Faux outrage (or more embarrassing - real outrage)

Reason has hit it on the head again. This time regarding Senate outrage about the AIG bonuses. I had heard on talk radio driving home yesterday that the bailout to AIG specifically protected bonuses agreed to prior to Feb. 11, 2009. It was a righty show, so I wanted to check before I got all indignant.

Now, Reason has said the same thing. The provision was included by Banking Committee Chairman Sen. Chris Dodd (D- Conn.). It really is unreal. They voted for the bailout, with few, if any conditions, specifically included an allowance for bonuses, and then express outrage when bonuses are paid and propose a special tax on the bonuses they approved.

From Reason: "It not only is dishonest but also means they, in a breathtaking abuse of power, believe using punitive taxation to appropriate someone's salary is a legitimate function of government."

Obama has asked his Treasury Secretary to pursue every avenue to block the bonuses. To bad he and his fellow Dems didn't think about this before, you know, they specifically approved the bonuses. Its sad that Congress could overlook that this would happen; its dishonest and shameful to specifically allow for it and then express shock. I'm sickened, angry and fearful.

As Reason points out, AIG and the government/people had a contract (the bailout), and now the government/people want out because they don't like the terms they agreed to and created.

That's just now how it works. Or at least it isn't.

0 = 0 = Zero

from slate.com: Obama's Change-o-meter is at... drum roll please ... 0. That's zero. As in Z-E-R-O. Not as in no change in the number, as in no change in politics.

If it wasn't so sad, it'd be funny.

Meanwhile Obama is blasting away at AIG for handing out bonuses that may have been required by contract. Here's a thought, if we hadn't bailed them out, this wouldn't be an issue. At the very least, government oversight has (once again) failed the American people.

And if we hadn't bailed them out, where would we be, exactly? Bad economy, check. High unemployment, check. Bank sector in the toilet, check. AIG in the dump, check.

Keep in mind, the bailouts were supposed to give AIG time to sell off assets to allow for payback of the bailout. Assets sold to date: 0. Again, zero.

I'm not defending the bonuses, which many would say should also number zero. You can certainly find fault, and many, many will. But isn't it slightly more egregious that our four or so "bailouts" later we still have a bum economy, no asset sales and no indication that an asset sale is on the horizon.

Bankruptcy, while it would have been a shock to the industry, wouldn't have shocked it much more than the Dow at 12 year lows and it would have resulted in a forced, and managed and manageable break up and sale.