A heartwrenching letter from a Kerry supporter

[jeskibuff]

Thank you for giving me the opportunity to speak my mind. I lost my job this past year. When Clinton was president I was secure and prosperous, but in the last year, we had to close our operations.

We simply could not compete with foreign labor. This foreign labor worked for low pay under very bad conditions.

They worked very long shifts, and many even died on the job.

This competition could hardly be called "fair." I was forced out of the place where I had worked for 34 years.

Not a single government program was there to help me.

How can Bush call himself "compassionate?" Far worse, I lost two of my sons in Bush's evil war in Iraq. They gave their lives for their country, and for what? So that Bush's oil buddies can get rich. My pain of losing my sons is indescribable.

While it is trivial next to the loss of my sons, I regret to say that I also lost my home. I simply have nothing left. How can Bush call himself a Christian when he neglects people like me? I am a senior citizen with various medical problems. I'm not in a position where I can begin a new career. I was reduced to the point where I had to live in a hole in a ground, all because of President Bush.

And when the authorities found me there, did they have any compassion for my misfortune and ailments? No, I was arrested. Mr. Bush, I dare you to look me in the face and tell me you are a compassionate man! I dare you to look me in the face and tell me you are a Christian! If I had any money left, I would donate it to the Democrat Party. I now support Kerry for President.

If Al Gore had been elected in 2000 I would still have a job, a home, and most importantly, my dear sons!

Regards, Saddam Hussein

Found here

[Justlisten2]

You're absolutely correct. If Al Gore was elected by the electorial college (he was elected by the people), you'd still have your sons and your job, and we'd still have our twin towers. I guess we're all losers with Dubya in office.

[jeskibuff]

You're absolutely correct. If Al Gore was elected by the electorial college (he was elected by the people), you'd still have your sons and your job, and we'd still have our twin towers. I guess we're all losers with Dubya in office.

1) Fortunately, the electoral process is the set of rules that our national elections run on and prevented us from getting that dolt into office. Please read up on the electoral process and you'll find it has MANY positives that provide an equal voice across our country.

2) So, are you saying that the WTC would still be standing if Gore was President? What leads you to THAT conclusion?

3) Democrats and Dictators...if you fall into one of those categories, then YES...you're a loser while Dubya's in office. Get yourself prepared for 4 more years of "loser" status if that's the case!

4) Are you one of those who believe that Iraq was there for Saddam to abuse at his pleasure? That if it weren't for GWB, he and his sons could continue merrily torturing and executing their countrymen whenever they wanted? That it's the right of a nation's leader to govern that nation in whatever manner he pleased?

[JSE]

"If Al Gore was elected by the electorial college (he was elected by the people), you'd still have your sons and your job, and we'd still have our twin towers."

How the hell did you come to that conclusion? Really, I would like to hear it. I guess I/we can infer that you mean terrorist only targeted us because President Bush was in office. Is that what your saying because that's what it sounds like?

Please, I want to hear your reasoning!

JSE

[jeskibuff]

So, are you saying that the WTC would still be standing if Gore was President? What leads you to THAT conclusion?

How the hell did you come to that conclusion? Really, I would like to hear it. I guess I/we can infer that you mean terrorist only targeted us because President Bush was in office. Is that what your saying because that's what it sounds like?

Great minds think alike, JSE!

[Justlisten2]

Dubya's number one priority when elected was to find a way to get Saddam. It was on the agenda at his first National Security Council meeting. Now if only he could find a way to get the American public behind him, in his quest to clear his daddy's mess. Do I think he's behind 9/11? No, it took too much planning for someone of his modest intellectual abilities. Do I think the government had info about the attacks and allowed them to happen anyway, ala Pearl Harbor, possibly. Pre-9/11 America wouldn't have stood for Dubya's agenda. Now he gets them all in his corner, hmmm. I wouldn't put it past the government to sacrifice American lives to get their agenda rolling. That may seem like f%^&ed up thinking to you, but it's no more f%^&ed up thinking than beleiveing that Hussein was a world danger. When I heard comparisons to Hitler..hahahahahaha. I held a guitar once, but I'm not Bruce Springsteen.

Sadly, you are probably correct about the monkey getting re-elected. The country's been going to he!! since Reaganomics. 24 years later I'm still waiting for the trickle-down. Really, I just envy Republicans, I just wish I could afford to vote for one. All the wars, the gun nuts and the right-for-lifers, I could live with, if I had the money. Although it does amuse me that one party won't let you kill them at birth (right to life) but will let you kill later on (death penalty), while the other party will let you kill them at birth (pro-choice) but not afterwards (death penalty). Don't you just think that one party would be for killing and the other party against it, period? That would be too simple.

[Bryan]

Let us put this in perspective. Members of Congress who saw the evidence for the war with Iraq did not oppose it until after the fact. The UN instituted resolution 1441 and Iraq failed to comply with it. We had been amassing troops in the Middle East for 15 months prior to going in. Hussein had every opportunity to open up his country but refused to do so. Hindsight is always 20/20 and right now it is still too early to say if the war was just. What would people say if those WMDs turn up in Iran, Lebenon, and Syria? Because of 9/11 we went to war against terrorists and those who support terrorism. Whether you agree with the war or not is one thing. However, it is done and it was justified.

Still would be interesting to see what Gore would had done had he been in office. Ironically enough, the answer, more often than not, is either exactly what Bush did or something else without ever specifying what that something else was.

Although it does amuse me that one party won't let you kill them at birth (right to life) but will let you kill later on (death penalty),

And what, exactly, is wrong with killing people who have willfully commited premeditated murder?

while the other party will let you kill them at birth (pro-choice) but not afterwards (death penalty).

Here you are referring to partial birth abortion. If the doctor doesn't perform the abortion prior to the head coming out the baby would be born alive and perfectly fine. Of course, this is a subject for a different time.

[piece-it pete]

Dubya's number one priority when elected was to find a way to get Saddam. It was on the agenda at his first National Security Council meeting. Now if only he could find a way to get the American public behind him, in his quest to clear his daddy's mess. Do I think he's behind 9/11? No, it took too much planning for someone of his modest intellectual abilities. Do I think the government had info about the attacks and allowed them to happen anyway, ala Pearl Harbor, possibly. Pre-9/11 America wouldn't have stood for Dubya's agenda. Now he gets them all in his corner, hmmm. I wouldn't put it past the government to sacrifice American lives to get their agenda rolling. That may seem like f%^&ed up thinking to you, but it's no more f%^&ed up thinking than beleiveing that Hussein was a world danger. When I heard comparisons to Hitler..hahahahahaha. I held a guitar once, but I'm not Bruce Springsteen.

Sadly, you are probably correct about the monkey getting re-elected. The country's been going to he!! since Reaganomics. 24 years later I'm still waiting for the trickle-down. Really, I just envy Republicans, I just wish I could afford to vote for one. All the wars, the gun nuts and the right-for-lifers, I could live with, if I had the money. Although it does amuse me that one party won't let you kill them at birth (right to life) but will let you kill later on (death penalty), while the other party will let you kill them at birth (pro-choice) but not afterwards (death penalty). Don't you just think that one party would be for killing and the other party against it, period? That would be too simple. ;)

I'm somewhat surprised that many people consider Iraq to be a Bush thing, simply because we (meaning the community of nations under the rule of law - not neccessarily the UN) had to remove the threat to Saudi Arabia in order to address one of the largest root causes of Al Quida terrorism. I remember, in my revisionist memory, that the Dean/Kusinich crowd, with media support, was SCREAMING about addressing root causes as we prepared to invade Afganistan. Remember the Arab "street"?

I am cynical enough to believe it is being used by Bushs' enemies even though they know we had to deal with Saddam, harming our cause by spreading doubt.

This is much more pausible than a sitting President blowing down the WTC. Evidence: the overwhelming vote supporting the invasion of Iraq.


It says a lot about the intellectual abilities of the current Dem leadership if they can't beat a monkey. (I have to admit, I like saying that:).


To say that we (the US) as a whole are not more weathy now than in 1980 is to deny the evidence of our senses. Reaganomics worked - Clinton didn't succeed in rolling it back - and now it's Clinton prosperity. Go figure.


I'm in agreement with Bryan about the death penalty and abortion being a topic for another post, but since you brought it up :), what is more illogical: saving babies & executing murderers; or executing babies & saving murderers?

Pete