Bush just loves taking care of millionaires

[wiffleball 4,695]

WASHINGTON — Congress wanted to guarantee that the $700 billion financial bailout would limit the eye-popping pay of Wall Street executives, so lawmakers included a mechanism for reviewing executive compensation and penalizing firms that break the rules.

 

But at the last minute, the Bush administration insisted on a one-sentence change to the provision, congressional aides said. The change stipulated that the penalty would apply only to firms that received bailout funds by selling troubled assets to the government in an auction, which was the way the Treasury Department had said it planned to use the money.

 

Now, however, the small change looks more like a giant loophole, according to lawmakers and legal experts. In a reversal, the Bush administration has not used auctions for any of the $335 billion committed so far from the rescue package, nor does it plan to use them in the future. Lawmakers and legal experts say the change has effectively repealed the only enforcement mechanism in the law dealing with lavish pay for top executives.

 

"The flimsy executive-compensation restrictions in the original bill are now all but gone," said Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, ranking member of the Senate Finance Committee.

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/front/6165162.html

 

Geesus, this guy is shameless. He originally just wanted to start giving lump-sum amonts to banks and auto companies. Congress finally added some pretty simple controls, and this guy STILL at the last minute decides he wants to take care of his buddies. Focker's GOT to be lobbying for a few board positions. Dude is all for Corporate Welfare at the highest levels.

 

[davebg 0]

The worst part is that it was all a shameless bait and switch. Paulson and the Treasury said they're going to use the bailout money in a certain way and the executive compensation limits were to be applied in a manner that deals with companies that took the bailout money in that way. Then, Paulson does a 180 degree change such that the executive compensation limits are not applicable. Of course, when these limits were being designed, Paulson and his staff were actively working on plans to circumvent them.

 

If they pulled this kind of sh|t with you at Best Buy you'd have a case, but since it's these shameless cvm-slurping cawk suckers in Washington we're sh|t out of luck.

[titans&bucs&bearsohmy! 2,745]

This is maddening.

 

Bush is such a piece of sh!t cacksucker. I hope he gets cancer ASAP.

[Strike 4,130]

ROFLMAO that anyone would whine about the worst thought out piece of legislation possibly in the history of this country. But yeah, it's Bush's fault again

[titans&bucs&bearsohmy! 2,745]

ROFLMAO that anyone would whine about the worst thought out piece of legislation possibly in the history of this country. But yeah, it's Bush's fault again

 

I seem to recall him urging it on...

 

I seem to recall his guy pulling the bait and switch on the purchase...

 

And I'm sure it was Pelosi and her ilk that gutted the oversight mechanism on executive compensation. That's plausable...

[wiffleball 4,695]

ROFLMAO that anyone would whine about the worst thought out piece of legislation possibly in the history of this country. But yeah, it's Bush's fault again

"But at the last minute, the Bush administration insisted on a one-sentence change to the provision"

 

Reading comprehension down much??

[Strike 4,130]

"But at the last minute, the Bush administration insisted on a one-sentence change to the provision"

 

Reading comprehension down much??

 

Who gives a crap. This bill, in any form, SHOULDN'T HAVE EVER BEEN PASSED IN THE FIRST PLACE!!! Whining about individual clauses that one person or group added or edited is focking hilarious.

[TD Ryan2 315]

ROFLMAO that anyone would whine about the worst thought out piece of legislation possibly in the history of this country. But yeah, it's Bush's fault again

 

No F' head, you're missing the point.

 

this has nothing to do with Bush.

it's about MY TAX MONEY going to millionaire ass holes that can't run their own companies efficiently.

 

I don't want any of them to have MY TAX money, be it the UAW, the math-challenged BANKERS, or the CEO's.

 

you apparently have no problem with your tax money bailing them out

you apparently have no problem with 6 figure bonuses being paid off of your dime.

 

and you call yourself a conservative? fool.

duck.

here come my shoe.

[Strike 4,130]

No F' head, you're missing the point.

 

this has nothing to do with Bush.

it's about MY TAX MONEY going to millionaire ass holes that can't run their own companies efficiently.

 

I don't want any of them to have MY TAX money, be it the UAW, the math-challenged BANKERS, or the CEO's.

 

you apparently have no problem with your tax money bailing them out

you apparently have no problem with 6 figure bonuses being paid off of your dime.

 

and you call yourself a conservative? fool.

duck.

here come my shoe.

 

Uh, apparently you missed the part where I said this may be the worst thought out piece of legislation in the history of this country. I oppose the bailout 100%. Always have and have made that clear in numerous threads. I find if focking hilarious that some people are now whining about individual clauses that Bush got put in to the bill when THE WHOLE FOCKING BILL is a POS.

[titans&bucs&bearsohmy! 2,745]

Who gives a crap. This bill, in any form, SHOULDN'T HAVE EVER BEEN PASSED IN THE FIRST PLACE!!! Whining about individual clauses that one person or group added or edited is focking hilarious.

 

I'll agree with you there.

 

And anybody who paid bonuses or dividends with taxpayer monies should be in prison.

 

But, sh!tty bill or no, you shouldn't gut the only oversight provision in it. Hell, that was the only part of the bill I did approve of.

[wiffleball 4,695]

But, sh!tty bill or no, you shouldn't gut the only oversight provision in it. Hell, that was the only part of the bill I did approve of.

 

 

Exactly. The fact that Bush is just shamelessly doing this shows you what a POS he is. When even CONGRESS thinks there should be oversight for the focking millionaire execs and Bush doesn't? Good Lord. What a POS. Pretty much shows what his agenda's been all along.

[Strike 4,130]

I'll agree with you there.

 

And anybody who paid bonuses or dividends with taxpayer monies should be in prison.

 

But, sh!tty bill or no, you shouldn't gut the only oversight provision in it. Hell, that was the only part of the bill I did approve of.

 

If congress thought it was important they shouldn't have changed the bill. But yeah, it's Bush's fault.

[TD Ryan2 315]

Exactly. The fact that Bush is just shamelessly doing this shows you what a POS he is. When even CONGRESS thinks there should be oversight for the focking millionaire execs and Bush doesn't? Good Lord. What a POS. Pretty much shows what his agenda's been all along.

 

that's the problem.

How many times can an agenda that is good for the lobbyists and corporate connections of the POTUS but bad for the American people be passed before you really have to consider that the unthinkable is happening:

that the elected leaders don't really care about the people and will so blatantly fock the people in the ass that noone can believe it.

[wiffleball 4,695]

If congress thought it was important they shouldn't have changed the bill. But yeah, it's Bush's fault.

[wiffleball 4,695]

that's the problem.

How many times can an agenda that is good for the lobbyists and corporate connections of the POTUS but bad for the American people be passed before you really have to consider that the unthinkable is happening:

that the elected leaders don't really care about the people and will so blatantly fock the people in the ass that noone can believe it.

[titans&bucs&bearsohmy! 2,745]

that's the problem.

How many times can an agenda that is good for the lobbyists and corporate connections of the POTUS but bad for the American people be passed before you really have to consider that the unthinkable is happening:

that the elected leaders don't really care about the people and will so blatantly fock the people in the ass that noone can believe it.

 

I just wonder how long people will apathetically take it before rising up, either electorally, or with actual violence.

 

I mean, I'm not naiive. I don't expect a squeaky clean government. I know that they are a bunch of corrupt, bought and paid for wh0res.

 

But at least have the courtesy to lie to me. Don't just blatantly do it right in front of my face.

 

The government, and their corporate masters, are like the wife in boogie nights, the one that would fock other guys right in front of her husband, and got mad when he was upset about it.

 

Eventually, he shot that b!tch as I recall.

[parrot 789]

Nice line of debate by Strike here...

 

"Since I hated the whole bill I can completely dodge the point that the Bush administration took actions to make a bad situation worse and ensure that the people most responsible for creating the situation from which this POS bill arose will continue to make obscene amounts of money, compliments of this POS bill."

 

I know wiffle is involved and you would never dream of agreeing with him even in the most cursory "Yeah, that's pretty focked up" fashion. But that being the case, maybe you should just stay out of a thread like this instead of pretending you're making some kind of sense. You aren't.

[wiffleball 4,695]

Nice line of debate by Strike here...

 

"Since I hated the whole bill I can completely dodge the point that the Bush administration took actions to make a bad situation worse and ensure that the people most responsible for creating the situation from which this POS bill arose will continue to make obscene amounts of money, compliments of this POS bill."

 

I know wiffle is involved and you would never dream of agreeing with him even in the most cursory "Yeah, that's pretty focked up" fashion. But that being the case, maybe you should just stay out of a thread like this instead of pretending you're making some kind of sense. You aren't.

[mayhem39 3]

that's the problem.

How many times can an agenda that is good for the lobbyists and corporate connections of the POTUS but bad for the American people be passed before you really have to consider that the unthinkable is happening:

that the elected leaders don't really care about the people and will so blatantly fock the people in the ass that noone can believe it.

 

 

Where have you been? This has been going on for decades..

[TD Ryan2 315]

Where have you been? This has been going on for decades..

 

it's the blatant part.

I'm not sure that it's ever been as blatant or as bad/reckless for the American people.

[TimmySmith 2,782]

Bush is a total idiot.

 

Yet somehow the left gives him credit for every single decision made everywhere in the US in the last 8 years

[IGotWorms 3,474]

Bush and his crowd are a bunch of crooks. They've been stealing U.S. tax dollars through war profiteering, only that wasn't enough so now they are stealing it through the bail-out as well. Its really quite an ingenious ploy. Because they are stealing from 300 billion people, no one person is losing enough to do anything about it. Plus this is all deficit spending, so they aren't even really stealing from us--they are stealing from our grandchildren. Only we are too stupid to see it.

[Patriotsfatboy1 1,432]

Nice line of debate by Strike here...

 

"Since I hated the whole bill I can completely dodge the point that the Bush administration took actions to make a bad situation worse and ensure that the people most responsible for creating the situation from which this POS bill arose will continue to make obscene amounts of money, compliments of this POS bill."

 

I know wiffle is involved and you would never dream of agreeing with him even in the most cursory "Yeah, that's pretty focked up" fashion. But that being the case, maybe you should just stay out of a thread like this instead of pretending you're making some kind of sense. You aren't.

 

Exactly.

[Recliner Pilot 61]

Bush and his crowd are a bunch of crooks. They've been stealing U.S. tax dollars through war profiteering

 

Since Obama now says he won't be bringing the troops home from Iraq as he promised during the campaign, and instead will send them to Afghanistan will he be guilty of stealing U.S. tax dollars through war profiteering too?

[tikigods 76]

Since Obama now says he won't be bringing the troops home from Iraq as he promised during the campaign, and instead will send them to Afghanistan will he be guilty of stealing U.S. tax dollars through war profiteering too?

 

Like you give a phuck about the troops protecting your lazy ass. Loser.

[BLS 313]

Wasn't it the fuckin liberals who said we had to do this bailout or our economy would collapse?!

 

 

YES....Bush is a fuckin ######.

 

That guy doesn't care one bit about this country.

[IGotWorms 3,474]

Since Obama now says he won't be bringing the troops home from Iraq as he promised during the campaign, and instead will send them to Afghanistan will he be guilty of stealing U.S. tax dollars through war profiteering too?

 

I doubt the Obama Administration will be handing out no-bid contracts to Halliburton.

[Voice_Of_Reason 0]

Dambit Wiff. You should be the anchor on NBC, CBS, CNN, ABC, and FOX. You in all your infinite wisdom cracked the all time shocker of shockers. You, the master of detective work finally got to the bottom of it.......Politicians are in it for themselves and those that will help them get richer? Dambit! You are good!

 

 

 

Question for you Wiff.......Got anything we didn't already know?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Pardon my angry satire. But I can't take it anymore. Dems blame Bush. Repubs blame Dems, Dems blame Neocons, Neocons blame Clinton, Clinton blames the vast right wing consipiracy, The vast right wing conspiracy blames the negros, the negros blame the white man, the white man blames the women, the women blame on society, society blames it on the immigrants, yadda yadda yadda.

 

They all suck. Please stop tossing blame on Bush or Congress or the Senate or any one person or group of people. We are in this freaking mess because all parties have failed us.

 

They all share in the failure and if you don't recognize this fact, then you are as much a part of the problem as those you blame!

[Recliner Pilot 61]

I doubt the Obama Administration will be handing out no-bid contracts to Halliburton.

 

Why not? Clinton did.

[Greedo 13]

Who gives a crap. This bill, in any form, SHOULDN'T HAVE EVER BEEN PASSED IN THE FIRST PLACE!!! Whining about individual clauses that one person or group added or edited is focking hilarious.

 

Even if something passes you don't like, that doesn't make it OK to make what has passed even worse. This loophole is bad news.

 

Since Obama now says he won't be bringing the troops home from Iraq as he promised during the campaign, and instead will send them to Afghanistan will he be guilty of stealing U.S. tax dollars through war profiteering too?

 

False. You're mincing words inaccurately. He's stated multiple times his intention to reduce forces in Iraq and increase them in Afghanistan.

[Recliner Pilot 61]

False. You're mincing words inaccurately. He's stated multiple times his intention to reduce forces in Iraq and increase them in Afghanistan.

 

LMAO!

 

So he will be war profiteering off Afghanistan, not Iraq. Gotcha.

 

Oh, if he is gonna send more and more troops to Afghanistan how is he gonna pay for all his handout goodies he promised during the campaign? Back then he said he would pay for them by bringing our troops home. Is it less expensive to fight the war in Afghanistan than it is in Iraq?

[posty 2,320]

Wasn't it the liberals who said we had to do this bailout or our economy would collapse?!

 

When the bailout to the auto industry kept getting voted down in the Senate, Pelosi, Frank, Dodd and Reid kept mentioning this over and over and over...

[tikigods 76]

Oh, if he is gonna send more and more troops to Afghanistan how is he gonna pay for all his handout goodies he promised during the campaign? Back then he said he would pay for them by bringing our troops home. Is it less expensive to fight the war in Afghanistan than it is in Iraq?

 

So you're suggesting you want the troops home and not in Afghanistan? You want the Taliban to continue to give safe haven to terrorist groups that are a direct threat to the United States?

 

Unfuckingbelievable. Are you related to Jane Fonda?

[Flashover 0]

LMAO!

 

So he will be war profiteering off Afghanistan, not Iraq. Gotcha.

So here we have a thread about the Bush Administration inserting a little provision to the $700 Billion bailout that basically got rid of the oversight for executive compensation. So now, these executives can still get their millions of dollars in bonuses and all RP can do is spin it to "Obama is going to be war profiteering off Afghanistan." After falsely stating that Obama said he will bring our troops home from Afghanistan once elected.

[wiffleball 4,695]

Dambit Wiff. You should be the anchor on NBC, CBS, CNN, ABC, and FOX. You in all your infinite wisdom cracked the all time shocker of shockers. You, the master of detective work finally got to the bottom of it.......Politicians are in it for themselves and those that will help them get richer? Dambit! You are good!

Question for you Wiff.......Got anything we didn't already know?

Pardon my angry satire. But I can't take it anymore.

 

Because you're a focking moron in this case. CONGRESS WANTED THE GAWDAMN LIMITS!, BUSH DIDN'T!! The "they're all crooks" schtick is pretty focking old - and shows the lack of mental accuity on specific issues. I'm sure it's a great way to avoid actually getting informed. I'm sure you're up there with the geniuses on this board who don't read the news because it depresses them, but if you don't see the stark contrast in this case, you're a focking idiot.

[Recliner Pilot 61]

So here we have a thread about the Bush Administration inserting a little provision to the $700 Billion bailout that basically got rid of the oversight for executive compensation. So now, these executives can still get their millions of dollars in bonuses and all RP can do is spin it to "Obama is going to be war profiteering off Afghanistan." After falsely stating that Obama said he will bring our troops home from Afghanistan once elected.

 

Keep trying Flash.........mebbe someday you will get ONE thing correct in ONE of your posts. My war profiteering comment was addressed to a poster charging Bush with war profiteering. In case you have not noticed, every once in a while threads get off subject around here. I'm not suprised this has passed you by given your idiocy.

 

Also, I never claimed Obama said he would bring troops home from Afghanistan. Obama claimed during the campaign he would pay for his gimme programs by bringing troops home from IRAQ. I simply questioned how he planned on paying for those programs if he was gonna bring some home from Iraq, but send more to Afghanistan.

 

Once again you are wrong on all counts. This is getting to be a consistant pattern for you.

 

Congrats!

[Flashover 0]

Keep trying Flash.........mebbe someday you will get ONE thing correct in ONE of your posts. My war profiteering comment was addressed to a poster charging Bush with war profiteering. In case you have not noticed, every once in a while threads get off subject around here. I'm not suprised this has passed you by given your idiocy.

 

Also, I never claimed Obama said he would bring troops home from Afghanistan. Obama claimed during the campaign he would pay for his gimme programs by bringing troops home from IRAQ. I simply questioned how he planned on paying for those programs if he was gonna bring some home from Iraq, but send more to Afghanistan.

 

Once again you are wrong on all counts. This is getting to be a consistant pattern for you.

 

Congrats!

So you did post about Obama war profiteering off Afghanistan? I guess I did get at least one thing right. My point however was that anyone, Liberal or Conservative, should be pissed about this provision the Bush Administration put in. Instead you ignore it and try and change the topic to Obama war profiteering off of Afghanistan.

[Recliner Pilot 61]

So you did post about Obama war profiteering off Afghanistan? I guess I did get at least one thing right. My point however was that anyone, Liberal or Conservative, should be pissed about this provision the Bush Administration put in. Instead you ignore it and try and change the topic to Obama war profiteering off of Afghanistan.

 

You are a little slower than usual today. As I explained in my last post, I addressed another poster on the subject of war profiteering that he brought up.

 

If you can't keep up have someone explain it to ya.

[Voice_Of_Reason 0]

Because you're a focking moron in this case. CONGRESS WANTED THE GAWDAMN LIMITS!, BUSH DIDN'T!! The "they're all crooks" schtick is pretty focking old - and shows the lack of mental accuity on specific issues. I'm sure it's a great way to avoid actually getting informed. I'm sure you're up there with the geniuses on this board who don't read the news because it depresses them, but if you don't see the stark contrast in this case, you're a focking idiot.

You've burried your head in the sand if you think any of them are actually for you. Go ahead, use kindergarten insults if you wish, but there are those of us well informed who see both sides as evil and those of you on either side as sheep. Your inability to see the whole while trying to point out specifics is equal to the term "can't see the trees through the forrest". You scream at Bush for doing this and that. While the whole time, right behind your back, your own party manipulates the system to line their own pockets.

 

Only when you stand up and say enough to both fully corrupt parties will you gain true freedom.

[Greedo 13]

Have you heard of the Brandenburg (sp?) group VOR? You should check it out - kinda interesting.

 

LMAO!

 

So he will be war profiteering off Afghanistan, not Iraq. Gotcha.

 

Oh, if he is gonna send more and more troops to Afghanistan how is he gonna pay for all his handout goodies he promised during the campaign? Back then he said he would pay for them by bringing our troops home. Is it less expensive to fight the war in Afghanistan than it is in Iraq?

 

Sending troops to a war does not equal war profiteering. You don't got me. I was merely correcting your misstatement.

 

I suspect, RP, given the economic situation, Obama will be paying now for Afghanistan and the "goodies" you reference by deficit spending. Though keep in mind there will be substantial savings from the Iraq pullout. And note too that virtually every economist now believes deficit spending to boost the economy is a good thing. The question, of course, is open to debate on which "goodies" are appropriate and which are not.