Health care. Love it or hate it, it's still a deeply divided issue in America today. I wasn't surprised that every democratic vote was going to be needed to get debate going in the Senate on it, but I was appalled at what Harry Reid did to make sure that it happened. I guess I shouldn't be with all the corruption that has been going on in the federal government over the decade, but the Associated Press reports that there is a provision in the Senate health care bill to give Senator Mary Landrieu's home state of Louisiana $100 million to help cover the costs for Medicaid. I mean, it's basically blackmail. How could you deny your home state $100 million? You cannot, and of course she is now going to vote for it. If democrats have to be that desperate to get past just one hurdle, I wonder what they will do when it actually goes to vote. Sure, let's just give one billion dollars to every senator's state. That way they will obviously vote for the bill, right? I thought the democrats were environmentally conscious as well; I wonder how many trees they are wasting to print out the 2,000+ pages for every senator to (supposedly) read.
Attorney General Eric Holder's decision to have 9/11 mastermind Khalid Shaikh Mohammed tried in New York City is being hotly debated. I disagree with the decision; what is wrong with having the man tried in a military tribunal? It just seems unnecessary to me to have Mohammed waste taxpayer's money and make a mockery of our court system. How is the court going to deal with all of the information that was given by him through 'enhanced interrogation techniques?' Wasn't Mohammed supposed to have his Miranda Right's read to him when he was captured? How can Mohammed get a fair trial if the jury is going to be from New York City? There are just too many questions and not enough answers; it just doesn't seem worth it when you could have a military tribunal and be done with it instead of having it drag out in New York City.
Attorney General Eric Holder's decision to have 9/11 mastermind Khalid Shaikh Mohammed tried in New York City is being hotly debated. I disagree with the decision; what is wrong with having the man tried in a military tribunal? It just seems unnecessary to me to have Mohammed waste taxpayer's money and make a mockery of our court system. How is the court going to deal with all of the information that was given by him through 'enhanced interrogation techniques?' Wasn't Mohammed supposed to have his Miranda Right's read to him when he was captured? How can Mohammed get a fair trial if the jury is going to be from New York City? There are just too many questions and not enough answers; it just doesn't seem worth it when you could have a military tribunal and be done with it instead of having it drag out in New York City.
|
|