Tweet
The Republicans don’t believe that people are inherently good. So its a waste of time to help others this attitude lets them rationalize greed and doing nothing to help the poor.
They always say I gave a bum a fiver once and he went straight to the liquor store instead of getting food. And that one person becomes the excuse for the rest of their lives on why they don’t help.
Get over it some people are good some are evil for the actions of one evil Man you refuse to help an estimated hundreds over a life time?
Tell me if one girl screws you over do you give up on Women?
or to put it another way
Didn’t God tell Lot he would Spare Soddom and Gommreah from destruction if he could find ten good men in the city? Tell me Republicans how do you find if you don’t look? Give a dollar when you can to a bum and over a lifetime you might give to a small city. And during that lifetime you already know that you won’t find ten good men?
Omniscient much:)
Sodom was one of a group of five towns, the Pentapolis (Wisdom 10:6): Sodom, Gomorrah, Admah, Zeboim, and Bela—also called Zoar (Genesis 19:22). The Pentapolis region is also collectively referred to as “the Cities of the Plain” (Genesis 13:12) since they were all sited on the plain of the River Jordan, in an area that constituted the southern limit of the lands of the Canaanites (Genesis 10:19). Lot, a nephew of Abram (Abraham) chose to live in Sodom, because of the proximity of good grazing for his flocks (Genesis 13:5-11).
In Genesis 18, God sends two angels, appearing as men, to Abraham in the plains of Mamre. After receiving the hospitality of Abraham and Sarah, his wife, God reveals to Abraham that he will investigate Sodom and Gomorrah, because their cry is great, “and because their sin is very grievous.” (vs. 20-21) In response, Abraham reverently inquires of God if he would spare the city if 50 righteous people were found in it, then 45, then 30, then 20, or even ten, with God affirming he would not destroy it after each request, for the sake of the righteous yet dwelling therein. The two angels of God proceed to Sodom and are met by Abraham’s righteous nephew Lot, who constrains the angels to lodge with him, and they eat with his family.
Genesis 19:4-5 describes what followed, which confirms the verdict as to the sin of Sodom and its end (RSV):
But before they lay down, the men of the city, the men of Sodom, both young and old, all the people to the last man, surrounded the house; and they called to Lot, “Where are the men who came to you tonight? Bring them out to us, that we may know them (NIV: can have sex with them , NJB: can have intercourse with them).”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sodom_and_Gomorrah
81 Comments
Didn’t God tell Lot he would Spare Soddom and Gommreah from destruction if he could find ten good men in the city? Tell me Republicans how do you find if you don’t look? Give a dollar when you can and over a lifetime you might give to a small city. And during that lifetime you already know that you won’t find ten good men?
Omniscient much:)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sodom_and_Gomorrah
Sorry my first comment was so good I decided to enter it as part of my diary sorry you have to read what I say twice:)
Hey Things on a roll tonight.
Didn’t God say He wouldn’t distroy man again, but they would do it to themselves.
Well were all working on it as fast as we can.
A link please I have never read that your scholarship surpasses mine today. I’m sure I would have remebered a Priest saying that.
“So its a waste of time to help others this attitude lets them rationalize greed and doing nothing to help the poor.”
Interesting theory. How do you reconcile it with the documented fact that Conservatives give more to charity than Liberals? Not that all Cons are Reps or all Libs are Dems, but you get my point.
They give more for the tax breaks it gives them, not to be nice guys.
Sure if you include political charity Ex Republican Senator Bill Frist’s charity had all his political advisors for his expected Presidential run on the charities board collecting fat salaries, then there are the Sham Charity Corporate tax dodges. Anti Commi group the Moonies is a religion giving cash to them is counted as a charity gift right?
The CIA also sends agents as relief workers to get information I think this practice is ok myself however I hope the CIA coughs up some cash to the charity when they do.
Also tax breaks didn’t the Republicans get all pissed that Bill Clinton donated his used underwear to charity and he valued it at some ridiculous amount?
How many other people inflate the value of what they drop off to goodwill? There are obviously problems with charity giving numbers why because as long as its a tax break all the people who cheat on taxes do have incentive to lie.
Any suggestions on resolving those problems and getting better numbers?
I hadn’t heard that. Could you direct me to where you found this information please? As I would like to verify it.
Also any charity gift where you brag about it you get your reward on earth Jesus said. I assume collecting a tax refund counts as reward on earth. Give a buck to a bum and nobody but you and him know then you get your treasure in heaven.
My mother (very old now), brother and I go out a day or two before Christmas each year and drive around the poorer sections of town and hand out $50 bills (usually around $500 in total). We might see a woman and her kids at a bus stop for example and my brother gets out of the car and hands the mother a $50 bill. The people at first are suspicious of us but soon respond warmly. It’s not going to change anyone’s life but it might make their day. None of these kinds of gifts are tax deductible.
Good for you part of this diary was inspired by a talk I had out side a bar with a fellow smoker (smokers must smoke outside now) after I gave a bum some cash.
Two thoughts:
First, the concept of santioned inequality can be tied directly to the so-called Puritan Ethic (Ethos?) which holds that those chosen by god are rewarded and the evil are punished.
If you’re rich, it’s because you “stack up” in the eyes of this god. If you’re poor, you must have committed sins and are being punished.
Second, the political expression of this ethos is embodied in this country (on steroids) within the group called the Family. They’re the ones that count Just Folks like Mark Sanford, John Ensign, Bart Stupak, Ben Nelson and Bill Nelson, George Allen, Tom Coburn… I could go on and on but really, the list of members is long.
And every one of them believes in this God’s Chosen crap, as described by the Puritans but, as I said, on steroids. I mean they would look as some despotic dictator and figure that person must be another of God’s Chosen since he has all that power.
I highly recommend reading Jeff Sharlet’s The Family if you wish to delve deeply into this mind set. It’s a relatively exhastive dicussion of what you describe — and describes how deeply embedded is this group within the politics of this country. (And yes, some of those names I tossed in there are indeed rather notorious Blue Dog Dems.)
The Family is an interesting topic definitely worth more research. Still Mark Sanford, John Ensign these scandals seem too linked to be coincidence the Left does not have connections inside the family someone an insider finked on them.
Someone cleared two Potential Conservative GOP Presidential Candidates off the field, someone exposed their Family connections thus tainting any other Family members if they decide to run for President.
The GOP Civil War has players we don’t see and have no idea what they want.
To be excessively ticky. It’s Calvinsm. Puritanism, particularly in the Plymouth group, is a bit more complicated. But certainly Calvinsm informs the current evangelicals and the corporate community. I think that is why the Rand folks and the Evangelicals fit so well together in the GOP…
I would add to your on target diagnoses CLASS. There just isn’t any prestige in being able to buy life sustaining products if everyone else can, or heaven forbid! the poor get them free.
agreed
So God created people ahead of time he knew would fail? The Problem of Evil is hard enough with free will.
So if your Rich but an inbred Moron who needs Legacy Admissions to get into college despite tons of money
being spent on your education.
I assume God hates you and is punishing you because despite every advantage money can buy you are still a failure at everything you do wars, the economy Bush, Darth, Condi, the Neocons the entire world knows your a failure.
Mark Sanford and John Ensign must really be hated by God despite having money and I presume happy family’s and a strong Family Christian background they embarrass themselves their families publicly and kill their Presidential Dreams.
Imagine your Born Rich because your predestined and God thinks you deserve it. Now Imagine God Predestines you to Public National Humiliation.
God must think you really deserve it, God must hate you!
It’s amazing how these creationist fundamentalist evangelicals believe in Darwinism when it comes to economic and social success yet froth at the notion of biological evolution.
Anybody see 60 Min. last night? They are discovering that even the Dinosaurs were social creatures!
Predestination for us Bootstraps for the nonrich?, but if even Dinosaurs were social creatures then Republicans lack of Empathy suggests a defect that even Dinosaurs would have looked down on. I assume of course that defects occur in everyone nobody is perfect not even the Dinosaurs.
I’m Near Sighted, my Feet Stink, I had my GallBladder out, still I have some Empathy for others I’m far from perfect but its funny possibly the least perfect among us dreams that they are the most Perfect, Predestined etc.
I read the other day a guy who is listed as the 253rd richest person in the world was charged with insider trading. If you are the 253rd richest person in the world you are worth over a billion dollars. The obviously question: Why does this guy need more money? That’s the enigma of greed.
I normally describe greed as an addiction like drinking or gamboling.
@TalkingStick – I was just thinking the same last night: Conservatives believe in Survival of the Fittest – Everyone for Themselves. That, I think, succinctly captures their ethos. “I’ve got mine, so do a lot of people, so screw ‘em if they don’t have insurance. They can go to the ER – they won’t bleed to death in the streets. They’re fine! If they wanted health care so badly, they should’ve found a job with benefits and kept it! the lazy scoundrels…”
@ThingsComeUndone – I also agree with you. I was lucky enough to be raised no religion so I grew up fairly open to it all. By virtue of my profession, I’ve had the pleasure of hanging out in a variety of denominations’ services – from Christ Science to Catholic. And while I love a lot of the groovy, feel good, “Faith, Hope and Love” of Christ’s story, I never bought into Original Sin. In practice, I find Original Sin becomes “People are basically bad/evil/lazy, etc.”
It’s so much easier not to care about your fellow human if you believe they’re basically bad. I’m losing my mind watching the health care reform process – my heart breaks and I cry actual tears whenever someone says the Public Option is dead.
If I wasn’t such a super-sensitive, bleeding-heart liberal, I wouldn’t be in so much pain over this. I wouldn’t have to declare “No News Days” to keep my sanity.
If I subscribed to a philosophy where people are basically bad & it’s everyone for themselves, I wouldn’t be so upset about all the people underserved by our current economic and health-care status quos.
Maybe the Conservatives are the lazy one’s taking the easy way out with *their* belief system.
I don’t actually think so. The wing-nuts, however uninformed, are writhing in just as much pain as I am, but over a completely different set of worries.
I felt much clearer about where the Conservatives are coming from after having read Bob Altemeyer’s The Authoritarians: http://home.cc.umanitoba.ca/~altemey/
Ah well, another day, another battle…
Lefties love the New Testament, Republicans the old Testament agreed.
It does take more strength to care you risk getting hurt still can an Authoritarian really love someone else can they sacrifice for another? Are such sacrifices regulated only to the accepted in group?
Most people don’t understand rich people. Their first million they consider working to amass that amount. Once there it become a game to see how much more they can amass. It’s not that they need or want the money, it’s to be able to make more.
It’s like in sports or the military or any kind of game the winning becomes the most important thing. To them winning means to get ricer and richer. To some boys it’s there toys, the more they own the better they feel. With the rich the only that matters is their accrud wealth.
At a point making more is an all consuming effort, and laws, rules, people, right or wrong, Country, and even family means less than the making of money. You can call it greed, lust, or insanity, but it so takes people over that it is more important to them than even life or death.
The love of money is a true love.
Winning is the thing at any cost after all the Republicans hate Government Regulation they want no rules. For them the market won’t sort things out nope they want to sell cheaper China Mercury poisoned cat food they are pissed the Government finked on them.
They knew about the effects the Coke in the Original Coke had on people getting customers addicted was a plus for them.
It’s hard to cheat if someones watching.
Why in the hell wouldn’t You want no regulation, Unless You wanted the right to cheat.
Wall Street was built by cheating, and it’s business prospectus is cheat as much as You can.
The Republicans look at money, and who has it as their true God, who wouldn’t defend their God.
iremember54: Where did you learn to read minds? And don’t Libs take tax breaks, too?
ThingsComeUndone: Some charities are ripoffs, yeah, and probably receive donations from both Cons and Libs. What does that have to do with the donors’ generosity in giving? And don’t Libs take tax breaks, too?
Radix: If you want to verify it, do some research.
Ah Grumpy Grumpy Grumpy. You seem to either be forgetting one of the rules of play at FDL/Seminal/et al blogs (or maybe you were not aware), but the convention here has always put the onus on the person making the assertion (such as yours in comment #4) to provide the link.
Otherwise, we tend to assume that the assertion materialized purely from your mind.
True, except for things repeatedly documented and discussed to the point where they should be common knowledge. Would you require proof if I claimed the White House is located in Washington, DC?
I came across that claim some months ago and checked it out. It was amply documented and I filed it away in memory as a fact. Now you want me to repeat my earlier work so you don’t have to.
Still, I’ll play along if you will. I will look it up again and post the links just as soon as I see your demands for proof from ThingsComeUndone that Republicans believe it’s a waste of time to help others, from iremember54 that they are motivated more by by tax breaks than by generosity, etc.
And we can all assume that their assertions materialized purely from their minds if they do not provide credible links, right?
Point the first: There are a whole lot of folks who are unaware of this having been repeatedly documented (myself among them).
Point the second: Using the White House in DC as an example is a not so excellent straw man argument.
Point the third: For what it’s worth, nether ThingsComeUndone, nor iremember54 claimed that their statements were “documented facts” (Edit: And I would assume they based those statements as much on observation of actions taken, like how all the problems in the economy are solvable by tax cuts/tax breaks or how the Republicans consistently vote against anything that does not help the few rather than the many)
“For what it’s worth”
It’s not worth squat: they made their assertions as statements of fact.
“I would assume they based those statements as much on observation”
Oh! Well, you are being fair, then, assuming their assertions materialized purely from their minds. And that was good enough for you to accept the statements as factual, no proof required?
tinman1967: I know, I just like to rub their noses in their hypocrisy.
I guess we’ll just have to disagree on that then. They made what I felt was an opinion statement (albeit one that can be buttressed from having watched the antics of John Boehner, GW Bush and most any Republican for the last 30 years on how wonderful Tax Cuts are. Or have you forgotten how tax cuts were supposed to increase revenues and how the Republicans fought to have tax cuts in the stimulus and the statements ?
And as for Republicans being heartless? Looks like Mike Enzi even admitted it.
So there you have some links to their “assertions”. Where’s your link?
Who supports national healthcare? Who wants Americans to pay the same lower price for drugs that people in other countries do? To be fair a Republican Governor in Illinois stopped the Death Penalty but he we all support him on that. We desire to regulate business why to help make products safer and cheaper. GOPers would have us go back to the days when Chicago Meat Packing plants were cheap efficient and probably gave how many Americans food poisoning.
Grumpy, don’t knock yourself out to prove anything to these people. If you say something they already believe, they’ll accept it 100%. If you say something they don’t believe then all the proof in the world will not convince them otherwise. You’ll likely get comments like “that comes from a right wing think tank/publication” or some such thing.
These people are amusing that way.
In any event I believe you without any proof what so ever.
Well given the track records of errors from many of the “right-wing think tanks/publications” I tend to think that skepticism is quite warranted.
Or do you think the folks at Heritage, Hoover Institute, AEI, NRO, Weekly Standard, etc are just misunderstood rather than woefully and egregiously wrong on most topics? Like how wonderfully we would be greeted in Baghdad or how Republicans make their own reality these days or taxcuts will solve unemployment or Sarah Palin is qualified to be president?
So did you ever get that heart you needed?
Nice takedown:)
Grumpy you know I mentioned the inflated Bill Clinton’s underwear charity donation story. My problem with charity numbers is thanks to tax deductions their is reason to lie about them.
And yes Lefties do take tax deductions however you must admit your side does hate taxes more than us so tax fraud is the kind of crime we would expect a Republican to do. Not all Republicans of course just as all Lefties don’t commit Eco Terrorism
Certain people commit certain crimes mostly about what they desire Tax Fraud heck any non violent crime is easier to justify. Given Republicans desire to not pay taxes and Charity is a tax break I must question the numbers.
dakine01: so you accepted their “opinion statement” without question? Why?
ThingsComeUndone: so now Reps are bigger tax cheats than Libs? LINK,PLEASE!
Take your pick
Because I knew it was easily verifiable from recent news accounts.
Your statement of “documented fact” that Conservatives give more to charity than liberals is not an easily verifiable fact. And I would question it because of knowledge that folks like Bill Gates, Warren Buffet and Ted Turner have in fact given away billions to help those around the world that are less fortunate.
Unlike someone like Barbara Bush who “gave” money to the Katrina relief efforts with the stipulation that it be spent on educational software only available, oddly enough, from her son’s business. Yeah that’s real charitable giving right there.
Grumpy you have a problem with the idea that crime flows from desire? That thieves steal because they want something, Murders for what ever reason want someone dead, and tax cheats don’t want to pay taxes.
Given the Republican screams about taxes you really don’t think more Tax Cheats would be drawn toward your party?
I will look for links I admit I might not find them which leaves both of us link less relying on the strength of our arguments.
You folks are SO funny!
“Because I knew it was easily verifiable from recent news accounts”
LOL! Ok, so there are recent news accounts that “Republicans believe it’s a waste of time to help others” and “they are motivated more by by tax breaks than by generosity”? Since that’s “easily verifiable” I’m sure you’ll be posting links any moment…
“Conservatives give more to charity than liberals is not an easily verifiable fact.”
Yeah, it was such a tremendous effort to go to Google and search for “conservatives donate more than liberals.” I be plumb tuckered out after all that hard work!
“which leaves both of us link less”
No: you’re linkless, mine is in post #37.
My objections to these numbers is at my comment at 7.
“political charity”? In which of my cited sources was “political charity” included, and what is that anyway?
Bill Frist’s Charity I call a political charity because he put his campaign advisors on the board at real nice salaries and did I say I got it from your sources?
I guess you missed the links I provided in mine @ #34.
Although I’ve got to say, comparing the amount of money collected in Salvation Army buckets in Sioux Falls, SD outside WalMart versus that collected in San Francisco outside of Macy’s does not smack of an empirically based study.
But at least you finally did provide a link after whining about it, even it is 3 years old and seems as much set-up as anything else.
Bill Frist’s Charity Funny, The Moonies a very political group why the GOP hangs with those nuts even if they hate Commies is beyond me, show me some Lefty tax fraud charity scams or your argument everyone does it argument fails for lack of proof.
Notice we want to spend money on helping Americans but the GOP wants more money for war. However while we are trying to keep costs down the GOP insists we spend more to keep insurance and drug companies happy. They also insist on more war spending but no tax increases.
We would tax the rich the GOP however wants us to keep on using debt to finance the war debt that we are charged interest on which means higher taxes later on.
“I guess you missed the links I provided in mine @ #34.”
The linkless comment was addressed to ThingsComeUndone, but I did glance at yours and saw nothing about charitable contributions. I’m at work and couldn’t go over them thoroughly, but they look to be off-topic.
Here’s something very on-topic, from the author of “Who Really Cares”:
“When I started doing research on charity,” Mr. Brooks wrote, “I expected to find that political liberals — who, I believed, genuinely cared more about others than conservatives did — would turn out to be the most privately charitable people. So when my early findings led me to the opposite conclusion, I assumed I had made some sort of technical error. I re-ran analyses. I got new data. Nothing worked. In the end, I had no option but to change my views.”
“In the end, I had no option but to change my views.” An honest man; you might want to consider emulating him.
Also tell me if I give to the Mormons or the Catholic Church its tax deductible right but when they use that money to run political campaigns against Gay Marriage well I stopped giving to them. Though I’m sure both churches got more from Republicans however the question of undocumented non tax break giving to charity the kind that JC says gets you treasure in heaven and not tax breaks/reward on earth we do have no numbers on that.
Giving to the Lake because they work politically to help people Healthcare, Gay Marriage, Green Power, Ending the wars is not tax deductible same with giving to Obama but regular people gave because they wanted to change things for the better. And that desire is at the heart of Charity giving.
http://www.amazon.com/reviews/R1UWWN4E57S455
College Freshmen are taught not to logically contradict themselves GOP scholarship like the Bellcurve book is funny:)
It’s pitiful, rather than funny, that you post diaries despite a lack of background knowledge, but it’s both pitiful AND funny that you won’t avail yourself of new information once it’s presented.
Arthur Brooks had the same
bigoted stereotypesunsupported assumptions that you do, but when presented with evidence to the contrary he revised his opinion. It would be great to have political debates with such intellectually honest people, more concerned with truth than agenda, but there don’t seem to be any here.Read my 54 “showed that people of faith, regardless of conservative or liberal,” gave more funny he never looked at secular Republicans you know guys like rush might talk a good game but nobody goes to the Dominican Republic with a bunch of Viagra hoping to meet a nice girl he went there to SiN!
Still why sin in the Dominican getting AIDs is much more likely there than here.
“Read my 54″
The book review link??? LOL! Okay, I read it. I liked the part about, “the folks who support government-type intervention, a typical solution of the far left liberal, do not give their time or money to any causes in almost a “Scrooge-like” fashion.” That’s from YOUR link.
Try this:
“According to Google’s figures, if donations to all religious organizations are excluded, liberals give slightly more to charity than conservatives do. But Mr. Brooks says that if measuring by the percentage of income given, conservatives are more generous than liberals even to secular causes.” link (my bold)
Since it would be impossible for you to properly acquaint yourself with the considerable data available since you only found out about it two hours ago you really shouldn’t expect anyone to take you seriously.
I have real work to do I’ll just cut to the chase:
Someone (anyone) says something (anything) that suits the Lib agenda and they gulp it down like a porn star at a gangbang.
Someone (anyone) says something (anything) that doesn’t suit the Lib agenda and the screaming is immediate: actually fact checking may or may not come later.
My central claim is in my title Why Republicans don’t like to help the poor.
Giving cash to the anti commie Moonies is helping the poor?
Barbara Bush who “gave” money to the Katrina relief efforts with the stipulation that it be spent on educational software only available, oddly enough, from her son’s business? Is helping the poor or her son?
Giving cash to Bill Frist’s charity does help people and was also used to help Bill’s campaign for President.
Giving cash to the Catholic Church helps the poor and pedophile priests stay out of jail.
Giving cash to the Mormons and the Catholic Church helps the poor and helps stop gay marriage.
A look at the percentage spent on real giving vs funny giving would lower the numbers of Republican charity giving.
The GOP lies about imaginary welfare queens, the GOP lies about poor immigrants spreading Leprosy, the GOP opposes Healthcare for everyone because it would cost to much never mind they support the wars.
And you rag on me me for drawing the conclusion that the GOP hates the Poor, Dark People etc? I have stated my objections to your statistics to quote Twain ” There are lies Dammed lies and then there are Statistics.
When Numbers and Actions don’t match I lean toward Actions as a way to judge behavior.
http://www.goodreads.com/review/show/25866926
My bold
http://www.salon.com/news/feature/1999/10/18/drugs/
Lots of funny charities out there lots of rich GOPers hiding assets from taxes might very well explain Grumpy’s numbers.
I forgot Pat Robertson and conflict diamonds in Africa.
I forgot tv Preachers who scare people into giving and then use the tax free cash for political causes like the moral majority, the Christen Coalition sure its a tax free charity deduction but political causes don’t help the poor.
Unless opposing Gay Marriage and abortion somehow helps the poor?
“A look at the percentage spent on real giving vs funny giving would lower the numbers of Republican charity giving.”
Then look at it and post a fucking link. Otherwise, we’ll tend to assume that the assertion materialized purely from your mind.
Happy Challenges do force us to get better:)
“Happy Challenges do force us to get better”
Even when the challenge is completely unmet?
This is your claim that you were supposed to provide evidence for:
“A look at the percentage spent on real giving vs funny giving would lower the numbers of Republican charity giving.”
Did you calculate the percentage to be disallowed for “funny giving”? No. Did you present a revised total of Rep. charitable contributions based solely on “real giving”? No. Did you do the same for Dem contributions and compare the two revised totals? No. Just as a side note, you still haven’t offered any evidence that Reps are bigger tax cheats than Libs, either.
You started with zero facts and you ended with zero facts, plus a monitor covered with flying spittle.
I’m citing the published works of a Professor of Economics who spent years on research, you’re ranting about the Moonies brainwashing people.
I’ve got statistics like, “In the 10 reddest states, in which Bush got more than 60 percent majorities, the average percentage of personal income donated to charity was 3.5. Residents of the bluest states, which gave Bush less than 40 percent, donated just 1.9 percent,” you’ve got an opinion based on Clinton’s undies.
I’m drawing on sources such as The Catalogue of Philanthropy, you’re whining about Barbara Bush trying to get a kickback for her son.
Here, try reading this. This blogger — like you — was surprised that his preconceptions were refuted by actual research. Unlike you, he had an open mind and not a lazy ass: he did some research of his own. Unlike you, he was willing to reconsider his position when additional data showed his stereotypes were flawed.
You’ve proved nothing, but I’m sure you had fun ranting and raving. Since that was your only purpose to begin with, I guess it’s fair to say you succeeded. Congratulations: I hope you can continue to ignore reality and enjoy your venom-filled fantasy world.
BTW: I stopped counting how much blood I’ve given the Red Cross when I hit the 2 gallon mark. What’s your score?
Hmmm? I’ve given and sold blood allot depending on my circumstances over the years but how can I convince you? I know advice never go out drinking after you gave blood the hangover is awful.
Looked at your link you do realize that the Red States with bigger giving also have lower tax rates agreed? They also have less social services, higher infant mortality rates in other words the less government does the more the private giving steps in and fails.
Blue States give more by voting for higher taxes in the first place which results in better results for the poor in those states like less infant mortality in other words government does do a better job than private giving?
I’m not that great at Statistics but I will save this comment for my files. Just got some interest in my Condo say I maybe moving soon but thanks Grumpy this idea maybe a Real Winner!
Conflict does force us to be better:)
If the GOP loves the poor then why oppose minimum wages hikes for the poor? Why hate Social Security which keeps old people from being poor? Why hate Unions? Why tax cuts for the rich?
http://findarticles.com/p/news-articles/scotland-on-sunday-edinburgh/mi_7924/is_2009_Oct_18/profile-reverend-sun-myung-moon/ai_n39295015/
My bold the Moonies make its members give up all their cash to the church that has to boost their giving numbers certainly past what I give. Moon hates Commies pays Bush 1 to speech I think we can assume his followers are Republicans.
Especially if the brain washing rumors are true.
http://www.consumerwatchdog.org/patients/articles/?storyId=17846
My bold The charity raised 44 million but only gave the poor 3 million? Yes I call that a funny charity.
A half million to campaign aides working at the charity? Where did the rest of the cash go?
Barbara Bush’s Hurricane Donation Earmarked for Son’s Business
Associated Press: Hurricane Donation Earmarked for Bush Firm:
Former first lady Barbara Bush gave relief money to a hurricane relief fund on the condition that it be spent to buy educational software from her son Neil’s company. The chief of staff of former President George H.W. Bush would not disclose the amount earmarked for purchases from Ignite Learning.
Houston Chronicle: Katrina Donation Ignites Debate; HISD Says Focus on Neil Bush’s Software Didn’t Violate Policy:
As Barbara Bush spent two hours championing her son’s software company at a Houston middle school Thursday morning, a watchdog group questioned whether the former first lady should be allowed to channel a donation to Neil Bush’s Ignite Learning company through Houston’s Hurricane Katrina relief fund.
“It’s strange that the former first lady would want to do this. If her son’s having a rough time of it, couldn’t she write him a check?” said Daniel Borochoff, founder of the American Institute of Philanthropy, a Chicago-based charity watchdog group. “Maybe she isn’t aware that people could frown upon this.”
Some critics said donations to a tax-deductible charitable fund shouldn’t benefit the Bush family.
http://taxprof.typepad.com/taxprof_blog/2006/03/ap_barbara_bush.html
My bold I guess Neil didn’t want to pay taxes on a handout from his Mom.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_Coalition_of_America
My bold a tax exempt group that passes out voter guides this helps the poor how?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GOPAC
Sorry wrong link.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/527_group
I found evidence of Funny giving by Republicans. If you want to look for funny giving by Dems go ahead. Regardless there is funny giving, that means the numbers for REAL Charity giving are suspect.
With US Senators like Bill Frist setting up funny charities and not being prosecuted can you say that any numbers cited for charity giving are real?
Without real data I can’t give answers however I do have enough proof to doubt the Republicans give as much as they say they do.
Further investigation is needed. However for an anti poor, anti healthcare, Social Security pro tax cut for the rich party you do seem awful upset that anybody would think that you are not generous to the poor.
I started with a conversation I had with a GOPer outside a bar we’re both smokers I gave a few bucks to a bum walking by he gave me the I gave once to a bum a story. I grew up in a GOP area I have heard this story before.
The Part about Lot and finding ten good people I remember from sunday school. You do know you can interview people and gather facts that way? It used to be called reporting. Maybe if the GOP did not have such a hate the poor reputation people might believe that your side really does give more. Instead of just assuming that your side is lying…again.
After the Bush years Chicago School of Economics has disgraced the profession. The banking Crisis was impossible because economists said their Math Models told them so:)
However if you want to defend the Moonies feel free!
Now your getting angry Clinton’s undies as a tax dodge was a bone I threw to you to be fair and show that Dems and GOPers both inflate the value of their Donations.
As I’ve said before some of these charities don’t really help the poor. The IRS should investigate until then nobody has real numbers on this.
However the facts of my Diary was based on a conversation I had with a GOPer what do you want to bet many Lefties and Moderates have had that exact same conversion with a GOPer many times over the years?
What do you want to bet my Diary rings true with their personal experiences? What do you want to bet that much like the Tobacco industry studies your claims don’t ring true?
And no matter how loud or how often you repeat it nobody will change their mind?
Red states give more to private charity Blue States vote for higher taxes to help the poor more which states have the best outcomes higher education levels, lower crime rates, longer lifespans, lower infant mortality rates.
Also how much does the government spend in those states vs dollars sent to Washington as taxes
Do private donations in red states equal, less than, greater than the greater taxes for social services in blue states? Matching urban and high population red states with urban and high population blue states and of course country and low population red and blue states could be tricky what criteria do I use to judge with?
Still fleshing this idea out but you know Grumpy without looking at your link I never would have caught this idea:)
Grump doesn’t understand that there is a reason we’re called “bleeding heart liberals”, being a “I’ve got mine”-Republican.
Hmmm? Grumpy’s link plus I’ll need a scale of social service and medical spending per capita for the states as well as per capita tax rates. Anything else needed?
Neanderthals took care of their sick and injured. Republicans are throwbacks. We really need to weed the gene pool and get rid of these sociopaths. http://afarensis99.wordpress.com/2009/09/30/an-open-letter-to-rep-alan-grayson/
Even fish display empathy for each other. With clown fish, if one lies down in the sand they other(s) try to get him up. Eels will hunt and bring back food to their sick mates. Dolphins rescue humans all the time from sharks, so they even exhibit cross species empathy for the vulnerable.
Birds do it too. If one is hurt and grounded the others stay around and distract would be predators until it’s better. Contrary to popular belief, birds don’t kill the sick or weak ones.
“Without real data I can’t give answers”
Wow, you finally got the point: you have no data and therefore shouldn’t be giving answers.