I find it odd that Paul Heise, a self-proclaimed economist, is attacking TARP. The Troubled Assets Relief Program was the only large government program of the past year formulated and passed during the Bush administration ane the only one turning a profit for the US Treasury. What does an American economist have against profit? Perhaps Heise's populist instincts override his good sense, assuming he has any.

Heise admits that Goldman Sachs paid back their TARP funds plus $1.1 billion for its use, but he says that as if it's a bad thing. Perhaps he'd prefer more "stimulus," the massive spending bill passed only 8 days after Obama's inauguration on a party line vote without having been read or debated. That has stimulated nothing other than a large increase in federal jobs and the coffers of Democratic interest groups. The private economy -- you know, the productive part -- is still losing hundreds of thousands of jobs monthly.

Frankly, if I were a member of Congress, I wouldn't have voted for TARP. No one and nothing is "too big to fail," including governments and countries. History has proven it time and again. The borrowing, spending and inflating policies of the Obama adminstration and their irresponsible enablers in Congress have put America on a very risky path.

However, I agree with one sentiment in his piece. Though I don't have the same sympathy for them Heise seems to, I recognize that we are represented by "...poor, fumbling congressmen and senators who are...trying to understand what comes next."

The pity is that, whatever comes next, it will be their fault, too.

It's time to clean house in Washington. Let's get rid of the current crop of arrogant, ignorant fumblers who put us in this mess.