Under what definition of news is the following not front-page news: the federal government cannot tell whether its spending $3 trillion well and effectively.

On Tuesday, the Senate finance committee held a hearing where three government watchdogs testified about the TARP program and other various corporate bailouts. Neil Barofsky, the special inspector general for the Troubled Asset Relief Program, noted that the total amount of money being spent by the US government on TARP and other programs is $2.97676 trillion. (Yes, he was that specific.) And he noted that since government IGs typically worry that 10 percent of any given government program can be lost to fraud and waste, he's looking at potentially $300 billion worth of fraud.

That statement--a hypothetical warning--received media attention. But perhaps more alarming were the reports from the hearing that the feds are not doing all they can to monitor the bailout money they are throwing at various banks, insurance companies and other financial institutions. Barofsky said that in December he had proposed that "Treasury should require TARP recipients to monitor their use of funds and be required to provide certified reports to Treasury on how they are using taxpayer money." That sounds simple and logical, right? You get billions from the taxpayers, you state how you're using those billions. But that hasn't happened. Barofsky told the senators that this modest proposal has not been adopted.

More troubling was the testimony of Elizabeth Warren, who chairs the Congressional Oversight Panel that oversees TARP and the other bailouts. She offered several disclosures that ought to make a taxpayer flip his or her lid. Warren noted:

My take on President Barack Obama's second press conference, first posted at MotherJones.com....

At the second press conference of his two-month-old presidency, Barack Obama sent a clear signal: I'm an establishment progressive, not an angry populist.

Before taking questions from reporters, Obama read a statement--a sort of mini-speech--off a teleprompter and recounted all the economic measures he has put into play: the stimulus package, a mortgage crisis plan, various plans to unclog credit within the financial system (including the toxic assets buy-back program), and his proposed budget.

Only after he explained how all this will help the economy recover did he note that was "as angry as anyone" about the bonuses paid to executives of AIG, the bailed-out insurance giant. Obama noted that the bonuses were another "symptom" of the culture of greed that allowed Wall Streeters to bring down the rest of the economy. Corporate executives, he warned, must realize that they cannot enrich "themselves on taxpayer's dime" and engage in "reckless speculation that puts us all at risk." But, he added, the "rest of us can't afford to demonize every investor and entrepreneur."

Sitck a fork in it. Obama's presidency is done. He's lost the people. He's adrift. He's screwed the pooch.

Some pundits are already pronouncing the O Era a bust--or suggesting it's near the cliff's edge. In the White House press room, reporters routinely ask press secretary Robert Gibbs if the Obama White House has already lost its mojo. Over at The Weekly Standard, Fred Barnes has declared Obama's stint a "flailing presidency." Given that Barnes considers the Bush presidency one of the best in this country's long history, his success-o-meter may be in need of recalibration. Barnes verdict is based mostly on the AIG bonus mess, which he calls a "crisis." Maybe for Senator Chris Dodd. But for most folks--including the man in the White House--the true crisis is the collapse of the economy. Certainly, the White House did not handle the AIG business well last week. But by bringing up Watergate while referring to the AIG business, Barnes shows how desperate he is to turn a bruise into a coma.

Over at Newser.com, media-poker Michael Wolff also went after Obama. He called him a "terrible bore." And--insult of insults--he compared him to Jimmy Carter. Obama's great sin, in Wolff's eye? He delivered a "turgid teachy fiscal lecture" on Jay Leno's show on Thursday night. Wolff goes on:

Rage against AIG is all the rage. The Washington Post reports on its front-page:

President Obama's apparent inability to block executive bonuses at insurance giant AIG has dealt a sharp blow to his young administration and is threatening to derail both public and congressional support for his ambitious political agenda.

That might be a bit hyperbolic. Is there anyone saying, "I won't support Obama on health care or clean energy because of AIG?" But the uproar over AIG is real. Senator Chuck Grassley, an Iowa Republican, has even suggested that AIG execs kill themselves, a la disgraced Japanese leaders. Stephen Colbert wielded an actual pitchfork on his show.

It's obvious: AIG has become the scapegoat for the economic collapse. Members of Congress who have been loathe to name names previously are now rushing to blast AIG. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has vowed to introduce legislation to kill those lousy bonuses. Of course, the company and its reckless executives deserve condemnation and scorn--and maybe jail cells. But the amount of the bonuses is minuscule compared to the amount of taxpayer money that has been poured into AIG by the Federal Reserve; in fact, it's about one-tenth of 1 percent of the AIG bailout.

It's easy to get upset about the AIG rewards. Just as it it's easy to get upset about Bernie Madoff. But focusing on either is something of a distraction. The real issue is not the AIG exec money-grab. It's how the system permitted AIG to jump so far off the rails and how the American taxpayers have been placed on the hook for AIG and so many other financial firms. Members of Congress and media pundits should spend as much time pondering financial reregulation and scrutinizing the various bailouts (to determine if they are indeed worthwhile) as they do demonizing AIG executives. For instance, the Federal Reserve since the collapse of the market has loaned $800 billion to $1.2 trillion to assorted banks, and it has refused to identify these institutions. That secrecy ought to prompt at least 5 percent of the outrage stirred up by the AIG bonuses. But it hasn't.

The AIG bonuses are truly outrageous. But they're chump change compared to what else is happening. No doubt, many bankers and Big Finance leaders are delighted to see AIG suck up this much oxygen. That means there will be less heavy breathing about all the other outrages still under way.

You can follow my postings and media appearances via Twitter by clicking here.

As regular readers can tell from the past few days, I've been fixated on a point: as mega-finance firms fail, it's absurd for McCain to beat on Wall Street when his campaign is chockfull of corporate lobbyists (past and present) who have been paid lots of money to rig the system for Big Finance firms. And that includes UBS executive and McCain adviser Phil Gramm, who, as chairman of the Senate Banking Committee, pulled a backroom legislative stunt in 2000 to make sure that credit default swaps--a certain financial instrument that helped pave the way to the subprime meltdown--would remain completely unregulated.

The nice thing about having an obsession and being head of a Washington bureau is that you can assign reporters to stories. So I asked Jonathan Stein and Nick Baumann, two colleagues of mine at Mother Jones, to go through a list of 177 lobbyists working for the McCain campaign and find those who have been influence-peddlers for financial firms. They did and discovered that over 80 of these lobbyists have been game-riggers for financial corporations. Consequently, we had a story to post:

In the past few days, as the economic crisis has deepened, Senator John McCain has been decrying the excesses of Wall Street. At a campaign rally in Tampa on Tuesday, he vowed that he and Alaska Governor Sarah Palin, if elected, "are going to put an end to the reckless conduct, corruption, and unbridled greed that have caused a crisis on Wall Street." He noted that the "foundation of our economy...has been put at risk by the greed and mismanagement of Wall Street and Washington."

He blasted CEOs who "seem to escape the consequences." He denounced Wall Streeters who "dreamed up investment schemes that they themselves don't even understand" and who used "derivatives, credit default swaps, and mortgage-backed securities" to try "to make their own rules." He excoriated Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac for gaming the system. And he slammed financial industry lobbyists for misguiding members of Congress. "I can promise you the days of dealing and special favors will soon be over in Washington." On Wednesday morning, after the federal government committed $85 billion to prevent the collapse of the American International Group (AIG) insurance conglomerate, McCain again assailed irresponsible corporate executives. "We need to change the way Washington and Wall Street does business," he proclaimed.

McCain has been quick with fiery, populist-tinged speeches. But one thing has been missing: any acknowledgment that McCain's own campaign has been loaded with the type of people he's been denouncing. As Mother Jones previously reported, former Senator Phil Gramm, McCain's onetime campaign chairman, used a backroom maneuver in late 2000 to slip into law a bill that kept credit default swaps unregulated. These financial instruments greased the way to the subprime meltdown that has led to today's economic crisis. Several of McCain's most senior campaign aides have lobbied for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. And the Democratic National Committee, using publicly available records, has identified 177 lobbyists working for the McCain campaign as either aides, policy advisers, or fundraisers.

Of those 177 lobbyists, according to a Mother Jones review of Senate and House records, at least 83 have in recent years lobbied for the financial industry McCain now attacks. These are high-paid influence-peddlers who have been working the corridors of the nation's capital to win favors and special treatment for investment banks, securities firms, hedge funds, accounting outfits, and insurance companies. Their clients have included AIG, the newest symbol of corporate excess; Lehman Brothers, which filed for bankruptcy on Monday sending the stock market into a tailspin; Merrill Lynch, which was bought out by Bank of America this week; and Washington Mutual, the banking giant that could be the next to fall. Among these 83 lobbyists are McCain's chief political adviser, Charlie Black (JP Morgan, Washington Mutual Bank,, Freddie Mac, Mortgage Bankers Association of America); McCain's national finance co-chairman, Wayne Berman (AIG, Blackstone, Credit Suisse, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac); the campaign's congressional liaison, John Green (Carlyle Group, Citigroup, Icahn Associates, Fannie Mae); McCain's veep vetter, Arthur Culvahouse (Fannie Mae); and McCain's transition planning chief, William Timmons Sr. (Citigroup, Freddie Mac, Vanguard Group).

When cable news shows air footage of McCain railing against greedy execs and the lobbyists who rig the rules for the benefit of Wall Street dealmakers, there ought to be a crawl beneath him listing these lobbyists. (Talk about a fair and balanced presentation.) Short of that, here's the list of the McCain aides and bundlers who have worked for the high-finance greed-mongers McCain has pledged to take on. So far, it seems, none of them have been cast out of the campaign. If McCain were serious about his outrage, he might throw these money-changers out of his own temple.

To see that list, click here.