Editor’s Response to Feinstein Response to Email Query re Syria

This is my response to the Feinstein email response found HERE.

“Dianne (since we now seem to be on a first-name basis),
Let me address your response point-by-point:
“The evidence is clear” is vague and ambiguous.  Means nothing to the taxpayers that have paid dearly out of their paychecks for the answers you claim to have.  That information belongs to the People.  It really doesn’t matter if you and the other representatives wish to keep secrets, we the People do not like it and do not really care how you “feel”.

File photo

File photo

Come clean or quit.

“We cannot turn our backs on this atrocity” is patronizing, at best.  Our Congress has turned their collective backs on the American people for a long time, now.  We collectively know that it is none of our business how other countries operate, and our representatives should not be so arrogant as to think they are capable of “lording” over others in other countries.  And to think that we are going to bomb them into not killing their own is a ridiculous notion.  We don’t have the information or insight to properly discern what another people some 6,000 miles away should do in their own land.  Besides, many other countries have a very different view of who was at fault for the murders.  And secondarily, why in the world are we arming al-Qaeda?

Lastly, in the polls we have taken, there is approximately only 10% support for your bill to somehow limit or define who should and who should not be able to speak freely on their publications.  It is more than arrogant to think that you or anyone else has the right to define who a writer/author/publisher is, and if you attempt to actually circumvent the First Amendment, expect to be met with a push for a Recall.


Henry Wright – Staff Writer

Fax (855) 442-1522


Leave a Reply

Notify of