Obama tries to temper furor over AIG bonuses

[Beacool]

March 24, 2009

WASHINGTON – President Barack Obama is trying to dampen a fire he once stoked, urging a more tempered response to public furor over bonuses paid to executives of the publicly rescued insurance giant American International Group.

Obama is virtually certain to use Tuesday's prime-time news conference to continue an effort that began over the weekend: cooling the anti-AIG ferocity, now that it threatens to undermine his efforts to bail out the nation's deeply troubled financial sector.

Obama's tone changed dramatically after the House voted last week for targeted taxes to take back most of the $165 million in bonuses paid to AIG executives. Many lawmakers felt Obama had encouraged their step, because he called the bonuses reckless, outrageous and unjustified.

In the White House, however, the situation seemed to be spinning out of control. Some fellow Democrats questioned the constitutionality and wisdom of the House's action. Executives of other troubled companies signaled they would not make deals with a federal government that revises agreements after they are signed.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090324/ap_on_go_pr_wh/obama

Finally!!! This is what he should have done in the first place.

:-)

[asphalt.jungle]

1. calling something "reckless, outrageous and unjustified"

doesn't mean you're telling congress to do something unconstitutional ... that's ridiculous.

[Beacool]

16. Congress overreacted as usual.

They only cared about covering their sorry asses. Most of them have received a myriad of calls and emails protesting these bonuses. People are like sheeple that the media whips into a frenzy at will. Most of them don't understand the first thing about financial matters; they only know what the media feeds them.

x(

[ShortnFiery]

2. Good luck with that! Especially since the corporate whores in Congress aren't going to pass EFCA

anytime in the near future. Probably never. The American People are beginning to wake the fuck up so Obama and his blue dogs better get a large dose of Populism lest they be let down - HARD. :grr:

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

3. Once again people get fed shit on DU for taking stances Obama later adopts

Back when Obama was talking about how angry he was the thugs were out in force insisting the AIG tax bill was beyond reproach.

Will the same thugs post abject apologies now?

The question answers itself...

[SemiCharmedQuark]

5. This is Charles Babington. I don't take what he says to be gospel truth

We'll have to see what Obama actually says.

Further, you are not helping matters by calling people "thugs".

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

13. Did you see the 60 Minutes interview?

I'm not trusting Babington... Obama already expressed that the AIG bonus tax was at odds with the spirit of the Constitution and was a bad way to do things.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

14. He did not say it was unconstitutional. He said he was investigating whether it was. I posted his

comments below.

Amended: I understand what you are saying. But *still* believe Babington is making a stronger case than Obama made.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

4. Babington is wrong. He didn't say it was unconstitutional. He said this:

BARACK OBAMA:

Well, I think that-- as a general proposition, you don't want to be passing laws that are just targeting a handful of individuals. You want to pass laws that have some broad applicability. And as a general proposition, I think you certainly don't want to use the tax code--is to punish people.

I think that you've got an-- pretty egregious situation here that people are understandably upset about. And so let's see if there are ways of doing this that are both legal, that are constitutional-- that uphold our basic principles of fairness, but don't hamper us from getting the banking system-- back on track.

[Beacool]

17. Whether it technically is unconstitutional or not,

it goes against the spirit of the law and should not take place. It sets a bad precedent. A legally binding contract is precisely that: legally binding. Congress should not tinker around the law in a fit of emotional outburst. This could lead us into a slippery slope.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

20. Personally, I agree.

[Beacool]

22. Good, at least someone does. LOL!!!

The mass hysteria is making me nervous. I don't want any government to have this kind of control. Today it's the Democrats, tomorrow it will be the Republicans.......and then what?

:scared:

[FrenchieCat]

6. What is this? AP propaganda?

:wtf: "In the White House, however, the situation seemed to be spinning out of control."

and then a fact is inserted that is a lie....."On Sunday, Obama told CBS' "60 Minutes" the House's plan to slap a special tax on the AIG executives would be unconstitutional. "

are we supposed to believe AP because....why? :shrug:

This kind of shit makes me sick :puke: .....which answers why at the end of the day, after the distortions and twisting, nobody knows what the facts are and what the lies are! People are made angry, but half of the time they have been lied to as to why they should be angry. How convenient for whomever is controlling the show, or whomever Associated Press answers to.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

8. If you recall, Charles Babington is the guy that wrote an article about a speech Obama gave before

he gave it.

http://www.mydd.com/story/2008/8/29/0261/49598

[FrenchieCat]

10. So what would be the reason that he is showing up here......

in an article that basically accuses Barack Obama of playing politics?

What would be the driving motive behind taking AP negativity as something
worthwhile reading?

I'm kind of disgusted currently at the assistance corporate media is getting around here. :puke:

[Beacool]

18. Well, Obama should have said it if he didn't.

The laws of this nation should not be abrogated just because the masses are upset. I expect cooler heads from the president and Congress. The public can have fits of paroxysm, but not our elected officials. So, if Obama is finally going to try to tamper the overreaction to AIG and its bonuses, it's about bloody time he did so and I'm all for it.

[FrenchieCat]

7. Beacool? Do you just copy and paste and not discern,

or what?

I don't quite get you missing the unthruths in this article,
and yet still feeling compeled to posting it without but a passing comment.

What's that about? :shrug:

[SemiCharmedQuark]

9. I watched the 60 minutes special and I *still* had to go back and read the transcript.

The lie is not exactly in plain sight.

Beacool *did* post a comment with it as well.

[FrenchieCat]

11. I didn't have to go back to the transcript to remember that he said he was looking into it....

and that he didn't announce the tax as unconstitutional. :shrug:

As far as the "comment", it had little to do with questioning the source,
from what I can tell.

Again, I'm tired of the fact that we run with bullshit and act like we've got something there.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

12. We're supposed to be able to trust AP. That's why.

[FrenchieCat]

15. That's the saddest aspect of this political climate.....

We can't trust anything, because so much of it is designed to confuse and mislead.

[Beacool]

19. I happen to agree with the article.

I hope that Obama DOES tamper down the overreaction to AIG. What upsets you so about this article?

[FrenchieCat]

21. I don't like inaccuracies and opinion purposefully reported.....

as straight up news.

I find it dangerous.

[Beacool]

23. More dangerous is for the WH and Congress not to keep a cool head.

The larger than life reaction to these bonuses is downright scary.

[FrenchieCat]

24. They were media induced....which is why I specifically used the world "dangerous".

scary and dangerous are not world apart.

[Beacool]

25. On that we can agree.

;)