Big Dogs Weblog

Obama Supporters Deserve The Money

by Big Dog on Feb 12, 2010 at 14:04 Political

Barack Obama and his Democrats took over where George Bush left off and bailed out banks and other financial institutions to the tune of billions of dollars. These entities were “too big to fail” and were spared the consequences of their bad decisions, decisions fueled by greed. Fueled by greed and knowledge that they would be bailed out if they made bad mistakes.

The financial giants reap huge rewards when they make investments and then get taxpayer money to save them when they gamble and lose. Ann Coulter has a great piece this week laying this all out. In it she describes what happened with regard to Goldman Sachs and other institutions that packaged bad loans and then insured them through AIG which could not cover the losses. Taxpayers bailed out AIG which was the same as bailing out Goldman.

During all of this, Obama went on the blame the bankers tour and discussed the greedy guys and how their salaries needed to be capped. There were tours by the homes of AIG executives, Congress worked on legislation taxing bonuses at 90% and the citizens of America were worked into a frenzy over the greedy bankers.

But these people helped put Obama in office. Obama received huge sums of money from the financial industry and they have been friends of the Democrats for a long time (as Coulter points out, Clinton bailed them out during his presidency). So it came as no surprise this week that Obama said he did not begrudge the bonuses of savvy bankers (particularly the ones who are his supporters):

Whatever Obama has in mind for punishing the financial industry, I promise you, he won’t punish his friends. After JPMorgan CEO Jamie Dimon took a $17 million bonus this week, and Goldman CEO Lloyd Blankfein got a $9 million bonus, Obama said he didn’t begrudge them their bonuses, saying, “I know both those guys.” Ann Coulter Human Events

What happened to people not getting huge bonuses? What happened to Barney Frank and his desire to cap salaries and bonuses of all of them even if they took no TARP money? What happened to the outrage generated by Obama and his minions over these greedy bankers?

I have no problem with bankers (or any private business people) making huge sums of money for doing a good job and I have no problem with huge bonuses. I did not have trouble with the AIG bonuses particularly because the Obama administration knew about them and people worked for a dollar a year in salary on the promise of the bonuses (which the administration then reneged on). I also have no problem with a business failing if it can’t make money and that includes financial giants and auto makers. If they can’t cut it then they can fail.

However, I am not the one who ran around whipping the country into a frenzy over greedy bankers. How dare Obama call these people greedy and rail against them last year and then step up to defend their huge bonuses this year? How can he do this and remain consistent?

He can’t, but he does not have to. If he says it is good his base will blindly follow. They will ignore Obama’s words and deeds of the past and focus on what the messiah says now. They will not draw the connection between Obama and the campaign dollars he gets from these people.

When Obama said he knows these people he meant the bankers but it could apply to his base.

Interestingly, David Reilly at Bloomberg has a piece that basically says Obama needs to man up and knock a few heads to show people who is in charge (note to Reilly, coequal means that he is not in charge of Congress). He writes about several issues which are better saved for another time but he does address financial regulation. Reilly spells out a number of tactics that Obama can use to threaten the banking industry into submission. The tactics look like something one would expect from Tony Soprano and not the leader of the US but Reilly is encouraging the kinds of tactics the left would scream fascist or Nazi over if a Republican did them.

The government owes the private sector about 7 trillion dollars. Suppose the banks called those markers all at once? Suppose the banks stopped lending for a week. I imagine if they tried hard they could send the economy in the Great Depression range so perhaps the mafia style tactics would be a poor idea.

Then again, Reilly is like typical supporters who decry strong-arm politics when Republicans use them but espouse them in order to push the Democrat agenda. This is typical of the left and we see it in Congress whenever they are in charge. We can’t knock heads of terrorists or it is torture but we can do what we want to those who oppose us…

I think the hypocrisy of Obma has been exposed in the past and it is very clear in his latest support of the huge bonuses. I also think we have a number of leftists in the media calling for him to get tough because they are worried about a Palin presidency.

Whether she will run or not or could even win is not the point.

Just the idea of that drives liberals and the progressives nuts.

And that is a joy to see.

[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]

Tags: aig, ann coulter, bailout, bonuses, goldman, hypocrisy, Obama, savvy