The Black Informant

African-American culture, news commentary, politics

White Liberalism speaks for the rest of us again

The Washington Post provides a excerpt of Mr. Egeland’s initial press conference where he accuses rich nations being too stingy in their response to the countries affected by the recent tsunami:

Despite his claim of being “misinterpreted,” a review of the transcript of Mr. Egeland’s initial press briefing confirms that he asked reporters at the United Nations why Western countries are “so stingy” and specifically cited the United States as an example of a country whose citizens want to pay more taxes so that foreign aid can be increased.

“An unprecedented disaster like this one should lead to unprecedented generosity,” Mr. Egeland said in his Monday briefing. (more…)

Mr. Egeland (who is not even an American citizen) somehow feels as though he has the authority to speak for us Americans who he believes wants to pay more taxes to do the job of the U.N.

I don’t remember seeing his name on the ballot last month. Maybe my voting district did not get the memo.

ref. Tarzan: The father of white liberalism

December 29, 2004 - Posted by Duane | Uncategorized | | No Comments

No Comments »

  1. While it may be only wishful (hallucenogic) thinking, I am hoping/praying that many churches in the US will be moved to send the entirety of the monies collected this Sunday to reputable relief agencies. I commend the US government for the trememdous aid it’s sending, but it would be great to see true Christian compassion surpass the urgent need to raise one more degree on the pledge thermometer for the latest Family Life Center or Sanctuary-Cathedral to seat 50,000. True religion is to attend to the widows and orphans. May the church in America get down to the Father’s business.

    Comment by Candace | December 29, 2004

  2. As a percent of GDP the US has pledged less than most. That’s a fact. And is not even the top giver in dollar figures. While I believe that the US will pledge more, we are the leaders, (that is what we tell ourselves) so we should lead.

    Comment by BH | December 30, 2004

  3. If you are looking at this from a per capita perspective, I would say that you are correct in saying that the US trails in giving;however, most of the money that is given by the US go to private organizations that are already on the ground when disaster hits. Even the critics agree with this. Mind you that many of these private charitable organizations do not represent a particular country, so if one was to go by what is on paper, one could easily come to your conclusion. So the US does in fact lead the world in charitable giving.

    Also keep in mind that the US is also leading a war in both Iraq and Afghanistan. Most people who choose to politicise this issue tend to forget that point.

    Comment by Duane | December 31, 2004

  4. We where fighting a war when Florida & the Gulf coast states needed bailing ot from the Hurricanes. And we did better there then some of the earlier figures we pledged to Tsunami victoms. It was not until critisim came that that the US started giving more. We are the United States of America. The largest economy in the world and it is by that standard we should be giving. “To whom mch is given, much is required”

    Comment by BH | December 31, 2004

  5. The last I checked, South Asia was not part of the US. True, we are the largest economy in the world, but the US cannot be the world’s mammy. The US should not be hammered if in the end we were not the top givers for the survivors of the tsunami when we have led the world in giving the other 99+% of the time. The primary role of the president is to take care of the US first. I bet you if the US was in fact the top giver in this latest situation, critics would accuse the US of being a show off. You gotta admit that no matter what we do, it will ALWAYS be a loose/loose situation.

    Comment by Duane | December 31, 2004

  6. We are not the worlds “nanny” but other countries with smaller economies giving MORE MONEY. That does not look good for the US. It is not a matter of shtting up critiics. If what the critics are saying is not true then ignore it. Threre is no no need to respond to a lie. BUT if what they are saying is true. What does that say about the US ? When we have more than enough to spare and there is a legitimate need and we can’t do better than we are doing. It is a shame.

    Comment by BH | January 2, 2005

  7. “We are not the worlds “nanny” but other countries with smaller economies giving MORE MONEY.”

    Still a very untrue statement.

    KEYWORD: Private donations

    Comment by Duane | January 6, 2005

Leave a comment

« Previous | Next »