Image Image Image Image Image Image Image Image Image

November 18, 2005

101st Airborne Message for John Murtha

November 18, 2005 | By | 6 Comments

airborne.bmp

A letter from a soldier to his mother:

Mom,

Be my voice. I want this message heard. It is mine and my platoon’s to the country. A man I know lost his legs the other night. He is in another company in our batallion. I can no longer be silent after watching the sacrifices made by Iraqis and Americans everyday. . .

Take the word of a soldier, for that is all I am, that our cause is a noble one. The reason we are here is one worth fighting for. . .

Freedom is not free, but yet it is everyone’s right to have. Ironic isn’t it? That is why we are here. Though you will always have the skeptics, I know that most of our military will agree with this message. Please, at the request of this soldier spread this message to all you know. We are in Operation Iraqi Freedom and that is our goal. It is a cause that I and thousands of others stand ready to pay the ultimate sacrifice for because, Cindy Sheehan, freedom is worth dying for, no matter what country it is! And after the world is free only then can we hope to have peace.

SGT XXX and 1st Platoon

101st Airborne Division (Air Assault)

Read the whole letter at Sgt Hook’s.

Share on Facebook0Tweet about this on Twitter0Share on Google+0Buffer this pagePrint this pageEmail this to someone

Comments

  1. phil

    Would true conservatives countenance the fiscal rape of their children and grandchildren?

    One thing the Bush Administration clearly has been very good at is focusing the attention of the press (and by extension the American people) on issues that they want to highlight. This has had the effect of advancing the Bush agenda, but has had the added effect of deflecting focus away from things that the Administration does not want to highlight. One of those issues is clearly the rampant, runaway spending of your tax dollars by Bush and the Republican majority congress. At this point there can be no doubt that, as they try to focus your attention on issues like stem cells and Supreme Court nominations, Bush and the Republican Congress are spending us all into a hole from which it will take us, our children and our grandchildren years to recover.

    You don’t need to take my word for this, nor the words of any democrat or Bush-hater. You need only to read what conservatives like George Will are saying, or the people at conservative think tanks like the Heritage Foundation and the Cato Institute. The Cato Institute recently completed a report on the spending habits of all US presidents during the last 40 years. If you’re interested in reading the report I’ve included a link at the end of this post.

    If you want to continue to believe that Bush and Congressional Republicans are “on your side” or if you care only about saving stem cells and banning gay marriage perhaps you should read no further. But if you’re interested in the truth and are concerned about your financial well-being and that of your children, perhaps you should read on. Here’s some of what the Cato Institute report had to say about presidential spending over the last 40 years:

    All presidents presided over net increases in spending. As it turns out George W. Bush is one of the biggest spenders of them all. In fact he is an even bigger spender than Lyndon B. Johnson in terms of discretionary spending.

    The increase in discretionary spending in Bush’s first term was 48.5% in nominal terms. That’s more than twice as large as the increase in discretionary spending during Clinton’s entire 2 terms (21.6%) and higher than Lyndon B. Johnson’s entire discretionary spending spree (48.3%).

    Adjusting the budget trends for inflation Bush looks even worse; his spending rate is much higher then Lyndon Johnson’s. In other words, Bush expanded federal non-entitlement programs in his first term almost twice as fast each year as Lyndon Johnson did during his entire presidency.

    George W. Bush is the biggest spending president of the last 40 years in both the defense and discretionary spending categories by a long shot. He beats Johnson by almost 4% in defense spending growth and more than 3% in domestic discretionary spending growth.

    And conservative columnist George Will points out that federal spending has grown twice as fast under President Bush and congressional Republicans as under President Clinton. And with respect to the argument that this profligacy is related to 9/11 and homeland security, Will and the conservative think tanks have noted that over 65 percent of the spending increase is unrelated to national security.

    Will further reports that Congressional Republicans (who achieved their majority by promising fiscal discipline) have presided over an orgy of pork spending with your tax dollars the likes of which have never been seen before. In 1991, the 546 pork projects in the 13 appropriation bills cost $3.1 billion. In 2005, the 13,997 pork projects cost $27.3 billion. Does that sound like fiscal discipline to you?

    You may support Bush and the congressional Republicans because of some vague promise of “progress” on social issues with which you and the Republicans agree. In that case perhaps you are entitled to refer to yourself as a “social conservative.” But nobody who calls themselves a fiscal conservative could support Bush and the Republican Congress who are spending your tax dollars in an orgy of profligacy the likes of which has not been experienced in our lifetimes. You can continue to deny yourself this truth, but be assured that true conservatives know the truth. Bush and the Republican Congress are asking you to mortgage your future and the futures of your children and grandchildren in exchange for soft “promises” on social issues. You are justifying the fiscal rape of your children and grandchildren perpetrated by your “moral leaders” in exchange for a vague promise of gains on social issues.

    Do yourself and your kids a favor; look them in the eye and explain to them why you have chosen to saddle them with these financial burdens, explain to them your reasoning. Then look in the mirror and explain to yourself how you can continue to support the people who you know in your heart are screwing you and to your kids. Is that morality? Is that conservatism?

    Read the whole Cato article here:

    http://www.cato.org/pubs/tbb/tbb-0510-26.pdf

    Read the Will column here:

    http://www.suntimes.com/output/will/cst-edt-geo17.html

  2. Phil, I am a little baffled as to why you would assume that I would disagree with you?

    You probably wrote it a wee bit stronger than I would have . . . but otherwise I’m not going to fight you on substance.

    I find it very troubling that politicians of all stripes come to Washington and immediately start building bridges to nowhere. You got any suggestions on how to rein ’em in, I’m all ears.

    But wait. I’ll start: abolish withholding. It’s criminal. Why should we be loaning money to the government all year long? You get rid of withholding and this fiction of the wonderful “refund” check and suddenly, when people had to write a real check every April, the federal budget discussions would take on a different tone.

  3. “I find it very troubling that politicians of all stripes come to Washington and immediately start building bridges to nowhere. You got any suggestions on how to rein ’em in, I’m all ears.”

    Term limits! Term limits would put an end to the concept of government by bribery, wherein we continue to vote in the politicians that politicians that bribe us with the promise of more and more pork-barrel projects and increases of nanny-state largesse.

    Term limits are not the perfect solution, but at least we might go back to the concept of “citizen legislators” and eliminate politics as a profession.

    V/R

    Chuck

  4. I like the idea of abolishing withholding, and I would go further — abolish the fiction of the employer contribution to Social Security and Medicare. Writing that check would put the fear of God in every taxpayer.

    But Phil’s anger, though justified, doesn’t get us to a solution. Democrats will be happy to balance the budget by slashing national defense and intelligence… is that what you want, Phil? An affordable future for your children and car bombs going off in major US cities every week?

    Democrats will happily balance the budget by raising taxes on the “wealthy” and on corporations, on gasoline and “polluting” industries. Your children will have an affordable future, but a stagnant economy, poor job prospects, and rising prices because of high inflation. Maybe that’s your preferable future?

    Ranting about the fact that Bush is not a true fiscal conservative is fine. Ranting about a Congress that is addicted to pork is fine. But what exactly is your solution?

  5. Me too, I hate taxes…heck if my family had the money taken out every payday we would’ve never had to pay for my college education by taking out student loans (54,000…worth), but as it is now I have do pay that off and continue to give the government money they just waste on things I could careless about.

  6. Thanks for the help with getting this Sgt’s message out. Nice little blog you’ve got here.

Submit a Comment