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.
Cliff Kincaid is the Editor of the AIM Report and can be reached at
25 Comments | Post a Comment
I agree with the comment from Sherril above and I am dismayed by the lack of any other comments here. The American People better wake up before we elect this man, we will surely end up with alot more taxes on us and “buyer’s remorse”.
UPDATED FROM SHERRIL 4/27/08
WE NEED TO KEEP MONEY AT HOME ACCORDING to DEAN
I was watching Howard Dean on “Meet the Press” this morning. He said that Americans were tired of the war and expense of that war; that we need the money here at home for the people. Well, does he really mean that? What about Afghanistan and Pakistan?
Barack Obama just had his Poverty Act of 2007, Senate Bill # 2433, rammed through the United States Senate by his cohort and supporter, Joe Biden. It was scheduled for Senate debate on April 24, 2008. Senator Obama was the person that introduced the bill on December 7, 2007. It had already passed the House on September 27, 2007. This Bill was tried in 109th Congress and died in committee.
So what you say. Well, here’s what. Not one person has talked about this giveaway piece of legislation awaiting President Bush’s signature, and believe me, he will sign it as a “Humanitarian” thing to do.
Let’s break this bill down. It is called the POVERTY ACT OF 2007, for those of you who would like to look it up. It gives to the United Nations $ 845,000,000,000, yes BILLION, for the purpose of increasing the daily cost of living from $1.00 to $2.00 dollars a day for the people of the African countries, such as Kenya, yes Obama’s Kenya, Tanzania, Darfur, Sudan, Mongolia, etc. That computes to about $280.00 for every American man, woman, and child. It also says that the United Nations can impose a tax on the citizens of the United States to make this happen.
• (Please keep in mind this is in addition to money that has already been pledged and given by the Unites Sates government (WE THE PEOPLE) to these and other African countries. President Bush had founded something called the Millennium Challenge Corporation and on his 6 day trip to Africa on February 17, 2008, he promised in Tanzania another $700,000,000 in aid. Finally, the President stated that “We have confronted, and will continue to confront, HIV/AIDS in our own country”, proposing now that the United States should lead the world in sparing innocent people from a plague of nature, and asking Congress “to commit $15,000,000,000 over the next five years, including nearly $10,000,000,000 in new money, to turn the tide against AIDS in the most afflicted nations of Africa and the Caribbean”. )
This Senate Bill that is set to become law does something that is very well hidden. The last part of the Bill refers to the to the # 4“UNITED NATIONS MILLENNIUM DEVELOPMENT GOALS.” The term `Millennium Development Goals’ means the goals set out in the United Nations Millennium Declaration, General Assembly Resolution (5/2/ 2000)
Okay, now lets understand what this actually means to the American People.
In this Act:
(1) APPROPRIATE CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEES- The term `appropriate congressional committees’ means--
(A) the Committee on Foreign Relations and the Committee on Appropriations of the Senate; and
(B) the Committee on Foreign Affairs and the Committee on Appropriations of the House of Representatives.
(2) EXTREME GLOBAL POVERTY- The term `extreme global poverty’ refers to the conditions in which individuals live on less than $1 per day, adjusted for purchasing power parity in 1993 United States dollars, according to World Bank statistics.
(3) GLOBAL POVERTY- The term `global poverty’ refers to the conditions in which individuals live on less than $2 per day, adjusted for purchasing power parity in 1993 United States dollars, according to World Bank statistics.
There’s nothing really BAD here and Congress will protect us from anything not in our best interest. Yes, they just voted to pass this Bill into law, so they will protect us!!!?
This is where it really gets good. Please pay attention......(Look at # 4 above.)
Inside that little jewel is a Section II; Peace, Security, and DISARMAMENT!!!!!
It states that:
• To ensure the implementation, by States Parties, of treaties in areas such as arms control and disarmament and of international humanitarian law and human rights law, and calls upon all States to consider signing and ratifying the “Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court.”
• To take concerted action to end illicit traffic in small arms and light weapons, especially by making arms transfers more transparent and supporting regional disarmament measures, taking account of all the recommendations of the forthcoming United Nations Conference on Illicit Trade in Small Arms and Light Weapons.
The regional disarmament are was not specified any place that I could find, SO IT COULD MEAN THE UNITED STATES. AND CONGRESS WILL PROTECT US!!
SO LET’S KEEP THE MONEY HOME FOR OUR PEOPLE, MR. DEAN?
Please do not get me wrong, as I am for helping people that need our help, but first and foremost I an for helping the American people that are living in squalor, on the streets and in cars; for helping children that go to bed hungry and seniors that that eat Cat food to survive; for helping people to recoup from disasters such as Katrina, the floods and tornados in the Midwest; California wildfires; etc.
THE AMERICAN PEOPLE FIRST.
Dear Sherril: I just read your update above and agree that Pres. Bush will sign this bill. The American People don’t pay attn to anything important that will affect us in the future. The war in Iraq was pushed on the American People by the Media & George Bush. It has obviously been a big mistake. Now we have this bill, the Global Poverty UN Tax. If this Obama gets elected we will have alot more to worry about. I just spent the last few hours reading about the history of colonialism in Africa, also slavery on Wikipedia. I wonder how many people are aware that the Africans themselves would war amongst themselves and take the P.O.W.’s to the coasts to sell them to the slave traders. Also the entire continent was colonized by European countries carving up the continent amongst themselves. Now that the Europeans were kicked out, the whole continent has decended into the African tribes killing each other and dictators taking over, rape & genocide. When the U.S. does finally leave Iraq, the same thing will probably happen to that country. What a disaster. And now the American people are paying for it dearly. Also, I can’t believe no one else is commenting on this tax here. I have been going to Youtube videos that feature Obama (alot of 20 yr old kids go on youtube for their info) and basically putting the info you have above into a short paragraph to wake them up (hopefully)in the comments below. They are hypnotized by Obama. Also, look at the other 2 choices, Hillary (whose husband bombed the Serbs look that up on Youtube) he also pardoned FALN TERRORISTS. and John “clueless” McCain. there is also a new website dontvoteobama.net you should look at. Spread the word.
I must be dreaming. Would someone PLEASE GET HUSSIN OBAMA OUT OF HERE AND SENd HIM TO China or the North Pole.
My Tax dollars STAY HERE IN THE GOOD OLE USA!!!!!
Katrina, today news Virgina tornato’s. earthquake in Ill., just heard earthquake in Northern Ca. USA HELP USA FIRST FOR OUR PEOPLE< BY OUR PEOPLE< FOT OUR PEOPLE!!
if you idiots want to blame obama for this when you should really be blaming your own stupid asses for being fooled by bush TWICE. if it wasn’t for bush’s outrageously awful spending (AND need i remind you that TENS OF BILLIONS OF DOLLARS SENT TO IRAQ ARE MISSING), we wouldn’t even be thinking of this. what a difference 8 years makes when your president is a bumbling moron with a corrupt cabinet full of old family friends! congratulations america you are currently at rock bottom. enjoy the taste of your own piss.
I certainly hope you will not sponsor this “GLOBAL POVERTY ACT” bill as taxpayers, we are tired of our dollars leaving this country.
It is time our tax dollars stay here in the USA
TO THE KRUGS; THERE IS NOTHING TO SPONSER ANYMORE.
IF PRESIDENT BUSH SIGNS IT THEN IT WILL BE LAW.
IF HE DOES NOT SIGN IT THEN IT WILL STILL BECOME LAW
WITHIN A CERTAIN PERIOD OF TIME.
THE ONLY WAY ONE CAN HOPE TO STOP THIS MONSTER NOW IS
TO SEND PRESIDENT BUSH A LETTER URGING HIM TO VETO THE BILL. A VETO IS ALL THAT WILL STOP IT UNLESS
CONGRESS OVER RIDES IT. IT MUST BE VETOED.
Does anyone on here have a clue? The protectionist statements voiced my Sherril and many others on this site are short-sighted. Globalization has taken effect. We cannot put our head under the covers and hope the rest of the world goes away! Many of our business leaders have begun to recognize this. Look at the financial numbers. Most American based firms generate 2-3% of revenues from domestic sales, while international revenues are in the range of 10-15%. What does this tell you? It says that America’s growth is slowing. It tells you that the rest of the world is rising, to the detriment (economically perhaps, and politically for sure) of the U.S. I have not read the specifics on this bill - but i pose these questions:
1) How can a bill that makes the transfers of small arms and light weaponry more transparent be a bad thing?
2) How can elevating the living standards of hundreds of millions of people be a bad thing?
Our country was founded on the principals of an open market economy, religious freedom, open immigration policies, etc. Now, you are arguing that we should close our border and decrease our funding to developing nations (i understand this bill increases our monetary obligations, and there is no bill currently in the house or senate that decreases U.S. foreign Aid. However, when you take into account global population growth, if we don’t increase our total foreign Aid, we are in effect reducing the Aid per capita in developing countries!)
So i ask each of you on this site, do we want/need a return to protectionism? Or do we need to open our borders and markets even further, after all, these two forces are what has made our great nation the envy of the world (at least until 2000!)?
Yes Steve, we all have a clue. Perhaps I can give you one right now. No one here
so far has said a word about not helping other nations with aid. There hasn’t been
a single disaster in this world that our great country hasn’t sent aid. Generally, we
give more aid than any other country. How much foreign aid came to New Orleans
or to the mid-west during the last great floods or to any of the massive fires we’ve
endured in the western US? Can anyone say “NADA?” as in nada dime?
The issue here is NOT about what our responsibilities to this world are. Ask yourself
how you would feel sitting in your Church when the plate comes around and you put in
a generous amount...only to have someone tell you THEY think it’s not enough and try
to force you to put in what THEY feel they want from you. I’d be willing to bet you’d
quickly find another church. The bill also give the UN the power to force more out of
us in the future.
“How can a bill that makes the transfers of small arms and light weaponry more
transparent be a bad thing?” This is a wonderful thing....but that is not the issue.
This is the beginning of the end of the Second Amendment.
I don’t know about the state you live in, but the Lottery was established under the guise
of 50% would go to education, but today most of it supports building and maintaining the
privately owned sports complexes of professional teams while the state continues to cut
spending on education.
This small arms portion puts us under direct control of any changes made later by the UN.
Believe me, changes WILL be made. The LOST treaty is the same. Both make bold
(on the surface) but palatable statements but the underlying power will be crippling.
You are correct when you say we have our heads under the covers or this bill would never
have passed. Too many Americans get all their news from sound bites at Yahoo, MSN, etc,
but don’t take the time to actually pay attention to the REAL news. Brittney shaving her
head is NOT news. THIS is news. This affects the way we live.
As a final note, if you are willing to take your own head out of your...covers, here are some
more provisions of the bill:
1. currency transfer tax, that is, a tax imposed on companies and individuals who must exchange dollars for foreign currency;
2. tax on the rental value of land and natural resources;
3. royalty on worldwide fossil energy projection—oil, natural gas, coal;
4. fees for the commercial use of the oceans,
fees for airplane use of the skies,
fees for use of the electromagnetic spectrum,
fees on foreign exchange transactions,
and a tax on the carbon content of fuels.”
5. standing peace force, meaning a standing United Nations army that might, in time, be large enough to force us to bend to its will;
6. the “eradication of poverty” by the “redistribution [of] wealth and land”
How do you suppose the United Nations expects to “redistribute” the land and the wealth?
And what country do you think the third-world majority will go after first?
7. cancellation of “the debts of developing countries,”
8. a fair distribution of the earth’s resources. and finally,
9. political control of the global economy.
Many of these same “fees” and policies are contained in the LOST treaty.
Dave,
Get a clue yourself and research the facts. We turned down military and economic aid from Mexico, yes Mexico in regards to Katrina and Rita. Mexican President Vicente Fox had an economic aid package approved and passed within 72 hours to help the Katrina refugees. He had also mobilized 5,000 members of the mexican army. So as far as other countries offering “nada”, that is a complete falsehood. Our arrogance prevented us from accepting help at a time when our friends in D.C. couldn’t get out of their own way ("Way to go Brownie!")
Since your bring up the 2nd amendment, have you ever read it? I’m guessing not. And i quote “A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” Now i don’t know about you, but i’m not so sure that the 2nd amendment affords us the rights we think it has. And if you are going to give me the argument that our supreme court has interpreted the law to mean that every citizen has the individual right to bear arms, you would be incorrect. Prior to the most recent 2nd amendment case (from D.C. which the courts have not ruled upon), the supreme court has heard exactly five cases as they relate to the 2nd amendment. U.S. v. Crukshank (definitely misspelled) did not deal with an individuals’ right to bear arms and neither have any of the four subsequent cases to be heard.
Dave, thank you for enlightening me about the other provisions of this bill. As i said, i have not read the bill (either the house or senate version) in it’s entirety.
Perhaps this conversation should be approached from a different angle. Do you still see the U.S. as the world’s dominant political, economic, and military superpower in 10, 20, even 50 years? America has begun a slow precipitous decline, (point of note here, since i have not read the bill, i am not arguing for or against it; i am arguing that the comments on this page are protectionist, short-sighted and will hurt America domestically and internationally), and the sooner the public wakes up and realizes that we will no longer be able to exert our will amongst nation-states, as we have done for the last two decades! We are entering an era of global economic success, the likes of which the earth has never seen before. Economics 101 will tell you that the growth of wealth is not a zero sum game, but political growth is a zero sum game, meaning that as other countries rise in geo-political prominence (China, India, South Africa, Brazil, Russia, etc.) our role as world leader and “super cop” will be greatly diminished. I am not Chicken Little “the sky is falling, the sky is falling”. I am saying that we are entering a time of unprecedented economic global growth, and unless the U.S. public and by extension government, recognize this and decide to deal with it diplomatically, we will be relegated to “has-been” status. Yes, has-been’s, just as the British are has-been’s on the world stage today. The primary reason for British world legitamacy is their uber-close relationship with the U.S. I am not trying to belittle or undermine the British, merely trying to illustrate the point that we will not have a global superpower to glom onto as the British did with the U.S. We will be operating in an economy and geo-political environment with two, three, maybe even four or five “significant powers”; none of which will be on par with the U.S. militarily and economically, but will have more geo-political influence than ever before. Why is that significant? For a thousand different reasons, but one stands out in my mind - “water rights”. We have already seen regional wars break out in Africa and Southeast Asia over water rights to one degree or another.
Let’s tackle your list of items listed above:
1) this seems excessive and would impede global economic growth, so based on what you have written, i would want it removed from the bill.
2) we have been paying taxes on our land my entire lifetime (Property taxes, school taxes - I live in Pennsylvania).
3) we should have institued a tax long ago on fossil fuel production. Perhaps than we would have more time to deal with global warming!!!
4) again, should have been doing this since the 70’s - perhaps we wouldn’t be so dependent on foreign oil today!!! We are over-fishing our oceans and polluting our oceans and skies. We will not be able to live in another few hundred years if we don’t address these environmental concerns!!!
5)What we have today is a military monopoly! I bet you don’t like when anyone has an opposing view either. Balance is key to stability (see the growth of the world economy during the cold war) and an opposing military force strong enough to take on the U.S. is essential (perhaps we would have thought twice about invading Iraq if there were military repercussions for us).
6) I would expect the U.N. to look at attempts to redistribute land the way it was done in Rhodesia and see that it failed miserably. I would expect a well thought intelligent decision on land/wealth redistribution - Again, i don’t pass judgment on things until i see the details, none of which you provided, except your fear-mongering statements.
7) We/other developed nations have been cancelling debt for decades (for proof see Afghanistan in recent years or Japan and Germany after World War II - remember High School History class - The Marshall Plan...)
8) again, #8 is bad because....?
9) you can’t cede political control of the economy by passing a bill in the U.S. I don’t think even you believe that could possible happen in today’s environment.
Dave, you present several well-thought reasoned arguments. But the underlying basis of each is protectionist!!! Again, this is short-sighted and will only succed in crippling America in the long term!!!!!!!!!!!
Doesn’t the United States do more than it’s share in helping the world now? Why don’t we spend more in the USA for better infrastructure, education, transportation and yes...lower gas and food prices? What does the rest of the world do to help us? Where were they when Katrina hit? Where were they when the tornados hit? Where were they in the aftermath of 9/11? Yes, it is one big world but we need to take care of one big USA first!
Dave, what I was trying to point out to everyone is
1st. President Bush dod not write the bill, Senator Obama did.
2. It was rapidly pushed throught the senate without the American people getting a wiff of it.
3. This is not a voluntary option.
4. BIG POINT BEING THAT AT THIS TIME OUR ECONOMY IS NOT EXACTLY WHAT WE WOULD LIKE AND TO HAVE OR EVEN THINK OF HAVING ANY ADDITIONAL TAXES WOULD BE UNREPAIRABLE IN OUR LIFE TIME.
5. I DO AGREE ABOUT ALL THE MONEY LOST IN IRAQ AND THE DAILY COST TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE.
BUT THAT IS SOMETHING WE CAN NOT DO ANYTHING ABOUT. IT IS GONE. WE DO NOT HAVE TO COMPOUND THE PROBLEMS BY HAVING LEGISLATION THE CONTINUES TO GE THE BANK AWAY.
It’s time to take care of the United States of America! U.S. US!!!
Obama is at the leading edge of the welfare wing of the welfare-warfare party.
McCain is at the opposite end of the warfare-welfare party.
All candidates of the welfare-warfare and warfare welfare parties ignore Constitutional limits on power.
I propose a merger of the two wings to reflect reality. It will be called the “Same Old Party” (SOP).
The new mascot will be a combination of the donkey and the elephant: A fat half-ass.
The American people want an end to the costly and dangerous state of permanent war, and self-perpetuating transfer programs that will bankrupt our children.
W.J. Malan
Author, “The Audacity of Truth”
doesnt anyone realize that we have spent almost ten trillion in five years? more american tax dollars go to fund president bushs party in the middle east than to anywhere else. get your heads out of the grounds and read John 6:1-14
So… is Osama Bin Laden still alive or did he retire already?
I didn’t know Osama wrote a bill? Kewl.
I thought he was a bad guy once.
To “the lost 60s hippy idiot”
YOU MORON!
WAKE UP!
This bill means “our” money goes to people who do not live “here”. Less money for our troops over in Iraq. Less money means less bullets to use by our guys, means more bad guys living.
We are already wasting alot of money. Everytime we knock off some rag heads kid or wife we have to compensate them. Last time I checked we only pay about $4500 per person that we kill or slaughter. Uncle Sam pays good money to compensate them. If this bill gets passed that means LESS WE have to pay them, which means they will get slightly a little bit more pissed. Wouldn’t get pis#ed if you only got $2000 or less for your dead kid????? WAKE UP YOU MORON! Besides raqi wemen can always have more kids. That’s wat wemen do. America FIRST!
In response to ‘USA FIRST’
I CAN’T BELIEVE YOU SAID THAT!
AND YOUR AMERICAN????
ARE YOU FOR REAL???
You’re almost as bad as some of the heartless people commenting here in regards to this. They say they feel bad and want to help people, but yet bicker and act so damn selfish and think only of themselves. What… $1 a day is too much to ask for from everyone??
You make me sick to be in the same country as you. America has a real chance to be a leader here once again and everybody is griping about hanging on to those nickels and dimes in their pocket? I’VE BEEN TO SOME OF THOSE PLACES!
If I had the financial resources and power to do some real humanitarian damage in eliminating this I WOULD IN A HEART BEAT. But I don’t. I’m a nobody. Instead I’m just a hypocrite like everyone else here. So just keep your pot belly happy ass planted in that lawn chair of yours, wave the stars and stripes and eat your subway and be merry.
WELL, WHEN YOU HOME HAS BEEN WIPED OUT BY A KATRINA, OR TORNADOS OR YOU THREATENED BY WILDFIRES OR FLOODS, WHO ARE YOU GOING TO CALL? IF YOU ARE SO INSENSETIVE TO THE NEEDS OF YOUR FELLOW AMERICIANS, SHAME ON YOU. HAUL YOU SELF DOWN TO NEW ORLEANS AND GET TO WORK. AND THERE IS NO NEED FOR UGLY LANUAGE. IT ONLY DENOTES A SMALL MIND.
I believe that the main point here is how this legislation has been swiftly moved through the process without any public hearings. This is just like the amnesty bill last year. It is healthy to debate differences! However, if there are no hearings, then one can get the feeling that something is being hidden from us. I get a very unsettled feeling when ‘our elected leaders’ don’t want to debate to see what ‘the people’ they represent think about what they are doing. There are always two sides to every story, but the story should be told openly before the book is closed.
BEFORE ME, I HAVE TWO LISTS. ONE LIST CONTAINS THE NAMES OF COUNTRIES WHICH HAVE STOOD BY OUR SIDE DURING THE IRAC WAR. THIS LIST IS SHORT. THE UNITED KINGDOM, SPAIN, BULGARIA, AUSTRALIA, AND POLAND ARE SOME OF THE COUNTRIES LISTED THERE.
THE OTHER LIST CONTAINS EVERYONE THAT REFUSED TO HELP US IN THE CONFLECT, OR WITH ANY EMERGENCY WE FACE. INCLUDING NATURAL DISASTERS.LET ME SUGGEST, EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATLY,FOREIN AID TO THOSE NATIONS ON LIST TWO CEASE INDFINITELY. THE MONEY SAVED DURING THE FIRST YEAR ALONE WILL PRETTY MUCH PAY THE COSTS OF THE IRACI WAR. THEN EVERY YEAR THERE AFTER GO TO OUR SOCIAL SECURITY SYSTEM SO IT WONT GO BROKE IN 20 YEARS.
NEED HELP WITH FAMINE? GET IT FIRST FROM YOUR CORRUPT GOVERNMENT LEADERS OR CALL FRANCE.
WE WILL HAVE A COUPLE THOUSAND TANKS AVAILABLE
TO GIVE FOR BORDER SECURITY, TO PREVENT MEXICOS CORRUPT GOVERNMENT, FROM SENDING THEIR PEOPLE HERE TO FATTEN THEIR PANTRIES WHILE THEY KILL AND INSLAVE THEIR PEOPLE. WE LOVE THE SPANISH PEOPLE,
THEY CAN’T HELP THEIR FAMILIES IN A COUNTRY THAT ONLY CARES ABOUT THE RICH.CHANGE YOUR COUNTRY THEN COME TO OURS FREELY.
TO THE NATIONS ON LIST 2 , A FINAL THOUGHT:
YOU MIGHT WANT TO LEARN TO SPEAK ARABIC.
God Bless!
1. Those of you who feel strongly that this should be done - that’s fine - do it on your own time and with your own $$. I don’t see a tax, something that I have no apparent say in given how it’s being rushed through, as being appropriate. I already give plenty of my time and hard earned $$ (that which the govt does not already appropriate) to those in need. That does not make me mean or callous - it makes me a realist.
2. The UN has shown its corruption and willingness of individuals within the organization to line their own pockets with $ designated to other means. Why on earth would we want to give them more $$ and assume they’ll be fiscally responsible?
3. If this is a democracy, for a tax that will be forced on all, those in favor of this OWE all of us a chance to debate and refine what they plan to put forth. I find the manner in which this is being ramrodded through to be very questionable. If we aren’t going to do so, we should abandon this so called democracy we have become and beg the crown to take us back.....
April 25 at 3:19 am | #1 | Link
Let’s try this seceniro: Louis Farrakhan, leader of the Nation of Islam has said about Obama: “We are witnessing the phenomenal rise of a man of color in a country that has persecuted us because of our color. This young man is the hope of the entire world that America will change and be made better. Comparing
Fard Muhammad, founder of the Islam Nation to Obama: A black man with a white mother became a savior to us. A black man with a white mother could turn out to be one who can lift America from her fall.”
Now we have the Proverty Act of 2007 which has passed the Senate and the House and is awaiting the signature of the President. What would happen to the Bill if the President dose not sign it? After so long it would become law. If and when Obama is sworn in as President he would be seen as the Savior of the World. Right? Look and see just how much aid and assistance Kenya has asked for. I believe it is something like 27 BILLION DOLLARS. And who is the man trying to over throw the government of Kenya. Why it is Obama’s cousin Raile Odinga. Where do you think we might all be headed by to a sad state of affairs just like the Kenyans are. Read all of the Proverty Act.
(4) MILLENNIUM DEVELOPMENT GOALS- The term `Millennium Development Goals’ means the goals set out in the United Nations Millennium Declaration, General Assembly Resolution 55/2 (2000).
United Nations Millennium Declaration:
II. Peace, security and disarmament
• To ensure the implementation, by States Parties, of treaties in areas such as arms control and disarmament and of international humanitarian law and human rights law, and call upon all States to consider signing and
ratifying the Rome Statute of the Intnl Criminal Court.
• To take concerted action to end illicit traffic in small arms and light weapons, especially by making arms transfers more transparent and supporting regional disarmament measures, taking account of all the recommendations of the forthcoming United Nations Conference on Illicit
Trade in Small Arms and Light Weapons.
LET THE BUYER BEWARE AND WATCH WHO YOU VOTE FOR