CBS News | Where Do Repeat Sex Offenders Go? | December 7, 2005 07:03:20: "Seventeen states have laws that allow holding sex offenders who have completed their prison terms. Governors in other states also have tried to use mental health laws to keep sex offenders in psychiatric hospitals once their prison terms end. ... The American Psychiatric Association has opposed civil commitment programs, saying government officials seem more intent on punishing sex offenders than treating them."
What are your thoughts? Should repeat sex offenders be locked up for good? Should they be listed on a national registry? Or should they be allowed to roam free and continue to prey on the innocent?
If you've been around here long, you know my thoughts. If not, you can find out here:
On Sex Offenders
August Updates
More On Sex Offenders
Tell me what you think.
Joe
Saturday, December 10, 2005
Friday, December 9, 2005
Federal Air Marshals
There's been a lot of fuss this week about the Federal Air Marshals who opened fire and killed a man who claimed to have a bomb. You've not doubt heard the news about it, and know most of the details. What you haven't heard is my opinion.
I used to do a decent amount of air travel for business, and still do on occassion. I've luckily never been in a situation where a Federal Air Marshal was needed. I've weighed both sides of the story, and I have to say this: kudos to those Marshals for acting swiftly and decisively.
Let's look at this a couple of ways. First, what if the man did have a bomb, as he claimed. With the action taken by these brave individuals, the man would have been quickly subdued and rendered harmless to the other innocent passengers. Mission accomplished. On the other hand, what if they had reacted as the critics suggest, and not taken such swift action? If the man had a bomb, as he claimed, we would not have been mourning the loss of one man who claimed to have a bomb on an airplane, but rather hundreds of innocent passengers who died at the hands of another terrorist. And what would the critics be screaming then? Most certainly, when it came out that there were Federal Air Marshals on the flight, they would have been criticizing them for their inaction. They would have been calling for changes in their training, but not the same changes they're calling for now. Instead, they would have demanded that Federal Air Marshals be better trained to detect danger and react appropriately.
All I have to say is this: when given the choice between the certain death of a self-proclaimed bomber and the potential death of hundreds of innocent people, I don't think there is a choice to be made at all. It's a no-brainer, and I thank God that we have men and women such as those Federal Air Marshals to protect our airlines from crazy would-be bombers (and crazies who only say they have a bomb).
Joe
I used to do a decent amount of air travel for business, and still do on occassion. I've luckily never been in a situation where a Federal Air Marshal was needed. I've weighed both sides of the story, and I have to say this: kudos to those Marshals for acting swiftly and decisively.
Let's look at this a couple of ways. First, what if the man did have a bomb, as he claimed. With the action taken by these brave individuals, the man would have been quickly subdued and rendered harmless to the other innocent passengers. Mission accomplished. On the other hand, what if they had reacted as the critics suggest, and not taken such swift action? If the man had a bomb, as he claimed, we would not have been mourning the loss of one man who claimed to have a bomb on an airplane, but rather hundreds of innocent passengers who died at the hands of another terrorist. And what would the critics be screaming then? Most certainly, when it came out that there were Federal Air Marshals on the flight, they would have been criticizing them for their inaction. They would have been calling for changes in their training, but not the same changes they're calling for now. Instead, they would have demanded that Federal Air Marshals be better trained to detect danger and react appropriately.
All I have to say is this: when given the choice between the certain death of a self-proclaimed bomber and the potential death of hundreds of innocent people, I don't think there is a choice to be made at all. It's a no-brainer, and I thank God that we have men and women such as those Federal Air Marshals to protect our airlines from crazy would-be bombers (and crazies who only say they have a bomb).
Joe
Sunday, December 4, 2005
GOP.com: National Strategy for Victory in Iraq
"Wednesday, November 30, 2005National Strategy for Victory in Iraq
The following document articulates the broad strategy the President set forth in 2003 and provides an update on our progress as well as the challenges remaining.
'The United States has no intention of determining the precise form of Iraq's new government. That choice belongs to the Iraqi people. Yet, we will ensure that one brutal dictator is not replaced by another. All Iraqis must have a voice in the new government, and all citizens must have their rights protected.
Rebuilding Iraq will require a sustained commitment from many nations, including our own: we will remain in Iraq as long as necessary, and not a day more.'
-- President George W. Bush
February 26, 2003"
President Bush's Weekly Radio Address
20051203.a.mp3 (audio/mpeg Object)In his weekly radio address President Bush said, "In this new century we must continue to welcome legal immigrants and help them learn the customs and values that unite all Americans, including liberty and civic responsibility, equality under God, tolerance for others, and the English language. In the coming months, I look forward to working with Congress on comprehensive immigration reform that will enforce our laws, secure our border, and uphold our deepest values."
Saturday, December 3, 2005
Reader Comments
Interesting Reader Comments
An anonymous reader has posted some very interesting comments to my recent update on Walgreens Christmas advertising. Excerpt: "So, who cares exactly how Walgreen's takes your money. It has nothing to do with your religion. And your religion has nothing to do with me and millions, even billions of other people. How bout that?!
Bet you don't publish this. But the Lady smiles on you anyway."
What I find most interesting about this reader's comments is that he felt so strongly about his (or her) position that he chose to post his comments anonymously. I find that to be a very courageous thing to do. NOT!!!
I invite you, anonymous reader, to email me directly, so that I might identify you to the rest of my readers.
I hope to hear from you soon.
Joe
An anonymous reader has posted some very interesting comments to my recent update on Walgreens Christmas advertising. Excerpt: "So, who cares exactly how Walgreen's takes your money. It has nothing to do with your religion. And your religion has nothing to do with me and millions, even billions of other people. How bout that?!
Bet you don't publish this. But the Lady smiles on you anyway."
What I find most interesting about this reader's comments is that he felt so strongly about his (or her) position that he chose to post his comments anonymously. I find that to be a very courageous thing to do. NOT!!!
I invite you, anonymous reader, to email me directly, so that I might identify you to the rest of my readers.
I hope to hear from you soon.
Joe
Thursday, December 1, 2005
Walgreens Says "Next Year Will Be Different"
 | |
| | |
| Great News! Walgreens Says "Next Year Will Be Different" Dear Joe, Because of your efforts, Walgreens has released the following response: "Next year, you can be assured our advertising will better incorporate 'Christmas,' and our holiday trees will be called Christmas trees. Unfortunately, all of this year’s December ads are already printed, so it's too late to make changes for this season." In addition, Lowe's has released a statement saying they now refer to all trees as "Christmas Trees" and have removed all signs that previously calling them "Holiday Trees." Your actions are bringing good results! We are hearing that many retailers are re-thinking their banning Christmas. Keep up the good work! Would you please send the enclosed polite letter to Kmart/Sears asking them to make Christmas an integral part of their promotions and advertising next year? We feel there is good reason to believe Kmart/Sears might honor your request. We will keep you informed as to their response. Additionally, and this is very important, please forward this to your family and friends. We need as much support as we can get in this effort. Thanks for caring enough to get involved. Sincerely, Don Donald E. Wildmon, Founder and Chairman P.S. Please forward this e-mail message to your family and friends! | |
| | |
| If you are a Federal Civilian, Postal or Military Employee, please consider AFA (#2058) for your annual CFC participation. | |
| Questions or comments about AFA? Contact us via email, phone, fax, or postal mail. | |
| | |
| www.afa.net Copyright 2005 American Family Association P O Drawer 2440 Tupelo, MS 38803 1-662-844-5036 All Rights Reserved |
Lowe's Drops "Holiday Trees" Label
Lowe's Drops "Holiday Trees" Label:
"Lowe's informed AFA yesterday that it is removing banners referring to 'holiday trees' from its stores. All 49 varieties of live and artificial trees at Lowe's and on Lowes.com are labeled as Christmas trees.
Lowe's assures AFA that the language on the banner was a mistake, and was not in any way an attempt to remove Christmas from the season.
We applaud Lowe's for listening to its customers and responding to their concerns. Just as we alerted Lowe's to our concerns, now let's show them our support by sending thank you emails.
Lowe's statement:
Lowe's has proudly sold Christmas trees in our stores for decades, and we continue to do so this year in all of our stores nationwide. All 49 varieties of live and artificial trees at Lowe's and on our web site, Lowes.com, are labeled as Christmas trees.
The product signs inside Lowe's stores have always said "Christmas trees," though an outside banner did not. To ensure consistency of our message and to avoid confusion among our customers, we are now referring to the trees only as "Christmas Trees." We have also removed the banner that read "holiday trees" from the front of our stores.
Lowe's apologizes for any confusion the banner created. We appreciate our customers bringing the matter to our attention and giving us the opportunity to correct the error.
For many retailers, including Lowe's, the holiday season encompasses all the holidays between October and early January. Thus we adopted an overall "Home for the Holidays" theme five years ago. In addition to spanning the season, we believe this theme is respectful of all our customers, regardless of which holidays they may celebrate.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
