Excuse me, but where is that "best and brightest talent"? If the bonus money is going to the same people who led AIG into the abyss it is now trying to climb out of, Liddy's definition of "best and brightest talent" is a whole lot different from mine. And here's a newsflash for Mr. Liddy: Contracts can be changed in extreme situations. I know. Mine just was. A few weeks back, my station WJLA/NewsChannel 8 went through a very difficult and painful round of layoffs, and the remaining employees were asked to voluntarily take a pay cut. Although I have a legally binding contract with the company and didn't have to agree to a salary reduction, I did so. And apparently, so did everyone else at the station. Why? Because the company is trying to put itself in a position to survive a 3-year recession without cutting any more jobs.

My question for Mr. Liddy and other corporate CEO's is why aren't you doing something similar, especially since you're relying on taxpayer bailout dollars to survive? Why aren't you asking all those people who may be entitled to a big bonus not to take them since technically, your company can't afford to give them? Didn't it ever occur to you that doling out millions in bonuses when your company is failing might be a bad idea and that the right thing to do would be to forego them? AIG certainly can't afford bonuses because it has indicated it wouldn't survive without taxpayer bailout money! When you're using the government's dime to survive, you have to cut the luxuries. That's the argument that's almost always used when Jim and/or Jane Sixpack who are struggling to make ends meet ask for government help in the form of welfare. They're told they can only have money for the bare necessities, nothing fancy. The AIG executives need only the bare necessities right now and bonuses are a luxury. They should be ashamed to accept bonuses paid for by so many taxpayers who are barely keeping their heads above water.  

As for the White House and Congressional lawmakers from both parties, spare me the "shocked" act. What, you're shocked about the bonuses? Didn't members of Congress approve the bailout money, and didn't the President sign off on it? Did none of you think to insert a provision that said no bonuses can be offered or accepted until the company is out of dire straits? None of you gets a pass on this. You're all responsible. Stop blaming each other and trying to score political points. Just fix the problem. Lawmakers, pass legislation revoking the bonuses and make it retroactive to last year on whatever date the bonuses were approved. Worried about lawsuits for breach of contract? Give me a break. Do you really think there's a jury anywhere in this country right now that would find in favor of the bonus recipient with the chutzpa to file the suit? Seriously. Now, get to work and do your jobs.