It smacks of the evil Socialism and welfare for the rich to me. If a mother on welfare should not get money from the government, why should the CEO of one of these companies? Also, imagine how may recipients of welfare it would take to equal the amount of money a few of these guys will make (all at tax payer expense)?
Once more I would mention that I am not ideologically biased? I am a principled (to me) pragmatist and Moderate on these things. I understand the "reason" behind this bailout from an economic standpoint (although Adam Smith and his invisible hand would be wagging a finger at this!). As my friend Brandon and I were discussing, Obama is sounding like Ron Paul on this is (yes, Ron Paulites- you are correct once more).
It is my contention that between rank-and-file Conservatives and Liberals, there is a big difference. One believes in socialism for some things and the other believes in socialism for other things. One believes in welfare for a specific population and the other believes in welfare for another population. It is only the purists on both extremes that believes differently.
I am reminded of one of Gandhi's deadly sins- "