Three men try to burgerlize off-duty cop's home, get shot

Score one for 2nd Amendment rights!

From the Miami Herald:

The three people who wandered into a Miami Lakes neighborhood with plans for a home invasion early Monday morning were not greeted by a frightened homeowner, but a police officer prepared to fight back.

That's the scene that unfolded at 4:30 a.m. Friday when three robbers tried to break into the home of a Bay Harbor Islands police officer and his wife, said Lt. Nancy Perez, a Miami-Dade police spokeswoman.

The off-duty police officer fired at the three intruders, possibly injuring one of them.
In investigating the attempted home invasion, Perez said detectives learned that a man had sought treatment for gunshot wounds at Memorial Hospital Miramar, which is in nearby Broward just north of Miami Lakes.

Constitution upheld by Judge

This is an update from an earlier post.

CNN:

An immigration judge on Friday rejected the federal government’s attempt to deport an
Egyptian immigrant who had been acquitted on charges of illegally possessing and transporting explosives.
Youssef Megahed was released after being detained as a suspected terrorist for almost five months by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, or ICE, in a politically explosive case that has pitted national security claims against charges of profiling and discrimination against Muslims.
A spokeswoman for the Justice Department’s Executive Office for Immigration Review, Elaine Kornis, indicated Friday that the government would appeal. However, ICE spokesman Richard Rocha later said the agency is reserving its right to appeal pending a review of the judge’s written opinion.
Megahed was released on his own recognizance, according to a court administrator. He needs to report once a month to a local ICE office and “not associate with known terrorists,” said Charles Kuck, the attorney for Megahed.

I'm really glad this judge had some sense. The Feds' arm (especially the INS) was getting a little long here. This man, Youssef Megahed, student at the University of Florida, had gone on a trip with a fellow student from the University. When pulled over for speeding, the police found explosives in the car. The car belonged to the other student, Ahmed Mohamed, who pled guilty in a plea agreement and is currently serving 30 years.

Megahed pled not guilty, and the jury agreed with him, finding him just a passenger in the car.

Justice had been served.

Then immigration came in to deport him, even though Megahed is a legal immigrant and his family is here. Even though the criminal justice system proved his innocence, the Feds thought they would overturn a state decision and use a legal loophole to banish this man.

Good thing we still have some federal judges with some sense. Megahed will still be watched, and will need to make sure to check all cars he gets into, but he will finally be allowed to go back to his family.

Terrorist released by "compassionate" Scottish government

Here's the ridiculous news item of the day:

CNN: The man convicted of murdering 270 people by blowing Pan Am flight 103 out of the sky above the Scottish town of Lockerbie two decades ago was heading home on Thursday after authorities set him free.

Abdelbeset Ali Mohmed al Megrahi, 57, landed in Tripoli, Libya, about 2045 local time (1845 GMT), according to local media reports.He is suffering terminal prostate cancer and has three months to live, Scottish authorities said.

Scottish Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill ordered al Megrahi's release on compassionate grounds, saying he will be "going home to die."

"Our justice system demands that judgment be imposed but compassion available," MacAskill said. "Our beliefs dictate that justice be served but mercy be shown."

The White House, which has urged Britain to keep al Megrahi behind bars, said it "deeply regrets" the decision.

President Barack Obama said: "We thought it was a mistake... We've also obviously been in contact with the families of the Pan Am victims and indicated to them that we don't think this was appropriate."

MacAskill said he accepted al Megrahi's 2001 conviction for the Lockerbie bombing, the worst terrorist atrocity ever committed on UK soil. He also said he supported a severe sentence.
But he said al Megrahi's lack of compassion for his 270 victims should not be a reason for Scotland to deny compassion to him.

Al Megrahi left prison Thursday, shortly after MacAskill's announcement and boarded a plane shortly afterwards.

Pan Am flight 103 exploded over the Scottish town of Lockerbie four days before Christmas in 1988, killing all 259 of those aboard the plane and 11 Scots on the ground.

Many of those on board the flight were Americans, and the U.S. government responded immediately to word of al Megrahi's release, saying it "deeply regrets" the decision.

"As we have expressed repeatedly to officials of the government of the United Kingdom and to Scottish authorities, we continue to believe that Megrahi should serve out his sentence in Scotland," the White House said in a statement.

The Scottish justice secretary said he decided not to transfer al Megrahi to a Libyan prison, even though a prisoner transfer agreement exists between the United Kingdom and Libya, but instead chose to set him free on compassionate grounds.

MacAskill said he believed the United States government and American families of the victims were led to expect before trial that whoever was convicted would serve out their entire sentence in Scotland.

"They did so on the basis of agreements they said had been made prior to trial regarding the place of imprisonment of anyone convicted," MacAskill said.

The U.S. attorney general, Eric Holder, was in fact deputy attorney general to Janet Reno at the time of the pre-trial negotiations. He was adamant that assurances had been given to the U.S. government that any person convicted would serve his sentence in Scotland."

The United Kingdom declined to back up those claims, leading MacAskill to side with the American position, he said.

Families of the Lockerbie victims have been sharply divided whether al Megrahi should be ever be released.

Susan Cohen, who lost her 20-year-old daughter, was adamant about her position, calling al Megrahi a "mass murderer" and his release "appalling."

"Are we so devastatingly weak now, have we lost all our moral fiber that you can say that Megrahi can be released from prison for a compassionate release? Where was his compassion for my daughter? Where was his compassion for all those people?" Cohen told American Morning.
Bert Ammerman, whose brother died in the bombing, called al Megrahi's release "ludicrous."

"First of all, he got his compassionate release when he got life imprisonment and not capital punishment, which Scotland doesn't have," Ammerman told CNN. He should have remained in prison, then after his death, his body could have been returned to Libya, he said.

"Two, he's going to be going back, even if he has terminal cancer, as a hero and he's going to be received as a hero in Libya," Ammerman said.
...
Al Megrahi was convicted in 2001 after the prosecution argued he had placed the bomb, hidden in a suitcase, on a flight from Malta to Frankfurt, Germany. There, prosecutors said, the bomb was transferred onto the Pan Am plane that went first to London's Heathrow Airport and then took off for New York.
...
Libya has formally accepted responsibility for the bombing and has compensated the families, though Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi later denied any culpability.

Al Megrahi was diagnosed in September 2008 with terminal prostate cancer, and medical officials have said his condition is rapidly deteriorating, MacAskill said. He said he declined an option to free al Megrahi and allow him to live in Scotland after senior police officers cited the severe security implications

Scotland will forever remember the crime that has been perpetrated against our people and those from many other lands," MacAskill said. "The pain and suffering will remain forever. Some hurt can never heal. Some scars can never fade."

He added, "However, Mr. al Megrahi now faces a sentence imposed by a higher power. It is one that no court, in any jurisdiction, in any land, could revoke or overrule. It is terminal, final and irrevocable. He is going to die."
-------------------------------------

Anyone else find this ridiculous?

Right-wing paranoid delusions: We are better than that.

From the Progressive Republican's article Nightmares
and Dreamscapes:
----------------------------------------------------
In a conference room. Maybe seven or eight government employees in their late 30s-early 40s. They’re wearing suits from Ann Taylor, or Men’s Wearhouse sitting on one side of a conference table that looks like it came right out of the Office Depot catalog In one hand they’re holding cups of coffee, or cans of Diet Coke (or some other caffeinated drink - they’ve been working late the last couple of nights) , the other hand busily hammering the keyboards of their mid-tier laptop computers, jotting down notes, trying to capture what the lady on the side of the table is saying.

Across the table is a woman in her mid 60s. Her blouse and pants recently purchased from the local Wal-Mart, her shoes from Payless Shoes. She’s nervously playing with her purse handles as she shuffles her feet. She’s not sure how to answer this last question. She should have been prepared for this question. She was…until just this second.
“We’d all like to get out of here today, Ma’am, so please answer as best you can,” the Committee chair sighs as she asks the question for the third time, “When you the government no longer finds you insurable…” she pauses, not for effect, but because she still can’t believe she has to ask the question.
“…how do you want to die?”
Chilling isn’t it? Cold, bureaucratic evil, like a scene out of the film CONSPIRACY. If certain right wing celebrities are to be believed this won ‘t be that far from the truth should Barack Obama’s health care plan pass both House of Congress.

But they are not to be believed. This is a a nightmare scenario crafted by self-styled leaders of the Republican Party. This is the kind of thing that has to stop.


Let’s be honest: Obama’s Plan is a bad one. It’s costly beyond comprehension. It adds bureaucratic roadblocks to an already excessively bureaucratic process. And, despite all the costs, it only provides additional care for a small percentage of the nation’s uninsured.
It’s a bad plan with any number of weaknesses that Republicans can point to as reasons we should be vehemently against it. Is it necessary to make things up about it?

Who is helped by devising scenarios like the one described above? Does Sara Palin making up spooky stories about Obama’s DEATH PANEL, really add weight to the argument against the real plan?

Does comparing the health plan to Nazis [limbaugh-20090806-hitler.flv] like friend of the blog, Rush Limbaugh, has done?

No. This type of rhetoric serves only to cheapen the debate.

Yes, Democrats spent a large portion of President Bush’s Presidency engaging in these very same tactics. Whether it was calling the President a Nazi for the War in Iraq or shouting down Republican members of Congress, the extreme left showed their true colors by acting insane on the public stage in support of their various causes. We justifiably condemned them for that behavior. We don’t need to turn around use those same tactics.

Not when we have the facts on our side. House Republicans have made some very clear arguments why they are against the current bill :

…was unnecessarily rushed through the Committee without proper understanding or even a reading of the bill by Members;
The massive spending and tax increases will damage an already reeling economy;
Americans will lose coverage they have and like;
The bill gives the government control over Americans’ personal health decisions
Clear, cogent arguments from the men and women we have elected to represent us in Congress. This is what we should be basing our resistance on. Not the overblown rhetoric of extreme right-wing celebrities. We have more sense than that.
-----------------------------------------------------------

I couldn't have said it better myself. People screaming "socialism!" "Nazis!" "Communism!" "Death Panels!" or other such nonsense are detrimental to the cause.

Stick to the facts: this plan sucks. We need a better one, not false and crazy accusations.

Republican HealthCare Reform

So this is going to be a list, of sorts, of what an alternative healthcare reform could be from the Republican side.

I'll start this list from comments I've read from other Republicans and conservatives, such as Jennifer and Pamela. The list will expand with other ideas found, or brought into the discussion in the comments. I'll update as we go.

So far, here is what I've got:

From Pamela D. Hart:
Add a policy, something like Medicare, let’s just call it “Medifree.” Medifree will cover anyone who doesn’t have private insurance, isn’t on Medicare, Medicaid or can’t afford insurance through their employer or any other means. Those who CAN afford insurance but choose NOT to purchase it, i.e. the 18-34 yr old invincibles and families who earn at least $50K, would have to purchase their own insurance. Those who truly can NOT afford insurance would get insurance through “Medifree” because they earn too much to qualify for Medicaid and are too young to be on Medicare.

Law and Order Teacher:
Have government and private health care form a partnership, something on the order of the public utilities commissions.

Jennifer:
*Change the tax code. Individuals should have the same tax incentives as employers who offer coverage. For example, there could be an income tax deduction of $7,500 for individuals and $15,000 for families. Over the long-term, people will move to portable, long-term individual insurance.

* Refundable tax credit. A refundable tax credit of $2,500 for individuals or $5,000 for families would eliminate the tax exclusion for those who get their insurance from their employers.

* Allow the purchase of health care insurance across state lines so that individuals have more choices in plans. This will encourage a robust market in individually owned health care.

* Reduce state regulations and mandates on insurance plans to help reduce costs. There are 1,901 mandates nationwide in 2007, up from 1,843 in 2006.

* Expand tax breaks for Health Savings Accounts. HSAs provide for tax-free accumulation and at the same time offer real protection against larges losses.

* Allow for the growth of convenient clinics. There are about 700 retail clinics located in Wal-Marts, Targets, and other Walk-in Centers. Convenient clinics reduce the costs by offering the uninsured an alternative to emergency rooms. It’s also an inexpensive option for people with HSAs.

* Medical Malpractice reforms are needed to help keep doctors’ insurance costs down which will reduce the costs of care. For example, states could enact laws that would put a cap on non-economic damages.

* Provide vouchers for the working poor so that they can purchase insurance from a state pool.

*Make health insurance more like car insurance. Provide choices.

Ablur:
Cost of Illegal Immigration to our healthcare system
Tort Reform - Frivolous and Record Breaking Awards
Education and Personal Health Responsibility
Freeing up Health Professionals to Deal with actual Health issues
Doctor Availability and the lack of new doctors entering the market
3rd party payer healthcare places incentives in the wrong area (HMOs and the real cost)