonus contracts are over a year old, signed before the depth of this recession had become apparent. Context is important, Hube!"

They're not actually a year old; nevertheless, to my above point: Why didn't the government -- which GIVING THEM BILLIONS -- renegotiate the freakin' contract, then?

"Hube needs to review his values!"

Anecdotal!

"I also find it ironic that the Right has no problem having the AIG bonus contract honored, but when it comes to the auto workers union contract with the auto makers, the Right has no problem with renegotiating them."

Straw man! I never said any such thing. Nevertheless, there's quite a difference between Congress violating the Constitution (Bill of Attainder) and a PRIVATE company desiring to restructure which may include renegotiating a union contract.

"So Hube, just where is YOUR consistency? Sounds like situational morality to me, you too?"

Straw man! See above.

Posted by: Hube at March 20, 2009 01:25 PM

Hube, in that instance I was talking about the Right, not you specifically, so no straw man this time. That said, I'm guilty of using the straw man fallacy at times myself.

Posted by: Perry at March 20, 2009 04:14 PM

Actually, Perry, my preference would be to see each and every one of those companies enter bankruptcy, where debts would be discharged and obligations renegotiated according to existing law -- not on the ad hoc basis established by Barry Hussein and the Clown Car Congress.

Posted by: Rhymes With Right at March 21, 2009 10:24 AM