Oh, the bonuses were contractual

We're reading a lot now about President Obama's purported "outrage" at the bonus payments bailed-out AIG made to its executives. Does he really expect us to believe his outrage is genuine? Where was Obama while the bailout was being arranged? If Obama did not know what was going on, and if Timothy Geithner did not know what was going on, and if Geithner was not talking to Obama about what was going on, what kind of a "deal" was really made for this bailout? If the right hand didn't know what the left hand was doing, and the left hand didn't know what the left hand was doing, who was responsible for the terms of AIG's bailout? Either both of these men are incompetent, or they're working hand-in-hand to scam the taxpayer. Geithner admits to scamming the IRS, and Obama was closed-mouthed about AIG's bonuses until there was a public outcry. Only when we screamed foul did Obama show knee-jerk "outrage" - apparently in self-defense. Obama should be just as outraged at Geithner as he would like us to think he is with AIG. Instead of addressing the issue, he's using the same cover-up he did with the earmarks in the budget - "Oh, that was last year's budget. Oh, the bonuses were contractual." Such pre-existing conditions didn't prevent him from rescinding President Bush's policies on abortion payments, rule of conscience for health care professionals, and embryonic stem-cell research. If he could declare those policies null and void, why can't he do the same with earmarks and disgraceful compensation practices?

Marvin Schulgen

Lombard