Bush is Compassionate? (Funny)


PDA






7.62FullMetalJacket
January 30, 2004, 11:52 PM
Bush cost me my job, my kids and my houses

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.

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

If you enjoyed reading about "Bush is Compassionate? (Funny)" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Lone_Gunman
January 31, 2004, 12:00 AM
Catching saddam was good.

Trashing the Constitution was bad.

Which is more important?

Geech
January 31, 2004, 02:05 AM
Catching saddam was good.

Trashing the Constitution was bad.

Which is more important?

Which wouldn't have been done by a Democratic president?

Lone_Gunman
February 1, 2004, 12:24 AM
Probably not, Geech, as the House and Senate are controlled by Republicans, and legislation may have stalemated if there had actually been a balance of power.

c_yeager
February 1, 2004, 02:20 AM
Probably not, Geech, as the House and Senate are controlled by Republicans, and legislation may have stalemated if there had actually been a balance of power.

So in other words a democrat president would have done the exact same thing but, it wouldnt have gone through because of the republican controlled congress. So we should all vote against Bush because the repubs control congress?

Lone_Gunman
February 1, 2004, 07:34 AM
Yes, thats what i think.

Medicare Reform and Campaign Finance Reform would not have passed if one party had not controlled both the legislative and judicial branches.

TallPine
February 1, 2004, 01:18 PM
Okay, but it was still funny. :D

Do we have to argue over the jokes, too? :rolleyes:

El Tejon
February 1, 2004, 01:25 PM
Tall, yeah, we do. So there!:D :D :D

Shooter 2.5
February 1, 2004, 05:33 PM
The person who created that is from Free Republic.

If you enjoyed reading about "Bush is Compassionate? (Funny)" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!