White House bracing for a bailout backlash

[BlueStateSaint]

It's good that there's a backlash coming.  Hopefully, it'll sweep the Dims out over the next four years.

White House bracing for a bailout backlash
Obama administration worried populist anger could complicate agenda

NEWS ANALYSIS
By Adam Nagourney
The New York Times
updated 4:14 a.m. ET, Mon., March. 16, 2009


WASHINGTON - The Obama administration is increasingly concerned about a populist backlash against banks and Wall Street, worried that anger at financial institutions could also end up being directed at Congress and the White House and could complicate President Obama’s agenda.

The administration’s sharp rebuke of the American International Group on Sunday for handing out $165 million in executive bonuses — Lawrence H. Summers, director of the president’s National Economic Council, described it as “outrageous” on “This Week” on ABC — marks the latest effort by the White House to distance itself from abuses that could feed potentially disruptive public anger.

“We’ve got enormous problems that need to be addressed,” David Axelrod, Mr. Obama’s senior adviser, said in an interview. “And it’s hard to address because there’s a lot of anger about the irresponsibility that led us to this point.”

“This has been welling up for a long time,” he said.

Mr. Obama’s aides said any surge of such a sentiment could complicate efforts to win Congressional approval for the additional bailout packages that Mr. Obama has signaled will be necessary to stabilize the banking system.

The rest is at:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29714426

Maybe the Tea Parties are working!

There's going to be Tea Parties all across the country on April 15th.  I think the site is http://www.taxdayteaparty.com or something similar.  There'll be one in Albany, about 1/2 mile from where I work.  There was a big one yesterday (March 15) in Cincinatti that was attended by 5,000 people, and it got some news coverage.  Michelle Malkin has the details at her site.

[Lord Undies]

These are things not clear to me:

Was AIG the recipient of a "bailout" or a government loan?

Was AIG honoring preexisting contracts when paying the bonuses?


These things make a difference.  If the money is a loan (and not a "bailout"), it isn't anyones business how it was spent. 

If it was a "bailout", the contractual obligations existed as part of AIG's debt, so it stands to reason the "bailout" government crew knew about the bonuses to be paid.

Enough with shady liberal politics.   It's time for truth to trump bullsh*t.

[thundley4]

I don't think it's a backlash just against the banks and Wall St., I think it's against all of the bloated pork barrel spending pushed through in the first 50 days. People are waking up, albeit slowly, to the fact that all this money is going to come out of their own pockets.

[Lord Undies]

I don't think it's a backlash just against the banks and Wall St., I think it's against all of the bloated pork barrel spending pushed through in the first 50 days. People are waking up, albeit slowly, to the fact that all this money is going to come out of their own pockets.

One of the least political persons I know, just the other day, said to me, "Corporations have never taken my money without giving me something I wanted in return - I can't say that about the government". 

That's the difference between capitalism and socialism.  People have eyes.  People aren't near as stupid as Washington is assuming.

[thundley4]

One of the least political persons I know, just the other day, said to me, "Corporations have never taken my money without giving me something I wanted in return - I can't say that about the government". 

That's the difference between capitalism and socialism.  People have eyes.  People aren't near as stupid as Washington is assuming.

Not all of the people anyway, but there are some that are purposefully stupid, such as those we see on Skin's Island. You cannot over estimate their stupidity.

[rich_t]

These are things not clear to me:

Was AIG the recipient of a "bailout" or a government loan?

IIRC it was a loan

Was AIG honoring preexisting contracts when paying the bonuses?

Yes, from what I've read


These things make a difference.  If the money is a loan (and not a "bailout"), it isn't anyones business how it was spent. 

If it was a "bailout", the contractual obligations existed as part of AIG's debt, so it stands to reason the "bailout" government crew knew about the bonuses to be paid.

Enough with shady liberal politics.   It's time for truth to trump bullsh*t.

[ironhorsedriver]

Most contracts I've ever seen ,that pay out bonuses that are delayed, have clauses written into them concerning the companies financial situation. Ours always state the bonus is subject to the companies finances and the viability of paying at the time, no money, no bonus.

[Hawkgirl]

Most contracts I've ever seen ,that pay out bonuses that are delayed, have clauses written into them concerning the companies financial situation. Ours always state the bonus is subject to the companies finances and the viability of paying at the time, no money, no bonus.

AND most bonus' are given to those who MADE money for the corporation.  How on Earth do these executives get a carte blanche contract when they successfully lost billions for the company and it's clients???

This screams SCAM.

[Lord Undies]

AND most bonus' are given to those who MADE money for the corporation.  How on Earth do these executives get a carte blanche contract when they successfully lost billions for the company and it's clients???

This screams SCAM.

It is a scam.  They are all democrat money men.  This money is just making a loop.  You can bank on it.