We agree and think 25 to life would be appropriate.

**********************

America needs Obamacare like Nancy Pelosi needs a Halloween mask.

**********************

Q: Have you heard about McDonalds new Obama Value Meal?

A: Order anything you like and the guy behind you has to pay for it..

**********************

Q: What does Barack Obama call lunch with a convicted felon?

A: A fund raiser.

**********************

Q: What’s the difference between Obama’s cabinet and a penitentiary?

A: One is filled with tax evaders, blackmailers and threats to society.

The other is for housing prisoners.

**********************

If Nancy Pelosi and Obama were on a boat in the middle of the ocean and It

started to sink, who would be saved? …. America !

**********************

If Nancy Pelosi has her face lifted one more time she’ll have a beard!

**********************

Q: What’s the difference between Obama and his dog, Bo?

A: Bo has papers

We LOVE you so.. how about liking us on Facebook?..

Powered By Facebook Like Post Plugin

The details were sketchy when Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., announced the deal Tuesday night, but on Wednesday President Barack Obama praised it. According to congressional and White House sources, the deal would jettison a full-blown government insurance plan in favor of expanding Medicare to people when they reach 55 and creating new private plans modeled on the federal employee program.

But those who oppose a government takeover of the entire health system should not get up and start dancing in the aisles, for this in reality is a bait-and-switch strategy. The liberals still want a single-payer socialized health system, and in the Senate they have made a tactical maneuver to buy time.

They realize they must buy time right now, because a growing majority of Americans simply do not want their government to take command of health care. So this week’s move is a holding action.

The bill still contains severe restrictions and mandates on private insurance, and if allowed to become law they would slowly but surely choke the private insurance industry out of existence. Then the only option would be the public option. It may be THE classic example of bait and switch.

Provisions in the legislation would assign a value to employer-provided benefits for each worker and report it on employees’ W-2 forms. That would make health insurance a taxable benefit.

What happened to the president’s promise that ObamaCare would not raise taxes?

The legislation has insurance companies squarely in the Democrats’ sights. Insurers will have to provide information on everybody they cover so bureaucrats in Washington can determine if an individual owes a penalty. And guess who is given enforcement power? Our friends at the IRS.

There still are mandates on how much coverage private insurers must offer and limits on how much they can charge, which makes private coverage actuarially impossible to stay in business.

When the private health insurance industry starts to fade away, the public will demand insurance, and guess who the Democrats in Congress want to offer that coverage? The tender ministrations of the federal government.

No, Tuesday’s “compromise” is a true Trojan Horse. The whole bill should be scrapped so that individual reforms can be debated, each on its own merit.

We LOVE you so.. how about liking us on Facebook?..

Powered By Facebook Like Post Plugin

The only states that won’t have to raise eligibility because of the Senate bill are Connecticut, Illinois, Maine, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Jersey, New York, Rhode Island, Tennessee, Vermont and Wisconsin (plus the District of Columbia). And the House bill would force even Massachusetts and Vermont to pay more.

Hardest hit would be Texas ($2,750 million a year in extra state spending under the Senate bill), Pennsylvania ($1,450 million), California ($1,428 million) and Florida ($909 million). Who knows if Florida could avoid imposing an income tax if it has to meet so high an unfunded mandate?

The required increases in state spending are likely to be quite high in some states whose senators are swing votes on ObamaCare:

* In Arkansas, home to swing Sens. Mark Pryor and Blanche Lincoln, the annual increased state spending would come to $402 million (not counting the federal share) — about a 10 percent increase in the state budget, which is now $4 billion a year.

* In Louisiana, whose Sen. Marie Landrieu sold her vote on a key procedural motion in return for more Medicaid funding, the increase would come to $432 million (a 5 percent hike in state spending) — more than wiping out the extra funds she got in return for her vote.

* In Sen. Evan Bayh’s Indiana, spending would go up by $586 million a year, a rise of 4 percent.

* In Sen. Ben Nelson’s Nebraska, the added state spending would be $81 million a year, a 2 percent increase.

The Sebate ObamaCare bill would cost North Dakota, home of Sens. Kent Conrad and Byron Dorgan, $14 million. South Dakota, represented by Sen. Tim Johnson, would have to boost Medicaid spending by $33 million.

The Medicaid-expansion provisions of the Senate bill are complex. In the first year of the program (2013), states must enroll anyone who earns less than 133 percent of the poverty level in their programs. For a family of four, the national average poverty level in 2009 is $22,000 a year. So any family that size that makes less than $29,000 would be eligible for Medicaid.

Many states, particularly in the South, actually have Medicaid cutoffs below the poverty level. Arkansas, for example, cuts off its Medicaid eligibility at only 17 percent of poverty level, and in Louisiana it goes up to only 26 percent. For these states, the spending increase required by the new bill is huge.

For the first three years of the program (2013-15) the federal government would pay for all of the costs of the Medicaid expansion. But, starting in the fourth year of operation — 2016 — the average state would be obliged to pay 10 percent of the extra cost.

For Democratic governors, this provision means sudden death. Particularly in states with limited Medicaid coverage, it would require huge tax increases.

We LOVE you so.. how about liking us on Facebook?..

Powered By Facebook Like Post Plugin

We LOVE you so.. how about liking us on Facebook?..

Powered By Facebook Like Post Plugin

According to recent news reports, they’re bringing back the so-called Fairness Doctrine RIGHT NOW, through the “BACK-DOOR” and right under your nose… by stealth… hopefully, before you are any the wiser.

Federal Communications Commissioner (FCC) Robert McDowell recently said that he “fears the new administration and a Democratic Congress may try to revive the so-called Fairness Doctrine without the public realizing it.”

McDowell’s comments appear on the front page and above the fold in this month’s edition of IT+Telecom News, an insider-publication for elected officials, regulators and industry experts, published by The Heartland Institute.

And this time around, they WON’T call it the Fairness Doctrine.

The same Heartland Institute article, titled, “FCC Commissioner Warns Against ‘Back-Door’ Fairness Doctrine” goes on to state: “It may surface with another name and with different justifications, McDowell said, adding the doctrine could be expanded to threaten free speech on the Internet.”

And McDowell is not the only one sounding the alarm. The same article quotes other experts in the communications field:

“‘McDowell’s concerns are legitimate,’ said Jeff McCall, a professor of communications at DePauw University in Greencastle, Indiana, ‘It’s hard to tell how [the Fairness Doctrine] might come back. It would likely be called something different. It’s a nuisance; it’s something that just won’t go away.’”

Yes… we’ve fought this battle before but it is very clear the extreme left is not going to give up.

Thomas Jefferson warned us that the price of freedom is eternal vigilance when he said; “The condition upon which God hath given liberty to man is eternal vigilance; which condition if he break, servitude is at once the consequence of his crime and the punishment of his guilt.”

That means we only have two choices… either we fight back RIGHT NOW… or we concede the fight and take the chance that the First Amendment will effectively become nothing more than a footnote in the history books.
The far left counts on your lack of knowledge when they pass laws and institute programs to curtail your God-given liberties. But when you shine the light of day on their plans… when they know that you can expose their intentions to the rest of the American people… they back down. The extreme left attempts to grab and keep power through stealth and deception… by controlling the media and passing legislation in smoke-filled rooms in the dark of night. You can do something RIGHT HERE AND RIGHT NOW TO TAKE THAT POWER BACK!

When you – and throngs of other patriotic Americans – flood their fax machines, they will know they cannot hide their designs and intentions from the American people. Let them know that you know that the extreme left is still trying to trample the First Amendment and SILENCE Rush Limbaugh, conservative talk radio and all dissenting opinion on the airwaves and the Internet.

EXPOSED: Plan B To Hush Rush And Silence Conservative Opinions On The Airwaves And The Internet.

Not only is it painfully obvious that extreme leftists in Congress and in the Obama administration are simply not going to give up when it comes to shutting down conservative voices on the airwaves and the Internet…

… they’ve already put Plan B into motion.

Let me explain.

A short time ago, your calls struck tremendous fear into the hearts of our elected officials in Washington. You made the term “Fairness Doctrine” such a pariah and a hot potato that on February 26, the Senate voted 87-11 in favor of an amendment offered by Senator Jim DeMint that would prevent the FCC from reinstating the Fairness Doctrine.

Only 11 hard-left Senators were willing to go on the record as supporting the Fairness Doctrine… because patriotic Americans like you made it clear that a vote in favor of the Fairness Doctrine was a vote in favor of draconian attempts to trample on the First Amendment.

Essentially YOU defined the issue and you beat them up so bad that 47 Democrats joined the entire Republican delegation in the Senate and supported the DeMint Amendment!

But hold your horses… there’s more to the story… and it isn’t pretty.

Minutes BEFORE passing the DeMint Amendment to kill the Fairness Doctrine, 57 Democrats passed another amendment, offered by Senator Dick Durbin, designed to essentially do THE EXACT SAME THING the so-called Fairness Doctrine was designed to do.

You read that right, 57 Democrats voted for an amendment designed to do the same thing as the Fairness Doctrine minutes before voting against the Fairness Doctrine so they could slyly and sanctimoniously tell the folks back home; “Hey… I voted AGAINST the Fairness Doctrine.”

Yes… the Fairness Doctrine is gone – but in name only. And in its place, the hard left is now pushing the adoption of policies that pose an EVEN GREATER THREAT to free speech.

Fortunately, the bill containing the Durbin and DeMint amendments is held up in Congress for the time being, but we can’t let these elected officials get away with such sickening duplicity.

With your help, we’re not going to let them get away with it!

You can help us expose them RIGHT NOW!

The far left counts on your lack of knowledge when they pass laws and institute programs to curtail your God-given liberties. But when you shine the light of day on their plans… when they know that you can expose their intentions to the rest of the American people… they back down. The extreme left attempts to grab and keep power through stealth and deception… by controlling the media and passing legislation in smoke-filled rooms in the dark of night. You can do something RIGHT HERE AND RIGHT NOW TO TAKE THAT POWER BACK!

When you – and throngs of other patriotic Americans – flood their fax machines, they will know they cannot hide their designs and intentions from the American people. Let them know that you know that the extreme left is still trying to trample the First Amendment and SILENCE Rush Limbaugh, conservative talk radio and all dissenting opinion on the airwaves and the Internet.

A Back-Door Mandate For The Fairness Doctrine…

Let’s take a look at the aforementioned Durbin amendment which supposedly seeks to “encourage and promote diversity in communication media ownership and to insure the public airwaves are used in the public interest.”

Sounds innocent enough… “promote diversity” … “insure the public interest” … that’s wholesome stuff… right?

It sounds almost as innocent as advocating a doctrine to promote “fairness” on the public airwaves.

But make no mistake; this latest incarnation of the Fairness Doctrine is even worse than the first.

Here’s why.

Back when Barack Obama was a candidate for President of the United States his campaign issued the following statement regarding the Fairness Doctrine:

“Senator Obama does not support re-imposing the Fairness Doctrine on broadcasters.”

The liberal media gleefully gave Obama cover and only reported that Obama was against the Fairness Doctrine… PERIOD.

But that wasn’t the end of it.

What the media did not report was the rest of the statement. And why should they?

Of course, the rest of the statement probably was not meant for the general public. It was essentially red meat for Obama’s extreme left wing supporters. Essentially it was a message to his base that he does not support the Fairness Doctrine because IT DOES NOT GO FAR ENOUGH!

Here’s the rest of the statement, by the way:

“He [Obama] considers this debate to be a distraction from the conversation we should be having… Sen. Obama supports media-ownership caps, network neutrality, public broadcasting, as well as increasing minority ownership of broadcasting and print outlets.”

In other words, why should the government settle with merely attempting to enforce “fairness?” Why not just call the shots when it comes to the ownership of radio stations?

Bradley Smith, a law professor at Capital University in Ohio, outlined the dangers when he said, “imposing the Fairness Doctrine through the back door by, for instance, limiting radio station ownership would be a death blow to nationally syndicated radio shows.”

The Heartland Institute quotes Smith even further:

“Smith notes another back-door ‘fairness’ strategy would be to mandate ‘community advisory boards’ empowered to determine radio programming – allowing bureaucrats to overrule audience choices.”

“Community advisory boards” … If that sounds familiar, it should.

It’s straight out of the Saul Alinsky playbook and if you’re thinking that this strategy is eerily similar to the strategy the extreme left used to cripple our economy, you’re probably right.

The far left counts on your lack of knowledge when they pass laws and institute programs to curtail your God-given liberties. But when you shine the light of day on their plans… when they know that you can expose their intentions to the rest of the American people… they back down. The extreme left attempts to grab and keep power through stealth and deception… by controlling the media and passing legislation in smoke-filled rooms in the dark of night. You can do something RIGHT HERE AND RIGHT NOW TO TAKE THAT POWER BACK!

When you – and throngs of other patriotic Americans – flood their fax machines, they will know they cannot hide their designs and intentions from the American people. Let them know that you know that the extreme left is still trying to trample the First Amendment and SILENCE Rush Limbaugh, conservative talk radio and all dissenting opinion on the airwaves and the Internet.

Here’s A Nightmare Scenario.

Members of your so-called local community advisory board, (possibly your local chapter of ACORN), burst into a radio station that broadcasts The Rush Limbaugh Show.

“We don’t think your programming is diverse enough,” they tell the station manager. Handing him a list, they give him an ultimatum: “Here are the programs that you will broadcast. If you don’t like it, tough, we put you out of business.”

Sound a little melodramatic?

Before you cast judgment, remember that our current economic crisis can be traced back, in large part, to ACORN, and other so-called community organizations, essentially doing the same thing to banks… extorting them into giving billions of dollars in questionable loans.

Howard Husock of Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government even predicted our current economic crisis years before it happened in an article: entitled “The Trillion-Dollar Bank Shakedown That Bodes Ill for Cities.”

Husock wrote:

“The National Community Reinvestment Coalition, a foundation-funded umbrella group for community activist groups that profit from the [Community Reinvestment Act] CRA, issued a clarion call to its members in a leaflet entitled ‘The New CRA Regulations: How Community Groups Can Get Involved.’ ‘Timely comments,’ the NCRC observed with a certain understatement, ‘can have a strong influence on a bank’s CRA rating.’”

Husock went on and told us how groups like ACORN essentially gained control of a huge segment of our economy and ran it – and all of us – into the dirt:

“‘To avoid the possibility of a denied or delayed application,’ advises the NCRC in its deadpan tone, ‘lending institutions have an incentive to make formal agreements with community organizations.’ By intervening, even just threatening to intervene, in the CRA review process, left-wing nonprofit groups have been able to gain control over eye-popping pools of bank capital, which they in turn parcel out to individual low-income mortgage seekers. A radical group called ACORN Housing has a $760 million commitment from the Bank of New York; the Boston-based Neighborhood Assistance Corporation of America has a $3-billion agreement with the Bank of America; a coalition of groups headed by New Jersey Citizen Action has a five-year, $13-billion agreement with First Union Corporation. Similar deals operate in almost every major U.S. city.”

Others have written on how alleged ACORN extortion contributed to our current economic woes.

Here’s what Michelle Malkin wrote about ACORN thuggery:

“These are the same activists that helped sow the seeds of the subprime meltdown. They aggressively played the race card and pressured banks to loosen standards, throw out down payments and lend to some of the nation’s riskiest borrowers. Now, these mobs protest across the country, disrupt foreclosure auctions, threaten bank executives and accuse lenders of, yep, racism for lending to those riskiest of borrowers.”

Groups like ACORN got rich off your tax dollars… they operated under the radar for years… and, even though you didn’t even know it, you were paying them to trash our economy.

Today, we are all suffering.

Do we want the same thing to happen to conservative talk radio and possibly even conservative voices such as those of CFIF and other conservative organizations on the Internet?

If the answer is no, then don’t wait — it’s up to you to stop them.

The far left counts on your lack of knowledge when they pass laws and institute programs to curtail your God-given liberties. But when you shine the light of day on their plans… when they know that you can expose their intentions to the rest of the American people… they back down. The extreme left attempts to grab and keep power through stealth and deception… by controlling the media and passing legislation in smoke-filled rooms in the dark of night. You can do something RIGHT HERE AND RIGHT NOW TO TAKE THAT POWER BACK!

When you – and throngs of other patriotic Americans – flood their fax machines, they will know they cannot hide their designs and intentions from the American people. Let them know that you know that the extreme left is still trying to trample the First Amendment and SILENCE Rush Limbaugh, conservative talk radio and all dissenting opinion on the airwaves and the Internet.

Yours In Freedom,

Jeffrey Mazzella

Center for Individual Freedom
917-B King Street
Alexandria, VA 22314
703-535-5836
Fax:703-535-5838

CFIF is a 501(c)(4) not-for-profit constitutional advocacy organization with
the mission to protect and defend individual freedoms and individual rights.

Contributions to CFIF are
not deductible as charitable contributions for federal income tax purposes.
Contributions may be deductible as a business expense.

We LOVE you so.. how about liking us on Facebook?..

Powered By Facebook Like Post Plugin

The bad news is, by hiking taxes in a recession, Obama will turn a disaster into a catastrophe. But there’s good news, too. The “rich” include most of Obama’s biggest supporters.

While liberals love being praised for their looks, their style, their brilliance and their courage, the one quality they don’t want talked about is their money. To the contrary, Democrats or Liberals are constantly boasting about how poor they are — as if that’s a virtue in a capitalist society with no class barriers.

No matter how much money they have, liberals will be damned if they’re giving up the poor’s mantle of angry self-righteousness. This is especially true if their wealth came by inheritance, marriage or the taxpayer, the preferred sources of income for Liberalus Americanus.

Democrats’ claims of poverty merely serve to show how out of touch elected Democrats are with actual incomes in America.

At the Democratic National Convention, for example, there were heartfelt tributes to the daunting self-sacrifice of both Barack and Michelle Obama for passing up lucrative jobs to work in “public service” — which apparently is now defined, such as in Michelle Obama’s case, as “working as a ‘diversity coordinator’ at a big city hospital for $300,000 a year.”

Seriously, even with a company car, full medical benefits and six weeks’ paid vacation thrown in, how do people live on that?

Meanwhile, the average salary for a lawyer with 20 years or more experience in the U.S. is a little more than $100,000. If Michelle Obama doesn’t lay off all this “giving back” stuff pretty soon, she’s going to find herself in Warren Buffett’s tax bracket.

During the campaign, Joe Biden was also praised by the Democrats for being the poorest U.S. senator — as if that were a major accomplishment.

Howard Dean, chairman of the Democratic National Committee, touted Biden as “a good example of a working-class kid,” adding that, to this day, Biden was “one of the least wealthy members of the U.S. Senate.” Only a Democrat would list “never really made anything of myself” on his resume.

On the Huffington Post, operated by a woman who acquired her wealth by marrying a rich gay guy connected to Big Oil, liberal blogger Steven Clemons gloated that, unlike John McCain, Biden wouldn’t “forget the number of houses he owns,” adding that, in 2006, Biden was ranked the poorest U.S. senator.

And at his high school reunion Biden was voted “most likely to try to bum a ride off of somebody.” Vote Biden!

According to tax returns for Biden and his public schoolteacher wife, in 2006, their total income was $248,459; in 2007, it was $319,853 — putting the couple in the top 1 percent of all earners in the U.S.

This, my friends, is the face of poverty in America. At least in the Democratic Party. It’s located just below that row of hair plugs. The Biden’s are yet another heart-rending example of America’s “hidden poor” — desperately needy families hidden behind annual incomes of a quarter million dollars or more paid by the taxpayer. My fellow Americans, we can do better.

The national median household income was $48,201 in 2006 and $50,233 in 2007. Working for the government pays well.

If liberals are going to show how in touch they are with normal Americans by demanding a Marxist revolution against the rich every time they control the government, how about taking a peek at the charitable giving of these champions of the little guy?

According to their tax returns, in 2006 and 2007, the Obamas gave 5.8 percent and 6.1 percent of their income to charity. I guess Michelle Obama has to draw the line someplace with all this “giving back” stuff. The Bidens gave 0.15 percent and 0.31 percent of the income to charity.

No wonder Obama doesn’t see what the big fuss is over his decision to limit tax deductions for charitable giving. At least that part of Obama’s tax plan won’t affect his supporters.

Meanwhile, in 1991, 1992 and 1993, George W. Bush had incomes of $179,591, $212,313 and $610,772. His charitable contributions those years were $28,236, $31,914 and $31,292. During his presidency, Bush gave away more than 10 percent of his income each year.

For purposes of comparison, in 2005, Barack Obama made $1.7 million — more than twice President Bush’s 2005 income of $735,180 — but they both gave about the same amount to charity.

That same year, the heartless Halliburton employee Vice President Dick Cheney gave 77 percent of his income to charity. The following year, in 2006, Bush gave more to charity than Obama on an income one-third smaller than Obama’s. Maybe when Obama talks about “change” he’s referring to his charitable contributions.

Liberals have no intention of actually parting with any of their own wealth or lifting a finger to help the poor. That’s for other people to do with what’s left of their incomes after the government has taken its increasingly large cut.

As the great liberal intellectual Bertrand Russell explained while scoffing at the idea that he would give his money to charity: “I’m afraid you’ve got it wrong. (We) are socialists. We don’t pretend to be Christians.”

We LOVE you so.. how about liking us on Facebook?..

Powered By Facebook Like Post Plugin

The bad news is, by hiking taxes in a recession, Obama will turn a disaster into a catastrophe. But there’s good news, too. The “rich” include most of Obama’s biggest supporters.

While liberals love being praised for their looks, their style, their brilliance and their courage, the one quality they don’t want talked about is their money. To the contrary, Democrats are constantly boasting about how poor they are — as if that’s a virtue in a capitalist society with no class barriers.

No matter how much money they have, liberals will be damned if they’re giving up the poor’s mantle of angry self-righteousness. This is especially true if their wealth came by inheritance, marriage or the taxpayer, the preferred sources of income for Liberalus Americanus.

Democrats’ claims of poverty merely serve to show how out of touch elected Democrats are with actual incomes in America.

At the Democratic National Convention, for example, there were heartfelt tributes to the daunting self-sacrifice of both Barack and Michelle Obama for passing up lucrative jobs to work in “public service” — which apparently is now defined, such as in Michelle Obama’s case, as “working as a ‘diversity coordinator’ at a big city hospital for $300,000 a year.”

Seriously, even with a company car, full medical benefits and six weeks’ paid vacation thrown in, how do people live on that?

Meanwhile, the average salary for a lawyer with 20 years or more experience in the U.S. is a little more than $100,000. If Michelle Obama doesn’t lay off all this “giving back” stuff pretty soon, she’s going to find herself in Warren Buffett’s tax bracket.

During the campaign, Joe Biden was also praised by the Democrats for being the poorest U.S. senator — as if that were a major accomplishment.

Howard Dean, chairman of the Democratic National Committee, touted Biden as “a good example of a working-class kid,” adding that, to this day, Biden was “one of the least wealthy members of the U.S. Senate.” Only a Democrat would list “never really made anything of myself” on his resume.

On the Huffington Post, operated by a woman who acquired her wealth by marrying a rich gay guy connected to Big Oil, liberal blogger Steven Clemons gloated that, unlike John McCain, Biden wouldn’t “forget the number of houses he owns,” adding that, in 2006, Biden was ranked the poorest U.S. senator.

And at his high school reunion Biden was voted “most likely to try to bum a ride off of somebody.” Vote Biden!

According to tax returns for Biden and his public schoolteacher wife, in 2006, their total income was $248,459; in 2007, it was $319,853 — putting the couple in the top 1 percent of all earners in the U.S.

This, my friends, is the face of poverty in America. At least in the Democratic Party. It’s located just below that row of hair plugs. The Bidens are yet another heart-rending example of America’s “hidden poor” — desperately needy families hidden behind annual incomes of a quarter million dollars or more paid by the taxpayer. My fellow Americans, we can do better.

The national median household income was $48,201 in 2006 and $50,233 in 2007. Working for the government pays well.

If liberals are going to show how in touch they are with normal Americans by demanding a Marxist revolution against the rich every time they control the government, how about taking a peek at the charitable giving of these champions of the little guy?

According to their tax returns, in 2006 and 2007, the Obamas gave 5.8 percent and 6.1 percent of their income to charity. I guess Michelle Obama has to draw the line someplace with all this “giving back” stuff. The Bidens gave 0.15 percent and 0.31 percent of the income to charity.

No wonder Obama doesn’t see what the big fuss is over his decision to limit tax deductions for charitable giving. At least that part of Obama’s tax plan won’t affect his supporters.

Meanwhile, in 1991, 1992 and 1993, George W. Bush had incomes of $179,591, $212,313 and $610,772. His charitable contributions those years were $28,236, $31,914 and $31,292. During his presidency, Bush gave away more than 10 percent of his income each year.

For purposes of comparison, in 2005, Barack Obama made $1.7 million — more than twice President Bush’s 2005 income of $735,180 — but they both gave about the same amount to charity.

That same year, the heartless Halliburton employee Vice President Dick Cheney gave 77 percent of his income to charity. The following year, in 2006, Bush gave more to charity than Obama on an income one-third smaller than Obama’s. Maybe when Obama talks about “change” he’s referring to his charitable contributions.

Liberals have no intention of actually parting with any of their own wealth or lifting a finger to help the poor. That’s for other people to do with what’s left of their incomes after the government has taken its increasingly large cut.

As the great liberal intellectual Bertrand Russell explained while scoffing at the idea that he would give his money to charity: “I’m afraid you’ve got it wrong. (We) are socialists. We don’t pretend to be Christians.”

We LOVE you so.. how about liking us on Facebook?..

Powered By Facebook Like Post Plugin