First Gitmo Detainee Tried In Civilian Court AN ABSOLUTE FAILURE!

Gitmo detainee Ahmed Ghailani has been aquited of all but one damn charge yesterday in a NY civilian court. Out of some 280+ charges! Those charges included one murder count for each of the 224 civilians killed including 12 friggen Americans, at our embassies in Tanzania and Kenya in 1998.

So what did we successfully get a conviction on for the Obama Administration's first attempt at putting terror detainees on trial in civilian court? One count of conspiracy to destroy government buildings which he may get 20 years for. Sort of takes your breath away, doesn't it? Well it makes me mad as hell!

But wait, there's more infuriating details. The trial apparently was plagued by technicalities...of course, imagine that?! The prosecution's star witness was not allowed to testify, the judge felt that because the witness was identified while the defendant was held at a CIA facility later determined to be using "questionable" interrogation methods, we will just throw out that key witness altogether. Oh come on, any skilled sleeze ball of a defense lawyer for these guys is going to be able to exploit the abiguity of international covert investigations, interrogation techniques, etc. to derail these proceedings. Put these pricks back in military courts where justice might actually be served and swift, harsh punishments can be delt!

The world is not marveling at our civilized handling of these mass murdering assholes, they're laughing at how we let them kill our people and then exploit our civilian justice system to get posh treatment. Next up is none other than self-professed September 11th mastermind Khalid Sheik Mohammed. Oh! Oh! Maybe, just maybe with Eric Holder and his boys at the wheel, we can get a trafic infraction conviction on this jackass if we're lucky!

Whoa whoa! Not extending tax cuts = raising taxes during a RECESSION!!!

I'm fed up with this crap, aren't you?! I mean really, let's dispell with the first myth. NOT extending non-permanent tax cuts is the EXACT same thing as RAISING TAXES. That is first and every economist that I hear says raising taxes during a recession argo taking more money out of the hands of the people, would be very bad right now and might even cause a double dip. Next, extending them for the middle class and not the upper would be just dumb.

Let's be logical here and set aside our media hype fueled middle and lower class Robinhood mentality to steal from the rich and give to the poor....just for a moment. First, if you took ALL of "their" money, we still wouldn't have enough to balance the budget this year or next, and certainly not enough to relieve "our" tax burden anything noticeable and let's look for a moment at who these rich people people are. Many of them, not all, are business owners. And what do business owners do? They own businesses that EMPLOY middle and lower class people. So, wouldn't it seem logical that to tax said business owners more would have an adverse affect on all of us? No? The light buld isn't on yet?

More taxes = less money they have to spend on capital expenditures like expansion, improvement or even....what's that HIRING. It's stunning. We have fallen into yet another class war over an issue, unbelieveable! These politicians and lawmakers use the emotional seed of class war that they and the media have planted to turn themselves into some sort of modern day Robinhood and martar for us the simple poor common folk. More irony? We elect RICH LAWYERS to these positions. Look, plain and simple. Extend the damn tax cuts for everyone, no wait, make the damn things permanent for everyone and let's move on.

In fact, let's focus on reducing government spending...that is the answer here. Not raising taxes, because I know that is exactly what they want to accomplish so they can pay down some of this debt. How else are they going to do it if they don't reduce spending and live within the government's means? Economist are debunking other solutions to it left and right. Pull back, let the private sector breathe, leave more money in the hands of the industry and the people and the economy might just start to up tick. Isn't anyone on the hill listening?! Ahhhhhhhhh!!!!!

Bush's New Book Has us Talking Legacy, History's Judgement and more

Ok, plain and simple from my opinion. Do I think that history will be kinder to the legacy of our 43rd President, George W. Bush? Yes. Let's face it, as I've always held, a lot of what he did that was hotly controversial at the time and even still now, will be documented from a purely factual standpoint in history books, softening the emotional blow so to speak. Oh and time heals all wounds just came to mind.

From what I see from the snippets of his interviews so far on his new book, it seems to be exactly what "the doctor ordered." Candidly admitting mistakes, regrettable actions based on what was later determined to be bad info, all the hallmarks of a sincere leader after a rough period of leadership. I waxed and waned during the Bush era, I really did. Like a sometimes manic and moody first Republican and then an Independent I loved him, I hated him, and it changed by the minute some days!

But I NEVER doubted the man's patriotism and sincere desire to protect his country. He even said, when Matt Lauer asked him about the practice of waterboarding, "Because the lawyer said it was legal, he said it did not fall within the anti-torture act. I'm not a lawyer. But you gotta trust the judgment of people around you, and I do." I know all the Liberals and Bush haters just had a conniption, screaming, "Bull!" and let's not forget the morally wrong nature of torturing people even if it didn't fit some legal definition of torture, right? Well in my opinion, that's all fine and good, but there were some dark days there folks when we didn't have the luxury of all this.

Sure we can second guess it all now, but like the man said he had a critical job to do, was surrounded by people who said he was acting legally and he went at it. I'm hearing a good strong "gray zone" argument here, aren't you???!! Bottom line, time and the selective memory of history may indeed soften the blow to Bush's legacy, but we shall see, right?

Midterm GOP Victories Humble President Obama, Signal Change? We shall see!

I have waited to post until the post-election day wore on and the tone and responses could be heard from our leaders. Well I heard one that now sets me off for a blog post!

Amid all of the usual leadership posturing happy happy lets work together for America BS and subtle threatening "with limits" came a quote worthy of focus in a White House news conference today, President Obama actually said, "I think people started looking at all this, and it felt as if government was getting much more intrusive into people's lives than they were accustomed to."

Well he just hit the political nail on it's oh too obvious head! Look, I wanted Republicans to take at least one chamber of Congress from the Democrats, not both but at least one. Can you blame me? These people went willy nilly on the spending, socialist like policies, and yes as the President just said, "government was getting...intrusive" and fat, bloated and just unsustainably too big! So, perhaps this little reality check will force Obama to work with the other side of the aisle, and to be as tenacious and adamant as he HAS INDEED BEEN about trying to fix the problems, but to do so in a manner that does not isolate and shut off an entire side of America and spend us into an oblivion of debt!

Now, do I think that we have greener pastures of less government spending, smaller government and sound, more inclusive economic policy ahead come January 1st? Uhm...not likely! Republicans aren't known for their frugality either, better, but they still usually spend, just on different stuff, like Defense and War for example. Now, if they truly absorb the fiscal conservative element into their ranks, we may have a fighting chance. But just remember, come 2012, we'd get another chance to throw some more of them out on their disconnected, over spending rumps if we choose, Democrat or Republican!

Big Name Republicans Flying off the Handle Today? What?!

Republican NY gubernatorial candidate Carol Paladino walks off a live interview with a CNN affiliate after pressed on allegedly sexist remarks and Sarah Palin gets sassy, calling a Politico report "crap" on Fox News. The right is poised to dramatically increase their position today at the national level in Congress, and perhaps even at the State level in legislatures and Governors' offices. Why the hostility?

Now Sarah Palin is usually mild mannered, sounding ill-informed and lost, but usually not too hostile. But Paladino, from what I see is a loose cannon 24/7! The man's a nut job, honestly. He's just so pist, why? Even if he has a dismal chance of winning, A) You're the one who wanted to run for the Republican nomination in the first place and B) Just running has surely given you some perks and all but guaranteed you future positions in the party. So take a chill pill man!