Joe Biden’s Budget Woes
Aug 20, 2012 Political
King Putt’s vice President and court jester Joe Biden recently took a swipe at GOP VP candidate Paul Ryan by invoking the wise words of his late father. Biden always tells people what the wise words of his father were as if Joe actually lives by them (or as if his father actually said them). Here is what Jester Joe had to say:
“…But my dad [had] a lot of wisdom. Every time someone tell you, say, ‘Look, let me tell you what’s important to me, what I value.’ My dad would go, ‘No, no. Don’t tell me what you value. Show me your budget, and I will tell you what you value.'” Weekly Standard
I am sure that Biden’s father was talking about people and their personal budgets but Joe made it sound as if ole daddy B was discussing any budget and the assumption is that Ryan has budget ideas that show values contrary to American values. Since Jester Joe decided to apply his pappy’s words to the federal budget I have to wonder if Joe is aware that the Democrat controlled Senate, which Joe is the president of, has not passed a budget in over three years.
If Joe wants us to believe that his daddy said he could tell what someone valued by looking at the budget what do you suppose daddy B would be able to tell about a group of people who passed NO budget?
I also wonder if his daddy would be proud of the fact that Joe is the president of the Senate (OK, he only has one real function there) and that he did not bother to push the Democrats to pass a budget. I would say that it shows the Democrats do not value using a budget or living within its means. I would say that it shows that Democrats value obstruction and cheating taxpayers out of money by not putting in place a mechanism to allocate that money appropriately. I know that it matters little because they do not have to balance anything and they spend as they want regardless of a budget BUT Joe said we could tell a lot about what people value by their budget.
If we accept this as true then we see a lot of things the Democrat controlled Senate values that are contrary to American principles.
To take it a step further, Jester Joe and his wife have donated about 1% of their income to charity while Mitt Romney and his wife have donated about 16% of their income to charity. It would appear as if Joe does not value charity.
That is, of course, unless he is being charitable with someone else’s money. Joe loves spending on social programs to help the folks out but only so long as he is spending money that is not his own.
He really does not value helping others when it comes to his own money
Liberals love to spend everyone else’s money and Joe is no exception to the rule.
I also wonder what his daddy would have said about plagiarism but that is something to save for another day.
Remember this folks when you hear the Democrats call Romney a greedy rich guy…
Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Tags: budget, charity, daddy's words, joe biden, liar, liberals, paul ryan
Freedom Versus…
Jan 5, 2011 Political
Situation:
Mr. X wants to help some people. He decides he’d like to provide them with food. He is specifically targeting homeless people in the local downtown area. He believes that these homeless that he sees need food, and he wants to meet that need. Mr. X starts up his kitchen and invites the homeless in. The homeless show up and start eating. The same homeless people come day after day and eat the food Mr. X provides. Mr. X is happy because he feels he is helping people. The homeless people are happy because they’re getting food.
After about a month, Mr. X decides that he wants to feed these people full-time. He’s going to need more money to do it, but he doesn’t have the money…
In a Free Country:
Mr. X comes to me and asks me, personally, for help. He explains his need and how he is helping people. I explain that I can appreciate his need, but I disagree with his methods. I say that I believe by providing and endless supply of food for the same homeless people over and over again that he is, instead, actually supporting them and encouraging them. After all, they don’t need to change their lives if he will provide them with food. Instead, I suggest to Mr. X that if he includes a program with job training, skills training, or placing other requirements on the free food, that I would be willing to donate some of my own time and money.
At this point, Mr. X has the option of accepting my terms and conditions, or looking elsewhere for support for his ideas. He may find others that agree with him and he continues to provide the free food. He is happy, the others are happy, the homeless are happy, and I am happy. He may not find enough others and instead agree to my conditions, and we find others who also agree. Then he is happy, the others are happy, the homeless are happy, and I am happy.
In America:
Mr. X decides he wants to feed the homeless. He sends men with guns to my house to force me to pay for the feedings. I object, and he threatens to send me to jail if I do not pay for the homeless meals. I ask why he needs me to pay for the meals, and he explains that it’s my civic duty and that it would be anarchy if I don’t pay. I ask Mr. X why he isn’t paying for the meals, and he explains that it is only civilized if I pay for the homeless meals and pay Mr. X’s salary while he is feeding them because I can afford it. He again threatens to throw me in jail if I do not pay him. He sends more men with guns to steal my property if I do not comply. More homeless show up for the free, unconditional meals, so Mr. X sends another bill to me for more money, telling me that since I have money and the homeless do not, it is my obligation to pay. I refuse to pay because I do not agree with the process, so Mr. X sends men with guns to kill me for disobeying. Mr. X is unhappy because he has a job that he does not like, but he has to pay his bills. Other people are unhappy because they have to pay high taxes they do not like. The homeless are not happy because they are not getting steak with every meal that they feel they deserve. I am dead.
I only wish this were an exaggeration. Sadly, it is not. Worse, the majority of people in America today support everything that is happening. And a wide majority completely would support my death in the situation above.
[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]
Tags: charity, coercion, freedom, government rules
Tis the Season
Nov 18, 2010 Political
So, has anyone else noticed the season? No, not the season formerly known as Christmas, but the season for raising money and giving. There are all the usual food drives, canned food drives, donations for this group and things for the hungry. But I have to ask, “Why?”
It’s not that I’m opposed to giving. Believe me, I give a great deal to charities that I believe in. But when there are numerous specifically non-religious food drives and the like “for the poor,” I have to wonder why in the world they need my money and food. After all, isn’t government taking care of them? We have spent hundreds of billions of dollars on just unemployment. Who is getting that money? What about the aggressive Welfare departments and food stamps? We’re giving out record numbers of dollars there. But still that’s not enough? My food prices are way up. My taxes are continuing to rise. And still people want me to give MORE?
See, this is what happens when government gets involved where it should not be. Right now, I only have three paychecks left before my taxes will likely go up by at least $100 a paycheck (if the tax cuts are not extended, as is being reported in some places). I’m working 50-hour weeks and looking for another job because I can barely afford food now, much less with $200 or more LESS a month. And I know my tax dollars are being wasted on these programs for the poor — yet people want me to give even MORE to them?
Sorry, it’s not going to happen. All you people who are having non-religious food drives and support, you can just go pray to your god, government, and see what it delivers for you. Sadly, I’m sure it will — taking more from me by force to give you more for nothing. See, all I want is to be left alone so I can be free to help people. But government will not allow me that freedom.
[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]
Ironies And Gall Surround Obama
Mar 26, 2009 Political
It is interesting to watch the MEssiah as he goes about his business because he is a complete contradiction to what he presented during the campaign. I believe that if he had discussed all this spending and had actually said what he was going to do he would never have won. The guy is hailed as a gifted speaker but as soon as he is away from a teleprompter he stutters and stammers and sounds like the years of drug abuse affected the speech center of his brain.
I think it is like watching a folly and it would be rather amusing if it were not so potentially fatal. His policies and his aggressive, steamrolling tactics are sending us down the path to hell.
Look at the irony of Obama and his cronies coming after those who don’t pay their taxes. Bloomberg and the Wall Street Journal report that Obama is putting together a panel to overhaul the tax system so that they can get the 300 billion dollars that is not paid as it should be. Does it strike anyone as ironic that this statement is made?
“There are hundreds of billions of dollars in uncollected taxes each year,” Orszag said in a conference call. The Volcker board “will be examining ways of being even more aggressive on reducing the tax gap.” [Bloomberg]
The irony is that Tim Geithner was not the one who made the statement, Orszag was. Is it because Geithner was one of the tax cheats the overhaul is looking to detect? How ironic is it that Obama wants to go after tax cheats when the guy he picked to run Treasury is a tax cheat? How ironic is it that Charlie Rangel is a major tax cheat and is not being aggressively investigated? Obama wants new rules to crack down on YOU while the Democrats are full of tax cheats. How many of this guy’s picks had to bow out because of some tax problem?
It is amazing. It is like having a doctor who smokes tell you to give up cigarettes because they are bad for you or your pastor telling you to be faithful to your swife while he is having an affair. It is just wrong, it is hypocritical, and it is unmitigated gall.
I believe everyone should pay their fair share of taxes but I think members of government should be beyond reproach and this bunch is anything but.
Look at Obama’s press conference last night. I told you this guy would continue to blame Bush for as long as he could. It is interesting that he continues to blame Bush for the bad stuff but takes credit for the good stuff. If something good happens in Iraq we never hear Obama say that George Bush is responsible.
No, instead Obama will go on national TV and LIE. He said he inherited a 1.3 trillion dollar deficit. That is an absolute lie. Forgetting for a moment that Congress controls the purse strings, let’s look at the deficit numbers. At Gateway Pundit there is a chart that shows the deficit under Bush was slightly over 400 billion dollars at its highest point. The projected deficits for Obama are over a trillion dollars for the first two years and never drop below about 600 billion. The projection out to 2019 is just as bleak.
The numbers are only public debt and don’t include government to government debt or the numbers for everyone are enormous. Obama was lying when he said what he did or he was using a different set of numbers in order to make his case. The information comes from the Heritage Foundation and they report that Obama has quadrupled the debt with his stimulus package.
Obama also defended his reduction of the charitable contribution tax deductions for wealthier Americans saying that it would not lead to less money being donated basing this on some kind of evidence. I don’t really know what plant he hails from but on Earth the opposite has been demonstrated. As pointed out at Just One Minute (from a 2005 analysis):
The authors compile and contrast the results of a vast number of studies looking at the interplay of tax rates and charitable giving. Although people have many motivations for their philanthropy the conclusion of almost all of these studies points in the same direction – on net people give less when it costs them more.
Maybe on Krypton that is not a problem but on Earth people, even those who are very charitable, don’t give as much if it will cost them more. The Obama plan is a disincentive to give but then again, why would a liberal understand charity? It isn’t like they actually give much…
Finally, the lynch mob has taken its toll on one AIG executive. The New York Times published the letter of resignation of Jake DeSantis. Be sure to read his entire letter. The guy worked for a $1 a year based on the bonus that AIG was legally obligated to pay. Now Congress wants to take 90% of it as a punishment for a guy who had nothing to do with the problems and who stayed on to help.
I see more of these coming. In the end AIG will fail and we will be on the hook for billions of dollars. If we had let them fail in September we could have saved that money.
[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]
Tags: aig, charity, Democrats, failure, geithner, irony, Obama, rangel, tax cheats, tax law
Who Cares How Paris Hilton Spends Her Money?
Jan 1, 2009 Political
Some people in Australia are in a snit because Paris Hilton went on a 40 minute shopping spree and spent nearly $4000. According to the story, some charities accused her of callous excess.
I guess she should donate her money to the charities instead?
I don’t follow Paris Hilton (though I stay in a lot of her hotels) and I don’t care what she does with her money. I have yet to figure out why she is such a big deal aside from her wealth. She is spoiled and cried her way out of a long jail sentence because she could not stand it there. Who could?
I will say that she had the best campaign ads during the last election and some of the things she said made more sense than what the real candidates were saying.
But one thing I am absolutely certain of is that she can spend her money any way she wants to. If she wants to give it to charity then fine and if she does not want to give it to charity that is also fine. If people had decided to give money to charity instead of Obama then charities would have had about three quarters of a billion dollars. But people chose to do something else with it and that is their right.
Paris Hilton lives a lavish lifestyle because she has tons of money. It is hers and I see no reason that she should be criticized for spending it however she wants.
Amazingly, Hilton was in Sydney to host an exclusive New Year’s dance party and she will get 100,000 Australian dollars for her appearance.
Why didn’t the charity criticize whoever decided to pay her that kind of money to host a party?
Source:
Breitbart
If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader.
Tags: charity, excess, new year's, paris hilton, party