Obama's insane Global Poverty bill

[ScreamingEagle]

Let's try this again. Perhaps there is a liberal here who can justify this insane piece of legislation that he is sponsoring.

So the Dims are criticizing the Pubs about having spent too much? Talk about being two-faced. The Dims have no plans to restrict spending. Take a gander at Hussein Obama's proposal, the “Global Poverty Act” (S.2433) This legislation could result in the U.S. spending about a TRILLION dollars…plus also result in a Global Tax....as if we need another tax. gee, I thought Obama was talking about his helping the American poor and needy…I guess we'll need another few trillion or so for that…

This bill of Hussein Obama's looks more like an insane step toward the New World Order because guess who's going to take our money and manage it? The UN, of course. Our money will not only go to the poor of the world (assuming it actually gets to them) but will also go toward implementing things like the Kyoto Treaty (global warming), the International Criminal Court Treaty (bye bye U.S. sovereignty), and banning small arms and light weapons (I thot Obama said he supported the 2nd?).

Well, at least now we know what actual kind of "change" Obama is alluding to in his snazzy but empty speeches….this guy is a veritable wannabe world socialist leader of the new world order.

I also find it quite interesting that this legislation of Obama's is not getting much publicity in our wonderful liberal media…after all, this is probably the first thing of "substance" that Obama has done! Could it be they are trying to hide this genuine socialist agenda out of sight from Americans….?

http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/1878

 

[CharlestonChad]

I've got a new nickname for you. The ScreamingSeagull

 

[ScreamingEagle]

I've got a new nickname for you. The ScreamingSeagull

Now. Now. Watch your language sonny. You don't want to upset the speech police.

ps: since i live near the sea names like seagull, seahog, sea urchin, etc. don't bother me at all...like water off a duck's back so to speak. In fact, I admire the lowly seagull - a very resourceful bird.

ps2: back to the subject....do you have something of value to say?

 

[CharlestonChad]

Now. Now. Watch your language sonny. You don't want to upset the speech police.

ps: since i live near the sea names like seagull, seahog, sea urchin, etc. don't bother me at all...like water off a duck's back so to speak. In fact, I admire the lowly seagull - a very resourceful bird.

ps2: back to the subject....do you have something of value to say?

Cool. Where do you live? I live in Charleston, SC. I'm not a big fan of the seagull, except that it will eat cigarette butts and always seem to poop on the most annoying person that you're with.

 

[midcan5]

Where have you people been? I guess as many of the posters noted recently, education in the US is nothing but brain washing. But what kind of brain washing is the harder question when this old news somehow spells the doom of all that we hold sacred.

"Many years ago, the United Nations set a target for development aid of 0.07 percent of Gross National Product. A handful of developed nations -Denmark, The Netherlands, Norway and Sweden-meet or surpass this very modest target of giving 70 cents in every $100 that their economy produces to the developing nations. Most of them fail to reach it. Japan, for example, gives 0.27 percent. Overall, among the affluent nations, official development assistance fell from 0.33 percent of their combined GNP in 1985 to 0.22 percent in 2002. But of all the affluent nations, none fails so miserably to meet the United Nations target as the United States, which in 2000, the last year for which figures are available, gave 0.10 percent of GNP, or just 10 cents in every $100 its economy produces, one-seventh of the United Nations target. That is less in actual US dollars than Japan gives-about $10 billion for the United States, as compared with $13.5 billion for Japan-although the U.S. economy is roughly twice the size of Japan's. And even that miserly sum exaggerates the U.S. aid to the most needy, for much of it is strategically targeted for political purposes. The largest single recipient of U.S. official development assistance is Egypt. (Russia and Israel get even more aid from the United States than Egypt, but it is not classified as development assistance.) Tiny Bosnia and Herzegovina gets a larger allocation from the United States than India. Japan, on the other hand, gives to Indonesia, China, Thailand, India, the Philippines, and Vietnam, in that order. India, for instance, gets more than five times as much assistance from Japan as it gets from the United States. Only a quarter of U.S. aid, as compared to more than half of Japan's aid, goes to low-income countries."


http://www.iaed.org/books/index.html

 

[ScreamingEagle]

Where have you people been? I guess as many of the posters noted recently, education in the US is nothing but brain washing. But what kind of brain washing is the harder question when this old news somehow spells the doom of all that we hold sacred.

"Many years ago, the United Nations set a target for development aid of 0.07 percent of Gross National Product. A handful of developed nations -Denmark, The Netherlands, Norway and Sweden-meet or surpass this very modest target of giving 70 cents in every $100 that their economy produces to the developing nations. Most of them fail to reach it. Japan, for example, gives 0.27 percent. Overall, among the affluent nations, official development assistance fell from 0.33 percent of their combined GNP in 1985 to 0.22 percent in 2002. But of all the affluent nations, none fails so miserably to meet the United Nations target as the United States, which in 2000, the last year for which figures are available, gave 0.10 percent of GNP, or just 10 cents in every $100 its economy produces, one-seventh of the United Nations target. That is less in actual US dollars than Japan gives-about $10 billion for the United States, as compared with $13.5 billion for Japan-although the U.S. economy is roughly twice the size of Japan's. And even that miserly sum exaggerates the U.S. aid to the most needy, for much of it is strategically targeted for political purposes. The largest single recipient of U.S. official development assistance is Egypt. (Russia and Israel get even more aid from the United States than Egypt, but it is not classified as development assistance.) Tiny Bosnia and Herzegovina gets a larger allocation from the United States than India. Japan, on the other hand, gives to Indonesia, China, Thailand, India, the Philippines, and Vietnam, in that order. India, for instance, gets more than five times as much assistance from Japan as it gets from the United States. Only a quarter of U.S. aid, as compared to more than half of Japan's aid, goes to low-income countries."


http://www.iaed.org/books/index.html

So then, doesn't this lead you to think that this "old news" legislation is nothing more than window dressing for Obama's campaign?

I think it is but I also believe it definitively displays the "new direction" in which Barack Hussein Obama wishes to lead our nation. This guy is a global socialist and a danger to America.

 

[manifold]

Hey Smeagle,

Don't sugar coat it, tell us what you really think.

 

[midcan5]

I think it is but I also believe it definitively displays the "new direction" in which Barack Hussein Obama wishes to lead our nation. This guy is a global socialist and a danger to America.

Then interesting times are coming as it seems he will be the next president.


"May you always live in interesting times." Chinese Curse

 

[ScreamingEagle]

Hey Smeagle,

Don't sugar coat it, tell us what you really think.

I am. But all I seem to get is ad hominems in reply from you liberals...

How about saying something in defense of Obama's idiotic legislation....or haven't you yet received your talking points from politburo central?

 

[ScreamingEagle]

Then interesting times are coming as it seems he will be the next president.


"May you always live in interesting times." Chinese Curse

I wouldn't go so far as to predict that.

I take it you agree with me...yet you plan to vote for Obama?

 

[Detmurds]

The United Nations needs to be shut down. As Megadeth would say,..."The System Has Failed"!

 

[manifold]

I am. But all I seem to get is ad hominems in reply from you liberals...

How about saying something in defense of Obama's idiotic legislation....or haven't you yet received your talking points from politburo central?

You assume much.

 

[maineman]

Let's try this again. Perhaps there is a liberal here who can justify this insane piece of legislation that he is sponsoring.

So the Dims are criticizing the Pubs about having spent too much? Talk about being two-faced. The Dims have no plans to restrict spending. Take a gander at Hussein Obama's proposal, the “Global Poverty Act” (S.2433) This legislation could result in the U.S. spending about a TRILLION dollars…plus also result in a Global Tax....as if we need another tax. gee, I thought Obama was talking about his helping the American poor and needy…I guess we'll need another few trillion or so for that…

This bill of Hussein Obama's looks more like an insane step toward the New World Order because guess who's going to take our money and manage it? The UN, of course. Our money will not only go to the poor of the world (assuming it actually gets to them) but will also go toward implementing things like the Kyoto Treaty (global warming), the International Criminal Court Treaty (bye bye U.S. sovereignty), and banning small arms and light weapons (I thot Obama said he supported the 2nd?).

Well, at least now we know what actual kind of "change" Obama is alluding to in his snazzy but empty speeches….this guy is a veritable wannabe world socialist leader of the new world order.

I also find it quite interesting that this legislation of Obama's is not getting much publicity in our wonderful liberal media…after all, this is probably the first thing of "substance" that Obama has done! Could it be they are trying to hide this genuine socialist agenda out of sight from Americans….?

http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/1878

from the text of the bill itself:

On March 22, 2002, President George W. Bush stated: `We fight against poverty because hope is an answer to terror. We fight against poverty because opportunity is a fundamental right to human dignity. We fight against poverty because faith requires it and conscience demands it. We fight against poverty with a growing conviction that major progress is within our reach.'.

(6) The 2002 National Security Strategy of the United States notes: `[A] world where some live in comfort and plenty, while half of the human race lives on less than $2 per day, is neither just nor stable. Including all of the world's poor in an expanding circle of development and opportunity is a moral imperative and one of the top priorities of U.S. international policy.'.

(7) The 2006 National Security Strategy of the United States notes: `America's national interests and moral values drive us in the same direction: to assist the world's poor citizens and least developed nations and help integrate them into the global economy.'.

(8) The bipartisan Final Report of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States recommends: `A comprehensive United States strategy to counter terrorism should include economic policies that encourage development, more open societies, and opportunities for people to improve the lives of their families and enhance prospects for their children.'.

smart people in America realize that global poverty is a national security issue. stupid people do not.

 

[jillian]

I am. But all I seem to get is ad hominems in reply from you liberals...

How about saying something in defense of Obama's idiotic legislation....or haven't you yet received your talking points from politburo central?

And with posts like that and threads like this one, you expect people to take you seriously?



Couldn't possibly be that you haven't a civl bone in your body, right?

 

[ScreamingEagle]

from the text of the bill itself:

On March 22, 2002, President George W. Bush stated: `We fight against poverty because hope is an answer to terror. We fight against poverty because opportunity is a fundamental right to human dignity. We fight against poverty because faith requires it and conscience demands it. We fight against poverty with a growing conviction that major progress is within our reach.'.

(6) The 2002 National Security Strategy of the United States notes: `[A] world where some live in comfort and plenty, while half of the human race lives on less than $2 per day, is neither just nor stable. Including all of the world's poor in an expanding circle of development and opportunity is a moral imperative and one of the top priorities of U.S. international policy.'.

(7) The 2006 National Security Strategy of the United States notes: `America's national interests and moral values drive us in the same direction: to assist the world's poor citizens and least developed nations and help integrate them into the global economy.'.

(8) The bipartisan Final Report of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States recommends: `A comprehensive United States strategy to counter terrorism should include economic policies that encourage development, more open societies, and opportunities for people to improve the lives of their families and enhance prospects for their children.'.

smart people in America realize that global poverty is a national security issue. stupid people do not.

So you think we should add another TRILLION to our financial burden, turn over our money to the UN, and then kowtow to the UN in the process while they use our money to promote "world laws" against us? Frankly, I don't consider that being "smart".

Since when is it the responsibility of our government to financially support people in other countries? Since when is it the responsibility of our government to even financially support people here in this country?

Can you provide proof that poverty is the cause of islamofascism?

And with posts like that and threads like this one, you expect people to take you seriously?



Couldn't possibly be that you haven't a civl bone in your body, right?

oh wow…another underwhelming attack…you libs are so boring...and is that what you call being "civil"?

 

[nibor]

from the text of the bill itself:

On March 22, 2002, President George W. Bush stated: `We fight against poverty because hope is an answer to terror. We fight against poverty because opportunity is a fundamental right to human dignity. We fight against poverty because faith requires it and conscience demands it. We fight against poverty with a growing conviction that major progress is within our reach.'.

(6) The 2002 National Security Strategy of the United States notes: `[A] world where some live in comfort and plenty, while half of the human race lives on less than $2 per day, is neither just nor stable. Including all of the world's poor in an expanding circle of development and opportunity is a moral imperative and one of the top priorities of U.S. international policy.'.

(7) The 2006 National Security Strategy of the United States notes: `America's national interests and moral values drive us in the same direction: to assist the world's poor citizens and least developed nations and help integrate them into the global economy.'.

(8) The bipartisan Final Report of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States recommends: `A comprehensive United States strategy to counter terrorism should include economic policies that encourage development, more open societies, and opportunities for people to improve the lives of their families and enhance prospects for their children.'.

smart people in America realize that global poverty is a national security issue. stupid people do not.

Who are the stupid people.....................the ones too poor to care????????

 

[nibor]

Let's try this again. Perhaps there is a liberal here who can justify this insane piece of legislation that he is sponsoring.

So the Dims are criticizing the Pubs about having spent too much? Talk about being two-faced. The Dims have no plans to restrict spending. Take a gander at Hussein Obama's proposal, the “Global Poverty Act” (S.2433) This legislation could result in the U.S. spending about a TRILLION dollars…plus also result in a Global Tax....as if we need another tax. gee, I thought Obama was talking about his helping the American poor and needy…I guess we'll need another few trillion or so for that…

This bill of Hussein Obama's looks more like an insane step toward the New World Order because guess who's going to take our money and manage it? The UN, of course. Our money will not only go to the poor of the world (assuming it actually gets to them) but will also go toward implementing things like the Kyoto Treaty (global warming), the International Criminal Court Treaty (bye bye U.S. sovereignty), and banning small arms and light weapons (I thot Obama said he supported the 2nd?).

Well, at least now we know what actual kind of "change" Obama is alluding to in his snazzy but empty speeches….this guy is a veritable wannabe world socialist leader of the new world order.

I also find it quite interesting that this legislation of Obama's is not getting much publicity in our wonderful liberal media…after all, this is probably the first thing of "substance" that Obama has done! Could it be they are trying to hide this genuine socialist agenda out of sight from Americans….?

http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/1878

The ACTUAL difference between the two parties is what, conservatism/liberalism..................yeah right maybe in window dressing and tactics to keep us all at eachothers throats....................maybe the glaring similiarities should be better addressed.

 

[manifold]

The ACTUAL difference between the two parties is what, conservatism/liberalism..................yeah right maybe in window dressing and tactics to keep us all at eachothers throats....................maybe the glaring similiarities should be better addressed.

I couldn't agree more.