Republican leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky) recently ever-so-slightly gave us a glimpse of how his party really views corporate bailouts. In public, in front of "mad as hell constituents," Republicans fight the good fight; they agree with angry Americans; and they're "appalled" by high-and-mighty executive bonuses, taxpayer-funded excursions and more spending. But, they smilingly assure us, bank bailouts are needed to shore-up lending; not just to line fat-cat wallets.
But now as President Barack Obama attempts to tame wild executive compensation, those same Republicans are saying woooaah... now hold on a minute!
Obama -- who boiled over last week, verbally punishing bailed-out banks for their lavish compensation levels -- now seeks to impose limits on executive pay. In fact, the administration intends to cut severance payments to bailed-out companies top 55 executives. Needless to say, this has been a long time coming.
Republicans are always debasing the idea of wealth redistribution, but the last bank bailout proved to be the largest example of wealth redistribution in America. These banks essentially took the hard-earn tax dollars of poor and middle-class Americans, and instead of freeing up credit, used it to line the pockets of their already wealthy executives!
That bailout money didn't come primarily from wealthy tax dollars -- just ask Berkshire-Hathaway CEO, Warren Buffet. He says that he pays much less income tax (percentage wise) than his own middle-class employees.
No, you funded the biggest wealth redistribution project ever!
If a Republican ever brings up the "wealth redistribution" argument in years to come (and they will when universal healthcare hits the fan), be sure to remind them of just how banks fleeced the average American during the Bush Depression.
Back in GOP-land, McConnell's rich-man profit loss alarm apparently went off after learning of the administration's plan to limit executive bonuses:
"I think we're all appalled by these -- some of these executive salary arrangements and bonus arrangements and perks and all the rest," [McConnell] said. "On the other hand, I really don't want the government to take over these businesses and start telling them everything about what they can do. Then you truly have nationalized the business."
"I think we're all appalled by these -- (notice the pause and flip-flop) some of these executive salary arrangements..."
Some of these executive salary arrangements? Some meaning, probably, GM and Chrysler -- where the GOP is trying to squash organized labor -- their executive salaries are appalling. Otherwise, Wall Street salary arrangements are okay... capitalistic... patriotic even.
Disgusting!
As we stumble blindly into the early 21st century, we'll gradually see this party for what it is... an obstructionist group filled with hypocrites. And as more average everyday hard-working middle-class Americans come to this conclusion, their voters will diminish.
GOP supporters need to ask one question: is my elected official arguing in my best interest or in the best interest of a few billionaires on Wall Street?
Think long and hard (cast aside the old GOP promise of "you could be rich one day too and you'll need us on your side"). Honestly, are you rich yet? How's your 401-K doing lately? Exactly.
If taxpayers are going to sit up a "bad bank" to take all the garbage rotting on Citi and AIG's books, we deserve sacrifices from their mismanagement. It's like the old conservative mantra goes: why reward lazy behavior with more welfare [corporate welfare]? These companies could get accustomed to living off the system -- if we let them. If anyone can understand why we should cut these executives salaries, it should be a Republican; a conservative. They ooze more saving and less spending.
Oh yeah, that's right, that whole GOP hypocrisy thing gets in the way.