May 2013
M	T	W	T	F	S	S
« Apr
	1	2	3	4	5
6	7	8	9	10	11	12
13	14	15	16	17	18	19
20	21	22	23	24	25	26
27	28	29	30	31

Questions and Observations

Free Markets, Free People

Bailouts Not Diverse Enough

Published March 31, 2009 | By Bruce McQuain

If you’re going to hand out big bucks, you need to do it in a politically correct manner.

Members of the Congressional Black Caucus on Monday criticized the lack of minority participation in the government’s financial bailouts and suggested that President Barack Obama isn’t doing much better than his predecessor to ensure diversity.

These particular vultures are feeling a bit peevish. They’re just not seeing the flow of money to their favored constituencies that they expect – especially with a brother in the Oval Office. I mean, come on – we are talking trillions here, right?

Where’s theirs?

~McQ

Share and Enjoy:

Posted in Bruce McQuain, Government, Race | Tagged bailout, CBC, Congressional Black Caucus, diversity

8 Responses to Bailouts Not Diverse Enough

Steverino says:

March 31, 2009 at 04:51

There’s just no pleasing some people. If you handed out hundred dollar bills, some would complain that they had to wait in line.
docjim505 says:

March 31, 2009 at 05:06

More proof (as though any were needed) that all this bailout and stimulus is less about helping the economy and more about politicians raiding the treasury to reward their supporters and special interest groups.
- Dale Franks says:
  
  March 31, 2009 at 06:44
  
  You’ve hit the nail on the head, my friend.
  
  We aren’t really talking about bailouts any more, in the sense of urgent and necessary action to prevent critical businesses from imploding and dragging down the whole economy with them. We’re really just talking about distributing the nation’s wealth to favored clients, which is a purely political decision.
- Arcs says:
  
  March 31, 2009 at 08:31
  
  More proof (as though any were needed) that all this bailout and stimulus is less about helping the economy and more about politicians raiding the treasury to reward their supporters and special interest groups.
  
  I think that’s exactly right. It’s the Democrat response to the perception of KBR raping the Treasury through no-bid contracts.
shark says:

March 31, 2009 at 06:00

Obama rolled back some of the welfare reforms didn’t he? There you go!

(And no, that’s not racist. The goal of the caucus is to promote policies that ensure their “brothers and sisters” wind up on the dole. Mission being accomplished!)
Julie says:

March 31, 2009 at 07:03

shark I agree!

Enough with saying racist to everyone who says what he thinks about the new president.
tired of this.
Neo says:

March 31, 2009 at 07:04

But now, in a little-noticed move, the House Financial Services Committee, led by chairman Barney Frank, has approved a measure that would, in some key ways, go beyond the most draconian features of the original AIG bill. The new legislation, the “Pay for Performance Act of 2009,” would impose government controls on the pay of all employees — not just top executives — of companies that have received a capital investment from the U.S. government. It would, like the tax measure, be retroactive, changing the terms of compensation agreements already in place. And it would give Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner extraordinary power to determine the pay of thousands of employees of American companies.

This ought to make lots of friends in the UAW as “Turbo-Tax” Timmy sets their pay.
I can see them now .. screaming for bankruptcy.
- Arcs says:
  
  March 31, 2009 at 08:32
  
  I would guess that the Pay for Performance Act of 2009 would only apply to those employees not under collective bargaining agreements.