Pulling things together

Sometimes certain ideas coalesce in time and when that happens, I'll try to point them out. The first one is this letter of resignation by an AIG executive.

(cwcid/ht) Tigerhawk

The second idea is this article in Scientific American. As interesting as the article is, the commentary by Instapundit really appeals to my love of irony.

(cwcid/ht) Instapundit

Finally, if my reader has read this far and clicked some or all of the links, I leave him or her with this quote.

"If you ask me to name the proudest distinction of Americans, I would choose...the fact that they were the people who created the phrase 'to make money.' No other language or nation had ever used these words before; men had always thought of wealth as a static quantity--to be seized, begged, inherited, shared, looted or obtaines as a favor. Americans were the first to understand that wealth has to be created. The words 'to make money' hold the essence of human morality."

The character of Francisco D'Anconia
in Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged

I can't vouch for the etymology of the phrase "to make money," but the point is that most of the people at AIG were creating wealth. They were condemned and punished for this in a way that was abominable.

Dear Senator Schumer

UPDATE: Ok, so I was wrong. Richard Epstein refutes the idea that the AIG bonus law was unconstitutional. If only I could believe that Chuck Schumer read Richard Epstein.

The following is a message I just posted on Sen. Charles Schumers Senate contact page.

Dear Senator Schumer,
The bill that recently passed the House (H.R.1586) to tax AIG bonuses is very likely unconstitutional and must not become law.

It is, in effect, a bill of attainder. Such laws are forbidden by Article I, section 9, clause 3 of the United States Constitution, which states:

"No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed."

You took an oath to uphold the Constitution. I expect you to do so at all times, but particularly in regard to this bill.

I am not an AIG employee and have no financial interest in AIG or any of its subsidiaries.
Sincerely,

How do I know this law is unconstitutional? By relying on my fellow bloggers, of course. Protein Wisdom is one source. There is a link in the comments of that post to this one at Powerline.

I didn't call my Senator as the Protein Wisdom post suggested. I took the Internet route instead.

This is what passes for accepting responsibility

The WSJ has an article today with the headline that "Obama Accepts Blame for AIG Bonuses".

The article contains this quote:

"Washington is all in a tizzy and everybody is pointing fingers at each other and saying it's their fault, the Democrats' fault, the Republicans' fault," he said at a town hall meeting Wednesday. "Listen, I'll take responsibility. I'm the President."

He added: "So for everybody in Washington who's busy scrambling, trying to figure out how to blame somebody else, just go ahead and talk to me, because it's my job to make sure that we fix these messes, even if I don't make them."

Is this what passes for taking responsibility these days? How about revealing that President Obama was a leading recipient of political donations from AIG last year. As reported in the WSJ Political Diary e-mail (paid subscription required):

"It turns out that last year AIG not only spent $10 million on lobbying Congress but also was a generous political donor. The top two recipients?
None other than Senate Banking Committee Chairman Chris Dodd, who collected $103,100, and then-Senator Barack Obama, who took in $101,332 (John McCain was a distant third). No wonder Messrs. Obama and Dodd both are scrambling to avoid the AIG tar baby. "

The Obama Administration is taking Orwellian rhetoric to new heights. I don't know what else to say about it.