“I intend to see this through,” Citigroup CEO Vikiram Pandit said at today’s annual shareholder’s meeting. He also said Citigroup would “repay every penny” of the money they borrowed from the government.

Shareholders are expected to vote on 4 four new additions to the board. They are also expected to vote on several other members, causing a major re-shuffling of the board. The board picks are not without controversy as several large shareholder groups are unhappy with the board’s performance.

Despite the profit announcement, Citigroup really isn’t performing that well.

“Citigroup results included several one-time items (widening debt spreads, the sale of Redecard and accounting changes) which muddied the waters in assessing the franchises underlying performance,” wrote Goldman Sachs (NYSE:GS) analysts Richard Ramsden and Brian Foran on April 19.

The analysts went on to say that Citigroup is still having major problems with credit quality and that doesn’t look to change in coming months.

On web discussion group Yahoo Buzz, the comments about Citigroup (NYSE:C) were scathing.

One by “castlewall” was typical: “Look out Citibank, as crooks your days are numbered unless you all sit down and think of all the money you have stolen for yourselves to pay out bonuses,” the message said.

Shadegrown was outspoken in his support of the terrorist group. “Not at all surprising, as Citibank can be construed as the face of significant greed and indifference to others. Well deserved, I would add. Thank God no one got hurt or killed. Bravo,” he wrote.

When the average web surfer cheers for your offices to be blown to smithereens, it’s safe to say as a company you’ve developed an image problem.

It’s easy to understand where all the antipathy towards Citigroup comes from. On so many levels the company is emblematic of the entire financial crisis that currently grips the world. Their continuous miscues and common misdeeds in the pursuit of profit are legendary. Their hunger to dine at the public trough is unprescedented. All of their corporate shortcomings have resulted in a company that elicits reactions such as this one when they’re bombed by terrorists.

“I thought the Upper Management of Citi bank were all terrorists,” said papanielsen.

Ouch. Yep, it looks like Citigroup has a real image problem.

A recent display of bad form occurred during the “Bowl Games.” Companies that have accepted billions from our government were still advertising during the Bowl Games, a move that didn’t sit well with many viewers.

“Some of the advertising folks at these firms might think it’s important to put their corporate brand on public events, but taxpayers might think they’re being taken for a ride,” said Pete Sepp, vice president for policy and communications at the National Taxpayers Union.

Bailed out banks are big ballers

This is only the tip of the iceberg. A bigger conflict of interest would be that these same companies are still lobbying the government, despite getting public funds. Should companies that have failed so enormously be allowed to shape public policy? And if companies aren’t lending money to Americans, then why bother spending huge money on ads?

That’s the exact question that Republican Scott Garrett posed.

“The irony is these guys aren’t lending to people, so what are they advertising for?” Mr. Garrett said.

Bank leaders could care less

Of course you can’t actually expect leaders of the nation’s banks to feel guilty about advertising while accepting bailout cash.

“For the last several years this has been part of an integrated marketing strategy and no taxpayer-funded TARP money was used for it,” said Citi spokesman Luis Rosero.

The auto industy has a huge base of lobbyists

Now that the US auto industry has been bailed out, will the still be allowed to lobby against fuel efficiency laws as they’ve done for decades? The auto makers have been so in love with gas guzzling vehicles for so long now that they automatically fight any push for greater fuel efficiency, which would also reduce our nation’s dependence on foreign oil.

Now that bailout funds have been dispersed to keep the auto makers in business, shouldn’t we as taxpayers expect that they should be allowed to exert less pressure on policy in Washington? Whether they do or not will be interesting as it concerns Barack Obama. Obama has pledge greater fuel efficiency on the campaign trail, and now that the government he represents is an investor in the “Big Three” auto makers, he’s in a position to push them to greater change.

Whether he does so successfully may end up being contingent on the power of the auto makers lobbying efforts. Personally, I’d like to see these companies lose any right to lobby now that they’re being “bailed out” by public funds.

Bailout insanity full speed ahead

There doesn’t appear to be any temperance ahead for any of the bailed out companies. In fact, taxpayer dollars are now being used to fund takeovers. That’s right, several banks are already in the process of using TARP funds to acquire rivals.

“As we see this economy shake out, there are going to be some that make it and some that don’t make it,” said Alan B. White, PlainsCapital’s chairman and chief executive. “And there are going to be good opportunities that people are going to be able to take advantage of. I hope I’m one of those.”

It turns out some companies that received bailout funds didn’t “need the money” and are now looking to use it to make higher returns.

“Some of the banks that have received the money don’t need it but decided they would go ahead and take it since it was available,” said Robert L. Clarke, a senior partner at Bracewell & Giuliani in Houston who was comptroller of the currency under presidents Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush. “But it has not changed their view of the risk of making loans.”

So even though these banks are willing to take money that they don’t need, they have no intention of loaning it back out to beleaguered consumers.

The bailout of the financial industry has left out one big component: the consumer. Consumers can’t expect even the slightest bit of credit reform until 2010. So in 2009, you can expecte bailed out banks to overcharge and abuse consumers in every while possible, all the while using TARP funds to take over rivals and lobby the government. Only in America.

Citigroup will absorb up to $42 billion of losses in the deal, with the FDIC covering any remaining losses, the government agency said Monday. Citigroup also will grant the FDIC $12 billion in preferred stock and warrants.

The FDIC asserted that Wachovia didn’t fail, and that all depositors are protected and there will be no cost to the Deposit Insurance Fund.

Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke, in a statement Monday, said he supports the “timely actions” taken by the FDIC “which demonstrate our government’s unwavering commitment to financial and economic stability.”

Wachovia has been one of the U.S. banks most affected by the mortgage meltdown which has been gripping the financial sector.

The main reason Wells Fargo has the edge is because the company has so far managed to miss most of the excitement of the credit crunch, which has caused the failure of 11 banks so far this year nationwide.

Wachovia (NYSE:WB) runs a huge branch network in the Eastern section of the United States, a prize coveted by either Citi or WFC.

So far the government in the guise of the Fed has been reluctant to involve itself in the Wachovia deal.

Wachovia stock has traded as high as $52.25, and ended the day at $10 on Friday.