It certainly seems true that a number of executives in firms being the recipients of Federal bailouts have sought to abuse the cash flow; on the other hand, there seems a fungible salient re the public in our times.

Media here and I'm sure elsewhere are abuzz with skyrocketing unemployment, on top of the miasma causing bailouts and on top of inability for most people to get credit for commercial, educational, or personal endeavors. Concurrently, of the amorphous comparatively few who can get advertising on mass media, a lot of it here is constantly peppered with: law firms reiterating their general availability to file class or personal liability and punitive damages claims; and companies urgin that if one can get a structured Court settlement of any kind whatsoever, one may approach them for upfront buyout of such settlement.

Now, most of us know, for example, that the USA Roman Catholic Church is perceived as a monolithic edifice, further charged by many public bodies as if to completely handle public distributions of social service and immigration-related funds...i.e., in times where many people are in financial tailspins, to some they might make excellent targets for renewed lawsuits based on steamroller, high shock value allegations in hopes of producing a quick settlement. Indeed, local media here the past few weeks have reported Catholic Priests around Illinois suddenly slammed with allegations of being literal child-porn drug lords out of rectory offices, child molsters literally on their altars, and the like, often with attendant defacements to their Church (which can be caused from lawbreaking disgruntled persons upon hearing of bare charges, persons in league with complainers to "slip convincers", or anything else wrongly undertaken in reaction to such news).

It would seem necessary and fair, on such grounds as aforesaid, that the public not be able to "jackpot" in re Presidentially-guided faith initiatives nor against any company involved in provision of bailout intendments. Just as the public should not expect bailout cash to be scarfed up by a relatively few execs, neither should the government nor bailees have to expect mass chunks can be taken away via nuisance lawsuits.

I would respectfully suggest as or in the nature that: any faith organization receiving Federal or any public funds have such funding suspended if any criminal or civil complaint is lodged against its agents; that should faith initiative or corporate bailees' agents settle out of Court to avoid judgment against them, rather than see a suit through, such faith or corporate entity should be banned for ten years at least from participating with public funds, or minimally be investigated by the highest relevant law authorities for criminal probe; that the public should be capped in damage allegation recoveries against public bailees or funded initiatives, specifically being limited to actual costs of damage or restoration to full mental health simple (no housing, maintenance, or jackpot trappings), reasonable costs thereof and interest thereon, together with reasonable costs of Court action; and that such "gloves" stay on against a bailee or funded intiative only until such time as the Office of Faith-Based Initiatives is rescinded, or in the case of corporations such unit has repaid its bailout money and no longer subject to executive pay caps.

Re the certain Conservative Senate objections re faith bills, I think it is fair of a President expected to maintain the Bush Office of Faith Based Initiatives to require no faith unit discriminate in God's intention of sharing with love toward one another; also, it seems a more proper Constitutional respect to not use Federal or other public money to promote the teaching of divinity matters nor to confer degrees therein nor to pay for religious activities peculiar to a faith unit...one thing if my or someone else's folks can form activities on their own, another if the State must fund us INTO being, instead of help us help others; also, who really wants State accrediting boards establishing secular standards for what is and isn't a "true faith" or "true faith doctrine" in re peaceable religions? Sounds a lot like the very intrusion of government into religious control even Conservatives disdain in OTHER nations.

That is my opinion as a USA national and voter re issues present at a time President Obama is soliciting for people to have house meetings re the stimulus and what it should do.