« A better Brookside | Main | Legalize steroids »

February 15, 2009

Giving our money away

The front page of The Star (2/5, A-1) pictured five CEOs and listed their total earnings for the year 2007. The smallest amount received was $1.6 million by John Mack of Morgan Stanley. Vikram Pandit of Citigroup was given $216 million.

What in the world could this Vikram Pandit (whose name should be Bandit) have possibly done to earn such a vulgar amount of compensation?

The big rub is just a few months later in early fall of 2008 they were begging and received billions of our money in the bailout. All of these “grants” came from the simple-minded idiots in the White House and on Capitol Hill, who were so anxious to give our money away they didn’t even bother to set forth any rules or contracts as to how this money was to be used, nor did they agree to any form of auditing.

What a disgusting situation. I blame our government for permitting it to happen.

Roberta Work
Leawood

Comments

Engineer

TinaMcG
If you have a majority, you can stop any bill from getting to the President's desk. You don't have to have a veto proof majority to do that. What I said was that they could stop anything they wanted to stop. That is a correct statement. Reread my sentence and tell what I said that was incorrect. That sentence was dead serious. The rest of the post, not so much.

TinaMcG

"The Democrats have held the majority since 2006. They could have stopprd anything they wished to stop."

Crap, pure crap. They couldn't do anything without a veto-proof majority in the Senate. There never was any "democratically controlled congress". Hell, Bush even vetoed sCHIP, didn'the?

jack

Tell me guys, who the pols were whose names are on the bill that overturned Glass-Steagall. Also, which party they were in.

Jeez-Louise, there is lots of blame to go around.

But please ya'll remember, "conservatives" are never responsible for the outcomes of their actions. With Bush in the Whitehouse and a solid majority in both houses of congress, Barney-Freaking Frank managed to bully them into the financial fiasco.

Barny-Freaking-Frank!

What a bunch of girliemen!

Engineer

Pub 17
The Democrats have held the majority since 2006. They could have stopprd anything they wished to stop. But I guess they thought everything was OK. After all if Countryside could afford to give such a sweetheart deal to Chris Dodd, how could he even imagine anything was wrong with any financial firm? And Barney Frank was doing OK despite the loss of the revenue stream from his business in the basement. On top of that all of his energy and attention was being takenn up with harassing and attacking those impertinent enough to suggest to various Congressional Committees that there were problems with Fanny and Freddie.

Pub 17

The Democrats were in control of Congress? Really? When was that?

We're talking about a filibuster-proof veto-override majority, right?

Smarter Than You

Tina’s ready to lead the villagers, pitch-forks and torches in hand, storming the castle.

The problem is these hand-outs occurred with the Dem’s in control of Congress. They pushed them through with no oversight.

“Fannie and Freddie-stein Redux” would be a great name for the movie. Nancy Pelosi in the bee-hive with white stripes down the side as the bride. Reid as Igor. Barney Frank as the mad scientist. Al Gore as the creature (he’s actually a robot in real life). And Jerry Mathers as the Beaver.

TinaMcG

What a disgusting situation. I blame our government for permitting it to happen.

Really? I blame the voters who put those yaboos into office...twice.

 
About KansasCity.com | About the Real Cities Network | Terms of Use & Privacy Statement | About Knight Ridder | Copyright