I only have it in cans.
Posted on 12/30/2004 5:07:39 AM PST by .cnI redruM
President Bush finally roused himself yesterday from his vacation in Crawford, Tex., to telephone his sympathy to the leaders of India, Sri Lanka, Thailand and Indonesia, and to speak publicly about the devastation of Sunday's tsunamis in Asia. He also hurried to put as much distance as possible between himself and America's initial measly aid offer of $15 million, and he took issue with an earlier statement by the United Nations' emergency relief coordinator, Jan Egeland, who had called the overall aid efforts by rich Western nations "stingy." "The person who made that statement was very misguided and ill informed," the president said.
We beg to differ. Mr. Egeland was right on target. We hope Secretary of State Colin Powell was privately embarrassed when, two days into a catastrophic disaster that hit 12 of the world's poorer countries and will cost billions of dollars to meliorate, he held a press conference to say that America, the world's richest nation, would contribute $15 million. That's less than half of what Republicans plan to spend on the Bush inaugural festivities.
The American aid figure for the current disaster is now $35 million, and we applaud Mr. Bush's turnaround. But $35 million remains a miserly drop in the bucket, and is in keeping with the pitiful amount of the United States budget that we allocate for nonmilitary foreign aid. According to a poll, most Americans believe the United States spends 24 percent of its budget on aid to poor countries; it actually spends well under a quarter of 1 percent.
______________________Snip______________________________
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
NYT can go to H___. They don't report stories. All they can do is gossip about people to make up stories while on the other hand......George W. Bush is a man of action and he does it in his own time. NYT...great for wrapping up rotten fish or anything else that stinks.
Willie, I see once again you have nothing positive to add to the discussion, so you're trying to divert the topic to one of your many agendas.
I am positive; you can go off and play all the word games you want, just find somebody else to play (i.e., IRRITATE) with.
In reality, that's a pile of garbage.
It completely ignores (deliberately) the actual contributions, especially from our country in particular.
There was zero reason for any comments about stinginess to be made. Aid has always been given to victims of disasters. Aid from countries all over the world, with the U.S. leading the way far far out front of all the others.
Contributions of real money plus actual items for healthcare, sanitation, clearing and rebuilding.
I skipped the NYT articles and editorials after the first one...They are so predictable and so wrong in their assessments.
BTW, not only was there zero reason for comments about stinginess (that doesn't exist) to be made, but it is offensive beyond description that a member of the corrupt and venal UN would dare to make such a statement.
I loved watching him try to backtrack and deny that he said what he said...
Congratulations.
I used your links on another thread..Thanks!
I only have it in cans.
Glad I could help!
False.
Coordination of Relief Assistance for Victims of the Recent Tsunamis
On-The-Record Briefing December 29, 2004
Excerpt:
ADMINISTRATOR NATSIOS: Let me just finish this before I forget what your questions were.
The second is in terms of our level of contribution. There's been a little controversy over it. We actually checked the figures. These are OECD figures, which is the accepted international standard. It's a standard apples-to-apple contribution for the world. We gave $2.4 billion last year, 40 percent of total contributions by all countries. We are, by far, the largest donor -- no one even comes close to us -- and have been for a long time.
The President actually has increased assistance in food aid and disaster relief while I've been Administrator in his first term, so we actually have more resources available than we ever have before. So we have been generous for a long time. We're the leaders. We have been. We will continue to be, as the President said today.
~snip~
They are probably following in the footsteps of John "why-would-I-donate-to-charity" Fn Kerry, Robert "I-hate-giving-my-money-to-the-little-people" Reich, and Al "I-like-to-spend-your-money-not-mine" Gore.
Geeez.... back in the good ol'days, it USED to be a VERY popular view on this forum.
Not Yours To Give
Not Yours To Give
NOT YOURS TO GIVE - Davy Crockett
Not Yours To Give
Not Yours to Give (From The Life of Colonel David Crockett)
Colonel David Crockett: "Not Yours To Give"
Not Yours to Give U.S. Rep. Col. Davy Crockett (Tenn): 'Not Yours To Give'
Of course, ever since the Anointed One took office and embarked on his spending spree, the postings of this classic have become MUCH less frequent.
(((sigh)))
Me either. I'm quite comfortable giving shelter and food for the homeless, nothing more.
Well, there's no denying there was a huge rogue element of the CIA doing just that. Goss is cleaning house, thank God.
(I'm not referring to the report you cited specifically as I didn't click and examine it, just your comment italicized above)
Coordination of Relief Assistance for Victims of the Recent Tsunamis
On-The-Record Briefing December 29, 2004
Excerpt:
ADMINISTRATOR NATSIOS: Let me just finish this before I forget what your questions were.
The second is in terms of our level of contribution. There's been a little controversy over it. We actually checked the figures. These are OECD figures, which is the accepted international standard. It's a standard apples-to-apple contribution for the world. We gave $2.4 billion last year, 40 percent of total contributions by all countries. We are, by far, the largest donor -- no one even comes close to us -- and have been for a long time.
The President actually has increased assistance in food aid and disaster relief while I've been Administrator in his first term, so we actually have more resources available than we ever have before. So we have been generous for a long time. We're the leaders. We have been. We will continue to be, as the President said today.
You are irritating when you try to divert any and all discussion to your agenda.
And by "the annointed one," I suppose in your own way you're making a slam at Bush.
I guess that's what people who never pick a winner do.
((((sigh)))) is right.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.