"Don't you dare" is probably the phrase most Americans, as well as most people in the Obama administration, were thinking last week when news broke that Citigroup, the Wall Street recipient of $45 billion in federal bailout or TARP (Troubled Asset Relief Program) money, was asking the Treasury Department for permission to pay bonuses to some select executives.

Such a move would reignite the taxpayer anger that erupted over similar AIG bonuses — paid by a company being kept alive with $150 billion in taxpayer funds.

The situation at Citigroup, like that at AIG, is not that simple.

Not everyone working at AIG is responsible for driving the company into the ground. In fact, most of those people have probably already left the company. One particular division of the giant insurance company that sold complex financial instruments is being blamed for the company's trouble.

And at Citigroup, the bonuses being sought would go to executives in the company's energy-trading division, which happens to be the most profitable part of Citigroup. That Citigroup unit, called Phibro, has been making hundreds of millions in profits for Citigroup.

Adding to the inevitable outrage, if such bonuses were allowed to be paid, the Phibro situation is further complicated by the fact that the head of Phibro, no doubt one of those thought to be deserving of a big bonus, happened to have made $100 million or so last year.

This latest news from Citigroup, when coupled with a recent report claiming that pay levels on Wall Street are climbing back to approach their 2007 peaks, should motivate taxpayers and voters to send a very clear message to the White House. No million-dollar paychecks, no multimillion-dollar bonuses, at companies receiving TARP money.

Citigroup argues that key people at Phibro are threatening to leave the financial services company because of the TARP-related pay and bonus restraints. It could be perceived as a threat to Citigroup, but it could be seen as an opportunity to sell the Phibro operation for billions of dollars and use that money to improve the bank's balance sheet or allow repayment of some of the TARP money.

More than one analyst has argued that the big, money-center banks — considered by the federal government to be "too big to fail" — should be broken up into smaller, more- manageable operations.

That line of thinking also supports a return to the time when commercial banking was a cautious and conservative business. New York Times columnist and Nobel Prize-winning economist Paul Krugman argued several weeks ago for a return to what he called "boring banking."

In such a scenario, the high-risk operations of giant financial firms would be shifted to other companies, thus removing the kinds of volatility, high leverage and risk that brought so much damage to so many of the giant banking companies.

The financial world, including Wall Street and big banks, appears to be receiving more-favorable treatment from the federal government, compared to the treatment of Detroit automakers.

It's time for more parity, and that means holding bankers and Wall Street managers to the same level of accountability as that applied to General Motors and Chrysler. And a good place to start would be to shut down any talk of big bonuses at Citigroup.