I finally got Sen Kerry's very belated response to my letter about Israel

[debbierlus]

Lebanon war....

I wrote Sen Kerry a letter expressing my outrage at the war with Israel (war, yeah, rocks on one side, mega bomb explosives on the other...I digress)...I wrote a very thoughtful and polite letter expressing the fact that Israel was breaking international law with their EXTREME excessive use of force and it did not seem to be a smart strategic strategy or a effective one. Indeed, reports are out now that Hezbollah is STRONGER then before the war with more support and weapons. They were a dying regime, and this war EMPOWERED them! And, now Lebanon is dealing with a massive humanitarian crisis, horrible psychological & physical wounds, and broken infrastructure. It has set the peace process back years (maybe decades)...

So, what does my Senator from MA write back. I get a FORM e-mail (yes, it was a letter, but it was his position letter that I am positive is sent out to all who write to him about the issue). This letter stated that he supported actions in defending itself, yet wanted to end the conflict quickly and foster a peaceful Lebanon. It was clear my letter and opinion were not considered, as the entire purpose of the letter was to question our government's support of Israel in barbaric actions.

And, it was all too eeirely similiar to the response I got several years ago, pleading with him to not vote for the Bush resolution to start with Iraq. It was a standard letter, citing talking points about his reservations but his committment to security and supporting the fight against terrorism. (I got that letter way after the fact, too). He didn't acknowledge any of the points I wrote (and, of course, now he admits he was wrong about his vote...Gee. Maybe if you had listened to the thousands of constituents who were pleading with you when it could have made a difference, it might have changed everything.)

Sorry to ramble, but I have had it. Senator Kerry, you are not my kind of Presidential contender. And, I will not support your bid in 2008.

[babylonsister]

1. Did you honestly think you'd get a personal response?

The guy has lots of work to do and many constituents. I don't think I've ever heard of any politician who writes personal answers to questions asked. I imagine there's not enough time in the day.

[debbierlus]

12. No. I expected a response to the issues that I raised.

It could have been a response to the people who opposed his supporting Israel in this war...

Two form letters is really not all that much to ask.

[Selatius]

2. Maybe that's why he didn't win in 2004

He didn't connect with the people like he should have.

[beachmom]

4. John Kerry has no problem connecting with the people

Perhaps if the poster would actually go to an event in Mass. that Kerry is present at, he/she can politely explain his/her disagreement on Israel. I think Sen. Kerry would be very gracious and understanding, and state once again why he has the views he does.

I am an avid watcher of C-SPAN, and I can tell you -- Sen. Kerry connects very well with the people. He's one of the best.

[EarthNeedsHope]

14. Well if that was true it wouldn't have been a close race against

the most unpopular man in the world.

[beachmom]

16. In the world, yes. In this country in 2004, decidedly no.

I knew a lot of people who voted for Bush, who thought he would "keep them safe". They were repeatedly lied to and scared into their vote. It also wasn't helpful that OBL showed up three days before the election.

The media pundits were also godawful. They said Kerry was "aloof" when nothing could be further from the truth.

They're beginning to learn. Check out this story in U.S. News, where EVERYONE wanted to have a beer with John Kerry:

http://www.usnews.com/usnews/news/articles/060922/22kerryiowa.htm

Around 9:30 a.m., into this milieu strolled Kerry. The Massachusetts senator was instantly surrounded by a sea of Hawkeye black and gold and Cyclone colors of cardinal and gold. Despite the mobs, Kerry looked fresh and pressed–his blue button-up and pleated khakis didn't show a wrinkle. He held a baby, he gently kissed the cheek of a disabled woman who wanted to speak about Social Security and who had written him a poem, and he showed no signs of surprise in regards to his surroundings. He looked to be in his element.

His arrival brought various reactions from the crowd. "I think he needs a beer," said Ben Mulder, a 21-year-old student from the local Kirkwood Community College.

Kourtney Johnson, 20, wearing a black "Bong Me" T-shirt, stood about 10 feet from where Kerry shook hands with fans.

"It's a weird opportunity for him to be here," she said. "But he's trying to connect with students, not just the older population."

Said Hawkeye fan Damon Lord, 29: "It would be better if he was drinking with us."

[Der Blaue Engel]

7. Sure.

Except that he did win in 2004. Oh, wait...they wouldn't lie to us. My tinfoil hat must be too tight.

[blm]

9. The DNC didn't connect the dots like they should have and strengthened

the Dem party infrastructure that had collapsed since 1997.

If they had been doing their job state by state, the Dem candidates in 2000, 2002, and 2004 could have had the votes they EARNED by election day counted instead of blocked, stolen and discarded.

[beachmom]

3. Sorry to tell you, but no one will be elected president without

being a strong supporter of Israel. I happen to agree with Sen. Kerry on this issue, but I admit that I am a minority here on DU regarding Israel.

I think you're just going to have to "agree to disagree" with the senator on this issue. In fact, I think you're going to have to do that with ALL the presidential contenders, because they all have similar views on it.

I think if you had a pressing personal problem for which you really needed the Senator's help, then you would get more attention. But it sounds like your letter was a policy beef -- I'm sure they noted your concerns on a tally sheet (I've never worked for a Senator, but I imagine they have something like that). You could also call their office, and tell them about your letter and that you're upset.

Think about ALL the issues that concern you -- I am sure the good Senator from Mass. serves you more than for most of us Democrats out in the country who aren't as well represented.

[debbierlus]

8. Why do agree with Israel? It was ineffective, thousands were killed

It destroyed much of Lebanon's infrastructure and strides they have made in economic development...

And, Israel has made the situation WORSE, not better....

So, exactly why do you agree? Do you think because you support a country you have to support all thier actions?

This isn't about supporting Israel. In fact, if you truly supported Israel, you would want them to make sound, effective national security decisions that would not make the situation WORSE. It is akin to saying you support Bush in Iraq because you support the United States. Israel's response was a disaster for BOTH sides. No winners. Only losers, and now they both have more problems to face. I did call their office, before and after I received the letter. Trite responses both times.

So, we just smile and go along. After all, we didn't have our families bombed to kingdom come. We didn't have our electricity taken away. Our airports ruined. Our children orphaned. No. What a selfish attitude...he has other good qualities....

Quite frankly, supporting that kind of human atrocity is wrong. And, I morally and ethically won't abide by politicians who won't challenge such crimes. I believe quite strongly that our leaders should be held along the highest standards.

[beachmom]

13. Well, that was Bush's failure. It is up to the president who does

the diplomacy to caution Israel against acting hastily to devastating results. Had we had someone better in the Oval Office (like, say, your senator), this whole thing could have been averted. However, to completely ignore Hezbollah's war crimes of hiding and launching rockets among the civilian populace and crossing borders to kidnap soldiers is an unfortunate oversight of yours. Had Hezbollah had all the money and equipment Israel had, there is no doubt in my mind that they would have used it ruthlessly.

A little "walk in someone else's shoes" visualization may be helpful. Israel is surrounded by enemies that have made it no secret that they seek the complete distruction of Israel. Even if Israel behaved to your liking, these extremist forces would STILL want to annihilate the Israeli people. And if it served their purposes to blow YOU up, they would do it. They are not liberals, they have no respect for human rights, and no time for anyone who does not adhere to their extremist Islamic ideology. Don't forget that Hezbollah is the militia arm of Iran.

I appreciate your empathy for the Lebanese people, but to act like Hezbollah is blameless in that horrible short war shows an unfortunate inherent bias in your opinions.

[sandnsea]

5. You don't like Deval Patrick either

So I don't quite know what to make of you.

[debbierlus]

11. What in the world is that supposed to mean?

Look, I spent a tremendous amount of time investigating our governor canidates. I was a friggin delegate. I voted for Gabrielli as a delegate because I initially liked what he had to say, and I wanted to learn more. I changed my mind about him. I had issues with all of them. I abstained from the governor's vote because after much soul searching, I could not support any of them. (although I voted in ALL other races). I have ethical issues with Patrick. I do not like the fact that he was a corporate feel good guy for unethical companies and made himself a multi-millionaire off it. I will vote for him November soley because I want democratic control in MA.

I find you comment insulting. What to make of me? I give my life to working for progressive causes and true representation of people, and I am questioned because I try to follow my own ethical code.

[sandnsea]

19. I question all "hold my nose" voters

when they're trashing some of our best Democrats and accuse anyone who has more than ten cents of being an unethical corporate whore and is willing to help flush them down the toilet despite the reality of how much worse Republicans will be. If I've misinterpreted your intent, then I would imagine you would address that instead of taking insult at a mistake.

[debbierlus]

24. Excuse me...I questioned the ethics of how he made his money

The fact that he had money is not the issue.

I spent a LOT of time researching each canidate, and my concerns about Patrick were legitimate. His work with Coke and Americquest - how he represented the companies...specific actions - THAT is what I questioned. I looked at his history and there were some things that came up that severely disturbed me.

Misinterpreted my intent? No. You judged me because I am not an enthusiastic supporter of Patrick and therefore, I am suspect. That is a REPUBLICAN way to behave...Lockstep without question.

I was a delegate. I went to the convention, and I was deeply disturbed by the reaction I got from even daring to question Patrick's history. I was under the delusion that the primaries were the time to discuss, debate, and talk philosophically about your party and the canidates. Instead, Patrick supporters were almost cultish in their support of him. And, you know what was really interesting. People didn't have much of a answer to my specific concerns, only that I was being nit-picky and expecting too much. In other words, they dismissed me without even addressing my issues. I was turning to my fellow dems for clarity and to help me make a more informed choice. Instead, I received at best, trite dimissal and at worst, open hostility.

Randi Rhodes says it best - primaries are for when you fall in love - & general elections are when you fall in line for your party. I am still not thrilled with Patrick though I will vote for him because I can't abide by a Republican governor.

Agree with me or not about Patrick. I really don't care. But, when you start questioning my intent and motives because I challenge a canidate on the merits...

I'll leave it at that...

[Mass]

6. Two different points here:

1/ You disagree with Kerry on his position. If this position is something primordial for you, you should not support him. No question about that.

2/ He did not send you a personal answer. Your expectation is irrealistic. No politician sends a personal answer to a policy letter. He/She has staffers who read the letters and answer to them. I definitively prefer than Kennedy, Kerry, and others work rather than reading the thousands of emails and letters they receive every day. Or were you expecting to be the only one to write to him on this issue?

[debbierlus]

10. I didn't expect a personal response - I expected him to address

My concerns....

All he sent me was a form letter that didn't address anything that I wrote about...

Is it so much to expect that maybe he has TWO letters...one for the people who agree with him and then, another, addressing the issues raised by the many people who don't. The two sides on this were pretty well articulated. He could have at least drafted a response to the people who opposed Israel's policy...

I don't think that is an unrealistic expectation.

[Mass]

15. Why? You want him to have two positions depending of the people?

I dont know. The staffer who answered answered giving you Kerry's position.

I can understand that you disagree with him, but I do not see why you would expect him to answer differently to those who were for this agression, those who were against him, and those who were stuck in the middle. I certainly expect my senator to tell me what he thinks and not to try to pander to me.

[debbierlus]

23. The point is that he addressed none of my concerns in the letter

I don't expect to be pandered to...I do expect that when someone takes the time to write you a letter, you at least ensure a relevant response. I am sure there were many constituents who were unhappy with the Senators position, and it would have been a simple enough task to actually address the similar issues people who opposed the policy rather then send a meaningless blanket statement that completely ignored those writing to oppose the policy.

Call me crazy...I don't think that is all that much to expect...

[geek tragedy]

17. You do know that Kerry himself never saw your letter, right?

It was probably a Legislative Correspondent--or perhaps a Legislative Assistant.

But, it's doubtful that even a high-ranking staffer even knew about your letter.

[seabeyond]

18. are you serious? you seriously expect kerry to read every letter

and respond to every person that writes him? are you really suggesting this? you are funny.

[KoKo]

20. True.....Senators & Congresscritters only respond to the $1,000 and more

donors. And even that group has to take a back seat to the ones who contribute more. Until we have Progressive PAC's none of them will listen to us.

[beachmom]

22. That's not quite right

I know a story of Sen. Ted Kennedy helping a constituent who had cancer who was without health insurance (unfairly taken away). Kennedy's office handled the problem, and her health insurance was restored. I'm not saying big donors aren't given a lot of access; they are. But to suggest that good senators (I also heard that Sen. Daschle was very good for his constituents) aren't responsive to constituents IN NEED is simply incorrect. But this poster simply had an opinion on a matter -- it was not a life or death situation and the poster does come across rather foolish to expect a personally written note by either the senator or a staffer.

[Mass]

21. By the way, did you get an answer from Kennedy?