Visit Counter

Tuesday, January 25, 2011

Chicago mayor's race could be up for grabs

Chicago mayor's race could be up for grabs with Emanuel's candidacy in doubt amid court ruling

Maybe this guy will get in.

"Rent is too damn high"

His first official act.... put the entire city on Section 8.

Illinois appeals court 
By Tammy Webber (CP) – 57 minutes ago

CHICAGO — For months, three of the main candidates in the race to become Chicago's next mayor struggled for attention while former White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel outpolled them and raised more money.

He also blanketed the airwaves with TV ads and gained the endorsement of former U.S. President Bill Clinton, who came to town to campaign for Emanuel.

But suddenly the campaign to replace Chicago's retiring Mayor Richard M. Daley looks like an actual race.

With an Illinois Appellate Court knocking Emanuel off the Feb. 22 ballot over a residency dispute, former U.S. Sen. Carol Moseley Braun, city Clerk Miguel del Valle and former Chicago schools chief Gery Chico suddenly found themselves in the spotlight — and trying to win over Emanuel supporters who suddenly may be up for grabs.

Even as Emanuel vowed to fight the decision, Braun was urging voters to join her campaign "with your time, your effort or your money."

"I'm extending a hand of friendship to all the Chicagoans who have been supporting Mr. Emanuel and all those who haven't made their minds up yet," she said. "Going forward, we pledge to work to create a city great enough to provide opportunity for every family. But we can only do this if we come together."

Reporters surrounding former Chicago Public Schools Chico outside a restaurant asked him if he was a front-runner — something that seemed inconceivable last week when a Chicago Tribune/WGN poll showed him with the support of 16 per cent of voters surveyed compared with a whopping 44 per cent for Emanuel. The same poll showed Braun with 21 per cent support, and city Clerk Miguel del Valle with 7 per cent.

"I'm trying to get every vote I can from everybody in this city," said Chico, who released records last week showing he had just over $2 million at his disposal, about one-fourth of the money available to Emanuel.

In their 2-1 ruling Monday overturning a lower court decision, the appellate justices said Emanuel met the requirements to vote in Chicago but not to run for mayor because he didn't actually live in the city for a year before Feb. 22.

Challengers to Emanuel's candidacy argued the Democrat did not qualify because he rented out his Chicago home and moved his family to Washington to work for President Barack Obama for nearly two years. Emanuel — who quit his job and moved back to Chicago in October after Daley announced he would not to seek a seventh term — has said he always intended to return to Chicago and was living in Washington at the president's request.

Emanuel's lawyers promptly asked the state's highest court to stay the appellate ruling and hear an appeal as soon as possible. Lawyers also asked the court to tell Chicago election officials to keep his name on the ballot if it starts to print them. The Chicago Board of Election Commissioners said it would start printing ballots on Tuesday without Emanuel's name; early voting starts next Monday.

The Supreme Court could act as early as Tuesday.

Appellate litigation attorney Christopher Keleher said it's likely the court would rule against Emanuel.

"I can tell you from experience that getting a reversal from any Supreme Court is difficult — even more so when you've got a truncated time frame," Keleher said.

But Emanuel said he was forging ahead.

"I have no doubt that we will in the end prevail at this effort. This is just one turn in the road," Emanuel said, adding that the "people of the city of Chicago deserve the right to make the decision on who they want to be their next mayor."

If he doesn't win the appeal, the race takes on a whole new dynamic. In a city with huge blocs of black, white and Hispanic voters, the Chicago Tribune/WGN poll showed Emanuel leading among all of them, even though his three top rivals are minorities.

Laura Washington, a local political commentator who writes a column for the Chicago Sun-Times, said if Emanuel is out, Chico, who is Hispanic, could be the big winner in terms of fundraising.

"Rahm has the establishment support, the civic leaders, business community, the money class, and Chico is as close to that type of candidate as anyone," Washington said. "They'd take Chico as a second choice, easily."

But Braun would be the big winner among black voters, she said. The recent poll showed Emanuel with the support of 40 per cent of black voters compared with 39 per cent for Braun, even though two other prominent black candidates dropped out of the race to try to unify the black vote.

But 27-year-old Thurman Hammond, who is black, said he never cared for Braun and planned to vote for Emanuel "because he was part of the Obama camp." If he can't, he said, he'll "have to do my homework" on the other candidates.

Others also said they would have to reevaluate the field.

Sara Grosby, 58, said she would consider Braun — although she's hoping she doesn't have to.

"In my opinion (Emanuel) already was a civil servant, working for Obama. I would think the court could cut him some slack," said Grosby, an aviation security worker at O'Hare International Airport.

Del Valle, another Hispanic candidate, said Emanuel's quandary bodes well for the other candidates, regardless of what the court does.

"Now voters see there's an opportunity to look at the field and give candidates either a second look or in some cases a first look," del Valle said. "People are going to pay more attention to the other candidates."


Associated Press writers Don Babwin, Deanna Bellandi, Sophia Tareen and Michael Tarm contributed to this report.

Copyright © 2011 The Canadian Press. All rights reserved.


Monday, January 24, 2011

Baby Doc likely after the money

This thug represents only a fraction of the long history of dictators in Haiti. He plundered the country out of hundreds of millions. Most of it American taxpayer dollars…  now he's back for more.  

Just one more reason, on a long list, of why Haiti is the toilet bowl of the Western Hemisphere. Pouring more money in has never been the answer as evidenced by the last (corrupt) election. Therein lies the question. Is Haiti capable of ever producing leadership that cares more about the people... then they do about themselves? So far it has been a resounding NO. 

WASHINGTON - The mystery of Jean-Claude Duvalier's return to Haiti, out of the blue and at a time of national chaos and instability, may be explained not by a thirst for power but another gnawing human need: money.

The former dictator has not said why he suddenly flew home after nearly 25 years in exile other than to help with post-quake reconstruction, but human rights activists and experts believe it may have been a manoeuvre to prevent the confiscation of at least US$5.7-million in frozen Swiss bank accounts.

"It would seem to be the most plausible explanation when you put these pieces of the jigsaw puzzle together," said Reed Brody, counsel to Human Rights Watch and a former prosecutor in Haiti.

The theory, which has gained wide currency in Haiti, stems from a law passed by Switzerland that goes into effect on Feb. 1 and would allow the confiscation of the last of Mr. Duvalier's frozen assets and their return to Haiti.

Known as the Duvalier law, it stipulates Switzerland can confiscate illicit assets and return them to an affected country even if that state has not taken legal action.

The law sets two conditions, however -- the failure to take action must be because of the weakness of the state's structures or the unavailability for trial of the affected person.

"That means that Switzerland could confiscate the money and repatriate it to Haiti, without Haiti having to prosecute Duvalier," Mr. Brody said. "But if Duvalier goes back to Haiti and is not prosecuted, then he could say, 'I was available for prosecution, and you didn't prosecute me: Give me my money back.' "

The former president for life, 59, showed up unexpectedly in Port-au-Prince on an Air France flight on Jan. 17 with what a diplomatic source said was a return ticket for Jan. 20.

He may have hoped to enter and leave unnoticed, but he was charged the following day with corruption and misappropriation of funds, and has now been barred from leaving.

Mr. Duvalier, who reportedly has been living in relative poverty in France since a costly divorce, came close to getting the Swiss monies last year.

On Jan. 12, 2010, the Swiss supreme court tribunal ordered at least US$4.6-million of the fortune be released to him, saying the statue of limitations had run out.

But on the very same day, a catastrophic 7.0 magnitude earthquake devastated Haiti, killing 220,000 people and leaving the capital in ruins and more than one million people homeless.

The disaster set off an uproar in Switzerland over the court decision, which prompted the Swiss government to issue an emergency decree blocking the release of the Duvalier money until a new law could be passed.

The Swiss government alleges Mr. Duvalier looted between US$400-million and US$900-million from Haiti during his 15 years in power at the head of a notoriously corrupt and violent regime founded in 1957 by his father, Francois Duvalier.

"None of it has been recovered. Period," said Irwin Stotzky, a human rights lawyer at the University of Miami who helped win a US$500,000 judgment against Mr. Duvalier in 1988.

"Some of it has been traced to Swiss banks, some of it we traced to their French banks many years ago."

Whatever Duvalier's motives for returning, it was not a good idea, his lawyer, Charles Gervais, admitted.

"Nobody expected him in Haiti and he came to Haiti as someone the world had forgotten about," he said.

"But since he got here, the media has been there, and human rights organizations are making claims. It was an ill time for him to come to Haiti."

On Friday, in his first press conference since his surprise return, Mr. Duvalier called for "national reconciliation" in Haiti and said he had returned out of solidarity with victims of last year's quake.

He also voiced his "deep sorrow for all those who say they were victims of my government."

"I am here to show my solidarity at this difficult moment," he added.

(someone get me a barf-bag)



'Baby Doc' wants to use Swiss money 'to help Haiti'

Sure he does.

FORMER US congressman Bob Barr claims ex-Haitian dictator Jean-Claude Duvalier is trying to unlock frozen funds left in Swiss banks after he fled to exile in Paris - for his country's benefit.

Duvalier ''is very interested in trying to get those funds freed up, not for himself, but so they can be used to help the situation in Haiti,'' said Mr Barr, who went with Duvalier to Port-au-Prince.

On Saturday Duvalier, 59, also known as ''Baby Doc'', apologized to victims of abuses during his government, vowed to help the quake-ravaged nation rebuild and said he expected to face ''persecution'' upon his return.
He declared himself ''impressed by the welcome I have received, especially from the crowd of young people who don't know me''.

But their attendance at the villa in the upmarket Montagne Noire neighbourhood was engineered. ''We were paid 10 gourdes ($A25¢) to show up,'' said one.

Most of the fortune that Duvalier had upon leaving Haiti in 1986 is said to have gone - initially on high living but latterly on an expensive divorce - and he is back just as the international community is topping up the coffers with billions in earthquake aid.
Haitian authorities have accused him of criminal conspiracy, embezzlement and corruption, prosecutor Aristidas Auguste told Radio Metropole.

A Swiss law set to take effect on February 1 may allow Haitian authorities to recover as much as $US7.3 million frozen in Duvalier's accounts, said Jenny Piaget, a spokeswoman for the Swiss foreign affairs department.

Amnesty International, which has pressured for Duvalier to be tried for crimes against humanity, said the corruption case is ''a positive step, but it is not enough''.

When asked about the crimes against humanity charges, Mr Barr, who is advising Duvalier but not representing him as a lawyer, said ''allegations are the cheapest commodity on the market''.

Robert Pastor, who served as former president Jimmy Carter's national security adviser for Latin America, said in an email that it was likely Duvalier's motive for returning was ''reconstruction of his image''.


Friday, January 21, 2011

Democrats coming together after the AZ massacre

Shelia (I'm right even when I'm wrong) Jackson Lee

Watch Cavuto eat her lunch.
This bitch has more slip-ups then a 3 legged jackass on ice skates. Blissfully the only peace anyone gets is when she occasionally "nods off" in her Congressional seat.

Speaking of pre-existing conditions... her's is terminal stupidity.

Another fine example.

Rep Steve (Auschwitz) Cohen

After this aired he proclaimed he was taken out of context.

 Do you buy that?


Tuesday, January 18, 2011

How Can This Be??

On a Tip from Jean Sweet 


This is an absolute travesty!

Love him or hate him .... 
~Limbaugh Nailed This One~ 

By Rush Limbaugh: 

I think the vast differences in compensation between victims of the September 11 casualty and those who die serving our country in Uniform are profound. No one is really talking about it either, because you just don't criticize anything having to do with September 11. Well, I can't let the numbers pass by
because it says something really disturbing about the entitlement mentality of
this country. If you lost a family member in the September 11 attack, you're
going to get an average of $1,185,000. The range is a minimum guarantee of
$250,000, all the way up to $4.7 million..
If you are a surviving family member of an American soldier killed in action,
the first check you get is a $6,000 direct death benefit, half of which is taxable.

Next, you get $1,750 for burial costs. If you are the surviving spouse, you get
$833 a month until you remarry. And there's a payment of $211 per month for each child under 18. When the child hits 18, those payments come to a
screeching halt.

Keep in mind that some of the people who are getting an average of $1.185 million up to $4.7 million are complaining
that it's not enough. Their deaths were tragic, but for most, they were simply in the wrong place at the wrong time.
Soldiers put themselves in harms way FOR ALL OF US, and they and their families know the dangers.. (Actually, soldiers are put in harms way by politicians and commanding

We also learned over the weekend that some of the victims from the Oklahoma City bombing have
started an organization asking for the same deal that the September 11 families
are getting. In addition to that, some of the families of those bombed in the
embassies are now asking for compensation as well.

You see where this is going, don't you? Folks, this is part and parcel of over 50 years of entitlement politics in this country. It's just really sad. Every time a pay raise comes up for the military, they usually receive next to
nothing of a raise. Now the green machine is in combat in the Middle East while their families have to survive on food stamps and live in low-rent housing.  Make sense?

However, our own US Congress voted themselves a raise. Many of you don't know that they only have to be in Congress one time to receive a pension that is more than $15,000 per month. And most are now equal to being millionaires plus. They do not receive Social Security on retirement because they didn't have to pay into the system. If some of the military people stay in for 20 years and get out as an
E-7, they may receive a pension of $1,000 per month, and the very people who
placed them in harm's way receives a pension of $15,000 per month.

I would like to see our elected officials pick up a weapon and join ranks before they start cutting out benefits and lowering pay for our sons and daughters who are now fighting.

"When do we finally do something about this?" If this doesn't seem fair to you, it is time to forward this to as many people as you can.

How many people
send this to?



Monday, January 17, 2011

Grand Jury Probes What Edwards Knew About Cover-Up Money

FILE - In this Friday, Dec. 29, 2006 picture, Rielle Hunter, background left, holds a video camera as former North Carolina Sen. John Edwards campaigns in Portsmouth, N.H. A federal criminal investigation is examining how much the two-time presidential candidate knew about money used to cover up his extramarital affair and illegitimate child with Hunter, and whether he had a wider practice of pushing the bounds of campaign finance laws, people involved in the case have told The Associated Press.

WASHINGTON -- A federal criminal investigation targeting John Edwards is examining how much the two-time presidential candidate knew about money used to cover up his extramarital affair and out-of-wedlock child and whether he had other practices that pushed the bounds of campaign finance laws, people involved in the case have told The Associated Press.

A federal grand jury meeting in Raleigh, North Carolina, is combing through records and testimony involving several political organizations and individuals connected to Edwards and trying to determine if the former U.S. senator from North Carolina and 2004 vice presidential nominee broke any laws. A recently issued subpoena focuses on a web of these political groups allied with Edwards, according to subpoena details provided to AP that offer a glimpse into the investigation being conducted behind closed doors.

The case largely stems from money spent to keep Edwards' mistress, Rielle Hunter, in hiding along with former campaign aide Andrew Young, who initially claimed paternity so Edwards could continue pursuing the White House without the taint of the affair.

Investigators are looking chiefly at whether funds paid to Hunter and Young -- from outside political groups and Edwards' political donors -- should have been considered campaign donations since they arguably aided his presidential bid, according to several people involved in the case who spoke on condition of anonymity because of the ongoing probe. And they're also looking closely at whether any entities linked to Edwards operated illegally.

While it could not be learned if federal prosecutors have found violations of a specific statute, federal election laws require disclosure of the money spent on campaigns for federal offices, limit the amounts of such donations and prohibit the conversion of campaign funds to personal use. 

Don't worry he is.

Edwards' attorney Wade Smith would not discuss specifics of the investigation but said, "We do not believe there is evidence that John has violated any election laws."

The investigation has been led for nearly two years by George Holding, the U.S. attorney in Raleigh appointed by President George W. Bush, with help from FBI and U.S. tax agents and attorneys from the Justice Department in Washington. North Carolina's senators have asked President Barack Obama not to replace Holding until he finishes this probe.

Several people interviewed by investigators say the questions focused on Edwards' knowledge of campaign finance law, even going back to whether he used his Senate office to conduct political business in violation of congressional rules. Subpoenas issued in the case request e-mails, records and other material related to more than two dozen individuals and organizations connected to Edwards and his allies throughout his political career.

Atop the subpoena list, read to the AP by someone with access to a subpoena, is the Alliance for a New America, which is what is known as a political 527 group, named for the tax code section that governs it. Also on the list is a like-named private entity called Alliance for a New America LLC, or AFNA LLC, and Edwards' former campaign manager Nick Baldick, who ran the political 527 group in support of Edwards' bid for the 2008 Democratic presidential nomination. (U.S. tax records for the same groups refer to the groups as Alliance for New America, without an "a.")

Baldick and his attorney Jim Lamb would not comment on the federal investigation, but Lamb said Baldick has been told he is not a target of it.

Federal records show that about $3.3 million of the $4.8 million raised by the 527 was distributed to AFNA LLC for unspecified "consulting services." The 527 and the LLC shared not only their name, but the same Alexandria, Virginia, post office box and the same contact, a Baldick associate named Katherine Buchanan. A crucial difference between the two Alliance entities was that the LLC was a limited liability company that did not have to publicly disclose how its money was spent. 

Lloyd Mayer, a Notre Dame law professor and tax expert, said it's clear that the alliance's creators established the LLC to hide the details of expenditures. It's a legal maneuver that campaign finance observers have long feared might become a part of politics as money managers try to shield their operations from the eyes of competitors and the public.

"The spirit of the law is being violated here," said Mayer, who has represented major advocacy group. "You shouldn't be able to hide what you're spending money on. But is the letter of law being violated or did they find a cute loophole?"

Buchanan, also listed in the grand jury subpoena, declined to discuss the groups or how their money was spent. Buchanan's home was listed in Virginia state records as the principal address for the LLC. Buchanan filed paperwork in August 2008 to close the LLC a year after its creation, declaring it "never began business."

A person involved in the investigation and who is familiar with the financial transactions told The AP that Baldick provided Young a salary boost of about $30,000 to move off the Edwards campaign payroll onto one of Baldick's private organizations around the time Young began taking care of a pregnant Hunter in fall 2007, when the primary campaign was heating up. Young also got more than $150,000 in payments as a commission for money he raised for Alliance for a New America. A month after Young got his last campaign paycheck on Nov. 14, 2007, he publicly claimed paternity of Hunter's child. 

Young has long since renounced his paternity claim and broken with Edwards. In a book, "The Politician," Young said he was covering up Edwards' fatherhood of the child. Edwards admitted paternity last year.

The person familiar with the financial transactions said Young received some payments from Slan Productions, a consulting firm also listed in the subpoena. In one filing with the Federal Election Commission, Slan Productions' address is listed as Baldick's home in Chevy Chase, Maryland.

The grand jury also has issued subpoenas for material related to the Hilltop Public Solutions consulting firm created by Baldick, a leading Democratic operative who also worked on presidential campaigns for Al Gore and Bill Clinton before Edwards picked him to manage his 2004 White House bid.

Tax records indicate the Alliance political group did directly spend about a third of its money on advertising in the 2008 Democratic presidential primary campaign. President Obama made an issue of the ads, which supported Edwards in the Iowa caucuses, because Baldick, then Edwards' former campaign manager, was running the group. In response, Edwards said it was a separate entity that he legally couldn't control but publicly called on the group to stop running the ads.


Friday, January 14, 2011



Saturday, January 8, 2011

Arizona Law having tongue in cheek effect...

Phoenix, AZ (AP) - SB-1070 is having an affect.

Illegal immigrants are boycotting Arizona by the thousands, showing their outrage with Arizona 's controversial new SB-1070 law by moving elsewhere. 

In the small town of Guadalupe AZ , south of Phoenix , Manuel Renaldo is one of those who is punishing Arizona by leaving. As he loaded his stolen car with his belongings and family of ten, Renaldo told this reporter through an interpreter "It's a matter of principle. I refuse to be supported by a state that treats me like a criminal."

The effects of the exodus are being felt by Arizona retailers who are reporting dwindling sales of beer, spray paint, and ammunition. Also hit hard are the state’s hospitals, which have reported a dramatic decline in births and emergency room visits. Tattoo parlors are in a state of panic. 

Renaldo told a reporter through an interpreter "He and his family are moving to California , which is a state that will support him and his family with dignity."


Thursday, January 6, 2011

Investigate this!

A great article by Ann Coulter

On a tip from:

Ed Kilbane
Senior National Correspondent

The Republicans are back in charge in the House of Representatives this week, and not a moment too soon!

Forget "stimulus" bills and "shovel-ready" bailouts (for public school teachers, who need shovels for what they're teaching), the current financial crisis, which is the second Great Depression, was created slowly and methodically by Democratic hacks running Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac over the past 18 years.

As even Obama's treasury secretary admitted in congressional hearings, "Fannie and Freddie were a core part of what went wrong in our system." And if it's something Tim Geithner noticed, it's probably something that's fairly obvious.

Goo-goo liberals with federal titles pressured banks into making absurd loans to high-risk borrowers – demanding, for example, that the banks accept unemployment benefits as collateral. Then Fannie repackaged the bad loans as "prime mortgages" and sold them to banks, thus poisoning the entire financial market with hidden bad loans.

Believe it or not, the loans went belly up, banks went under, and the Democrats used taxpayer money to bail out their friends on Wall Street.

So far, Fannie and Freddie's default on loans that should never have been made has cost the taxpayer tens of billions of dollars. Some estimates say the final cost to the taxpayer will be more than $1 trillion. To put that number in perspective, for a trillion dollars, President Obama could pass another stupid, useless stimulus package that doesn't create a single real job.

Obama's own Federal Housing Finance Agency reported recently that by 2014, Freddie and Fannie will cost taxpayers between $221 billion to $363 billion.

Over and over again, Republicans tried to rein in the politically correct policies being foisted on mortgage lenders by Fannie Mae, only to be met by a Praetorian Guard of Democrats howling that Republicans hated the poor.

In 2003, Republicans on the Senate Banking Committee wrote a bill to tighten the lending regulation of Fannie and Freddie. Every single Democrat on the committee voted against it.

In the House, Barney Frank angrily proclaimed that Fannie Mae was "just fine."

Rep. William Clay, D-Mo., accused Republicans of going on a "witch hunt" against Fannie Mae and attempting a "political lynching of Franklin Raines" (which, in a game of "bad metaphor Scrabble" would have been a double word score).

Fannie was pressuring banks to write mortgages with no money down and no proof of income. What could go wrong?

In 2004, Bush's White House Chief Economist Gregory Mankiw warned that Fannie was creating "systemic risk for our financial system." In response, Barney Frank went to a champagne brunch with his partner "just because."

Democrats saw nothing of concern in the Fannie debacle. Bad mortgages don't contain sodium, do they? They don't engage in "hate speech." And they don't emit carbon dioxide. There was nothing to catch a Democrat's eye.

In 2005, when the housing bubble burst, Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., introduced a bill allowing Fannie Mae to buy up even more schlock mortgages, apparently reasoning that if owning some toxic mortgages is bad, owning lots of them must be better!

He accused Republican opponents of his suicidal bill of being against affordable housing. (And that is a specific example of how liberals love the poor so much, they promoted policies to create millions more of them.)

As late as 2008, Sen. Chris Dodd, D-Conn., who had received more than $133,000 in political contributions from Fannie Mae, called Fannie "fundamentally strong" and "in good shape" – which is the kind of thing the Politburo used to say about Yuri Andropov right after he died.

(Amazingly, Dodd was only the second-most embarrassing Democrat to run for president in 2008, but only because John Edwards was also running that year.)

As the titanic losses were racking up, Fannie Mae's operators, Franklin Raines and Jamie Gorelick, disguised the catastrophe by orchestrating a $5 billion accounting fraud – all the while continuing to pressure banks to make absurd, politically correct loans and denouncing Republicans as enemies of the poor.

In Gorelick's defense, at least when she was wrecking the economy, she wasn't able to wreck national security by building any more walls between the FBI and the CIA.

Have you ever noticed that whenever there's a major calamity in this country, the name "Jamie Gorelick" always pops up? I think I'll pull some articles about the Great Chicago Fire from Nexis to see if there was a "Gorelick" living on Catherine O'Leary's block.

As Peter Schweizer points out in his magnificent book "Architects of Ruin," which everyone should read, Enron's accounting fraud was a paltry $567 million – and it didn't bring down the entire financial system. Those involved in the Enron manipulations went to prison. Raines and Gorelick not only didn't go to jail, they walked away with multimillion-dollar payouts, courtesy of the taxpayer.

(Here's more fascinating Jamie Gorelick trivia: That giant wall she built between the FBI and the CIA, making 9/11 possible? It was financed with a risky loan from Fannie Mae.)

Under the Democrats' 2010 "Financial Reform" bill (written by Chris Dodd, Barney Frank and Goldman Sachs), Raines keeps his $90 million, Jamie Gorelick keeps her $26.4 million, and Goldman keeps its $12 billion from the AIG bailout.

Let's get it back. Twelve billion, one hundred and sixteen point four million dollars might not sound like a lot to you, but it starts to add up.