From the March 2008 Idaho Observer:

Open Letter to Idaho Lt. Governor Jim Risch

Idaho Lt. Governor Jim Risch is running to replace the disgraced Sen. Larry Craig. To stump for himself, Risch sent a letter out to constituents asking for their support. The letter was designed to appeal to the party faithful who still buy into the war on terror and that we must, at all costs, prevent Democrats from representing Idaho in D.C. Following is our response to his letter:

Dear Lt. Gov. Risch:

We recently received a request from you seeking our immediate financial support for your bid for retiring Senator Larry Craig’s senate seat.

First we are appalled that Senator Craig, who was arrested for lewd conduct last year and subsequently spent $213,000 of public money on his defense, is being allowed to retire at public expense.

You state in your letter that "from cutting taxes to protecting the Second Amendment, from defending the unborn to putting an end to failed government programs, from enforcing the rule of law to balancing the budget," you are "100 percent with the Republican party."

What are you saying? Our Republican president is the person who has initiated these failed programs, broken the law, and created the most unbalanced budget in the history of our nation—backed by the Republicans in Congress.

You continue by saying, "I am steadfast in my opposition to granting amnesty to illegal aliens . . ."

That position is also in contradiction to your previous statement of being "100% with the Republican party," since our Republican president has been meeting behind closed doors with the president of Mexico for several years in order to open our borders to Mexico and has also defied acts of Congress and the will of the American people by allowing Mexican truckers into the country. In addition, Republican presidential nomination frontrunner John McCain, is a known advocate of amnesty and mass Mexican immigration.

Then you state, "Finally, I am committed to the fight against terror. America cannot afford to surrender from the global struggle in the war on terror—no matter what the Democrats call their plan."

Terror is a state of mind. It is what a child feels when airplanes of the largest military in the world are flying overhead, bombing his town. How do you propose to battle that, except through the purveyance of peace?

Finally, you say "that there are evil leaders in this world who hate America and everything we stand for," and that "it is the height of naivety to think that terrorist-sponsoring states like Iran will stop trying to kill Americans because Democratic president-wannabe Barack Obama offered to sit down for tea with them."

What is your definition of evil? Is it not evil when a country attacks another based on a lie forwarded by their president, allows destruction of 7,000 years worth of their history, kills 600,000 of their women and children, displaces 4,000,000 of their citizens, and permanently poisons their environment with depleted uranium?

"Terrorist-sponsoring Iran" president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, has stated,"The Almighty did not create man to live in war, hostility and vengeance ....He did not make man to spend his time in hardship, exile, deprivation, enmity, and antagonism such as are prevalent in our era. God created man to live in a friendly, intimate atmosphere of love based on monotheism and justice. He created man to establish a prosperous, creative and ideal society. Today, human society still suffers from such individuals and governments who cannot be satisfied with their own portions alone, but who can only visualize prosperity through the deprivation and destitution of others. They strive to rule other nations, and by sowing seeds of discord among them, consolidate their own domination."

Perhaps what he doesn’t like about America is that what she stands for is fear, hate, war, greed, covetousness, control, corruption, exploitation, and the elimination of liberty both at home and abroad, along with the unrelenting support for Israel whether they are right or wrong. And if that is what you are "100 percent" behind, you will not have our vote.

In closing, you are apparently unaware of the escalating cost of continued war. How do you propose to balance the budget AND continue waging "the war on terror"—a war with no foreseeable end.

~The Idaho Observer