because your balanced view of this will reinforce the other side of course. Normal and rational conservatives would go "Oh good, they are being analytical and fair" and they'd pull back their own bullying and concede some points we make.

However, we both know that won't happen. The bunch instead will pile on quickly and press the advantage you're giving them by being truthful and fair.

So, to preempt that move, let me remind everyone that there was this loud cry from the right when the auto makers were coming with their hands out (and for considerable less money than AIG got) for all the UAW contracts to be renegotiated.

My question is then, if the AIG bonus contracts are so locked in stone that nobody has the right to go after them, why was it ok to attack the existing contracts for the auto workers?

Now of course I understand that in order for the auto companies to survive and not fall into bankruptcy, they had to renegotiate contracts. It was the responsible thing to do for both sides.

So, here's a thought (which of course won't work at all because of the panic it would bring). You're right that the government should have the ability to nullify an existing contract of law but there's nothing saying they can't take back the bailout money they gave out and let AIG go into bankruptcy, especially Chapter 11. In that case, by law, the courts would have the ability to nullify existing contracts and rebuild them as necessary. Maybe all they have to do is threaten and some of these "gentlemen" would see the error of their ways and not accept such huge bonuses.

I won't hold my breath.

Art