Without a shirt

This past week George Bush said no to increased medical funding for low income children. No doesn't even do it justice. For the fourth time in his presidency he used his power to overide the Senate effectively vetoeing a bill the majority had supported.

A few hours ago my family and I were driving through NE Calgary delivering Thanksgiving dinners to those in need. One house in particular stood out to me. As Angie and Lex walked with the box the question of safety fluttered through my mind. If the house wasn't falling down it was barely standing up and the windows might as well been saran wrap for all the good they were doing. They knocked. I tensed. A woman not much older then us opened the door and next thing I knew Angie had handed over the box and a smile broke out. As Angie began to walk back with Lex skipping along beside, a little boy with no shirt and pants much too short called out. Angie turned around as the boy, beaming, handed her home-made cards with the words, Thank you, have a wonderful thanksgiving, scrawled across, then he bounded back inside.

Why the veto, Mr. Bush? Its not like they were asking you to anty up. Smokers would take the hit and in the end 4 million more children would be cared for. One could even argue that the same people being taxed would be the same people being helped as often smokers are the ones who can't afford the necessary insurance for their kids, the same insurance that their habit has made necessary. Either way, kids should never have to pay the price for the decisions of self involved adults, whether its their smoking parents or vetoeing president. To his credit, Bush did wish to help, but only to the tune of 5 billion dollars, a miniscule amount compared to the cost of the Irag war for instance. Note: Current estimates put it at 1.2 Trillion Dollars. The focus of the government ought to be to help poor children and to focus on poor children, said Bush. I agree. I just don't think he does, or else he would have agreed to the 35 billion his own Senate had approved.

Our deliveries continued with much of the same yet no house rivaled the emotion we felt by the shirtless boy bearing homemade cards. The last house I delivered to was 30 minutes away so I dropped Angie and the kids off, the kids had reached the crazy I'm bored stage, and headed off. As I drove sounds from Angie's pink ipod made the time pass quickly. I finally arrived and after a few minutes of banging unsuccessfuly I phoned eager to inform them that their dinner had arrived. I was never able to reach them, even though I had called before I left and they assured me they'd be there, and so I was forced to leave having wasted over an hour of MY time. The dinner sits in my freezer waiting to be re-gifted.

I feel I have been fair in my analysis of Bush and his veto. I have refrained from harsh criticism and cynical rants, it is Thanksgiving after all. That being said, I do believe God's appointed leader, Bush's words not mine, must be held accountable for misplaced priorities. Any President who places war above caring for his nation's most vulnerable is a man in danger of maligning the same God he seeks to represent. The critiscm has been swift as the Democrats have deemed him heartless while his own Republican party has openly expressed their concern that he may have crippled them heading into the next election.

I'll be honest. As I drove away from the last house I ranted about how "ungrateful and irresponsible" the people were. But caring for the needy requires sacrifice. It means in order for them to win a lot, I must be willing to lose a little. An extra 30 Billion is a little, an hour and 30 minutes more is a little. A healthy child feeling cared for is a lot. Yes, even if he is still without a shirt.

John