John at Galt Stock has a cutting-edge article up with portions written by Don at ColoradoGold. Both men hit the sweet spot posing the very questions you want to ask liberal Uncle Louie, the geeky green guy next door, or the progressive car-pooling neighborhood Mom you endure, because, well…it’s car-pooling. Below note the examples of Democrat big shot charity and enjoy the free ice cream while you and your future abides in credit crisis hell.
Deficits don’t matter! My brother asked about buying physical silver. I visited Coloradogold.com to check availability. Don likes to write a rant or two every week. I thought you would enjoy his observations.
Unintended consequences, as of 2012, all seem to be located in Washington D.C.
People are getting old and may be hurting if they didn’t save enough? Let’s do Social Security and force them to save. People get sick and may not have enough money for health care? Let’s have Obamacare, Medicare, and Medicaid. People may get hungry? Let’s give ’em food stamps.
And a thousand other unintended consequences are voted upon, not voted upon, or even done by unconstitutional ‘executive order,’ but from D.C. they come. Why does this happen? Is it because the bureaucrats, Congress, Senate, or President are very loving humanitarians, and are concerned about us? Does the milk of human kindness pour from their votes and orders? Are they the wonderful people, who admire and copy us when we do good deeds, tip generously, and help the needy?
Or is it so that they can get re-elected to those posh offices with the power trip of being an elected Congressman or Senator? Is it so they can brag about how much bacon they have brought home, and how many roads, parks, and other stuff they have gotten through by attaching them to some other nonsense bill?
Is Washington D.C. full of rotten to the core politicos, worthless bureaucrats, hangers on, groupies, and scum of all sizes, ages, and colors? Not counting the Tea Party, are any of them worth a hoot in hell? Are the usual Republicans any different than the usual Democrats? ColoradoGold
Gotta love Don. I would just ask one question of some who believe in the altruistic beliefs of our political class. How much do they personally give to charity? The answer to the question settles the debate. When Bill Clinton inventoried his used underwear to take a charitable deduction but wanted to expand government to take care of people, what was his motivation?
Barack Obama gave an average of less than one-percent of his income to charity from 2002 thru 2004. This was before his tax returns became public in his climb up the political ladder. He has increased his contributions in the last few years, but how much do you think he will give once he is out of office (and tax returns are private)?
Joe Biden gave an average of $369 to charity in the ten years prior to becoming Vice-President. Al Gore gave only $353 to charity in 1998. His spokesman said you could only “truly judge a person’s commitment to helping others…what they have done with their lives.” Does that mean what I think it means? Gore thinks it is charity to spend my tax money, to borrow more, and spend it in entitlement programs?
Andrew Cuomo made no charitable contributions in 2003 and averaged $1,000 the next two years while he made more than $1.5 million. John Kerry gave ZERO to charity in 1995 (before he married Theresa Heinz).
Robert Reich was President Clinton’s Secretary of Labor. He always rails against conservatives. He ran for governor of Massachusetts in 2002 and had to release his tax returns. He gave less than 0.2% of his $1 million income in cash and a used drum set.
Jesse Jackson donates less than one-percent of his personal income, but his family has a charitable foundation to shake down corporations. The Jackson Foundation is controlled by family members. It collected $964,000 in “contributions” in 2004. The foundation held a “gala celebration” in honor of Jesse Jackson that cost $84,172, gave $46,000 to two colleges and probably took the rest in payroll. On their tax form that year under “Direct Charitable Activities” they answered “None.”
In 2007, Arthur Brooks wrote “The Surprising Truth About Compassionate Conservatism.” Mr. Brooks is a teacher at Syracuse University. His research showed that charitable giving is higher in “Red” states than democratic leaning states. “That conservatives…tend to be more religious and charitable than liberals…In other words, people in favor of forced income redistribution are privately less charitable than those who oppose it, regardless of how much money they earn.”
“In our age there is no such thing as ‘keeping out of politics.’ All issues are political issues, and politics itself is a mass of lies, evasions, folly, hatred and schizophrenia. The very concept of objective truth is fading out of the world. Lies will pass into history.”— George Orwell
End Galt Stock article