Okay, I'm sorry, but Bono is the one who's infuriating.
What's all this bullshit about calling Paul Martin infuriating anyways? I mean, personally, I think what the PM is saying is logical.
Bono's been going on and on ad nauseum, pushing Canada to commit 0.7% of our GDP to foreign aid 'cause right now, we only spend about 0.26%.
Okay, look --- I'm not saying that we shouldn't do that, but what Martin said about not making any promises because he wants to commit to small increases that he knows he can afford was logical and sensible. What's the point of making bullshit promises that you can't afford to make good on?
If anything, I applaud Martin for being upfront and honest and sticking to what he knows is feasible.
It's all good and well for the likes of Bono and Bob Geldof to come riding in and telling the G8 leaders that this is what we should do to wipe out poverty...and it's a worthy, admirable cause that we really do need to do something about...but I think Martin's the only one who's looking at things in a realistic light. And come on --- he's the one who's running a country. What do Bono and Bob Geldof know about that?
Dumping more money's not going to wipe out poverty in Africa right away. Geldof has acknowledged this. This sort of thing takes time and money's not the catch-all solution.
What really irritated me was when Bono called Martin's unwillingness to make promises he can't keep "very frustrating and annoying and infuriating."
Um, yeah.
I think that Martin's being honest, at least --- which isn't something you can say about a lot of politicians.
Martin flat out said, "We will ultimately (reach) the 0.7%, but we're nto going to do it...until we can basically say to Canadians, 'Here's how we're doing it and here's when we're going to do it and there are no caveats and conditions."
*
Geez.
And here I was, thinking on Americans got all patriotic and shit.
What's all this bullshit about calling Paul Martin infuriating anyways? I mean, personally, I think what the PM is saying is logical.
Bono's been going on and on ad nauseum, pushing Canada to commit 0.7% of our GDP to foreign aid 'cause right now, we only spend about 0.26%.
Okay, look --- I'm not saying that we shouldn't do that, but what Martin said about not making any promises because he wants to commit to small increases that he knows he can afford was logical and sensible. What's the point of making bullshit promises that you can't afford to make good on?
If anything, I applaud Martin for being upfront and honest and sticking to what he knows is feasible.
It's all good and well for the likes of Bono and Bob Geldof to come riding in and telling the G8 leaders that this is what we should do to wipe out poverty...and it's a worthy, admirable cause that we really do need to do something about...but I think Martin's the only one who's looking at things in a realistic light. And come on --- he's the one who's running a country. What do Bono and Bob Geldof know about that?
Dumping more money's not going to wipe out poverty in Africa right away. Geldof has acknowledged this. This sort of thing takes time and money's not the catch-all solution.
What really irritated me was when Bono called Martin's unwillingness to make promises he can't keep "very frustrating and annoying and infuriating."
Um, yeah.
I think that Martin's being honest, at least --- which isn't something you can say about a lot of politicians.
Martin flat out said, "We will ultimately (reach) the 0.7%, but we're nto going to do it...until we can basically say to Canadians, 'Here's how we're doing it and here's when we're going to do it and there are no caveats and conditions."
*
Geez.
And here I was, thinking on Americans got all patriotic and shit.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home