Letters To The Editor


February 06, 2007

Resolution impedes cutoff of war funds

The Senate should reject the Levin-Warner nonbinding resolution on Iraq ("Symbolic measure spurs war debate," Feb. 5).

America's imperial invasion of Iraq has been an unmitigated disaster.

With tens of thousands of Iraqis and more than 3,000 Americans needlessly slaughtered, and countless more physically and psychologically maimed for life, it is time to end President Bush's criminal venture to dominate the Middle East for the benefit of his corporate friends.

As the latest National Intelligence Estimate confirms, there is simply no legitimate justification to continue this war one day longer; the United States is incapable of achieving any outcome that could charitably be described as successful ("Intelligence analysis of prospects bleak," Feb. 3).

Yet the Levin-Warner resolution would prohibit "the elimination or reduction of funds for troops in the field."

Ostensibly designed to foster the safety of American troops, this language is wholly uncalled for in a resolution that is designed to express the Senate's opposition to Mr. Bush's escalation of forces in Iraq and will only make the inevitable funding cutoff that much more difficult to accomplish.

Only a cutoff of funding for Mr. Bush's mad enterprise can bring our brave young men and women safely home.

The soldiers in the field are merely cannon fodder to Mr. Bush; as long as the Congress gives him the money, he will spend it to guarantee their continued slaughter and to provoke Iran into a confrontation in Iraq that will start a wider, even more disastrous war.

Sheldon H. Laskin


Senate bill threatens power of president

On Groundhog Day, as I waited for Punxsutawney Phil to make his nonbinding resolution on the weather, I couldn't help but think of the similar foolishness taking place as our senators contemplate other nonbinding resolutions more related to political posturing than military strategy ("Symbolic measure spurs war debate," Feb. 5).

Their resolutions would be nonbinding because they don't have the constitutional authority to produce a binding resolution micromanaging the commander in chief.

If the senators were serious about ending the Iraq war, they could simply withhold funds to pay for the war.

Other than some early morning carousing, the Punxsutawney foolishness doesn't have a downside. But the Washington foolishness certainly does.

These sterile, nonbinding resolutions demoralize our military while providing hope to the insurgents.

Further, they are a complete waste of time - time that could be better spent working on the serious issues these senators were elected to address, such as illegal immigration, Social Security reform, elimination of the Medicare drug plan's "doughnut hole," and homeland security.

Richard Tatlow


Beat enemies before proposing troop cut

Adversaries have declared war on the United States and preach a doctrine of hate for all Americans.

While we are eager to extract our troops from harm's way at the earliest possible time, we must first come to terms with those adversaries and their doctrine of hate ("130 die in Iraq bomb blast," Feb. 4).

Any troop withdrawals should be preceded by a negotiated cease-fire that will be honored by all parties.

But at the moment, it doesn't look like the leaders of the various combatants are willing to take the necessary steps to bring about a lasting cease-fire.

James M. Hall

Perry Hall

Let Medicare dicker to trim drug prices

There is no reason why Medicare should not be allowed to use its purchasing power to bulk-purchase prescription drugs at discount rates ("Increase planned for medical costs," Feb. 4).

With our tremendous federal deficit, that could only help to reduce the cost of Medicare and drugs to the United States and its citizens.

Eric Wyckoff


Odd to see concern on Mitchell's ethics

Politics not only makes for strange bedfellows, it makes for strange headlines.

If I had heard that a candidate for mayor of Baltimore was being asked to leave his or her day job because of possible conflict of interest, I would have felt certain that the candidate would be Mayor Sheila Dixon ("Mitchell's day job on hold for mayor race," Jan. 27).

As City Council president and a member of the Board of Estimates, Ms. Dixon voted on contracts that directly involved a company where her sister worked and declined to disclose that relationship, in violation of ethical requirements.

How strange that City Council member Keiffer J. Mitchell Jr., whose behavior has never raised questions about ethics, should be the subject of such a headline.

Jon Gilden


New city slogan a waste of funds

It amazes me that Mayor Sheila Dixon would even consider changing the city's "Believe" slogan to "Embrace."

Does Baltimore really have surplus money to pay for such a frivolous expense?

K. Chaney


Advertising intrudes in role of doctors

I was heartened to read The Sun's article "TV ads for drugs found wanting" (Jan. 30).

Baltimore Sun Articles
Please note the green-lined linked article text has been applied commercially without any involvement from our newsroom editors, reporters or any other editorial staff.