NationStates Jolt Archive

Yeah, fuck the poor.
http://www.reviewjournal.com/lvrj_home/2006/Dec-18-Mon-2006/news/11460940.html

Well Bush promises money, but the legislature has to deliver.

I guess the Democrats aren't interested in helping out.

Bono said he also was seeking to close a "commitment gap" between what President Bush has requested for anti-poverty efforts and what Congress has agreed to spend in the past.

After meetings with incoming Senate Majority Leader Reid, House Speaker-to-be Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., and Democrats on the House Appropriations Committee, Bono said he came away empty-handed.

"I'm alarmed we could not get a commitment from the Democratic leadership to prevent the loss of $1 billion in the continuing resolution," Bono said Thursday in a statement.

"I don't know who to blame. Democrats are blaming Republicans. Republicans are blaming Democrats. But the million people who were expecting (mosquito) bed nets don't know who to blame. They just know that a promise made by the United States to keep their families safe is in danger of being broken next year."

Don't look now - the Democrats are in charge of the purse strings.

What part of "The Democrats don't have control of Congress yet" don't you understand?

What part of "The Democrats don't have control of Congress yet" don't you understand?

What part of The Democrats can promise the money to Bono because in effect, they will, do you not understand?

What part of "The Democrats don't have control of Congress yet" don't you understand?
Whatever part of that means he is wrong.

Or, maybe there are certain qualifiers attached to the budget, which your source convienently neglected to mention the name of so people could find out about it for themselves.

Don't look now - the Democrats are in charge of the purse strings.
Not yet they aren't. But it's good to see what we'll get a steady dose of in the coming year. :rolleyes:

Or, maybe there are certain qualifiers attached to the budget, which your source convienently neglected to mention the name of so people could find out about it for themselves.

Hey, they also promised to eliminate riders and pork...

did you even read the rest of the article?

Bono, the U2 frontman and anti-poverty activist, was on Capitol Hill to seek assurances that $1 billion in planned U.S. spending to fight AIDS and malaria in Africa would not be lost if Congress freezes agency budgets in the coming year.

note the 'if'

it's rather important, because if it doesn't happen, there won't be an issue to begin with

and

A day later, Bono reconsidered his tough comments and took a softer tone in a follow-up.

Bono said Friday that Reid "acknowledged a difficult situation" with the congressional budget "but he sincerely pledged his best efforts to improve the situation."

forgot to include that in your little quote, did you?

didn't think any of us would actually follow the link?


I hope you also noted that they never gave him an outright 'no'. they didn't even give him a 'no' at all.

Ried doesn't know what the budget will look like, because he can't speak for all of the incoming congressmen yet.

I hope you also noted that they never gave him an outright 'no'. they didn't even give him a 'no' at all.

Ried doesn't know what the budget will look like, because he can't speak for all of the incoming congressmen yet.

In Washington, if there isn't a yes, it's a No.

If he can't speak for them, I guess Harry isn't the leader, right? Or Pelosi?

Didn't we hear promises of helping the poor, rather than spending on war?

Lies. And yes, each time they get caught in a lie, it will be posted.

Don't you love how people only read what they want to hear?

Don't you love how people only read what they want to hear?

Don't you love how people love to believe promises that will not be kept?

Don't you love how people love to believe promises that will not be kept?

Gay Marriage Ban Amendment comes to mind. . .:rolleyes:

lol I love how this thread is about a continuing resolution. Quick question eve do you know what that is and if you do could you please elaborate on it for us.

If he can't speak for them, I guess Harry isn't the leader, right? Or Pelosi?

there is a difference between 'leading' someone and 'putting words into their mouths'

there are many people in this nation who would rather see lowering taxes on the lower class and taking less of a role in the international arena. yes, even if it does mean we stop sending billion dollar checks to other nations. and some of those people are democrats.


I like how you suddenly care about 'catching people in lies'.

bullshit, you don't care about the truth.

this is as petty as putting thumbtacks on the teacher's chair after you fail a test.

your side got caught pants-down in the cookie jar, and you just want to smear mud, however little of it you can get your hands on, on the rest of us.

grow up

lol I love how this thread is about a continuing resolution. Quick question eve do you know what that is and if you do could you please elaborate on it for us.

Yes I know what it is.
Why didn't Reid promise something for next year? He and the other Democrats are surely in charge then, right?

It's not like Bush would veto it - he already promised to help.

Looks like Democrats aren't willing to commit to help after they've gotten elected. They can sit back now and do nothing.

It's not like Bush would veto it - he already promised to help.

I'm sure. Yet another promise that wont be kept.

Yes I know what it is.
Why didn't Reid promise something for next year? He and the other Democrats are surely in charge then, right?

It's not like Bush would veto it - he already promised to help.

Looks like Democrats aren't willing to commit to help after they've gotten elected. They can sit back now and do nothing.

See this is the funny thing. The Repubs who lost control of congress are basically passing all the fiscal responsibility to the Democrats now instead of dealing with it before this congress ends. This is why I'm laughing at the fact that this is about a continuing resolution which is a resolution which basically rolls whatever funding programs have over to the next year because Congress can't pass a specific budget resolution dealing with programs. Why would that gridlock occur well because you've got conflict in congress and now the repubs are going to pass this conflict and slowness of the budget process as the Dems not doing anything. Well I've got news for you eve its not just the Dems who aren't the ones willing to do stuff budget wise. The repubs are just as guilty.

Looks like Democrats aren't willing to commit to help after they've gotten elected. They can sit back now and do nothing.

I get it...


If a rockstar comes in asking for a billion dollars for his pet charity, and he doesn't get an immediate 'yes', then none of the new senators deserve their positions, right?


where the hell have your standards been for the past six years?

Hey, they also promised to eliminate riders and pork...

Actually, they decided to pass a continuing resolution to keep the government funded and running, since the Republican congress couldn't get its shit together and pass the necessary spending bills. Part of that involves there being no earmarks for the coming year.

0 for 2 by my count, on this thread at least.

Actually, they decided to pass a continuing resolution to keep the government funded and running, since the Republican congress couldn't get its shit together and pass the necessary spending bills. Part of that involves there being no earmarks for the coming year.

0 for 2 by my count, on this thread at least.

Don't worry, he'll be 0 for 5 before long.

Actually, they decided to pass a continuing resolution to keep the government funded and running, since the Republican congress couldn't get its shit together and pass the necessary spending bills. Part of that involves there being no earmarks for the coming year.

0 for 2 by my count, on this thread at least.

You'd think he'd realize this since the whole thing is about a continuing resolution. That doesn't make the Dems bad for not doing anything yet, it makes the Repubs look bad because they couldn't get these budget resolutions passed when they had congress.

What I find annoying about this thread is that NONE of this has come to pass. Until the 110th Congress is sworn in and working, Dems do not set the agenda.

I would trust Harry Reid a lot quicker than the departing Dr. Frist, who is such a good Dr. he can analyze a medical case, diagnose and make a statement about a persistent vegetative state all via the miracle of video tape.

People are bellyaching even BEFORE the Dems take control. Well, at least some things are predictable.

The last person I expected to engage in this nonsense is Eve Online, whom I thought had a better head on his/her shoulders than this thread indicates.

Good for both of them. No aid money, American money needs to stay in America. If we "must" take from the semi rich to rich people to give to the poor atleast give it to poor AMERICANS. Though I would much prefer much fewer aid programs in America. Knowing that American money goes to foreign countries makes me sick.

If Bono wanted money for charity, why doesn't he just not buy a new pair of glasses this month or have his hat fly by coach?
The money he'd save would prob match anything the US govt would give him.

How'd Sonny Bono manage to speak from beyond the grave, anyway? Ouija board? Whoopi Goldberg? The Amazing Kreskin?

What part of "The Democrats don't have control of Congress yet" don't you understand?

As a conservative he doesn't understand any of the words in betwenn "a" and "zyzzyva" when formed into coherent sentences that describe reality.

Good for both of them. No aid money, American money needs to stay in America. If we "must" take from the semi rich to rich people to give to the poor atleast give it to poor AMERICANS. Though I would much prefer much fewer aid programs in America. Knowing that American money goes to foreign countries makes me sick.

Well then, this ought to make you feel better.

Most of it is a money laundering scam to promote the growing divide between the rich and the poor in this country.

Tax money is sent to poor countries on the condition that it only be spent on US products, which are sold at usurous rates by people who know that money has just been pumped into the local economy that must be spent at their stores. i.e. If you had a million dollars that could only be spent at Bob's House of Chewing Gum and Forced Sodomy wouldn't you be likely to buy that million dollar stick of gum? If you're having trouble making up your mind, being forced to submit to sodomy costs 1,000,001 dollars.

So would the people of the Marianas Islands and other such places.

Well then, this ought to make you feel better.

Most of it is a money laundering scam to promote the growing divide between the rich and the poor in this country.

Tax money is sent to poor countries on the condition that it only be spent on US products, which are sold at usurous rates by people who know that money has just been pumped into the local economy that must be spent at their stores. i.e. If you had a million dollars that could only be spent at Bob's House of Chewing Gum and Forced Sodomy wouldn't you be likely to buy that million dollar stick of gum? If you're having trouble making up your mind, being forced to submit to sodomy costs 1,000,001 dollars.

So would the people of the Marianas Islands and other such places.

It makes it somewhat better but not too much.

I would scream with joy of we killed this money. We shouldn't be spending a penny in foreign countries unless they
a) are sending us waffles
b) have good looking women they want to import to us
c) are asking us to buy nukes in order to fight their pest problem.

These things I approve.

I would scream with joy of we killed this money. We shouldn't be spending a penny in foreign countries unless they
a) are sending us waffles
b) have good looking women they want to import to us
c) are asking us to buy nukes in order to fight their pest problem.

These things I approve.

If there's anything I like in this world, it's hot women, good waffles, and playing fast and loose with nuclear warheads.

Next thing you know we'll have Hilary Clinton as President - just because she's a woman. She's by the far the most liberal annoyance I've seen in a recent while in the political standing, and I know that, regardless of her horrible politics, people will vote for her simply because they'd like to see a woman in the White House.

I'm perfectly fine with a woman president, but let's try to find one who's not quite such a bitch.

I can't stand Democrats.

Next thing you know we'll have Hilary Clinton as President - just because she's a woman. She's by the far the most liberal annoyance I've seen in a recent while in the political standing, and I know that, regardless of her horrible politics, people will vote for her simply because they'd like to see a woman in the White House.

I'm perfectly fine with a woman president, but let's try to find one who's not quite such a bitch.

I can't stand Democrats.

Such stunning reasoning capability. :rolleyes:

Yeah, fuck the poor.
http://www.reviewjournal.com/lvrj_home/2006/Dec-18-Mon-2006/news/11460940.html

Well Bush promises money, but the legislature has to deliver.

I guess the Democrats aren't interested in helping out.



Don't look now - the Democrats are in charge of the purse strings.This is indeed a disappointment, but at least people like you won't be bitching about them not being fiscally responsible.

This is indeed a disappointment, but at least people like you won't be bitching about them not being fiscally responsible.

Actually I would be willing to bet my next paycheck that if the Democrats had committed the billion dollars our right wing friends on this forum would be screaming bloody murder about the Democrats wasting "their" hard earned tax dollars on mosquito nets!

Actually I would be willing to bet my next paycheck that if the Democrats had committed the billion dollars our right wing friends on this forum would be screaming bloody murder about the Democrats wasting "their" hard earned tax dollars on mosquito nets!Duh. The Democratic Party can do nothing right in the eyes of EO.

2 things as been mentioned

1) Dem's don't control congress yet so wtf you bitching about

2) Amazing how (assuming things were true) the dems are the ones being CONSERVATIVE

WTF are the right wingers bitching about I thought they were supposed to be the "Conservative" party

WTF are the right wingers bitching about I thought they were supposed to be the "Conservative" partyBut the conservatives are so well known for their own love of supporting welfare! :rolleyes:

But the conservatives are so well known for their own love of supporting welfare! :rolleyes:

Yeah ... I still find it stupid they call them selfs conservative but push for even bigger government oversight on just about everything

They are less conservative then the dems it feels sometimes

But the conservatives are so well known for their own love of supporting welfare! :rolleyes:They love to support corporate welfare. It's just the poor people they feel don't deserve it.

Next thing you know we'll have Hilary Clinton as President - just because she's a woman. She's by the far the most liberal annoyance I've seen in a recent while in the political standing, and I know that, regardless of her horrible politics, people will vote for her simply because they'd like to see a woman in the White House.

I'm perfectly fine with a woman president, but let's try to find one who's not quite such a bitch.

I can't stand Democrats.

You know nothing about politics if you call Hillary Clinton a liberal. There are only two liberal/progressives in recent memory who were Senators, one was the late Senator Paul Wellestone of Minnesota and the other is Senator Russ Feingold of Wisconsin. Before that we have to go all the way back to Fritz Mondale.

Further, Mrs. Clinton will have problems in her own party getting to be the nominee. Y'see, too many Democrats are concerned about her "polarizing" image (a fabrication of conservative talk radio and schmucks like Matt Drudge).

I see no future for either Mrs. Clinton or Ms. Rice in Presidential politics. So I guess we are going to have to wait a little longer for a female President. It will continue to be dominated by WASP men until folks get their thumbs out of their collective butts.

Oh, and don't worry, I can't stand close minded, pea brains either. So while your opinion is duly noted, it certainly has no effect on me.

Hillary Clinton is a political centrist, just like her husband was. Frankly, by European standards, Mrs. Clinton is right of center.

I wouldn't vote for Hillary because to me, she seems like too much of a shark: she plays the politician too well, and only stands by what will get her voted in, instead of what she really believes.

I'd take Bill back in office any day.


I see no future for either Mrs. Clinton or Ms. Rice in Presidential politics. So I guess we are going to have to wait a little longer for a female President. It will continue to be dominated by WASP men until folks get their thumbs out of their collective butts.

I'd vote for Obama in a flash.

when he talks about an issue, there's more than just promises: there are plans.

I'd vote for Obama in a flash.

when he talks about an issue, there's more than just promises: there are plans.

Barack Obama is pretty much the real deal. I must say the thought of him running for President is pleasing to me. It would be novel to vote for someone I believed in, rather than having to compromise.

<sigh> I'm just afraid that some nutjob out there might kill him.

I am not terribly enamored of Mrs. Clinton, good senator does not often mean good President.

Barack Obama is pretty much the real deal. I must say the thought of him running for President is pleasing to me. It would be novel to vote for someone I believed in, rather than having to compromise.

<sigh> I'm just afraid that some nutjob out there might kill him.

I am not terribly enamored of Mrs. Clinton, good senator does not often mean good President.

What's that line from Dave Chapelle? Something along the lines of "The first black president has to watch out. That's why my vice-president will be Mexican for a little insurance. You can kill me, but that will open up the border. Best to leave me and Vice President Santiago to our own devices."

Grr. I can't find it.

What's that line from Dave Chapelle? Something along the lines of "The first black president has to watch out. That's why my vice-president will be Mexican for a little insurance. You can kill me, but that will open up the border. Best to leave me and Vice President Santiago to our own devices."

Grr. I can't find it.

Hooray for Obama, and that is a pretty good quote.

Hey, they also promised to eliminate riders and pork...

So did the Promis To America and teh Bush administration and we have seen more pork than in any administration ever. Far more. So much more pork all the Jews had to leave Washington DC for Kosher reasons.

Next thing you know we'll have Hilary Clinton as President - just because she's a woman.

You mean like how we currently have the worst President in American history just because he's "a good Christian man"?

I'm perfectly fine with a woman president, but let's try to find one who's not quite such a bitch.

That's the worst thing about politics. It becomes more about personality than competence. For all that Busheviks whine about John Kerry, he couldn't have fucked things up more as a Democratic president with a Republican Congress than Dear Leader has as a "Republican" president with a Republican Congress.

I can't stand Democrats.

And you took that long to make your bottom line point, Bushevik?

You mean like how we currently have the worst President in American history just because he's "a good Christian man"?

Actually, even being a die-hard liberal, I gotta disagree there. After all, bush has only been incompetent. While that means he's a bad president, I'd still rate him above the ones that were competent but who used their ability to drive their own agenda that was detrimental to the nation.

That being said, Obama ftw.

What's that line from Dave Chapelle? Something along the lines of "The first black president has to watch out. That's why my vice-president will be Mexican for a little insurance. You can kill me, but that will open up the border. Best to leave me and Vice President Santiago to our own devices."

Grr. I can't find it.

Barack Obama/Bill Richardson 2008! or

Barack Obama/Henry Cisneros 2008! (I love my uncle)

Fried Tuna;12109236']Actually, even being a die-hard liberal, I gotta disagree there. After all, bush has only been incompetent. While that means he's a bad president, I'd still rate him above the ones that were competent but who used their ability to drive their own agenda that was detrimental to the nation.

That being said, Obama ftw.

You mean YOU DON'T THINK Bush has a conservative Christian agenda driving him? Are he and Turd Blossom just using Christians for the power they give the Republicans?

GW Bush rates as the worst President in my lifetime, just beating out Nixon and LBJ.

You mean YOU DON'T THINK Bush has a conservative Christian agenda driving him? Are he and Turd Blossom just using Christians for the power they give the Republicans?

GW Bush rates as the worst President in my lifetime, just beating out Nixon and LBJ.
Yeah, I mean there was some good that came out of LBJ and Nixon. It might have been by accident, but good did come out of their administrations--the War on Poverty was largely successful, reducing it from near 30% to below 15%, the formation of the EPA, etc. I have a hard time figuring out what good has come out of the Bush administration.

All right EO you went of half cocked this time. Everyone else has pretty much destroyed your pathetic rationale so I'll let you be. Thou once was a challenging advesary, but now you're just stuck on being blanket partisan.

Yeah, I mean there was some good that came out of LBJ and Nixon. It might have been by accident, but good did come out of their administrations--the War on Poverty was largely successful, reducing it from near 30% to below 15%, the formation of the EPA, etc. I have a hard time figuring out what good has come out of the Bush administration.

Well, the bad PR reeking off of that guy pretty much stopped the 'Moral Majority' dead in its tracks in the eyes of the rest of the nation.

In Washington, if there isn't a yes, it's a No.

Hey, are you Deep Kimchi? He also spoke of Washington politics with such wisdom, and was pointlessly biased against Democrats.

Knowing that American money goes to foreign countries makes me sick.
People who hate altruism make me sick.

Fried Tuna;12109236']Actually, even being a die-hard liberal, I gotta disagree there. After all, bush has only been incompetent. While that means he's a bad president, I'd still rate him above the ones that were competent but who used their ability to drive their own agenda that was detrimental to the nation.

That being said, Obama ftw.

Ah, but you see, there's the rub.

Bush is incompotent AND has used his authority to push his own agenda to the detriment of the nation. If he were compotent he would have run a succesful war in Iraq for no other reason than to establish himself as a heroic war president. A goal he has held ever since seeing what he thought was his father waste his "political capital" after Senior's Iraq War.

It wouldn't have gone so badly if he had done it well. It certainly wouldn't have wasted 300 billion taxpayer dollars as well as hundreds of thousands of innocent lives.

The incompotence is about on par with the selfishness, but both is about the most horrible thing you can get. We've had well intentioned dumbasses like Carter. We've had evil geniuses like Clinton. Whenever we get a well intentioned genius like Theodore Roosevelt or JFK we assassinate them (figuratively if not literally). Why the fuck we've had two terms of an evil dumbass is beyond reason.

GW Bush rates as the worst President in my lifetime, just beating out Nixon and LBJ.<coughReagancough>

You mean YOU DON'T THINK Bush has a conservative Christian agenda driving him? Are he and Turd Blossom just using Christians for the power they give the Republicans?


My point was that while he drives the conservative Christian agenda, he's horrible in it. However...



Bush is incompotent AND has used his authority to push his own agenda to the detriment of the nation. If he were compotent he would have run a succesful war in Iraq for no other reason than to establish himself as a heroic war president. A goal he has held ever since seeing what he thought was his father waste his "political capital" after Senior's Iraq War.

It wouldn't have gone so badly if he had done it well. It certainly wouldn't have wasted 300 billion taxpayer dollars as well as hundreds of thousands of innocent lives.

There is some truth there.

The incompotence is about on par with the selfishness, but both is about the most horrible thing you can get. We've had well intentioned dumbasses like Carter. We've had evil geniuses like Clinton. Whenever we get a well intentioned genius like Theodore Roosevelt or JFK we assassinate them (figuratively if not literally). Why the fuck we've had two terms of an evil dumbass is beyond reason.

Classifying Bill Clinton as an evil genius quite goes past me. He wasn't exactly leftist, but most of his policies were sound. Had he not been caught with his pants down (or more importantly, lied about it), he'd probably be remembered as one of the best presidents in a long time both sides of the fence.

Hey, are you Deep Kimchi? He also spoke of Washington politics with such wisdom, and was pointlessly biased against Democrats.


Glad to see I'm not the only one who noticed a resemblance. Eve Online has denied such a connection, however.

Glad to see I'm not the only one who noticed a resemblance. Eve Online has denied such a connection, however.

Deep Kimchi was from Herndon allegedly, this guy's from Falls Church. The difference is clear!

Deep Kimchi was from Herndon allegedly, this guy's from Falls Church. The difference is clear!

Oh...Falls Church...that certainly does explain some things.

I can't stand Democrats.

Really? Well, taht's okay. We love you anyway.

*puts a daisy in Oakondra's gun barrel*


want to have sex and do some drugs?

Hey if the Dems are willing to cut the budget, then I support them, and I am a Conservative.

<coughReagancough>

Sorry Jello, I don't have too warm a spot for Mr. Reagan in my heart either, but he was not in the same ballpark of bad as Nixon, LBJ and Bush 43.

I will grant you as a gay man, I was pissed off at him. He couldn't say AIDS in public for a long time and he certainly couldn't acknowledge gay folks on the stump by name (we were simply "those people" for the longest time).

But it is a telling thing when one of Nixon's own (John W. Dean) calls Bush the worst President in recent memory and calls all of his crimes worse than Watergate. Oh, and moderate Republicans despise this man and his old band of cronies who are all now resigning in droves.

The only difference between Nixon and Bush 43 in the end will be the fact that Bush 43 won't get impeached and convicted although he and his VP almost certainly deserve it.

Come to think of it, does anybody love this bastard other than his wife and the BushCo clan?

Come to think of it, does anybody love this bastard other than his wife and the BushCo clan?

Il Douche has a cult of personality that worships him, and there's a good representation here on NSG. They're the reason the term 'Bushevik' was coined in the first place.

Il Douche has a cult of personality that worships him, and there's a good representation here on NSG. They're the reason the term 'Bushevik' was coined in the first place.

That I never understood. I doubt seriously if his "cult" understands just how badly Bush 43 has crippled true conservative politics. It is not my cross to bear as a liberal, but I am sad that some of the more well-reasoned and enlightened fiscal conservatives have to hold their noses and put up with this sorry excuse for a human being and the idiots that he surrounds himself with.

Gates will have a hard time reigning W back from his utterly STUPID and ill-informed public remarks about Iraq and now that Pace, Abizaid and the General Staff have temporarily grown a set of testicles, the less Mr. Bush says in public, the better off he will be.

70,000 new troops? By when? You notice he is fuzzy on that. It certainly won't happen overnight and certainly not in the next fiscal or recruiting year.

More sacrifice? By who? By now the only members of the military who love this bastard are the deluded, crack-smoking fools that have been drinking the poisoned kool-aid all of their lives. Certainly not professional soldiers, Marines, officers and airmen with minds of their own.

I pulled the pin on 22.5 years as a military officer as soon as I could when this ass became President. I don't regret that move one iota. I absolutely cannot bear the thought of this lightweight demanding more soldiers die because he is too damned embarassed to admit he was WRONG.

Arrogant, foolish and wrong. Those are the only words that come to mind when I think of the man in the White House right now.

Glad to see I'm not the only one who noticed a resemblance. Eve Online has denied such a connection, however.
I've been harbouring suspicisions myself for a while, also.
I was just waiting for him to start rambling on about guns and swinging before 'J'Accuse...!'


I have to wonder - how does someone (Eve), whose nation started just a month ago, know of another NS'er who hasn't been around on this board for months?

I've been harbouring suspicisions myself for a while, also.
I was just waiting for him to start rambling on about guns and swinging before 'J'Accuse...!'
My other clue was a remark I saw about his great sex life...

Deep Kimchi was from Herndon allegedly, this guy's from Falls Church. The difference is clear!
Wikipedia reveals that they are next to each other!

What part of The Democrats can promise the money to Bono because in effect, they will, do you not understand?
Why should anyone promise money to Bono? He's not a citizen of the US and should have no impact on the policies of the people who live in the country and are responsible for electing their public officials.

Why should anyone promise money to Bono? He's not a citizen of the US and should have no impact on the policies of the people who live in the country and are responsible for electing their public officials.
He's looking for money for Africa. That's why they should listen to him.

He's looking for money for Africa. That's why they should listen to him.
I don't care what Bono is looking for. He's an utter douche in the way he goes about it. He pulled some crap a while back where he threatened to not play in Canada because Paul Martin wasn't willing to go against the wishes of the majority of Canadians and give a set % of the GDP to help Africans right away, instead choosing to give what we could afford to give.
Bono shouldn't have any say in the way that governments (apart from ones running countries where he's a citizen) are run, he's an entertainer, not a politician, he's not even a voter in the US. Why should he get to influence US government policies?

i hate to break it to you guys; but money to Africa helps no one but the warlords. how? you ask. it isn't like there is some magic button that when pressed places a nice new crisp twenty dollar bill (or whatever amount) under someone in Africa's bed. In order for said person to get said aid it has to be brought through territory controlled by who? oh right the warlords who will let you pass through for a nominal fee. Which will go to buy mroe guns and the like to make life an even more living disaster for everyone invovled makign Bono scream that we aren't doing enough so we send more money to Africa so the same warlords take their fee and buy more guns.

I don't care what Bono is looking for. He's an utter douche in the way he goes about it. He pulled some crap a while back where he threatened to not play in Canada because Paul Martin wasn't willing to go against the wishes of the majority of Canadians and give a set % of the GDP to help Africans right away, instead choosing to give what we could afford to give.
A lot of bands boycotted South Africa for having apartheid. Not saying that Canada is equally bad, but it's the same idea.

Bono shouldn't have any say in the way that governments (apart from ones running countries where he's a citizen) are run, he's an entertainer, not a politician, he's not even a voter in the US. Why should he get to influence US government policies?
Oh, I don't know, because he's doing the right thing? Giving a voice to the voiceless? The Africa issue is too important for your sort of whining.

A lot of bands boycotted South Africa for having apartheid. Not saying that Canada is equally bad, but it's the same idea.
Not really, there's a huge difference between attempting to override the decisions of a democratically elected government and refusing to play in a country that actively oppresses a large portion of its population.

Oh, I don't know, because he's doing the right thing? Giving a voice to the voiceless? The Africa issue is too important for your sort of whining.
He's doing the right thing by demanding that everyone just throw money at a problem and hoping that it helps? It's not as though there aren't enough homeless and hungry Canadians who could also be helped by this money either and don't have many people speaking for them.

Il Douche has a cult of personality that worships him, and there's a good representation here on NSG. They're the reason the term 'Bushevik' was coined in the first place.

Haven't heard "Il Douche" before. Must remember that one.

Why should anyone promise money to Bono?

Because he's awesome.

Not really, there's a huge difference between attempting to override the decisions of a democratically elected government and refusing to play in a country that actively oppresses a large portion of its population.

Override decisions? You act as if this is not a two way street here. I don't care what nationality Bono is, at least he is making an attempt to improve life on this sad little globe. As far as the rest of it goes, he is allowed to ask for commitment on behalf of a charity and the US government has the right to say "yes" or "no."


He's doing the right thing by demanding that everyone just throw money at a problem and hoping that it helps? It's not as though there aren't enough homeless and hungry Canadians who could also be helped by this money either and don't have many people speaking for them.

Hasn't stopped other charities from doing the same thing, why some of the most crooked charities I know have official sanction from the US government. Look at some of the "charities" in the Combined Federal Campaign. How about some of the United Way charities?

You have no right to moan and cry if you aren't willing to offer a fair alternative. Get off your high horse.

Finally, there is a "charity" that the US has for it's own people. You call it "welfare." I am certain that the Canadian equivalent to the US Department of Health and Human Services also has low income relief programs for indigent and near indigent people. There is only one problem with either of these programs...people whine about giving money to the poor and indigent out of their tax dollars and then suggest private charities take up the slack.

It's the old Texas two step...you don't want to give money away to those in need, so you cry about those "liberal social welfare" programs, and then when you suggest that people give generously to a private charity that does the same thing...and guess what, you don't give a dime to it.

You people are all the same. Giving is fine as long as you ain't doing it. :rolleyes: