Her generosity brings tears to my eyes

[GaryPen]

...because my eyes won't stop rolling around in my head.

HOUSTON - Former first lady Barbara Bush gave relief money to the Bush-Clinton Katrina Fund on the condition that it be spent to buy educational software from her son Neil's company.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060324/ap_on_re_us/katrina_barbara_bush

 

[W_Tracy_Parnell]

...because my eyes won't stop rolling around in my head.

HOUSTON - Former first lady Barbara Bush gave relief money to the Bush-Clinton Katrina Fund on the condition that it be spent to buy educational software from her son Neil's company.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060324/ap_on_re_us/katrina_barbara_bush

A couple of facts you leave out:

Only part of Mrs. Bush's donation was earmarked for the Ignite software program. A spokesperson for her stated, "(the) rest of their donation was not earmarked for anything."

The spokesperson also said, "She knew that (Houston schools) was using this software program, and she's very excited about this program, so she wanted to make it possible for them to expand the use of this program."

Nationally, some other donors also specified how they wanted their donations spent, according to the spokesperson.

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/metropolitan/3742329.html

Now, my question is what the heck is wrong with donating money for a product you believe in rather than throwing it into a money pit and hoping something good comes out of it? It seems to me that enough of that has gone on already.

 

[vurbano]

Dont expect fairness from these liberal Bush bashers

 

[W_Tracy_Parnell]

I know what you mean!

I think this is a huge problem in this country though. Get a pile of money, whether it comes from charity, taxes or wherever, and throw it at a problem. We will all be paying for years and years for Katrina with much of the money wasted (as in the example of the trailers sitting unused).

As far as federal tax dollars, I would like to see some accountability in this country either through a balanced budget amendment or a pay as you go situation. That way both the Iraq war (which I support) and Katrina would have to be paid for by cuts somewhere else and/or increased taxes. There was a congressman somewhere (don't remember the name) that wanted to release the Katrina money in small chunks on an as needed basis and he introduced a bill for that I believe. Of course, it went no place.

Or we could look at a flat tax or national sales tax. But they will never do it because it is too easy to play with the books the way the system is now and politicians like that-on both sides.

 

[GaryPen]

You guys will come up with any excuse to defend these douchenozzles. Amazing. Truly amazing.

 

[charper1]

Gary: you know that goes both ways equally?

Some will purposely mis-report/mis-quote or exclude key elements and comments to prove the opposite of, or to distort what was really being reported or to scramble the truth.

It is common practise to earmark potions or donations regardless of political affiliation.

 

[Bunnyman]

Bullsh!t. If one of the Clintons had "earmarked" a charitable contribution in the same way you Bush apologists would be crapping in your pants. Fox News would be having aneurysms every five minutes.

You don't do that with charitable contributions, divert them to a family member, even if it is "legal". That's called profiteering and it's stupid and ignorant at best and sleazy and corrupt at worst.

But wait, they're the Bushes. They wrote the book on stupid and corrupt.

 

[W_Tracy_Parnell]

Like Charper said (and the article I posted the link to agreed) it is common practice to designate money to specific areas. And I repeat-what in the world is wrong with that? It's YOUR money!

As far as this being an issue, you can bet the mainstream media will take every opportunity they get to "bash Bush" no matter which Bush it is.

 

[vurbano]

Bullsh!t. If one of the Clintons had "earmarked" a charitable contribution in the same way you Bush apologists would be crapping in your pants. Fox News would be having aneurysms every five minutes.

You don't do that with charitable contributions, divert them to a family member, even if it is "legal". That's called profiteering and it's stupid and ignorant at best and sleazy and corrupt at worst.

But wait, they're the Bushes. They wrote the book on stupid and corrupt.

Wrong, the Clintons' escapades would have been covered up. Kept quiet. The press would have ignored it. How much have you heard about SLick Willie consulting with DUBAI port company on how to get their deal passed???? Nothing.

 

[dragon002]

and if you did report it, they would find you in fort marcy park, you know a "suicide" by shooting yourself in the BACK of the head.


and profiteering, how about ms rodhams futures trading??

get real.

 

[Tom in TX]

...because my eyes won't stop rolling around in my head.

HOUSTON - Former first lady Barbara Bush gave relief money to the Bush-Clinton Katrina Fund on the condition that it be spent to buy educational software from her son Neil's company.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060324/ap_on_re_us/katrina_barbara_bush

My eyes are rolling, too! Why on earth would they donate money! They are greedy Republicans, and should keep all their money to themselves! Why help the schoolchildren of Houston? Let them fend for themselves!
Tom in TX

 

[GaryPen]

Like Charper said (and the article I posted the link to agreed) it is common practice to designate money to specific areas. And I repeat-what in the world is wrong with that? It's YOUR money!.

Specific areas? Maybe. Specific corporations. That's just sleezy, like the bunnyman said. And to do it so brazenly, so openly, in broad daylight, is a hallmark of these elitist, arogant, entitled, profiteers.

It's not quite as bad as giving no-bid contracts worth hundreds of millions of dollars to a corporation whose stock is owned by family members of the vice president of the United States. But, it smacks of the same I'll-give-you-salt-and-say-it's-sugar-and-you'll-not-only-believe-it-but-zealously-defend-it-being-sugar attitude that they've been displaying for years now.

Thankfully, people are starting to wake up from the trances they've been under, and are finally seeing that not only does the emperor have no clothes, he's been stealing theirs, as well. It's about friggin time! (Even the strong opposition against gay marriage is subsiding, as people realize it was a smokescreen, a ruse, a clever ploy used by these liars to distract from the real issues.)

 

[GaryPen]

My eyes are rolling, too! Why on earth would they donate money! They are greedy Republicans, and should keep all their money to themselves! Why help the schoolchildren of Houston? Let them fend for themselves!
Tom in TX

Don't be an idiot. Of course donating money to worthwhile charities is good.

You're a very smart guy, and you know perfectly well what's wrong with this particular donation.

Don't let some blind loyalty force you to defend something that is just greedy nepotism in the guise of generosity.

 

[GaryPen]

Gary: you know that goes both ways equally?

Of course! It doesn't justify it, though.

 

[dragon002]

Specific areas? Maybe. Specific corporations. That's just sleezy, like the bunnyman said. And to do it so brazenly, so openly, in broad daylight, is a hallmark of these elitist, arogant, entitled, profiteers.

It's not quite as bad as giving no-bid contracts worth hundreds of millions of dollars to a corporation whose stock is owned by family members of the vice president of the United States. But, it smacks of the same I'll-give-you-salt-and-say-it's-sugar-and-you'll-not-only-believe-it-but-zealously-defend-it-being-sugar attitude that they've been displaying for years now.

Thankfully, people are starting to wake up from the trances they've been under, and are finally seeing that not only does the emperor have no clothes, he's been stealing theirs, as well. It's about friggin time! (Even the strong opposition against gay marriage is subsiding, as people realize it was a smokescreen, a ruse, a clever ploy used by these liars to distract from the real issues.)

now you did it.

whether i was democrat, liberal, independent, moderate, or the republican conservative that i am. MARRIAGE is two persons, a male and a female human, read the bible, the koran or the torah.

it is not two gays doing the bone dance with Mr sphincter, or two lesbos 69ing. sorry!

 

[W_Tracy_Parnell]

Specific areas? Maybe. Specific corporations. That's just sleezy, like the bunnyman said. And to do it so brazenly, so openly, in broad daylight, is a hallmark of these elitist, arogant, entitled, profiteers.

Corporations? Whose talking about corporations? We are talking about donations to charities. Very typical-find any problem and the cause is the evil corporations. The same corporations that employ millions of Americans and that millions more are invested in and profiting from.

Anyway, here is the quote from the article:

"Nationally, some other donors also specified how they wanted their donations spent, Becker said.
For example, one man wanted his money to go to Habitat for Humanity but via the former presidents' fund. Nearly $1 million has been raised for the local fund and more than $120 million for the national."

It's not quite as bad as giving no-bid contracts worth hundreds of millions of dollars to a corporation whose stock is owned by family members of the vice president of the United States. But, it smacks of the same I'll-give-you-salt-and-say-it's-sugar-and-you'll-not-only-believe-it-but-zealously-defend-it-being-sugar attitude that they've been displaying for years now.

I assume you are refering to haliburton? It's not a "no bid contract" when it is determined that a certain company does a job that no one else can do. That is exactly what happened when the CLINTON administration reviewed Haliburton's contracts.

 

[W_Tracy_Parnell]

You're a very smart guy, and you know perfectly well what's wrong with this particular donation.

So do I. It was made by a Bush (which is the main point here really) who had the audicity to ask that part of their money be spent on a certain very worthwhile program that benefits schoolchildren and also happens to benefit a member of their family. Imagine that-helping others while helping your family in a small way! I don't know what the world is coming to!

 

[GaryPen]

.. read the bible, the koran or the torah.

I've read Mother Goose and Grimm's Fairy Tales. Do they count?

.. it is not two gays doing the bone dance with Mr sphincter, or two lesbos 69ing. sorry!

Although, there is a certain appeal to the latter image.

 

[GaryPen]

Corporations? Whose talking about corporations? We are talking about donations to charities. Very typical-find any problem and the cause is the evil corporations. The same corporations that employ millions of Americans and that millions more are invested in and profiting from..

For an engineer, you have very poor reading comprehension skills. She made a donation to charity with the stipulation that the money goes to buying products from her son's corporation. What part of that simple concept do you find so difficult to wrap your head around.

Anyway, here is the quote from the article:

"Nationally, some other donors also specified how they wanted their donations spent, Becker said.
For example, one man wanted his money to go to Habitat for Humanity but via the former presidents' fund. Nearly $1 million has been raised for the local fund and more than $120 million for the national."..

Specifying which charities your donations go to, or to what purpose it is spent, is not the same as saying they must spend the money buy purchasing goods or services from a specific company.

A. Why do you keep ignoring that fact, and trying to spin some other image out of it?
B. Why defend such a practice?

 

[dragon002]

san jose', oh! by san fran............that explains a lot!


one is equally disgusting as the other, unless im between them! lol