-
Michael Vick for the EPA?
October 30, 2009 | 3 comments
-
Hip Hop’s Intellectual Strikes Again
September 14, 2009 | 13 comments
-
Come Again, Ma’am?
July 27, 2009 | 3 comments
-
Rich Logic
July 24, 2006 | 1 comment
-
Double Standard
February 10, 2006 | 1 comment
The Spectacle Blog
Two quick thoughts on progressive politics and the tragic situation in Haiti:
1) The usual suspects on the left have pounced on remarks by Rush Limbaugh, accusing him of telling listeners not to donate to Haitian relief efforts. In point of fact, if you listen to what he said in context he was making two separate points, both of which are true.
The first point Limbaugh made was in response to a caller who asked why he should donate to Haitian relief through the White House — as President Obama has suggested — when he could donate directly to the Red Cross for that purpose. Limbaugh pointed out that donating through the White House would likely get you on mailing lists for political contributions in the future. Does anyone, anywhere doubt that this is true? At no point did Limbaugh discourage donations to the Red Cross.
The second point Limbaugh made was also true: Historically, Haiti has been an rat hole for economic aid. The money does the people little good, and it tends to be skimmed by a perpetually corrupt government.
In other words, Limbaugh told two truths. The juxtaposition of them, however, enabled Limbaugh-haters to construct a false paraphrase: Limbaugh says don’t help the people of Haiti. He said nothing of the sort.
2) Given the agonizingly slow pace of getting rescue workers and equipment on the ground in Haiti, why is no one asking that familiar question: Would the relief effort be quicker if the people of Haiti were white?
Think that question would be wafting across the airwaves if Bush were still president?
View all comments (11) | Leave a comment
More Blog Posts by Mark Goldblatt
http://spectator.org/blog/2010/01/15/haiti-and-political-hay
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
Current Issue
- The Great Train Robbery
- Ailes: A Voice for the Silent Majority
- Peace in Our Times
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
Rick V.| 1.15.10 @ 9:55AM
Excuse me - a"rat hole for economic aid"? "The money does the people little good, and it tends to be skimmed by a perpetually corrupt government. " And what country are we talking about here?
Greg Wilson| 1.15.10 @ 10:08AM
I don't disagree with the post, and I like Rush. I guess the only thing I would say is that these Rush lessons, while quite smart and funny, are always destined to media fodder. While listeners appreciate his ability to illustrate absurdity by being absurd, etc., I do think comments like the ones in the news today, hurt Rush's ability to influence the debate and persuade people. Having said that, it does make for a good show.
I see Rick's point, but at least we have a reasonably decent infrastructure in this country.
bluecollarbytes| 1.15.10 @ 10:15AM
excerpt: 2) Given the agonizingly slow pace of getting rescue workers and equipment on the ground in Haiti, why is no one asking that familiar question: Would the relief effort be quicker if the people of Haiti were white?---
The first days of the aftermath sound much like Katrina's- no communications, unprecedented damage, no way to get supplies in, authorities overwhelmed or 'missing in action'. But I've not heard one talking head accuse Obama H. of being caught flat-footed in his response. Nor should he be accused of course. It was a wholly natural catastrophe, like Katrina, except that Katrina was as bad as it was thanks to man's insistence on building below sea level.
If only Bush can be somehow tied to Haiti's non-existent building codes.....
SubSailor| 1.15.10 @ 11:01AM
I'm sympathetic to the people of Haiti, but also see that nothing has changed since my last visit there (1960) as part of an aid mission. I wonder how many Billions we have sent down since then, all to line the pockets of various dictators. And then, I have to wonder, at some point did the Dominican Republic fall into the sea? Last time I visited they were on the same Island and probably less than 100KM from the epicenter. Did the earthquake stop at the border? Or is it simply the people of the DR are more independant and getting on with digging out? Or maybe we don't hear of them because they a generally "lighter skinned" than their cousins in Haiti.
Doug| 1.15.10 @ 11:47AM
A few points:
We don't hear about the disaster in DR because it doesn't exist. The earthquake damage starts about 40 miles from Port and does not extend into DR. Racist remark SubSailor.
Relief has been slow because transportation infrastructure is destroyed. The airport was destroyed, roads into the city wee destroyed; relief flights are coming in from as far away as China, Russia and Isreal, but with out a fully functioning airport there is a bottleneck.
Comparing this to Katina is apples and oranges. Katrina had lots of advance warning, was on us soil, was near by lots of resorces, had a land route out of harms way and into the affected area. There is no comparison between the two.
Haiti may have had corrupt dictators but the USA is no angel in Haitis history.
doug| 1.15.10 @ 11:48AM
2) Given the agonizingly slow pace of getting rescue workers and equipment on the ground in Haiti, why is no one asking that familiar question: Would the relief effort be quicker if the people of Haiti were white?---
No, being white would not have protected the airport from destruction.
Charlie Green| 1.15.10 @ 12:24PM
This, should not be a time again to bring up race whe we all need help in understanding one another. Rush Limbaugh, bring in two good points. The goverment is corrupted,and why the white,and not american Red Cross? I am not a Rush Limbaugh Listener,But he is Right and I cannot stand many of his racist views.
Jack| 1.15.10 @ 7:16PM
Huh? You're NOT a Rush Limbaugh listener--but you can't stand his 'racist' views?
If you don't listen to him how do know he's a racist? It's foolish to judge Rush when you've never listened to him speak.
Charlie Green | 1.15.10 @ 12:39PM
This, should not be a time to bring up race when, we all need help in understanding our true motivebehind what we call ( for a good cause). Rush Limbaugh,brings in two good points. the goverment in Haiti is corrupted, and why give through the White House? Why not give Through the American Red Cross? I am not a Rush Limbaugh listener, but he is right and I cannot stand many of his racists views .
Mark Milner| 1.18.10 @ 1:38AM
The left always misinterprets Rush. I love the way the leftists say they hate him, yet have never listened to him. After the Oklahoma City bombing, Rush said he had talked to his Israeli friends that were in the loop, and it did not seem like the M.O. of arab terrorists. The next day many were reporting that Rush said it was arab terrorists.