My top rule is:
Do not do what the Democrat’s say
Normally, the Democrats are reacting to a truth that either they cannot accept or a truth they do not want others to believe. So when Theron McChesney said, "Sibson needs to apologize". No I don’t and I won’t. The Hildebrand Boys have pounded John Thune on Ellsworth from the very start. If it comes off, they no longer have a reason to whine about Ellsworth. They desperately want Ellsworth to be a negative issue, just like drought relief, when Thune runs again. If Ellsworth comes off the list due to the leadership of John Thune, then theywill be devastated.
Sibby’s rule number one means you do no accept challenges from a Democrat. Here is the one issued to me by McChesney:
But, most important, Sibson’s comment is a wholly inappropriate. It is completely insensitive and trivializes the tragedy of suicide. Steve Sibson should remove the comment from his site and publicly apologize from making such a ridiculous statement.
Instead of accepting a challenge, I will issue a challenge of my own. Why doesn’t McChesney denounce the Islamic militant suicide bombers? How about those who kill themselves as they purposely take with them innocent people including children. How about those who committed suicide on 9/11 as they took thousands more with them? Let’s hear McChensey show his sensitivity toward the families of those who died on 9/11. Let’s hear McChesney trivialize the lives who died on 9/11. Or does McChesney view them as little Eichmanns as Ward Churchill did? Like Cindy Sheehan, does McChesney view the actions of the terrorists as being those of "freedom fighters"?
So how about it McChesney, whose side are you on…the terrorists who use suicide as a weapon or the victims of those acts? Does sensitivity to the suicide bombers include blaming America and/or the President of the United States for their actions?
Let’s not forget about Chad Schudlt who apparently was in Hildebrand’s office with McChensey, because he made a similar post attacking me for being insensitive to suicide and denying that he or any Democrat wanted Ellsworth to close. That is a complete lie. Not one of the anti-war, anti-military, anti-American supporters of Cindy Sheehan could care less about a military base such as Ellsworth. And Chad Schudlt certainly supported Cindy Sheehan. So for what reason would Schudt care about Ellsowrth remaining open? In his own words:
If only Thune had the "president’s ear" all along, we wouldn’t be sitting on the edge of our seats wondering if $300 million is about to sucked out of the Rapid City economy.
Yeah, it’s all about money and politics and not about military necessities. And if Ellsworth is left on the closing list, then it is because it is not militarily worthy. And the question then becomes why did Bill Clinton not allow the military aspect override the political aspect back in 1995? But Schuldt doesn’t care about the military aspect. And Schudlt doesn’t seem to care that the current President has put the military above politics during this era of war against terrorism. His expectation was for President Bush to step in and not allow a factual base decision to be made. This action was to be done because of "clout". I have heard about Daschle’s clout, and it has become apparent that clout means corrupting the process, No wonder we have deficit spending when decisions are made made without considered the feasibility of the spending.
