Hey, seeing as how Gibbs is the press secretary, and the story mentioned this was during the White House's press meeting, to me that sounds like Gibbs was doing his job. He was asked about these personalities (Cheney and Limbaugh and others) and then he (SHOCK!) answered the questions. At this point I'm wondering just what it was that should have been doing on the economy, besides, you know... his job.

That aside, are you a paid Republican flak that's paid to post RNC talking points? I asked because your post is trying to tie some of President Obama's aides in a internet reply to a press secretary's report. If you aren't a paid republican shill, you sure are coming off like a paid poster because you are commenting on Aides that don't appear in the article. Your post attempts to deflect the attention of the article from the salient points (that WHPS Gibbs gave his opinion on Dick Cheney) to something else. Anything else, why not use the biggest story of the day, the Economy! I mean who can argue with that logic, right? Right??

Even if that isn't your aim, please direct your concerns to proper venue. This is an article about Gibbs smacking down several right-wing heroes. If you object to that, that's fine... trying to steer the discourse to another topic does your point no good, and detracts from whatever point you were trying to make. Make your points about how Gibbs was wrong in his assesment of Cheney's role over the last 8 years. Or make your point about why our media representatives asked about Cheney and Limbaugh and not more important things.

Since when did any credit company care about long-term customers or services and not shareholder worth?

What can society do to move away from instant gratification? What can businesses tied to our society do to move away from the focus on shareholder maximization vs. service excellence?

Anytime I attempt to screw up some empathy for anyone connected to firms that took the bailout money I find myself split. I am split between over-the-top disgust at the executives and managers at the company, those in charge of the decision-making, and nothing by empathy for the assistants and cleaning staff and gophers in the organization that trusted their management to steer them through troubled waters.

Instead of steerage, these captains of industry placed their faith in the Titanics of finance. They made their bets (read "steamships") too big to fail, padded the front of their ocean-liner with credit-default-swap "iceberg protection" armor. And then, when the economy slammed into the mother-of-all-icebergs, they didn't know what to do. So, as their Titanics are sinking, and rescue ships are throwing rescuers aboard to help save the ship (read: bailout funds), these captains are making the rescuers play chamber music while the captains finish their lavish meal... all while the ship sinks.

In case you all missed the analogy (don't know how you could...) The finance execs are all designers, builders and captains of the titanic as far as I am concerned. Too big to fail!!! They'll never sink!!! Why is everyone upset at our hubris and gross extravagance? Why aren't they sad that we are facing public scorn for our bad business deals???

When I consider that the largest of these bonuses handed out was around 6 million dollars (granted, this individual is returning the bonus)... and at 40k a year, that's more than I will make in ONE HUNDRED AND FIFTY YEARS... I have no sympathy toward the executives that are being told to hand back their bonuses.

It seems you can't talk about the AIG bonus debacle without someone getting ready to cudgel the writer over the head with, "CLASS WARFARE, CLASS WARFARE, CLASS WARFARE".

No really.

I am frustrated with everyone discussing the numbers of this mess. I am especially frustrated when the amount given to AIG is compared to the amount of the bonus money distributed, and somehow were supposed to conclude that 165 million dollars isn't anything to be concerned about when AIG took 173,000 million dollars in bailout funds. I am frustrated because, that's semantics. OF COURSE something measured in Billions will be bigger than something measured in millions. That shouldn't be the part we are measuring though! Why are we comparing how much it costs to right an insurance company, versus bonuses paid to executives of a failed company??

To answer the question posed by Mr. Leonard, YES, good reverent deities, YES numbers matter. Individual numbers matter. Forget comparing the individual to the corporation, compare those executives to ME. Or to anyone making less that 100,000 dollars a year.

Do you know why the executives are whining about class warfare? Because they think that whining about it will protect them from scrutiny and scorn. They think that they got away with it for so long, that they can get away with it now. The "Rich" (and this includes the media as well...) call any criticism of their lifestyle as "Class Warfare". They'll rail against the unwashed masses because we don't understand "Retention Contracts" and "Derivative Trading" and because they mentioned "Tea Party" first, somehow they're the victims in this great global downturn. Someone took their roulette table away and they're so quick to hide among the slobs that never took a turn at the table.