Ghosting Miranda

 

Don’t Blame Shots for All Ills, Swine Flu Officials Say

Don’t Blame Shots for All Ills, Swine Flu Officials Say - NYTimes.com

As soon as swine flu vaccinations start next month, some people getting them will drop dead of heart attacks or strokes, some children will have seizures and some pregnant women will miscarry.

But those events will not necessarily have anything to do with the vaccine. That poses a public relations challenge for federal officials, who remember how sensational reports of deaths and illnesses derailed the large-scale flu vaccine drive of 1976.

This time they are making plans to respond rapidly to such events and to try to reassure a nervous public — and headline-hunting journalists — that the vaccine is not responsible.

Am I willing to take a chance that the  flue vaccine will not harm me? No, I am not. I rather take my chances with the flu.

Read about the testing they have done on this shot. There have been circumstance in which this  shot, has harmed people.  Are you willing to take that chance? Are you willing to jeopardize your life. How do we know if this flu was not made from a lab? Do you all remember the story about when they first invented the swine flu. There were people that actually died. I am sorry to say  that I do not  trust my government to be a   guinea pig on a  shot that has not been tested through the normal clinical trials. I might have MS but I still value my life. I do not think this  shot is a wise  decision. I also think if  the man upstairs  wants  you to  get  sick   you will get  sick. If it is  your time it is  your time, nothing will prevent it. It is up to  God, not man if you live or  die. If  God  wants you  dead, no man made  injection will prevent it.

 

Obama to Use Current Law to Support Detentions

By

PETER BAKER

 

Published: September 23, 2009

WASHINGTON — The Obama administration has decided not to seek new legislation from Congress authorizing the indefinite detention of about 50 terrorism suspects being held without charges at at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, officials said Wednesday.

Instead, the administration will continue to hold the detainees without bringing them to trial based on the power it says it has under the Congressional resolution passed after the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, authorizing the president to use force against forces of Al Qaeda and the Taliban.

In concluding that it does not need specific permission from Congress to hold detainees without charges, the Obama administration is adopting one of the arguments advanced by the Bush administration in years of debates about detention policies.

This is just  wrong. It is not right to hold people without being convicted of doing something wrong. America wanted change. People voted for Obama because we did not want another Bush in the office. Unfortunately  it appears that Obama has let us down. We are just like those countries that hold the political prisoners. We are just like Vietnam who held our guys in their camps. We are no better then they are. The reason being is because of our president, and the presidents before him. We have grown into the enemy. People use to look up to this country. Now we just let others down. Where is the justice? Where is our humanity?

Obama to Use Current Law to Support Detentions - NYTimes.com

We need to get a healthcare passed soon. We need to get our kids out of  Afghanistan. That is what  we need to  do. America needs  to  stand up. We need  to  let our  voices be heard.

WWE's Linda McMahon running for Senate | KansasCity.com Prime Buzz

 

WWE's Linda McMahon running for Senate

from msnbc.com

Watch out, Chris Dodd. After decades of running the business side of World Wrestling Entertainment, WWE CEO Linda McMahon is jumping into a different ring.

"I've decided to enter the race as GOP candidate for the U.S. Senate from Connecticut," McMahon said.

News of McMahon's candidacy is sure to draw mixed reviews from people who either love or loathe the royal family of wrestling, particularly McMahon's husband, Vince -- a man known for his on-screen temper.

Depending on how you view the Senate, the highly fictional performances in wrestling are either the furthest thing from public service imaginable -- or just a lower-rent version of partisan politics.

While Mrs. McMahon's wrestling persona may have been characterized by jokes and pretend games, she says she's serious about her candidacy for the U.S. Senate. And given the nation's uncertain economic climate, she says her financial expertise makes her the right woman for the job.

"We've got mounting debt in our country. I'm not a politician, but I am a businesswoman," McMahon told us in an exclusive interview at her Connecticut home. "I've created jobs here in Connecticut and [turned] a 13 person company [into one] over 500."

The WWE's financial guru defines herself as a fiscal conservative, and promises she will refuse donations of more than $100 and largely finance her own campaign.

"I know you can't spend your way out of debt, and I'm not going to have any special interest money backing me," McMahon said.

A Senate run wouldn't be McMahon's first foray into the world of politics. She currently serves on the Connecticut Board of Education.

And while her personal finances haven't suffered much amid the national recession, McMahon says she knows what it's like – and can relate to those whose savings have been stripped away by the poor economy.

"I've been there early on in my career," she said. "I was bankrupt, so I know what it feels like to lose everything."

Despite her ventures in the fantastical world of WWE, McMahon said she's not concerned that voters may not take her seriously.

"I've had a lot of fun watching the product of WWE and I'm very proud," she said, adding, "I'm about the business of business. I'm the CEO of the company."

But McMahon hasn't exactly acted in a behind-the-scenes role when it comes to the WWE. She's been videotaped in some fictional scenes in which most politicians – or aspiring ones – wouldn't be caught dead.

Remember the clip where a wrestler accused her of making his life miserable, just like she makes her husband's life miserable?

"That's what you do," the wrestler shouted as he got in McMahon's face. "Why don't you do what women do? Why don't you go scrub some pots and pans?"

That's just the nature of the WEE, says McMahon. "The content is a soap opera."

And unlike the shocking, degrading way her husband treats her on screen, McMahon describes her husband as "very supportive" when it comes to her political aspirations.

McMahon is one of several Republicans vying to take on Chris Dodd in next year's election. Recent polls indicate Dodd is vulnerable, trailing by as much as 10 points behind other Republicans.

And for McMahon, the wrestling experience might come in handy on the Senate floor.

"Well, you never know," she said. "A body slam here or there might work."

WWE's Linda McMahon running for Senate | KansasCity.com Prime Buzz

Why not let the woman go run for GOP. It could be the vest  decision for the U.S senate. Think about it. She is obviously has  business sense. Granted  people will be trusting her  with more then a  wrestling company. In fact a whole state, or more. I believe she will be able to do it too. Look how she  helped the business of WWE. Yes the actors are the main stars, but  they need people behind the sense to make  the show. She obviously did that. I really hope people  take her seriously on this. I truly believe she would be able to help, as long as people can separate fact from fiction. Don’t hold her career in the WWE, against her, but see it as a positive, and how she worked to make the company  form 13 to 500 plus.

Should the rights to bare arms be removed from the constitution?

The Second Amendment (Amendment II) to the United States Constitution is the part of the United States Bill of Rights that protects a right to keep and bear arms from infringement by the federal government, including federal enclaves and Washington, D.C. The Second Amendment was adopted on December 15, 1791, along with the rest of the Bill of Rights.

The American Bar Association has noted that there is more disagreement and less understanding about this right than of any other current issue regarding the Constitution. For almost a century following the ratification of the Bill of Rights, the intended meaning and application of the Second Amendment drew less interest than it does in modern times.

I am not sure  where the  confusion of the second amendments comes in. There are  two know quotes about the amendment. They are,

“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed “ 

And,

“A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed “

Now as you can see this amendments, gives permission for the militias to have fire arms.

Now, What is a Militia?

“a military force composed of ordinary citizens[1] to provide defense, emergency law enforcement, or paramilitary service, in times of emergency without being paid a regular salary or committed to a fixed term of service. “

There we have it look, ordinary citizens. That is you and I. We are the people that make up a militia to protect or homes are states, or rights as American citizens. Normal people make up a militia. In order to protect or homes, or states we need our guns. This  is why we have the second amendment. So  should we lose that right to bare arms. No we shouldn't. We never know when or if we might have to defend our homeland, and fight along side or military. American have a right to protect themselves. I do believe that there are to many that abuse  this right. When they abuse this right. I believe they should suffer the consequences and lose their right to bear arms. I do not think those who are responsible, and has never committed a violent crime should  lose their right to bear arms. I also think  their should be a requirement that people  take gun safety courses, and are required to learn how to shoot a gun, before  being allowed to handle such a weapon.

(CNN) -- Prosecutors will seek the death penalty against a former California Sunday school teacher accused of killing an 8-year-old girl earlier this year.

Sandra Cantu's body was found in a suitcase in an irrigation pond near where she lived.

Melissa Huckaby, 28, was indicted last month in the death of Sandra Cantu, a playmate of Huckaby's daughter. Huckaby lived in the same mobile home park as Cantu and her family in Tracy, California.

Sandra's body was found April 6, stuffed into a suitcase and submerged in a pond at a dairy farm. She was last seen alive March 27 in the mobile home park.

Huckaby is charged with kidnapping and murdering Sandra, according to the indictment, along with lewd and lascivious acts on a child under 14 and rape by instrument. She pleaded not guilty in June, but entered another not guilty plea on Thursday at a hearing, minutes of which were provided to CNN by a court spokeswoman.

Prosecutors said at the hearing Thursday they plan to seek the death penalty.

I hope this woman does get the death penalty. I am not real big on the death penalty. The only time I am is when a child is involved. This woman deserves to die. She should never get out of prison. I hope her life is really hard in prison. I hope she doesn’t get any favors what so ever hat all. The courts need to set an example there has been too many crimes against children lately. We need to show people they can not get away with things like this. Children look up to us, the adults, to love and protect them. What a betrayal these monsters do to these children. These poor children. Their innocence are forever lost. Once the innocence is lost they will never gain it back. It is up to us to protect them. The courts would  be protecting the children if they got this woman off the streets and off this  world for  good. All people like this  should be sent away forever.