I understand that this is actually a mistranslation of the famous cliche that the Chinese character for “crisis” is an overlay of the characters for “danger” and “opportunity”. Let’s play that out.
Right now, we have a massive humanitarian crisis where rapid fire logistical, monetary and other support would doubtless do a world of good (if delivered quickly enough). We have an American government with little will to do anything beyond a token showing (for which it has duly– and rightly– been criticized). But… we have other immense resources…
Once again, I’m going to go back to my theme: where are Democrats on this? Maybe they’re out there, and I’m just not hearing them. Or maybe, as usual, the silence is deafening.
We can start, of course, with the revolution in Democratic politics: the internet fundraising list. I realize that our perverse election laws are such that the use of such tools for mundane purposes like raising money to save hundreds of thousands or millions of lives and probably staving off worldwide pandemic is probably illegal, but I’m sure high priced legal talent can find away around that. Among other things, John Kerry is sitting on millions and millions of dollars in unspent campaign money (and he is a multi-millionaire anyway, as is his wife).
Certainly, he can seize the bully pulpit right now, and urge the nation (red states and blue) to come together in a massive creative effort to raise money, logistical support and expertise to be brought to bear on the South Asian/East African humanitarian crisis right now. He can urge the hundreds of thousands of Americans who generously gave to his (pathetic and awful) Presidential campaign to give what they can to the humanitarian effort– right now– at internet speed, to save as many lives as we can, and to take American leadership to the forefront of something good for a change, even as our sitting government is content to have us be portrayed as (and, really, BE) a stingy, self-centered, ill-mannered, pariah state, more interested in spreading instability and chaos than in doing good.
It’s long been stipulated that George W. Bush is a dickhead, and we don’t expect much, if any good to come out of that end. But we’re still a free people, with immense resources of money, time, and we would hope, good will. This is an opportunity to do so something constructive– not just because it will score political points (it may, it may not), but for that most fundamental of reasons we used to think Democrats did things: because it’s right..
While waiting for Senator Kerry or other Democrats to act on this (I suspect we’ll be waiting a while), you might want to consider supporting some decent relief organizations, such as Save the Children or CARE or Oxfam or the charity or vehicle of your choice.
Just sayin’…
tdog
Amazingly, it hasn’t occurred to the Bush administration (or Dems, either, TD), that one of the worst-affected areas–Indonesia–is also an Islamic area rife with anti-U.S. sentiment. We had an unbelievable opportunity to show a kinder, gentler side of American plenty by stepping out front to lead the world in relief efforts and to get the U.S.A. “brand” out to a huge Muslim population. But Bush’s bicycle riding and brush clearing in Crawford were much more important, obviously. So, we were thought to be ponying up only $15 million while Bush relaxed and said, “Who ever heard of Aceh, anyway?”
Unbelievable.
This is right on target, TD. If there’s to be a progressivism worth having it needs to be about more than whining about the deficiencies of the other side.
Catching my eye: morning A through Z
Here’s what’s caught my eye this morning: Dean Esmay continues posting on AIDS, HIV, AZT and scientific orthodoxy. Love it or hate it you ought to read it. Infidel of Duophony has a good run-down of relief efforts. And some…
Not to mention his pinched, mean look at the press conference, where he bristled with indignation at being called cheap. What a little, little man.
Give me a break. No one is as little and pathetic as Michael and Mamayo are right now. This is the type of crap that has made the Democratic Party the success it is today. The initial pledge was just that — initial, and it was far more than any other government’s initial pledge. The United States provides more than 40% of all foreign aid in the world annually, which doesn’t include the billions private charity or the billions in military assets we devote to humanitarian assistance around the globe. Keep it up, guys, and Republicans won’t have to worry about you in 2008 either.
Actually, Lawrence, if you read my comment carefully you would note I was saying that because of Bush’s (and the Dems)lousy public face on this, we were THOUGHT to be contributing only $15 million. The point being, we obviously are contributing vastly more than $15 million, so why let this small initial number from AID be the only public announcement about our contributions, and miss the chance to reap as much goodwill as possible?
That said, our foreign aid contribution, as a percentage of GDP, is pitiful. That we contribute more in absolute numbers than other countries is saying nothing, since we are larger and have much more to give.
And why call a press conference to announce an increase in aid if you look like you really couldn’t give a shit, but you’re just mad about being called cheap?
I suspect before long, many people will regret having voted for that small spirited mean little man.
And the first relief planes in were Australian and,er, French.
I’m looking at this as a series of possible opportunities (and this is a developing story).
I have little doubt that at the end of the day, the United States will pony up more aid than anybody else, as we usually do– but we may or may not get credit for it. Since “moral authority” is an absolutely critical element of the “war on terror”, it is essential that the image of how we give aid is every bit as important as the aid itself– it may be crass, but that’s the facts of life now. Mamayo’s point is very well taken; it IS our government’s job not only to do good, but to be SEEN as doing good, especially as these are not only stricken areas, but politically sensitive ones as well. I suspect that the President will shortly do more on that front as well, though if he doesn’t, grousing won’t make it so.
I wouldn’t worry too much about the first impressions here in any event– this story is going to go on for weeks and months, and the humanitarian disaster of burying hundreds of thousands of people and rebuilding the lives of countless millions will obviously take years.
The opposition party and its so-called leaders DO have a real opportunity to step up now, especially with Congress out of session and the program we have set up for international humanitarian aid officially out of money, to (1) call for an immediate special session of Congress to FUND said program, and provide additional funding given the magnitude of this crisis (which, btw, may well have killed nearly as many or maybe even more Americans than died on 9-11, if many of the missing don’t turn up) (2) call on ALL Americans– as private citizens– to fund humanitarian relief efforts, (3) lead by example– maybe have millionaires– like Mesrs. Kerry and Edwards, for example– make extra large donations, and maybe volunteer for some relief work.
At this point- the Democrats have a freebie here. The party out of power can’t (credibly) be accused of playing politics over this– if the call is for private action and non-controversial public disaster relief legislation, rather than simply grousing about “the other side”.
Or we can all treat this the way we treat everything (and as I fear, from their collective silence, Democratic “leaders” will treat this)–as a political football at best– and multiple opportunities will be lost.
I’d just like to see some good come out of this horrible tragedy– whether political points are scored by it or not.
Mamayo, the calculation to which you refer (foreign aid as a percentage of GDP) does not include private charitable contributions by Americans (about $35 billion annually) or the many billions more in military expenditures incurred subsidizing the defense of others (Japan, South Korea, Tawain, Europe, etc. as well as that spent through our Navy protecting sea lanes for international trade). Those are real costs and their exclusion renders your criticism meaningless.
I guess Michael’s real problem is that Bush didn’t look like he ‘felt their pain’ enough. Oh well.
As usual, TD, I find you much more agreeable in comments than I do on the front page. Well said.
Face it, Bush is just not a gracious person, and he gets mulish when he doesn’t feel like “performing.” At this point, I wouldn’t expect anything different. I like it that people are looking at the inaugural expenditures (both public and private) and the leftover campaign funds and realizing what these huge sums of money could purchase if they were not destined to be squandered on the outrageously expensive silliness of our political process. Realistically, however, these funds are not going to be “diverted” for disaster relief. Heads would explode!
Don’t you think that there is an inability to respond by the Bush administration? I keep thinking of the Bush aide who talked of them “making history” which we “reality-based people” would waste time analysing. Well, 9.0 on the Richter scale is reality biting hard; when reality plays its hand, it has all the aces. When you’re supposed to be the ones “making history”, it kinda takes the wind out of your sails. Perhaps that explains the response we’ve seen?
To tell you the truth, after well over 3 years of basic Bush bashing on this blog, I really don’t want to talk about him very much beyond “setting up the story”.
My usual answer re: President George Walker Bush is something like “disappointed but not surprised”.
To quote Forest Gump (irony intended), “Stuff happens”. There are lots of things Bush could do that I’d be delighted to see him do. But I could say the same of Harry Reid, John Kerry, Nancy Pelosi, Hillary Clinton and other “Democratic leaders”.
They are free to seize the moment, ESPECIALLY in moments like this when the President goes (irony intended) AWOL in this istance. To be fair– as I suspected he would– Bush is responding to the crisis, and frankly, not inappropriately. We’d all wish he took more decisive action, and with potentially thousands of Americans and hundreds of thousands of others dead or injured or displaced, maybe– MAYBE– symbolically cutting off his vacation would have been nice (though I do wonder what difference it would make).
Look: this is a small man, who, IMHO,isn’t up to the job for a variety of reasons involving his emotional and intellectual shortcomings. BUT– that was MY humble opinion. The electorate has spoken, and disagrees. Or maybe they don’t even disagree– but “our side” was too busy showing contempt for the common man with a brilliant Ivy League debater who windsurfed and snowboarded but HAD TO PRETEND he was “a hunter”, and could never be wrong, even when caught dead to rights.
Indeed, the common man might wonder why our party, which overwhelmingly opposed the IRaq war, might nominate someone who voted FOR it (and then insisted he didn’t!!! because everything was complicated– “I have a plan.”
As this humdinger of a year winds into its last few hours, let’s all look ourselves in the mirror, shall we, and try to figure out what we, or “our side”, can do to make this world a nicer and better place, WE can do things because they are right, and let the ultimate political chips fall where they may, and whether “the other side” does or not, at least WE can go about our lives with a clear conscience, knowing at least WE valued principle and decency over short term political benefit or expediency. That’ll be the day, eh?
Happy new year, everybody.
Well said TD, but your last paragraph probably describes the stance of the US Communists of the 1930-1950 era. You realise there will likely be another McCarthy-type witch hunt one day, given the current direction of US politics (although what exactly is un-American about exercising one’s right to believe in whatever?). I agree with you nonetheless.