Bailout profits? I don't think so.

Commenting on this article I read this morning:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32623489/ns/business-the_new_york_times/page/2/

In case all the numbers don't make much sense, let me clear it up. The US Taxpayers gave the banking industry $700 BILLION dollars. Now, as repayment comes in, the US taxpayers have 'profited' $4 Billion.

No - that does not mean the US Taxpayer has now has $704 Billion. It just means that of those who have paid back their part, $4 Billion is the interest paid. But the article further states: "But all the profits taxpayers have won could still be wiped out by two deeply troubled institutions."

The truth is, this article is terribly optimistic in this bailout repay process. If all of the money is paid back, and their is a 'profit', then I'll happily admit I was wrong. But I believe there will be no 'profit' from this bailout, other than to enhance the size of the wallets of the CEO's, who in turn will give more of 'their' money to politicians, who authorized the bailout in the first place.

Districts cut bus routes in spite of kids' safety

As school resumes for the year, and with two children in school, and with living within 2 miles of the school they attend, I was informed by my wife that the school district is not going to let our older child ride the bus. It seems that all kindergarten children are picked up for school, and then also given rides home from school on the bus. But it appears that this year, our older child will not be allowed to ride the bus because we live too close to the school. She will have to walk or ride her bike.

I found online, yesterday, an article on school district bus route cuts and it got me thinking. This is the article I read: http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jETUu9PqaxiHeflQ3H7-dK_eaJ3QD9A983KO0. The important part I want to mention is this:

"Deadly school bus crashes are rare, while past studies have shown riding to school in a car, walking and bicycling account for hundreds of student deaths a year."

Hundreds of student deaths! Hundreds.

So, in my discussion with my wife, she mentions that while Obama and the cash-burning government we currently live under have now spent $3 Billion (with a big 'B') in an effort to get more people to buy NEW cars (don't get me started on who, exactly, this program benefited, because it wasn't the common-folk end user), school districts nation-wide are cutting back on school bus routes due to lack of funding.

Obama says "Buy Cars". Schools say "no buses. Car, walk, or bike to school". Studies show riding a bus is safer than cars, bikes or walking.

Therefore - by natural deduction of facts:

Obama Declares: WE DON'T CARE ABOUT OUR CHILDRENS SAFETY!

No, he clearly doesn't care if our children get run over while walking or biking to school. He wants us to buy cars to benefit corporate America. He wants us to drive our children to school, thus increasing the chances of student injury and death. But he clearly cares about big business - you know, GM, Chrysler - big name corporate companies who are the actual beneficiaries of the Cash for Clunkers program.

If I had an extra million dollars - I'd give it straight to the school system. The ONLY way we will improve our futures is by educating the youth. When the youth grow up, and take over - THEIR education is what will fix the problems that previous and current generations have caused. Obama doesn't seem to care. He'd much rather ensure a CEO's FAT paycheck than to ensure the young, growing mind of a student be better educated. Or in this case - even get to the school safely for the chance to learn.

My daughter can walk or ride a bike to school and back. We live close. But the bus will be coming by our house everyday to pick up our kindergartener. When they were dropped off this morning at the school, maybe 15 students got off, leaving Dozens of open seats. I'll be lobbying the district for sure.

Healthcare - yeah - that.

Eventually, everyone will have to talk about healthcare. As much as I'd like to think it will be shot down and go away, it is becoming more and more clear that Obama will continue to push this issue right until the very bitter end. So I guess I'll talk about it too.

I've been reading recently about the many 'disruptive' town hall meetings with our elected officials. It seems every day their is a new article online about people who dislike the idea of Obamas Universal Healthcare (UH) and the terrible things they are doing in order to express their opinions.

On MSN today: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32385814/ns/politics-capitol_hill/?GT1=43001 "From Ps. to Ga., health protests intensify"
From the New York Times: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32381149/ns/politics-the_new_york_times/ "The roots of rage at a town hall meeting"

They go on and on - everyday we see more. So shouldn't this be a sign? Isn't this the right of every American to speak their mind? We all have the freedom to be heard, in an organized and logical way. So why does one who disagrees with this UH plan get labeled as 'rowdy' and 'protester', when those who are fighting FOR it are getting listed as 'proponants', and 'advocate' or 'defender'? Is this because if it's the Presidents idea, then it's the 'right' idea and everyone else is against it?

Everything I am reading is screaming at me: LISTEN TO THE PEOPLE! LISTEN! Democract Representative (term used very loosely) John Dingell was approached by a citizen he is supposed to represent about his support for Obamas UH plan. What did the citizen get? Police escort from the building with only stays, stops, and the run-around from his 'representative'. Then Mr. Dingell goes on TV and tells us all that these disruptive people are wreaking havoc in the meetings! What???

Let me tell you what is happening - well, has happened - probably a long, long time ago. The citizens elect officials who are supposed to represent the people. Those representatives go to Washington, sit in their cushy offices, meet in nice boardrooms and listen to the president tell them what they need to go tell their constituents. The president says 'This is a good idea' and the 'representatives' (yeah, pretty loose) come back to us and tell us that we should like this idea!

Well - no. No, How about, I tell my representative what I want, and he/she goes and tells the president what WE want! Isn't that the way it is supposed to work? Isn't that the way it was designed? Yes. But now it's become just the opposite and what are we supposed to do? The nation cried foul on the bank bailout. The nation said no to the auto industry bailout. And yet they (and many others) continue to go through! Why? Because WE are not being represented, we are being preached to about all the 'wonderful' things government has planned.