Rogers' Newsletter Avoids War Talk

Does Rep. Mike Rogers even know there's a war on? You can't tell by reading his Legislative Email Update.

Rogers' three-page, taxpayer-funded letter arrived in my email inbox on Tuesday (July 10, 2007). The headlines: "Rogers Proposal Would Boost Alternative Fuel Research, Protect Jobs," "Rogers Rejects Senate Amnesty Bill," "Mentoring Legislation Co-Sponsored by Rogers," and "Michigan State Receives $50 Million for Energy Research, Creates 100 Jobs."

Missing was the headline I'd really like to see: "Rogers Breaks with Bush on Disastrous Iraq War." No surprise there. Rogers appears ready to follow Bush all the way to the bottom of the public opinion polls and continue to support the war which the overwhelming majority of Americans now oppose.

But neither is Rogers crowing about his support of that war. Where's the headline touting his determination to keep fighting in Iraq come hell or high water? If he supports this war, why doesn't his newsletter give us an update on its progress and explain why we are succeeding and must keep at it?

Instead, Rogers gives us warmed-over news about a Department of Energy grant to Michigan State, which already has appeared in the Detroit Free Press.

Rogers' silence may be an admission -- if you don't have anything good to say about a war, don't say anything at all.

After skipping the Brighton 4th of July parade, Rogers did emerge from his summer vacation long enough to talk to the Livingston Press & Argus about the war. In a story in Wednesday's edition (July 11, 2007), Rogers
wanted to give the recent troop escalation more time.

"The truth of the matter is, nobody's really sure if it's working yet," Rogers was quoted as saying, adding that any discussion of it should be put off until yet another report is due out in September.

Rogers' position is illogical. He supposedly opposed the escalation in January, proposing that troops be moved out of Baghdad to track al Qaeda fighters elsewhere in Iraq. But after opposing it in January, now he wants to stick with it.

Then he goes on to disingenuously misrepresent the position of Democratic Sen. Carl Levin, who has introduced legislation to begin withdrawing troops in 120 days and end combat by next April.

"Immediate withdrawl is not the answer," Rogers said.

Starting withdrawl in four months and keeping troops in Iraq until April 2007 is hardly "immediate."

Rogers' alternative plan seems to be little more than an attempt to construct political cover for himself. He wants to separate himself from Bush's "surge" while continuing to support the war.