Readers Respond: Page 1 | Page 2 | Page 3 | Page 4 | Page 5 | Page 6 | Page 7

More reader responses to the "Tone Deaf?" post and my question about what the political up-side is for the Obama Administration in downplaying the AIG bonuses fiasco:

TPM Reader CC:

I read TPM several times a day, and I really appreciate the effort you all put into giving us insightful, fact-based coverage. Nevertheless, I think you're way off on this one.

To hear you folks tell it, you'd think we were talking about a significant proportion of the bailout funds going to the fat cats. I was shocked to find out the other day that the money going toward bonuses for the AIG executives is actually only about 0.1% of the entire bailout package AIG received; this just isn't the picture you're painting.

I give most Americans credit enough to distinguish between actual threats to their well-being and livelihoods, and an undesirable but not-incredibly-costly aspect of a bailout that most of us agree was and is urgently needed....

Your outrage is understandable, but it's also disproportionate and distracts from the central issue: recovery. The prize - keep your eyes on it.

TPM Reader JB:

My thought is that they willfully "don't get it". Corporate and financial interests are so deeply entrenched in the fabric of this world we live in that they can't be bucked. They just can't. Fiddle around with the edges. Talk some talk. Put on some shows. And stay the course. There is a cult of money and it pervades everything. The "up-side" is that the true powers that be aren't really threatened and the losers, (you know who), are put in their place as firmly and with as little drama as possible. I want to like Obama but his talk of the buck stopping with him and his support of Geithner masks the reality of what is going on. ... If Obama were serious he would have Krugman and Stiglitz deep in the mix. But they are on the outside looking in. A safe several arms lengths away from where they might actually accomplish something and influence the course of events.

TPM Reader RK:

The point that neither Obama or the Congress gets is that the AIG bonuses are just the most recent glaring example of the two tier justice system that has come to characterize America. And the natives are getting restless and are beginning not to want to listen anymore.

Bonuses for failture at AIG, immunity for illegal wiretapping for the telecoms, commutations for Scooter Libby, refusals to testify before Congress for Rove, no sanctions for torture for Rumsfeld and Cheney, no accountability for the lies which got us into the war by Bush, politicization of the Justice Department by Gonzales, fraud by Countrywide with no penalty, taxpayer rip-offs at Fannie and Freddie, bailouts for Goldman, and yet cram downs for Detroit autoworkers and little relief and constant vilification for the poor guy who lost all his equity in the little house he thought might make him comfortable. And on and on and on.

And there is not one of us out here who doesn't think that we would be fired if we lost money for our companies. Many are worried that even if the do a good job they will be fired. Instead of retention bonuses, I bet some people would give a week or two's salary back to keep their jobs. Everwhere you turn the cracks and seams of the cowboy economy are breaking open. AIG has become today's poster child for the inequality in the system.

TPM Reader DC:

Wrong. We're thinking about both, and more. On top of the bonuses; on top of the AIG bailout; Paulson/Bernenke/Geithner/Obama's entire bailout approach to dealing with toxic assets as opposed to a temporary nationalization approach smells. It stinks of swindle, rip-off, secrecy, manipulation, and exploitation. The AIG bonuses merely were symbolic.

This being the case, Obama is spending political capital at a pace only steps behind his economic team, which is to say at a considerable pace. I can say this in spite of having been an enthusiastic and active supporter during the election. Not being ideological, I don't give free passes for untrustworthy behavior.