« Malt Beverages and Lacy Underwear in Utah? | Main | Another E-mail from Rocky »
Response Arguments from the "Hired Help"
By Bryan CathermanOver the years, many letters, either in affirmation and in opposition to various actions of elected leaders (the hired help), have been mailed from my home or e-mailed via my laptop. They all receive responses thanks to the help of college interns. Interestingly, none of the responses ever just say, “thank you for you comments, I will consider these as this issue…” These letters always become an opportunity for an argument, including letters written in support.
I once wrote a letter to an infamous Utah Senator in agreement of his stance on an issue (which does not happen often). The letter I received in response a couple months later was three pages long and went on and on about how we have to do more, we need to raise money, and we also need to do this and that. Oddly enough, I did not really support the Senator’s actions now that the previous stance I though was good was being used as a political tool against those “liberal activists” in his letter.
Yesterday another letter waited for me in my mailbox, this time from the only Democrat in Utah’s US delegation. After returning from Iraq, I was very concerned about the manpower of the JAG (the area in which I served) in Iraq compared to the over abundance of manpower gainfully unemployed stateside. National Guard and Reserve JAG soldiers were called up all over the country. I was one of them. For 9 months, I worked stateside. At first, the workload was great, but then we ended up regularly taking half of the duty day off, having BBQs, and generally goofing off. Thanks to my insane boredom, I volunteered to go to Iraq, were I learned of the extreme shortages of the same skilled manpower. Our active duty Regiment called for over twice the JAG people we had (and that MTOE was for peace time, they need even more in war), but back in the states, my fellow activated reservists were having soccer days and hikes to Pike’s Peak. One contingent was playing all day, while the other was doing its mission extremely short-staffed. Reservists were called away from home to play rather than conduct the mission we trained to do—fight and win wars. I wrote letters to the officials that authorized the call ups upon my return to the states.
Included with Representative Matheson’s response letter was a letter from an Army Colonel stating that the JAG has a stateside mission that is very important. The letter then went on to explain the mission of the JAG, and how the deployments are balanced as they should be, and all is well. Everybody is needed and nobody is playing around. My observations were incorrect. My letter was an attempt to inform the good Representative of how the system is being manipulated, the mission in Iraq was extremely short staffed (which very likely lead to the Abu Gharib disaster), and an observation of the misuse of one unit of JAG reservists. My argument was that if the staff should not be in Iraq, then the Reservists sitting around at Fort Carson should go home because the soldiers that are normally supported by stateside missions are not stateside anyway. My argument was that it does not seem right to activate so many Guard and Reserve forces to play games all day. The letter told me they do not play all day, so I do not know what it was I saw, because it was not training. The letter was an argument against my own observations. Did anybody even read my letter, or do elected leaders see incoming mail as just another political opportunity to argue their own agendas? My point being, that anymore, nobody just says “thanks, I will look into it and keep your comments in mind.”
Included with Representative Matheson’s response letter was a letter from an Army Colonel stating that the JAG has a stateside mission that is very important. The letter then went on to explain the mission of the JAG, and how the deployments are balanced as they should be, and all is well. Everybody is needed and nobody is playing around. My observations were incorrect. My letter was an attempt to inform the good Representative of how the system is being manipulated, the mission in Iraq was extremely short staffed (which very likely lead to the Abu Gharib disaster), and an observation of the misuse of one unit of JAG reservists. My argument was that if the staff should not be in Iraq, then the Reservists sitting around at Fort Carson should go home because the soldiers that are normally supported by stateside missions are not stateside anyway. My argument was that it does not seem right to activate so many Guard and Reserve forces to play games all day. The letter told me they do not play all day, so I do not know what it was I saw, because it was not training. The letter was an argument against my own observations. Did anybody even read my letter, or do elected leaders see incoming mail as just another political opportunity to argue their own agendas? My point being, that anymore, nobody just says “thanks, I will look into it and keep your comments in mind.”
Posted by catherman on September 21, 2005 07:44 AM
