From Fox News we have this beauty:
About 1,000 New York City high school students walked out of class and rallied near City Hall to protest a plan to eliminate their free transit passes.
The students converged at City Hall Park at noon. They chanted "Save our MetroCards!" and "This is what democracy looks like."
They planned to march across the Brooklyn Bridge for a second rally at a transit facility.
More than 500,000 city students receive free or reduced-fare MetroCards to get to and from school. Eliminating them would force families to buy monthly passes that cost about $1,000 a year per child.
The city's transit agency proposed ending the free rides to help close an $800 million budget gap.
No, this is what a protest march during school hours looks like. I think some kids need an in-school suspension in support of this action.
Now, while your first blush would be to support the city in this and laugh at the kids and say, "Serves them right for getting free rides!", you might want to remember that your, or your city's little kiddies, already get free rides. Except for most of you those free rides are made on city school buses. Why in NYC they use regular city buses I do not know.
But my point is, does it make a difference in the means of the transit when the city would pay for it anyway? Or, had these kids been riding the little yellow school buses, would the city be now forcing them to ride city buses?
Food for thought.
But this is the main reason why I post this. Isn't it the Socio-Commie-Dems that always berate the Republicans anytime any funding for children or children's programs were reduced in any way?
Wonder if there will be any news about these Dems (and Bloomberg is a Dem) taking bus rides out of the mouths of babies from the NYC media?
But, even more so, why make the kids the first ones to take a hit with the budget crunch? How about the drug addicts? How about the subsidized artists? How about the fluffy-feel-good social programs? How about the No-SmokingNo-fatNo-Salt enforcement? How about cutting back on enforcing "green"?