Founders gave Congress power to cut war funds

In response to the letter by Judith Tier (March 22), to accuse one of giving aid and comfort to the enemy is quite a serious charge, and I am appalled that you use this charge so freely.

We may agree or disagree on whether it is prudent to cut funding, but your charge that it is treasonous is quite irresponsible.

We do agree that the Congress actually does have the power to vote for cutting the funding of our troops. This is not treasonous but rather pretty clearly defined as the role of the Congress in the Constitution. The founding fathers purposely separated the functions of declaring and funding a war from the power to conduct a war.

As James Madison wrote, “The accumulation of all powers, legislative, executive and judiciary, in the same hands, may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny.”

We have unfortunately had six years of George Bush consolidating presidential power without limitation. The American people clearly voted to end this tyranny and to change course in Iraq during the last election, and a surge was not what they had in mind.

Upon assuming power, Nancy Pelosi has had the audacity to pursue such a policy, which is supported by the vast majority of Americans who elected her and the Democrats.

I humbly suggest that people who call such actions treasonous, such as you, don’t have a problem with Nancy Pelosi but rather with our Constitution and system of government.

You may support granting George Bush unlimited powers, I do not. The basis of my views is the U.S. Constitution, not the writings of Joel Rosenberg which seems to guide your foreign policy views. I prefer to base my views on the writings of the founding fathers rather than interpretations of Biblical prophesies.

This is not the first time that Congress has exercised its role in military affairs. Funds were famously cut off at the end of the Vietnam War. Additionally, the same sanctimonious Republicans who question the loyalty of opponents now, had no problems trying to restrict Bill Clinton’s use of the military. That Republican Congress cut funding for operations in Somalia and Bosnia.

In cutting funds for Somalia, John McCain said, “Somalia is a prime example of lofty ambitions gone awry. Our service men and women have become … part of a mission to build Somalia into a stable democracy, something, incidentally, it has never been, and shows no sign of ever becoming this decade.”

The situation sounds eerily familiar now. According to your argument, John McCain was giving aid and comfort to the enemy. I reject this argument as it relates to Nancy Pelosi and John McCain. I at least try to be intellectually honest in my beliefs.

In relation to 9/11, despite the misleading statements by Dick Cheney, Iraq did not have anything to do with 9/11. We were all impacted by those horrible events; supporters of the president do not have exclusivity on that suffering. I happened to work across the street from the World Trade Center and watched the towers collapse.

Supporters of the president should stop wrapping themselves in the flag and these horrible events. Need I remind you, it is over five years later, and where is Bin Laden? It is an eternal reminder of a failed policy of using 9/11 to focus on Iraq rather than the people who actually attacked us.

Rob Boyle

Red Bank