Recall Biden’s quote from not too long ago:
Catholic social doctrine as I was taught it is, you take care of people who need the help the most.
Too bad he only talks about helping those in need rather then doing it….
As Sarah does:
Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin made considerably less money than rival Sen. Joe Biden, but the Palin family gave more to charity in the last two years than Biden has in the last eight combined, according to Palin’s tax records released Friday afternoon.
Palin, the running mate of presidential candidate Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), and her husband Todd reported meager earnings from 2006 and 2007, at least by presidential-politics standards.
In 2006, the Palins paid $11,944 in taxes on $127,869 in income. In 2007, they paid $24,738 on $166,080.
But in 2006, they donated $4,880 to charity, and in 2007, they donated $3,325.
By contrast, Biden (D-Del.), Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama’s running mate, has donated a total of $3,690 since 1998 despite his higher Senate salary, according to an analysis posted by National Review.
Of course what Biden meant was that it was better to spend YOUR money to redistribute to those in need rather then his own.
Once again proving the study done by Arthur C. Brooks as written about in his book Who Really Cares: The Surprising Truth About Compassionate Conservatism
— Although liberal families’ incomes average 6 percent higher than those of conservative families, conservative-headed households give, on average, 30 percent more to charity than the average liberal-headed household ($1,600 per year vs. $1,227).
— Conservatives also donate more time and give more blood.
— Residents of the states that voted for John Kerry in 2004 gave smaller percentages of their incomes to charity than did residents of states that voted for George Bush.
— Bush carried 24 of the 25 states where charitable giving was above average.
— 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.
— People who reject the idea that “government has a responsibility to reduce income inequality” give an average of four times more than people who accept that proposition.
Do as I say, not as I do…
See author page
Yep, no surprise there! Libs think that the government is somehow the best way to meet the needs of the people? Really? Any of us who have worked in the federal government know better. Most of the money taxpayers are compelled to hand over to the federal government is wasted on buildings, bureaucrats and boondoggles.
If instead of throwing our money down that rathole, taxpayers donated directly to local charities in their communities there would be no poverty, no homeless people (unless by choice), no hunger, no illiteracy and every uninsured person could get free medical care from a local private clinic.
AND, we could save the planet from the evils of global warming by eliminating all those bureaucrats driving to work every day and the fossil fuels required to heat, cool and light their oversized office buildings.
The reason Democrats use the wasteful and inefficient federal government as the clearinghouse for all these social ills which could be best addressed at the local level is clear: They put politics before caring for the poor, the sick and the needy. Like everything else they do they put politics before country. And they know that if we are dependent on government we will forced to look to them for help.
That averages out to about $5.00 per week. Plus a little extra for Christmas and Easter, I guess.
Wow. Impressed I’m not…
Sarah gave 4% of her and Todd’s income to charity in one year while Joe gave one tenth of one percent of his salary to charity over ten years.
Adjusted
Gross Income Charity
1998 $215,432 $195
1999 $210,797 $120
2000 $219,953 $360
2001 $220,712 $360
2002 $227,811 $260
2003 $231,375 $260
2004 $234,271 $380
2005 $321,379 $380
2006 $248,459 $380
2007 $319,853 $995
Total $2,450,042 $3,690
Wow, really… you want to really discuss what is given to charity by the Palin Family. Let’s get real.
Here is a rcent article. One of many on the web.
“In 2009, Sarah Palin’s daughter Bristol joined a teen pregnancy prevention nonprofit called the Candie’s Foundation. Today, the Associated Press reported that the Candie’s Foundation released its 2009 tax information, revealing that Bristol was paid a salary of $262,500.
But a closer examination of the tax form by ThinkProgress shows that the group disbursed only $35,000 in grants to actual teen pregnancy health and counseling clinics: $25,000 to the Mt. Sinai Adolescent Health Center and $10,000 to the National Campaign to Prevent Teen Pregnancy.
For every dollar Bristol gave to the cause, she gave $7.50 to herself.
Her charity, the Candie’s Foundation, also spent $165,000 on advertising. That’s another $4.71 for every dollar given to charity.”
_American Press
Remember when Obama was running for president and he wanted to FORCE high school students to ”give” of their time to public service in order to graduate?
Remember when he wanted to create a ”public security force” as large and well funded as our military defense forces?
Well, for years I used to mentor children who needed help with reading.
I did it for free.
Recently I found out two of my young neighbors are mentoring youths.
But they are NOT doing it for free!
Stimulus money is being paid to them to mentor these youngsters!
And, they are not ashamed to admit how often they also propagandize the youths in their care, either!
Who’s going to stop them?
Now, all I wonder is, would they do all of this for free?