After years of agitation over what they saw as President George W. Bush's self-righteous moral certitude, journalists on Thursday night embraced President Barack Obama's vilification of those working for Wall Street firms who got a bonus last year. “Shameful,” NBC Nightly News anchor Brian Williams teased his newscast, “that's how President Obama labels those Wall Street types paying themselves big bonuses while getting billions in tax dollars.” Reporter Chuck Todd referred to how Obama was “channeling his inner populist” as he “got upset about something that the public has been angry about for weeks.”
CBS's Katie Couric led with how “we found out what it takes to get Barack Obama angry,” that “employees of financial companies in New York collected nearly $18.5 billion in bonuses last year” and “the President called it 'shameful.'” Chip Reid related how “the President told advisors the anger rose straight from his gut” before Reid relayed that another liberal politician, New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo, “said the President's remarks are 'a welcome breath of fresh air.'”
Echoing Couric, ABC anchor Charles Gibson announced: “The President did not mince words this afternoon. Indeed, he was angry.” Dan Harris, who showcased a clip of left-wing cable TV host Jon Stewart, backed up Obama's take: “These bonus numbers are not only infuriating to the President, many Americans are bewildered and angry, too.”
Only the CBS Evening News, in a follow-up piece from Anthony Mason, noted how many on Wall Street have “taken huge pay cuts” and explained how bonuses are part of basic compensation: “While it's true that more than $18 billion in bonuses was paid to Wall Street workers in 2008, that plunged nearly 50 percent from the record $34 billion two years ago. The average worker saw a 37 percent drop in bonus pay last year to $112,000. That's the lowest level in five years. What's more, Wall Street uses the term 'bonus' differently.” Viewers then heard from Scot Melland of Dice Holdings:
It's more than likely that the bonuses paid to these financial services people accounts for 50 percent or 75 percent of their total compensation and it's geared to revenue brought in or success they brought into the firm. So it's more akin to a sales commission than what you or I would think about as a bonus.
The MRC's Brad Wilmouth provided these transcripts of the Thursday, January 29 stories on CBS and ABC:
CBS Evening News:
KATIE COURIC: Tonight, huge bonuses on Wall Street, outrage on Pennsylvania Avenue.BARACK OBAMA: That is the height of irresponsibility.
...
COURIC: And good evening, everyone. In the second week of his presidency, we found out what it takes to get Barack Obama angry, and this is what did: a report that employees of financial companies in New York collected nearly $18.5 billion in bonuses last year, even as the industry was drowning in debt and collecting taxpayer bailouts. The President called it "shameful." From the White House, here’s Chip Reid.
CHIP REID: In the Oval Office today, the President blasted Wall Street bankers for taking billions of dollars in bonuses while pleading for a bailout to keep them afloat.
OBAMA CLIP #1: -at a time when most of these institutions were teetering on collapse and they are asking for taxpayers to help sustain them-
OBAMA CLIP #2: -that is the height of irresponsibility. It is shameful.
REID: The President told advisors the anger rose straight from his gut as he read reports that New York City securities industry employees got more than $18 billion in bonuses in 2008, the sixth highest total on record. It's about the same amount they got in 2004. But then, Wall Street was flying high. Now they're getting fat bonuses while millions of Americans are watching their nest eggs evaporate. It's time, the President lectured, for Wall Street to show some discipline.
OBAMA: - that they have to start acting in a more responsible fashion if we are to, together, get this economy rolling again. There will be time for them to make profits, and there will be time for them to get bonuses. Now is not that time.
REID: The President said he plans to talk directly to Wall Street executives, just as Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner did earlier this week, when he stopped Citigroup from taking delivery of a $50 million private jet after the bank got $45 billion in a taxpayer bailout.
OBAMA: We shouldn't have to do that because they should know better.
REID: Late today, New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo, who has some oversight responsibility over Wall Street, said the President's remarks are “a welcome breath of fresh air.” He said he looks forward to working with the Obama administration “to ensure that Wall Street wakes up to its new responsibilities and abides by a new code of corporate responsibility.” White House officials say the President wants nothing less than to redo the way Wall Street does business. That ambitious goal will begin when he issues new regulations governing the financial industry soon.
ABC's World News:
CHARLES GIBSON: Welcome to World News. Tonight, President Obama lashes out at the billions in bonuses paid on Wall Street.BARACK OBAMA: That is the height of irresponsibility. It is shameful.
...
GIBSON: Good evening. The President did not mince words this afternoon. Indeed, he was angry. On a day when the government reported a record number of workers filed claims for unemployment benefits, President Obama came down hard on Wall Street for paying $18 billion in bonuses to executives last year.
OBAMA: At a time when most of these institutions were teetering on collapse and they are asking for taxpayers to help sustain them, and when taxpayers find themselves in the difficult position that if they don't provide help that the entire system could come down on top of our heads, that is the height of irresponsibility. It is shameful. There will be time for them to make profits, and there will be time for them to get bonuses. Now is not that time.
GIBSON: So with more on the bonuses, Dan Harris is here. Dan?
DAN HARRIS: Hi, Charlie. These bonus numbers are not only infuriating to the President, many Americans are bewildered and angry, too. Even as Wall Street firms buckled under losses from risky mortgage-related investments, and even as taxpayers shelled out hundreds of billions of dollars to bail those companies out, the state of New York estimates that the bonuses that Wall Street firms paid out last year represented the sixth largest hall ever. There is anger on the street-
UNIDENTIFIED WOMAN: Disgusted, outraged, it's appalling.
UNIDENTIFIED MAN: I think it's shameful.
HARRIS: -on the Web with people calling for those bonuses to be collected back, and on late night TV.
WALL STREET EXECUTIVE: If you don't pay your best people, you will destroy your franchise.
JON STEWART: You don't have best people! You lost $27 billion! Do you live in "Bizarro World"?
HARRIS: Wall Street executives often argue that bonuses are needed to retain the best and brightest.
STEVEN HALL, STEVEN HALL AND PARTNERS: The only assets that the company has are the people that can make the money. Without those people, there's no business, there's no way of generating revenue and making profits.
HARRIS: But with banks firing, not hiring, these days, others say that argument simply does not fly.
PROFESSOR JONATHAN KOPPELL, YALE UNIVERSITY: I'd like to see somebody who's willing to actually test the market if they thought that their bonus was not good enough. You know, let's roll the dice and say, "Hey, you know, Bob, sorry, we could only give you a $500,000 bonus this year. If you want to walk out the door and try and find yourself a better job, knock yourself out."
HARRIS: Wall Street may be playing a dangerous game here at a time when Congress is considering rewriting the basic rules of American capitalism.
KOPPELL: When you send the message loud and clear to Congress that you are incapable of policing yourself, you are basically asking for Congress to write a more intrusive regulatory set of rules.
HARRIS: And tonight, administration sources tell ABC News that next week, when the administration unveils a major new plan to fix the financial system, there are going to be provisions in there that crack down on Wall Street bonuses.
—Brent Baker is Vice President for Research and Publications at the Media Research Center





COURIC: And good evening, everyone. In the second week of his presidency, we found out what it takes to get Barack Obama angry, and this is what did: a report that employees of financial companies in New York collected nearly $18.5 billion in bonuses last year, even as the industry was drowning in debt and collecting taxpayer bailouts. The President called it "shameful." From the White House, here’s Chip Reid.
REID: Late today, New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo, who has some oversight responsibility over Wall Street, said the President's remarks are “a welcome breath of fresh air.” He said he looks forward to working with the Obama administration “to ensure that Wall Street wakes up to its new responsibilities and abides by a new code of corporate responsibility.” White House officials say the President wants nothing less than to redo the way Wall Street does business. That ambitious goal will begin when he issues new regulations governing the financial industry soon.
JON STEWART: You don't have best people! You lost $27 billion! Do you live in "Bizarro World"?















Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Did anybody think...
Fri, 01/30/2009 - 09:33 ET by klchadwickDidn't any of these people stop and think that maybe, just maybe, if congress hadn't have interfered in the first place that this might not have occured at all?
Apparently not. Of course,
Fri, 01/30/2009 - 09:41 ET by ThatDudeApparently not. Of course, the bailout is just another highlight of how the left thinks problems can be solved. Just throw money at it and hope some of it sticks. If they truly wanted this to succeed, they would have been more strategical in the distribution and *gasp* allowed failed business models to fail.
Nonpartisan Pelosi?
Fri, 01/30/2009 - 09:44 ET by klchadwickWell according to Princess Pelosi, she is a "nonpartisan" and we should support her. (and by her she means Obama, after all aren't lib talking points interchangable? He said "I won" and then she said "Of course we wrote the bill, we won the election)
I'm sorry, I might start
Fri, 01/30/2009 - 09:36 ET by taterI'm sorry, I might start caring about being outraged if the people telling me I should be outraged didn't make multi-millions...and a president who received how much campaign money?
www.theholyrosary.org
"There is no problem, I tell you, no matter how difficult it is, that we can not resolve by the prayer of the Holy Rosary." -Sister Lucia
2.0?
Fri, 01/30/2009 - 09:41 ET by klchadwickYou mean that Obama 2.0 raising $75 million a year isn't acceptable? I mean after all, the messiah can not live my words alone! ;0) I wonder if keeping his campaign going in order to raise money over the nex four years is deemed "shameful" to any lib.
Tator,
Fri, 01/30/2009 - 09:42 ET by ThisnThatYou hit the nail on the head. What right do these people have to espouse holier-than-thou attitudes, when they, themselves, are grossly overpaid? The emperor indeed doesn't wear any clothes in this day and age.
___________________________________
The challenge is to follow a consistent plan despite inconsistent prices - Sarah Palin, State of the State of Alaska speech
Aw, quit picking on them...
Fri, 01/30/2009 - 09:58 ET by SickofLibsCouric only makes $15 million PER YEAR. (a mere $1,250,000 a month)
Williams only makes $10 million PER YEAR. (a mere $833,000 a month)
Factor in bonuses/perks... how do they get by?
I would assume BHO is also outraged...
Fri, 01/30/2009 - 09:44 ET by Prester John....US Senators getting sweetheart deals from mortgage companies their committees oversee.
Dreams of Obama
Fri, 01/30/2009 - 09:46 ET by klchadwickWell he wasn't outraged that he made as much as he did from his books, which are only quasi-bios. After all, they are only his "recollections" and not in the correct order, yet he promoted them as if they were completely based in fact and reality. I guess it's obvious that he has never been based in fact and reality.
Obama's faux outrage would
Fri, 01/30/2009 - 09:54 ET by ThisnThatObama's faux outrage would have been much more effective if he had focused on Congress, and asked them why they received salary and wage increases based upon the work (or lack of) they did.
And while he's at it -- can he comment on his days spent in the US Senate since he became a Senator; and how about all the "Present" votes he has made in his career? Don't those also deserve some outrage due to the fact that he drew full salary for much less than full service?
___________________________________
The challenge is to follow a consistent plan despite inconsistent prices - Sarah Palin, State of the State of Alaska speech
Glen Beck makes the most sense on this subject...which is scary
Fri, 01/30/2009 - 10:10 ET by lareeGlen Beck discussed the economy and the so called stimulus package this morning on Imus in the Morning.
http://youhavetobethistalltogoonthisride.blogspot.com/2009/01/glen-beck-confides-to-imus-i-cant-ever.html
Speaking of the "economy"
Fri, 01/30/2009 - 10:16 ET by ThisnThatSpeaking of the "economy" -- the GDP was what, around 3.5% -- vs "economists" predictions of 5.5%? That's a significant miss! Who are these so-called experts? And tell me why we listen to them? And what else are they totally wrong on?
___________________________________
The challenge is to follow a consistent plan despite inconsistent prices - Sarah Palin, State of the State of Alaska speech
So are we discarding economists?
Fri, 01/30/2009 - 10:22 ET by nwahsSo are we discarding economists now? How small will our world become?
No, we're only getting rid
Fri, 01/30/2009 - 10:26 ET by ThisnThatNo, we're only getting rid of the fools that can't get within 50% of the right number on a month-to-month basis. People with better skills can remain.
It's the Obama way, you know. Just like Wall Street -- if you don't perform, you don't get credit. Not my words -- his.
___________________________________
The challenge is to follow a consistent plan despite inconsistent prices - Sarah Palin, State of the State of Alaska speech
I'm for that
Fri, 01/30/2009 - 10:31 ET by nwahsI'll go with that. Its the American way ( or used to be). Take pride in your work.
TNT
Fri, 01/30/2009 - 10:28 ET by BlondeI believe the numbers represent the contraction in the GDP, so although it was bad, it was not as bad as expected.
The numbers involved in the GDP are just like the "stimulus" package numbers....so large as to not be comprehended by the average person (and I used to work with 2 comma money all the time, I still have a hard time wrapping my mind around 4 comma money).
Predicting the economic activity of anything is not an easy task....we each do it in our own lives on a regular basis...but who can predict when the transmission's going to go?
BT, The difference
Fri, 01/30/2009 - 10:38 ET by ThisnThatBT,
The difference between a transmission and the economy is that everyone relies upon the predictions in the economy. Budgets are made; policy is made; fortunes are made (or lost) based upon these predictions. So, their accuracy is important.
I agree -- it is hard. But, if it is too hard, then let's stop putting so much emphasis on the predictions. However, if we insist upon living by these predictions, then let's start demanding better performance. 50% error is, in my opinion, too large. Fire the people who are giving us such faulty predictions and replace them with better, more qualified individuals. Else, stop the dependence.
At least, let's set some standards. Is 50% error ok? If it is, how about a 100% error. Or 300%, or 1000%. Where do we stop? What is the standard, anyway?
___________________________________
The challenge is to follow a consistent plan despite inconsistent prices - Sarah Palin, State of the State of Alaska speech
We told you so
Fri, 01/30/2009 - 11:33 ET by KC MulvilleThisnThat, allow a philosopher a moment to gloat.
Philosophy spends an enormous amount of time discussing "theories of knowledge." And yet, maybe 95% of college freshmen scorn those woolly discussions as pointless and stupid - why don't they talk about something that really matters????
These forward-looking predictions about what the economy will do, and the backward-looking anaysis of how the economy actually performed in reality, are functions of theories of knowledge. How do you know what you think you know? How do you create expectations, and how do you measure the accuracy of your expectations? These questions are exactly what philosophy is about.
George Will calls economics "applied philosophy." I disagree. Economics should be based on philosophy, but isn't. The study of economics split off from philosophy a long time ago, and economists forgot about logic and epistemology when they split.
TNT
Fri, 01/30/2009 - 11:44 ET by BlondeMy point is that a prudent person (or CEO, or municipal executive) takes into account that all things do not remain the same, ever. Always have a Plan B, and a Plan C.
Here's just one example: in Broward County...the run-up in the housing bubble created a surplus of $2B over five years. Instead of being fiscally responsible, the (democrats, I might add) county government ratcheted up their spending to match the increase in revenues. Rather than being fiscally responsible (a la Sarah Palin) and continuing to streamline government, they spent like drunken democrats (I'm giving the sailors a break). Now they're left crying with their hands out, because that level of spending can't be maintained.
The same goes for corporations and individuals. I could see (we all have eyes, yes) that housing was falling off in late 2006....and planned accordingly, as my job depended on construction.
The flaw in your logic, I think, is that you are wanting the government to be responsible for something that is inherently fuzzy...kind of like blaming George Bush for Katrina. Forecasting, be it economic or hurricane tracking, is an inexact science. Models are merely models, and require assumptions about data (can you say climate change?).
Will the media cover it??
Fri, 01/30/2009 - 10:20 ET by nwahsWill the media cover it? Should they?
Should any of the talk show host be taken seriously on this subject? If they have any coherent plan, its probably regurgitated from an actual economist. Why not go to the actual economist and get the nuances that have probably been omitted by those regurgitating/extrapolating (perhaps naively) the plan?
It is none of the government's business what bonuses are paid...
Fri, 01/30/2009 - 10:37 ET by R D Helm...in the private sector.
This is comrade PrezBo's most ominous statement yet:
"There will be time for them to make profits, and there will be time for them to get bonuses ... Now is not that time."
I'm sorry, comrade Obama, but it is not up to the government to decide when it is okay for private companies to make profits and/or pay bonuses. This is not the former USSR. Yet.
-Unless, of course, the Marxists currently in power are trying to drive talented people away from their jobs here in this country and force them to work overseas for companies in competition with the ones here in America.
I wonder how Commie Katie would like for the government to decide she is not worth all those millions CBS is paying her.
After all, a half-trained, drunken parrot could pretty much do her job.
-Dave
Our clueless political leaders are about to drive us all over a cliff. The time to HITM is now-before we go over.
Dave, his campaign rhetoric
Fri, 01/30/2009 - 10:42 ET by ThisnThatDave, his campaign rhetoric was telling. At that time he was making comments on how much a plumber should be making. And he was telling us that anyone making over $250,000 was obviously not working hard -- and deserved to be taxed heavily so that the fruits of that person's work can be "shared". This man is a socialist, thru and thru -- and he doesn't care who knows it, now that he's a dictator, also.
___________________________________
The challenge is to follow a consistent plan despite inconsistent prices - Sarah Palin, State of the State of Alaska speech
Get used to it
Fri, 01/30/2009 - 10:48 ET by slickwillie2001In order for the socialists to take over our economy, job #1 is the demonization of all private industry, profits, and the entrepreneur class. Note how news stories simply use the $18.5B figure, with no information about how widely and thinly distributed it is. (Someone add up the salaries and staff and office costs for all congress so we have a figure for what they waste!) (There's also an old-fashioned jealousy component at work here.)
The Obamists also conveniently ignore the business cycle. This money is likely for performance in some portion of 2008, maybe the first half or maybe all of 2008. This is money that is DUE the employees by agreement. If the company reneges on bonus payments they are open to lawsuits from employees.
The business jet stuff is more nonsense. If the CEO of my company is being paid a couple of million a year, I DON'T WANT him wasting time in airports flying tourist class. And when you order a business jet the lead time from order to delivery is at least a year with custom interiors. To cancel the jet now you would pay huge penalties. It's almost cheaper to take delivery and then sell it second hand if necessary. Again, simple jealousy plays a part here.
I am waiting for a sob story on the old media showing laid-off workers from the companies that fly, maintain, and furnish business jets. When do we see that?
The business cycle, indeed
Fri, 01/30/2009 - 11:00 ET by ThisnThatIf the bonuses go down to nothing next year (due to this year's performance), we'll hear nothing about it. Exactly like we heard nothing about Chevron, whose revenue fell to $43 billion from $60 billion, and exploration and production profit dropped to $3.15 billion from $4.84 billion. Last year, oil was evil. But now that profits are down, the left is more satisfied. Granted, the left won't be happy until all the oil companies go out of business, but at least they're headed in the right direction. /sarc
___________________________________
The challenge is to follow a consistent plan despite inconsistent prices - Sarah Palin, State of the State of Alaska speech
Overpaid look in the Mirror
Fri, 01/30/2009 - 11:00 ET by Robert S LaRuersl775
It is amazing that this group of overpaid teleprompter readers can even comment on such a thing. They make so much money and put it away that they have zero stake in the health of the economy. They will not be affected by this because they are in the same set of people they mention. Hey, let them move to my situation and maybe they could file a complaint. They would also see the stimulus for what it is a spending bill for favorite friends.
Money after all, is just
Fri, 01/30/2009 - 11:20 ET by rbosqueMoney after all, is just money.
What IS shameful is the promotion of ABORTION. That IS EVIL.
Congress passed laws that
Fri, 01/30/2009 - 11:35 ET by nadadhimmiCongress passed laws that FORCED banks to give unqualified, unsecured loans to minorities, ie, blacks to "right" centuries old grievances. This was really reverse racial discrimination designed as social engineering. The socialist polititians set the policy and the always much smarter capitalist bankers took advantage of the opportunity to have the Govt make good the bad loans that never would have been issued in a non-rigged system. End result: we pay off the loans and the banks keep the houses and sell them for huge profits when the market improves. We need to try for treason the politians, (Frank, Dodd, Raines), and bankers, convict them and duly execute them. Yes, I actually mean kill them, after conviction of course. This would make future thieves think twice. Hey, it works in China!!
When can we expect to see
Fri, 01/30/2009 - 13:04 ET by TEWhen can we expect to see Obama and his leftist political advocacy groups (i.e., ABC, NBC, CBS, PBS, CNN, MSDNC, NPR, the New York Times, the Washington Post, Time, Newsweek, the Associated (with terrorists) Press, al McClatchy, al Reuters, al Jazeera, et al.) denounce Michelle "For the first time in my adult life, I am proud of my country" Obama and the University of Chicago for paying Michelle Obama $300,000 per year for a sham, bogus, so-called "job" which the University of Chicago conveniently eliminated once Michelle Obama moved to Washington, D.C.?
Here is a question that
Fri, 01/30/2009 - 13:07 ET by Scuba DudeHere is a question that should be asked, When in 2008 were these bonuses paid?. I have worked in the Financial industry for over 25 years and I can tell you you usually find out about your bonus in Dec and receive the check sometime in Jan or Feb. So that would mean the bonuses paid in 2008 were for Fiscal year 2007, WAY before this economic meltdown.
This will be the second time that Barky is getting the facts wrong, just like accusing Merrill spending over a million in TARP funds on redecorating an office when the work on the office was done in Jan 2008, again long before the crisis and before TARP was even created.
Liberals lying yet again to get their way.
comp model
Fri, 01/30/2009 - 13:07 ET by sawing battaobama is either ignorant or disingenuous.
the wall street compensation model is DIFFERENT from other industries. most employees have a relatively LOW base wage and most of their compensation is given in "bonus". When i moved from a non wall st. industry to a wall st firm, my base salary went down - way down. my bonus went way up. all in, the # wasnt much different. The bonus isnt fully variable/performance based as the name would suggest....and obama knows it.
Obama is all up in arms about the bonus number, but the story isnt what he's trying to make of it.
1) War on Prosperity: the government should want banks to win. in order to do so, you need the best and brightest and without paying for that telent, they will not take the long hours, the risk, and will move to other jobs. cutting bonus further will raise liklihood these investments in wall street will lose.
2) much of their bonus is really expected annual comp under the name "bonus".
3) reducing pay further will HURT new york and the rest of the country's tax revenue and EVERY ancillary industry - restaurants, builders, car sales, you name it.
one could argue that paying wall street is a much BETTER model for stimulating the economy than funding this joke of a stimulus package....at least the money gets in the hands of people, not just Acorn, condom distributors, etc.
Re profits
Fri, 01/30/2009 - 16:03 ET by slickwillie2001Yes, Obammy today said 'this is not the time for profits'. Someone should remind the doofus that over a third of a corporation's profits goes to the government in taxes, and more to some states. Does he want to forego this federal revenue? What further federal revenue accrues when those profits are paid out to stockholders in the form of dividends?