Yeah, but it's in a blog on that site. I have found no other reference to it, including searching for the word donation in Monday's White House Press Conference.

That was pretty obvious to me... I mean did it really need to be implied?

Now that Bill and I are done, for now, a couple of interesting tangents that have already been touched on here:

Similar to 9/11 donations, if some of these donations just don't seem to get there because appropriate means to get the aid to the people are already working at full capacity or it simply isn't needed, who cares? The money will still be in these charities which need them anyway. Now, it is of course different if they're skimming the money or allowing it to be skimmed similar to what we see in the UN aid programs.

Also, Evad and Axle have been talking about the man-made slaughter of people. Well, why didn't some people that care so much about this tsunami because of the human death toll seem to care about the far greater killing in Africa, Saddam's Iraq, and certainly significant, if not greater, death in other countries. Or maybe the better question is why do they want to help tsunami victims but opposed help for many of these other people.

I suppose I see your reasoning, but any unneeded loss of life is sad...

You assume too much...

Helping people that are living under the cover of violence or an oppressive force isn't attractive for many. Tsunamis are just destructive forces of nature so, when one strikes, aid comes and leaves somewhat easily. But when there is a case over mass-killings, aid, many times, fall under the fear of inclining, potential violence and danger.

The thing that pisses me off the most about these tsunamis/disasters/whatever is when people refuse to give help when they really should. Bush should be donating, but worse are the fellow south asians who refuse to move the bodies of the dead because they are of a different religion. WTF is that? Despicable failure to stand beside your fellow man during a time of crisis.

People in this world need to get off their freaking high-horses...
be humble.

You misquote me. I said, for now.

Now we're done.

For now.

imho, as much as i see the differnet points you guys are trying to argue in this thread, the ones trying to slander bush (i am not pro-bush by far so dont even start on me or i will stiletto-heal you in the face) are no petty than he was, at his bad moments. People are dead, dying, missing, countries are wrecked, people are homeless and starving, and all you guys seem to be doing here right now, is point a finger at who hasnt helped. he helped in some way, im sure it wasnt a piece of pie trying to get the rest of the gov't to agree to give that much freaking money and send that many soldiers in that area for relief aid. im hereby changing this thread. theres too much f***ing negativity about something that is already negative, and its taking away from whats happened. why dont we all start posting how each of us have helped, if you want to compete at something, lets compete at that. im not triyng tos ound friggin hippyish but its really disappointing seeing some of the behavior coming up in this thread. it isnta bragging thing, but if you want to brag, sure go ahead, if you want to top something someone else has given, go ahead. atleast it'll be progress rather than pointless.

i donated 55 to redcross and gave blankets and bottled water.

Well said. Not typed. But, well said!

I love it when lower income people give money to charities it's fine....when wealthy people do it's dismissed as being for tax purposes only and, of course, if they don't give ANY they get just as much scorn.

What would you have them do?

I would respect bush more if he took a really arrogant stance on it and didn't give money to anyone.

Then if he were to give money to the tsunami victims I would really be impressed.

Most people don't donate to charity because most people care more about themselves than others. We would rather spend 50 bucks on a couple of dvd's or a nice shirt than send it over there for food or whatever. It's really sickening when you think about it, and the fact of the matter is, most rich people only donate money because they either have a guilty concience, or it puts them into a different income tax bracket. I know if I was rich I would be able to think of something to do with that 60 grand that Bush gave away. Either that or I'd quit *****ing about democrats wanting increased taxes for rich folks.

well, these are just the volentirs (sp?), also, the reason foreigners are not being burried is because they want the families to identify them and give their releitives the chance to give their loved one a proper burrial and not just have them dumped in a mass grave.

you do know it is better to give money as they can use it to get the items needed at a much cheaper price. They are even saying on the news that you shouldn't donate items and only donate money for the reason (and more, check the websites for more details) I gave you.

I have not given anything myself as I don't have a bank account that allows me to spend money online (I use an eftpos card that can only be used at the place where the transfer takes place)

but my mother has made a number of donations. I don't know how much though.

...there are plenty of places offline where you can donate cash. I cannot beleive you've been blasting Dubya about donating when you haven't bothered to find a way to do so yourself. "Well my mum has given some" doesn't exactly hold up your moral high ground.

Yeah, what he said.

"As long as you have money and people continue to die from starvation, you're not more moral; you just feel less guilty." - Horribly misquoted from an episode of 'Dilbert'.

In a natural disaster, it's quite clear that something terrible has happened and those people need help.

In anything political, it is never that simple. Trying to make it that simple will end up overlooking important factors.

Bill - Isn't that stereotyping just a little bit on rich people? The non-rich make donations and their gracious, but rich people do and everyone hisses because they think they're trying to save on taxes?

Yeah, there might be some, but to say everyone whose rich considers it - that's just stereotyping.

I'm sure all Southerner's are confederates...
I'm sure all Northerner's are stuck up and rude...
I'm sure all White's are ignorant...
I'm sure all Black's are poor and uneducated...
I'm sure all Jewish people are cheap...
I'm sure all Muslims are terrorists...

All those are stereotypes (Which I do not believe) but which are using your same type reasoning.

People CAN be different Bill and have a heart.

And you fail to show proof on how Bush is a billionaire. Make a claim like that, you better back it up.

There's quite a difference between "fails to donate" and "hasn't donated yet."

I think all White people, at least in America, are ignorant and I AM white. :p

I think all White people, at least in America, are ignorant and I AM white. :p

Well, you partially prove your point.

Everyone's ignorant regarding something...that's a very vague statement, don't you think?

Thought I'd make this thread worth while...