Who Is To Blame For Citi?

Author:
Publish date:
Updated on

Apparently that is the question to be asked/answered/debated/shouted about among people who like to self-gratify to the sound/sight of their own words today. Since that, too, is a fetish of ours and yours, we'll get on board.
The Journal, I'm guessing, seems to believe Bob Rubes and Co. are to blame, wondering aloud this morning, "Why are Robert Rubin and other directors still employed?" The Post, I think, feels the same way, demanding that someone "Bounce These Bozo Bankers" who supposedly "orchestrated the fall of this behemoth." Charlie Gasparino, too, counts himself among those calling for Rubin's head (and the board in general but really mostly Rubin), and his vote counts for more than everyone else's because, as CG told Steve Liesman earlier, he called BS on Bobby first, like, years ago (Gasparino also uproariously opened the bit by saying he's to blame, so we'll include him in the mix). Prince Alwaleed, taking the path less traveled, is pretty okay with Bobs and the board but, you might've heard, feels quite strongly that Chuck Prince is our number one perp, as does Sandy Weill. A bunch of random readers like to leave comments daily about how Vikram Pandit got us in this sitch, and deranged as they may be, we must still acknowledge (and dismiss) what they have to say. And surely there are more! Since figuring out who, exactly, we should tar, feather, kill and sexually assault (in that order) is of the utmost importance, now that we kinda own this bank, I've rounded up the suspects below. Please weigh in. Appropriate measures will be taken tonight.

Online Surveys & Market Research

Related