(12-19-2006) Bono unhappy after meeting Democrats - Chicago Tribune*

[V Nura]

It's this kind of short sighted thinking that really just makes me want to move.

 

[Lally1011]

The U.S. has ranked high in terms of charity when compared to other countries. I distinctly recall that, during the tsunami disaster, there information posted somewhere as to how we ranked but I can't locate that for the time being. I was compelled to do the reaserch when the initial dollar amounts seemd a bit low and, eventually, we were criticized upon. Then the government responded with the huge numbers after we realized what Australia had given.

http://usinfo.state.gov/scv/Archive/2005/May/10-192837.html

 

[Liesje]

I think we give the most of any nation, or at least near the top, but relative to GDP, we suck!

However, it's hard to say, b/c these figures don't take into account private donations. Personally, and speaking for everyone I know, when we donate it's through a private program or charity, so it doesn't get counted. So it doesn't mean US citizens give less than other nations, it just means our gov't is ridiculously stingy relative to our GDP.

 

[Reggie Thee Dog]

Bono says it's an emergency (not a cause) in his speeches and I believe him. I don't believe Iraq is an emergency(in terms of needing funding) or should have a higher priority.

And I agree with you, so you misrepresented or misunderstood my quote. I'm not saying we shouldn't give me, now or ever, I'm saying we got other things on our plate, that UNFORTUNATELY have taken higher priority. Funding the Iraq War is NOT one of them, but figuring out what is going on in Iraq is a much greater priority right now.

We can all be idealistic about Africa because 'our hero' Bono said it's the most important thing in our lives. Look it is important, and I, nor do most Americans want to see people suffer when there is help available, however we've got other crisises in this country that have spun out of control for 6 years now, and they need to be addressed. Sorry Bono and Africa will have to wait...but only temporarily. The money will be there...it will, I'm sure of it.

I'm not against aid to Africa, and really neither are Pelosi and Reid, there are just other things they need to address before they can turn to Bono's cause...which is an emergency in Africa.

 

[ntalwar]

I'm not against aid to Africa, and really neither are Pelosi and Reid, there are just other things they need to address before they can turn to Bono's cause...which is an emergency in Africa.

I think that's a common excuse that Bono has heard from politicians for years - that the money is coming, just wait. And those promises get broken. There will always be higher priorities for US funding. That doesn't mean "lower priority issues" should be or are ignored. The government is capable of multitasking. He was only looking for a committment, not cash right then and there. The US already gives $27 billion in total foreign aid annually. So some of the existing aid could be redirected. They shouldn't agree to meet with Bono if they know they are going to turn him down.

I wouldn't classify it as "Bono's cause" either. If you've listened to his speeches (the non-concert ones), you will see that he is a representative for the poor to governments. Just the same way that major corporations have lobbyists as their representatives and meet with politicians and get funding, tax breaks, favorable legislation passed, etc.

 

[Yahweh]

America wont be out of Iraq in 20 years that will be the legacy of this government, a war that doesn't have a plan or any real goals for victory, it will be the biggest cash debacle in us history.

The dollars that have been spent so far are just a drop in the bucket compared to the total amount that will have to be spent on this war. Africa for the US isn't at all a high priority never has been and quite frankly never will be, it doesn't make them any money to put money into Africa, and that is all that the US government and almost any government of a first world nation cares about.

Humanity might be equal in Gods eyes but it certainly isn't equal in the eyes of the first world and especially the United States. Justice will never be served in Africa and the entire continent is going to go up in flames. Although it will be a silent death of the forgotten.

 

[Reggie Thee Dog]

I think that's a common excuse that Bono has heard from politicians for years - that the money is coming, just wait. And those promises get broken. There will always be higher priorities for US funding. That doesn't mean "lower priority issues" should be or are ignored. The government is capable of multitasking. He was only looking for a committment, not cash right then and there. The US already gives $27 billion in total foreign aid annually. So some of the existing aid could be redirected. They shouldn't agree to meet with Bono if they know they are going to turn him down.

I wouldn't classify it as "Bono's cause" either. If you've listened to his speeches (the non-concert ones), you will see that he is a representative for the poor to governments. Just the same way that major corporations have lobbyists as their representatives and meet with politicians and get funding, tax breaks, favorable legislation passed, etc.

Understood...sadly with a new power change in Congress, it will not be a priority at this time, that's all I'm saying. It is not on the top of any American politician's list. I'm not saying that's good or bad, and I hope they do address it as soon as possible.

 

[Liesje]

I agree, ntalwar. The more we label it "Bono's cause", the more we distance ourselves from it and dissociate any personal responsibility. Replace any "Bono's cause" with "our/their responsibility" and it reads more accurately.

 

[Rachel D.]

This is not the only newspaper source I've seen this story in. There have been several reports of this around for a while now, so don't try to dismiss it as tabloid junk. Bono DID meet with Democrats and they DID give Africa the shaft.

I do think that it's ironic (hypocritical) how Republicans got blasted when they didn't want to commit enough money to Africa and now the Democrats are excused becuase they're just trying to save money. And now the tune has cahnged. "Well, maybe they're right..." Before, it would have been "Those greedy bastards! They don't care about the poor!"

 

[ireallyheartu2]

[/B][/QUOTE]As I've said many times I really wish there were a strong third party in the states to kick all these bums (Dem and Rep) out!!! It's really about time don't you think??? [/B][/QUOTE]

I agree the 2 party system hasn't been effective for some time now. The way the system is set up now it is very difficult for a 3rd party to get a foothold. IE the Green Party

 

[anitram]

Re: Re: (12-19-2006) Bono unhappy after meeting Democrats - Chicago Tribune*

What crap, and here's the part they don't understand:

Bono may be upset but he isn't even a U.S. citizen and isn't likely to affect many votes in congressional districts across the country.

How backward can they be??

It's not backward, it's true.

The reality is that a very small and insignificant number of people will change their votes based on this issue. It has been proven again and again.

Africa as an issue, has been wonderfully advocated for by a number of people, even some on this very forum. Unfortunately, politically it has been a loser of an issue and has not been influential, regardless of how you slice it. Because this is a U2 forum, we hear more about it, the reality of the real world out there is that most people don't know, don't care or simply don't believe this is a number one priority. I don't know how to change that. But interestingly enough, environmentalists were in the same position for many years and their grassroots efforts have finally triumphed. The environment, as an issue is no longer one on the fringes, but it has started to pervade our social fabric so much so that for example in Canada, Brian Mulroney just publicly stated that a complete failure in environmental policy will cost this Conservative government the next election. My hope is that Africa someday becomes part of the mainstream in this way.

Right now it is not. It is not a potent political issue, and it is definitely not one which will bring about political change or change the political landscape, if you will. It's the cold, hard truth.

 

[Teta040]

Let me add to Anitrams' statement a bit. Forgive me a bit for being cynical, but regarding environmentalism, it isn't the determined dedication and perserverance of a small but vocal minority of people who triumphed after years of effort. That was not enough to swing the issue. Maybe 30 yrs ago about the "environment"--generally speaking. But if "The environment" means, say, something like global warming (which it is a code word for these dyas), people cannot be woken up to the urgency of the issue unless it is slammed right in front of their faces.,and for a LONG time. Look at the lack of response to the continuing aftermath of Katrina. It isn't Al Gore's film alone that is finally waking people up tog lobal warming for good. It's the fact that the things he was talking aobut in that presentation are finally coming true. People are experiencing for themselves deadly heat waves, fires, floods, hurricanes, etc. They have to see the Time mag cover pic of the drowning polar bear to believe it. Until something actullay begins to hit people personally and directly, in the pocketbook, the outdoors, or whatever, they will NEVER have a sense of urgency. I doubt Europeans would have different ways of looking at war, conservation, frugalim, the death penalty, etc, than Amrricans if they hadn't had to suffer the ravages of two World Wars on thier soil. Changing peolle's minds took time and unfortunately these types of lessons are not easily learned. It's human nature.

As regards the meeting--this is what may have happened. Reiad must have told Bono "It's not good for us to appropriate money if Bush is going to veto anything we try to pass; so why the effort?" (This is what I hope did NOT happen....the Dems have done a LOT of stupid things but to not even pledge to try to get some funds through even knowing the money will never be spent has to go down as one of the coolssal lame-brained things ever..).to toss aside a great political opportunity to pass Bush off as stingy and themselves as good guys (esp after Bush's own rubber-stamp Congress got rid of that $5 bil....) would be a new Democratic low.
Never mind that it may look good some say, that the Dems can present themsleves to conservatives as frugl and not typical pork-barrel spenders. After having Jim Wallis give the addresss on radio, they know that many evangelicals are elctrified by the African crisis and turning them off is a big error.

Either that, or Reid attempted to mollify Bono off with a
"not yet." Not likely. We'll see. If there's one thing we know about our B, he does NOT give up! He'll be a bigger pest to the Dems than the Republicans after this (if that's possible)..