Forbes just released it’s Top 2000 biggest companies of the world list. It allows a person to sort it just about any way they want to. So, I played with it a little. One thing that got my attention right off the bat was the fact that in this time of skyrocketing fuel costs putting the hurt on the average American, here’s the Top 10 Most PROFITABLE companies in the entire world:
| Rank | Name | Industry | Country | Profits ($bil) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | ExxonMobil | Oil & gas operations | United States | 36.13 |
| 2 | Royal Dutch/Shell Group | Oil & gas operations | Netherlands | 25.31 |
| 3 | Citigroup | Banking | United States | 24.64 |
| 4 | BP | Oil & gas operations | United Kingdom | 22.63 |
| 5 | Bank of America | Banking | United States | 16.47 |
| 6 | General Electric | Conglomerates | United States | 16.35 |
| 7 | Total | Oil & gas operations | France | 14.51 |
| 8 | Chevron | Oil & gas operations | United States | 14.1 |
| 9 | ConocoPhillips | Oil & gas operations | United States | 13.62 |
| 10 | Microsoft | Software & services | United States | 13.06 |
Something just ain’t right with that. Congress needs to bring the boys to the table. NOW!
- Technorati price gauging, Forbes
Now, when I posted my little thingy on Cynthia McKinney trying to steal the spotlight on the national security debate, I KNEW Nancy Pelosi would not sit still for one second and allow that to happen. Realizing she was being upstaged in a major way by the upstart McKinney, Nancy intentionally displays her plans upside down knowing that a bunch of bloggers like myself would post something to the effect of how much Nancy truly holds security in contempt by not even bothering to care enough to make sure she’s got it right. Now, the definitive clincher to the total disregard her colleagues have for national security I think is eloquently displayed by all the fellow members of her party applauding and otherwise doing nothing to inform her she’s screwing up.
This McKinney-Pelosi one-two punch on security almost leaves me speechless. Once I stop laughing I’m sure I’ll get my speech back.
That’s right. On her way to discuss national security, McKinney chose to ignore secuirity, and when questioned by security, chose to attack.
The only thing she got right this time is when offering her apology, acknowledged it was HER fault for not wearing her pin instead of falling back on her tired and meaningless race card she usually prefers to wear instead of proper ID.
Meanwhile:
- Nancy Pelosi stated that McKinney’s actions were indicative of the Democrats’ overall contempt for national security. McKinney, fired back that if Pelosi didn’t stop her political stereotyping of Democrats, she’d bitch-slap her as well.
- Russ Feingold called for a censure of McKinney for using the phrase "bitch-slap". Stating that McKinney’s efforts to side-step and evade national security were not indicative of her party’s efforts in regards to the same issue. That, in the best interests of national security, it’s OK to break a few laws.
- Howard Dean immediately called for McKinney’s impeachment and removal from office on the basis that assaulting an officer is a felony and he is tired of campaigning for members of his party while they are in prison.
- Diane Feinstein immediately introduced legislation making it illegal to slap a police officer. Harry Reid, pointing out that this is already a law, tabled it. Bill Frist, seeing a golden opportunity, demanded a vote on the bill that already was a law. So, it went to Committee. Sixteen Committees looked into and decided that since it already was a law, they could just argue over the text of the law and PRETEND to vote. John Kerry and Ted Kennedy immediately declared a filibuster on the grounds that they would not put up with accomplishing nothing and therefore would assure that nothing would be accomplished in their effort to accomplish nothing. This angered Hillary Clinton. She blamed the fight over nothing on the Right-Wing Majority. AP ran it.
- Jesse Jackson threatened to boycott Google unless McKinney played her race card.
- Bill O’Reilly pointed out that DC Police DID have the right to shoot to kill. And, they’ve done it before. Maybe that’s why she offered the proper apology?
Either way, how can someone be so flippant about security and still expect us to take them seriously when discussing the same issue?
People, do yourselves a favor, vote this idiot out and get someone that has some sense. This guy here looks OK to me:
If he were Republican I’d probably like him even more. But hey, ANYTHING’s an improvement. What you people down there don’t get is Cynthia is guaranteeing that no federal money is going to her district. I’m not talking pork barrel stuff here, I’m talking every day programs that are put out to bid. You guys lose that money every single time because you have a loon for a congressman. All anyone else would have to do is keep their mouth shut and they would do more for their district than Cynthia does. And, if elected, I’m sure Hank could guarantee more help for his people.
- Technorati Cynthia McKinney, Hank For Congress
Now, ya gotta understand before going any further here, I am conservative. But, I am a TRUE Conservative. You don’t find a whole lot of TRUE conservatives any more. Today’s political environment only allows for extremes on both sides of the fence. True conservatives don’t see the need to push a political agenda. Just being what you are IS your political agenda. If others don’t follow that agenda, it’s just their loss. As such, I received an email that pretty well sums up my political "activism". Namely:
Okay, here’s the plan:
Back off and let those men who want to marry men, marry men.
Allow those women who want to marry women, marry women.
Allow those folks who want to abort their babies, abort their babies.
In three generations, there will be no liberals!!!
Damn, I love it when a plan comes together.
That’s a TRUE conservative plan in action.
- Technorati true conservative
Here’s the headline:
More Than a Million French Protest Law
It discusses this month’s rioting in Paris over new work laws. Now, per the norm, it shows police behaving violently towards an unarmed crowd. That is SO cliche. What they don’t use in the headline is this picture from the same event:
A “protester” kicking someone when they’re down. Just sort of puts a different perspective on the whole thing doesn’t it?
Just saw a report today ranking states by their level of airborne carcinogens. So, I had to have some fun with it:
| New York | 64.80 | 10 |
| California | 56.80 | 23 |
| Oregon | 52.50 | 16 |
| District Of Columbia | 51.10 | 19 |
| Illinois | 45.30 | 21 |
| New Jersey | 42.60 | 2 |
| Massachusetts | 41.70 | 8 |
| Connecticut | 41.20 | 8 |
| Maryland | 40.95 | 19 |
| Michigan | 40.90 | 4 |
| Washington | 39.90 | 3 |
| Pennsylvania | 38.80 | 12 |
| Rhode Island | 38.10 | 1 |
| Ohio | 36.80 | 13 |
| Florida | 36.50 | 44 |
| Arizona | 36.20 | 16 |
| Delaware | 35.10 | 35 |
| Nevada | 34.00 | 25 |
| Texas | 33.85 | 40 |
| Utah | 32.90 | 29 |
| Hawaii | 31.00 | 11 |
| Indiana | 30.65 | 34 |
| Colorado | 30.55 | 24 |
| Virginia | 30.10 | 45 |
| Minnesota | 30.00 | 14 |
| Missouri | 29.60 | 50 |
| New Hampshire | 29.60 | 25 |
| North Carolina | 29.40 | 45 |
| Georgia | 28.35 | 41 |
| Wisconsin | 28.35 | 28 |
| Louisiana | 28.25 | 42 |
| Tennessee | 27.50 | 48 |
| Idaho | 26.45 | 33 |
| Alabama | 25.20 | 39 |
| South Carolina | 24.90 | 51 |
| Oklahoma | 24.45 | 18 |
| Kansas | 22.90 | 27 |
| West Virginia | 21.50 | 35 |
| Nebraska | 21.40 | 30 |
| New Mexico | 20.20 | 22 |
| Mississippi | 19.60 | 49 |
| Kentucky | 19.45 | 45 |
| Maine | 19.40 | 4 |
| Arkansas | 18.30 | 32 |
| Vermont | 16.60 | 15 |
| Iowa | 16.40 | 42 |
| Alaska | 15.50 | 7 |
| Wyoming | 14.20 | 31 |
| Montana | 10.90 | 6 |
| North Dakota | 10.80 | 38 |
| South Dakota | 8.68 | 37 |
This list is the airborne carcinogens by state, ranked from the worst to the least. I found it just a LITTLE bit odd that 13 of the 22 states that voted for Kerry occupied the TOP 13 spots. Surely dirty air doesn’t affect the mind in such a profound way?
Now, where it gets REAL fun is the third column is tobacco tax rates and their national ranking accordingly. Anyone else see the irony in the fact that the states that punish tobacco smoking the most all occupy the Top 13 states in dirty air, and all vote liberal?
- Technorati red blue states, air quality, tobacco
I am so sick of these conspiracy theories, I’m going to just put all the reasons why I think they are whacko right here and just point them here from now on.
Sheen just repeats the guts of what’s been floating around since 9/11, so I’ll pick on him. From his radio call-in:
“It seems to me like 19 amateurs with box cutters taking over four commercial airliners and hitting 75% of their targets, that feels like a conspiracy theory. It raises a lot of questions.”
I don’t guess anyone needs to remind him that considering at that time airlines were totally unarmed to protect themselves that a boxcutter was much more lethal than anything they would have had to protect themselves with. Secondly, flying airplanes into things hadn’t been done before, so they had no reason to suspect this was anything more than a typical hijacking. Once the fourth airplane realized what was going on, they stopped it. Coincidence Charlie? As far as hitting 75% of their targets, how hard do you suppose it is to pick out the World Trade Center from the sky? Not like it stood out or anything. The Pentagon sits isolated just south of the national monuments and many other recognizable landscape features. It as well is not hard to pick out from the sky, even from a LONG distance. This claim is so stupid it’s mind boggling that it’s survived.
“There was a feeling, it just didn’t look any commercial jetliner I’ve flown on any time in my life”……
There are actually several views of the airliners hitting the towers. In all of them, they look like commercial airlines to me. What part of them, from the view he saw, made him think they didn’t look like a commercial airplane?
“and then when the buildings came down later on that day I said to my brother ‘call me insane, but did it sorta look like those buildings came down in a controlled demolition’?”
Ahhhh, there’s the heart of the matter. It LOOKED like it was a controlled implosion? He goes back to this point several times. So, let’s dig a little, shall we? According to a bunch of engineers ( what’s that? I’m not relying on Hollywood actors? ):
The way the building collapsed must have been caused by explosions
One demolition expert on the day of the collapse said it looked like implosion but this is not very strong evidence. Implosion firstly requires a lot of explosives placed in strategic areas all around the building. When and how was this explosive placed in the building without anyone knowing about it. Second, implosion required more than just explosives. Demolition experts spend weeks inside a derelict building planning an event. Many of the beams are cut through by about 90% so that the explosion only has to break a small bit of steel. In this state the building is highly dangerous, and there is no way such a prepared building could still be running day to day like WTC was.Why did the building fall so quickly?
The buildings did fall quickly – almost (but not exactly) at the same speed as if there was no resistance. Shouldn’t the floors below have slowed it down? The huge dynamic loads due to the very large momentum of the upper floors falling were so great that they smashed through the lower floors very quickly. The columns were not designed to carry these huge loads and they provided little resistance.The author respect people’s right to question theories, but at the present time the author does not believe there is enough evidence for him to change his views on this incident.
I’ll just add one more little comment to this opinion. These guys aren’t even American. They have no vested interest in either side of this discussion.
Sheen then gets wilder:
“Sheen then questioned President Bush’s actions on 9/11 and his location at the Booker Elementary School in Florida. Once Andy Card had whispered to Bush that America was under attack why didn’t the secret service immediately whisk Bush away to a secret location? “
Because, as it’s been pointed out repeatedly, Card and Bush didn’t know it was an attack at that point. As Bush has explained numerous times, he wanted to exhibit a sense of normalcy amid the chaos and uncertainty. Question that decision all you want. But, to assume it was because he was in on it makes no sense at all. By the time the second airline hit the tower, the military and FAA were already aware that other planes were missing as well. The procedures to take down threatening aircraft were being put in place. Very few people knew where Bush was at that point in time. He was as safe there, or safer, than almost anywhere in the US. Within the hour, he had vanished into hiding. A lot of people at the time questioned why he went in hiding. According to Sheen and that bunch, he didn’t hide fast enough. Get the point? There’s a conspiracy angle no matter WHAT Bush did that day.
“The question of how Bush saw the first plane hit the north tower, when no live footage of that incident was carried, an assertion that Bush repeated twice, was also put under the spotlight.”
OK, just got one thing to say Charlie:
Bush didn’t say he saw it live.
In regards to the Pentagon:
“Show us this incredible maneuvering, just show it to us. Just show us how this particular plane pulled off these maneuvers. 270 degree turn at 500 miles and hour descending 7,000 feet in two and a half minutes, skimming across treetops the last 500 meters.”
It didn’t descend 7,000 feet in two and a half minutes. Eyewitness accounts ( and there are MANY ), had it flying low at probably less than 1,000 feet. It did a HUGE 270 around the Pentagon and then hit short and slammed into the Pentagon on the ground. In other words, he flew low to find his target, missed it, circled back partially, landed short, and bounced into it. This Charlie, doesn’t sound very remarkable to me for someone who had taken flying lessons.
“We have not been able to confirm that a large commercial airliner hit the Pentagon because the government has seized and refused to release any footage that would show the impact.”
I can confirm it. My father saw it happen. Charlie’s assuming this happened in a vacuum. It didn’t. It happened over a city of a million people and happened so low to the ground a lot of people witnessed it. If a meteor strikes in Siberia and obliterates itself, does that mean it never existed? As far as footage of the impact, was there ever any made? I mean, it’s not like CNN would have a stationary camera fixed on the Pentagon now is it? First he cites video that does exist by saying it doesn’t, then cites video that probably never existed as if it did. There was a lot of post-impact coverage, I watched it.
“I understand in the interest of national security that maybe not release the Pentagon cameras but what about the Sheraton, what about the gas station, what about the Department of Transportation freeway cam? What about all these shots that had this thing perfectly documented? Instead they put out five frames that they claim not to have authorized, it’s really suspicious,” said Sheen.
Now, if Charlie were to drive the freeway and look at what was hit, he’d understand why his question doesn’t make a lot of sense. Look at a map of northern Virginia some time. As far as the frames from a security camera, watch this:
As far as the rest of the “a plane never hit the Pentagon” theory, this guy has a TON of pics of the airplane. It’s definitely an airplane. It’s definitely a 757.
Concerning how the Bush administration had finalized Afghanistan war plans two days before 9/11 with the massing of 44,000 US troops and 18,000 British troops in Tajikistan and Uzbekistan, and in addition the call for “some catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbor,” as outlined in the PNAC documents, Sheen stated, “you don’t really put those strategies together overnight do you for a major invasion? Those are really well calculated and really well planned.” “Coincidence? We think not,” said Sheen and he called the PNAC quotes “emblematic of the arrogance of this administration.”
What Sheen is totally ignoring was Bin Laden was an enemy of the US BEFORE 9/11. He had claimed responsibility for the WTC attacks of 1993. Remember that? Bush spoke of his desire to take Bin Laden out when he campaigned for office. So, to assume he wasn’t serious is a stretch. Clinton had attacked Afghanistan trying to hit Bin Laden over the Cole and African Embassy bombings Why would Sheen presume Bush would be any less anxious to get Bin Laden before he got us AGAIN? Now, any logical mind could presume as well that Bin Laden responded to the troop movements with a preemptive attack. A conspiracy theorist takes the man who had attacked us repeatedly completely out of the picture. We are supposed to assume that Bush felt compelled to create a crisis in order to respond to something the US had already perceived as a crisis ( the Cole and Embassy bombings, even though most had forgotten these images.
That wasn’t 2001, that was 1993. Bin Laden claimed responsibility. He had been attacking the US with increasing bravado since 1993. There was a LOT of pent up frustration over Clinton’s inability to do anything to stop them. Bush vowed to do something. He got elected. He didn’t need a crisis to take action.
Sheen joined others in calling for a revised and truly independent investigation of 9/11.
Why? Because the TWO commissions so far didn’t come to the conclusions Sheen wants? News flash here Sheen, they didn’t come to the conclusion I wanted either! However, I put all the blame on Jamie Gorelick. That’s just not quite as fascinating as a massive government conspiracy now is it? The problem Sheen is facing is no one is ever going to be able to prove his point. Ever. I’ve pretty much dismissed most of it here, and I haven’t really tried all that hard.
“It is up to us to reveal the truth. It is up to us because we owe it to the families, we owe it to the victims. We owe it to everybody’s life who was drastically altered, horrifically that day and forever. We owe it to them to uncover what happened.”
What happened, the truth, is a Muslim fanatic declared war on the US in 1993 and we didn’t take him seriously. He kept attacking and we buried our heads in the sand and and pretended everyone loved us. He told us what he was going to do, and we ignored him while spending our delusional tech bubble. When he finally did what he said he was going to do, we grasped at straws trying to justify that delusion we had held on to since 1993. No one could possibly hate us that bad. Rather than face up to the fact that yes, there are people in the world that truly, deeply, HATE what Charlie Sheen represents and would love nothing more than if he were in the Towers that day, they try to push the only values they know on to the situation. That it was a power grab by a power hungry politician. That makes sense in Hollywood. Someone willing to die for their religious beliefs doesn’t. Someone willing to kill thousands of people in their religions belief doesn’t. It just sounds SO much more American, and therefore Hollywood, if there is some US conspiracy theory behind it.
Fact is Michael and Charlie, this ain’t Hollywood. The real world didn’t grow up viewing the world through a camera lens. The real world doesn’t have the luxury of a second take. The real world is ugly. The real world is brutal. The real world made a statement on 9/11/01. Some people listened. Some people, like Charlie and Michael Moore and others, continue to bury their head in the sand and pretend the US did this on its own volition to itself and if we vote our own people out, this will all be over and forgotten. Fact is, as delusional as some people get, we don’t control the entire planet. The US is not the only stage there is. And, if we go back to pretending it is, like Charlie et al want, we’ll be attacked again.
I’m not EVEN going to go into the goofball Northwood Document’s 39 year old speculative plans in regards to the Cold War did NOT mean one damn thing in 2001. If they had done something in 1962, then MAYBE it might. But, being as Kennedy dismissed it, and there’s not one shred of evidence to support a similar thing occurring here, it is meaningless.
23
Mar
Originally posted February 22, 2006:
A while back I did a story on a church that was protesting deceased soldiers in the name of hating gays. What actually led me to that story was a local newspaper article of a man who was a member of The Patriot Guard. As despicable as the church is, these guys are plum near heroes to me. This is what they do:
Patriot Guard Riders Mission Statement
The Patriot Guard Riders is a diverse amalgamation of riders from across the nation. We have one thing in common besides motorcycles. We have an unwavering respect for those who risk their very lives for Americas freedom and security. If you share this respect, please join us.
We dont care what you ride, what your political views are, or whether youre a “hawk” or a “dove”. It is not a requirement that you be a veteran. It doesn’t matter where youre from or what your income is. You dont even have to ride. The only prerequisite is Respect.
Our main mission is to attend the funeral services of fallen American heroes as invited guests of the family. Each mission we undertake has two basic objectives.
1. Show our sincere respect for our fallen heroes, their families, and their communities.
2. Shield the mourning family and friends from interruptions created by any protester or group of protesters.
We accomplish the latter through strictly legal and non-violent means.
What they do is shield the families and loved ones of the fallen soldiers from assholes like Fred Phelps and his psychotic thugs.
Check them out, help them if you can. They don’t ask for much.
Other posts on The Patriot Guard:
And the list goes on and on and on. I know a few of Fred’s readers drop by here. They won’t say anything when they do. I guess they’re ashamed. They should be. It’s a shame as well we NEED The Patriot Guard.
UPDATE: March 23, 2006Volokh has initiated what I imagine will be an interesting discussion on the legal merits of this situation. Although they are looking at the aspects of the ban on protesting funerals, I would like to see their opinion on the merits of the Patriot Guard protecting those funerals as well. I imagine it’s perfectly legal, being as if I wanted a totally private funeral, I have every right to enforce that privacy. I really think the bans are fairly unnecessary, as protesters tend to ignore such laws and wear their arrests as a badge of honor. And, people have the right to expect law enforcement to enforce their right to privacy in the first place. However, the symbolic gesture of these laws is not unnoticed.
SurveyUSA came out with their governors’ popularity polls for 2006. I
love looking at these things. Here’s some things I noticed:
- Compared to 2005, 10 Republican governors are losing popularity, 6
Democrat governors are as well. - Compared to 2005, 17 Republican governors are gaining popularity,
15 Democrat governors are as well. - In 2005, 11 Republican governors were more unpopular than popular ( can
you say, in trouble? ), 7 Democrat governors were as well. - In 2006, 8 Republican governors are in trouble, 7 Democrat governors as
well. - There are currently 28 Republican governors, 22 Democrat. This
means at this time, 31% of the Republican governors could be in trouble, 29%
of the Democrat governors. In 2005, those figures were higher for
Republicans and exactly the same for Democrats. - The most unpopular governor, bar none, is Bob Taft of Ohio. He’s
done a pretty good job in apparently alienating his own party. - The governor sinking fastest, bar none, is Kathleen Blanco of Louisiana.
Good. - The two fastest rising stars are Bob Riley of Alabama ( 29% swing ), and
Haley Barbour of Mississippi ( 28% swing ).
My conclusions are:
- What sticks out to me the most is that given the perceived unpopularity
of President Bush, you’d think that the Republicans would be more adversely
affected than what is showing. However, the Republican governors are
picking up spots while the Democrats have remained the same. If the
elections for all 50 states were held tomorrow, the counts look like they
would remain pretty much the same. That leads me to believe the same
thing I’ve always believed, all politics are local. - Of the states affected most by Katrina, the Republican governors have
experienced a huge increase in popularity while the lone Democrat is falling
like a brick. All media focused on placing all blame on FEMA and Bush.
Stars came out trashing Bush. However, it appears the local people
perceived things a little differently. FEMA is FEMA, it didn’t respond
any differently for Louisiana than it did for Mississippi or Alabama.
Sure, the impact of Katrina was different, but the leadership format is
exactly the same in all three states. People in Mississippi and
Alabama have rewarded their governor, the people of Louisiana have pretty
much abandoned theirs. Bottom line, the local people apparently have
seen the difference in effective leaders and ineffective leaders regardless
of what major media reported. That’s a good thing. Kathleen
Blanco taking the worst hit in the US makes me feel a LOT better about
things. - Last and probably least, the nature of politics on a national level is
like a pendulum, it swings one way and then the other. Local politics
is usually more stagnant. The party in power tends to remain in power
for long periods of time. What I’m getting at is although some
governors are in horrid shape, the people voting will simply vote for
another member of the same party. What you most definitely can not do
is use these polls to gauge any national trend. A couple of governors
are of the minority party in their state, and are in bad shape. In
those two states you can probably fairly predict the majority party will
take them back, but in some states such as Louisiana, no matter how
unpopular the Democrat is, their replacement will most likely be yet another
Democrat. Because of that, I didn’t bother to make any predictions on
a national level based on these numbers. - Numbers are fun to play with. But when it comes to local politics,
that’s all they’re good for.
On a more local level,
RCP has pointed to races this fall that these numbers might give a clue to some
changes:
- Ehrlich (R-MD): plus 4 net rating (48 approve – 44 disapprove)
- Rendell (D-PA): plus 3 net rating (49-46)
- Perry (R-TX): plus 1 net rating (48-47)
- Doyle (D-WI): minus 4 net rating (44-48)
- Granholm (D-MI): minus 7 net rating (45-52)
- Blagojevich (D-IL): minus 8 net rating (44-52)
- Minner (D-DE): minus 11 net rating (41-52)
- Baldacci (D-ME): minus 16 net rating (39-55)
- Kulongoski (D-OR): minus 20 net rating (36-56)
- Schwarzenegger (R-CA): minus 35 net rating (36-61)
- Murkowski (R-AK): minus 36 net rating (29-65)
That’s seven Democrats and four Republicans. Once again, that seems to
totally buck what major media is telling us.
- Technorati
governor poll,
Kathleen Blanco,
Haley Barbour,
Bob Riley
There’s something going on that I just don’t get. Well, maybe I do, but I prefer people to think and see if they can figure things out for themselves as opposed to me just pushing my thoughts on them. Namely, every time some US star says something bad about Bush, it’s all over the media. People cheer, and people argue it. But, the bottom line is the “I hate Bush” message they wanted advertised is done so free of charge by every broadcast, cable, print, and news outlet.
But, when someone famous says something like this:
An Open Letter to Senator Russ Feingold
I would like to preface this letter by saying that I am not being a Bush apologist, a pro-war advocate or any of the other tags you people like to hang on anybody who has the timidity to attack you or something youve done.
No sir, I write this letter as an American. An American who thinks you have not only made a fool of yourself but that youve put American lives in danger with your totally politically motivated proposal to censure a sitting President in time of war.
Youve even got your fellow democrats backing away from your proposal like it was radioactive. They wont even agree to bring it to a vote.
How many American lives will your senseless proposal cost? Senator Feingold, do you honestly think that there isnt joy in Iran and Syria over what youre doing? Its like saying, Keep up the fight boys, Im going to give you a hand.
Everytime I write a piece like this, I get emails from people who say that what Im saying in essence is that if you dont agree with the war in Iraq, youre being anti-American. Well being anti-war and trying to make political brownie points with the left wing fringe of the democratic party at the cost of American lives is a totally different thing.
I dont know how you look in the mirror or sleep at night Senator, knowing that there are thousands of young American troops who not only will read you demoralizing statements, but that Al Jazeera will broadcast them to every radical nut in the Middle East encouraging them to come on down to Iraq and join in the fun. Maybe they can get another self-serving American Senator to spout off on their behalf.
We all know what youre trying to do Senator. You want to make a run at the presidency in the next election and youre trying to get a little further left than Teddy K and Im sure that your stock just went up with moveon.org, Michael Moore and the Hollywood bunch. But speaking just for myself Mr. Feingold, Id like to say that you disgust me.
You see, if you really believed in what you are doing it would be a different thing. But when you do something simply for selfish gain, not caring who or how many you hurt, in my book, its wrong, bad wrong.
But I guess its a matter of conscience Mr. Feingold and if yours is so calloused that youd be willing to risk the lives of Americas sons and daughters there is nothing I can say that would affect you in the least, except that this could well be a two headed snake, one end pointed at your enemy and the other end at you, and both ends have fangs. In other words Mr. Feingold what goes around comes around.
Im sure the Democratic Convention is going to be interesting next time. With you trying to be the anti-war candidate and Hillary trying to please everybody, Howard Dean screaming and John Kerry and Al gore whipping their dead horses, it should be spectacular.
Pray for our troops.
What do you think?
God Bless America
Charlie Daniels
March 20, 2006
The only place their message is heard is where they said it in the first place.
And then, media makes a big deal about Bush not being terribly popular. Am I the only one who sees the connection?
