PDA

View Full Version : Senator Obama - Tax legislation on Americans, to "end" Global Poverty! R U Kidding!


Wndrtch
02-15-2008, 06:09 PM
Yessiree, the Libs are eyeing your wallet again. It's not enough that we wasted many trillion dollars over the last 30 years, fighting LBJ's "War on Poverty" with no result or even any improvement on poverty in the US, now they want a new tax to help with Global Poverty.

Our Esteemed Senator and current front-runner for the Democratic ticket, has proposed legislation that is secretly up for a vote today in the Senate, mandating that the US cut global poverty numbers in half, by 2015! :shock:


Barack Obama's Global Tax Proposal Up for Senate Vote
By Cliff Kincaid
Feb 12, 2008

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.

You really want a good scare?


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.

There go our Dem controlled legislators, making us proud again. They never calculated the cost, nor did they even know what was in the bill before they passed it in the House. Brilliant!
http://www.nationalledger.com/artman/publish/article_272618845.shtml[hr]
Yessiree, the Libs are eyeing your wallet again. It's not enough that we wasted many trillion dollars over the last 30 years, fighting LBJ's "War on Poverty" with no result or even any improvement on poverty in the US, now they want a new tax to help with Global Poverty.

Our Esteemed Senator and current front-runner for the Democratic ticket, has proposed legislation that is secretly up for a vote today in the Senate, mandating that the US cut global poverty numbers in half, by 2015! :shock:


Barack Obama's Global Tax Proposal Up for Senate Vote
By Cliff Kincaid
Feb 12, 2008

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.

You really want a good scare?


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.

There go our Dem controlled legislators, making us proud again. They never calculated the cost, nor did they even know what was in the bill before they passed it in the House. Brilliant!
http://www.nationalledger.com/artman/publish/article_272618845.shtml


Wow! They're bold these days. Senator Obama has this crap on the front-page of his website too.

“Eliminating global poverty remains one of the greatest challenges we face, with billions of people around the world forced to live on just dollars a day,” said Senator Obama. “We can – and must – make it a priority of our foreign policy to commit to eliminating extreme poverty and ensuring every child has food, shelter, and clean drinking water. As we strive to rebuild America’s standing in the world, this legislation will not only commit to reducing global poverty, but will also demonstrate our promise and support to those in the developing world. Our commitment to the global economy has to extend beyond trade agreements that are more about increasing corporate profits than about helping workers and small farmers everywhere.”

Well, at least we know how he plans to "repair" America's image. He's going to tax us into oblivion, and cut checks to everybody around the Earth!

So, tell me again, what his qualifications are?

PostmodernProphet
02-15-2008, 07:23 PM
third time I have had to do it but, SR 2433 has no spending provisions and commits us to nothing.....

lily
02-16-2008, 02:48 AM
Indeed Prophet......as some would like us to belive the sky is not falling.


I'd also like to know where he thinks the money comes that we spend on other
aide we sent countries. One would think noble causes are only good when Republicans do it. Maybe the OP doesn't know that Bush is on a 5 day tour of Africa promoting his fight of diesease, poverty AIDES and growth development.

bishop
02-16-2008, 03:01 PM
lily, the money comes from trees... don't have enough, just shake the tree and some more fill magically fall down..

the fact that people continue to fall for this same old song and dance definitely doesn't say much in terms of their collective brainpower... the democrats talk high and mighty about ending poverty, etc., etc... and then when in office, they engage in deficit spending and utterly fail to accomplish their mission. and then the republicans on the other side pledge to cut taxes, which can only truly be done when they're financed by spending cuts. all the republicans have done is increase the federal government (along with their democrat counterparts), and extend our line of credit by endlessly borrowing from foreign governments.

where does the money come from? does anyone really care? i don't think so - their votes a much different story..

Osborn F. Enready
02-16-2008, 10:12 PM
Thank you Bishop for addressing the real issue.

Bishop said:
where does the money come from? does anyone really care? i don't think so - their votes a much different story..

That really says it all..... :shame:

preservanation
02-17-2008, 12:22 PM
If Obama is able to ram through Congress only half of his proposed insanity, we're in big trouble.

Maybe this guy wont be so hard to beat if nominated.
His vision of America might be vastly different than the rest of the electorate.
He should start being called out on this stuff, I hope McCain has the ability to slice and dice this guy. If he runs toward Obama, like he's been known to do with the left, he'll get clobbered. Obama-lite wont do.
If it is pointed out who and what Obama is, and McCain paints the starkest differences between himself and these Global Marxist policies....the GOP can win.

The Emperor has to be shown that he has no cloths.
Obama reminds me of Karl Marx in a blue suit, with more charisma and less brains.

bishop
02-17-2008, 01:21 PM
...the GOP can win.

and the country still loses...

what obama is saying is no different than any of the other glorious babble that republicans and democrats have been spewing for years. bush made some extremely lofty statements pertaining to africa - and has poured billions into the continent.. funny how republicans haven't characterized his actions as being a "globalist marxist", yet they're having fun picking obama's comments apart.

preservanation
02-17-2008, 01:36 PM
You know, I have problems with Bush, but they are not the same ones the left has.
The viciousness of the Lib/Dems have been unrelenting.

If the left didn't so persistently, voraciously and insanely vilify Bush and attack him on everything and anything, especially Fla, 2000, tax-cuts, WOT and Iraq....maybe, just maybe, the right wouldn't have so strenuously defended him, ever think of that?
Kerry would probably be President right now.

The Left's hand was so over played, the other side of the table made a bundle calling their bluff.

bishop
02-17-2008, 01:53 PM
If the left didn't so persistently, voraciously and insanely vilify Bush and attack him on everything and anything, especially Fla, 2000, tax-cuts, WOT and Iraq....maybe, just maybe, the right wouldn't have so strenuously defended him, ever think of that?

that's definitely one pitiful reason to support a politician.. hopefully it isn't what really happened, but i wouldn't rule it out either.

i'm far from the left, and i've been piling it on to this horrible president for at least 6 years straight - as have many small government conservatives who stand tall for principle rather than the unprincipled and untrustworthy gop..

but to go back to my point... you mock obama's comments as being that of a "globalist marxist", yet i'd bet money that you fervently supported bush's re-election campaign in 2004, despite all of the big-government, socialist crap he piled on during his first term. principle vs. party.....

preservanation
02-17-2008, 02:14 PM
yet i'd bet money that you fervently supported bush's re-election campaign in 2004, despite all of the big-government, socialist crap he piled on during his first term. principle vs. party..... You'd win that bet.
Conservatives didn't have a choice, and the alternative was unacceptable.

bishop
02-17-2008, 02:33 PM
sadly, that's always the case - no matter if you're left or right leaning.. even saint reagan grew the government in all directions, despite all of the lofty rhetoric. he also showed the establishment that egregious deficit spending was a-ok.

yet, americans continue to perpetuate this retarded game of supporting the 2-party (1-party imo) system.

preservanation
02-17-2008, 02:43 PM
I would welcome another party, if they represented my ideology, and were organized enough to be nationally viable.

Tharagor
02-17-2008, 02:49 PM
If the left didn't so persistently, voraciously and insanely vilify Bush and attack him on everything and anything, especially Fla, 2000, tax-cuts, WOT and Iraq....maybe, just maybe, the right wouldn't have so strenuously defended him, ever think of that?


The right would have defended him because he's a Republican President. Besides, assailing him on his War on Terror and imbecilic invasion of Iraq was the right thing to do.

Redress of grievances is not only a protected right, it's our civic duty.


Kerry would probably be President right now.


Pure conjecture without any evidence or logical support what so ever. Which makes the statement pointless.


The Left's hand was so over played, the other side of the table made a bundle calling their bluff.


No bluff. The 2004 election was just evidence of one of the problems with democracy in it's myriad of forms. Regression to the mean.

preservanation
02-17-2008, 04:19 PM
It was/is a bluff...The Dems never succeeded in employing all their dire plans for Bush.
Dems got elected in 06 on the notion that they were going to have Bush and Cheney drawn and quartered in the Town Square.
Same thing with funding to Iraq. Funding has gone up since the Dems took the House.
These were promises they had no intention of keeping or even had the ability to fulfil if they wanted to.

One of their problems is that they had to run a bunch of Blue-Dog Dems to gain seats against weak Republicans in red districts, in 06. Now it seems they aren't so eager to vote with the lefty leadership in the party.
Must be driving Pelosi and Harry Reid batshiit...I hope so.

Wndrtch
02-18-2008, 06:18 PM
third time I have had to do it but, SR 2433 has no spending provisions and commits us to nothing.....


So you're saying this legislation is just as empty as he is?

Good!

I've never seen a Congress waste more time on nothing, than this one. I'm beginning to think Jerry Seinfeld is running things over there. A show about nothing.

Good going, Nancy & Harry![hr]
I would welcome another party, if they represented my ideology, and were organized enough to be nationally viable.


I personally would like to see a "no-party" system. Get rid of political parties and their labels. Let Pols run on ideas, instead of "D's" and "R's". A third party would just compound the problems in Politics, and guarantee that 2/3rds of the voters are pissed-off at the elected.