When actress Meryl Streep talked about Haiti in her Golden Globes acceptance speech, she hyperventilated (as only the glorious Meryl can) about how she was giving money to something called Partners in Health, a remark that sent the more alert among the show’s viewers scurrying to Google to find out what organization Streep might be talking about.
This is a very good thing.
If you have not already given to Haitian relief, or if you have and you feel you can afford to fork over a bit more, Partners in Health, which has worked on the ground in the country for over 20-years, is one organization you might most want to consider.
Writer Tracy Kidder profiled Partners in Health and its co-founder Paul Farmer in his everyone-should-read-it 2003 book Mountains Behind Mountains—portraying vividly in the book’s narrative, the intelligence, insight, skill and passion with which the organization is run.
Then last week, Kidder wrote an excellent NY Times editorial in which he pointed out that, because most of Partners in Health’s 10 or so clinics and hospitals are not located in Port-au-Prince, unlike many of Haiti’s health facilities, they remained undamaged. As a consequence, PIH is one of the largest intact health care providers in the country. And because of its deep roots in Haiti and its ability to work well with Haitian Ministry of Health, it is able to get help to those who need it most right away, without the delay and bureaucratic nonsense that is plaguing some of the other aide organizations. (Here’s their Charity Navigator score, by the way.)
Here’s a video of Kidder talking about PIH on Rachel Maddow’s show.
And as I mentioned last week, Operation USA, is another excellent place to give to the relief effort. (Here’s their Charity Navigator score.) The bang for the charitable buck with OP USA’s work is nothing short of remarkable.
But, for Haiti in particular, Partners In Health might be one of the most direct methods of transforming American donations into immediate help for the suffering Haitian people.
Ah, yes. Hollywood, with high incomes and expensive jewelry, cars, and homes, giving each other awards in an opulent setting while asking others to give to a cause…. Sort of brings a tear to one’s eye for their sacrifice to not think of themselves for thirty seconds.
“Ah, yes. Hollywood, with high incomes and expensive jewelry, cars, and homes, giving each other awards in an opulent setting while asking others to give to a cause………”
******************
confucius says ……..
Some cause happiness wherever they go; others, whenever they go.
“with high incomes and expensive jewelry”
Wealth envy is a sad thing. I thought this was a chronic condition of just liberals? Apparently not.
No, Scott. You have it wrong. It’s not wealth envy. It’s about Hollywood wanting others to sacrifice to share when they don’t themselves. They’re a bunch of hypocrites.
I wonder if Streep would be willing to sell her Golden Globe trophy and donate the proceeds to the Haiti rescue? No, on the other hand, I don’t wonder. When the rubber should meet the road, celebrities run into the ditch.
Sandra Bullock certainly didn’t run in the ditch. I read today she directed a cool million to Drs. W/O Borders, whereas the Material Girl Madonna only chunked a quarter of that. Of course I suppose it’s a sign that Madonna’s fallen on hard times? Yeah right!
By the way, the point of this post was not to suggest anything one way or the other about actors and their giving, but only to point at Partners in Health.
Actors are just like anybody else: some are perfectly delightful human beings whom you’d be more than happy to have as your neighbors. Some—not so much.
I simply used Streep as a way in because she mentioned how she felt weird being at an awards show when so much suffering was going on elsewhere, then she nattered something about Partners in Health, which I’d been thinking about referencing anyway.
I do, however, really appreciate people like George Clooney and Bono who have gone out of their way to inform themselves and who know they are absurdly blessed by monetary success, and who use the power of their celebrity to accomplish much good, and don’t ask for some kind of special credit for doing so.
Then, Celeste, do a better job of picking your sources for charity recommendations. There are more credible givers than Hollywood celebrities.
If Martin Luther King, Jr. were alive today, he would say, “Right on, Woody!”
Obscene juxtaposition of the names a great man and a bigoted clown in that last sentence. I don’t know whether the shamelessness outpaces the stupidity or vice versa.
Too bad this little crank, desperate for attention, still stinks up the comments here…and insults the memory of Dr. King in the process.
Celeste, thanks for the heads up – it’s hard to know which charities are legit when there are so many competing for attention all at once. However I must admit Woody has a point with his comment: some of these actors, like Olivia Wilde of “House” (AND Streep and Amy Poehler) are getting kudos for auctioning off the glamorous gowns they wore, which they got for free in the first place, for Haiti relief.
Meanwhile it’s so frustrating to see what’s going on in Port-au-Prince, even as a hospital a 75-minute drive away is sitting empty, fully equipped and waiting for patients; can’t say offhand WHOSE but it was on ABC’s World News LATE last night and on the website, if anyone cares to check. This suggests the tremendous lack of organization there: one thing lacking is clearly just transportation.
REG LIED! He said that he would stop commenting here but now he’s back as bad as ever. It was so peaceful when he was gone. He even mutilated Marc Cooper’s site so badly that Marc had to step in to stop reg’s insults. I discuss points and reg throws out profanities and name calling. Maybe he will go away from here again to spare us.
However, over there, he did propose that the U.N. coordinate future disaster efforts like Haiti’s. Let’s see how they’re doing on this one.
UN Troops Fire Rubber Bullet into Haitian Crowd
Controlled chaos turned to confrontation when UN peace keepers were ordered to clear the street filled with Haitian men seeking jobs.
A guy who thinks “child molester” is a funny insult, serially posts racist cartoons and who tosses “fag” into the hopper here or at Marc’s needs to shut his filthy fucking mouth.
Any blog that allows this piece of shit to comment deserves him.
Proclamation (Shared with other states)
Your comments here about Haiti, reg, have been so enlightening.
If Robert E. Lee were alive today, he would say. “Reg, you are no gentleman and have no business trying to associate with people of class and good manners. Good day, sir.”
Spoken like a true sonofabitch of the unreconstructed South…go fuck yourself, you racist, homophobic, lying little moron.
That is all.
Wow. Do you make points here for personal attacks and name calling? Just asking in case we need to know if we all should freshen up on our repertoir in the event somebody pisses us off.
“Your comments here about Haiti, reg, have been so enlightening.”
This relentless little troll’s contribution here is to diss people who are contributing to relief…when he’s outed here, he whines and wants critics to go away.
No problem with going away…I’ve been away and enjoying commenting elsewhere – this isn’t a productive forum for me because the cheapest and tawdriest of commenters are given free rein and I have trouble just ignoring it…just kind of amazed that a guy who used Richard lo Cicero’s death to try to score cheap and dishonest points or who has serially invoked “child molester” as an insult is welcome.
Trollboy happened to have pushed too many buttons today over at Coopestown and I had to take him down. Engaging the simpering little weasel here is overkill.
reg scored a “takedown?” I thought that you had to enter a match to score a takedown. reg just circles outside the ring flinging curse words and false accusations at everyone who steps in to challenge him. That’s not engaging someone. I hope and presume that his last comment is really his last.
I just realized why reg back with his crude attacks on this site. The electricity is out where Celeste lives, so she can’t get on line to see his vile words and to delete them. So much for reg’s respect for Celeste, even after she asked people to dial it back. He takes advantage of her absence to fling his filth around here. He hits her when her back is turned. In the meantime, ignore him.
“vile words” from the guy who called me a “child molester” many times over. Also, Woody, you are totally delusional if you think you’ve ever won an argument on substance with me. You haven’t. Never. You don’t have the analytic capacity to make an argument on its merits. The only thing that sustains you is a core of dishonesty and a trivial nature that assumes annoying people and repeating the same drivel over and over is “argument.” No one who reads your comments on either of the sites you troll takes you seriously – you are pathological and pathetic. The only reason one can’t “win” an argument with someone like you is because “you’re not even wrong” you’re so fucking lowlife and moronic.
You should have been banned when you hauled out the “child molester” shit and started dancing on Richard lo Cicero’s grave – spouting lies, incidentally – over at Marc’s – if not for the serial racism and homophobic garbage Why you haven’t been is a mystery. You’re cheap, tawdry, retrograde, dishonest and ignorant. And annoying. That’s your ace in the hole – your persistence is what gets you the attention you crave. If you weren’t such a child, you’d be ashamed of your idiotic antics. Now pull your Eddie Haskell shit…keep trolling…and try to restrain your worst impulses at least in your spate of dumbass remarks here and at Coopers about the Haitians who are suffering. Not asking much…
The data point that Woody hates more than any other because it proves his entire “ideology” is built on bullshit – the enormous growth of national deficits under the tax-cutting “fiscal conservatives” he loves so much –
http://zfacts.com/p/318.html
(It’s a bit too easy to prove an “accountant” mouthing teabagger bullshit as his best shot is a historical and economic illiterate with simple bigotry as his backup mode.)
In order for Woody’s POV – his general prescription for all of the nation’s ills – to be taken seriously, he first has to explain how “fiscal conservatism” could possibly mean cutting taxes across the board BEFORE one has come up with a plan to cut government expenses. The tax thing – with the exception of targeted tax cuts, which I and many libersls have often supported – cannot precede actual spending cuts that a party is willing to run on and prove politically possible. This is something we’ve learned from the Arnold debacle in California (not just Arnold, but a generation of “magical” economic thinking about taxes and spending, starting with Prop 13.) Reagan, Bush, et. al. are NOT fiscal conservatives -just irresponsible tax-cutters (demagogues) yet Woody gave them his full support.
There are a handful of conservatives who are reality-based – Bruce Bartlett and Judge Richard Posner writing on economics, most notably (Posner has finally read Keynes and thinks his Chicago School buddies are delusional in the wake of the most recent financial crisis.) Another good conservative thinker who is trying to avoid the pitfalls of FOX/TeaParty/Palin insanity is Andrew Sullivan. But Woody isn’t a “conservative” – he’s a pinched little man, full of resentments and bigotry, parading his ignorance. Trivial. And when he’s going full bore – such as posting racist cartoons, trying to find some partisan points in child molestation, of all things, or baiting gay people, he’s contemptible. Beneath contempt, really.
Now explain your economic genius to us…since you’ve got a degree in accounting. Let’s get a dissertation on your “fiscal conservatism” – or is it just that you don’t like paying taxes like the next guy in line. Big deal. Bwaaaahhhaaahhhh!!!!
I’m going to give you this as a freebie – since there’s no logical answer to the problem I’ve outlined that gave us the biggest deficits ever under “fiscal conservatives.” I’ll let others judge your “logic.” I have no doubt what a bunch of nonsense you will spew, and frankly I don’t have time to help you with your psychological problems, i.e. not having grown up.
Reg, I’m delighted to have you back and welcome your differentiation between fiscal and philosophical conservatives and the political conservatives who, at present, seem to call the shots in the Republican party. But please dial back the swearing and the direct personal attacks.
Thank you.
(I still have no power but, thankfully, Starbucks does.)
reg, do you realize how much you sound like a girl?
Does screaming and throwing dishes amount to winning an argument to you?
For substance, one graph, the one you linked, does not explain the situation behind the numbers. It completely omits the parties of Congress responsible for growing “entitlement programs” and for necessitating spending to rebuild a neglected military and to re-grow an economy through tax cuts and private investments. Also, it was common for the Democrats in Congress to say that Reagan’s submitted balanced budgets were DOA. What a pathetic waste of time you are.
And, we sure don’t need people instructing us on budget matters when those same people wasted a trillion dollars only to see unemployment grow and wasted bail out money on companies that should have gone bankrupt.
If I want a stimulus, I trust American workers to determine the best way to spend their money rather than let the government waste it. In my area, we’re still trying to figure out why Obama built handicapped access ramps and street crossings along a road for which there are nothing but fields and no sidewalks. Some people around here could have used new cars instead, but you wasted their money on nothing.
But, while the subject of this post is Haiti, you just keep on throwing your spitting hissy fit about nothing related to the topic. Go back to those wonderful sites where you engage others without anyone like me to throw water on your ideas.
My guess is that it’s that time of the month and you have a nose bleed. Get over it and go away.
Don’t feel intimidated by reg, Celeste. Things were a lot more calm and rational when he was gone.
Here are numbers that should concern us: A by-the-numbers look at Obama’s first year
Celeste – I don’t have time for this so I won’t be commenting here as long as a troll who accused me of being a child molester serially on your blog – and who danced on richard lo cicero’s grave – is welcome. The only reason I even bothered is that the little prick – and there really are no other accurate terms – hauled out the child molester bullshit again over at Marc’s. If you want to play host to a vile little troll, that’s your call.
Enjoy!
Keep lying and goodbye!
Woody enjoys fishing and the hooks Reg every time.
Oh, and for the record, Woody’s response on “tax cutters” as fiscal conservatives evaded the issue – do you cut taxes unless you have a politically viable strategy to cut government spending first. He danced past it…doesn’t have an answer except “blame the Dems” which is essentially not wanting to take responsibility for the GOP’s “fiscal conservatism” beyond opportunistic tax cuts that make deficits worse. He’s got nothing. Read Bruce Bartlett on this if you want to get past total nonsense emanating from the ignorant, selfish and crude.
I knew he’d blow that one…he’s much better at the Eddie Haskell thing than at any substantive discussions that are grounded in actual data and analysis as opposed to bullshit.
Later…
For the record, one can’t explain complex economic matters to a school dropout who already has made up his mind.
Woody, you have just done what I asked reg not to do. I didn’t read high enough on the thread.
Reg, I’m keeping tabs on Woody as well. What happened in the past I cannot fix. I can only fix things in the here and now. I would prefer you were stayed around as I value the intelligence of your comments. But if you’re unhappy with the climate I respect whatever choice you make.
With either of you, there is no reason why an argument has to devolve into the kind of name calling that goes on between you two. There really isn’t. You’re both adults.
I have a very limited time on the web today and much to do so I hope I can leave the subject at what I said.
Woody, you’re just baiting me. Next one I delete. I have zero patience today.
Celeste, I have no idea what you’re talking about when you said that I’m baiting you. And, if you look at attacks between reg and myself, you’ll find that 100% of his are personal and vile and very few of mine would be found objectionable by objective people. If anything, reg is baiting you to monitor me when he’s the offender. Don’t be a fool and fall for that.
reg, stay away. I haven’t seen any intelligent comments by you. Celeste was just being nice. Things were much better and more civil without you.
Me likes me men w/fire in their belly! I’m a latecomer to this forum and I believe “child molester” accusations is below both of you. The Richard LoCicero contributions ended shortly before I found this blog. I know from your references that he is passed and ended his days homeless. I’m sorry.
Gava, you can’t possibly know the truth without both sides of the story, the time frame, and what reg was saying himself. I’m not going there, but he’s just shouting loud and long trying to act the victim. It’s an old liberal trick of demonzing your opponent. Have better sense then to fall for it.
Is the blog hijacking about over yet?
Gava, here’s what reg is currently referencing. Of course, he didn’t have a problem with it except that I brought it up.
Oooh, that is so terrible. I didn’t even mention a name. reg assumed that it was about him. What a whiner!
Okay, I just needed to put this in for clarification.
Scott, I apologize for my part. You’ll notice that this only happened when reg broke his promise and came back to this site with his personal and crude attacks. I should defend myself when smeared, but he shouldn’t start the smearing. That’s all that I’ll say on this.
I have really tried to avoid getting into this, but I have to respond to Woody’s acting as if he is as pure as driven snow. This is poppycock.
I have googled how many times Woody has called me pathetic or stupid on this site: it’s in excess of 100 for the latter and in excess of 75 for the former, all for having the temerity to disagree with him. This was especially insulting to Celeste.
I am making a firm effort to ignore Woody as I think Hiroshi nails it in comment number 28. Let’s be honest, however: none of us has clean hands, myself included.
So Woody, I really could care less if you hate my guts and hope I die, but out of respect for Celeste, could you cut the ad hominem comments and baiting reg.
And reg, please take my advice and ignore him.
What Randy Paul said. All of it.
Randy, it’s hardly fair to concentrate on me when your blogging partner has been the greatest offender of personal attacks. Whenever I bring up a point, he immediately launches into a personal and obscene attack. That’s it. There is no substance in his responses.
Those aren’t cases of baiting him. Rather, it’s cases of reg trying to fight by slinging mud. You and Celeste know it’s true.
And, Randy, you know that I’ve been cordial to you since the first of the year. Why deal in history?
I googled how many times reg basically told me to f- myself on this site and came up with 171. Calling me a racist came to 213. What do you have to say to that?
What does Celeste have to say to that? And, I’m offended, Celeste, that you completely accept what Randy said without putting forth a fairer side. And, you claim to be on the side of justice.
I’m the victim. Not the perpetrator. Just because you two share a left-wing philosophical view with a vile attacker is no reason for you to go off on his victim.
Importantly, note that this attack activity didn’t occur when reg was away and only started when he came back. He’s the one variable. Think.
Thanks, Celeste. I tried, but some people can’t help themselves.
Back to ignoring.
Randy, reg is your blogging partner and you’re going to defend him, shamelessly, by attacking me. Should I get GM to come over here and make a presentation favorable to me?
No, you didn’t try., unless you were trying to stir it up more. You should have stayed quiet and let it die, but you wanted to get in your digs.
I tried, Celeste.
“You’re both adults.”
Actually, that’s what’s in question. I don’t think it’s true. There are some things Woody does that drive me nuts. I will call a moron a moron. I don’t believe I have actually engaged in hyperbole with Woody – he’s so over-the-top that he proves any hyperbolic intent on my part factually accurate. These comment threads don’t work for me. But other than the presence of an insufferable troll, you’ve got a great blog.
reg, to be factual, you fight with almost everyone and call them vile names, too. Since “these comment threads don’t work” for you, then stay off of them so that calmness can return.
Matthew Chapter 5, Verse 9:
Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called sons of God.
“Calling me a racist came to 213. What do you have to say to that?”
It’s true, based on your behavior – especially linking to racist cartoons. It would still be true if I said it 1000 times. Therefore, go fuck yourself for the 172nd time. You’re a childish slimeball. And the child molesting insinuations aside – and you didn’t “Eddie Haskell” your way out of even that last one – your treatment of Richard was inexcusable and, frankly, obscene.
Celeste is welcome to delete…but the fact is that Woody acts like a serial polluter and should have been banned. My opinion. Internet comments. Big deal.
As Reagan would say, “There you go, again.” I state the facts and get rewarded with an obscene personal attack. Nice, reg. Maybe Celeste doesn’t mind that. We’ll find out if your crude values are the same as hers or if she wants clean discussion without what you empty on everyone from your trash mouth.
Celeste? Are you going to stop this? I’m trying to be cordial and simply stand up for myself while I keep getting attacked. Can’t you see what they’re doing?
I’m not going to ask you ban anyone, but I would expect you to maintain a forum that isn’t offensive in language and intent to most people.
Oh – sorry – one more, because I’m still waiting for the “accountant” to show his stuff in response to the questions about fiscal conservatism and how it relates to his childish dogmas…
“Woody Says:
January 19th, 2010 at 2:16 pm
For the record, one can’t explain complex economic matters to a school dropout who already has made up his mind.”
You have proven, for the record, that you can’t explain them to anyone, because you don’t have a clue other than your “tax cut” fantasies. You showed NOTHING. And yes, I’m a school dropout. What does that make you ?
reg, I’ve run circles around you on economics. I’ve actually taken college courses including Master’s courses on the subject and have taught managerial economics. My understanding far surpasses yours. You haven’t put up anything worth debating.
Now, affirm to everyone that you’re not a pedophile or gay or on any sex offender lists. Put up!
Proverbs 17:4
A wicked man listens to evil lips; a liar pays attention to a malicious tongue.
Now, I’m going to watch Celeste on “The Filter” while flipping to FOX to watch the Massachusetts returns and the Brown victory.
Randy, deal with the man in your corner. Then, you won’t have to deal with me and others.
Pride, the seventh deadly sin.
I dont regularly comment here although I appreciate this site and its focus. Celeste, can I make a friendly suggestion? If you could at bare minimum remove any comment which made no practical point and was just ad hominem, i think it would send a message. Any insinuation around the “child molesting” thing for example should be immediately struck. Something like that would make it easier for all of us to read through the comments. Here’s a very recent example. Get rid of it..
“Now, affirm to everyone that you’re not a pedophile or gay or on any sex offender lists. Put up!”
Ahmed, when is the last time that I brought up reg’s affinity for boys? This is just a straw man that comes up only because you liberals keep bringing it up.
The comment was a like-kind response to reg’s comment above mine. It gives him a chance to clear any doubt, as he tried with me. There’s no difference.
But, your offense for some things don’t outweigh my being offended for others. It’s just that your lower set of values don’t see the plank in your own eye.
Now, if you and Randy or through taking up offenses for a fellow liberal, who is quite guilty of many wrongs, then butt out. Drop it.
“Ahmed, when is the last time that I brought up reg’s affinity for boys?”
By saying that he has an “affinity” you’ve yet again brought it up. Actually, your whole attitude around this and fixation on homosexuality borders on pathological. So you brought it up at 7:44 pm and now 8:13 as well on top of what I documented over at Marc Cooper where, over three times, you mentioned it as well, recently. Why dont you show some good faith, if possible, and stop anything around child molestation and boyas, its pretty creepy and makes the entire place toxic. It also insults other commentators and the social issues which Celeste is attempting to create a dialogue on. Thanks, man
Enough.