August 31, 2009
Posted by Coonsey in Uncategorized.add a comment
TORTURE was ILLEGAL but Let’s IGNORE THAT!
Senator John McCain responded to former vice president Cheney’s comments about the AG Holder’s investigation of torture by CIA:
These people make no sense what so ever with their logic. War crimes were committed but for the sake of possibly upsetting somebody or hurting their feelings, we should just ignore the crimes and ‘move on’.
A gang of crooks just stole drugs for their own pleasure or to sell for profit themselves, from a famous drug cartel. Problem is, this gang of crooks were all police officers working for the city. The attorney general said after careful consideration, “We need these policemen on the job and alert — so we aren’t going to punish them for their crimes, we should just move on.”
This is crazy!!!!
Why are the media even listening to Cheney and his daughter; but especially HIM? That’s like listening and talking to Adolf Hitler or the Godfather about the reasons for gassing Jews or killing other gang members?
I’m not saying Cheney is as BAD as Hitler was but he DID advocate going against the Constitution and is still supporting the IDEA that torture worked so therefore we should disobey our own laws.
Does this give the police, FBI and fire depts the right to torture prisoners in the jails or arrested — if it means possibly saving lives? I mean, think about it. What if we capture a member of the drug cartel. We know that his selling drugs can cause death among those that use those drugs. Should we torture him to find out other gang member’s names to save lives?
Do you have a limit as to how far you will go to quote, save lives?
Should we euthanize people with the H1N1 virus — after all, it could save others from catching it and possibly dying. How far should we go with this ignoring of our laws?
August 29, 2009
Posted by Coonsey in Uncategorized.add a comment
Ruben Navarrette Jr: Demoralize and Destroy the Country’s Intelligence Agencies?
Ruben Navarrette Jr., a nationally syndicated columnist and a regular contributor to CNN.com wrote the following:
It’s not every day that you see an administration devour itself. But that’s pretty much what happens when you have the Justice Department investigating the CIA. This will poison the relationship between the entities, which still have to work together to keep America safe in the war on terror.
And we’re expected to believe that Holder is acting on his own, without approval from the president. Obama has said he wants to “look forward, not back” and called this “a time for reflection, not retribution.”
This is not a good look — not for Holder, not for Obama and not for the administration…
What do Americans know that the Obama Justice Department doesn’t? Maybe this: If you wanted to demoralize and destroy the country’s intelligence agencies, and thus put its people at risk, you’d be hard-pressed to find a more effective way of doing it than by prosecuting CIA agents who did the nation’s dirty work and acted in good faith, oftentimes after consulting with lawyers about the legality of their methods.
By the way, where did those lawyers work? This is the poetic part. In the case of Steven Bradbury, Jay Bybee, and John Yoo — the authors of the so-called “torture memos” that were the subject of so much reporting a few months ago — they worked in the Office of Legal Counsel at the Justice Department.
That would be the same Justice Department that is now investigating CIA officers for, in some cases, doing what the department’s lawyers told them was legally permissible to do.
Mr Navarrette, would have you believe that the CIA is above the law, that they would never commit a crime and that they almost always consulted with the Justice Department before doing anything illegal. Good grief!
Mr Navarrette, would have you believe that the ‘end‘ justifies the ‘means’.
He would also have you believe that because a few bad apples were caught in fact doing illegal actions for the Bush/Cheney administration, that other members of that same organization would rebel and purposely disobey any order given to them by the White House or Justice Department thereafter. He would have you believe that they would want ‘payback’.
“If you wanted to demoralize and destroy the country’s intelligence agencies, and thus put its people at risk, you’d be hard-pressed to find a more effective way of doing it than by prosecuting CIA agents who did the nation’s dirty work and acted in good faith”
If what you say is true Mr. Navarrette, then thousands of our military would currently be “demoralized” and our military would be “destroyed” over the prosecutions of some of their bad apples that committed atrocities while conducting military actions during war time. You say that any prosecutions would:
“poison the relationship between the entities”
Former Vice President Cheney said as much recently:
“President Obama’s decision to allow the Justice Department to investigate and possibly prosecute CIA personnel, and his decision to remove authority for interrogation from the CIA to the White House, serves as a reminder, if any were needed, of why so many Americans have doubts about this administration’s ability to be responsible for our nation’s security,” Cheney said.
Are you/he implying that our troops would disobey Pentagon and White House orders if any of their fellow comrades were prosecuted or court marshaled for illegal actions? You/he don’t have much confidence in our troop’s sir, if this is what you mean – nor do you have confidence in our CIA agents in doing their jobs.
Some CIA agents actually questioned the legality of the action they were taking. In fact, a few have been reported as saying something like,
“We knew this was going to come back and bite us . . . These people weren’t judges, they were just lawyers in the justice department. It was kind of like us telling ourselves it was okay to do it.”
The official recalled the atmosphere at the time of the 9/11 attacks. “A colleague of mine said, ‘I know this is all wrong but I keep picturing these people jumping out of windows and falling out of buildings’.”
Yet they chose to go ahead and do ‘the job’ as ordered. These people may be vindicated for their actions because they were ordered to do them. The person(s) that did the ordering would hopefully then be brought to justice instead.
It’s been reported that there may have been some agents that went further than authorized – they should be punished for those war crimes – don’t you think? Otherwise sir, what would you consider a ‘war crime’ to be?
If we were at war with Russia or China and these illegal actions took place against our own troops, would you still ignore them? How would you explain that to the soldier that may someday be a POW themselves?
War Crimes may have been committed, most likely were from the reports we’ve been shown. If America steps aside and ignores those crimes, how will we ever have the right to demand justice for crimes made by other nations?
August 28, 2009
Posted by Coonsey in Uncategorized.add a comment
Internet Addicts: Help Is On the Way…Maybe?
The Heavensfield Retreat Center, located in Fall City, Wash., claims to be the first U.S in-patient center to treat Internet, video game and texting addictions. Enrollment in the clinic’s 45-day Internet addiction recovery program, called reStart, costs roughly $14,500.
The program is designed to wean patients off the Internet by combining traditional talk therapy with social skills training, such as lessons in conversation techniques and dating. Patients also feed goats, raise chickens and do home-maintenance work as a way of getting reoriented with the offline world.
Wow, what a way to make money huh? Just offer your assistance to those addicted and you could get rich.
What I thought was funny about this story was the following statement:
The program’s Web site cites research that suggests “anywhere from 6 and 10 percent of the online population is dependent on one or more aspects of cyber technology and the Internet.”
Their WEBSITE???
Get off your ADDICTION to the Internet by logging onto THEIR WEBSITE!?
Makes sense to me, doesn’t it you?
August 28, 2009
Posted by Coonsey in Uncategorized.add a comment
Well, Well, Well, Look What We have Here:
It appears a PRIVATE HEALTH INSURER also provides for end-of-life planning coverage that is similar to that being put forth by House Democrats.
Under the “Member Rights and Responsibilities” portion of United Healthcare’s website there is an outline of “exactly what you can expect from your health care experience and how you can improve that experience, too.” The list includes the following pledge:
Consumer will be allowed to “Choose an Advance Directive to designate the kind of care you wish to receive should you become unable to express your wishes.”
The goal of the provision, it seems, is to offer consumers the type of medical consultation that is often needed (and frequently forgone) to make end-of-life procedures can be smoother and less painful. If it sounds similar, that’s because the House provision that has been derided as creating government-administered.
Officials with United Healthcare did not immediately return request for comment.
The truth is finally seeping through the muck! Now what will Governor Palin, Sean Hannity and others say? Will they apologize for scaring seniors into believing the government is going to kill them off — I doubt it; but I do know they SHOULD!
UPDATE
It appears that even the Federal Employee Health Benefit for congressional members includes the END OF LIFE Advanced Directive option. I wonder if YOUR Senator or Representative realizes this option is available for THEM TOO?:
Your Rights
OPM requires that all FEHB Plans to provide certain information to their FEHB members. You may get information about us, our networks, providers, and facilities. OPM’s FEHB website (www.opm.gov/insure) lists the specific types of information that we must make available to you. Some of the required information is listed below.
The right to an Advance Directive, living will, or other directive to your contracting medical providers with respect to your future healthcare choices.
The right to information regarding how medical treatment decisions are made by the participating medical providers or Health Net of Pennsylvania, Inc. as well a payment structure.
August 28, 2009
Posted by Coonsey in Uncategorized.add a comment
Aren’t these little darlings adorable? I want one!
Photo provided by the Oregon National Primate Research Center at Oregon Health & Science University
August 28, 2009
Posted by Coonsey in Uncategorized.2 comments
Why We Need Universal Health Care and Public Option
This video is a very good example of why universal health care and a public option is important:
August 27, 2009
Posted by Coonsey in Uncategorized.add a comment
VOTE KIDS: Senator Scores
I received the following email from John Quinn. I think some of you might be interested in this information:
I’m writing on behalf of Vote Kids, a nonprofit advocacy organization based in DC, to let you know that we’ve released a scorecard evaluating how U.S. Senators have voted on legislation that affects children this year. Your blog is relevant to children’s issues, so I wanted to make sure you knew about our scorecard.
Thirteen million U.S. children live in poverty, 8 million are without health insurance, and more than 3 million are reported abused and neglected. These numbers will only get worse during the current economic recession.
Thirty-two Senators earned perfect scores of 100%. Four Senators earned zeros – Jim Bunning (KY), James Inhofe (OK), Tom Coburn (OK) and Jim DeMint (SC). In all of their states, a greater share of children live in poverty, perform less well in school, and remain uninsured than children nationwide.
The scorecard, which includes full descriptions of the selected votes and analysis of how each affects America’s children, can be found on the Vote Kids website at VoteKids.org. For more information, please contact Vote Kids President, Michael Petit, at (202) 223-8870.
August 27, 2009
Posted by Coonsey in Uncategorized.add a comment
Obama: Time for a ‘Give Back’? How about No Tax Returns?
We’ve heard nothing but the idea of tightening the rules on the financial markets, CEO pay, trade partners and on businesses since the worst recession showed its ugly teeth at the end of last year and the beginning of this year. Perhaps it’s time to loosen the strings a bit.
Americans are starting to get a bit shakey over the new rules and seeing government hands in the pot, sort of speak. Perhaps it’s time to ‘give away’ something?
I’m not sure what that give back should be; but it should be something that effects millions in their everyday lives.
For example, maybe the President should announce a new task force that will investigate and produce a way to make easier, the way we report our taxes every year by using electronic means. We all know how he loves the Internet and uses it within the White House and other departments within the government.
Businesses and financial institutions all file reports on individuals and companies to the IRS and other respective government entities electronically now. The government should have all relative information available to them. You and I both know that if they wanted to, they could find out how much toilet paper we buy, let alone how much we make and spend.
All a taxpayer should have to report is any income, investments or expenses that haven’t been reported electronically. It should be up to the government to search all the relative databases for the appropriate information to record our taxes every year — not the tax payer.
Unfortunately, the Republican Party will most likely buck this idea as well as all the others. It might eliminate the companies and individuals that do our taxes for us every year like accountants and software companies like Taxcut or TurboTax, etc… Gee, we wouldn’t want that would we?
August 27, 2009
Posted by Coonsey in Uncategorized.add a comment
Stories Like This Make Me Sick
A Saudi Arabian father forced his 10-year-old daughter to return to her 80-year-old husband Sunday, after she was found hiding at the home of her aunt for 10 days, Arab News reported.
The young girl’s husband, who denies he is 80 despite family claims, accused the aunt of violating the terms of his marriage, allowed by Sharia Law.
This whole family needs to be hung by the neck for ruining this child’s life.
Who the hell cares if the man is 80, 60 or 20 years old, it’s the ‘child’ that matters here. Damn I hate to hear these kind of treatments toward children.
This nation is one of our allies; can you believe that? We criticize and sometimes sanction North Korea, Cuba and China for their treatment of women and children; but we hold hands and kiss (Bush) or bow down (Obama) to these people.
I wonder if the former President realized at the time one of these girls was probably that Arabian’s wife?
August 26, 2009
Posted by Coonsey in Uncategorized.add a comment
Shepard Smith Debunks John McCain’s Charge that Reconciliation would be a ‘Drastic Change’
Fox News’ Shep Smith fact-checked McCain’s claim::
“The truth is Republicans used this in 2001, 2003, and 2005 to pass then-President George Bush’s tax cuts,” Smith said. Armed with some research, he then reported this quote from Sen. Judd Gregg (R-NH):”
“Reconciliation is a rule of the Senate (that) has been used before for purposes exactly like this on numerous occasions.” … “Is there something wrong with majority rules? I don’t think so. … The point, of course, is this: If you have 51 votes for your position, you win.”
How refreshing it is to see somebody on Fox speak the truth!
