To scrape together his $500,000 stake in the Texas Rangers, George Bush borrowed the money from a bank in Midland where he once was a director. He owned 1.8 percent of the Rangers. He later invested an additional $106,302.

Then he threatened to move the team out of Arlington, Texas, sending local officials scurrying to put together a deal they couldn't refuse. Under the resulting agreement, the taxpayers of Arlington would raise $135 million, the bulk of the cost of construction, through a hike in sales taxes.

Then he, along with his ownership partners, raised a hefty portion of their $50-million down payment from fans, through a one dollar surcharge on tickets.

His partners had upped Bush's stake in the team from 1.8 to 11.8 percent because he was the public and famous face of the team, therefore his cut from the proceeds of the team's sale was $14.9 million, a twenty-five-fold return on his investment of $606,302.

All that through connections, family friends and a good ol Texas land grab.

Now I hope you can understand why he doesn't want to give up more that $10,000 of his hard earned money.

tempathy: 10 farking grand is more than you jerkoffs put up. fark off. you whiners

Hey, I think the rest of your post carries a good point, but it's kinda lost when you start your post like that ($10,000 is just under 50% of my income, so there is no way I will be putting up that much). People here may be "whining" about Bush, but that doesn't mean they haven't also done as much as they can, nor that they don't recognise that every $10k donated will go a long way to helping people who need it pretty badly right now.

"Ask someone devout of the bible story in which a poor fellow parting with his last penny is more generous than some rich guy giving up gold pocket change."-04:45:18 PM agreywolf42

Buying your way into Grace: 10%.
Having a four-year-old Rwandan child give you a huge smile just for being there: Priceless.

True Charity-don't posture with out it.

/Given in the credit card vernacular for those who understand no other.

How about eveyone who biatches about how much ANYONE donates post how much THEY personally donated.

When you donate more that $10k, then you can complain.

(Maybe Sandra will come in and talk to us then.)

you people make want to vomit

"When you donate more that $10k, then you can complain."

What kind of idiot logic is that? This guy is a multimillionaire, 10k is pocket change to him. As far as I'm concerned, the folks who are barely getting by and are still donating are the heroes. How about "when you make a bigger donation based on percentage of net worth, then you can complain"? Oh wait, people on here HAVE done that, and they're the ones complaining.


It's funny, many people have given much more than Bush (some a hundred times as much or more). It speaks volumes that this site decides HE is the one deserving of the "hero" tag.

10K? Let's see the President makes 400K a year from his job and probably 10 times that from "family" holidings. So you're telling me 10K was all he could afford? Sounds like a tax shelter to me.

Nice gesture, but:

"According to Slate magazine, George W. Bush has a net worth of around $9 million to $26 million."

He probably owns suits that cost more than 10,000 bucks.

And, if it were John Kerry, I'd say the same.

silversnake: cancel ur inauguration and than maybe he will be a hero


go one step further and leave office. I would give it a hero tag then

This thread demonstrates how truly retarded fark has become . . .

Gibby,

I bet you own suits that cost more than $400. Did you donate $400?

Oh wait, you're probably a 13 year old. I bet you own pajamas that cost more than $20. Did you donate more than $20?

$10k is $10k. Say thank you, shut up and move on.

Durang...

This thread shows how kneejerk people have become...

If Bush did it, liberals will find a reason why it is wrong. Period. He could give every penny he has and people would bash him because there's none left to give PETA, Greenpeace and NAMBLA.

How can so many fark liters be assholes? The man gave $10k to charity and that isn't enough for you?

"This thread shows how kneejerk people have become..."

Nah, it's a reaction to the headline. Tons of people have given more money than bush, both in terms of absolute numbers and percent of net worth. What makes him deserve a "hero" headline while the people who have done more are ignored?

Where's my parade?

/Didn't donate
/Not going to

Here's a novel idea, you pathetic partisan dolts: Why don't we ask someone ACTUALLY AFFECTED BY THE FARKING TSUNAMI whether they're glad to have another $10,000 to help them out? I mean, I'm happy that you think that this tragic natural disaster gives you another opportunity to demonstrate your superiority through your bleating outrage and indignance towards Bush, but maybe, just maybe, now is not the time for your ego to be center-stage.

"now is not the time for your ego to be center-stage."

Ego? Lets look at the facts.

Many people on this thread have made donations. Who sent out a press release saying how much they donated, people on this thread or bush?

I'll ask again, why a headline and hero tag for Bush when others have done much more?

ten grand from an oil family? wow my heart weeps over his generosity. that'd be like me putting up posters all over the office like HEY EVERYBODY I GAVE EIGHT BUCKS!!!!!

michaelgvh:

Actually, I don't own a suit at all. And I sure as Hell wouldn't spend $400 on one if I did, considering I rarely wear one.

I'm also an educated 36 year old male and not a 13-year old. And you are missing the point of my post. Which is, if you are a multimillonaire, $10,000 is pocket-change. I didn't say it was a bad thing to do. IMO, It's not worthy of a hero tag, either. It's like me donating a dollar.

But I'll not argue the point with you, because it's like dualing with an unarmed man.

By the way, I did donate. Here: http://donations.paypal.com/

And how much did you donate, smartass?

michaelgvh:

Actually, I stand corrected. If George W's net worth was the least of the two figures quoted by Slate Magazine (9 million) it would be like me donating $22. (I donated more than $22.) If it were the higher number (26 million) it would be more like me donating 8 bucks or so.

So, where's my hero tag?

Don't mistake a healthy dose of Cynicism for Liberalism. I'd have said the same thing if John Kerry had donated 10K.

I'm willing to bet there's a IRS limit on charitable contributions that's around 10K.

Any Farker want to research it or know better?

For a man worth north of 20 million in line to inherit substantially more in the coming years. Remember Bush Sr. and Barbara have not so many years left. He has no expensese for living a lavash lifestyle now. Taxpayers will subsidize him for 30 years+. He gives 10k whoppty farkin doo!

Present estimates are that the war in Iraq has cost $147,611,513,432. That's 148 BILLION dollars we spent to terrorize a nation that was no threat what so ever to it's next door neighbors let alone the United States. For this we get to remove a evil despot and kill tens of thousands of innocent muslims in the third world and sent 1200+ Americans home in body bags.

Then we offer 10 million, then 35 million, then 350 million for aide. Wow! that's .2% of what we've spent so far on the FUBAR policies of war this idiot has!

Ah, I love to rant sometimes.

Shakey

GibbyTheMole

I'm glad somebody made that point. It's pocket change for one of the wealthiest and most powerfully entrenched/attached families in North America. And that's just his "listed" assets. If you could take that all away, I doubt it would even pinch.

Number of liberal Farkers slamming the president for "only" contributing 10 g's = All

Number of Farkers that donated dollar-one themselves = zero

Uncle Eazy

"Seriously, he should donate all the money for the inauguration and not do one this year. That would make a lot of people rethink their opinions of him."

Right after John Kerry donates all the money he has left over from the campaign.

Here's a "Top Ten" quick summary for those unwilling to dedicate a hour to read all the posts:

(1) Sandra Bullock is teh hawt.
(2) 49% of farkers biatch about Bush being a scrooge. Same farkers have donated a total of $0.79/per in aid.
(3) Leonardo DiCaprio has "tiny yellow balls."
(4) France still sucks.
(5) Michael Moore is still fat.
(6) Saudis are our friends/enemies.
(7) Al Gore won the election cuz the electoral college is teh dummb.
(8) Ted Rall has never been funny, satirical, nor germane to any issue.
(9) Ashlee Simpson should be [insert cruel and unusual behavior here].
(10) This is the only "Top Ten" post in the thread.

QQue
(2) 49% of farkers biatch about Bush being a scrooge. Same farkers have donated a total of $0.79/per in aid.

I'll biatch about it. $10,000 is the equivalent of 5o cents and a large pepsi to that rich sack of shiat. And yes, I did give a helluva lot more than $.79.

What did you donate?

I think Leonardo Dicapro ( i know i farked up the spelling) did it best. He gave, but he didn't announce how much. That's true charity. Bush should have done that. Sandra should have done that. No one should knock anyone one for giving money; only knock those that brag about it IE Chimpy McFlighsuit.

Lee

PS more Sandra pics please ;-)

The Red Cross has just announced new donation guidelines, and here's the press release:

We appreciate your potentially generous donation in this time of crisis and grief for those who have been adversely affected by the Tsunamis in the Far East. However, to ensure that the delicate and tender sensibilities of Western Liberals who have never been to Asia aren't offended, please include a copy of your 2004 tax return with your dontation. This will allow us to, in a fair and equitable manner, ensure that your donation is commensurate with your income. If your donation appears to be an insignificant percentage of your 2004 adjusted taxable income, we will, on behalf of the affected, decline and return your donation to you. In addition, inside your returned donation, we will helpfully include a suggested donation amount based on our own internal calculation of what would be a "fair" amount to soothe the hearts, minds, and egos of the aforementioned culturally and intellectually superior Western Liberals, on whose behalf we sincerely thank you.

The only way that man deserves a hero tag is if he ends all the f*cking wars he ever started with his bare hands.

The victims and charities should return all money from righties, its not heartfelt or genuine.

what a f***ing hero! bush cheney '04! i can't believe i ever doubted him! unbelievable all the wrongs $10,000 can right!

Wow, he's a MULTIMILLIONAIRE and he donated $10K. Pathetic. He is an utterly sorry excuse for a man.

Geez, all of you biatch and moan about everything Bush does. Chill out and find something else to complain about. the bitterness and anger has gotten pretty stale. And who are you to say what others should donate? talk about arrogance and hypocricy. None of you would be happy with other people looking at your salary and net worth and biatch to you about what you should be giving and what a cheap bastard you are. Go annoy some rich liberals about there donations: Gates, Soros, Buffet, Kerry the gigolo,...

pontechango
VideoVader: "Besides, do you expect me to look at Rall's treatment of Tillman and brush it off as SATIRE?"
Considering that you are just as brainwashed as Pat Tillman was, NO, I don't expect you to grasp the joke.

I know it's a joke, but IT AIN'T FUNNY! I view this joke the same way I view hateful, racist jokes: I get the punchline, but you're an a-hole if you say it and mean it. I know you can call it satire if you want, but the message is still serious, and you can't expect me to brush it off as though it weren't.

And hasn't it occurred to you that Tillman might, possibly, maybe, have been capable of making his decisions with a clear head? Just because someone disagrees with you doesn't mean they had to have been brainwashed, and I find it odd that you assert as much without providing any proof in Tillman's case. Prove to me he was a brainwashed, racist idiot, as Rall claims. If you can't, you're just committing slander.

VideoVader

I view this joke the same way I view hateful, racist jokes: I get the punchline, but you're an a-hole if you say it and mean it.

Look, I'm not as cynical as Rall is about Afghanistan but I'm not going to condemn him for disbelieving the Bush Administration's motives and vision. If you think Pat Tillman is a hero, you are entitled to your opinion. It is, however, only an opinion. Getting killed by your fellow troops doesn't make you a hero in my book, it makes you a victim. Rall and his readers are also entitled to their opinion that Tillman was a sucker. I'm inclined to agree that anybody who invests their faith in George W. Bush is an idiot. Including you.

If Pat Tillman was a real hero, he would have discovered true political awareness and helped put an end to the Bush Administration's lust for domination and permanent war.

VideoVader

I know it's a joke, but IT AIN'T FUNNY!

Neither is anything by Cox & Forkum but you post that bullshiat around here all the time.

Looks like she just heard the Ashlee Simpson halftime show....

/Aisle seat please

2005-01-05 05:36:49 PM Theburner wrote, "'iiPandaa --
As another farker posted today, this would actually look LESS bad if he had given nothing.' Usually I don't respond in this manner.. But are you Retarded? Not giving money is better than giving money? Seriously.. Think before you speak so that we can't discover the level or your retardation immediately."

TheBurner: Of course the $10K will help -- I never said otherwise.

What I said -- which you would have gotten if you truly read before you whined -- was that a small $10K donation from someone so rich LOOKS bad, and looks worse than simply giving nothing and looking cheap/preoccupied. By having given only $10K, W looks cheap/preoccupied -- and hateful, as if he values those who truly suffer so little. This is more important than you may think, since this White House has already tried to find a public-relation upside to this catastrophe. As Sec'y Powell said, our response to this tragedy can help us craft a better image in the Muslim world.

I always think before I speak. I challenge you to match this by reading before you rant.

The pic posted by Yakuzaru sums it up best.

I'm still waiting for Bush to explain why he wasted the UN inspectors time. History shows he was going no matter what they reported.

I suggest those that voted for him go risk their life in Iraq and allow those that don't support his oil war to come home. When they finish that job they can continue their "freedom fight" in dozens of other countries with human rights issues he somehow passed over. Not enough liquid gold I guess..........

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/evil/

OMG... You people have got to be freakin kidding me... Why? Why? I have a sneaking suspicion that regaurdless of who would have been elected you would still be bit(hing to bit(h. You just like hearing your own keyboards clicking. The man was just trying to show a personal goodgesture. It's is so aggrivating that every time the mans name comes up it's like a poorly written symphony of pissing and moaning from you all.. or most of you. I just come to look out of sheer morbid curiosity. ugh..

I don't really see the point of arguing about this. Yeah, GWB is a huge farkup and come inauguration day I will hang my head in shame knowing what a downward spiral he's sending our great country and the rest of the world into. And as much as I hate Bush and disagree with or disapprove of just about everything he's done, $10k is still $10k. Sure, he could have given more. Sure, we are spending, as a country, how many times more than that (recently put at $5Billion a MONTH) to kill people in Iraq. (I know, that's unrelated but it will continue to piss me off forever and you must all suffer and hear of it...my apologies). Sure, I'm pretty sure that part of his donation was politacally motivated and wasn't given out of 100% generousity or compassion, but right now that's not important. Let's not forget those who are dealing with this tragedy right now. They need water, food, medical care, homes. They need to rebuild their cities and towns. And as an American who lived in India for 8 months (no, not too long but I'm sure longer than most of you) and have been to these places devasted by the tsunami (not as a tourist, mind you, but as an average citizen living there) they can use all the money they can get, regardless of the source or intentions behind the source. They will need more than just immediate relief. The rebuilding of lives and livelihoods and towns and roads etc will go on for years and years, long after most of us stop thinking about what's happened.
So all of you fellow Bush-bashers, please continue because we need voices of reason in this country, but be reasonable about this. At least he did donate, and there's nothing wrong with that. And all you Bush-lovers, well....I don't know what to say to you excect that I just learned that you and I, average Americans, have paid about $1600 thus far to fund your war against Iraq. Since I in no way, shape, or form support this illegal occupation, I want those of you who did/do to refund me that money so I can add it to the donation I've already made to the tsunami relief. I think it's only fair that my money be used to heal and not hurt.
And because I know someone will ask, here are your figures:
http://www.washtimes.com/upi-breaking/20040701-024236-4063r.htm

And since I know better than to expect any of you to actually listen to me....LET THE FLAME CONTINUE!!

(Thank you for your time)

Let's put it this way, Bush cannot win anyway on this anyway.

If Bush donated $1 Million, the silly left libs would say he is buying policital capitial and taking advantage of the tragedy.

If Bush donated $10K, or let's say $100K, Bush is the scrooge of the year.

Which is it? What is the 'correct' answer?

Yakuzaru apparently the MODS are A slee P here.

Till they come back, THIS is for you.



.... p.s. Skeletons are NOT "Post contained graphic content" ( unless you consider what "Yakuzaru " posted to be ........... graphic ................. )

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

I thought so.

I can't take the people who post at Fark seriously anymore.

Bush gives all retards hope!!!!!!!

thomas
as sad as it is either way..but are you saying that it's better that a foreign occupier kill Iraqis than the leader of their government?
If that was a picture of the 10's of thousands of civilians that died by our hands, would that make you happier? Of course that war is not legitimate. You think it's worth, (and I'll put this in an America-first, egotistical way you'll probably relate to more) 1000+ killed/10,000+ wounded American soldiers, who sacrifice everything they have, based on the fact that Bush warned that Iraq could, and would attack us without notice but sometime very soon, if we did not act first? No, you probably don't, and you shouldn't. It's not worth it. Of course if you think so, why don't you sign up for the Marines? Right...because it's easier to have other people do it and you can just put your "Support our Troops" sticker on your car and wave your flag during parades. But think about it...the best way to support our troops is to respect the sacrifices they sign up to make and not to waste that and their lives when not necessary for the peace and protection of the country they love. The war that it seems you support makes America less safe - is that what you want our soldiers to die for?

and, oki
As I thought I made clear in my Boobies. The correct answer is to do something positive. By donating 10K, no matter what the motivation behind it, that is something positive. Most people, hate Bush or love Bush (oh...the sex jokes....) agree that no matter what else he does, this is something good. Some farkers just like to talk to hear themselves, and just like some Rep's...there are some Dem's who can never say anything nice about the person they didn't vote for even when they deserve some credit. And by the way, we're not "silly left libs". We're the ones that think first, which makes us smarter and more positively influential by far. But we can be silly too. Like on weekends after we've downed a couple beers :)

instantkarma the sad difference with BUSH and Saddam is that there were NO CAMERAS to record the Iraqi Deaths under his rule. Without someone going in and ENFORCING the laws, like the president has done, the killings ( that you never see ) under Saddam would continue. Untill there is a "set weapons to STUN" option for our millitary, there is NO OPTION other than to go in with force to accomplish an objective. Saddam began his rul over the Iraqi people with bloodshed, and bloodshed has been neccessary for his rule to end.

NO OTHER WAY.

If Saddam was NOT taken out, there would be year after year of MORE bodies added to the mass graves in Iraq. These graves would have Iraqi people, but NO BAATHISTS ( since they rules the country. ) It makes me sick to see the injured and dead Iraqis such as the post by Yakuzaru.
What is going on in Iraq is like Chemo. It'b been forced uppon them, and it's sick, and destructive. The cancer ( Baathists ) are fighting back because this is their death, if the Iraqi people will rule themselves with out them.
The Baathists, and the former "shock troops" of Saddams' Army do not like being OUT of POWER and they will slaughter Army and Police recruits, cut the heads off of American Civilians, bomb residential areas as well as US Army soldiers to TERRORIZE the IRAQI people and ( with the help of the media ) the United States along with the World.

They win. the Iraqi People lose. You 'root' for the Insurgency, like Michael Moore does ( calling them "Freedom Fighters" ) and you are aiding our enemny.

I won't sign up for the Marines because I was in Saudi Arabia in 1990-1 for the first war. I dont need to become a police officer to support law enforcement.

This is not about yellow sitckers or 'dieing for fallujah'
If you don't understand that,

then I can't help you.

We don't need camaras to know Saddam was a horrible person that killed lots and lots of people. I think everyone accepts that as a fact. But as far as your thinking Bush has 'enforced these laws' I'm not sure which laws you are referring to because there doesn't seem to be any followed over there now. Or have you already forgotten that Bush doesn't believe in the Geneva convention, that many of our soldiers there, for whatever reason, are breaking international law in their treatment of prisoners? And you're right, if Saddam were still in power he would probably still be killing, but we're doing the SAME thing. Only now it's a lot more random. Saddam mostly killed those he felt might be a threat to his power. We're killing, for example, a car filled with a family on it's way to a hospital because a woman inside is in labor and it's so chaotic that they might happen to miss one of our checkpoints. Or we bomb a whole neighborhood in the middle of the night because there 'might' be an insurgent inside, only to find out once again, our 'intelligence' was wrong. With us occuping Iraq, the average citizen has a MUCH greater chance of getting killed than when Saddam was in power.
And, it's just the Baathists that are fighting back against us. It's a lot of regular young people there, who view us, quite correctly, as occupiers. The Iraqi people in general have a different set of beliefs and lifestyles than we do, and they feel like we're trying to turn them all into a little America. They believe they are right, and hence they fight back. It would be the same if another country invaded us and took out our government and tried to instill one similar to theirs. If you didn't have too much of a problem with your own government, you'd probably fight back, too rather than be forced into something else by a foreign country. But the point is that we did not invade Iraq to 'rescue' them from Saddam. We weren't there for moral reasons. There are always other options if that were the case. And now instead of worrying about Saddam, Iraqis have to worry about Americans and insurgents terrorizing them. It's twice the fun!
But seriously, I hope you aren't suggesting that I'm rooting for the insurgency. That's pretty ridiculous. I'm saying that we made a huge, unforgivable mistake going there, and that Saddam being out of power isn't enough to justify it. Not when there are real problems that do threaten America (N. Korea, Iran, for example). Believe me, I probably have more a moral sense of outrage than most, but by invading Iraq we are only creating more death to those in Iraq, and as previously mentioned, creating a much, much, much larger chance of terrorists acting out against us once more. Whereas Iraq before was pretty stable, at least in day to day life, now there are bombs in the middle of the city going off, terrorists from all over the area heading that way, getting together, sharing ideas and hate, whereas under Saddam, terrorism was pretty non-existent (except, of course, terrorism by Saddam himself). If we really cared about the Iraqi people, we could have assassinated Saddam and rid them of that evil without taking over the whole country. But that's not what Bush wanted. He needs an ally (preferrably, an ally with oil), hence the attempt at an Iraqi democracy. But that is not worth the lives lost on both our sides. When will we learn violence only begets more violence? And if we really cared about helping a repressed/violated/whatever people, why not have instead invaded Sudan, for example? I'm sure there would have been a lot less loss of life (how's that for alliteration!?) and there are millions suffering there? We don't because it's not a smart move politically. That's why we're in Iraq, that's why we shouldn't be. That's why Regan shouldn't have himself supported these 'freedom fighters' to quote him and michael moore and yourself back in the 80's. We support the Taliban and Iraq by providing them with weapons and money and surprise!? they start using them....against us. violence = violence.

sad indeed.

BTW, what does being in the first war have to do with being in this one? Are you saying you're too old? (That's not meant as an insult, just real curiosity) Or, do you not feel this war is worth it? That it's not worth losing your life over to create 'little America in the Middle East'? Or are you planning instead of joining the Peace Corp in order to help prevent the killing of innocent people like those in Iraq that you think we're now saving?