More fall-out from rush to pass stimulus bill
Once more we see more fallout from the the ill-advised rush to produce a so-called stimulus bill.
When Congressman Russ Carnahan gave his “state of the District address” at the Affton firehouse, it was clear that he was absolutely clueless. He read a text that he obviously had not written, and apparently had never bothered to read. He was unable to answer any questions coherently, and the entire theme of his talk was that we might not know what we’re doing, but we’d better do it fast.
During Mr. Carnahan’s speech in Affton, one could actually see Nancy Pelosi’s lips moving and could marvel at how she manipulated his strings.
Now Carnahan rushes to the microphone to get in line to decry the evil AIG management that paid out bonuses, and to cosponsor a bill to try to impose a 90% tax on them. The problem is, he voted for the provision in a bill that just had to be rushed through before the public could get wind of what it conatained.
Senator Chris Dodd, who inserted the language specifically allowing the bonus payments (and the biggest recipient of AIG campaign funds, slightly ahead of Barack Obama), first denied knowledge of the provision, then claimed that he never understood that it would actually allow for AIG bonus payments. Treasury Secretary Geithner, who claims to have known nothing before this week, suddenly appears on video tape answering comnittee questions about the upcoming payments nearly three weeks ago.
These actions represent everything that many Americans find reprehensible about Congress and the government in general.
We in Missouri can do nothing about Mr. Dodd. Maybe the good citizens of Connecticut will fire him when he runs for a sixth term next year. In the meantime, we have the opportunity to throw Mr. Carnahan out on the curb next year. We should not miss the chance to do so.
Bob Byrne
St. Louis
22twain: The government is pledging up to $200 billion and they only had a small part?
I would love to see a list of how much bailout money has been given away so far, and to whom. Anyone have a link to such a list? Anyway, using the article at the link as a reference, this is my list. (Note: interesting discussion of Fannie/Freddie bonuses in this article) So far, Fannie and Freddie have not taken huge sums of money (relatively speaking). Of course, the big question remains, how much more money will be dispersed, and to whom.
(LINK) Bloomberg
Fannie — $15.2 billion (not from TARP funds)
Freddie — $44.6 billion (not from TARP funds)
AIG — $173 billion (not from TARP funds)
TARP — ~$300 billion (various banks and companies)
I’ll try that link again from an earlier comment:
(LINK) Obama aide had stint at Freddie
Well, as long as the subject of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are being raised again…
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac paid McCain’s Campaign Manager, Rick Davis $15,000 a month ($180,000 per year) from the end of 2005 through the end of August ’08 for of a total of just over half a million dollars. It was used to buy access to the campaign, also, Mr. Davis lobbied congress on behalf of Fannie Mae with his consulting co., Davis- Manafort.
“Lisa: Emanuel not only left congress in 2001, he served a tidy two years with an investment banking firm. Of course he had no experience or qualifications for the position, but managed to earn $18,000,000. What did he do, well, he was the key player in a couple of mergers that needed federal government approval to conclude. I am in Hot Springs, betting horses at Oaklawn Park, but will be glad to provide the details of this if anyone (STL) desires upon my return to the Ozarks.”
Lost in the Ozarks
Lost in the Ozarks, what is this obsession you conservatives have with the past and always digging up archaic information? Can you try to be more relevant?
But let’s focus Lost in the Ozarks’ logic on Dick Cheney and what he did to earn so much money at Halliburton:
What unique skill-set and business acumen did Cheney offer Halliburton, as a contractor to the military?
‘Access and influence’… Pure and simple- having served as defense secretary under George H. Bush.
Lost in the Ozarks, your canard: “no experience or qualifications for the position” –seems to apply equally to Dick Cheney…
On the Sept. 14, 2003 edition of NBC’s Meet the Press, Vice President Dick Cheney said, “And since I left Halliburton to become George Bush’s vice president, I’ve severed all my ties with the company, gotten rid of all my financial interest. I have no financial interest in Halliburton of any kind and haven’t had, now, for over three years.”
But, just as Cheney’s wild claims about weapons of mass destruction turned out to be untrue and his claim that Halliburton had no ties to Saddam Hussein was bogus, his denial about profiting from Halliburton as vice president was also a bald-face lie. So while Cheney denied any relationship with Halliburton as vice president, he conveniently forgot to mention that he continues to receive from the company deferred salary of over $150,000 while maintaining 433,333 shares of unexercised stock options. Certainly, Cheney has a “financial interest in Halliburton” while working as vice president.
When confronted with the proof of his ongoing financial ties with Halliburton, Cheney responded by claiming his deferred salary and stock options are not actually a “financial interest” as defined by federal ethics standards and therefore not a conflict of interest. This prompted the Congressional Research Service to issue a report which confirmed Cheney’s ongoing financial interest in Halliburton “is considered among the ‘ties’ retained in or ‘linkages to former employers’ that may ‘represent a continuing financial interest’ in those employers which makes them potential conflicts of interest.”
Caught in another lie, Cheney manufactured another excuse: He said the financial interest in Halliburton is not tied to the success or failure of the company because of an insurance policy. In other words, the insurance policy, which guarantees his financial interest will be paid to him regardless of Halliburton’s success or failure, is proof there is no quid-pro-quo.
Cheney’s deferred compensation and stock option benefits are in addition to a $20 million retirement package paid to him by Halliburton after only five years of employment; a $1.4 million cash bonus paid to him by Halliburton in 2001; and additional millions of dollars in compensation paid to him while he was employed by the company.
A link, anyone?
http://www.halliburtonwatch.org/about_hal/ethics.html
I would not advise any rational readers to hold their breath waiting for ‘Lost in the Ozarks,’ ‘Amazed by self-lunacy,’ ’slim,’ ‘John,’ ‘Stuperdave,’ ‘bud,’ ‘dr.debunk,’ ‘lamecock’ etc. to suddenly start posting messages decrying all of Cheney’s lies… ilk such as they only feel outraged when a Democrat lies… funny, that.
Friday, March 13, 2009 07:15 PDT
Karl Rove’s funny numbers
“The second “most read” story on the Wall Street Journal Web site Friday morning was a column by Karl Rove, “The White House Misfires on Limbaugh.” It’s a fascinating column in a number of respects — not least the Alice-in-Wonderland quality of watching Karl Rove criticize someone else for politicizing the White House. But one paragraph jumps out.
And among those [unpleasant realities] America now faces is Mr. Obama adding $3.2 trillion to the national debt in his first 20 months and 11 days in office, eclipsing the $2.9 trillion added during the Bush presidency’s entire eight years.
Where in the world does that $2.9 trillion number come from?
When George W. Bush took office, the national debt was $5.66 trillion. When George Bush left office, it was $10.62 trillion.
Now it is true that Obama’s budget does forecast the national debt rising to $14 trillion by next year. But that’s the kind of unpleasant reality one must grapple with, when your first order of business after moving into the White House is to clean up the incredible mess left by the last guy. Obama took office and immediately confronted two wars, a broken banking system, and the worst economic contraction since the Great Depression. If he fixes those problems, while adding his own umpteen trillions to the national debt, we might end up considering it a bargain.
But no matter how much Karl Rove attempts to spin the facts, history is never going to look back at George Bush’s doubling of the national debt, and go, you know what, it was worth it!”
― Andrew Leonard
http://www.salon.com/tech/htww/2009/03/13/the_math_of_karl_rove/index.html
-JOHN
OH you poor man, you have nothing better to do than sit around and blog all day long. My problem is that the truth could be staring you right in the face, and you will still deny it. Yes, you are the descendant of the old confederate republicans here in Missouri who practiced staunch racism. It is in your blood. You people live in denial…
Lisa12,
Your the one that said they pledged up to $200 billion to bail out Freddie and Fannie, not I. So they only used a few billion so far, what happens if they need all $200 billion? If you can consider $60 billion a few billion, relatively speaking….
As a side note, it appears that some of the justification that liberals give for Obama running a deficit is to fix the problems left to him. If thats the case, why critize Reagan for running deficits? Then again, no one seems to remember that Carter left Reagan a deficit either.
And Republicans have no reason to talk either, from 2001 to 2007 budget years you guys ran up a pretty big bill you know.
Its like I said. Pot. Kettle. Black. And it does not matter which side you pick either…..
And why is it that NBC doesn’t do the “Fleecing of America” series any more. Based on the past few months, it seems like it has gotten worse…..
“1. Russ Carnahan is a decent, honest man who makes a difference because he’s not afraid to take on tough issues and do the right thing.”
Tim Hogan
_________________________________________________
I just about bust my gut laughing at this line.