• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Exposing & Combating Liberal Media Bias

A

Anonymous

Guest
“Exposing & Combating Liberal Media Bias”
Hurt ACORN, Hurt the Poor
Whoopi Goldberg says Republicans will never help
Timothy Egan Drools
After 9-12, NYT blogger still decrying anti-Obama 'Astroturf'
CBS Plays Hide the Socialist
Single-payer radicals are just 'Harvard Medical School' experts



The View Sticks Up For ACORN: Republicans Aren't Going to Take Care of the Poor
By Noel Sheppard (Bio | Archive)
September 18, 2009 - 00:21 ET

The ladies of ABC's "The View" on Thursday spoke out against Republicans who "have always felt that there was something a little off about ACORN," and said the embattled community organization needs to be given a second chance because "the Republicans aren't going to take care of [the poor]."Sure...who cares that they're advising people how to set up child prostitution rings, cheat banks, and evade taxes if they're helping the poor?

Of course, nobody on the panel pointed out that the Democrats currently control both Chambers of Congress as well as the White House.

Alas, facts are never important to these folks when they get on a roll (video embedded below the fold with rough transcript, h/t our dear friend Ms Underestimated with assistance from Jeff Poor):



WHOOPI GOLDBERG: So the fallout continues over the filmmaker who posed as a pimp and visited offices of community outreach group ACORN. Now Sean Hannity showed this clip last night of the filmmaker asking how to get underage prostitutes across the border. Take a look. [...]

GOLDBERG: So, just, you couldn't understand what they were saying. Here is the gist of what happened. ACORN is a group that is a group of community organizers. They have several places across the country and they work with poor folks and disenfranchised folks for housing, for medical health and all kinds of stuff. The Republicans have always felt that there was something a little off about ACORN and no one could actually put their finger on it. So now two young filmmakers who say that they're conservatives went out to show the kinds of people that are working for ACORN and to give credence to the ideas that, you know, this is not a good organization. I think my --

BARBARA WALTERS: It's like saying that prostitutes can...

GOLDBERG: ...by showing that you can talk, they talked to five different places and they talked to five different people who all -- they asked questions like how do we run prostitutes or how do we set up crack houses or whatever, just stuff that you know you don't want to see. So there's now a lot of discussion in Washington whether they should take away ACORN's funding, whether they should see it dismantled, see it disappear?

JOY BEHAR: I understand that they have taken their funding away already.

GOLDBERG: Not all of it.

BEHAR: Well, a lot of it. It was voted in Congress to take it away. 87 to a few others. I don't know.

GOLDBERG: But here is my question. So, we have seen over the last couple of years boneheads in all organizations. We've seen them on Wall Street, we've seen them in the banking system, we've seen them in Washington, we've seen them all over. Do we dismantle the Senate and the Congress and all of Wall Street and all of these places because there's boneheads -- you know what I want to say really badly but I can't -- in all of these places. So here's my question: who suffers when ACORN disappears?

BEHAR: Poor people.

GOLDBERG: So maybe it's not a good idea to throw the baby out with the bath water. It's better to --

WALTERS: Keep, change things, which ACORN is trying to do. They've shut down all the branches that were compromised, I'm reading, they're conducting staff training. They are ordering independent investigations. We gave some of the banks a chance, didn't we, until they found their way. For heaven sakes - I mean, Whoopi and I have, gove them a chance. Let them try to do what they're supposed to do and don't hurt the poor people that don't have any chance.

SHERRI SHEPHERD:: Because you've had these are isolated incidents.

BEHAR: More oversight on all of these things.

GOLDBERG: Everything, I mean, you know, there are boneheads in all organizations. We've worked for them. We know that they're there. But do you kill the whole thing? And I don't think so. A lot of people think that you should kill it. But you can't answer, you can't tell me where those people who become even more disenfranchised go. Because we know the Republicans aren't going to take care of them. Cause we see that doesn't work anymore for them. So now where do they go? I am sick and tired of people dismantling stuff and saying, "Oh, we're for the people," and then leaving the people this. Because they don't care. Find a way to fix it.

BEHAR: They haven't dismantled the Catholic Church and they have some boneheads in there.

GOLDBERG: This is true.

Amazing.
 

badaxemoo

Well-known member
Maybe a pork pie would actually be good.

There is quite a bit of good pastured pork in my freezer.

After all, unlike some posters on this site, I actually do raise hogs.
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
Take care of the poor?

I'm all for it, but when the Bureaucracy component costs just as much as is making it to the poor, there's some adjustments that need to be made.

I'll try to find the numbers, but in the meantime, I'll go from memory.

In Toronto, it costs about $55,000 to $60,000, for one homeless person.

I've seen numbers for the US that are similiar, if not higher.

and once again, it's more than a left vs right thing. It's coming down to cost/deficit and debt.

we can't afford the waste and corruption in either country.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
badaxemoo said:
Maybe a pork pie would actually be good.

There is quite a bit of good pastured pork in my freezer.

After all, unlike some posters on this site, I actually do raise hogs.

Try teaching the little brats some manners and dicipline them more often. :wink:
 

Ben H

Well-known member
Who Gives and Who Doesn't?
Putting the Stereotypes to the Test

By JOHN STOSSEL and KRISTINA KENDALL
Nov. 28, 2006 —

There are a million ways to give to charity. Toy drives, food drives, school supply drives…telethons, walkathons, and dance-athons.

But just who is doing the giving? Three quarters of American families donate to charity, giving $1,800 each, on average. Of course, if three quarters give, that means that one quarter don't give at all. So what distinguishes those who give from those who don't? It turns out there are many myths about that.

Sioux Falls vs. San Francisco

We assume the rich give more than the middle class, the middle class more than the poor. I've heard liberals care more about the less fortunate, so we assume they give more than conservatives do. Are these assumptions truth, or myth?

To test what types of people give more, "20/20" went to two very different parts of the country, with contrasting populations: Sioux Falls, S.D. and San Francisco, Calif. The Salvation Army set up buckets at the busiest locations in each city -- Macy's in San Francisco and Wal-Mart in Sioux Falls. Which bucket collected more money?

Sioux Falls is rural and religious; half of the population goes to church every week. People in San Francisco make much more money, are predominantly liberal, and just 14 percent of people in San Francisco attend church every week. Liberals are said to care more about helping the poor; so did people in San Francisco give more?

It turns out that this idea that liberals give more…is a myth. Of the top 25 states where people give an above average percent of their income, 24 were red states in the last presidential election.

Arthur Brooks, the author of "Who Really Cares," says that "when you look at the data, it turns out the conservatives give about 30 percent more." He adds, "And incidentally, conservative-headed families make slightly less money."

And he says the differences in giving goes beyond money, pointing out that conservatives are 18 percent more likely to donate blood. He says this difference is not about politics, but about the different way conservatives and liberals view government.

"You find that people who believe it's the government's job to make incomes more equal, are far less likely to give their money away," Brooks says. In fact, people who disagree with the statement, "The government has a basic responsibility to take care of the people who can't take care of themselves," are 27 percent more likely to give to charity.

Rich vs. Poor

The second myth is that the people with the most money are the most generous. You'd think they'd be. After all, the rich should have the most to spare and households with incomes exceeding $1 million (about 7 percent of the population) make 50 percent of all charitable donations.

But while the rich do give more in overall dollars, according to the Social Capital Community Benchmark Survey, people at the lower end of the income scale give almost 30 percent more of their income.

Many researchers told us lower income people give more because they think they are more likely to need charity or know someone who needs charity.

Laurie Tanner is one of those people. She says, "I remember a time when honestly, I couldn't afford a gallon of milk for my son. And I had a good friend that stepped in and helped me, and I've never forgotten that."

The United Way helped Vincent Lau when he was a teenager. Now he donates to them. "I'm glad to help, " Lau says.

Workers at the meat packing plant where Lau works make on average around $35,000, yet the Sioux Falls United Way says it gets more contributions of over $500 from employees here than anywhere else.

Another employee at the plant, B.J. Motley, has a wife and four kids to support, but he gives part of his paycheck to charity every week

"My mom always says 'it's always good to give,'" he says. "[I've] got a great family and I've been blessed."

And what about the middle class? Well, while middle-income Americans are generous compared to people in other countries, compared to the rich and the working poor, they give less. "The two most generous groups in America are the rich and the working poor," says Brooks. "The middle class give the least."

The Church Connection

Finally, the single biggest predictor of whether someone will be charitable is their religious participation.

Religious people are more likely to give to charity, and when they give, they give more money: four times as much. And Arthur Brooks told me that giving goes beyond their own religious organization:

"Actually, the truth is that they're giving to more than their churches," he says. "The religious Americans are more likely to give to every kind of cause and charity, including explicitly non-religious charities."

And almost all of the people who gave to our bell ringers in San Francisco and Sioux Falls said they were religious or spiritual.

So how did our little test turn out? Tune into a special edition of "20/20," "Cheap in America," to find out.

Copyright © 2009 ABC News Internet Ventures
http://digg.com/politics/Conservatives_charitably_donate_30_more_than_liberals_as_a_whole

Mitt Romney Pledges Salary to Charity if Elected President

Mitt Romney, who is running for the Republican presidential nomination, said on Tuesday that he would donate all of his salary to charity if he is elected president, the Associated Press reports.

Mr. Romney, the wealthiest of all the candidates running for president, has assets estimated at $190-million to $250-million.

Mr. Romney said he would likely accept the presidential salary of $400,000 annually but would donate the money to charity. While serving as governor of Massachusetts, he declined his $135,000 annual salary.

As a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, Mr. Romney, like other Mormons, is expected to donate 10 percent of his salary to the church annually.
http://philanthropy.com/news/philan...ledges-salary-to-charity-if-elected-president
 
Top