How can we not say that there is a very real threat facing the liberated people of the modern world? How can we not say that the questioning the validity of a desperate--even frantic, if necessary--struggle is foolhardy. How can we say that the ones among these liberated people who do the questioning are on a fool's errand?
The idea that the war in which we are now engaged is merely a slogan or pet phrase produces that type of divisive speech that turns back the clock of the national debate. How will we accomplish a unified plan for security in our nation with talk that relegates the entire premise of this necessary war to foolish doublespeak? It cannot be justified, nor can an all-to-late call for “strong diplomacy” after this type of talk (Edwards). Instead, it becomes much like sending invitations to a wedding when the engagement has already been broken.
This is a day when the threat of Weapons of Mass Destruction is a grim reality. For this reason, public figures should work together to deal with the problems that surpass nuance and that split hairs over implementation and strategy. While I am certain of your desire to strengthen this greatest nation, your choice of words causes the average citizen to stop paying attention to your message and see you as a more unreasonable man than you have consistently been known to be. I pray that this will not become the prevailing opinion of a public servant whose potential vision could be a catalyst for justice and liberty not only within the borders of America, but beyond it's shores, also.
Once again allow me to state my admiration of your service to our proud country. I hope this letter finds you in all the promise that life, and this blessed nation, have to offer.
Yours for the future of America,