• Front page
• Receive letters on your RSS reader

Antonio D’Lallo or Thornton writes:

Dear Editor, Congressman Udall availed himself of our servicemen and women in order to justify his support for continued funding of the Iraq War at a town hall meeting held in Thornton. Udall claims that he has listened to the calls and read the many letters of anti-war protestors and peace supporters. He quoted his mom’s dictum of how he has two ears and one mouth for a reason; to listen more. However, he gave little time to hear about peoples’ concerns about the funding of the war and, at this rare appearance, stated that we can phone, fax, or write to him about our concerns. Many of us have phoned, faxed, and wrote! We have spoken only to his secretaries and office staff. Meeting face-to-face with a congressman is an opportunity to be heard directly without the filter of staff members or the second hand information from secretaries. It allows people to participate in a democracy by being directly heard by their representative.
This was a poor lead up to his U.S. Senate run and he faces a daunting task of trying to win over his anti-war/pro-peace base. Finally, I was appalled by his polling the audience with the question “How many of you are for cutting off funding of the troops?” Not the troops Conressman “Two Ears and One Mouth,” but the war. Udall must stop using the troops as an excuse to continue this illegal war. Bring our troops home now and stop funding this illegal war!

This letter has not been edited.

READER COMMENTS

Keep in mind that many of the letter writers and callers are from a small group of foreign operatives whose mission is to disparage Americans who have learned that this war is not in Americas' interest. By writing many, many letters, and posting many, many posts, they deceive the policy makers into believing that there are more war supporters than there actually are.

America is reaping its just rewards for electing so many Vietnam War draft-dodgers, as policy makers. These bipartisan SuperChickenHawks, collectively, haven't found anything they are willing to die for, however, they can't resist playing computer war games with the lives of kids from our poor and working class families. In '08', the question should be, "do I want this politician to determine if I or my blood and treasure, should live or die".

The thing this letter writer misses is that he and his friends (all liberal america and military haters) aren't Mr. Udall's complete and total constituency. Cutting off funding for the "War" is cutting off funding for the troops you ingnoramous.
Udall is not using the troops as an excuse - it is the REASON why he would vote against cutting "war" funding.
idiot

antonio,Your problem is you are too stupid to understand the facts and make a educated conclusion.What is sad is idiots like you are allowed to vote electing total anti-American corrupt democraps that support the terrorist over our own troops.

3:35 states that those who want a rational foreign policy aren't Udall's total constituency. If indeed Mark Udall is suppose to represent the people in his district and the overwhelming majority of the people in his district (60%+) want an end to this endless occupation then shouldn't he being voting in accordance with the wishes of his constituents? Why do we call them representatives if they don't represent us? Mr. Udall might make a fine Senator but if his votes are to help him climb up the corporate ladder and are not in line with his constituents then who is to say that he won't ignore the wishes of the voters of the Colorado when he is a Senator. What you do in small things is indicative of how you will handle big things.

PS: Is Keith even capable of one post that isn't a personal attack? Maybe some of the more embarrassed conservative bloggers can encourage him how to write a post that doesn't involve a personal attack. How refreshing would that be?

Somewhere a few months back, I read in the RMN that there is enough money for the troops if the president uses it wisely. The extra money will keep them in Iraq longer, not take care of them now.

Does anyone remember this article, I think it was an editorial.?

Wes,
Where do you get that "(60%+) of Udall's constituency want an end to the endless occupation"?
I cannot find those numbers on any website or newspaper article of recent. Please enlighten me and others to your facts.

Udall now has play fiddle for the entire state now Wes, not just the majority of loons you claim he represents in this district.
And you are right It's not going to be so easy for him to win a Senate seat if he maintains his Boulder Ideology. This is real politics now and I'm not so sure he knows how play to a state wide audience.

And you are right It's not going to be so easy for him to win a Senate seat if he maintains his Boulder Ideology. This is real politics now and I'm not so sure he knows how play to a state wide audience.

Posted by Jack Bauer on September 23, 2007 08:39 AM

Here is a national poll that shows 61% nationwide view the invasion as a mistake.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/03/18/poll.wars/index.html

Since you seem to believe that CD 2 is more liberal than the rest of the nation then it follows that CD 2 has a higher percentage of people who believe we can't continue to waste blood and treasure to prop up Bush's failed presidency.

As far as real politics is concerned that is the one thing that Republicans do best. Serving their constituents and the good of the country is the last thing they consider. Udall unfortunately is playing politics before constituents just like Tancredo. They are both still elected representatives and should show up and vote according to the wishes of the people who voted them into office.

You probably need to get back to fantasizing 24/7 about nuking Iran. Big bad dudes like Jack Bauer don't waste their time writing drivel on newspaper forums when they could be terrorizing the rest of the world. So much killing still to accomplish and so much terror to spread. Get after it Jack. I'm pretty sure you think we're still a couple hundred thousand deaths short of getting our way.

Wes,
NATIONWIDE is NOT Udall's Constituency my friend. Sorry, but you specifically wrote:

"If indeed Mark Udall is suppose to represent the people in his district and the overwhelming majority of the people in his district (60%+) want an end to this endless occupation then shouldn't he being voting in accordance with the wishes of his constituents?"

Try again buddy.

Hey try this one you nuke obessed terrorist.

http://www.coloradodaily.com/articles/2007/09/20/opinion/your_take/yourtake1.txt

This one is putting support in the area to end the occupation at around 88%. I was being generous to use the national average of 60%+ or didn't they teach you how to extrapolate in terrorist training school you big bad macho TV wannabe.

The real question in this debate is whether representatives should represent the voters in their district or whether they can give voters the finger anytime they feel like. You have to figure with the hypocritical Republicans if the majority of the votersit in CD 2 supported an endless occupation and Udall voted against their wishes there would an enormous stink about how Udall doesn't understand representative democracy. If the majority supported their position then Republicans would be up in arms over someone not complying with their wishes. If the situation is reversed well of course the representative doesn't have to represent the voters. It is such transparent hypocrisy.

POST A COMMENT

• Iraq war
• 9/11 an inside job?
• Democrat’s comments
• Ramblings of Evangelical Christians
• Rise in atheism
• Reopen 9/11 investigation
• We need the truth about 9/11
• Purity ball