An Evangelical Rant

The Decline of Pat Robertson

Two weeks ago, we all, once again, witnessed the devastation of Mother Nature at her worst. From a few years ago in New Orleans, to the Christmas Day Tsunami nothing has torn more at our hearts than watching the effects of the devastating Earthquake in Haiti. We have seen, the best in humanity, show its face with aid pouring in to that Island Home from all corners of the globe. However, among the good, ignorance and outright stupidity has also shown itself.

Being raised as a Roman Catholic and attending an Episcopal Church, I along with others, pray for the well being of the Haitian people. However, ignorant and despicable comments by the likes of Rush Limbaugh and even more shocking Pat Robertson can only leave a person to shake their head and wonder how these individuals can justify the breath they consume everyday. Mr. Robertson made statements that Haiti was being punished by God because of the pact they made with the devil to rid themselves of French Colonial Rule. Is this really what all of you evangelicals believe. Are any of you who follow Mr. Robertson so ignorant and outright heartless that you could believe that a God, who receives worship from the very creatures he finds precious, would want to “punish” them for freeing themselves? If you do then, you are the biggest reason why, many of the generation coming up, are turning away from religious beliefs.

The following is an editorial from the Star-Ledger that pretty well states my opinion on Mr. Robertson and all of his followers; http://blog.nj.com/njv_editorial_page/2010/01/pat_robertson_and_haiti_dement.html
The Star-Ledger Editorial Page
NJ Voices: Opinions from New Jersey
International »
Pat Robertson and Haiti: Demented demonology
By Star-Ledger Editorial Board/The Star-Led...
January 16, 2010, 5:41AM
Bottom of Form
Televangelist Pat Robertson sounded like a demented old fool when he said the devastating earthquake in Haiti is God’s wrath for a "pact" Haitians made with the devil to gain independence from the French.
"They were under the heel of the French. You know, Napoleon the third, or whatever. And they got together and swore a pact to the devil," Robertson said Wednesday on the Christian Broadcasting Network’s 700 Club.
Insensitive and stupid as it was, this is hardly the first time Robertson has spewed such ridiculous apocalyptic revelations.
He told the Pennsylvania town of Dover in 2005 that disaster might strike there because its citizens voted out school board members who favored teaching intelligent design over the theory of evolution. That same year, he said Hurricane Katrina was sent by God as a punishment for America’s legalization of abortion.
Robertson’s babble is not to be confused with real religious philosophy. He’s nothing more than a nut job peddling an extreme right-wing world view.

Catholicism and religion in general, are finding themselves on the decline in today’s society. The younger generations coming up are being turned off by the outrageous racism and bigotry that is promoted by many religious figures of today. I believe that even the Pope realizes to make the Catholic Church numbers grow, open mindedness and a better teaching of God’s love will gain more than preaching a fire and brimstone attitude.

So Mr. Robertson, here is some advice. SIT DOWN AND SHUTUP! If you are truly a man of the cloth, then preach of God’s love, healing and wanting of worship. Stop acting like you are running for office. You tried that once already and received a humbling experience. Give the rest of us a break.

That’s How I See It.

Websites of reference; http://blog.nj.com/njv_editorial_page/2010/01/pat_robertson_and_haiti_dement.html
http://hamptonroads.com/2010/01/senator-jabs-robertson-over-haiti
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pat_Robertson
http://www.patrobertson.com/
http://www.cnn.com/2010/US/01/13/haiti.pat.robertson/index.html
http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2010/01/15/politics/politicalhotsheet/entry6101136.shtml

Rush Limbaugh, BSA

Bull Shit Artist

Is it possible for Rush Limbaugh to stage a fake illness just to provide him a platform to bluster his narcissistic buffoonery? Let us give this some thought for a moment. President Obama takes his family to Honolulu on a vacation. It just so happens, that Rush Limbaugh is vacationing there as well. Gee, what a coincidence. Now, the Healthcare Bill has passed a historic hurdle just prior to the Christmas break. Mr. Limbaugh, along with all the members of the NO PARTY Republicans, is dismayed to put it extremely lightly. Suddenly, Mr. Limbaugh has chest pains and needs immediate medical attention. When all is said and done, the doctors can not find anything wrong with Mr. Limbaugh, in particular, with his heart. That revelation was no surprise to me considering the way he poked fun at Michael J. Fox. I figured he did not have a heart to begin with. So, now the blustery buffoon touts about our nation having the finest healthcare on the planet and there is no need for healthcare reform. What the narcissistic idiot does not realize, or maybe it is by design, no one is criticizing the healthcare. It is the availability of healthcare that is in question. All of this availability being manipulated by Insurance companies who will favor profits over the health of the people they are supposed to serve.

But, of course, the multi-million dollar per year ignoramus, bolstered by the weak minded malcontents who listen or even follow him, does everything he can to mislead and misguide a populace for ratings and status. Who knows, he is supposedly losing weight and trying to get in shape. Personally, I think he is just trying to get laid by Sarah Palin. Be careful Rush, Todd is still around. The following was featured on Hawaii News Now and appears to be the norm for how this scenario is being viewed by all; http://www.hawaiinewsnow.com/Global/story.asp?S=11757107
Rush Limbaugh says tests clear him of health problems
Posted: Jan 01, 2010 3:34 PM EST Updated: Jan 02, 2010 6:37 PM EST
By Duane Shimogawa bio email
HONOLULU (HawaiiNewsNow) - After suffering chest pains this past Wednesday, conservative radio talk show host Rush Limbaugh was discharged from The Queen's Medical Center Friday.
Limbaugh and his doctor spoke to the media for the first time since the incident happened. He says doctors found nothing wrong with his heart after numerous tests.
He says he most likely suffered a spasm in an artery leading to his heart.
A crowded room of national media switched gears Friday morning. Instead of covering the vacationing President Obama, the tiresome group rushed to Queen's for a Rush Limbaugh announcement.
The first thing Limbaugh addressed wasn't his health. Instead, he thanked the Kahala Hotel and Resort and Queen's.
"Their security staff reacted like that to my distress call at 2:30 on Wednesday afternoon," Limbaugh said. "The people at Queens Hospital could not have been better, I feel very, very fortunate, I've been treated to the best healthcare the world has to offer."
This past Wednesday afternoon, Limbaugh says he felt pain coming from his upper left chest. A pain like he's never experienced before.
It sparked questions about his controversial past with painkillers.
"Are you taking painkillers for your back pain?" A reporter asked. "No, Prednisone," Rush said.
Limbaugh then sat down and tried to walk it off, but the pain was still there. That's when he called security and just 20 minutes later he was at The Queen's Medical Center, undergoing extensive tests. He says the pain went away a half hour later.
"The pain was real and they don't know what caused it and I think for everybody out there, I'm 58, will be 59 in couple of weeks, and you start thinking about these kinds of things, don't mess with it," he said.
The doctor who treated him agrees.
"If you think you're having a heart problem, call for help, call 911, get to the hospital and get to a tor's attention because time is very important," The Queen's Medical Center's chief of cardiovascular disease Dr. Joana Magno said.
And for extra pre-caution, Limbaugh got an angiogram. But nothing turned up, no arterial disease, no coronary disease. His best guess is an artery spasm.
"Turn it over to professionals right off the bat, don't tough it out, don't try to make it go away on your own, it's not worth the risk," he said.
Limbaugh says he got no special treatment from hospital staff. He says his time there felt like a hotel stay.
"Takes things like this to prepare you in life for the eventuality that you are getting older, not as young as you were and not as invincible as you once thought you were," he said.
He says he'll return to work on Wednesday.
doc

As you can tell, I am not a fan of Rush Limbaugh. However, I do wish him good health and hope he is able to recover fully. I would like to believe he has had a change in heart with regard to his personal and political beliefs. However, that would mean he has a heart. A man who spews the filth and fervor, along with the likes of all conservative hate mongers which abuse our freedom of speech, will probably never change until they finally have to face their maker.

That’s How I See It.

Websites of reference;
http://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/wireStory?id=9464645
http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/today.guest.html
http://news.scotsman.com/world/US-radio-host-Rush-Limbaugh.5952086.jp
http://www.hawaiinewsnow.com/Global/story.asp?S=11757107
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/abraham/detail??blogid=95&entry_id=54456
http://thecelebritycafe.com/feature/doctors-find-nothing-wrong-rush-limbaugh-01-02-2010
http://www.businessweek.com/news/2010-01-01/rush-limbaugh-says-doctors-found-no-evidence-of-heart-disease.html

Finger Pointing

The Republicans are Experts

The recently failed attempt, by an Al-Qaida operative, to bring down an international flight while landing in Detroit, has sparked the Republican Party to attempt an “I told you so” campaign. While criticizing Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano, (I have to admit, I am doubtful of her abilities as well) the party of NO, seems to have memory loss, when it comes to who originated DHS and the rules they play by today. It was the Republican Administration of George W. Bush and his fellow criminals who, in 2003, established what some have nicknamed the “Homeboy Security Department”. This farce of a Governmental Agency is supposed to bring together, all intelligence gathered information, so that data can be shared and used for the protection of the American People. However, two of the most important organizations are not bound under Homeland Security Rule; the departments are the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). Now, I realize the lack of involvement by these two agencies should not hurt the overall performance of DHS but, it is quite apparent, Homeland Security is falling way short of the intended results it was created to achieve.

The Republican attempt to disparage the present administration will probably fall short. President Obama did not rise up through the politics of Chicago without learning a thing or two about reaction. The following is an article appearing in the Guardian which seems to place the event in perspective; http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/dec/30/us-plots-retaliatory-strikes-yemen
US plots retaliatory strikes against al-Qaida in Yemen over plane bomber
Chris McGreal in Washington, Nasser Arrabyee in Sana'a, and Hugh Macleod guardian.co.uk,
The US is planning retaliatory strikes in Yemen against al-Qaida over its attempt to blow up a transatlantic flight on Christmas Day.
American officials say intelligence efforts are focused on identifying and tracking down those who plotted to put Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab on the plane with enough explosive in his underwear to bring down the Northwest Airlines flight from Amsterdam. But they warn that finding those responsible is unlikely to be swift and say that identifying other "high-value" al-Qaida targets for retaliatory attack would also be a priority.
"First we have to find out who put Abdulmutallab on the plane with the bomb," said a US official working alongside intelligence organizations. "He's providing some leads and we're not dealing with an unknown quantity here. We've been watching and listening to what goes on in Yemen and we may have pieces of the puzzle already and just need to fit it together.
"If and when we identify them then we plan how to deal with them. Who they are is one thing, where they are is another.If they're still in Yemen and we can get a lock on them then it won't be too difficult to know what to do. But they know who they are and won't be standing out. After that we can move with the president's authorization. I don't think there's much doubt that authorization will be forthcoming, but no one should think all of this is going to happen overnight."
The official acknowledged that there was likely to be political and public pressure on Barack Obama to strike back at al-Qaida, particularly with Republican opponents breaking with the usual solidarity on national security issues to accuse him of weakness and making America vulnerable to attack.
"The people we want are the ones who put Abdulmutallab on the plane. Until we can get them there are other high-value targets that will make the point that attacking America does not go unpunished," said the official.
But given the regular attacks against al-Qaida in Yemen, these may have a greater impact on American public opinion than on the extremist group.
The US has been conducting a covert assault with drone attacks on al-Qaida bases for about a year, while CIA agents inside the country help direct ground operations. American Special Forces have been training the Yemeni military and may have been involved in raids.
General David Petraeus, the American regional commander, and John Brennan, the president's counterterrorism adviser, both visited Yemen this year.
Joe Lieberman, chairman of the Senate's homeland security committee, who visited Yemen in August, described the country this week as a focus of the assault on al-Qaida. "Yemen now becomes one of the centers of that fight. We have a growing presence there – and we have to – of special operations, Green Berets, intelligence," he said.
Yesterday, Yemeni forces targeted Nasser Ahmed al-Ahdal; a former prisoner released after renouncing violence but believed to have renewed links to al-Qaida. One man was injured and captured but Ahdal and two others escaped.
Several al-Qaida members killed in raids by Yemeni forces in the past fortnight had been released or had escaped from prison. Others who have left jail to rejoin the fight include Nasser al-Wahayshi, the Yemeni leader of al-Qaida, who escaped along with 22 others from prison in Yemen in 2006. His deputy, Saeed al-Shihri, joined al-Qaida in Yemen last year after being released to Saudi Arabia from Guantánamo.
While intelligence officials plan how to hit back abroad, they are under pressure at home after Obama blamed intelligence failings for Abdulmutallab being allowed to board a plane to the US. The president has ordered that a preliminary report be delivered to him today tomorrow explaining how the young Nigerian managed to smuggle the explosives on to the flight.
The criticism is focused on the CIA and the national counterterrorism centre (NCC) established after 9/11. The CIA is under scrutiny because it picked up intelligence from Yemen that a Nigerian was involved in a forthcoming attack at about the same time that Abdulmutallab's father told US diplomats in the Nigerian capital, Abuja, that his son had become radicalized in Yemen and was a possible threat. That information was shared with CIA officials in Abuja who passed it on to the NCC, but it was apparently not matched with the intelligence from Yemen. On Tuesday Obama condemned the failure to share information and other intelligence failings as "totally unacceptable".
CIA in the line of fire
First the finger was pointed at Janet Napolitano, the homeland security secretary, who blundered after the failure of Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab's bombing attempt by saying "the system worked".
But with Barack Obama condemning intelligence failures as "totally unacceptable", attention is focused on the CIA and the national counterterrorism centre (NCC), set up after 9/11 to pool information and forestall the kind of plot that Abdulmutallab came close to completing.
The CIA is under pressure after it was revealed that it apparently had two important pieces of the puzzle that might have prevented the attack and did not put them together.
The New York Times said the agency picked up intelligence from Yemen that a Nigerian was at the forefront of a looming attack on American interests. At about the same time, the CIA was part of a briefing at the US embassy in Nigeria after Abdulmutallab's father warned American diplomats that his son was becoming radicalized, and was in Yemen. The CIA drew up a file, but then sat on it for five weeks.
For its part, the NCC was told by the state department about the warnings by Abdulmutallab's father, but then did not check whether the young Nigerian had a US visa. He did.
The president described the handling of the warning as a failure.
Richard Clarke, a former chief counter‑terrorism adviser on the US national security council, said that while Napolitano is feeling the heat for a political misstep, it was the CIA and NCC that should shoulder responsibility. "There does appear to be a failure here either at the CIA or the new national counterterrorism centre. Homeland security didn't get the information. I think the problem lies at the intelligence community and not at homeland security," he said

In the end, I believe the Republican Party is once again, kicking a dead horse and needs to address their internal party problems before they try to convince the American People to trust them again. With our armed forces deployed in the area and the readiness to retaliate, Yemen would do themselves a favor to rid their country of Al-Qaida before we decide to do it for them. Ask Iraq and Afghanistan if that is not a wise decision in hindsight.

That’s How I See It.

Websites of reference;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homeland_security
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Janet_Napolitano
http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/02/11/emergency.supplies/
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/dec/30/us-plots-retaliatory-strikes-yemen
http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2009/12/30/yemen-terrorism.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yemen
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091229/ap_on_re_mi_ea/ml_yemen_us_airliner_attack
www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=6031772n

2012

Why I Cannot Wait Until 2013
I am writing this article because I have reached the fed up point of hype. The year 2012 is still, a little more than, two years away and I already cannot wait for 2013. Before I give you my reasons, I want to warn all you readers who suffer from the following; Impressionable, Gullibility, Mental and Emotional vulnerability and outright STUPIDITY!!! You may be insulted by what you read next. Remember, you have been warned!!!

Recently, a movie entitled 2012 was released to movie theaters throughout the country. Prior to this release, the Mayan Calendar has been quoted as being, the tell all, to the end of days for all of us on earth. The Hype for this movie starring John Cusack, Amanda Peet, Danny Glover and Woody Harrelson has been a testimonial to the special effects of movie making. The problem though, extends to any and all who are trying to exploit the end of days for money making ventures. Now in a Capitalistic Society, this would not be so bad except for those of the populace that cannot tell fiction from fact. From the History Channel to the Discovery Channel and anybody with a website, the attempts to sell the story of the End of Days is now blossoming into public hysteria not seen since the War of the Worlds radio broadcast on October 30, 1938. Inquiries made to NASA have become so frequent and with such fear and apprehension that funds have been spent to create a website for NASA to debunk the claims of Earth’s destruction and assure everyone that we will still be here on December 22, 2012. The following are links to all the NASA websites addressing the 2012 rumor; http://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/2012.html
http://astrobiology.nasa.gov/ask-an-astrobiologist/intro/nibiru-and-doomsday-2012-questions-and-answers
http://fora.tv/2009/02/04/Neil_deGrasse_Tyson_Pluto_Files#Neil_deGrasse_Tyson_World_Will_Not_End_in_2012 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nibiru_collision
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nibiru_%28mythology%29
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nibiru_(Sitchin#Planets_proposed_by_Zecharia_Sitchin
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_doomsday_prediction
http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/misc/planetx/

The following article from the Telegraph website says it all about the 2012 fears;
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/space/6534662/Mayan-2012-apocalypse-theory-not-true-Nasa-says.html
'Mayan 2012 apocalypse theory' not true, Nasa says
The world is not coming to an end on December 21, 2012, Nasa insisted on Monday in a rare campaign to dispel rumours fueled by the internet and a new Hollywood movie.
The latest big screen offering from Sony Pictures, "2012," arrives in theatres on Friday , with a $200 million production about the end of the world supposedly based on theories backed by the Mayan calendar. The doomsday scenario revolves around claims that the end of time will come as an obscure Planet X - or Nibiru - collides with Earth. The mysterious planet was supposedly discovered by the Sumerians, according to claims by pseudo-scientists, paranormal activity enthusiasts and internet theorists. Some websites have accused the US space agency of concealing the truth about the wayward planet's existence, but Nasa has denounced such stories as an "internet hoax." "There is no factual basis for these claims," Nasa said in a question-and-answer posting on its website. If such a collision were real, "astronomers would have been tracking it for at least the past decade, and it would be visible by now to the naked eye," it added. "Obviously, it does not exist." "Credible scientists worldwide know of no threat associated with 2012," it insisted. After all, "our planet has been getting along just fine for more than four billion years," added Nasa. Initial theories set the disaster for May 2003, but when nothing happened the date was moved forward to the winter solstice in 2012, to coincide with the end of a cycle of the ancient Mayan calendar. Nasa insisted the Mayan calendar does not in fact end on December 21, 2012, as another period begins immediately afterward. And it said there are no planetary alignments on the horizon for the next few decades.
And even if the planets were to line up as some have forecast, the effect on our planet would be "negligible," Nasa said. Modern Maya in Guatemala and Mexico have also rushed to debunk the "prophesy". they view the burgeoning end-of-the-world 2012 industry with a mixture of confusion, exasperation and anger at what is perceived as a Western distortion of their traditions and beliefs. "There is no concept of apocalypse in the Mayan culture," Jesus Gomez, head of the Guatemalan confederation of Mayan priests and spiritual guides, told The Sunday Telegraph. Cirilo Perez, an adviser to Guatemala's President Alvaro Colom is a prominent ajq'ij - literally a "day counter", a wise man who makes predictions and advice on the most propitious dates to marry, plant or harvest. He decried the commercial exploitation of Mayan culture by outsiders. "This has all become business but there is no desire to understand," he said. "When foreigners, or even some Guatemalans, see us, they think 'Look at the Maya, how nice, how pretty', but they don't understand us."

So, for all of you who have fallen victim to the fears of the world coming to an end, you can be rest assured that, we will all be here tomorrow and for a long time to come. Now, if for some reason you still believe all the erroneous websites quoting doom and gloom, I have eight easy steps to relieve you of your anxiety.
Step 1; Pull all your money out of your bank account.
Step 2; Go to your local Gun Store.
Step 3; Go inside and purchase a hand gun with ammunition.
Step 4; Leave the store.
Step 5; Find a very private place.
Step 6; Load the ammunition into the gun.
Step 7; Place the gun to the side of your head.
Step 8; Pull the trigger.
You will have done yourself and everyone who has had to listen to your whining over life ending, a favor. FOR GOD’S SAKE, SMARTEN UP AND GET A LIFE!

That’s How I See It.

Websites of reference;
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/space/6534662/Mayan-2012-apocalypse-theory-not-true-Nasa-says.html
http://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/2012.html
http://astrobiology.nasa.gov/ask-an-astrobiologist/intro/nibiru-and-doomsday-2012-questions-and-answers
http://fora.tv/2009/02/04/Neil_deGrasse_Tyson_Pluto_Files#Neil_deGrasse_Tyson_World_Will_Not_End_in_2012
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nibiru_collision
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nibiru_%28mythology%29
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nibiru_(Sitchin#Planets_proposed_by_Zecharia_Sitchin
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_doomsday_prediction
http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/misc/planetx/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_(film)
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080502170653AA3tvRa
http://mashable.com/2009/11/12/nasa-debunks-2012/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maya_civilization
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maya_civilization#Mathematics

A Military Matter

Since the Presidency of George W. Bush, I still find myself a Moderate in Political beliefs. However, I have developed a slight lean towards the Left. I do not associate with either party. I prefer to remain unaffiliated. In this way, my loyalty will be dictated by the ability of the candidate and my confidence in them. Not due to a party affiliation. I voted for Barack Obama and was very glad that many Republicans were voted out of office. I hope many more will go in 2010. If that becomes the case then, by 2012, we will all have a good idea if the Democratic Party can take us into the future or if we will need another change. I may not agree with everything the Democratic Administration is trying to do but, Healthcare is definitely the most important and most needed reform at this time. Job creation runs a close second along with boosting our economy. I am not quite sure I agree with the methods and results so far but, the previous administration has shown we could do much worse. However, a decision has been made recently that I have reservations about. That decision is to prosecute the September Eleven Conspirators in a Federal Court instead of a Military Trial.

Now, I am a firm believer in the Criminal Justice System. I know that successful prosecutions occurred in the trials of the World Trade Center bombings of the early 1990’s. I do not believe that the terror suspects from 9/11 will have some fancy lawyer using some sly tactics to get acquittals for their clients. I do not believe that Liberal Rogue Judges may throw out evidence and cause a mistrial. It is the difference between the attacks back then and what has occurred here, that asks the question whether this is a Civil Investigation or a Military matter. Even the question of Islam and the Muslim world, does not come into play. It is the suspects, motive, opportunity but, more importantly, the overall conspiracy behind the act and the following events which took place afterwards.

In 1993, the World Trade Center bombing was a Criminal Investigation with international cooperation through Law Enforcement Agencies. Then President William Jefferson Clinton did order a limited Military response to Al-Qaida suspected strongholds overseas. However, no Military invasion occurred as a result of the bombings. Convictions were obtained on most suspects. One or two may have been acquitted in trials in their own countries.

In 2001, the Taliban Government of Afghanistan spoke out about the World Trade Center attacks praising the terrorist attackers and claiming to have the Al-Qaida Leader, Osama Bin Laden, within their borders. As we all know a war ensued with Afghanistan to topple the Taliban Government along with the invasion of Iraq and the subsequent regime change within that country as well. It is because of these events is why I believe the suspects being placed on trial in New York City for the 9/11 attacks should be dealt with by a Military Court. Unlike the attacks in 1993, Military action took place in direct response to these attacks and the terrorist group Al-Qaida has declared and still wages a terrorist war against our country.

Many have questioned the legality of the invasion we perpetrated upon the sovereign nation of Iraq and all of the actions taken place during this time. But, I believe that is a question for an International Court to determine. The fact still remains we went to war over the Trade Center attacks. This act alone should make it a Military matter, not civilian.

So, I find myself agreeing with people such as Rudy Giuliani and others on the Right Wing, when it comes to prosecution of the conspirators on 9/11. Any inappropriate procedures or illegal actions should be dealt with militarily in a Military Court. A Civilian Court is not the place for these individuals, nor for these acts, at this time. Let us just hope that justice will prevail and not make a mockery of a system we hold dearly.

That’s How I See It.

Websites of reference;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Trade_Center
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Trade_Center_bombing_(1993)
http://www.fbi.gov/wanted/terrorists/teryasin.htm
http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/1998_hr/s980224c.htm
http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/index.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taliban
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gulf_War

Traitor

The Political End Of Joe Lieberman

Earlier this week Independent Connecticut Senator Joe Lieberman announced he would join the Republican Party with their Filibuster attempt at the Public Option of President Obama’s Healthcare Bill. Quite frankly, I believe this will be the straw that breaks the camels back, with Senator Lieberman and his ties to the Democratic Party. Unlike Arlen Spector, who is nothing more than an over the hill has been, Mr. Lieberman has found himself on the precipice of political destruction.

The following is an article from CBS News by Stephanie Condon; http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2009/10/30/politics/politicalhotsheet/entry5463995.shtml
Lieberman May Support Republicans in 2010
Posted by Stephanie Condon
Sen. Joe Lieberman took another step farther away from the Senate Democratic caucus this week, when he said he may support some Republican candidates in the 2010 elections and may not run as a Democrat when he is up for reelection in 2012. "I probably will support some Republican candidates for Congress or Senate in the election in 2010. I'm going to call them as I see them," Lieberman told ABC News. "There's a hard core of partisan, passionate, hardcore Republicans," he said. "There's a hard core of partisan Democrats on the other side. And in between is the larger group, which is people who really want to see the right thing done, or want something good done for this country and them -- and that means, sometimes, the better choice is somebody who's not a Democrat." As for whether he would run as a Democrat himself in 2012 , "That's an open question," Lieberman said. Lieberman ran as an independent in the 2006 general election to hold onto his Connecticut Senate seat, after being knocked out of the Democratic primary by challenger Ned Lamont. He managed to hold onto his chairmanship of the Senate Homeland Security Committee by agreeing to still caucus with the Democratic party. Lieberman's allegiance to the Democrats has proven to be unreliable, however. In the 2008 presidential election, he supported Republican candidate John McCain. Earlier this week, Lieberman said he would join a Republican filibuster against the Democrats' health care bill as it is currently written. Lieberman opposes the bill's government-run health insurance plan. At least one Democratic leader on health care, however, thinks Lieberman will change his tune on the issue. "When it comes down to getting the 60 votes necessary to pass this bill, I do not believe that Joe Lieberman would want to be the one person who caucuses with the Democrats … to bring this bill down. I don't think he wants to go down in history like that," Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa) told reporters Thursday. "He still wants to be a part of the Democratic Party although he is a registered independent. He wants to caucus with us and, of course, he enjoys his chairmanship of the [Homeland Security] committee because of the indulgence of the Democratic Caucus. So, I'm sure all of those things will cross his mind before the final vote." Lieberman also told ABC he will support Democratic Sen. Chris Dodd's reelection campaign in Connecticut next year.

To give a more hardcore perspective is an article by Timothy Nolan of Slate.com;
http://www.slate.com/id/2233743/
Did Lieberman Just Kill the Public Option?
Don't bet on Connecticut's junior senator showing independence from the insurance lobby.
By Timothy Noah
Senate majority leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., says that "Joe Lieberman is the least of [my] problems" in passing health reform with a public option. I'm not so sure.
Connecticut Sen. Joe Lieberman, who was formerly a Democrat but who is now an independent, announced today that "if the bill remains what it is now, I will not be able to support a cloture motion before final passage." In other words, Lieberman will support a filibuster. "I can't see a way in which I could vote for cloture on any bill that contained a creation of a government-operated-run insurance company," Lieberman said.
One largely unspoken assumption behind Reid's quest to get an "opt out" version of the public option through the Senate is that he doesn't really need 60 votes for the health reform bill itself. He just needs 60 votes for the cloture motion prior to final passage. Once a filibuster is cut off, health reform can pass with 50 votes (the 51st being Vice President Joe Biden, president of the Senate). One reason Reid's gambit looked so promising as recently as yesterday was that Lieberman, despite his previously stated opposition to the health reform bill even without a public option (i.e., as passed by the Senate finance committee), had agreed not to support a filibuster against it. It now appears that Lieberman either changed his mind or was misunderstood.
Reid seems to think he can keep Lieberman onboard by allowing him to "be involved in the amendment process." In his 2008 book The Good Fight, Reid writes that he and Lieberman differed on the Iraq war but "on other issues, he's always with me." But can Reid really count on Lieberman this time? In recent years Lieberman has not shown himself to be an especially trustworthy character. (The New Yorker's Hendrik Hertzberg has the details here and here.)
Ezra Klein of Washingtonpost.com and Jonathan Chait of the New Republic both point out that Lieberman's reason for opposing the public option—that it's too expensive—makes no sense, because the public option actually lowers the cost of health reform by exerting downward competitive pressure on the private-insurance premiums whose purchase the government would subsidize. The Congressional Budget Office's scoring of the Reid proposal is expected to show this. But any illogic in Lieberman's position strikes me as evidence not that Lieberman is likely to change his mind when he becomes better acquainted with the facts but, rather, that Lieberman has already decided facts shouldn't get in the way of his opposition.
Why would Lieberman want to sink health reform? Klein points out that in the pretty recent past, Lieberman has supported the general goal, if not the specifics, of Obamacare. But consider Lieberman's political situation. He is no longer a Democrat. That means he no longer has a political base. In the future, he will have to rely more on constituencies and on cash. The White House suggests that Lieberman wouldn't dare alienate voters by opposing health reform. But what's the most cash-rich constituency in the Nutmeg State? The insurance industry, which is headquartered in Connecticut and employs 64,000 people.
At the moment, insurers probably aren't too pleased with Connecticut's other senator, Democrat Chris Dodd, because Dodd is a prominent advocate for the public option. As I've noted previously, Dodd, during the past 20 years, received $2.3 million in contributions from insurers—more than any member of the House or Senate except John McCain, R-Ariz. During that same period, Dodd collected $774,000 from health insurers, ranking second only to House Minority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio. Lieberman, even though he's from Connecticut, has during that same period had to settle for 14th place in both insurance-industry contributions and health-insurance-industry contributions. Blocking the public option might allow Lieberman to displace Dodd as "the senator from Aetna."
Support for this hypothesis may be found in Lieberman's timing in announcing his opposition to the Senate finance bill. It was Oct. 13. That was one day after the insurance lobby released its study dumping on the finance bill. Until then, it seemed likely the insurers would either support the finance bill (which contained no public option and was poised to make them half a trillion dollars richer) or keep mum. Lieberman's quick seconding of the insurers' opposition suggests that he will permit no daylight between himself and the insurance lobby.
Further evidence can be found in the substance of Lieberman's argument that the public option would bust the budget. It may be nonsensical, as Chait and Klein say, but it isn't randomly so. It's the same argument the insurers are making. "Probably all people who have health insurance are going to see their premiums go up," Lieberman said, "because there's going to be cost shifting as there has been for Medicare and Medicaid." The proposition that cost savings achieved through public insurance programs never impose financial efficiencies on doctors, hospitals, and private insurers but, instead, lead doctors and hospitals to shift more of their costs onto private insurers lies at the heart of the insurance lobby's opposition to both the Senate finance bill and the public option. But the health insurers haven't persuaded most economists, and the Congressional Budget Office thinks the cost-shifting argument against health reform is incorrect.
If I'm right that Lieberman is determined to line up behind the insurance industry, then there's no hope he will ever support any version of the public option, even on a procedural cloture vote, because there's no hope insurers will support a public option. And if health insurers decide in the end to oppose health reform without a public option, Lieberman will oppose that, too. Please, God, let me be wrong.

I personally believe Joe Lieberman is a Traitor to the voters of the state of Connecticut and has slapped the Democratic Party in the face for the last time. Also, I do not believe the Republican Party is willing to accept him with open arms. If they were, he would have received the nomination for Vice President on the McCain ticket last year. Instead he was snubbed for the likes of former Alaskan Governor Sarah Palin.

I hope a petition is started in Connecticut and Mr. Lieberman is recalled and a new election takes place. It would serve the voters of Connecticut well to throw this Traitor out of office. I also call upon the present administration to strip Mr. Lieberman of any and all Chairmanships he holds. He no longer deserves the prestige nor honor of holding these positions.

You know what would be a nice touch? If there is a recall election and Mr. Lieberman is voted out. How about Rham Emanual and Harry Reid go to Joe Lieberman’s Office, grab him by the scruff of the neck and the seat of his pants and throw him out of the Capital Building, right down the front stairwell for all to see. Maybe party loyalty, honesty and integrity just might start making a comeback. But, then again, honesty, integrity plus politics probably will never mix. I guess we can only hope.

That’s How I See It.

Websites of reference;
http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2009/10/30/politics/politicalhotsheet/entry5463995.shtml
http://www.slate.com/id/2233743/
http://lieberman.senate.gov/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Lieberman
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1009/28788.html
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/independent-sen-joe-lieberman-hell-back-republicans-2010/story?id=8952240
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/lincoln-mitchell/is-anybody-still-surprise_b_336685.html
http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/07/lieberman-i-stand-with-the-small-minority-of-americans-who-oppose-public-option.php
http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2009/10/somebody-buy-joe-lieberman-puppy.html
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/person.xpd?id=300067
http://www.courant.com/topic/politics/joe-lieberman-hpp2355.topic
http://liebermanmustgo.com/
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/27/top-15-lieberman-betrayal_n_336024.html

How Revolutions Start

What The Wealthy Should Fear The Most

Soon after President Barack Obama took Office Right Wing Lunatic, Republican Congresswoman Michelle Bachmann, insinuated that people were angry and may need to revolt to gain control of their government again. Even if those were not her exact words, the references were sure there. I have given some thought to what it would take for an Average Joe or Josephine to reach a point where they felt they had nothing more to loose. Maybe, to even strap a bomb on themselves and be willing, to sacrifice themselves for something better. Sure, we have the fanatical of any group who can talk weak minded souls into doing their bidding for them. But, what is the word you can use to describe when a point has been reached that, the masses as a whole, decide to rise up and cause change. I believe that word is hope.

The hope in having a safe home to live in. The hope in having the ability to feed yourself and your family. The hope that you can provide all the basic necessities, like healthcare, needed to live a decent life in this world. Hope, something the wealthy in this world, never needs to worry about. Unless, all hope is lost. At that point, I believe the wealthy, the elite and the Corporate Stronghold should have plenty to cause deep concern. It is at that point when the wealthy and company will stand to loose everything as well.

The gap between the wealthy, the middle class and the poor is much too big. The greed being consumed by the wealthy is eroding the one safeguard that keeps the mass population from rising up and destroying everything the wealthy wishes to hoard. The following is an article by Vice President Joe Biden. This was posted on the USA Today Website on January 30, 2009. I believe this article brings home the point I am trying to make here; http://blogs.usatoday.com/oped/2009/01/time-to-put-mid.html
Time to put middle class front and center
Commentary by Joe Biden
For years, we had a White House that failed to put the middle class front and center in its economic policies.
President Obama has made it clear that is going to change. And it's why he has asked me to lead a task force on the middle class.
America's middle class is hurting. Trillions of dollars in home equity, retirement savings and college savings are gone. And every day, more and more Americans are losing their jobs.
For the backbone of the USA, it's insult on top of injury. Over the course of America's last economic expansion, the middle class participated in very few of the benefits. But now in the midst of this historic economic downturn, the middle class sure is participating in all of the pain. Something is seriously wrong when the economic engine of this nation — the great middle class — is treated this way.
President Obama and I are determined to change this. Quite simply, a strong middle class equals a strong America. We can't have one without the other.
An economy for all Americans
Right now, our most urgent task is to stabilize our nation's economy and put it back on track. That is what our economic recovery package moving through the Congress is all about. We need to make these critical investments to jump-start our economy.
On top of this urgent task, though, we have an important long-term task as well. Once this economy starts growing again, we need to make sure the benefits of that growth reach the people responsible for it. We can't stand by and watch as that narrow sliver of the top of the income scale wins a bigger piece of the pie — while everyone else gets a smaller and smaller slice.
One of the things that makes this task force distinctive is it brings together — in one place — those agencies that have the most impact on the well-being of the middle class in our country. We'll be looking at everything from access to college and training with the Department of Education, to business development with the Department of Commerce, to child care reform with Health and Human Services, to labor law with the Department of Labor. With this task force, we'll have a single, high-visibility group with one goal: to raise the living standards of middle-class families.
Over the upcoming months, we will focus on answering those concerns that matter most to families. What can we do to make retirement more secure? How can we make child and elder care more affordable? How do we improve workplace safety? How are we going to get the cost of college within reach? What can we do to help weary parents juggle work and family? And, above all else, what are the jobs of the future? Here, we'll be looking at green jobs, better-paying jobs, better-quality jobs.
Open to the public
At the end of the day, it will be our responsibility to offer clear, specific steps we can take to meet these concerns and others.
Unlike some previous government task forces, our task force will operate in a fully transparent manner. We will consult openly and publicly with outside groups that have thought long and hard about these issues and can help us bring the most far-reaching and imaginative solutions to these problems. All the materials from our meetings, and any report we produce, will be up on our public website. None of this will happen behind closed doors.
In government, as in life, you need clear goals to succeed. In the Obama/Biden administration, we have set a very clear goal: Our administration will have succeeded if the middle class once again starts to share in the economic success of this nation.
Joe Biden is vice president of the United States.

Regardless of where you believe the middle class begins in financial terms, we live in a class base society. You can not have a wealthy class if you do not have the lower classes below it. You can not have any of the lower classes if you do not allow them the ability to thrive. So, I would suggest to all who have the wealthy ability. If you want to keep the wealth you have, the best way to safeguard it is to make sure you keep your greed in check. Show some empathy to the lower classes so that hope will thrive. If you do not, your wealth will be fleeting and you will find yourselves struggling just to survive instead of living a life of privilege.

That’s How I See It.

Websites of reference;
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/10/03/medical-premiums-burden-middle-class/
http://pewglobal.org/commentary/display.php?AnalysisID=1051
http://www.whitehouse.gov/strongmiddleclass/
http://www.pbs.org/now/politics/middleclassoverview.html
http://themiddleclass.org/
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/6398137/Cutting-middle-class-benefits-would-save-billions-reform-says.html
http://marketplace.publicradio.org/display/web/2008/01/11/what_is_the_middle_class/
http://pewresearch.org/pubs/793/inside-the-middle-class
http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1882147,00.html
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204313604574328552267381152.html
http://yglesias.thinkprogress.org/archives/2009/03/john_stossels_tall_tales_about_middle_class_income.php
http://blogs.consumerreports.org/money/2009/02/what-does-it-mean-to-be-middle-class-in-america-today.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Middle_class
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_middle_class
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21272238/
http://blogs.usatoday.com/oped/2009/01/time-to-put-mid.html