View Full Version : Cheap Ass ed Liberal Scrooges Fancy Themselves as "Friend of Goodness "!

06-08-2008, 04:02 PM
(Look at this!) Reagan gave more to charity than FDR; and other stingy libs

Consider the case of Andrew Cuomo, He has, according to his website, "compassion toward the most vulnerable of us. but according to his own tax returns he made no charitable contributions between 1996 and 1999. In 2000 he donated a whopping $2,750. In 2004 and 2005, Cuomo had more than $1.5 million in adjusted gross income but gave a paltry $2,000 to charity.Cuomo made no charitable contributions in 2003, when his income was a bit less than $300,000.."
Al Gore has been famously stingy when it comes to actually giving his own money to charities. In 1998 he was embarrassed when his tax returns revealed that he gave just $353 to charity.
Senator John Kerry likewise has a poor record. In 1995 he gave zero to charity, but did spend $500,000 to buy a half stake in a seventeenth century painting. In 1993, he gave $175 to the needy.
Senator Ted Kennedy has clearly relished his role over the years as a liberal Robin Hood. He once told Al Hunt of the Wall Street Journal, "I come from an advantaged life, and I'll be goddamned if I'm going to get re-elected to the U.S. Senate by taking food out of the mouths of needy children."
But With a net worth of more than $8 million in the early 1970s and an income of $461,444 from a series of family trusts, Senator Robin Hood gave barely 1 percent of his income to charity. The sum is about as much as Kennedy claimed as a write-off on his fifty-foot sailing sloop Curragh.
Jesse Jackson has often claimed that he operates from a "liberal spirit of compassion and love" while conservatives are "heartless and uncaring toward the silent poor."

Jackson and his family have also established a charitable foundation called the Jackson Foundation to support the underprivileged. they receive large contributions from corporations. In 2004, for example, they collected $964,000 from corporations like McDonald's, Anheuser-Busch, and GMAC.
When asked on the tax form to described "direct charitable activities," the foundation responded: "none." The Jackson Foundation spent nearly twice that amount -- $84,172 -- on a "gala celebration" in honor of -- you guessed it -- Jesse Jackson.
Roosevelt had an average income of $93,000 ($1.3 million in today's dollars) but gave away about 3 percent of his income to charity. In 1935, during the height of the Great Depression, when people really could have used it, he donated just 2 percent.
" President Ronald Reagan, for instance, was often called heartless and callous by liberals. Unlike Roosevelt or JFK, Reagan was not a wealthy man when he became president. He had no family trust or investment portfolio to fall back on.

And yet, according to his tax returns, Reagan donated more than four times more to charity -- both in terms of actual money and on a percentage basis -- than Senator Ted Kennedy. And he gave more to charities with less income than FDR did. In 1985, for example, he gave away 6 percent of his income.
In 2005, Vice President Dick Cheney gave away 77 percent of his income to charity. He was actually criticized by some liberal bloggers for this, who claimed he was getting too much of a tax deduction

The main point of liberal compassion appears to be making liberals feel good about their superior virtue. Such are the rewards of being a "friend of goodness."

"Touchie Feelie Liberals, Hypocrites of the 'First Water' !"


06-08-2008, 04:53 PM
Apparently for them, charity begins in the House...and Senate.

Constitutionally Speaking
06-08-2008, 05:05 PM
Liberals are only generous with YOUR money. With their own they are stingy..

Did y'all happen to see that evil villain, Dick Cheney, only gave away 77% of his income???

06-08-2008, 07:36 PM
One of the reasons I despise those in Hollywood. They put on a benefit to raise a measly $500,000 for a certain cause. I'd like to see them personally donate even a tenth of what they make per movie.

06-09-2008, 01:41 PM
One of the reasons I despise those in Hollywood. They put on a benefit to raise a measly $500,000 for a certain cause. I'd like to see them personally donate even a tenth of what they make per movie.

Worse yet, the "goodie bags" they give them for showing up probably eat up at least half of the donations. :mad: