Letter To The Editor After Reading About Cong.Murphy In Iraq

[On Par]

After reading the account of Congressman Murphy's Humvee tipping over, on the way to the airport, http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/05333/614025.stm I fired off this letter to the editor.

BTW, I'm in Jack Murtha's district, and Murphy's is adjacent to his.


Congressman Murphy, after 2 1/2 years of occupation, (Nov 29 - Injured Congressman Murphy back home from Iraq) driving from Baghdad to the airport is still a high-risk venture that, according to you, must be taken at night, with secret routes, and at high speeds. And this somehow reaffirms your resolve that we should stay in Iraq?

With that strange dichotomy of words verses your being upside down in a ditch on the side of the road, how do you explain your resolve when driving to the Baghdad airport becomes mission-impossible? If it was a Sunday drive, take the kids, watch the airplanes land, we’d be making progress. Instead, what we read about is the number of reduced deaths while traveling "ambush alley" to the airport. Congressman, this does not translate into progress, it translates into what it is...futility.

Mr. Murphy, time for you wake-up and smell the viability of your words. 2 1/2 years and we can't secure “one road,” the main road. Yet, you want us to stay until we secure the entire county.

Bottom line Congressman - you survived, and got to come home. We’re pleased about that. We want the same for our troops.

[Tsiyu]

1. Nice. A little logic thrown on legislators

is always a necessary action...

[Richardo]

2. Nice letter. Love the closing.

:thumbsup:

[Pacifist Patriot]

3. Very well done!

[Sub Atomic]

4. Not to nitpick

but please spell versus properly in the third sentence.

[longship]

5. Damned good letter!!

Others should read this carefully and take a lesson on how to write a LTTE.

1. Issue is framed beautifully.
2. Engaged Jack Murphy positively without name-calling or ad hominem.
3. Short and to the point. Says a lot with very few words.
4. A good lead paragraph which references a previous article and its date of publication.
5. A snappy tag line at the end.

Editors eat this stuff up--they'll likely publish it.

on edit: Yes, "verses" is incorrect. It should be "versus". Hopefully you will correct that before mailing it. If not, the editor may correct it for you.

BTW, gladly recommended.

[Richardo]

7. Excellent critique, longship...

Thanks. The 'checklist' should help any letter writer.

[On Par]

8. Thanks for Kind Words and the Mispelling Correction...

All of a sudden I realized why "verses" wasn't caught by Spellcheck. Wrong word, correct spelling!

I sent it in to the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette. I'm sure they'll catch it, but will send the amended version immediately. Thanks again everyone. I'll let you know if/when it gets published.

[On Par]

9. Update, The Editor Replied ....

...the spelling correction had been made. No word if/when they'll publish.

Pardons also for misspelling "misspelled!"

[second edition]

6. Good letter! n/t