Get Out!

THE VOTE!

Re:Sabbatical(A Compendium)
[Inserted now.] [Updated/edited 11-2-10]
[But for Comedy Central (RSN)]
[Not Fully Red? ]
[Meanwhile a real page turner.]
[Added 11-2-10 Obama(No Moss)! See Rolling Stone(RSN)above(page turner)
also Gawker Controversy]

[Final comment: TwoRead. But for TARP; world recession. But for American Recovery and Reinvestment Act; 8-1/2 million jobs. But for Reid and Obama! Oh, and Republicans.
To wit: TARP(bailout) and ARRA(stimulus) are not the same or even the same administration.
Neither is the recession end, job recovery.]

Fungible Heading.

Fungible - Sabbatical

White House: TARP Money Might Not Be Traceable
This is a misleading headline. The words "traceable" or "untraceable" were not used by Gibbs in yesterday's briefing.
They know where the money went. They were then unable to follow it. *
Gibbs: "...It's a little bit of a push and pull, right -- is the economy going to expand until or unless a small business can get the credit it needs to expand, and vice versa." **

* italics all my words.
** both bold mine

[Speaking of push and pull: Investigator Rules Against Palin in Ethics Probe I mean, why is it so expensive to defend against frivolous claims? And which comes first the dismissal or the legal fees? And is the law followable or traceable by Republicans and vice verse us?***]

*** not to mention "a check of her accounting" and the media's not mentioning that although only 1 of 19 charges have been successful the bulk of her bills (see oops) was to mislead (Oops, that's fungible as the expenses were Alaska's(not her bills) in investigating her false claim regarding the successful "troopergate".)

A Plea to Congress

Please support the President and his economic leadership, in particular the comprehensive if not yet always comprehendible rescues and reforms.

The immediate fixes cannot be perfect nor the long term costs of delay neglected. The powers that are needed are not there yet and must be considered carefully but much of what is on the table was placed there by those who were part of the problem while that alone does not take them away from being part of the solution.

I urge the TARP oversight board and Finacial oversight committees to investigate all bailed out institutions and not only how they came to need rescue, but to make sure they do not get out from under their need to change. Any reimbursement of bailout funds must be complete, and there must be an understanding of how things will be different, before there is any back tracking or refunding.

I think that all political measures should be considered in supporting the four pillars of Obamanomics; Energy, Education and Healthcare reform and fiscal responsibility, as well as the international scope of financial and progressive reforms.

Please see the Humpty Dumpty allegory for the wall that needs to come down, between people and progress.

Sincerely,
Roger Larson

[Update 3-27-09 bold added to Obamanomics: it is a link to an article by the president and international scope has one too. The rest of the body of the text can be read with the links as footnotes.]

[Without getting too into the term "political capital" which the previous administration really had none to spend, it may be something that if you don't use, you lose. I do not see how doing what the people sent you there to do is a risk.]

AIG should reconsider name change.

It is ironic that AIG should attempt a name change. Now that AIG is owned by US, is that the U of the "new" AIU Holdings Ltd.? Hopefully it is not Unlimited but so far it is Underthetable.
[I will leap to the point that the good name of the United States is at stake in this name change and the potential for changing minds about corporate welfare being at stake. Attempts to return TARP funds must include funds that came from any other bailout efforts and not in the expectation that things will return to the old way of doing business. I think that is implicit but it is yet to be resolved how or made explicit.]

What does the U stand for and why should AIG change its name now that taxpayers own 80% of it? Did we get a voice in that? And what about all that advertising* which went for naught?

* update [Speaking of Leviathans and who is too big?]
[Also a new look at the cost of advertising and the media should be taken in respect to free speech and freedom of the press as opposed to prepaid or bought and sold, views and news.]

Between the charges

and between the lines:

In their defense, A.I.G. said that they are contractually obligated to pay the bonuses in question. Not paying these bonuses, the company said, would cause their executives to leave the company and could trigger a collapse at A.I.G., which could set off a collapse around the world.

I am not sure if it was from this article: A.I.G. Using "Suicide Strategy" to Push Bonuses by Matt Renner TruthOut.org but it occurred to me that these bonuses were hush money. That is probably what is referred to above. But in my mind, trade secrets were not only a threat to the economy but also to the bubble blowing which was their job at AIG. And now "hush money" is more than just in my mind, but on Hardball in the AIG bonus backlash Rep. Gary Ackerman used the term. But that does nothing to topple my Humpty Dumpty allegory. Clarifying on 1600 Pennslvania Avenue Ed Schultz points out these are not performance bonuses but retention bonuses. That does not really buttress any charge as hush money, but it might be a good market indicator when such heavy bonuses are built in preemptively, and a preemptive indicator of market failure. And yet we have another controversy where charges are under defined, or interchanged as to what kind of bonuses are being talked about and the involvement of TARP.

[3-19-09 TARP updated and links added: AIG was prior to TARP and a look back.]
[Correcting an Impression (1): still confusion(2). My own missing (3) link.]
I may not be as confused as I think. Apparently $30 Billion latest AIG potential for drawdown has been caught in this confusion and is potential leverage. Who knew what when is still unclear and contradictory.(for 1,2,3 see continued.)

word of the day

Just my word:
bailout

Sort of a bubble up! [Corrections are being made to the earlier portion of the bailout to clawback to reality. Imagine: A CEO from a corporation needing to take help from TARP expecting that maybe his talents will be more valued at corporations that do not need TARP.]

Summary of a Flap.

Bailout or Meltdown? [UPDATE: above expired link with likely replacement.]

Really in actually reading this report[**], I will not cross-check it with all my comments and references. But McCain's panic was a beneficial coherence with Bush's, ironically indicated by looking into their eyes and seeing the same deer in the headlights. I don't know if it was in the reflection or their face as a hole, but the only plus to this Double of Mass Distraction is that "you can fool me once..." or I mean we see the boys "who cried wolf", while others have kept their cool.

LAST WORD: I may have to seriously suspend something as my wrists need their own wresting to other matters. But with that I will reference a guest on Rachel Maddow: author of... Angler: The Cheney Vice Presidency The real flap in my view. Now is this a flap that is too out there? Well it has to do with the approach that is being taken and by who for whom, or is it whom for who?
In this flip-flop the people matter and there are only three branches of government and the media and politics are the people's business. In fact the press is mentioned in the Bill of Rights not to mention what is not mentioned in the constitution. How does this connect to any thing close to home? Well, floods and bailouts and who is a fundamental or just under the trickle down. Isn't it appropriate that TARP was the original name for the flap. Speaking of eyes and flaps, why not just face the fact that the people not only want to have the debate, but some think it should be about the economy rather than foreign policy now that would take courage* to face with out blinking.

* not to mention George or Will

[**] 3-19-09 rare editorial touchup throughout, one typo and italics and bold only and the economy link.