Standing in his driveway, the AIG executive was asked by a New York Times reporter about his life since the AIG bonuses were disclosed. The Times offered this account of his answer: "'You have to understand,' he said, 'there are kids involved, there have been death threats....' His voice trailed off. It looked as if he was fighting back tears. 'I didn’t have anything to do with those credit problems,' said James Haas, 47. 'I told [AIG chief executive Edward M. Liddy] I would rescind my retention contract.' He ended the conversation with a request: 'Leave my neighbors alone.'"

The article puts a human face on the the much reviled, bonus-blessed executives of bailed-out financial firms. Clearly, some don't see the bonuses as a blessing. Haas, labeled "Jackpot Jimmy" by the New York Post, is not the only bonus recipient who has offered to give the money back.

If Congress has its way, he and other "bonus babies" (another label from the ever-colorful Post)Times column today, David Brooks suggested the government was paying too much attention to the bonus backlash: "The Washington political class has spent the past week going into made-for-TV hysterics over $165 million in AIG bonuses. We’re in the middle of a mult-itrillion-dollar crisis, and our political masters -- always willing to throw themselves into any issue that is understandable on cable television -- have decided to risk destroying the entire bank-rescue plan because of bonuses that account for 0.001% of the annual GDP."