A letter from my Republican Congressman And MY RESPONSE

[kelliebrat]

The following is the letter I got from Congressman Ken Calvert in response to my letter to side with the Democrats and support the bill Bush eventually vetoed. Congressman Calvert is not only got corruption problems, but he's still spouting the same Saddam/9-11 crap after all these years.

Dear Mrs. Groves ,

Thank you for contacting me regarding the war in Iraq . I appreciate the
opportunity to respond.

Congress' top priority since the inception of the Constitution is to
"provide for the common defense." September 11, 2001, changed the United States' perspective on what it means to defend our nation and consequently our national budget reflects America 's continued priorities of freedom and security for all. On October 10, 2002, the United States House of Representatives voted to authorize the use of force in Iraq . The enemies of freedom, not only in Iraq , have made it clear that they will stop at nothing to attack our nation and we must defend ourselves in every way we can. Since the United States cannot fully prevent other nations and terrorists from obtaining nuclear and biological weapons if their will is to possess and use them, we must have a system in place to help ensure our safety. Clearly arms control efforts and diplomatic efforts are the preferred method to resolving conflicts, but if they fail, it is the constitutional duty of Congress to ensure that the country has provided for a sound national defense.

The President's submission of the defense budget includes the base fiscal year (FY) 2008 request, the FY07 supplemental, as well as the projections for supporting combat operations in FY 2008. The Administration, following the guidelines that the Armed Services Committees set forth in our National Defense Authorization Act of 2007, has presented a budget that allows for a more complete view of defense spending in the near-term and the opportunity to ensure that equipment reset and readiness - which are so essential to the long-term health of our forces - have been given a primary focus and proper funding.

I will not support any move by the Majority party in the Congress to cut off funding for American troops serving in a combat zone. Instead, I remain committed to the members of the United States Armed Forces and their mission in Iraq and in the global War on Terror and will continue to support the Armed Forces with the moral and tangible support necessary to complete the mission and secure victory. I am a cosponsor of legislation, H.R. 511 (Rep Sam Johnson TX-03) which states that Congress will not cut off or restrict funding for units and members of the Armed Forces that the Commander in Chief has deployed in support of Operations Iraqi Freedom and Enduring Freedom. As a Member of the House Armed Services Committee, I will continue my active participation in the oversight of our nation's policy in Iraq and Afghanistan and the defense budget. We have changed the leadership at the Pentagon and in the field and are now enacting a new strategy as well as new political diplomatic initiatives. I believe we must make every effort to succeed.

Once again, thank you for contacting me. Please feel free to do so again on any issue of importance to you. In the meantime, I invite you to visit my website at <http://www.house.gov/calvert> www.house.gov/calvert .



Dear Congressman Calvert,

Thank you for your response. We do, however have very different views about this war and how to 'supporting our troops'. Our troops have done everything we've asked of them. They completed the mission when Saddam was overthrown.They completed the mission when millions of Iraqi's voted for a new government. They were victorious in doing exactly what they were asked to do for their country. They are now being asked to fight an enemy without a country, in the middle of a raging civil war. They are in harms way because of the complete lack of planning and lack of an exit strategy. Our National Guard doesn't have the equipment or ready troops to guard our own nation because vital equipment has been shipped to Iraq and tours are being extended at an alarming rate.

While I commend your staunch support of our brave military men and women, I am curious at what your definition of 'victory' for Iraq is. As I said before, if the objective of this war was to oust Saddam, we've accomplished that.

I'm puzzled by your reference to September 11th and the war in Iraq. Iraq had nothing to do with the terror attacks that day, that has been proven again and again. The focus should have been, and should still be capturing and/or killing Osama bin Laden, the man who IS behind the attacks of September 11. The fact that we are now mired in Iraq fighting an unknown enemy is due to the disastrous blunders made in planning this war. By showing our enemies that if you attack the United States and kill thousands of people, you'll be able to do it again in 6 or 7, maybe even 10 years because you'll still be free to do so. Iraq was not a terrorist state until we took our eye off bin Laden and invaded and occupied the country.

Sincerely,
Mrs. Groves
Riverside, CA

There are more talking points, lies and downright crap pouring out of my congressman.....what a sycophant. (thank you waiting for hope)

[rfranklin]

1. Unfortunately, that's their story and they're sticking to it...

At this point it doesn't matter. They say they are for democracy but they do not have the support of the majority of the American people, and they don't care.

[kelliebrat]

3. I know ..

It's unfrickenbelievable. They really believe that if they keep repeating it, somehow it will magically be true. Hell if that was the case I'd be repeating "I'm really a size 5, I'm really a size 5"

[waiting for hope]

2. I got one similar from Dole -

She had stopped responding to me about a year ago - but felt the need to respond to the "situation" in Iraq. Her letter sounded like a commentary from one of the RW shrills over at Fox, I got a little sick to my stomach reading it.

Tool is too soft a word:

Tool

1.) One who tries too hard to ingratiate themselves to others, in order to be liked, or to get votes.

2.) Most politicians.

--Larry told me what a great job I'm doing again today. He is such a tool.

--Congressman (Mark) Green (R-WI) will say anything to get some buzz about his campaign for governor. What a tool!

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=tool&page=2

I prefer this:

Sycophant

someone who kisses ass to get ahead in life, often claiming positions above hardworking people.

I told the boss he had a nice ass and now i'm a partner.

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=sycophant

[kelliebrat]

4. I like yours better n/t

:think:

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

5. Please let me know what he says in answer

He sounds like someone who would at least read and answer your letter. My conman is an idiot and keeps spouting the same old same old.

[kelliebrat]

6. Will do, I've been waiting

to see if he responds. I'm not holding my breath though, he's pretty busy with his new appointment to the appropriations committee and he IS 'ethically challenged'.

[Bitwit1234]

7. Norm Coleman sent me an email with almost the same words

so, is the republican party sending out a pat answer to complaints from voters. Thinking they can convince us that THE TERRORIST ARE GOING TO ATTACK US HERE. The terrorist are going to set off dirty bombs in our cities...a la cheney...blah blah blah ...do you people believe their bull.