The general secretary of a deadbeat organization and, coincidentally, former foreign minister of a deadbeat ally called the United States a “deadbeat donor,” pissing off US congressional figures.
Deadbeat Calls US ‘Deadbeat’
Previous post: Obama Praises Korean Education System?
{ 54 comments… read them below or add one }
What’s a “deabeat”?
I see.
I like the part where the guy said “deadbeat”
hmm. Renegotiate terms for payments or pull out? Would be interesting to see the reaction to that.
Well, at least we Americans are superior deadbeats of refined sensibilities or at least the “senior Republican” in the article should have reminded Ban Ki-moon of that fact.
“eujin”, a deadbeat is a person who does not pay their debts
OR
a really cool name for a death-metal band.
Thanks Elgin. Koehler’s titles are a bit like Carr’s posts; you have to keep re-reading them because they change sometimes.
‘Ban also urged Congress to adopt climate change legislation to boost chances for his top goal this year: clinching a global climate deal’.
And yet, no one seriously addresses the global population, which by conservative estimates is expected to top 8 billion by 2050. Horseshite by any other name . . . .
I’ve always said that Ban would prove to be a consumate diplomat and an accurate representation of the Republic of Korea.
“a deadbeat is a person who does not pay their debts”
Kind of like an ungrateful ally?
Well, Ban is speaking as a U.N. chief so he doesn’t have South Korea’s complex history with the U.S. in mind while he uses the word deadbeat.
Now is really not the time for anyone to be calling the US “deadbeat” because the US is kinda broke right now. It’s a sore issue. Banky Moon could have been more diplomatic about this.
Given what the right-wing generally thinks of the UN, I wonder what Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, or Mark Levin would have to say about this. More than likely, it won’t even register on AM talk radio’s radar because conservatives are busy tripping over themselves to find fault with Obama. Republicans would rather see Obama fail than the US recover.
Rush Limbaugh went public with the statement that he WANTS to see Obama fail.
I hope the right leaning americans on this blog are listening.
http://thinkprogress.org/2009/01/20/limbaugh-obama-fail/
Why is the US stuck paying 22% of the UN’s operating cost? How many countries are UN members? What percentage are they paying??
IMHO, the US should just give their 2-week notice and pull out of the UN entirely.
As far as calling the US a deadbeat donor nation, whooo baby! The US is the most generous nation in the entire flipping world. No one give more to charities, both inside and outside their country, than the US.
My response to Ban Gi-moon, “Bite me asshole. You would still be plowing your rice paddy with an oxen if it weren’t for the generosity of the US. Might be prudent to remember that the next time you decide to name-call.”
Food for thought, no pun intended… interestingly, I do not South Korea on that list….
Contributions to WFP 2009
http://www.wfp.org/node/9243
Contributions to WFP in 2009 (in US$) as of 8 March 2009
1 USA 207,874,080
2 Japan 128,200,000
3 United Kingdom 36,416,319
4 Netherlands 35,268,135
5 European Commission 29,931,468
6 Germany 19,020,187
7 Russian Federation 15,000,000
8 UN CERF Common Funds and Agencies 13,352,440
9 Brazil 11,880,000
10 Spain 11,775,892
11 Italy 10,948,641
12 Luxembourg 10,569,492
13 Private Donors 10,201,624
14 Saudi Arabia 6,335,049
15 Greece 4,817,508
16 Canada 4,103,748
17 Switzerland 3,655,770
18 Australia 3,472,202
19 Pakistan 3,436,130
20 New Zealand 3,296,703
21 France 2,624,672
22 Austria 1,130,187
23 Jordan 781,101
24 World Bank 331,972
25 Finland 294,714
26 Cuba 74,400
27 Faroe Islands 52,128
28 India 27,660
29 Kazakhstan 20,000
30 Thailand 17,182
31 Israel 15,000
32 Singapore 10,000
Grand Total 574,934,404
Let’s see what the donation were for last year…
Ah, THERE’S South Korea! Seems they donated about 437,000 more than Cambodia. Impressive.
Contributions to WFP 2008
Contributions to WFP in 2008 (in US$) as of 8 March.
1 USA 2,070,114,362
2 Saudi Arabia 503,752,713
3 European Commission 355,434,578
4 Canada 275,392,315
5 UN CERF Common Funds and Agencies 217,580,402
6 Japan 177,899,509
7 United Kingdom 171,049,996
8 Private Donors 143,749,183
9 Netherlands 117,435,477
10 Spain 116,943,829
11 Australia 110,696,128
12 Italy 101,732,716
13 Germany 100,478,897
14 Sweden 81,673,457
15 Denmark 56,543,698
16 Norway 53,466,460
17 Switzerland 45,667,965
18 France 40,877,758
19 Iraq 40,000,000
20 Ireland 39,819,740
21 Finland 28,256,633
22 Belgium 24,784,250
23 India 17,130,140
24 Nepal 16,200,000
25 Russian Federation 15,000,000
26 Luxembourg 14,275,773
27 New Zealand 14,069,125
28 World Bank 11,142,763
29 China 9,575,850
30 Greece 8,539,968
31 Bangladesh 7,186,983
32 Kenya 6,035,767
33 Ghana 4,550,000
34 Turkey 4,100,000
35 Austria 3,935,285
36 Republic of Korea 2,601,010
37 OPEC Fund 2,436,829
38 Burundi 2,431,050
39 Madagascar 2,410,773
40 Cambodia 2,164,000
41 Iceland 2,104,166
42 Republic of Zambia 2,030,052
43 African Dev Bank 2,000,000
43 Indonesia 2,000,000
45 Pakistan 1,925,185
46 Burkina Faso 1,857,363
47 Brazil 1,440,694
48 Mauritania 1,237,445
49 Egypt 1,211,145
50 Poland 1,163,668
51 Colombia 1,103,369
52 Haiti 975,000
53 Czech Republic 816,725
54 Republic of Congo 800,000
55 Venezuela 750,000
56 Malawi 539,460
57 Honduras 453,304
58 East Timor 350,000
59 Peru 316,652
60 South Africa 315,364
61 Liechtenstein 302,770
62 Romania 300,532
63 Ecuador 247,780
64 Estonia 241,999
65 Bolivia 232,750
66 Cyprus 200,000
66 El Salvador 200,000
68 Mali 176,000
69 Monaco 157,232
70 Botswana 151,200
71 Thailand 137,864
72 Slovenia 135,407
73 Portugal 110,891
74 Mozambique 105,048
75 Argentina 100,000
76 Tanzania 94,042
77 Jordan 88,728
78 Cuba 74,400
79 Slovakia 71,995
80 Hungary 65,000
81 Syria 62,630
82 Croatia 62,000
83 Guinea, The Republic Of 59,148
84 Andorra 57,807
85 Mexico 50,000
85 United Arab Emirates 50,000
87 International Organization for Migration 42,626
88 Faroe Islands 30,425
89 Israel 30,000
90 Lithuania 27,052
91 Nicaragua 25,000
92 Panama 21,565
93 Bulgaria 15,000
94 Sri Lanka 11,163
95 Holy See 10,000
96 Bhutan 5,014
97 Malaysia 4,213
98 Singapore 2,126
Grand Total 5,044,284,381
* Allocations to WFP from common funding mechanisms.
Note: Contribution data may be subject to change as a result of retroactive adjustments
#12,
Guess what? I hope Obama fails, too. I am really not in the mood for the government to own ever larger chunks of the economy. I also find it sickening that government has used the current economic downturn to make the DC area into a boomtown.
I know this might come as a shock to the Hawaiian punch drinkers out there, but hoping that Obama fails is not the same thing has hoping that America fails.
Remember, “Dissent is the highest form of patriotism.” (Not said by Jefferson, BTW.)
Boooo. So basically you’re willing to trade a temporary period of suffering by ALL americans for a temporary control of power by your favored party?
I think that comes perilously close to justifiably being described as anti-american. Sure, saying that on a blog like this is easy enough, but I doubt you would have the balls to say it in something like a town hall gathering.
Seriously, folks are being willful idiots about this. Not like that’s anything new. A coupla points:
1) Limbaugh very clearly said “IF Obama wants to implement socialism, then I hope he fails.” If you don’t see the difference between that and hoping Obama and therefore the USA fail in general, then you are, quite frankly, an idiot. It’s very clear. Here, I can say this: If my dad wants to kill me, then I hope he fails. Now, are you assholes going to run to the media shouting “colontos wants his dad to fail!”? Or how about this: if America decides to kill all the Jews, then I hope she fails. This is the problem with the media; they misinterpret things, and they do it purpose and they know they do it, just to sell a story. Because nuance and subtlety do not sell well, but big strident headlines do. But I can understand the media doing it, because they need to make money. What I can’t understand is dipshit fucks on the internet that take it as God’s truth and parrot it on every message board from here to 4chan. Those are the people that really frustrate me, JW…*nudge*.
2) I hope you don’t pretend for a second that every liberal in this country (this country being America, where my computer chair is currently located) didn’t want Bush to fail. That includes wanting us to lose in Iraq. One of the liberal grand poobahs, Harry Reid, stood on the floor of the Senate and proclaimed in his best Laurence Olivier that “This war is lost,” just like that charlatan bloward Klansman Byrd maxed out the drama-meter by saying “Today I weep for my country” and bullshit like that. They wanted us to lose in Iraq so that they could say “I told you so,” that they were right all along. They wanted Bush to fail and they wanted Iraq to fail, and they said so, vocally, many times. Now when Limbaugh makes a qualified statement that he wants a specific theoretical part of Obama’s platform to fail, suddenly HE’S the traitor? Don’t make me fuckin’ laugh. And you don’t think the media has a left bias? They’ve been all over Limbaugh like white on rice, shilling for the Dems at every opportunity. And if you parrot that shit, then YOU’RE the idiot, not anybody else. Have some fucking self-respect, think a little bit.
Whoa colontos, slow down. Then you can accuse Limbaugh of something almost as bad — falsely accusing the president of your own country. Limbaugh, if you look at that link I put up above, clearly says that he wants LIBERALISM to fail. We’re not exactly talking about genocide here.
Cuts both ways man.
JW #18,
I think you may need to actually read what you quoted. I specifically said “hoping that Obama fails is not the same thing has hoping that America fails” and I made it pretty clear that I opposed the state taking over larger chunks of the economy, which is what Obama is working on. IMHO, Obama failing would be good for the country, especially since his policies are prolonging the current downturn in the business cycle and sowing the seeds for another economic crisis a few years down the road.
Of course I would be willing to say that in a gathering of people (“town hall meetings” outside of New England are just cheap pieces of political theater used by both parties). I don’t know what kind of fascist hell you are thinking about where I would not.
Let me write it one more time for folks who might still not get it: Obama is the president of America. He is not America.
PS: “sickened” is a little strong (post #17). “Disturbed” would be more accurate.
#19
A conservative hopes liberalism fails? Shocking. I am still waiting for the story here.
Ok if that’s all you meant to say, then you’re right and I apologize for equating you with Limbaugh. But Limbaugh wasn’t just saying that he wants Obama to fail to *implement* his policies. He wants the policies to fail all the way so that it shows up in the consequences in the form of suffering, which would be the only way to have him decisively removed from power.
JW. You ain’t makin’ sense now.
Well, read it. Limbaugh says he wants liberalism, and therefore Obama, to fail. Have we come to the point that everybody knows for certain that liberalism is bad for america? Then why do we have two major parties interchanging executive power almost every 2 elective cycles?
No, that’s pretty much exactly what he was saying.
Limbaugh has come to that conclusion decades ago, yes.
#22 You have to remember that Limbaugh believes that Obama’s policies (and American liberalism in general) are bad for America. So hoping that Obama fails is hoping for the best for the USA. There is nothing in Limbaugh’s statement which should be taken to mean he hopes the country is worse off.
#24,
No – we’ve come to a point that the opposing party is ‘led’ by a pig-headed and small-minded person that only the most obtuse would listen to and only the most stupid would believe. Do you Republicans believe that Rush’s ‘ideas’ would benefit any more than .001% of America’s population?
Just to remind you folks, Limbaugh is currently the most popular face of conservatism.
So far, all you’re showing is that you can parrot James Carville and the MSM. Good job on that, I guess, but seriously, how about some thinking?
Hey, I never claimed that I was smart enough to think at your level. Just doing what I can.
I once saw a documentary or news report or something which showed an utterly contrite and embarrassed Ban Kimun – and saying something like how he wanted to hide under the desk when they read out the paltry sum S.Korea contributed. So he doesn’t put aside feeling Korean and feeling embarrassed about it. However, having said that I don’t think we can use it as an argument about his direct words to US. What he was thinking in his head just popped out of his mouth and this is Bush-stupid for someone in the position of a king diplomat, but to accuse him of being a Korean first, is keeping with the spirit of UN. I mean, don’t we all assume that the background bias is left behind while you take the job?
*is* keeping with the spirit of UN -> *ISN’T*
So extending your logic to Iraq, for those who believe that the US military occupation of Iraq is bad for Iraq and the US are hoping for the best for both countries if they wish for the US military to fail.
I know this is off topic, but can somebody please tell me how to put a photo next to my comments?
misuda, it took me way too long to figure that one out on my own, so I will lend you a helping hand. Click on the link below, sign up for a free account, upload your image and set it to your liking and it will start appearing on this site as well as any other gravatar enabled sites.
http://www.gravatar.com
I’m not sure why nobody helped me when I asked for help. BOOOOOO
Aww shit, did you mean a photo WITHIN the comments and not next to your name? I don’t think you can do that.
Wait, don’t sign up for a free account. Use your “misuda” account. Dammit I’m such an idiot.
Those are some nice numbers you have there Gillian. I hope you’re not offering them in support of “The US is the most generous nation in the entire flipping world.”
Just look at some of the per capita contributions, Luxembourg $21, Netherlands $2, Faeroes (not a member of the UN) $1.06, Japan $1, New Zealand $0.77, USA $0.68. I suppose the US deserves some credit for not being as advanced as some of those countries. They also have the undoubted burden of hosting the UN Headquarters and the extra hassle that comes from having to permanently sit on the Security Council and veto stuff. Both China and India look after more under-fives than the US does.
Thanks JW, you are an angel. It was real easy after all that googling.
D’uh, it don’t worky. Arrgh.
Nope, there I am, Thanks JW!
since all the recent action is on this thread, I’ll try to use it to steer some of you guys here:
http://www.rjkoehler.com/2009/03/07/open-thread-90/#comment-215469
Eujin, I am indeed using those numbers, along with the fact that the US pays 22% of the total operating cost of the UN, to support my contention that the US is the most generous country in the world.
And just for shits and giggles, I gotta ask: Just because a country has money does that obligate them to give said money to poorer, lesser fortunate countries? I am sensing a bit of “Poor=entitled” “Wealthy=obligated” I am personally a bit tired of the world standing there with their hand out. Just my personal opinion.
#26
You have to remember that Limbaugh believes that Obama’s policies (and American liberalism in general) are bad for America. So hoping that Obama fails is hoping for the best for the USA. There is nothing in Limbaugh’s statement which should be taken to mean he hopes the country is worse off.
Why are you defending Limbaugh? The man is a politically-inspired entertainer. A demagogue-clown.
Andy, it is one thing to be opposed to the President’s policies. It’s quite another to say that you hope the President fails. The success of the President and the welfare of the nation are closely linked. By saying that you want the President to fail is to wish the nation harm.
I know this might come as a shock to the Hawaiian punch drinkers out there, but hoping that Obama fails is not the same thing has hoping that America fails.
Remember, “Dissent is the highest form of patriotism.” (Not said by Jefferson, BTW.)
No, I believe in this case one could conceivably call it treason.
#43
Eujin, I am indeed using those numbers, along with the fact that the US pays 22% of the total operating cost of the UN, to support my contention that the US is the most generous country in the world.
The Parable of the Widow’s Mite tells us that per capita donation is more meaningful than absolute figures.
Just because a country has money does that obligate them to give said money to poorer, lesser fortunate countries?
No one’s obligated to do anything. The US gives aid to poorer countries out of enlightened self-interest. Nothing’s really for “free”.
There will ALWAYS be another economic crisis down the road, Andy. Have you heard about the Biotech bust of 2017? Were you prepared for the Hydrogen Economy debacle 0f 2029? If you were lucky, the Aquaculture meltdown of 2035 didn’t hit your retirement pot too hard, but no one escaped the pain of the Mass-customized Spacedust Chemical boom of 2050!
(Note that I didn’t mention which Administration held the White House for the above crises. I ran models on both alternative realities, and there was no correlation.)
I wanted Bush to fail.
I fear that Obama may be failing.
I hope Obama gets it together.
I want America to succeed.
and
I want everyone within earshot of the US media to permanently reduce or suspend their intake of pundit-juice.
#33
Sorry, the logic does not extend. I am kind of surprised that you don’t get that (unless you are intentionally trying not to). I have seen the same comparison made in other places, I just would have expected more from you.
If the US had failed in Iraq, it would have meant more dead Americans. If Obama fails, it would meant that there would be less government ownership of the economy and less of a drain of recourses to finance said massive government expansion. That, IMHO, is good for the country. Your challenge is to figure out how the US failing in Iraq would have been good for the USA. A more accurate comparison would be to have hoped Bush would fail to get Congress to authorize the war.
#44
No it isn’t. Let me lay it out in very simple terms. Obama has an agenda. His agenda is bad for the country (YMMV on that point but that is my view). Therefore his failing is good for the country. I would like nothing more than to see Obama be a one-term president. Another option would be to get a Republican majority in the House after 2010 (the Senate is out of reach) to force him to moderate.
Of course, on areas where I agree with his agenda (and I am sure there are a least a couple), I wish him all the best.
As for the treason bit, if you really believe that, please feel free to forward the contents of the offending post to the FBI.
Obama is the president, not the God-king.
#46,
That is a given (and a good point as far as it goes). But, just as housing policies decided in the 1970s, 1990s and just after 9-11 made this downturn worse than usually, bad ideas instituted now can make things worse down the line.
This has been fun. Maybe we can pick this up again next week.
Signing off.
YOU and others who support the occupation may think that failure means more dead Americans, but those who oppose the war think failure means fewer dead Americans if it results in an early withdrawal. A prolonged occupation, even if Iraq “gets better” as defined by meeting some benchmarks, more Americans may still die if key benchmarks like disarming the militias remain unmet.
A prolonged occupation, even if Iraq “gets better” as defined by meeting some benchmarks, means more Americans may die if key benchmarks like disarming the militias remain unmet.
I’m trying to think of a way to make this sound sensible. Obama fails but it’s not bad for America. Anything bad that happens can be put right in four years time. Obama borrows too much money, but we never have to pay it back. The economy goes down, but not too much. Unemployment goes up, but not too much. People lose their jobs, but quickly find new ones and no one is tempted to commit crime or get divorced or become an alcoholic, at least not too much and not for very long. Nationalization causes our industries to become uncompetitive, but our foreign competitors are not able to take advantage of it, at least not in the long run. Some talented, highly-skilled people think about emigrating, but never go through with it. The quality of education in some schools goes down, but not so much that the kids can’t make it up in later grades. The Iranians and others take advantage of our weak foreign policy, but somehow don’t manage to do anything truly evil with it, although they clearly demonstrate they would like to, they’re just too incompetent to follow through. Oh, and the areas where we agree with his agenda, we wish him all the best.
I don’t think you’re hoping he fails, I think you’re hoping he doesn’t become President.
#44. “By saying that you want the President to fail is to wish the nation harm.” That is a lie. Obama’s spending spree and governmental exposion is bad for America. If Obama succeeds with his plan, unemployment will reach 20%, depression will ensue, and a world war will be the only means of recovery. I hope he fails at that. Do you want him to succeed?
#44,
NK, I have to disagree, as #53 did, with that statement. If I thought that some respected Republican, rather than an arrogant-and-asshatic entertainer, wished that President to fail…that’s different. It really is the natural course of things. I am sure that, although I beleive them to be wrong, a patriotic Republican base exists that can simultaneously wish the President no success while still wishing the nation well.
Admittedly, the chance of the Prsident failing and the country doing well (what’s that one, ergo hoc sunt propter hoc?) because of that failure is small, but stranger things have been known to happen.
Just so you know, I am very glad our President is who he is – better than the other guy, ya know?
You must log in to post a comment.