I received the following verbatim quoted e-PSA from Senator Durbin's office (D-IL, Senate Assistant Majority Leader):

"Thank you for contacting me about the war in Iraq. I appreciate hearing from you.

Like you, I have the deepest respect and gratitude for our men and women in uniform. They have served our country with honor and distinction in the war against terrorism and the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. I have consistently worked to ensure that our troops have the best equipment and protection possible despite my disagreements with the Bush Administration's policies toward Iraq.

With our involvement now in its fifth year, more than 3,800 American soldiers have been killed and more than 28,000 have been wounded, including thousands who have suffered life-changing injuries such as traumatic brain injury or the loss of a limb. In addition to these losses, this war is costing us more than $15 billion a month. Add to this the escalating sectarian violence and the unknown number of innocent Iraqi civilians who have perished as a result, and it is clear the Bush Administration lacks a coherent strategy to stabilize Iraq and achieve victory. Our policy toward Iraq needs a new direction.

I voted against the 2002 resolution authorizing this war because I believed the Bush Administration had failed to make its case for war with Iraq. While I never regretted that vote, I have grown increasingly troubled by the votes I have had to cast since then on whether to continue to fund this war.

With each war-funding vote, I have asked myself this question:  What would I want Congress to do if it were my son or daughter riding through the streets of Baghdad, Samarra, or Fallujah? I have worked with others to try to change the President's strategy in Iraq and begin to bring the troops home.  When we could not gain the 60 votes needed to break a filibuster by the minority, I voted to give our troops the support they need while they are in harm's way. But Congress must not give this President another blank check for his war in Iraq.

The United States cannot win an Iraqi civil war. Our troops have done everything we have asked of them. We owe it to them and their families to hold our government accountable and continue to press for a new direction. We must make it clear to Iraq's political leaders and its people that they must take responsibility for the future of their nation, engage in an effective reconciliation process, and establish and maintain peace with the help of a trained and fully functioning Iraqi security force. The Iraqis face a difficult road ahead, and we should continue to help them as they strive to move forward. But by continuing our current open-ended military commitment in Iraq, the Bush Administration is simply prolonging the day when the U.S. soldiers there are able to return home to their families.

Winning the war on terror requires us to be able to respond to dangerous situations wherever they may occur. Reducing the U.S. military presence in Iraq will not only give the Iraqis a greater incentive to take the lead in securing their own nation, it will also allow U.S. forces to respond more readily to contingencies affecting the security of the United States elsewhere in the world."[End quotes]

Here's what I would offer in contemplation of the PSA's words:   

As to the body of said PSA, again: Democrats have had since 9-11-2001 to come up with a plan different than Bush if they believe a better one re war on terror can be made; in 2006, Democrats did NOT say they would simply just get troops out of Iraq, they would strategically re-deploy them...and all through 2007 to date, it's "just get all troops back to the USA, period, yessir, that's what we promised folks and got elected on"; Durbin plays to heartstrings about being worried sick about our troops being in harm's way, and says he'd want his kids just never at war for any reason or even policing ANY foreign area, and that coming home is ALL that can be done...but Democrats all 2007 have told our kids in harm's way that Qaeda did nothing to provoke them, Qaedans kill them as freedom fighters against Bush oppression, our kids are Nazis killing freedom fighters having nothing to do with 9/11, our kids are stormtrooping for a Stalinist Hitler who thinks you shouldn't let the credible bluffing of Hussein and of WMD by same be different from actually having them and defying the world, and that to atone for our Nazi troop kids Democrats want to offer them IDs, inclusion in our credit system, and anything else their hearts desire, ahead of all others.

Oh, um, the civil war thingy 2006 bloviations re Iraq by Democrats? Oh, the icing on the cake...if you see a civil war, keep "divisive Bush/GOP" from progressing via Democrat demands for partitions between the warriors, and blow off real and bluffed threats from a leadership element in the Arab world that puts knives to throats of each other and the globe...leave 'em alone, what could happen...9/11 wasn't their fault, remember? Well, that's all great theater and obstruction of political opponents while you push to keep the any-old-kind-and-number-of-immigrants subprime culture so heavily enriching the elite of the States Rights club, but it doesn't form the least iota of ANY plan to stabilize the Mid-East and undercut Islamic terrorism, nor does it thus offer what Democrats would cost us on balance against the Bush way.

Heck, most non-Conservatives yap about Global Warming, yet say we need only build as many New Urban homes as cheaply made as possible against rising heat, and if this cuts into groundwater and similar resources and makes them look paradoxical re Global Warming, just tear down all the old stuff even if then there's way less room for Old Urbanites....and via likes of Daley and IL Dems, we're told Iraq funds could be used for BILLIONS needed to keep just Cook-Lake County transit going, let alone anything anywhere,  Bush is forcing cuts due to Iraq Nazism, "hate Bush yeaaarrrrgggghhhhh!", but now local media reports Metra has to raise its fares a whopping TEN CENTS per year for next three years to meet budget.

All the Dems now offer is partisan scare and sleight of hand against Bush; world facts emerging since 2006, I continue to support George W. Bush re the Mid-East and the war on terror.

Like I told some friends in Tennessee re the recent news Bill Frist places ahead of ALL comers re 2010 TN Governor race, at least two to one against even Harold Ford Jr. per Rasmussen poll, we all benefit when every State has competent officials since we're all attached to the same Federal policies, Congressional acta, and national economic system; it comes as no shock to me therefore that former Senator Frist is placing so well.

If non-Conservatives want to introduce legislation amending Federal law to undo the Federal monetary system and go back to each State having its own banks and currencies, not just deposit State funds in private banks while saying the actual State Treasury is broke or some such scheme, while many Democrats urge replacing the local currency in their areas with the peso, that might make officials behave more soberly if they had to fly right or see other States and nations disfavor their money...but that would weaken ability of national defense and more, it's not happening, and too many subfederals are usurping powers specifically reserved to the Federal government in the plain text of the Constitution; worse, they say they "have" to so act because President Du Jour allegedly isn't, while their Federal reps attempt invention of any enabling laws which would "validate" subfederals as doing Federal will without nosing around by ANY President ever again...and if Federal money isn't being spread to the hands of business and diverse USA population compositions at-large, as if reserved only for a finite political orthodoxy, well, people can pass amongst themselves whatever they want to the point they actually butt against the politically orthodox who hire or otherwise set them up.

Such thinking by some has currently reached a point where some all at once have said re an Iraqi terror strike attempt on Senator Inhofe's plane "so close and yet so far", re 9/11 "neither Qaeda nor planes were involved", re Qaeda "they're freedom fighters", re those part of or willing to join strikes on our nation and troops "hey, L.A. will give such people housing and inclusion socially as we leave them alone to fester in the Mid-East, even if just not using oil any more later sets them off or we can't get any if something else happens, and even if they hold knives to non-violent Muslims and dare us to not spare their lives by doing their bidding"...while obviously avoiding accountability text in every pork-laden bill as the money will only be spent on such pursuits, and as President Du Jour can be blamed for not acting where they didn't, and new laws creating tort liability on telecoms, housing developers, whatever private parties are proposed to make THEM responsible for having followed any laws while sustained by Courts or having followed someone's political orthodoxy.

Again, officials who grasp the meaning and scope and intentions of the Constitution as a whole are extremely important to every State, and every State affects the national tones.

In that spirit, as a lifelong Conservative Federalist, I support the re-election of Senator Jim Inhofe and other Conservatives, as I find they are more attuned to global common sense without an overly-pronounced sense of self-grandeur, and don't turn off the globe with offers to sound like even the USA caves into Mid-East power bluffs, or encourages financial reward to those killing USA and so many other nations' personnel.

Early voting probably got the better of Virginia voters...no Democrat majority until election, no Democrat announcement re early votes re wanting IDs for illegal immigrants for commercial profits, or Democrat closed-door removal of $3billion for border security itself.
Ah, the audacity of selling hope so loudly nobody notices stealthy footsteps behind their backs...it seems even on homeland security itself, for all the words and grandstanding, we nationals and legal immigrants together aren't worth being protected in the minds of some; could be why they won't wear the USA flag or pledge allegiance to it...one wonders if they cross their fingers while taking ex officio oaths to protect, preserve, and defend the Constitution of the United States of America, as well.

Wherefore, I continue to support the within following paragraphs written by the American Conservative Union received by me in nature of petition:

RE: Support the Clear Act of 2007

Congresswoman Marsha Blackburn's Clear Act of 2007 (H.R. 3494) is still in committee and state and local governments that institute sanctuary policies are simply becoming more bold.

Governor Eliot Spitzer of New York wanted to give driver's licenses to illegal aliens and six Texas mayors are actually threatening to sue the U.S. government to block the border fence.

This insanity will not stop until you bring the Clear Act of 2007 to the floor of the House and the Senate and make it law.  Bring this bill to the floor and DARE any Member of Congress to stand against it.

Criminal aliens are running wild in sanctuary cities all over the country, and they pose a clear and present danger to both American citizens and legal immigrants. We must stop them and this legislation may be our last, best chance.

Please vote for the Clear Act of 2007. These so-called "sanctuary cities" are defying Congress and thumbing their noses at the American people.Congress can and must force these cities to obey federal immigration laws.