The response to the mortgage security mess is now winding its way through the government sausage factory and the next level of operational leadership is being revealed. 
This morning, Hank Paulson announced that Neel Kashkari will oversee the $700B program –
The Treasury Department plans to tap Neel Kashkari, an assistant secretary of international affairs and a former Goldman Sachs banker, to oversee the government’s $700 billion financial rescue program, sources familiar with the situation said yesterday.Kashkari has been a close adviser to Treasury Secretary Henry M. Paulson Jr. on the credit crisis and helped draft the legislation for the massive rescue plan. He is expected to run the program on an interim basis until the Treasury finds a permanent head, according to sources who spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to comment. Kashkari’s replacement would stay on after the next administration takes office in January.
At the tender age of 35, Neel is being handed quite a shopping budget. Then again, often the only thing bigger than a government amplified problem is the government created solution.
The WSJ credits Neel with being a key man behind the scenes who crafted much of the “Paulson Plan” –
[Neel] spent much of his tenure at Treasury helping Mr. Paulson stem the fallout from the housing correction. He helped implement an alliance of mortgage-industry players who joined last year to help homeowners in danger of foreclosure.
Mr. Kashkari was part of the Treasury team that negotiated the asset-repurchase program with Congress, putting in marathon sessions along with Robert Hoyt, Treasury’s general counsel, and Kevin Fromer, the head of legislative affairs. He was also one of the originators of the plan. Last year, he and Phillip Swagel, assistant secretary for economic policy, crafted a proposal called “break the glass” — referring to the emergency nature of using such a tool — which envisioned Treasury buying bad loans and other assets.
<
p>Neel’s official bio is up on Treasury’s website and makes for interesting reading that crosses paths with many mutineers –
…Prior to joining the Treasury Department, Mr. Kashkari was a Vice President at Goldman, Sachs & Co. in San Francisco, where he led Goldman’s IT Security Investment Banking practice, advising public and private companies on mergers and acquisitions and financial transactions. Prior to his career in finance, Mr. Kashkari was a R&D Principal Investigator at TRW in Redondo Beach, California where he developed technology for NASA space science missions such as the James Webb Space Telescope.Originally from Stow, Ohio, Mr. Kashkari graduated from the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign with a Bachelor’s and Master’s degree in Engineering. He also received an M.B.A. in Finance from the Wharton School. Mr. Kashkari and his wife reside in Maryland.
Googling around, I found a CSPAN clip of Mr Kashkari keynoting an AEI-sponsored event last month on alternatives to Fannie-Mae / Freddie-Mac for mortgage financing. Neel gets introduced about 9:30 into the clip and finally starts speaking around 12 min into it (ch 3).
 |
|
Yep, he does bear an eery resemblance to his 62 yr old boss. |
In the clip, Neel describes how a “covered bond” market could be created in the US based in large part on a similar, successful system deployed in the Netherlands and how it differs from our current system. One particularly attractive aspect would be avoidance of the government backstops which I personally hold responsible for the necessity and size of the $700B bail out (although not necessarily the bubble itself).
Regardless of whether you agree with his policy recommendation, Neel comes across as a very bright, articulate technocrat who crisply enumerates where we stand, where he wants to take us, and why. The Q&A (particularly ch13 / Q2) shows him sticking to his guns and handling prickly interrogation with grace and style.
But what good would any of this be if he didn’t make his dad proud?
Feeling like he wanted a change of pace, and wanting to learn more about finance, Kashkari attended Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania and earned his master’s degree in 1997, said Neel’s father Chaman Kashkari.
“The whole idea was to combine engineering with finance,” said Chaman Kashkari. “He told me the country needed people who have a good concept of engineering and a good concept of finance.”
…Chaman Kashkari said he came to this country from Kashmir, India, before his son was born.
“This country has given to us and given a lot,” he said. “I’m very happy that [Neel] can do something extra special. I’m very happy that Stow has the environment to produce people who do something special.”
Homey’s ditched rockets of one sort for quite a different beast. Either way, it’ll be the ride of his life. 
UPDATE: Longtime mutineer KXB points us at this NPR Profile of Kashkari via the News tab.
Next we shall discuss the difference between froth and bubble.
So F&F somehow engineered the asset bubble using their GSE status? They were just playing the game they were thrown into. Play it, they are accused of moral hazard, don’t play they are accused of being an inefficient govt bureaucracy. Firms a fraction of their size got bailed out, I don’t see how we could avoid this if they were a private player.
51 · Dr Amonymous said
you can’t look at the 2 largest mortgage institutions, 2 institutions with their hand in a whopping $6trillion worth or loans, with approximately 20-30% stake in subprime, famous for giving $$ to politicians, with an accounting scandal to boot, with access to government privileges, loans, subsidies, etc and responsible for 2 of the largest single bailouts in history? i know, must not use specifics to obscure the big picture. its the big picture that matters.
please. you solved the mystery before you even knew of the murder. so you don’t care about debating because your mind is made up. looking at evidence that may exonerate the defendant risks allowing the one you’re so sure is guilty to go out and commit another crime.
a href=”http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gramm-Leach-Bliley_Act”>Gramm,Leach, Bliley and Bill Clinton. Cauldron boil and superbubble,
52 · voiceinthehead said
well, its a concentration of power argument, voice. this makes things more dangerous, more likely. certainly pro-regulation activists understand that even in regards to purely private companies, perhaps especially.
but F&F, since they were so tightly regulated and the bush admin did call for an investigation, shows the limits of regulation as well. would regulators have caught this? the ones that did (the accounting) were blocked by congress. would regulators really be wise enough to know when there’s a bubble, when firms are over-leveraged, when the financial models are not accounting for a black swan event when the people with $$ in the market don’t know either?
bubbles are so obvious in hindsight, but when we’re in the middle of them its really just human psychology, ie “Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds”
Phil Gramm, James Leach, Bliley and Bill Clinton. Cauldron boil and superbubble, sorry y’all.
13 · razib said
Mandelbrot!
Rockets… Finance… both succeptible to spectacular flame-outs.
Seems like you can’t have any big project these days without a suitable desi boy at the whip.
That’s proof by assertion. Nothing in this crisis would change, if we replace F&F with half a dozen (or more) private companies(EPDMC). Given the size of asset bubble, without the accounting scandals and over leverage they would be bailed out a tad bit later. F&F would be nowhere in the Top five reasons behind this crisis.
lol. We are talking about housing(not some new tech, which isn’t understood clearly by masses) for heaven’s sake, which is as old and as predictable as it can get. Saying you can’t spot a housing bubble, is like saying you can’t count. It was obvious to AG.
Maybe if people didn’t believe price reflected all the available information…
they now need to change the name to “Brownman Sachs”. I wonder if Neel’s mom sighed and said “at least my other son graduated from medical school”?
finally, i hope that Neel could one day use his high profile and shed light on the tragedies happening in Kashmir.
Is this what Neel crafted or will inherit ?
From IBD Editorial And just what did this rescue package contain  in addition to money for our distressed financial system, that is? Well, the makers of wooden arrows for children came out as big winners in the larger package, as that small industry got $2 million in tax benefits. Meanwhile, auto racetrack owners sucked a $100 million tax break into their intake manifold and domestic wool fabric producers spun $148 million in tax relief. As should be expected, companies developing politically correct solar and wind power were heavy favorites. They will get roughly $15 billion in tax breaks, 10 times as much as businesses dealing in fossil fuels  even though the simplest way to ease our current energy crisis is by drilling for the billions of barrels of oil we have here in the U.S. but which Congress has kept out of bounds. An additional $8 billion in relief will go to the victims of natural disasters. It’s a shame that the recovery legislation was weighted down with extras, particularly that $10 million credit that is intended to help businesses defray the costs of storing the bicycles their employees pedal to work, and the nearly $500 million in tax breaks for movie companies that produce films here in the U.S
bubbles are so obvious in hindsight,
Not correct. Tons of economists did mention about the Real Estate bubble. To begin – Dean Baker & Robert Shiller come to mind. It was Greenspan & Beranake – the ones supposed to look out for everyone – failed to recognize the bubble.
For the pro-regulators here is an argument that puts the blame partly on Big govt. regulation for the current crisis –
From IBD editorial
Manju
Can’t believe this nonsense. Many did not buy a house, or invest in the stock market because they believed that we were in a bubble.. This was clear for years {people ought to stop reading the garbage put out by the economist’s ($5/barrel of oil) columnists and begin to read from people who have crediblity.}
There were literally dozens of columns from Krugman alone Here are some of them
Predicting a nightmare housing bubble situation right after 9/11 Krugman in 2001 Fear Itself
At the start of the bubble in 2002 Dubya’s Double Dip?
Mind the Gap
Warning of adjustable-rate mortgages and advising people not to use them in 2004. Questions of Interest
Noticing the begining of the end. And the scale of the crisis to come Running out of bubbles
That Hissing Sound
we all knew how it ends, but then if we are honest is’nt it true that we all knew how it was going to end and we just wanted to take advantage of it while it lasted? Well it now has ended and main street deserves to suffer.
Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard. — H. L. Mencken
59 · voiceinthehead said
well, how is this not proof by assertion? 6 private F&Fs wouldn’t have an implied govt backing, so a huge chunk of bonds wouldn’t trade as if they’re guaranteed, would they? 6 separate F&Fs would increase the possibility that one of them would recognize an asset bubble. Their power over congress would also be dispersed and government would have less power to mandate them to take risks.
if americans actually believed this there wouldn’t be any stock picking, would there?
1.
2.
Hey, who’s right here!?
Priya, this is nonsensense as well, and has been clearly shown to be so.
Follow any economics blog to see how much this has been debunked
There are the Desis who save. And then the Desis who cave.
http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/10/06/california.murder.suicide/index.html
DizzyDesi, Suraj, and voiceinthehead:
re: Bubbles
the existence of people who see an irrational market doesn’t negate the mass psychology of bubbles. the internet bubble, dutch tulip craze, 1920’s stock market, etc all had prominant naysayers.
i have no doubt, however, that you 3 wise man all bought credit default swaps and are typing your comments from your 3000acre montana ranches.
@ 53 · Manju [snip
Make a f@#king argument, don’t just sit there and regurgitate the koolaid they gave you at some pseudolibertarian blog and then call me names. You have to account for all three of these factors, not just “government” (whatever the f@#k that means).
Does this sound primarily like an ideology of government intrusion into the economy was leading the charge? Does using that explanation help us undersatnd why this situation occurred? Does it help us understand where the money came from to issue all this credit” does it help us understand how speculation became so widespread? Does it help us understand why highly leveraged buying became common? Does it help us undersatnd why the ratings agencies didn’t do a good job? Does it help us understand why institutions that were “too big to fail” emerged, necessitating (allegedly;) bailouts? Does it even help us understand how nonbanking institutions were able to enter into the market to offer mortgages to people? Does it help us undersatnd the timing?
And then move to the general to explain how the food crisis, how the oil price rise, how the recession, and the other economic factors that are making life miserable right now and have been for several years occurred. Then you can come back to me and talk to me lilke I’m an idiot.
i have accounted for factors other than government, repeatedly, and i didn’t call you names. you’re the one trying to stop a conversation about a certain factors.
sounds like a mixed economy. crony capitalism. profit motive mixed with government power.
.
yes, i know. you want to talk of about the big picture, the interconnected system thts surely at the root of this. anything that counters this narrative, this ideology, must be denounced as bigotry. never mind how your precious big picture has terrorized so many communities the world over.
Worked on NASA Projects and was an engineer in college? I think our economy is in good hands. More government institutions should be turned over to people with these kinds of resumes. 😉
Manju – FWIW, you can do your thang … but one of my general rules here is to ignore folks who basically argue that you’re ignorant. There are enough smart, respectful folks out here who’ll constructively disagree and not insult you in the process….
heh… good one… if you wanna guest blog for SM, drop me a note 😉
Is it a bad sign that, when I heard this story on NPR today, I immediately thought of Vinod and Abhi?
73 · Camille said
No.
I imagine both Vinod and and Abhi are daydreaming about exchanging business cards with Neel Kashkari.
Who hasn’t seen the man-crush dance at desi weddings before?
Yeah right. As I recall, that super sophisticated plan was: “Give me $700,000,000 in untraceable and unauditable funds or you will never see your economy again”.
Was he also the source of all of Mr.Paulson’s penetrating insights over the past 18 months as he repeatedly claimed that the problem was solved, overblown, non-existent or all of the above?
75 · central texas said
That was $700,000,000,000 they were talking about. And as Dipanjan noted in another thread, they really wanted $1,000,000,000,000.
But whether anybody named is actually a crook or not, the best sheriff is a former (and reformed) gangster. How else are you going to know all the mischief they were up to?
That said, while regulators are getting the blame, and ‘farsighted’ ‘single-handed’ economists are getting the, er, credit – it is also true that virtually all investment banks turned simple mortgage backed securities into complex unregulated securities that, in an ideal world would have been hedging devices for the sophisticated investor – but sold them to all – including school board fund managers. Regulators could have done little if people themselves were choosing unregulated securities over regulated ones. To be sure, investment banks hard-sold these derivative securities, and then, for a ‘small fee’, turned around and ‘insured them’.
When all this is over, among other things that have to happen – these opaque derivative securities ought to be more strictly regulated.
No – because it’s impossible.
Most people are not aware as to how the securities industry operates, and think of it more as a medicinal field and want an FDA like agency to oversee the financial industry. For eg: Let’s say Merck’s R&D department comes up with a cure for skin cancer. They have to submit a patent and conduct extensive trials and submit them to the FDA for approval. The process could take years, but since the patents hold, and skin cancer is around to stay, this methodology of regulation causes minimal damage.
It would be disastrous to apply this method of regulation to the securities/derivaties industry. Let’s say, on April 1st, Pleasantville municipal department wants to issue Munis to add an extention to their elementary school by September 1st. They offer some assets, and call for tenders. Let’s also say that Merrill has a Pension fund, who wants to invest a portion into Muni Bonds. At this time, they need to quickly come up with a match for both their clients needs, and use derivaties for their hedge. And they need to do this by April 10th, or Goldman will steal the client.
At this time, do you think it makes sense for them to tell an FDA like agency what they’re doing and get their approval? Some of these are so complex that this Government agency would have hire talent from outside to decipher them (and those who can do this would never work for the Government for 1/10th the pay). Every time a new product comes out, the agency would have to scramble for talent. And do you expect the Government to get back to you in a week’s time? The elementary schools kids will have to sit in overcrowded class rooms for a couple of years!
It’s too much regulation that caused this mess, not to mention too much credit.
M. Nam
77 · MoorNam said
Great point Moornam…. brings to mind this very interesting, recent interview from Warren Buffett –
FWIW, I fully agree that more regulation of Freddie/Fannie was needed. But, what Buffett does a great job of pointing out is a very relevant, real world example of public choice at work.
Many of the folks decrying the fall of capitalism are fluent in the language of “market failure” but I fear that not enough are fluent in “governance failures”. (or perhaps, think that all “government failures” merely stem from having Republicans in sight).
20 · 20 · MoorNam on October 6, 2008 02:02 PM · Direct link · “Quote�(?)
I hope Neel’s credibility is strong enough to weather the imminent downfall of his mentor’s, who is now known as the man who burnt the Thanksgiving turkey but is still being allowed to cook for Christmas.
Could not find anything on the web as to what Neel’s code of ethics is based on – and that’s what the angry, huddled masses will be scrutinizing him for. We’re really not in a Credit crunch or an economic Hurricane. We’re in an Ethics crunch. There were tons of very bright, articulate technocrats in Frannie, Bear etc, but look where they took us.
Oh I don’t know… Maybe losing their homeland makes them more stoic and helps them to process crisises like most of us cannot?
Consider this episode as a jewellery heist. You could point some of the investment banks as the one who cut through the door or the one who cracked open the safe. But Govt’s Frannie was in charge of the getaway car and disposing off the loot for cash in a manner that nothing could be traced back to them.
M. NamMoorNam said
Boston_Mahesh wrote: Actually Vikram Pandit is NOT a Kashmiri. He’s a Marathi.
yglesias:
Desi, please.
70 · Manju said
A summary:
However, if anyone calls attention to this trend – or even pattern – , we are “ideological” or not “Respectful.” Having a temper is one thing – and I fully acknowledge that I can be less than civil. But are these really times and circumstances in which civility on a blog with this kind of conversation is what’s most important? particularly with respondents like Manju who will twist the arguments, selectively reply, use pinpointed button pushing, etc. to largely make no point at all but simply draw out the conversation further and further from any analytical argument until it devolves into something equivlanet to “well do you like chocolate? Yeah i like chocolate.”
I chose no, because you’re going to have kids reading this stuff and they’re going to be brainwahed just like you and I and everyone else who grew up in the U.S. was in the 1980s and 1990s. maybe a strategic error– satire is usually more effective than engaging with people who are fundamentally uninterested in connecting their stories about the world to what happens in the world. So, I will transform accordingly…
Technocrats? Godless killing machines. Don’t trust ’em, never have. Once you enter the government, the stench oozes on to you. Like that commie Henry Paulson. Why didn’t they just do what they did last time when there was a crisis – they should have had a secret meeting with executives of huge CEOs run by Dick Cheney – you know, let the market decide things.
“personally, I would also add that the fact that wages have stagnated for 40 years or so led to the need for credit”
This is the heart of the problem. Wage increases in the mid twentieth century allowed the American middle class to reach peak levels of prosperity (the FORD worker in the 50s who lived in a paid for house and sent three kids to college). The war has always been between the elites and the middle class. A middle class that steadily demanded more out of life than being wage slaves (too bad those days are gone) which directly threatened the hegemony of the elites. Well I guess it seems the elites have won (for now)
84 · glass houses said
Yes, it’s the latte drinking elites at the New York times and the rest of the liberal media are the ones who have won. I mean, they’re trying to take away our freedom and turn us against each other with all this talk about “bailouts” and “regulation” and “credit crises.” I mean, who cares if some people get more money than other people and it destroys the economy – that’s what makes us American. Well, that, and giving $700 billion to rich people.
Dr. Am, the kids reading SM will be alright in spite of being exposed to Manju’s twisted thinking. Are you so interested in Manju’s thoughts because you find his to be the prevalent view around you? If so, I understand your passion. But I’ve been reading something other than the WSJ op ed page and getting my news through sources other than Fox and I find there are many who express views similar to yours.
Personally I like disagreeing with Manju. He can be good-natured and witty about it and I like chocolate.
85 · bess said
No, it’s because it takes things that I think are important and turns them into idle parlor conversation. I’ve realized that somewhere along the way, the conservative movement in the u.s. adopted postmodernism and thinks it can say whatever it wants and “facts” don’t matter. I’m sure it’s fun, but when the entire financial system is melting down and globally billions of people are affected (and have been increasingly for over a decade), I would rather that someone pointed out that you can’t just spin all the time and conceren troll. I just did it the wrong way here, but I’m not sorry, because I think the dialogue was constructed that way beyond my will (see my first comment and where we ended up).
I dislike vinod’s thoguhts because free market fundamentalism (apparently except for the bailout 😉 was seen as a plausible set of ideas for too long – and that I was surrounded with for a long time- I don’t live in the U.S. anymore. He also has some rightwing pomo stuff going on too – in the use of identity politics to mask a basic and fundamental class-driven politics.
What drives me insane is the combination of the two, with the knowledge that my mom’s retirement account might evaporate because of similar arguments replicate at the highest levels of power. But it’s okay…I’ll let suresh talk to them from now on.
i like chocolate too 🙂
Nice try. Too much credit, yes not too much regulation.
Now your example for lack of a better word is ridiculous. Even us commie pinkos do not want evey transaction to be regulated. That is like asking FDA to approve each bottle of Tylenol. What we need is regulation at an aggregate level.
It is ok if your hedge fund friends make less than a billion dollars a year if in the process the country’s ecomnomy is protected. Although prices have gone up recently I hear you still can eat well for this kind of money.
The following was actually posted on another blog. Who knows if there’s any truth to this, but if so, it puts a different perspective on all the accolades posted here.
I actually know this person. Imagine my surprise when I saw his scary eyes staring me down online.
He and I have a mutual friend. We were at an event last year. I cannot be more specific, but it is true. A few of us sat outside that evening, to chat. My Significant Other and I joined him, his wife, and another couple. Oddly, they were at 2 tables, segregated by gender. The women talked weather. The guys talked politics.
Kashkari, a diehard ultra-conservative, immediately starts dogging Hillary Clinton. He said “I’d never vote for her because I don’t think women should be president.� Verbatim. My SO told me this.
My SO defended women’s rights, but Kashkari wouldn’t have it. He insisted women should never be leaders. Kashkari’s own SO said earlier, that although she had a career, “I basically follow Neel around wherever he goes.� Verbatim. Meaning she’d uproot her job whenever he felt like moving on. I thought that was interesting as well.
Kaskhari then said global warming doesnt’ exist. He said wind energy is stupid. And he would look up things on his Blackberry whenever my SO said something, to prove him wrong.
Because he didn’t like non-conservatives, or anyone with an open mind, or apparently even those who believe in gender equality, he was angry with my SO. He later went to our mutual friend and said my SO had talked about being abducted by aliens! Yes, Neel Kashkari – head of $700B bailout, said this, in an attempt to attack someone he disagreed with.
This is the person the GOP wants to manage your money. I assume sooner or later, he may run for office. Now THAT would be a scary day. Comment by Friend of a Friend – October 6, 2008 at 6:18 pm
Nara,
With words like “ridiculous”, “your hedge fund friends”, “you still can eat well”, you are begining to sound more like the doctor on this board.
And what I am saying is: If you remove credit, and the backing of GSE’s – you won’t need to regulate anything. People will self-regulate, because their own money is at stake. Once the Government took on risk, people gambled with other people’s money. And once people have to pay 50% down to own a home (as it should be) due to lack of credit, they will not specultate.
Apparently, in the early 80’s only 20% of the US population had access to a credit card (as oppposed to 70% now). And that’s what we’ll get to – verrry quickly.
M. Nam
Opacity is not usually productive anyway, except for the few with special lenses, but the whole notion of bundling and securitizing loans where the underlying collateral is an assorted bunch of private dwellings of random groups of people beset with outrageous medical bills from accidents and illnesses and insane legal bills from divorce is not only inhumane but downright stupid.
What abot the equity bubble? No GSE was involved although credit in the form of margin accounts was a definite factor.
What about the bailout of LTCM ? I know credit was involved but no gevernment entity was involved.
I think greed is the underlying reason and since that cannot be quantified or regulated we would have to go up one level and regulate what we can. We cannot engineer a perfect system and neither should we try. We all know some people tried and the results but some sensible regulation is warranted.
I’ll extend Moornam’s point and say that burst bubbles are a fact of life anytime there’s speculation about the future (size may vary, of course). We’ve all laid down plans and had expectations about future events (not just $$ but also family, relationships, etc.) that just flat out don’t pan out. It’s just the way the world works.
You could eliminate a sort of financial bubble by eliminating credit (carloans, education loan, homeloans, etc.) by not allowing folks to use those instruments to make future plans…but the need to have $$ now based on future expectations is pretty powerful and is the basis for all sorts of black markets, money lenders, etc. through out time. So, credit is inevitable and thus, so are bubbles.
The key thing that made mortgages/CRA/F&F bubble diff is that neither the $5T dotcom bubble nor the $5B bust of LTCM involved govt backstops/mandates and thus subsequent taxpayer $$$’s buying up the dubious assets others were banking on.
Granted. But it is the artificial bubbles created by analysts and the rating agencies that bother me. Most individual and small time investors like me read analysts reports and some financial statements to buy and sell securities. If we do not have confidence that this analysis is not biased because of other activities that the “agencies” employing these analsysts are involved with, there is a huge confidence risk in the whole investment system. To restore confidence we need tougher regulation not the current chinese walls.
I would disagree with this statement. To restore confidence, you need a system that is more open and transparent, not necessarily with more or less regulation. Transparency is an enemy to both big businesses that aren’t honest or government bureaucracies that are ineffective.
I think it depends on what kinds of risks that you take for creating products or innovations. Even in scientific R&D one makes innumberable attempts (sometimes with vague ideas) and only a few succeed. Somebody pays for this extravaganza with the hope of big future payoffs. In the case of the financial industry, were the risks and financial products, that created the bubble economically sound or dubious/manipulated ? If it is the former then who are the (direct and indirect) beneficiaries of the success/profits ? If only a narrow segment benefits then the liability (during failures) cannot be uniformly distributed and burdened on the non-beneficiaries. Dubious and manipulated risks/speculations indeed need better regulation besides better governance.
85 · bess said
oooooh…i just got it. You like things that are bad for you. That’s the nicest thing anyone’s ever said to me.
Here’s Valleywag on Mr. Kash & Karry.
Manju, are you really a guy?
97 · Amrita said
people are always asking me if i’m for real
atool, my friend of a friend’s little sister’s best friend’s baby cousin says she can’t read the ’ gossip for all the � cursing.
don’t lie, Manju, you like it* too. Though I believe this ** is your brand. *may not be workplace appropriate ; ) **no worries
Bwahaha!