A Bleak Future

I know some people. Some time back, they formed an organization. While this group isn't perfect, it does some important things that no other group does as well.

Anyway, this organization has gotten itself into a bit of debt problem.

Right now, there are about 33 people in the group, and the organization has debts of about $2.2 million. The group keeps pretty good records and are remarkably open, so they happen to know that, collectively, they earn about $1.96 million per year.

Their budget for the current year is to spend about $400,000 on various projects. Unfortunately, they are only going to collect about $318,000 in dues from their members. Pretty clearly something is going to have to be done to resolve this.

Last week, some of the leaders of the group suggested that perhaps some of the spending could be cut back a bit. As I understand it, it went something like this:

"Take a look at this $1.76 that we spend on this charity. I'm not saying that it isn't a good charity; it is. It does great work. But we are $2.2 million in debt and will add another $70,000+ this year, so this seems like something we should look at. This cut is only 0.0004% of the current budget."

Unfortunately, the membership of the group did not react... how can I put this... rationally to this suggestion.

I worry about the long-term future for this group.

Who Said It

OK, people have been saying too many nice things about me lately, so I need to do something about that.

So, you all think that you know America, huh? OK, tell me, which of the rabid pro-war US presidential candidate said the following statements:

Demonstrating the simple-minded "for us or against us" attitude that makes people hate the US:
"Uh, every nation has to either be with us or against us. Those who harbor terrorists or who finance them, uh, are going to pay a price." (Sept 13, 2001)

In denial about how bad the situation is in Iraq:
"The fact that you have these suicide bombers now, wreaking such hatred and violence while people pray, is to me, an indication of their failure..." (Feb 19, 2005)

"...I think you can look at the country as a whole and see that there are many parts of Iraq that are functioning quite well. There might be occasional problems but it is not the steady drumbeat..." (Feb 19, 2005)

Tying Saddam to Al Qaeda:
"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including Al Qaeda members..." (October 10, 2002)

You can find the answer by Googling any of those exact phrases; the first search result in each case will reveal the answer. Clearly this is exactly the kind of leadership that America doesn't need if it has any hope of winning over the Arab world.

So, who is the candidate that more Arabs would like to see get elected? Well, according to a poll of those in Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia and the UAE, Maktoob Research in Dubai discovered that Hilary Clinton is the 5-1 choice among those expressing a preference, because she "will continue where her husband left off".

Of course, in fairness "over half (55%) of the respondents who answered that they 'did not care' who was elected President stated that the candidates were all the same regarding negative policy towards the Middle East, Arabs and Muslims, and supportive of Israel".

Yep, I'm glad to see that everyone realizes that there are absolutely no major party candidates who want to completely withdraw US troops from everywhere outside the US. Or would speak out "against a July 2006 House resolution [that condemned] attacks on Israel and '[supported] Israel’s right to defend herself'".

Or one who has been "critical of Israeli use of force in the Palestinian territories" or "opposed the Palestinian Anti-Terrorism Act of 2006".

There also are no candidates that want the "United States were to step forward aggressively..." to force a return to the 1967 borders.