We live in the communications age – or so it’s said. "I cannot vote to stop funding the troops while they are in harm’s way" communicates a lie, basically, because you wouldn’t be voting to stop funding the troops, you’d be voting to fund their return to their home bases. And you know it.
(whole letter below)
Senator Carl Levin
269 Russell Office Building
US Senate
Washington DC 20510-2202
By Fax: (202) 224-6221
Dear Senator Levin,
With regard to your op-ed piece in the Washington Post this morning, I gotta ask: how can you confuse "funding the troops" with funding a war? Presumably you have read the bill, and understand that in Russ Feingold’s own words "it ends funding for this war after our men and women in uniform have been safely redeployed out of Iraq."
Presumably you are familiar with the Republican obfuscation over the issue of "supporting the troops" and "funding the troops." They make it sound like the troops are going to have to hitch a ride back to the US and buy their own meals on the way. As Chairman of the Armed Services Committee you know that’s not true. Besides, you supported the use of deadlines for redeployment in Somalia. What’s different about Iraq?
We live in the communications age – or so it’s said. "I cannot vote to stop funding the troops while they are in harm’s way" communicates a lie, basically, because you wouldn’t be voting to stop funding the troops, you’d be voting to fund their return to their home bases. And you know it. So what is it that you really have to say? Use the media to say something original, that allows us to understand your real position and argue, if we need to, with your real position.
Imagine a real discussion, where people actually say what’s on their minds, rather than issue talking points. Don’t you miss that?
Best regards,
sozzy