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

Global Poverty Act

Cal

Well-known member
Obama’s Global Tax Proposal Up for Senate Vote


AIM Column | By Cliff Kincaid | February 12, 2008

It appears the Senate version is being pushed not only by Biden and Obama, a member of the committee, but Lugar, the ranking Republican member.
A nice-sounding bill called the "Global Poverty Act," sponsored by Democratic presidential candidate and Senator Barack Obama, is up for a Senate vote on Thursday and could result in the imposition of a global tax on the United States. The bill, which has the support of many liberal religious groups, makes levels of U.S. foreign aid spending subservient to the dictates of the United Nations.

Senator Joe Biden, chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, has not endorsed either Senator Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton in the presidential race. But on Thursday, February 14, he is trying to rush Obama's "Global Poverty Act" (S.2433) through his committee. The legislation would commit the U.S. to spending 0.7 percent of gross national product on foreign aid, which amounts to a phenomenal 13-year total of $845 billion over and above what the U.S. already spends.

The bill, which is item number four on the committee's business meeting agenda, passed the House by a voice vote last year because most members didn't realize what was in it. Congressional sponsors have been careful not to calculate the amount of foreign aid spending that it would require. According to the website of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, no hearings have been held on the Obama bill in that body.

A release from the Obama Senate office about the bill declares, "In 2000, the U.S. joined more than 180 countries at the United Nations Millennium Summit and vowed to reduce global poverty by 2015. We are halfway towards this deadline, and it is time the United States makes it a priority of our foreign policy to meet this goal and help those who are struggling day to day."

The legislation itself requires the President "to develop and implement a comprehensive strategy to further the United States foreign policy objective of promoting the reduction of global poverty, the elimination of extreme global poverty, and the achievement of the Millennium Development Goal of reducing by one-half the proportion of people worldwide, between 1990 and 2015, who live on less than $1 per day."

The bill defines the term "Millennium Development Goals" as the goals set out in the United Nations Millennium Declaration, General Assembly Resolution 55/2 (2000).

The U.N. says that "The commitment to provide 0.7% of gross national product (GNP) as official development assistance was first made 35 years ago in a General Assembly resolution, but it has been reaffirmed repeatedly over the years, including at the 2002 global Financing for Development conference in Monterrey, Mexico. However, in 2004, total aid from the industrialized countries totaled just $78.6 billion-or about 0.25% of their collective GNP."

In addition to seeking to eradicate poverty, that declaration commits nations to banning "small arms and light weapons" and ratifying a series of treaties, including the International Criminal Court Treaty, the Kyoto Protocol (global warming treaty), the Convention on Biological Diversity, the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women, and the Convention on the Rights of the Child.

The Millennium Declaration also affirms the U.N. as "the indispensable common house of the entire human family, through which we will seek to realize our universal aspirations for peace, cooperation and development."

Jeffrey Sachs, who runs the U.N.'s "Millennium Project," says that the U.N. plan to force the U.S. to pay 0.7 percent of GNP in increased foreign aid spending would add $65 billion a year to what the U.S. already spends. Over a 13-year period, from 2002, when the U.N.'s Financing for Development conference was held, to the target year of 2015, when the U.S. is expected to meet the "Millennium Development Goals," this amounts to $845 billion. And the only way to raise that kind of money, Sachs has written, is through a global tax, preferably on carbon-emitting fossil fuels.

Obama's bill has only six co-sponsors. They are Senators Maria Cantwell, Dianne Feinstein, Richard Lugar, Richard Durbin, Chuck Hagel and Robert Menendez. But it appears that Biden and Obama see passage of this bill as a way to highlight Democratic Party priorities in the Senate.

The House version (H.R. 1302), sponsored by Rep. Adam Smith (D-Wash.), had only 84 co-sponsors before it was suddenly brought up on the House floor last September 25 and was passed by voice vote. House Republicans were caught off-guard, unaware that the pro-U.N. measure committed the U.S. to spending hundreds of billions of dollars.

It appears the Senate version is being pushed not only by Biden and Obama, a member of the committee, but Lugar, the ranking Republican member. Lugar has worked with Obama in the past to promote more foreign aid for Russia, supposedly to stem nuclear proliferation, and has become Obama's mentor. Like Biden, Lugar is a globalist. They have both promoted passage of the U.N.'s Law of the Sea Treaty, for example.

The so-called "Lugar-Obama initiative" was modeled after the Nunn-Lugar program, also known as the Cooperative Threat Reduction (CTR) program, which was designed to eliminate weapons of mass destruction in the former Soviet Union. But one defense analyst, Rich Kelly, noted evidence that "CTR funds have eased the Russian military's budgetary woes, freeing resources for such initiatives as the war in Chechnya and defense modernization." He recommended that Congress "eliminate CTR funding so that it does not finance additional, perhaps more threatening, programs in the former Soviet Union." However, over $6 billion has already been spent on the program.

Another program modeled on Nunn-Lugar, the Initiatives for Proliferation Prevention (IPP), was recently exposed as having funded nuclear projects in Iran through Russia.

More foreign aid through passage of the Global Poverty Act was identified as one of the strategic goals of InterAction, the alliance of U.S-based international non-governmental organizations that lobbies for more foreign aid. The group is heavily financed by the U.S. Government, having received $1.4 million from taxpayers in fiscal year 2005 and $1.7 million in 2006. However, InterAction recently issued a report accusing the United States of "falling short on its commitment to rid the world of dire poverty by 2015 under the U.N. Millennium Development Goals..."

It's not clear what President Bush would do if the bill passes the Senate. The bill itself quotes Bush as declaring that "We fight against poverty because opportunity is a fundamental right to human dignity." Bush's former top aide, Michael J. Gerson, writes in his new book, Heroic Conservatism, that Bush should be remembered as the President who "sponsored the largest percentage increases in foreign assistance since the Marshall Plan..."

Even these increases, however, will not be enough to satisfy the requirements of the Obama bill. A global tax will clearly be necessary to force American taxpayers to provide the money.

Americans who would like their senators to know what they are voting on can contact them through information at this official Senate site.
 

Steve

Well-known member
Before Obama's rise to power his squeaky clean record offered no "ammunition" to the republican's..

He avoided controversial votes.. even going as far as to vote "present".

as he gets more exposure his stand on the issues will be clear, and most will see he is an ultra liberal...
 

Cal

Well-known member
Steve said:
Before Obama's rise to power his squeaky clean record offered no "ammunition" to the republican's..

He avoided controversial votes.. even going as far as to vote "present".

as he gets more exposure his stand on the issues will be clear, and most will see he is an ultra liberal...
I understand that PETA is rooting for him as well.
 

Hanta Yo

Well-known member
Hi Cal, good to read from you again! :p

Just hope and pray the Republican party gets the Presidency because we are doomed no matter which Democrat gets it :cry: :cry:
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
But we can't/won't guarantee each little kid in the US has access to health insurance coverage/care... :???: :( :( :mad:

In Africa, Bush Makes Case for U.S. Aid

Saturday, February 16, 2008 12:52 PM




DAR ES SALAAM, Tanzania -- President Bush is betting Congress will hear him better from the heart of Africa than it does from down the street in Washington.


Foreign aid programs that Bush sees as crowning achievements—and which he holds dear—are having their spending levels questioned on Capitol Hill. By visiting Africa for six days to showcase their results, Bush aims to change that in the short term and secure the programs' future beyond his presidency.


His first stop Saturday was Benin, a tiny sliver on West Africa's coast. Hundreds of millions of U.S. dollars are helping to pay for an aggressive anti-malaria campaign, the training of tens of thousands of teachers and reforms to Benin's judiciary, port and financial systems.


"My trip here is a way to remind future presidents and future Congresses that it is in the national interest and in the moral interests of the United States of America to help people," Bush said.


The first American president to visit Benin, Bush spent three hours at the airport in Cotonou. He promoted progress in the country and then flew across the continent to Tanzania after his plane refueled,


On Sunday and Monday, Bush planned to highlight a new aid pact with Tanzania as well as U.S.-funded efforts on AIDS, malaria and education.


Bush also goes to Rwanda, Ghana and Liberia. Like Benin and Tanzania, they are desperately poor but making strides, with U.S. help, on economic growth, the rule of law and better living conditions.


The president's aid programs are a shift from the past and generally have drawn bipartisan support in Washington.


His five-year, $15 billion AIDS relief plan is the largest-ever international health initiative devoted to one disease, raising the number of people on anti-retroviral treatments from 50,000 to 1.3 million.


A five-year, $1.2 billion anti-malaria initiative has reached 25 million Africans with insecticide-treated bed nets, a simple but effective solution to a deadly problem.


One foreign aid program started under Bush, the Millennium Challenge Corporation, limits U.S. development assistance only to nations that embrace democracy and free markets, fight corruption and invest in education and health. It has approved $5.5 billion in compacts with 16 countries, nine in Africa.


Programs such as these have kept the United States relatively popular in Africa, unlike throughout the rest of the world. Yet even ordinary people here consistently express surprise, as have Africa experts at home, at Bush's largesse. Bush was asked by a Beninese reporter whether his visit was "a stunt."

Thousands of people lined Bush's motorcade route the entire way in from the airport in Dar es Salaam. He was greeted by dancers in tan shirts bearing his likeness and waving American flags.


Bush wants $30 billion over the next five years for his AIDS program. Democrats complain that is too little and there is debate about its emphasis on abstinence and requirement of anti-prostitution pledges.


His Millennium Challenge approach is more threatened, in part because of a slow initial pace of getting the money out. Lawmakers gave it $1.5 billion for the last budget year, half of Bush's request, and seem to be similarly inclined this year.


Lobbying for it from Benin, Bush said it is a more effective way of helping Africa—by helping countries there help themselves.


"I reject some of the old-style type of grants, which basically said, let's feel better, we'll just give some money out," he said. "We believe that rather than making ourselves feel better, that our money ought to make the people of a particular country feel better about their government."


He has called the program an alternative giving because of either "guilt" over colonialism or "gluttony" for Africa's many resources. Maintaining the program as U.S. policy after he leaves office next January is a a priority.


Every one of the five countries on Bush's itinerary has a stake in that. Benin has a $307 million compact, Ghana has a $547 million one and the centerpiece of Bush's Tanzania visit is the signing of its $698 million deal, the biggest so far. Rwanda is a "threshold" country and Liberia's goal is to get there, too.


"He is here to support the countries which strive to be virtuous," said Benin's president, Thomas Boni Yayi.


Bush traveled to Africa at a time of several conflicts. An electoral dispute in Kenya turned into a wave of ethnic violence in that once- model country; atrocities in Sudan's western Darfur region are continuing and causing tension with neighboring Chad; places such as the Horn of Africa, Congo and Zimbabwe are seeing an escalation of long-running troubles.


Bush said he would discuss the strife "and expect there to be, you know, focus and concrete action" at each stop, many of which take him to the doorstep of the conflicts. He said his administration has a strong record on trying to find solutions on this violence-plagued continent.


He defended his trip's overarching emphasis on the positive all the same.


"When you herald success, it helps others realize what is possible," Bush said. "This is a large place with a lot of nations, and no question not everything is perfect. On the other hand, there's a lot of great success stories, and the United States is pleased to be involved with those success stories."


On Kenya, Bush endorsed a power-sharing agreement on Saturday. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice is peeling off from his entourage on Monday to make a quick mediating trip to Nairobi. Her top Africa deputy said that anyone on either side who obstructs the political process will face U.S. penalties. "There will be not be business as usual," Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs Jendayi Frazer told reporters traveling on Air Force One with Bush.


Bush also he hopes to use his Rwanda visit to press for a speedier deployment of a joint African Union-U.N. peacekeeping force to Darfur. Bush intends to thank Rwandans for contributing the largest contingent of troops to that mission, a gentle nudge to nations he believes are not doing enough.


Bush's welcome in Tanzania was not all positive. In the country that was the site of one of the deadly truck bombings against U.S. embassies in 1998, a Muslim group demonstrated Friday against his visit in Dar es Salaam's streets.
 

Cal

Well-known member
Hanta Yo said:
Hi Cal, good to read from you again! :p

Just hope and pray the Republican party gets the Presidency because we are doomed no matter which Democrat gets it :cry: :cry:
Hanta Yo, weren't you impressed by Tom Daschle's endorsement of Obama?? YUK!

Hope your family is all doing great!
 

Cal

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
But we can't/won't guarantee each little kid in the US has access to health insurance coverage/care... :???: :( :( :mad:

With a slaughter horse ban, maybe each sick kid could receive his very own free government issued pony to make him feel better... :wink:
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Cal said:
Oldtimer said:
But we can't/won't guarantee each little kid in the US has access to health insurance coverage/care... :???: :( :( :mad:

With a slaughter horse ban, maybe each sick kid could receive his very own free government issued pony to make him feel better... :wink:

GW must be planning to replace our horses with zebras- maybe thats why he signed all those bills -eh?...What else would he be spending hundreds of billions $ in Africa for :???:
Can't be to aid sick kids- or to keep kids from getting sick- he already vetoed those bipartisan backed plans in his own country...... :???: :( :( :mad:

The new neocon Republican "fiscal conservatism"- taking it from the taxpayer in the US- and spend it around the world- and when you run out, borrow more from their unborn grandchildren to pump into their globalist dream of conquest- One World Order ....To hell with domestic business's, infrastructure, or folks on the homefront...
 

Mike

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
Cal said:
Oldtimer said:
But we can't/won't guarantee each little kid in the US has access to health insurance coverage/care... :???: :( :( :mad:

With a slaughter horse ban, maybe each sick kid could receive his very own free government issued pony to make him feel better... :wink:

Can't be to aid sick kids- or to keep kids from getting sick- he already vetoed those bipartisan backed plans in his own country...... :???: :( :( :mad:

OT, Tell the whole truth. Bush didn't veto a bill to stop aid to poor kids without health insurance. Poor kids still get help.

He vetoed a bill expanding the SCHIPS program to those making as much as $70,000.00 per year.

You biatch about spending money, then turn around and biatch about saving!

You sure you ain't coming down with Alzheimers? :roll:
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Mike said:
Oldtimer said:
Cal said:
Can't be to aid sick kids- or to keep kids from getting sick- he already vetoed those bipartisan backed plans in his own country...... :???: :( :( :mad:

OT, Tell the whole truth. Bush didn't veto a bill to stop aid to poor kids without health insurance. Poor kids still get help.

He vetoed a bill expanding the SCHIPS program to those making as much as $70,000.00 per year.

You biatch about spending money, then turn around and biatch about saving!

You sure you ain't coming down with Alzheimers? :roll:

If you live in some areas like LA, Honolulu, and D.C. where rent on a rathole is several thousand dollars a month-and houses are priced in the millions- $68,000 for a family income doesn't go far...That amount was pinpointed for only certain areas based on cost of living in those areas-- or do you not trust GW's government folk that put out those area cost of living figures either :???: ....
Why do you think government workers living in those areas get COLA's on top of their GS salary :???: Thousands a month....
Now some states like Montana don't have enough funds to cover all the kids that need it.....But thats OK--Backslap ol GW and his spending the money on AIDs in Africa- where they continue to proliferate it because they think if they have sex with several virgins they can cure themselves :roll: Pure money down a globalists rathole.....

Even my own very conservative Congressman Rehberg voted in favor of adding the 2 to 4 million kids that don't now have health care to the program- realizing the need for this program...
 

Bullhauler

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
Mike said:
Oldtimer said:
OT, Tell the whole truth. Bush didn't veto a bill to stop aid to poor kids without health insurance. Poor kids still get help.

He vetoed a bill expanding the SCHIPS program to those making as much as $70,000.00 per year.

You biatch about spending money, then turn around and biatch about saving!

You sure you ain't coming down with Alzheimers? :roll:

If you live in some areas like LA, Honolulu, and D.C. where rent on a rathole is several thousand dollars a month-and houses are priced in the millions- $68,000 doesn't go far...That amount was pinpointed for only certain areas based on cost of living in those areas-- or do you not trust GW's government folk that put out those area cost of living figures either :???: ....
Why do you think government workers living in those areas get COLA's on top of their GS salary :???: Thousands a month....
Now some states like Montana don't have enough funds to cover all the kids that need it.....But thats OK--Backslap ol GW and his spending the money on AIDs in Africa- where they continue to proliferate it because they think if they have sex with several virgins they can cure themselves :roll: Pure money down a globalists rathole.....



Don't forget that there are families that got their kids on chips because they were paying 20-30000 a year on health care costs. Seventy thousand doesn't go too far if health care eats up $30,0000 of it each year.
 

olderroper

Well-known member
Cal said:
Obama’s Global Tax Proposal Up for Senate Vote
In addition to seeking to eradicate poverty, that declaration commits nations to banning "small arms and light weapons" and ratifying a series of treaties, including the International Criminal Court Treaty, the Kyoto Protocol (global warming treaty)

This is what we got to watch out for. Small arms and small weapons pretty much covers all our hunting equipment. That's just about elimate any gun ownership in the US.
I don't happen to keep any heavy weapons like a tank or a cannon or a jet in my back yard.

Shoot they'd even take away my BB gun, my slingshot and my bow an arrow.
Don't go to sleep yet. They are always trying to slip some little thing by us.
 

Red Robin

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
Mike said:
Oldtimer said:
OT, Tell the whole truth. Bush didn't veto a bill to stop aid to poor kids without health insurance. Poor kids still get help.

He vetoed a bill expanding the SCHIPS program to those making as much as $70,000.00 per year.

You biatch about spending money, then turn around and biatch about saving!

You sure you ain't coming down with Alzheimers? :roll:

If you live in some areas like LA, Honolulu, and D.C. where rent on a rathole is several thousand dollars a month-and houses are priced in the millions- $68,000 for a family income doesn't go far...That amount was pinpointed for only certain areas based on cost of living in those areas-- or do you not trust GW's government folk that put out those area cost of living figures either :???: ....
Why do you think government workers living in those areas get COLA's on top of their GS salary :???: Thousands a month....
Now some states like Montana don't have enough funds to cover all the kids that need it.....But thats OK--Backslap ol GW and his spending the money on AIDs in Africa- where they continue to proliferate it because they think if they have sex with several virgins they can cure themselves :roll: Pure money down a globalists rathole.....

Even my own very conservative Congressman Rehberg voted in favor of adding the 2 to 4 million kids that don't now have health care to the program- realizing the need for this program...
If Montana doesn't suit someone well enough , I would think they could move. We aren't a nation that guarantees everyone , everything, and anywhere. If I want to make more money, I can move to NY. It isn't worth it to me so I stay here. Unlike you though I won't ask those that are successful in NY to send me some of their hard earned money to support my kids.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Well Red Robin- its not only Montana- its many of the rural states and urban centers (like NY) that are having a problem with the excessive high costs of health care and health care insurance.....Especially when the cost of health care insurance rose by 10.6% last year alone....

But like I figured- you'd rather be backslappin your idol old GW for sending your tax money all over the world- while he could care less of the domestic issues facing this nation....

Personally since GW has thought he needs to spend like a drunken sailor- I'd rather see it go back into the US economy for aiding US citizens and US infrastructure....

It isn't going to matter if its GW, McCain, Hitlery or Obama- they are all sold out to globalization - and in order to do that US citizens will have to lose many of their rights, while the country loses much of its sovereignty....
 

Mike

Well-known member
Unlike you though I won't ask those that are successful in NY to send me some of their hard earned money to support my kids

RR, you must be forgetting the Socialist/Communist ideals of making everyone equal by the redistribution of income and taxes to the less fortunate?

To a certain extent, I believe in helping other countries during hard times in that their money will come back to us in the form of purchased goods later on.

Other countries did send us cash after Katrina, you know.

It can be taken too far though.
 

Mike

Well-known member
Foreign countries have responded generously to Hurricane Katrina. Donor nations and their contribution:

Country Support
Afghanistan $100,000
Armenia $100,000
Australia $7.6 million
Azerbaijan $500,000
Bahamas $50,000
Bahrain $5 million
Bangladesh $1 million
Belgium Medical/logistics teams
Canada 2 helicopters, 32-person rescue team, evacuation flights, medical supplies
China $5.1 million cash and relief supplies
Djibouti $50,000
Finland Search-and-rescue team; 3 logistics specialists
France Tents, tarps, MREs, water treatment supplies, cleaning equipment
Gabon $500,000
Georgia $50,000
Germany MREs, high speed pumps, forensic experts
Greece 2 cruise ships
India $5 million
Iraq $1,000,000 cash
Ireland $1,000,000 cash
Country Support
Israel Tents, first-aid kits, baby formula
Italy Generators, water pumps/purifiers, tents, med supplies
Japan $200,000 cash and $844,000 in relief supplies, $1.5 million in private donations.
Kuwait $400 million in oil, $100 million cash
Maldives $25,000 cash
Mexico Transport vehicles, 1 helicopter, ambulance and medical teams.
Mongolia $50,000 cash
Nepal $25,000 cash
New Zealand $1.4 million cash, search and rescue teams
Nigeria $1 million cash
Norway $1.54 million in relief supplies
Qatar $100 million cash
Republic of Korea $30 million cash and in-kind donations
Saudi Arabia $5 million from Aramco, $250,000 from Agfund
Singapore 3 helicopters
Sri Lanka $25,000 cash
Taiwan $2 million cash, medical supplies
Thailand Forensic experts, blankets and food
UAE $100 million cash
UK MREs
Venezuela Up to $1 million

Source: State Department
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Mike said:
Foreign countries have responded generously to Hurricane Katrina. Donor nations and their contribution:

Country Support
Afghanistan $100,000
Armenia $100,000
Australia $7.6 million
Azerbaijan $500,000
Bahamas $50,000
Bahrain $5 million
Bangladesh $1 million
Belgium Medical/logistics teams
Canada 2 helicopters, 32-person rescue team, evacuation flights, medical supplies
China $5.1 million cash and relief supplies
Djibouti $50,000
Finland Search-and-rescue team; 3 logistics specialists
France Tents, tarps, MREs, water treatment supplies, cleaning equipment
Gabon $500,000
Georgia $50,000
Germany MREs, high speed pumps, forensic experts
Greece 2 cruise ships
India $5 million
Iraq $1,000,000 cash
Ireland $1,000,000 cash
Country Support
Israel Tents, first-aid kits, baby formula
Italy Generators, water pumps/purifiers, tents, med supplies
Japan $200,000 cash and $844,000 in relief supplies, $1.5 million in private donations.
Kuwait $400 million in oil, $100 million cash
Maldives $25,000 cash
Mexico Transport vehicles, 1 helicopter, ambulance and medical teams.
Mongolia $50,000 cash
Nepal $25,000 cash
New Zealand $1.4 million cash, search and rescue teams
Nigeria $1 million cash
Norway $1.54 million in relief supplies
Qatar $100 million cash
Republic of Korea $30 million cash and in-kind donations
Saudi Arabia $5 million from Aramco, $250,000 from Agfund
Singapore 3 helicopters
Sri Lanka $25,000 cash
Taiwan $2 million cash, medical supplies
Thailand Forensic experts, blankets and food
UAE $100 million cash
UK MREs
Venezuela Up to $1 million

Source: State Department

And we've seen how badly all that Katrina money was squandered-misused and abused-by those doling it out, and those receiving it.... I wonder how much of the stuff we send to Africa and the rest of the world (most of which have even more corrupt governments than here) end up in the right place :???:

Sad thing now is that we're bipartisanly doling out Billions $ in tax rebates in a make Congress and the Administration "look good", "feel good" package, telling folks to go spend to stimulate the economy ( which many economists, left and right, say is too little, too late)- that could maybe have been better taken care of if the current administration had thought about putting a little funds back into the US and taking care of the problems of the US residents rather than sending it all to Asia, Africa, Europe, mideast.... :???: Our economy might not be in the sad shape it currently is ....
 

Texan

Well-known member
Mike said:
OT, Tell the whole truth. Bush didn't veto a bill to stop aid to poor kids without health insurance. Poor kids still get help.

He vetoed a bill expanding the SCHIPS program to those making as much as $70,000.00 per year.
Thanks for pointing this out, Mike. The libs always want to play politics with social programs - trying to instill fear in the electorate.

The President is right - we don't need to expand the SCHIPS program.

But....I think it's way past time that we make the President start leaving his checkbook at home when he goes out of the country. He has developed a habit of throwing money around like he's a freakin' Kennedy.

'Compassionate' conservatism sucks - it's time for a REAL conservative.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Texan said:
'Compassionate' conservatism sucks - it's time for a REAL conservative.

While I agree--Where/When will we find one? Definitely isn't amongst the three stooges currently running :???: :( In fact besides Hunter and Paul- I didn't see any running at all- and none being promoted by the establishment Republicans......
 

Texan

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
While I agree--Where/When will we find one? Definitely isn't amongst the three stooges currently running :???: :( In fact besides Hunter and Paul- I didn't see any running at all- and none being promoted by the establishment Republicans......
Well....McCain is somewhat of a fiscal conservative. I don't like him, but at least he's better than some of the others on fiscal policy. But I suspect it will be four to eight years before we find a real conservative.

After four years of Democrat control of everything, people should appreciate a conservative enough to elect one.

That's assuming us conservative white guys still have the right to vote after four years of Obama, Pelosi and Reid. And assuming that we have anything left to drive - or gas money. It might be hard to go vote after the Democrats take everything we've got.
 
Top