freepers have attacked my ltte-can you get my back?

[w8liftinglady]

I recently posted this letter to the editor in the Waxahachie Daily Light-a totally neocon area.
http://thedailylight.com/articles/2006/01/03/dailylight/opinion/letters_to_the_editor/02%20letters.txt

The response has been as follows
http://thedailylight.com/articles/2006/01/11/dailylight/opinion/

my response is posted on another thread
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x112855

It hasn't been published(I just wrote it today)
The editor is good about posting all letters,so I was hoping a few of you could write your own letters,put any kind of slant you like-to even things up a bit.Thanks a lot !!!!

[acmejack]

1. Sure, I'll write one and send it to them

But, it will have to be in the morning. I am a morning type person, I am way too deep in the evenings festivities at this point, but I won't leave a fellow texican on the hook with a bunch of cons. Just want to offer coherent support!

[w8liftinglady]

2. lol...thanks-I need to partake now myself;)

[flamin lib]

3. I'll try to help out. There have been some recent revelations worth

broadcasting that might ruffle a few conservative feathers.

[w8liftinglady]

4. Thanks so much.

[TexomaDem]

5. the 2nd link

is no more. All I get is an archive search page. Must be gettin too many hits from DU'ers. And they're embarrassed by the ignorance of their repuke readers.

I did find one from 1-12-06 that mentions your ltte. But it's mostly about body armor. Which you didn't bring up in your letter.

[w8liftinglady]

6. Thanks for looking.

A couple of folks from DU have written some really good letters.:)

[babylonsister]

7. For inspiration to other DUers:

I didn't realize actual sites could be referenced and would be printed; my bad. Keep us posted please!

>As an online Texas news junkie, I've been following your
>Letters to the Editor with interest, so thought I'd write one
>of my own. Specifically, I was informed by a letter dated
>January 3, 2006, entitled "On The Bush Administration". I do
>believe the writer had many valid points concerning the
>failure of this administration, specifically as it relates to
>treatment of our soldiers and veterans. Imagine my surprise at
>Mr. King's response (a LTTE dated January 11), defending this
>admin for not providing armor for our troops, while ignoring
>all the other salient points made.
>Well I too can google, and found an interesting little tidbit
>that came directly from the Pentagon: "A secret Pentagon study
>has found that at least 80 percent of the marines who have
>been killed in Iraq from wounds to their upper body could have
>survived if they had extra body armor. That armor has been
>available since 2003 but until recently the Pentagon has
>largely declined to supply it to troops despite calls from the
>field for additional protection, according to military
>officials." For anyone interested, they too can find this
>information, and from a variety of sources, though I find it
>laughable that Mr. King does not consider AP or Reuters
>reputable.
>I would also like to point out, as the wife of a retired vet,
>what the VA now seems intent on doing. If the Department of
>Defense gets their way, there is going to be huge cuts in
>Tricare coverage for both current soldiers and veterans. These
>men and women have earned the benefits they get, yet the DoD
>is intent on paring down services while increasing costs. Our
>healthcare is going to double by 2008, prescription co-pays
>will go up, while the number of providers will decrease due to
>the Tricare system not covering as much as it once did. I
>shudder to think how injured soldiers will be treated, and we
>know they number in the many thousands...so far: this number
>doesn't even include all the PTSD-related cases that are sure
>to blossom as this unprovoked war rages on. Additional
>information can be found at the National Association of
>Uniformed Services' (NAUS) website.
>Perhaps, if Mr. King were to be directly affected by anything
>this admin does, he'd have a different viewpoint of how
>compassionate they really are towards our soldiers and vets.
>Respectfully,
xxxxxxxxxxx