2000. How do you like that number? It's pretty high, huh? Some people are saying it's not a very significant number, that 2000 is only significant to people with agendas and ulterior motives. Well, then I guess I have an agenda and ulterior motives because I find 2000 United States Troops killed in Iraq to be very significant. Call me a crazy liberal if you will, I know it seems a bit odd to some to put such a high value on human life. 2000.
"I hope all you people who voted for Bush and voted for 'staying the course' are happy because 2000 American lives are all you have to show for it."
So you voted for Bush in 2004. You voted for Christianity, you thought. You voted pro-life, you thought. You voted for safety, you thought. I hate to be the one to break it to you but, try as Bush might, there is still separation of Church and State in most places, you still can't pray in school and no one is forcing me into those homes of brainwashing you call church. That cause is void, you lost. Abortion is still legal, you people still have to sin yourselves by doing work on Sundays protesting places like Planned Parenthood which gives low income women more annual exams than abortions. Most of you protesters are lucky; you don't have to fight through a bunch of moral citizens screaming obscenities at you when you go to get your vaginas checked because you have health care. Good job on that by the way, because only rich people deserve to be healthy anyway. You lose again. And onto safety, yeah there's been no terrorist attacks since 9/11 (which was under Bush's watch, I may add) but is our "great" leader the cause of that? To take a bit from The Simpsons, I have a rock here that keeps tigers away, see no tigers, it must be the rock, right? Do you catch my drift? There is no proof that anything Bush has done has prevented a terrorist attack. Again your reasons for voting for him and null and void.
"Now I know my man Clinton was investigated, he got a blow job and lied about it. Was anyone's life endangered?"
I am so sick of people claiming that Republicans are our moral voice in this country. As we speak, many people high up in the Bush Administration are under investigation for leaking the name of a CIA agent. Now I know my man Clinton was investigated, he got a blow job and lied about it. Was anyone's life endangered? No, and leaking a CIA agents name put her and her families lives in danger. Which one is more immoral?
So back to my main point, 2000 people are dead for no good reason. And you're right, 2000 is no more significant as 1 or 145. They are all human lives that have been lost for a stupid cause. Bush hasn't lost his children, no one he personally knows has lost a child because rich people don't have to fight our wars. Nope, it's the lower income people of America that have to fight for the rich white men when most of them don't believe in the cause but they do it anyway. They do it because they have to. They made a vow to protect this country and go where the Commander in Chief sends them (even when it's not to a place that will help protect our country). They are dying for no reason. Bush has blood on his hands and it makes me sick. Right now I am sick of everyone who voted for him and I think you people have blood on your hands as well.
And just so you know, I am not going to finish this essay before I share that at least 26,000 Iraqi citizens have been killed and American lives matter no more or less than these people's lives. I am sure that it is more like 30,000 that have been killed and that is not counting Iraqi Military or Police. But Americans don't care about that number, right? If 2000 isn't significant then why should 30,000 be significant? Human lives don't seem to count for much anymore--at least not here--but thank the Christian God that we brought morality back to the White House when Bush was elected. Yeah, great.