The television is full of heartbreaking pictures of unspeakable, unwatchable human tragedy. Relief starts to arrive from all over the world, but especially from America: soldiers from the 82d Airborne Division, the super carrier Carl Vinson, C-130 cargo aircraft by the dozens, the Navy’s only hospital ship. President Obama announces that America will not forsake Haiti.
But two Americans, both heroes to millions, utter unimaginably vile language that makes one doubt their humanity.
Rush Limbaugh says the earthquake is “made to order” for the Administration, which will “use this to burnish their, shall we say, credibility with the black community.” He went on to discourage anyone from giving to the Red Cross for Haitian relief, saying that the President’s appeal would only lead to collecting names to solicit later for campaign contributions. “Besides, we've already donated to Haiti. It's called the U.S. income tax.”
Pat Robertson, founder of the Christian Broadcasting Network and host of The 700 Club, a Christian TV program syndicated throughout the U.S. and Canada, matched Limbaugh in his hate: “A long time ago in Haiti…they were under the heel of the French, and they got together and swore a pact with the devil. They said ‘We will serve you if you’ll get us free from the French.’ Ever since they have been cursed by one thing after another.”
9 comments:
I think we SHOULD write about Limbaugh. Lots of people follow him,in small part because some of what he says is sensible. But when the real hate comes out let's highlight it: America is pretty polarized but we're not a nation of haters, and ultimately we won't be pied-piped by a hater.
Bob, I'm always a little squeamish about condemning people who are telling the truth. Obama's guys DO use the contribution lists to create mailing lists---nothing especially wrong with that, but Rush isn't wrong to say so. Taxpayers ARE the ones contributing to the Haitian relief. And the Red Cross IS one of the most inefficient users of charity funds, as its performance after 9-11 showed. Way too much overhead. I didn't care for Limbaugh's tone, but his substance was essentially accurate.
The comment about the black community was in bad taste, but given that the Bush Administration's failures in New Orleans were disgracefully attributed to racism, I don't think putting race into the relief calculus is all that big a stretch either. Limbaugh's a convenient demon, but comparing him to Robertson is unfair. A better comparison to Robertson (more politically balanced, too!)is Danny Glover, who said that the earthquake was Earth's punishment for the failed Copenhagen summit. Now THAT'S truly idiotic!
Sorry, Jack. This time the Obama folks weren't going after potential contributors. Valerie Jarrett went all over TV asking people to contribute to the Red Cross—no way for her to get your email address, unless you think the Red Cross is going to give it to them. If you go to www.whitehouse.gov and click on Contribute online to the Red Cross, you go straight to the Red Cross website. Again the Obama team doesn’t know who you are.
Taxpayers ARE contributing, I agree, but Obama wants individuals to give. They have asked the Red Cross to coordinate charity. If you think their overhead is too high, give to Doctors Without Borders, or Catholic Charities, or to SOMEONE.
Rush wasn’t saying give to a more efficient charity because the Red Cross is inefficient: he was saying don’t give at all, the federal funds are quite enough. That’s just heartless.
As my comment just above yours said, some of what Rush says is sensible. What he said about Obama, Haiti, and the Red Cross was hateful.
Bob, that's just not what Rush Limbaugh said. He said, in essense if you are going to give, give to a private charity, because you are giving to the public effort already. He's talking to people who didn't know Medicare was a government program. I just read the whole transcript twice. He just never says not to donate to Haiti. He expresses suspicion of the White House effort and the Red Cross. OK...he's suspicious, and accuses an administration with tactics orchestrated by hyper-partisans like Rahm Emmanuel and David Axelrod of being politically motivated. That may be wrong, it way be ungenerous, but it's hardly "horrific."
I'd love to know if Judith has ever actually listened to a Limbaugh show. I'm guessing not.
Jack, I’ve read the transcript very carefully, and I don’t see where Rush said anything like give to a private charity. Quite the reverse, he trashed what private charities do:
“Look, there are people that do charitable work every day in Haiti. It’s not as though — like Debbie Wasserman Schultz, it’s our fault. Reverend Wright, it’s our fault, there’s no excuse for such poverty when there’s a nation as rich as we are so close. There are people that have been trying to save Haiti just as we’re trying to save Africa. You just can’t keep throwing money at it because the dictatorships there just take it all.”
If that’s an endorsement of giving to a private charity to help Haiti, then this blog is an endorsement of Rush Limbaugh. Just so our readers can judge for themselves, here’s the link to the transcript:
http://emptysuit.wordpress.com/2010/01/14/rush-limbaughs-transcript-donating-to-red-cross-for-haiti-relief/
Post a Comment