Katrina Takes Spotlight Off Cindy

Hurricane Katrina is barreling along at 13 mph with sustained winds of 175 mph and she is classified as a category 5, the highest hurricane rating. Katrina is expected to make landfall in New Orleans sometime overnight and the city has been ordered to evacuate. New Orleans is below sea level and the expected water surge will certainly submerge the city in 20-30 feet of water. There have only been 3 category 5 hurricanes to hit the US in the history of hurricane tracking and they have all left devastation in their wake. Katrina promises to be no different and it is all but certain she will level buildings and take lives.

It has taken Mother Nature and a category 5 hurricane to remove Tropical Storm Cindy from the focus of the news. For weeks the anti-war protest ostensibly designed to show a mother to expressing her grief has caused a bottle neck in Crawford Texas and saturated the news with every movement of TS Cindy. It is unfortunate that a category 5 hurricane will cause death and destruction and cause countless grief and loss to thousands of Americans. It is more unfortunate that until this hurricane, nothing was newsworthy enough to remove the band of squatters from the forefront of the news.

Interestingly, we now have counter demonstrators who are seen as villains by those who support TS Cindy as a bunch of violent people. Several weeks ago a jackass drove a pick up truck through the crosses planted by the anti-war demonstrators. He should suffer whatever the law says is appropriate. There were some signs torn up by people who though they were being infiltrated by the anti-war group but all in all it has been peaceful. Some people removed names from the crosses because the families did not want their loved one’s names on them. I guess some view this as antagonistic but the police allowed them to remove the names so long as they left the crosses in place. People removed the names and left. It is only right. TS Cindy and her troop did not have permission to use the names and were violating the families privacy and disrespecting the dead. Be that as it may, it would appear that we have several groups of protesters, all people with no real lives, causing havoc in a town of 700 people.

It is time for all this nonsense to stop. Cindy needs to go home and take care of the family she has that is still alive and the other protesters need to go back to where they came from and allow things in Crawford to return to normal. It is also time for the MSM to start covering other news and forget Crawford. In case they are unaware, she is now on her 16th minute. Unfortunately, the news that will be covered involves devastation to countless Americans. My prayers are with those who will suffer the effects of Katrina. I also pray that when the coverage of Katrina has subsided TS Cindy will be yesterday’s news.

Someone tell Cindy that President Bush is in New Orleans and will speak to her if she can get there right away.

Print This Post

If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.

7 Responses to “Katrina Takes Spotlight Off Cindy”

  1. It is also taking focus off the “You don’t speak for me, Cindy” tour. The purpose of the counter-protest rally was to strike a balance in the MSM. Katrina must be a liberal since she diverting attention from people who have valid contradicting point of view to see that the sheep of the country don’t hear both sides.

  2. boknows says:

    I hope no one minds if I “re-post” a previous response of mine I made on another board. After reading an article in The Weekly Standard . . .


    I posted the following with regards to Ms. Sheehan and her “circus”:

    May God forgive the comlibs who find this sort of “circus” beneficial to a lost cause (the Democrats’ agenda). My apologies for using Democrats and agenda in the same sentence.

    One day, Ms. Sheehan is going to wake up. She is going to wake up to no Casey, no husband, no family, no friends, no Geo Soros, and no more of the MSM, CNN, and MessNBC television cameras. I fear that when she finally awakes, her only companion will be the aching remorse she will feel as she realizes she allowed such an inane circus to be created in the wake of her son Casey’s admirable and heroic life and death.

    Here’s hoping that the squatters at Camp Cindy will soon realize they are on their 16th minute and my last nerve.

    God bless those in the path of Katrina.

  3. N. Mallory says:

    While I agree that the families who didn’t want their children’s names on the crosses have that right, I don’t agree that putting together a memorial for those who have died in the war is disrespectful of the dead. If so, then we need to tear down that Vietnam Memorial in Washington and the D-day Memorial in New Orleans. I guess I can see past Cindy’s attention agenda on that. I thought it was extremely respectful of the anti-war protestors group.

    I guess it’s hard to see past the hatred of Cindy to see the kindness in the gesture. I guess we shouldn’t memorialize our fallen in Iraq then.

  4. Big Dog says:

    If the intent was to memorialize the dead then it would be a different story. The crosses and the names upon them are being used to generate anti war sentiment and to portray it as if they had died in vain. They are being used as part of the circus and this is not in the least little bit a memorial. This is no different than that pig Michael Moore using the war dead on his web site in that despicable fashion.

    Your Vietnam analogy lacks logical argument. How many protesters are using the names on the wall to push their particular beliefs? None.

    And to make it clear for the narrow minded who can only look at Cindy as a hero, I do not know her and she has not done anything to me so I do not have a hatred for her. I do however, hate what she is doing. For those of you who can not see past your adoration of her to see that she is disrespecting the troops then I feel sorry for you. The families were not asked and that is wrong. I guess the next thing we can expect is for Cindy and the gang to go to Arlington and protest using the names of all the people buried there to cite past injustices of the terrible US. Well, at least there are armed guards there.

  5. Surfside says:

    First, they are not erecting a memorial; they are erecting a protest in the name of the dead. This is a very different thing.

    Secondly, most of these soldiers truly believed in what they were doing and gave their lives for their belief. Certainly Casey Sheehan was one of those, as he volunteered for the mission on which he was killed. Is it really fair to use names of dead soldiers who likely would be opposed to that action? I seriously think not! The term “turning in their graves” comes to mind. The protestors have a right to air their views on Iraq, but not by invoking names of the dead who cannot defend or protest this likely misuse.

  6. N. Mallory says:

    Geese, for you it’s either all right or all wrong, all black or all white. There’s no middle ground, no gray area. That’s not a realistic way to live.

    The crosses have been described as a memorial. Heck, even Crawford locals who are against Cindy came out to help reconstruct the broken ones after the truck incident because they saw it as a memorial. Too bad you can’t see that there is some good in some misguided actions.

    I don’t know how most of those soldiers felt or what they believed. I know what the ones I’ve talked to feel and believe and I’ve gotten mixed answers to my questions and mixed feelings about the whole thing.

  7. Big Dog says:

    They have been described as a memorial. I and many others have described them as disrespectful. They are being used to further a politically motivated cause. They have no place in it. If it is about Casey then put his cross there.

    I have spoken to thousands of soldiers and I have a company of them there right now. I know that to a soldier they would not want this done to them if they died. I have contact with many many soldiers and while there are, naturally, dissenting views most believe in what they are doing.

    The services are over their goal of reenlistments. Some people have reenlisted a second time. Does not sound like many dissenters.