Gabriel Murray

January 10th, 2005 · No Comments· 16 views

Hey, let’s get all of Gabriel’s comments today in one place, and make faces at them. In order from last to first:

I also wanted to clarify something: Chuck’s claim that liberals don’t care about brown people was based on a Google search.
Thank you, anonymous: that was a hilariously inane rebuttal. I felt compelled to praise it at my blog, Public Editor.
I’m not surprised that you would turn this into another cheap shot on the UN as a whole. Comparing Egeland to Bundy and Gotti illustrates how extreme your views are, as if it weren’t evident enough from your blog.
>Remember, Egeland was talking about all Americans, not
> just the right.
Actually, he said that most of the citizens of these supposedly stingy
countries wanted to give *more* but that their governments fretted
about spending taxpayer money on humanitarian relief. I don’t think he
attacked the American people at all; that is your perception.

Even if “Hollywood” hasn’t donated a ton to this tragedy, what right
does that give you to charge that liberals don’t care about people of
other colors?
“It is beyond me why are we so stingy, really,” the Norwegian-born
U.N. official told reporters. “Christmastime should remind many
Western countries at least, [of] how rich we have become.”
“There are several donors who are less generous than before in a
growing world economy,” he said, adding that politicians in the United
States and Europe “believe that they are really burdening the
taxpayers too much, and the taxpayers want to give less. It’s not
true. They want to give more.”
He mentions the U.S. in the context of Western countries. So why did the U.S. media froth up about a direct attack on the U.S. as being stingy? He then followed up on his comments and said that the U.S. has
been the biggest humanitarian donor.

The reason I say jingoism is that there seems to be some kind of dick contest with regard to tsunami aid, and I don’t think that should be our focus.
I think it’s incredible that based on a Google search you would
conclude that liberals don’t care about “brown people.”
It’s interesting how this “stingy” comment has provoked so much defensiveness and jingoism from a certain faction of Americans, when the original comment was neither directed specifically at the U.S. nor exclusively regarded the tsunami effort. Something tells me you didn’t need an excuse to bring on the jingoism, though.
Oh, and here’s my take on your accusation that liberals don’t care about the tragedy:
http://www.publiceditor.com
This is an incredibly disgusting post. After the tsunami hit and many Americans wanted more than $15 million to be sent as relief, some on the right were claiming that these calls for relief were some kind of obscene politicization of the tragedy (David Brooks, for example). Most people ignored these cheap shots, as they were genuinely concerned about relief, not politics. This post takes the cake as far as politicization of a tragedy. Congratulations, anonymous moron.

Don’tcha just love the guy? Warm, open minded, serious yet with a touch of whimsy. And that smile, why it lights up the room! If only he could find a cure for that nasty itch. You know the one. The kind you don’t talk about, liberalism.

BTW, I said in an e-mail to Gabe that listening to Egeland talk about stinginess and low taxes was like listening to John Gotti talk about preventing drug abuse or listening to Ted Bundy suggest that women take a self-defense course.