[Peace-discuss] Re:reply to Kerry fundraising letter

[parenti susan rose]

Let me add my  admiration and thankfulness for what you write, Ricky.
It's a clarifying letter. We need to influence the discourse; your letter
does that. Kucinich is doing that. We all need to become as
articulate as you two are.

When people say, "Get Bush out of the White House!!", I reply: "Bush is a
plural--there are lots of Bushies around, hiding under other names. Don't
say 'Bush IS', say, 'Bush ARE'. And it's not the people only, it's the
ideas we want out. What don't we want, what do we want. Speak!!"

Thanks again.



On Mon, 24 May 2004, Chuck Minne wrote:

> What a fabulous, fabulous letter! Can you send it to various papers and g=
et it run as an opinion piece?
>
> Ricky Baldwin <baldwinricky at yahoo.com> wrote:[I recently received an appe=
al for funds from John
> Kerry For President Inc., as I suppose did many of
> you. At Sunday's meeting we discussed communicating
> our positions to the Kerry campaign, so I thought I'd
> share my response, below. I'd be interested in any
> thoughts anyone has. - Ricky]
>
> Dear John Kerry:
>
> I received your fundraising letter the other day,
> saying you=92d =93fight for every vote,=94 and asking for
> money. So I=92m writing to let you know what it would
> take for you to win my money and my vote.
>
> Your letter is pretty vague about why I should vote
> for you -- as is your campaign. It=92s mostly about
> voting against George W. Bush, and maybe you think
> that=92s enough. But some of us expect better. I for
> one want to vote against what Bush represents -- not
> just against the man -- and I=92m not sure that you=92re
> giving me that chance.
>
> First, your letter cites Bush=92s =93inept, reckless
> foreign policy.=94 But you=92ve agreed with him on every
> major policy decision along the way. You voted for
> the illegal and immoral war in Iraq. You said, =93I
> believe we must always have a preemptive right=94 to
> first strike, which is illegal under the UN Charter.
> You have agreed with the vicious and illegal Israeli
> policies toward occupied Palestinian lands, blaming
> the Palestinians for Israel=91s refusal to abide by UN
> Resolutions calling for Israeli withdrawal. You were
> right behind Bush in condemning the US abuse of Iraqi
> POWs -- and rightly so -- but you also joined Bush in
> declaring the problem to be of limited scope, limited
> to a few =93bad apples=94, and not the pattern of abuse
> stretching back to Vietnam that the evidence shows
> (and you once seemed to know). I'd like to see a
> reversal of these positions.
>
> You also voted for the =93USA PATRIOT Act=94, the =93Visa
> Entry Reform Act=94 and other draconian legislation,
> much of which was on the Republican wish list for
> years. You seem to agree with the President that the
> only way to protect our lives is to trash the
> Constitution, the same document you would have to
> swear to defend if you=92re elected, just the opposite of
> what I look for in a candidate.
>
> True, as you say, millions live in fear of losing
> jobs, healthcare, pensions, etc. But so far you
> haven=92t shown that you would fix any of that. These
> are not academic issues to many of us who have not had
> the benefit of your personal wealth. My family has
> experienced unemployment, loss of healthcare and other
> benefits, underfunded education, children raised in
> poverty and abortions out of desperation. My mother,
> who recently suffered a major heart attack as well as
> gall bladder surgery, may be about to lose her
> healthcare. These are issues I personally, along with
> millions of other Americans, need to see addressed in
> reality not just rhetoric. You say you want to
> replace =93doubt with hope,=94 =93fear with security,=94 and
> =93broken promises with a real plan.=94 But mostly what I
> see coming out of your campaign so far are doubt, fear
> and not much of a plan.
>
> On jobs, you called the idea of pulling out of NAFTA
> and the WTO =93disastrous,=94 even though these kind of
> so-called =93free trade=94 agreements are in fact draining
> off US jobs at a =93disastrous=94 rate, not to mention the
> devastating effect on neighboring economies. You
> haven=92t promised to stand behind unions when their
> employers lock them out or permanently replace
> strikers, to my knowledge. You haven=92t come out in
> favor of penalties or other consequences for
> corporations that =93cut and run=94 from communities that
> have subsidized them for years, leaving unemployment,
> poverty and despair in their wake. (They could pay
> the money back, for example.)
>
> On healthcare, you haven=92t spoken in favor of a
> single-payer plan, of the kind that eliminated the
> problem of the uninsured in Canada, or national health
> as they have in England. My wife is from England,
> and, sure, they complain about the national health,
> but when they learn how America=92s system works (or
> doesn=92t work) they can=92t believe their ears. To them,
> no civilized country would tolerate the US healthcare
> system. In Canada, too, their healthcare system is
> the single favorite government program of all time,
> and it works. That=92s why so many Americans now are
> crossing in Canada to buy their drugs. As far as I
> know you haven=92t spoken out in favor of =93free trade=93
> in pharmaceuticals, however.
>
> And I=92m not clear at all on what you plan to do to
> save pensions, or Social Security, from the common
> theft of bosses and government budget policies. I
> know you voted against the Republican =93lockbox=94 bill,
> but I haven=92t seen your =93real plan=94 to protect either
> of these.
>
> I=92m very glad that you oppose school vouchers and
> support abortion rights, which does distinguish you
> from the President. But you seem vague on these
> points, too, at least to me. The basic problem with
> education funding now is that most public schools are
> funded by property taxes, so the poorest kids get the
> poorest education. The current problems with abortion
> rights, too, are mostly economic. Federal funds pay
> for many medical procedures, but not abortion or
> proper reproductive counseling. On the other hand,
> many women feel driven to have abortions because of
> the prohibitive costs of day care, or because they are
> forced to work by Clinton-era welfare cuts. I haven=92t
> heard you offer to help with these problems.
>
> Your letter asks for my help in waging =93a campaign in
> which we stand up for what we believe in=94 -- but what
> do you stand for? You mention =93our cause,=94 but you
> don=92t seem to have one -- except getting elected. If
> I=92m wrong, I apologize, but your campaign seemed to
> start off center-right, and since you had sewed up the
> nomination you have jogged further right. We don=92t
> need another Republican in the White House, Mr. Kerry;
> that=92s supposedly why we have the Democrats. You need
> to offer us a genuine alternative if you want to
> inspire us to turn out and vote for you, much less
> work on your campaign or give you money.
>
> Maybe you will win despite the problems I point out,
> and nobody would be happier than I would be to see
> George W. Bush=92s policies repudiated. I=92m just not
> clear that voting for you, or sending you money,
> represents that kind of repudiation.
>
> Thank you for your time. I look forward to your
> reply.
>
> Sincerely,
> Ricky Baldwin
>
>
>
>
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
> http://messenger.yahoo.com/
>
> _______________________________________________
> Peace-discuss mailing list
> Peace-discuss at lists.cu.groogroo.com
> http://lists.cu.groogroo.com/cgi-bin/listinfo/peace-discuss
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Friends.  Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger