I have gotten a few emails from Republican friends encouraging me to get out and vote for Bush, etc., bla bla bla. I write back and politely explain why I'm voting for Kerry. Well this morning I got a different one that was in the other direction. Its pretty good so I thought I'd share it. I've removed the sender's name to protect the innocent of course:
Dear Friends,
I'd been planning to write a letter to friends and family about this
election for some time. I know politics is a dicey subject, and I would
never pretend to have all the answers, but as a Grandfather of three young
boys and two
Young girls I am nervous about the direction of our beloved country.
Below is a letter from Doug McGrath a fellow Republican (from Crawford,
Texas) has said
it better than I would have ever said it.
My best to all,
*****
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
A letter to my Republican friends and family,
I have never before asked anyone to consider changing his vote in an
election. As a WASP, I was taught early that the paramount duty of
friendship is to be supportive; in fact, the general rule for all things
WASP is to keep things pleasant. And nothing interferes more with a person's
sense of the pleasant than an opposing political view.
But Jane and I have our little son to think of now, and somehow the hope in
his eyes obligates me to step forward and try through this letter to
influence you to carefully consider your vote this year. (I haven't made
enough money to buy influence; I have to go the cheap route and use email.)
This election is solely, almost poignantly, about security -- ours and the
world's. That's what President Bush wants it to be about and I think it's
right that it be so. He believes that the security crisis that began with
9/11 brought us new enemies and that the war against them must be waged here and abroad "for as long as it takes." So the pertinent question must be: is President Bush the right person to lead us in that complex and difficult
crusade? Does he have the smarts, the analytical gifts, and the ability to
unite and rally the nation that marked the war leadership of other great
statesmen like Lincoln, FDR and Churchill?
On the terrible day of 9/11, when the President was told that the nation was
under attack, he did not get up from his chair amongst the children for 7
minutes. There may be good reasons for this, but as a Republican, would you
think it was okay if Jimmy Carter had sat there like that? Would you tell
your friends that he was merely trying not to panic people?
The second thing. After President Bush did get up, he did not fly back to
the scene of the crisis but away from it. What would it mean to you if Bill
Clinton had flown west when the east coast had been attacked? Compare the
President's responses to another Republican, Mayor Giuliani, whose personal
bravery was an inspirational example of heroism. President Bush's defenders
say that the secret service wouldn't let him fly to D.C. Are they in control
of the Commander in Chief? If Hilary Clinton had been president and flown
away as he did, would you find that the action of a fearless leader?
If these were the only mistakes Bush made, they could be excused as early
stumbles in a day of horror, heartbreak and confusion. But they were not a
break in a pattern of otherwise rational and intelligent action; they were
the pattern.
So the President launches the war in Afghanistan. And bin Laden escapes. As
we all now know, the job was farmed out to Afghan mercenaries. Has anyone
from the administration explained why this decision was made, especially
since we have the world's greatest army? Surely, at that time, no army had a
greater incentive to find him than ours. If George McGovern had made that
decision, would you still approve it?
The administration has spent untold amounts of words and time trying to
persuade the public, through information that has largely been discredited,
that Al Quaeda has links to Iraq. Months were spent making the case against
Hussein, the man who didn't attack us, while bin Laden, who did, went free.
In fact, to start the war in Iraq resources, funding and that ineffable
thing called momentum were all diverted away from bin Laden's capture to
invade a country that had not attacked us. If Teddy Kennedy had made that
decision, would you think he was a strong and wise leader?
And then there was, and is, the war in Iraq. I guess the test for any war is
twofold: would you be willing to die for that cause, and, would you be
willing to have your children die for it? One can only answer that question
when one knows the threat. And the difference between "There are weapons of mass distraction" versus "they had the capability someday to make weapons of mass destruction which might used against us some time" is obvious to any of us, including the White House. They knew the second statement would not persuade anyone, so they made the first.
If you believed a country had weapons of mass destruction and was preparing
to use them against us, would you not fight that enemy with the help of as
much of the civilized world as you could get? (Surely, the coalition of the
first Gulf war will be remembered as the crowning achievement of his
father's administration and a model for the use of our forces.) If you could
not persuade other countries to join you, and you had to go in largely on
your own, wouldn't you still send the most overwhelming force you could
assemble? Wouldn't you have to if you feared the use of weapons of mass
destruction? If you didn't send a sufficient force, what does that say about
either your ability to plan properly or your sincerity about the threat? If
Barney Frank went in with many fewer troops than his top generals thought
correct, would you think he deserved four more years as commander in chief?
Public relations are important in any war, but they must be coupled with a
sense of reality. When the President declared that major combat operations
were over, a little over a hundred servicemen and women had died. As you
know, it is now ten times that amount. He has never once admitted his
mistake, nor has he, in this election year, adjusted his policy to achieve a
secure Iraq. He recently told Bill O'Reilly he'd say the same thing again.
What does that tell us about him? That he's steadfast or that he's deluded?
Many of you are successful business people, leaders. Would you hire an
employee who can't admit a mistake? Would you hire someone to work for you
who didn't speak well? I know there have been many jokes about how ineptly
Bush speaks but it matters that he can't speak. It's a reflection of how his
brain works. Why would we want someone in charge of our safety who can
neither communicate nor recognize a mistake? An essential quality of
leadership is the ability to adjust to changing realities.
There is no question that mistake after mistake has been made in Iraq; and,
in fairness, error is as inherent in running a war as it is in everything
else. The issue is this: is the administration learning from their mistakes
and improving the conduct of the war? Think back 6 months ago, even a year.
Do things seem better in Iraq or worse? Or much worse?
The right to vote is a gift, handed down by generations of patriots. In our
profane times, it is one of the last sacred things. But it is of little
value if cast inside the straitjacket of party loyalty. One of the great
affirmations of the power of American democracy came during the Vietnam War when Lyndon Johnson's own party turned against the war and forced him from power. No knives drawn yet he was beheaded-- because people had the courage of their convictions to value the nation's interest above the party's. In hearing Johnson say over and over that we were winning the war when
everything on TV showed the opposite, they saw a man who was either
dishonest or unable to admit his mistake. Are we seeing anything different
now?
Many of my Republican friends ducked the issue of Bush's failure as
president by saying, "I'm not enthusiastic about either candidate" or "I
could never support
John Kerry." Apart from party loyalty, why is that? I
would hardly argue that Kerry is perfect (that goose shooting act was
beneath parody) but there's no question that he is a man of honor. Leave
aside the Madison Avenue spin and the requisite partisan vitriol and just
consider what we know about him. He put his life on the line for his country
in Vietnam. He went, he served, he saved lives and he bled. I don't care how
good a lawyer he is: he couldn't talk his way into three purple hearts.
He has devoted his life to public service and while some of his policies may
be too liberal for you, I think we all know he wouldn't have gotten us into
this tragic war. Plus, he married a billionaire. Surely as Republicans, you
can admire that!
We saw in the debates that he is a composed, authoritative and intelligent
man. If you fear that a vote for him will endanger the 2nd amendment or the
state of the inheritance tax or your capital gains obligations remember that
he will be working with a highly partisan Congress; they'll keep an eye on
him for you. He won't be able to do much that doesn't appeal to both
parties.
But to reelect Bush is to reward failure. A vote for him says that
incompetence and the loss of over a thousand American lives in the worst run
war of the last hundred years is an acceptable standard. Also, if he behaved
as he has in his first term when he knew he had to stand for reelection, how
will he behave with no such checks?
Finally, I ask you to look to his predecessors in the GOP and match his
performance against theirs. Would Eisenhower have waged a war like this?
Reagan? Impossible to imagine.
There is some good news: I am done. It will be unpersuasive to end by
appealing to you based on what this election means for our stature abroad or
how it might affect the soundness of our finances. Those are abstractions
and we're Americans-cheap emotion is usually what does the trick. So let me,
with respect, make this suggestion. As you consider your vote, think of how
consequential it will be, not for the country or the world, not even for
yourself, but instead for someone you love. Someone you might value as
dearly as Jane and I do each other and our little boy. And then vote for the
man who has the wisdom to shape the world for that person.
________
Wow! I think he has hit the nail on the head.
Space Invaders Champion!
Cosmic Defender Champion!
Linear Mode