They’re Back – The Dixie Sicks and Sleazehan Invoke Constitutional Rights

In an interview with UK's Telegraph newspaper, Robison accused some country artists of jumping on the anti-Chicks bandwagon to further their own careers. She said, "A lot of artists cashed in on being against what we said or what we stood for because that was promoting their career, which was a horrible thing to do. A lot of pandering started going on, and you'd see soldiers and the American flag in every video. It became a sickening display of ultra-patriotism."

From Yahoo News.


...Natalie Maines also confessed that she does not understand patriotism:

“…You can like where you live and like your life, but as for loving the whole country... I don't see why people care about patriotism."

If that’s how you feel Natalie then what was all that gushy patriotic talk we heard in the midst of your melt down March 2003? Were you being less than honest when you said???

"While war may remain a viable option, as a mother, I just want to see every possible alternative exhausted before children and American soldiers' lives are lost. I love my country. I am a proud American."

It’s all about you Dixie Chicks. Your claim that country artists display patriotism solely to diss you is laughable. If our soldiers and our flag sicken you, maybe you should consider upping your meds. Perhaps Discovery Channel will feature you on their hit show Intervention. Just kidding but seriously..

Understanding patriotism requires an appreciation for history. History buffs know that America founded the guarantee of free speech in the modern age. Our constitution is the oldest one standing. Many fundamentals The American Constitution have been adopted or mimicked by other nations.
Today, long after America’s forefathers sparked a worldwide movement, freedom of speech is no longer perceived as an American product. History reveals however, that everyone in the free world who benefits from such constitutional protections is indebted to American Troops.
If it weren't for our soldiers Miss Maines, you would not have had a career to destroy. Also, you would be more likely shut your pie hole.
That goes double for you Sleazehan (aka Sheehan)

She's unattractive and she's a poor spokesperson. She is however a self proclaimed victim and that makes her an asset to the left. Or so they think. Keep talking Cindy!

Cindy in Canada

Link from the left (in fairness)

Just Another Stunt?

Before Katrina the President lost the support of some Fiscal Conservatives upset that he had yet to veto a single spending bill.
After Katrina, President Bush embarked on a downward spiral unprecedented since the Carter Administration. People with little psychic endowment could predict with confidence - the President was going down.
First came the Katrina aftermath. No one really approved of the Government’s handling of the disaster. Conservatives arguments defending Bush had to do with the extent the Feds should assume responsibility for evacuation and relief. They pointed out that local authorities did little to help their neighbors. Basically they just waited for the Feds (i.e. the rest of us who chose to live above sea level) to step in and save them. The media and the left went on a spree of attacks that appeared to send George Bush into a tailspin. On November 14th 2005 CNN reported that Bush’s approval ratings dropped to an “all time low” 37%.
Time is also working against the President in Iraq. Katrina and bad news from the front cost him all his fair weather fans.
Just when things couldn’t get any worse for the Bush-Whacker they did. Recently, when the border (or lack thereof) came to a major head, Bush tried to walk a mighty thin line and faltered heartily. Dissent spread quickly amongst Conservatives who dominate the AM radio. Many of Bushs' staunchest allies were blasting him on the air. By February 2006 Bush’s numbers fell below the Carter range (30%). Add it up and it's fair to say that by the end of 2005 Bush was pretty much shaved.
Then came along Tony Snow. Shortly after Snow’s appointment as Whitehouse Spokesman, the President “turned the corner” and things started looking up. He tried to throw Conservatives a bone with talk of beefing up border security but his hardcore constituents weren’t buying. The President then made a lame attempt to woo Conservatives with a futile gay marriage ban amendment bill. That is likely the gayest thing our President has ever done.
Within the last week however, the President pulled a couple of cues (if you’re conservative) or stunts (if you’re a lefty). Greasing Zarqawi was a major score for the President much to the discomfort of Americas Liberals and enemies alike. Bush scored an extra point with his bold and rather daring surprise visit right into the heart of the war zone. May there be hope for this Administration yet?




Terrorist felt that they were loosing before Zarqawi took final gasp.


From NBC


Disarray

Zarqawi Eliminated! Beginning Of The End?

Thursday June 08, 1:11am Tempe:
I woke from a nightmare early Thursday. I was paralyzed for a few moments before coming fully aware. The nightmare had to do with reports of me getting killed.
I sometimes sleep with the am radio on and it’s not uncommon for the radio content to influence my dreams. When I first heard the news of Zarqawi's demise I thought I was still dreaming. It didn't take long however, before I realized the reports were not part of my nightmare. The report came from Fox News, but it sounded credible nonetheless. :)
Imagine the relief I felt finding that it was the evil Zarqawi getting killed and not me!


The greasing of Zarqawi in terms of its strategic significance is being understated by much of the mainstream news. Even so, statements from the left were not Cynical to the degree anticipated by some right wing talk show hosts. I was surprised by the reaction of the father of one of Zargawi’s victims. He lamented Zargawi’s death and in effect put Zargawi on an equal moral footing with his son. He is likely suffering from "Sheehan Syndrome."

What da???

Captured Alive!

Interesting Retrospective

Less Than One Week Ago

Special Report: Poffrono Takes Fire From The Left

Sunday June 04, 2006
3:31pm Tempe:
An email entitled Why it's over for braindead American Fascists like you caught Poffrono's eye Sunday. It was an impassioned response to Poffrono's recent report on the Iraq War claiming a net gain in lives.

The shots were fired early Saturday by one George Freespirit.
Be warned the following email contains coarse language and is likely unsuitable for dignified readers.

George Freespirit wrote:

"Shitheadski You make the critical error of keeping your head so far up your ass that you are unable to recognize or comprehend what is actually going on. Once you've done that - you've lost your mind and all semblance of rationality. Your level of ignorance is only matched by your stupidity and blind jingoism. If you think that the war in Iraq is saving lives then you are indeed certifiable and you should turn yourself in to the medical authorities for immediate treatment, possibly electro-shock therapy."

Iraq death toll 'soared post-war' Poor planning, air strikes by coalition forces and a "climate of violence" have led to more than 100,000 extra deaths in Iraq, scientists claim. A study published by the Lancet says the risk of death by violence for civilians in Iraq is now 58 times higher than before the US-led invasion." BBC News - 29 October, 2004

"The war in Iraq is saving lives. (LOL) If you don't believe me do some eighth grade math: (Ha, talk to me again when YOU pass the fourth grade, you clueless nitwit)."


Poffrono responded from his Tempe Compound Sunday:

"You may have a point about the shock therapy and the jingoism. That given, if I wanted to be unfair I would cite the lowest estimate I could find (16,000). The 100,000 figure you’re using comes soley from the Lancet Study. Lancet, a highly respected medical journal, is forthright with flaws in their reports."

From The Washington Post:

… The researchers and the Lancet editors acknowledged that the study has clear limitations, including a relatively small sample of violent deaths that were examined directly and the researchers' reliance on individual memories for some information…

…Garlasco of Human Rights Watch said it is extremely difficult to estimate civilian casualties, especially based on relatively small numbers.

"I did not use the Lancet study because it is flawed and it represents an extreme and unsubstantiated opinion. Likewise, I did not use the low estimate of 16,000 either. The figures I decided to go with came from:

Iraq Body Count

The good people at Body Count hardly support Bush’s foreign policy. I stand by my estimate of 40,000 because it's the fairest estimate I could find short of clinging soley to the Lancet Study. No one knows how many civilians were killed by U.S. intervention.

I also employed a ridiculously low estimate assessing murders attributed to Tyrant Saddam Hussein. I did not include deaths resulting from the Tanker War (1980-88). The casualties of that war (estimated 1 million +) can be credited to Saddam and the son of a bitchen Bathists. I did not include civilian casualties from Saddam’s invasion of Kuwait.

>Liberal estimates of Saddam’s death toll reach 3 million!

I stand by my results but admit that like everyone else, I’ve probably missed the mark. Even so, it is fair to say that U.S. intervention is saving lives.
At the very least it is lazy and wrong to liken America to Natzi Germany or Stalin's Russia like you did with your anti-American propaganda on the message boards. Such comparisons are just plain asinine!"

The Gadsden Flag

I love the Star Spangled Banner but this is the American Flag I chose to hang above the fish aquarium. If you're a history buff like me you might enjoy this site:

Gadsden Info

Trading News Update: Hardcore Volatility – Opportunity Abounds!

Early Results are in from the purchase of ACLS

After nearly two weeks of holding 100 shares, I find the report mixed but generally positive. ACLS caught my eye because it had suffered from market conditions not relevant to the stocks core value. It looked dirt cheap! Who doesn't love a dirt cheap stock? Also I've talked before about investing in inevitable trends that you do not like. No one I know would like having a computer chip implanted in them. Since you do not like the idea of spy chips tracking people, it's only a matter of time before you get chiped yourself. Why not at least make a few bucks by investing in the technology that makes chips better? Axcelis is an inovative group developing semiconductor technology. All kidding aside I kind of like ACLS.
The purchase occurred the Monday before last. Take a look at the chart and you’ll see the hardcore volatility. Note the chart shows that it resisted pricing below $6.00. Consider the bear attack against the big markets early this week. It’s likely that if ACLS was going to close in the $5.00 range it would have done so Monday or Tuesday. Wednesday the stock rebounded favorably with the upturn of the broader market. The down side - attaining sizable revenue with this stock may take a while.


This is a long hold with a chance of a modest return within two to five months. I’d say that Axcelis Technologies is a low risk, modest return stock. Although ACLS is a solid investment, I’m certain that much greater opportunities abound out there. We'll see if my prediction is holds water in the comming weeks. I've been wrong before ;^)


Total cost: $635.00
Value 06/01/06: $664.00