How Selfish Can Omama Be

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by dalakhani

Fascinating. By this logic, does that mean that there is a group of "angry conservatives" at the other end of the spectrum that are feeding a third of the starving babies in Africa? Was bush more personally charitable than Clinton?

I don't know about Clinton. But I remember when Bush was running against Gore, the media checked on their charitable contributions. It wasn't even close. In the year they checked, Bush gave tens of thousands to charity and Gore gave like $350.

I think there are certainly some "angry conservatives" out there. But I don't think they claim to be the party whose hearts bleed for everyone. So I don't think you have the same type of hypocrisy as you do with the angry liberals. The conservatives may be hypocrites about other stuff.

There was actually a book about this stuff. It was called "Do As I Say, Not As I Do: The Hypocrisy of Liberals". Here is what the book is about:

"Members of the liberal/left exude an air of moral certitude. They pride themselves on being committed and selfless and seem particularly confident of the purity of their motives and the evil nature of their opponents. To correct economic and social injustice, liberals support a whole litany of policies and principles: progressive taxes, affirmative action, greater regulation of corporations, raising the inheritance tax, strict environmental regulations, children’s rights, consumer rights, and more."

"But do they actually live by these beliefs? Peter Schweizer decided to investigate in depth the private lives of prominent liberals. Politicians like the Clintons, Nancy Pelosi, the Kennedys, and Ralph Nader; commentators Michael Moore, Al Franken, Noam Chomsky, and Cornel West; entertainers or philanthropists Barbra Streisand and George Soros. Using everything from real estate records, IRS records, court depositions, and their own statements, he sought to examine whether they lived by the principles they so forcefully advocate."

"What he found was a long list of contradictions. All these proponents of organized labor had developed various methods to sidestep paying union wages or avoid employing unions altogether. They were adept at avoiding taxes; invested heavily in corporations they had denounced; took advantage of foreign tax credits to use non-American labor overseas; espoused environmental causes while opposing those that might affect their own property rights; hid their investments in trusts to avoid paying estate tax; denounced oil companies but quietly owned them. The same applied to causes like affirmative action, civil liberties for accused criminals, and expanded rights for minor children."

http://books.google.com/books/about/...d=IsKz-Y3nEbUC

[Rupert Pupkin]

Biden is extremely charitable. He gives $369 a year to charity. That is unbelievable.

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/...inancial_N.htm

[herkhorse]

I don't know why I come down here


Charity should be measured in intent not amount.

[Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by dalakhani

Fascinating. By this logic, does that mean that there is a group of "angry conservatives" at the other end of the spectrum that are feeding a third of the starving babies in Africa? Was bush more personally charitable than Clinton?

dala...

you should change your signature.

Eagles got lucky to back into the playoffs and then lose immediately in 2010. Since then Vick has shown he is a below average quarterback.