Obama and The Fat Cats

In less than a year, we're back to square one.

Just a few days after ascending the throne, still coasting on the momentum of his campaign, Obama signed a massive bailout bill into law.

At about the same time, Obama chose to go to war with Wall Street fat cats. The time was right. Fearing that the economy was sinking like the Titanic, America was ready to take the fat cats down.

Riding on that wave of populist angst, Obama punished financial industry executives, many of whom were simply cleaning up a mess not of their own making. The move was a semi-successful attempt to distract the angry mob from the notion that Obama & Friends were saving the skins of the very same scoundrels who were thought to have been responsible for trashing the economy in the first place.

With the lukewarm success of his early scapegoating, Obama moved on to an alphabet soup of fall guys: America, Bush, Cambridge Police, Doctors, Fox News, the GOP, Israel, Kanye West, Limbaugh, Media Coverage, the New York Times, Scare Tactics, Tea Parties, Victory, etc.

Now, less than a year into his rule, Obama is right back where he started: criticizing successful, law-abiding members of the financial industry. "I did not run for office to be helping out a bunch of fat cat bankers on Wall Street," Obama said in an interview on CBS's "60 Minutes" program on Sunday. (Judging from the results of his first year in office, Obama did not run for office to help anyone.)

At this point, Obama has become well acquainted with the law of diminishing returns. Ever since the White House called on Americans to turn on each other in the fishy email initiative, White House stigmatization has lost its political potency. In fact, for some, feuding with Obama became quite profitable.

If you haven't been called out by Obama yet, be patient. He'll probably get to you at some point in the next 3-7 years.

Tax Me Like You Really Mean It!

From the Washington Times:

As he empathized with recession-weary Americans, President Obama arranged in the days just before he took office to secure a $500,000 advance for a children's book project, a disclosure report shows.

One blogger suggests we do unto our politicians as they have done unto Wall Street:

Since threats of confiscatory government taxes on "unmerited" or "windfall" income seem to be all the rage these days, I am simply proposing that all elected government officials who write books should be taxed at 100% on any royalty advances that they receive while in office — while they are employed by us as our public servants. That's only "fair" ... isn't it?

Obamaphiles don't like the idea:

• The limit on banker's bonuses is because the gov't gave BILLIONS OF DOLLARS to the banks. The gov't dollars should NOT be used to pad the already wealthy banking executives pay when their companies have performed so poorly.  I don't see Obama getting BILLIONS in gov't money for screwing up the financial system, like the bankers did.

• The growing discrepancy between extreme wealthy [sic] and the average American is what leads to political instability. And that only adds to market turbulence. It seems obvious what needs to be done, and yet boneheads are out there rambling in complete ignorance of the situation.
  

But Bush foes are interested in applying the AIG precedent to George Bush:

See, Dubya just signed a big ol' book deal. Crown publishers is paying him a $7 million advance to writing a book called Decision Points, all about what a decider he was. Now the general wisdom is that Bush screwed things up. Seriously, ask Pelosi, Rangel, Reed or Obama and they'll give you a whole litany of things he did wrong to get us in this mess.

If you can tax AIG bonuses at a punitive rate, is there any reason not to tax Bush? Is there some special exemption for ex-Presidents that protect them against vindictive tax policy from current politicians? Not as far as we know.

I can't take it anymore! Democrats whine about the "excessive" earnings of the high achievers in this country, but when the very same Democrats are elected to high office, they use the office as a stepping stone on their quest to take home seven figure mountains of cash.

Liberals say the key to a more just society is to get more money into the U.S. Treasury.  I say "put your money where your mouth is." There's hardly a liberal in this country who couldn't afford to send a FEW extra dollars to the U.S. Treasury on a voluntary basis.   Go ahead Mr. Liberal, give until it hurts.   Or try a more cautious approach.  Are you supposed to be getting a tax refund? Let Uncle Sam keep it.  The Federal Government doesn't owe you any money, you say?  Just send ten extra dollars to Uncle Sam. Then you'd actually have a little credibility. But you won't do that will you? 

You won't admit it, but your actions speak louder than words — you know that an extra dollar in the hands of Government, even with your democrat buddies in charge, is a bad investment!

And don't give me the this faux outrage about Bush's $7 million figure deal. Republicans aren't the ones preaching against productivity and wealth.

More

Bonfire of the Trivialities

Now, in the scheme of things, $165 million is a rounding error. It amounts to less than 1/18,500 of the $3.1 trillion federal budget. It's less than one-tenth of 1 percent of the bailout money given to AIG alone. If Bill Gates were to pay these AIG bonuses every year for the next 100 years, he'd still be left with more than half his personal fortune.  

Grandstanding, parochialism...and a rush to mindless populism. Over what?  ...Bonus money that comes to what the Yankees are paying for CC Sabathia's left arm.

Is that AIG tax constitutional?

Concluding his written statement, Gregg said that the Senate bill would undermine the credibility of the U.S. tax system and "create an atmosphere where any group that offends the sensibilities of the majority may be at risk for punitive tax treatment."

'Tis The Season to Take Chances

As Senate negotiations on the auto industry bailout stall, at least two senators are starting to sound a little desperate.

On Thursday, Harry Reid predicted financial doom. "I dread looking at Wall Street tomorrow," Reid said. "It's not going to be a pleasant sight."  Someone tell Reid it's okay to look now.  The Dow closed at 8,629.68 (up 64.59) on Friday, and no one was jumping out of buildings.

Yesterday, a pathetic Barbara Boxer put a bizarre holiday twist on the bailout debate.  On the senate floor, clad in festive red, Boxer implored her colleagues: "This is the Christmas Season. My goodness, let's take a chance on this. Let's take a chance on this."

Honorable Senators, please try to be sober.  There's no reason to panic.  The unions know you're trying very hard, and you're going to get your foolish bailout sooner or later.  

More

Bank bomb kills Oregon police officer.

Guess which state is most corrupt.  You probably guessed wrong.

$50G Buys a 4-Day Presidential Inauguration Trip.