Skip to main content

AIG CEO compares taxpayers' complaints to African-American lynchings

In an interview with the Wall Street Journal, AIG CEO Bob Benmosche said the following with regard to the public outrage over AIG paying executives $165 million in bonuses after being rescued by taxpayers during the Great Recession:

"Now you have these bright young people [in the financial-products unit] who had nothing to do with [the bad bets that hurt the company.] ... They understand the derivatives very well; they understand the complexity. ... They're all scared. They [had made] good livings. They probably lived beyond their means. ... They aren't going to stay there for nothing.

The uproar over bonuses 'was intended to stir public anger, to get everybody out there with their pitch forks and their hangman nooses, and all that - sort of like what we did in the Deep South [decades ago]. And I think it was just as bad and just as wrong."

Yes, taxpayers whom showed their vocal displeasure with executives receiving $165 million in bonuses after they were the ones to rescue AIG from collapsing is akin to African-Americans being hung for the color of their skin...

Democratic Maryland Representative Elijah Cummings released this statement after being notified of Mr. Benmosche's ignorant comments:

"As the leading critic of AIG's lavish spending before and after its taxpayer funded bailout - and as the son of sharecroppers who actually experienced lynchings in their communities - I find it unbelievably appalling that Mr. Benmosche equates the violent repression of the African-American people with congressional efforts to prevent the waste of taxpayer dollars. If these statements are true, I believe he has demonstrated a fundamental inability to lead this modern global company in a responsible manner - a company that exists today only because it was rescued by the American taxpayers - and that he should resign his position as CEO immediately."

Benmosche has since responded by sending this message via email: "It was a poor choice of words. I never meant to offend anyone by it."

The man says that taxpayers' vocal outcry of wasted taxpayer dollars through $165 million in executive bonuses is just as bad as African-Americans getting lynched in the South, but didn't mean to offend anyone by it? Is the guy tripping on acid or just flat out stupid?

I love the sad attempt at an apology too.

"It was a poor choice of words. I never meant to offend anyone by it."

How about just saying you're sorry, bozo?

With that kind of a statement, I have to imagine he'd respond similarly to the following hypothetical scenarios:

Benmosche quote: "These nasty tweets attacking us for giving away bonuses to our executives is like what Hitler and the Nazis did to the Jews in the Holocaust!"

Benmosche apology: "It was a poor choice of words. I never meant to offend anyone by it."


Benmosche quote: "That critical column in the New York Times of our company was worse than attacks abused wives experience!"

Benmosche apology: "It was a poor choice of words. I never meant to offend anyone by it."


Benmosche quote: "All this public outcry about how we do things at AIG could be more damaging than the AIDS epidemic amongst queers!"

Benmosche apology: "It was a poor choice of words. I never meant to offend anyone by it."


With Bob Benmosche comparing complaints about wasting taxpayer dollars to lynching African-Americans, I'd have to say he's a poor excuse for a human being, and I hope he's offended by that.

http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2013/09/24/2671131/aig-bonus-outrage-lynching/

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Boycotting jukeboxes because of TouchTunes

I love music and enjoy hitting the bar(s) over the weekend, so naturally, when the mood strikes me, I've never been coy about playing some songs on the jukebox. This past Thursday, a friend of mine turned 50, so several friends of her's, including myself, all met up to celebrate the occasion. At around 9:30, a friend of mine and I both chipped in $5 to play some songs on the jukebox. Four hours and 231 skips later, we gave up on hearing the songs we had selected, and went home knowing we had just wasted $5. This wasn't the first time such a thing had happened to me (and many others), and due to that, I'll be boycotting jukeboxes. Why? The scam known as TouchTunes. You see, here's how the plot typically breaks down. A person (or group of people) downloads the TouchTunes app on his/her phone, consumes one too many adult beverages, and due to this, has less care for spending extra money to hear the songs of their choosing right NOW. That's the thing with TouchTun

The difference between "looking" and "checking out"

I may be way off with these numbers, but it's my approximation that at least 75% of individuals whom are involved in a serious relationship feel it's perfectly acceptable to "check out" members of the opposite sex they're not involved with. Meanwhile, approximately 25% either don't feel this is acceptable or aren't sure about the matter. I hadn't thought about this matter for a while, but since I've been dating a woman for about 8 months, the topic has been pondered about some. When reading or hearing others discuss this very issue, I often times hear comments similar to the following: "It's human nature to look." "There's nothing wrong with checking others out. I'm sure he/she does it too!" "It's fine to do it. Just don't tell your boyfriend/girlfriend about it or do it in front of them!" "It's natural to find people attractive." When observing the array of comments, I i

The verdict is in. To no one's surprise, Jonathan Hoenig has been found guilty of being an idiot.

Just recently, when discussing the Michael Brown shooting and whether or not race had anything to do with it, Fox News contributor Jonathan Hoenig said, "You know who talks about race? Racists." One moment while I provide Mr. Hoenig with the well deserved slow-clap. :: slow-claps for two seconds :: So, that was quite the line by Mr. Hoenig, wasn't it? "You know who talks about race? Racists." Well, wasn't he just talking about race? So, by his own words, I guess that makes him a racist. Also, if he wants to be consistent, does this mean that people whom talk about gender are sexists and people whom talk about sexual orientation are homophobes? With that line of thinking, Hoenig would engage in the following back-and-forths: Hoenig: "So, who are you voting for?" A woman: "The Democratic candidate, because he's been adamant about his support for equal rights for women." Hoenig: "You sexist feminist nazi!"