Friday, April 27, 2007

This is a test.......

Time for a new National Party???

The Military Supplimental has been passed by the Senate and the Legislature. The president has said he will use his veto to send it back to congress to work toward more PORK and compromise??? The Republicians have bowed to the rantings of the Dems for 5 years. Most of the Executive Branch have been relieved, fired or quit. Now they are eyeing Condi. I'm sure the Attorney General will succumb to the constant pressure from the left and resign. Talk about micro-management. I would hate to work for one of those Democrats, if they truely believe that an employer should have complete knowledge of his or her complete department on an ongoing basis. That's ludicrous. This administration has been doing nothing but CYA and someone running interference for far too long, while the Chief Executive is still trying to run an effective domestic and foreign policy. When they should be taking the initiative, they are asleep at the wheel. Why are not committees being formed to investigate the Senate and Legislature for sabotaging the war effort and giving aid and comfort to the enemy??? Why is not someone asking for censure on Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi? because they are in politics are they protected against hate speech and anti-American retoric? I'm sorry, I cannot buy into this Anti-Military, Anti-American .
People speak of accountability, Where is this accountability when it comes to congressmen/women. Are they exempt, but you say, if you don't like what they do vote them out. Would that I could. I will be voting against the one that represents me in the Senate in 08, but she can do a lot of damage during the time she has left. Hopefully, the State Republican party will wake-up and smell the coffee. Maybe its time for another party more receptive to the needs of constituents and the Nation.

Thursday, April 19, 2007

Why??? such carnage

Now after the damage is done, people who perhaps could have stopped this mass murder look at the situation and ask why?? Why, I say was this person who it was said in 2005 was a danger to himself or others, released from an involintary emergency admission. He surely had an evaluation and was determined to not be a danger to himself or others. That's why. Otherwise he would not have been released.
Ask any mental health professional and he/she will tell you that the Mental Health System has really gone so far overboard in the protection of individual rights that they have overlooked both the safety of the individual and of others. The procedures involved to involintarily admit an individual to a mental health institution is set in law.
It starts with an evaluation of the individual by a certified counsellor then the condition is verified by at least another psychitrist swearing on an affidavit that the individual is a danger to himself or others. He/She can then be hospitalized. Then a petition is filed with the court with the petitioner, usually the councellor arriving at a hearing with his/her witnesses to prove the case. This hearing is held within 3 days of the initial hospitalization. The reason being to prove to a judge that indeed this individual is in need of hospitalization. If it is proved to the judges satisfaction than the individual is insitutionalized for 10 days. If the hearing does not satisfy the judge that the individual is indeed a danger to him/herself or others based on the evidence he/she is released immediately. If not he/she is hospitalized. Then, after 10 days another hearing is held to prove that the individual is or is not still a danger to him/herself or others. Now if with the medication coupled with the non-hostile, safe enviornment that the individual has been housed, stabilizes an individual at the hearing he presents that certainly he/she is no longer a danger to himself or others and he/she is released.
I'm sure states differ on their requirement for involintary admission to a mental health facility, but they probably are pretty much the same.
Remember when the states released all their patients from the state mental health insitutions?? They are still on the streets in all the major cities in all of the states. and laws were developed to Protect them?? If it can be shown, that they indeed pose a threat to themselves or others than help might be available, however you have to get them to the help to be evaluated.
The purpose of this rant is to let people know its not as easy as it presents to protect an individual who is incapable or unwilling to protect themselves. Certain procedures are written into Mental Health laws in every state just so you can't just lock up an individual who appears to be mentally impared. Its all a matter of law.

Wednesday, April 11, 2007

Ms. Pelosi's trip with the other left leaners

I was really surprised by the reception Ms. Pelosi got from the Media on her return to the U.S. Some of the MSM really called a spade a spade. Finally, some streight forward news. Not all that transpired while she was there but, leastways it wasn't the usual biased reporting expected from them. Isreal was not too happy on her message carrying ability. Lebanon was enraged over the remark she made about the way to lebanon was through Damascus, Not too smart, if you ask me. Seeings that it is suspected that Syria had something to do with the assasination of their much loved leader. Then her speaking for the Citizens of the US. I'm sorry, she is not speaking for me. She was not elected as president she represents the San Francisco groupies not the President of the United States, who is the only person, or his representative, who is mandated to initiate foreign policy. Stay home Nancy, say what you want in this country, but remember, you are judged by your words and actions.