President Bush donates $10,000 (page 4)

144001

I agree that Bush should not be lambasted for personally contributing to the relief efforts. The amount seems quite small for a man of his stature, but it's still more than most of us will give. Of bigger interest here is the $40 million that will be spent on his inauguration party, in light of the initial $15 million/$35 million promise of aid to the region made by his administration. This is especially outrageous in light of recent comments by Rumsfeld to soldiers complaining about the lack of armor, "you go to war with the army you've got." Too bad we also had to go to the polls with the choices we had.

xjw_b12

144001

Too bad we also had to go to the polls with the choices we had.

LOL. Like Do I want a Pepsi or a Coke?

Fleur

The point is...................... George W. Bush (or anyone else for that matter) is NOT obligated in any way to give one thin dime for the charity or betterment of another. It's charity and IMO it's shitty for people to judge whether the amount they have DONATED of their own earned money is enough! It's a gift! I'd hate like hell to give any of those people a gift and have them judge whether my gift to them was of appropriate size or value depending on my income level. It's a damned good thing we have people in this world with the means and the desire to donate sums of money that make a difference and IMO it's demanding and ungrateful to be sitting in judgement of the amounts.
As far as the inaugural celebrations are concerned- did you question the money spent by the Clintons on Bill's inaugural celebrations and whether he should have donated that money to whatever disasters were going on at that time? Or do you reserve this misguided contempt only for George Bush? I'm certain we could find all kinds of things that were going on in either of those years that the $$ could have been spent on instead of those days' worth of activities or the costumes Bill and Hillary wore at those events.

whoa. I have no idea why you're so hostile toward me because I have a political opinion of the leader of our country. I never attacked you, swore at you, or said that your opinion was "shitty". demanding and ungrateful? I think again, you're protesting too much in the defense of someone who is, depending on your POV, either indefensible or in NO need of defense.

And to answer your question, Xenawarrior, I don't know what Bill and Hillary spent because I was a dub back then and I was still waiting for Jehovah to fix everything. FYI I disagree with ALL these fancy political soirees; I was appalled by the amounts spent on the democratic AND republican national conventions before the election, as well as the amounts spent on advertising for the elections, etc.

I would also like to add that you have no idea how much I personally have given or have done for charity in my life. If you did know, you might not be swearing at me. But that's okay.

I should have learned by now not to touch political threads. I do not need to be sworn at, by anyone. I think that you owe me an apology, but I won't hold my breath.

essie

edited to add p.s. Preston; "G-Bo." I love it.

defective light

Wonder if the check was written on the account of : Bush & sons, Inc ?

xenawarrior

I agree that Bush should not be lambasted for personally contributing to the relief efforts. The amount seems quite small for a man of his stature, but it's still more than most of us will give. Of bigger interest here is the $40 million that will be spent on his inauguration party, in light of the initial $15 million/$35 million promise of aid to the region made by his administration. This is especially outrageous in light of recent comments by Rumsfeld to soldiers complaining about the lack of armor, "you go to war with the army you've got." Too bad we also had to go to the polls with the choices we had.

144- Hey there !! The only taxpayer money being spent on the inauguration is for the ceremony only and amounts to $1 million set aside by Congress for that purpose. The "up to 40 million" being spent on parties and balls and all the rest of it is paid for with private money NOT taxpayer's money. I don't believe we can start telling private citizens what they can do with their money and is it possible for private donors to fund our military? Why don't we tell Michael Moore to donate all of the money he receives from "Farenheit 911" to the disaster relief effort- from the date of the tsunami forward. He's made millions on that movie and it's all profit now so why not? I hear John Kerry still has money sitting in his campaign coffers. Why not put pressure on him to donate that to the disaster relief? And why not call out to cancel the Academy Awards in March and filter all of the money from that pomp and circumstance into the relief? Or maybe cancel the Super Bowl??? Just what the heck are we doing celebrating sports and spending money like that on a tradition when there are bad things happening? The price of a 30 second ad for the Super Bowl this year is $2 million. Why not cancel it and all the advertisers funnel that money into the disaster relief. Essie:

whoa. I have no idea why you're so hostile toward me

Which came first- the chicken or the egg? You walked into this thread with this:

OMG I was JUST coming here to post about this.
)(!*&%~&^$~!!!)(&!*&%!.
that's all i have to say about that.

It appears that you had just read or heard about it and couldn't wait to post about your anger about it. I guess we both have some hostility on different sides of this.

I never attacked you, swore at you, or said that your opinion was "shitty". demanding and ungrateful? I think again, you're protesting too much in the defense of someone who is, depending on your POV, either indefensible or in NO need of defense.

And I think you are protesting too much about something that is a very good thing- someone GAVE $10,000 of their own money to a worthy cause. I didn't attack you and I wasn't singling you out- I was talking about all of the people out there who are judging the depth or the speed of others' giving in this situation. I do believe it's shitty. And if you are doing that then I think it's shitty that you are but you aren't the Lone Ranger there. And I would compare "shitty" to be about as much "swearing" in this day and age as the "hells" and "damns" you use yourself.

I would also like to add that you have no idea how much I personally have given or have done for charity in my life. If you did know, you might not be swearing at me. But that's okay.

I didn't question what you give personally and I don't really know what one thing has to do with the other.

I believe that it's merely another opportunity to bash Bush. I don't see people chastising the famous people they are fond of or judging what they are giving or even asking if they are giving. Politicizing this disaster just sucks. XW

Valis

xenawarrior

ROTFLMAO !!

*Cheers*

edited to add: Cassidy even liked that one !!

MungoBaobab

Essie:
whoa. I have no idea why you're so hostile toward me
Which came first- the chicken or the egg? You walked into this thread with this:

OMG I was JUST coming here to post about this.
)(!*&%~&^$~!!!)(&!*&%!.
that's all i have to say about that.
It appears that you had just read or heard about it and couldn't wait to post about your anger about it. I guess we both have some hostility on different sides of this.

The difference is Fleur's post was the second one on topic and didn't personally attack any forum members for thinking otherwise. Fleur doesn't see the differing opinions of others as a personal attack against her. She doesn't stoop to swearing at people to make her point.

144001

XW,

"The "up to 40 million" being spent on parties and balls and all the rest of it is paid for with private money NOT taxpayer's money. I don't believe we can start telling private citizens what they can do with their money and is it possible for private donors to fund our military?"

Bush has more power than any president of my lifetime and certainly has the ability to control the spending on his own party. The $40 million cost far exceeds the cost of any prior inauguration, including the Clintons that you chose to use as a comparison in the post (Clinton's biggest, and 2nd inaug cost, was $29.6 million). While it is true that the money comes primarily from private donations, spending an unprecedented amount on a party for Bush's inauguration, in light of recent events including without limitation the revelation of the shameful lack of armor for our young men and women who have recklessly been placed in harm's way by the inauguree, as well as the unbelievable devastation and horrific loss of life in southern Asia, seems insenstitive at best.

"Why don't we tell Michael Moore to donate all of the money he receives from "Farenheit 911" to the disaster relief effort- from the date of the tsunami forward. He's made millions on that movie and it's all profit now so why not? I hear John Kerry still has money sitting in his campaign coffers. Why not put pressure on him to donate that to the disaster relief? And why not call out to cancel the Academy Awards in March and filter all of the money from that pomp and circumstance into the relief? Or maybe cancel the Super Bowl??? Just what the heck are we doing celebrating sports and spending money like that on a tradition when there are bad things happening? The price of a 30 second ad for the Super Bowl this year is $2 million. Why not cancel it and all the advertisers funnel that money into the disaster relief."

Why stop there? Why don't we rewrite the Constitution, bulldoze New York and turn it into a farm, etc. . . . Your analogies are not even close to being valid, are ridiculous, and unworthy of a response. Never did I assert that private citizens should be forced to contribute to anything. Misrepresenting my statements and then attacking what I never said or implied is a response I usually get from Jehovah's Witnesses.

President Bush donates $10,000

Share this