Say Anything Blog

Rob, whoever did that math needs a refresher course.

0.07% of $12 trillion works out around to $8 billion

On another note we have Senator Obama to thank for demonstrating once again that the global warming jihad isn’t so much about saving the Earth as much as it is about robbing from the rich to give to the poor nations third-world totalitarian leaders in a pointless exchange of revenue.

I find it interesting that the lefties are always telling us that we can’t be the “world’s policeman”, or that we shouldn’t try to provide freedom for the world’s oppressed peoples or to share our hugely successful free enterprise economic system with them, but it’s just fine for us to be the world’s welfare provider.

If you don’t know by now, don’t mess with it.

Carrick: No matter what the number, it’s too much.  We can’t afford it, and we certainly can’t afford a Barack Obama as President.

If you don’t know by now, don’t mess with it.

Just a followup on that comment, I think anybody who is genuinely interested in changing the state of poverty in these third world countries should spend a few minutes researching the consequences of blank checks sent to these impoverished third world nations.

What one realizes is that the reason that poverty exists in most of those countries is because of the totalitarian socialist governments running those countries.  Without launching into a treatise on why socialism is a necessary prerequisite for a stable totalitarian government (you are buying out the poor), I’ll just point out that if you hand these governments a blank check you are just propping up the government, and therefore indefinitely extending the poverty and suffering that the peoples of these countries are undergoing.

Bono has had a number of comments on this along the lines “no more blank checks, please” addressing exactly this issue.  I do think that he is right and it is in our common interests to end poverty in those nations, but having your heart “in the right place” as most liberals do pretty much guarantees that they have their heads stuck in a warm, most and dark place at the same time.

Robert108, $8 billion we could afford if it were going to the right place. $800 billion is a gigantic amount, that would slam our country into a major recession, on the other hand.

If we say it as part of a process of democratizing these countries, and extending to them a true free market environment, it would be in our mutual interests for that to happen.

But I agree with you that we can’t afford to send even one red cent to these governments, since we are guaranteed it will just prop up their corrupt regimes even longer.

But I agree with you that we can’t afford to send even one red cent to these governments, since we are guaranteed it will just prop up their corrupt regimes even longer.

Exactly.

If you don’t know by now, don’t mess with it.

Corrected the post.  I should have read a little closer.

As for helping the poor, it often seems to me that we could do that more effectively (and at no cost to the taxpayer) simply by liberalizing a number of our international trade regulations.

Rather than give them money, why not let them earn it?

Of course, that probably wouldn’t sit well with the unions and protectionists at the left.  We can give these people billions of dollars in tax dollars, but god forbid we engage in open trade with them.

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

I do think that he is right and it is in our common interests to end poverty in those nations…

I should hope the debacle of the so-called “War on Poverty” has taught us that poverty can’t be “ended” by simply throwing money at it.  If that doesn’t work in our country, which has economic and personal freedom, why would we think it would work in countries where they don’t enjoy those freedoms?  The problem in socialist countries is structural; they are using a bad economic model, and no amount of outside money will make it productive.  We should give freely of our economic expertise, not our money.

If you don’t know by now, don’t mess with it.

Rob, there are ways we could spend our money in those countries that are much better than giving them the money directly.

For example, reforms in their agricultural practices would make a huge difference, especially in times of “drought”. (A relative word when it comes to agriculture, because changes in farming practices can have a major effect on what a given shortage of rainfall does in terms of agricultural production.)

Doing things that improve their educational systems is another, especially in countries where the only way you can get your kid educated is to send him to some mind-indoctrinating religious “school.”

There are plenty of others, these are the two that came to my head immediately.  Both involve spending some of our resources, but neither involve propping up dictators, which is essentially what Barrack is proposing to do.

Maybe, Carrick, but it seems to me that free and open trade (prompting an influx of capital and know-how) is a much more efficient way of accomplishing those goals.

Of course, I don’t think the two solutions are mutually exclusive either.  It’s not like we have to do one and not the other.

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

Obama:

It’s a Washington where politicians like John McCain and Hillary Clinton voted for a war in Iraq that should’ve never been authorized and never been waged - a war that is costing us thousands of precious lives and billions of dollars a week that could’ve been used to rebuild crumbling schools and bridges; roads and buildings; that could’ve been invested in job training and child care; in making health care affordable or putting college within reach.

Obama again:

We can’t keep spending money that we don’t have in a war that shouldn’t have been fought. We can’t keep mortgaging our children’s future on a mountain of debt. We can’t keep driving a wider and wider gap between the few who are rich and the rest who are struggling to keep pace.

As usual, it’s not the principle that matters.

Rob, I’m thinking of the old saw “give a hungry man bread so he can eat, and he’ll be hungry tomorrow.  Teach him how to grow his own wheat and he’ll never be hungry again”.

But I agree with you on free market systems.  The unfortunate facts is they exist as a result of the “pay off to the general public” by the totalitarian regimes, who otherwise few would ever support. 

The bottom line is that a free markets will never exist in those countries until there is a change in their political system.  I think the solution is “revolution from within”. 

But it would initially have to involve seed-money from our government, because what businessman would invest in such a corrupt system?  Nor why would he invest knowing that his investments could be confiscated at will, and further that the US government would probably even look the other way when it happened, as they have done in the past.

IAMbs: Obama’s inaccurate rhetoric is still no excuse for us giving welfare to the corrupt nations of the world.  Classic leftie misdirection.

If you don’t know by now, don’t mess with it.

Robert, perhaps my point wasn’t clear (wouldn’t be the first time!) When Obama doesn’t like where the money is going, it’s desperately needed at home.  When he, for political reasons, wants money to go for some pet cause, we’ve got all the money in the world available for it and no need for it here.

Got it.  I guess I wasn’t clear that I was chiming in with you.

If you don’t know by now, don’t mess with it.

D’oh!  I’ll just stop posting and go have more coffee…

Rob,

I can’t disagree with the intent of the post. But I can’t seem to find anything in senate bill or the house resolution which mentions a percertage of GNP.

It was talked about at the G8 summit:

(9) At the summit of the Group of Eight (G-8) nations in July 2005, leaders from all eight participating countries committed to increase aid to Africa from the current $25,000,000,000 annually to $50,000,000,000 by 2010, and to cancel 100 percent of the debt obligations owed to the World Bank, African Development Bank, and International Monetary Fund by 18 of the world’s poorest nations.

Granted the US would, as always, commit to the lions’ share of this $50B...but this is an agreement coming from our current administration, with at least some at the behest of the Millennium Challenge Act of 2003.

The Obama/Hagel bill is nothing more than a verbosely written tirade commiting us to aid to Africa.

“To love is not to stare steadfast at one another...it is to look forward, in the same direction.”
Saint-Exupéry

Carrick, LDSally, Robert108:  Mea Culpa! I am the author of the original post A CONSERVATIVE’S NIGHTMARE which Rob excerpted here, and I am to blame for the excessive number of zeros. But, as one of you said, ‘any amount is too much’ in this bizarre scheme.

In my original post - and based on Barack Obama’s speeches and literature - I set forth a detailed account of what we could expect in four years of his Presidency. Maybe I should have called it AN AMERICAN NIGHTMARE.

"Here lies, in honored glory, an American soldier, known but to God.”

The stakes are high. Whether the issue is the economy, or energy, or the federal courts or national security, the right answers are coming not from the Democrats, but from the Republicans. The surge of operations that began a year ago is succeeding. The only way to lose this fight is to quit. Richard M. Cheney, Vice President, 30 May, 2008

I have never known a Democrat who met a tax they did not like. Obama is no different.

Socialism is socialism even when you camouflage it as a Democrat.

Carrick, LDSally, Robert108:  Mea Culpa! I am the author of the original post A CONSERVATIVE’S NIGHTMARE which Rob excerpted here, and I am to blame for the excessive number of zeros. But, as one of you said, ‘any amount is too much’ in this bizarre scheme.

I knew already. Well written by the way, despite your inadvertent mathematical error.

So if you (or Rob) could, would you please answer a couple of questions I have ?

Would you provide a link as to your source of this:

The Act will require the President and Congress to set aside .07% of the annual gross national product - our GNP

and…

It is Barack Obama’s response to the call of the Bali Global Warming Conference for a global carbon tax;

Is this prose on your part, or was this referenced somewhere? I’m not criticizing, just curious.

Thanks.

“To love is not to stare steadfast at one another...it is to look forward, in the same direction.”
Saint-Exupéry

LaydownSally:  For you, Madam? Anything!

The link to the details on the Obama/Hagel bill - which now that I went back and looked - does cost over $800 billion and takes .7% of our GNP, not the .07% I originally posted - is as follows:

http://www.glenbeck.com/content/articles/article/198/5991/

Since the original UN resolution calling on the G8 nations to pony up was followed by the Bali global warming conference also calling on wealthy nations to support a global tax to empower poorer ‘powerless’ states, I concluded that Barack Obama, a committed internationalist, was responding to the call.

"Here lies, in honored glory, an American soldier, known but to God.”

The stakes are high. Whether the issue is the economy, or energy, or the federal courts or national security, the right answers are coming not from the Democrats, but from the Republicans. The surge of operations that began a year ago is succeeding. The only way to lose this fight is to quit. Richard M. Cheney, Vice President, 30 May, 2008

Sorry, pparets.

The link only takes me to Glen Becks homepage.

I searched through it and came up empty.

Would you check the link?

Thanks

“To love is not to stare steadfast at one another...it is to look forward, in the same direction.”
Saint-Exupéry

Well Folks,

Now I’m critizing.

I’m sure if I wanted to, especially since I’m no fan of Obama, I could dig up plenty of reasons why and how he would make things worse for us.

But from the first mathematical error to the last (i.e. 0.7% of GNP is still not $800M), the information from above is full of errors, and should be retracted.

There is a Global Poverty Act before congress (H.R. 1302 and S. 2433) but as I stated earlier it is…

nothing more than a verbosely written tirade commiting us to aid to Africa.

Whether you agree with these bills or not, they are recieving full bi-partisan support and are in fact an
expansion on what Bush already has in place. Nothing more.

I don’t know if it’s a misunderstanding or a misreading of what Glen Beck wrote but no where can I find a number which is the product of a percentage of GNP.

“To love is not to stare steadfast at one another...it is to look forward, in the same direction.”
Saint-Exupéry

LaydownSally:  There but for a single ‘n’ go I. Sorry. =) Here’s the correct link for the Obama GLOBAL POVERTY ACT info.

http://www.glennbeck.com/content/articles/article/198/5991/

"Here lies, in honored glory, an American soldier, known but to God.”

The stakes are high. Whether the issue is the economy, or energy, or the federal courts or national security, the right answers are coming not from the Democrats, but from the Republicans. The surge of operations that began a year ago is succeeding. The only way to lose this fight is to quit. Richard M. Cheney, Vice President, 30 May, 2008

pparets,

Thanks. It worked.

I hope you read my above comment, because it still applies.

I like Glenn Beck, but he’s got it all wrong in this instance.

“To love is not to stare steadfast at one another...it is to look forward, in the same direction.”
Saint-Exupéry

LaydownSally:  Interestingly, the exact same .7% and a cost of $800 billion or more for the Global Poverty Act was reported on NPR… of all places!

I have no link to it.

"Here lies, in honored glory, an American soldier, known but to God.”

The stakes are high. Whether the issue is the economy, or energy, or the federal courts or national security, the right answers are coming not from the Democrats, but from the Republicans. The surge of operations that began a year ago is succeeding. The only way to lose this fight is to quit. Richard M. Cheney, Vice President, 30 May, 2008

pparets,

Use you calculator...it doen’t compute and..
It’s not in the bill!!

Do your research.

“To love is not to stare steadfast at one another...it is to look forward, in the same direction.”
Saint-Exupéry

laydownsally:  Do my research? I’m inclined to trust the work done by Beck’s staff and the people at NPR.

Why are you so fixated on this?  If you disagree with the findings, feel free to contact Glenn Beck and express your displeasure.

Is it accurate to assume that you support the purpose and intent of the Obama/Hagel Global Poverty Act?

"Here lies, in honored glory, an American soldier, known but to God.”

The stakes are high. Whether the issue is the economy, or energy, or the federal courts or national security, the right answers are coming not from the Democrats, but from the Republicans. The surge of operations that began a year ago is succeeding. The only way to lose this fight is to quit. Richard M. Cheney, Vice President, 30 May, 2008

Sorry pparets,

I’ll drop it...just thought you might be interested in the truth, when you blog about something.

Guess not.

“To love is not to stare steadfast at one another...it is to look forward, in the same direction.”
Saint-Exupéry

LaydownSally:  I would like to think that you are being a little testy here. I would never knowingly print anything that I knew was not the truth.

"Here lies, in honored glory, an American soldier, known but to God.”

The stakes are high. Whether the issue is the economy, or energy, or the federal courts or national security, the right answers are coming not from the Democrats, but from the Republicans. The surge of operations that began a year ago is succeeding. The only way to lose this fight is to quit. Richard M. Cheney, Vice President, 30 May, 2008

LDS: Have done some research on this bill, and can’t find the hard numbers, but still maintain that it’s a flawed concept to try to do anything about poverty by tax and spend tactics.  It’s unfair, IMO, to confiscate money from the productive people in one country to give to the corrupt UN, which will then pass some of it on to various corrupt dictators and slaveowners around the world.  Even here in the US, where we have an actual good economic system, that tactic doesn’t work, so why would anyone think it would work anywhere else?  Instead of quibbling about numbers, realize that even one dollar is too much to put into this boondoggle.

If you don’t know by now, don’t mess with it.

Robert,

It’s unfair, IMO, to confiscate money from the productive people in one country to give to the corrupt UN, which will then pass some of it on to various corrupt dictators and slaveowners around the world. 

I agree with you, except on one point. The money isn’t going to the UN.

Instead of quibbling about numbers, realize that even one dollar is too much to put into this boondoggle.

Once again I agree. But, I’m not quibbling about the numbers. They are wrong, but that’s beside the point.

Now understand...so I don’t have to repeat myself.
I don’t agree with this program, but this whole concept started with Bush at the G8 summit, not Obama. And I’m not defending Obama.

My dispute with blogs such as this is that we constantly complain about the libs ignoring the facts… then we turn around and attack Obama with untruths.

“To love is not to stare steadfast at one another...it is to look forward, in the same direction.”
Saint-Exupéry

Last word,

This isn’t a typo I’m refering to, the whole thing is wrong.

The money isn’t going to the UN.
The numbers are wrong.
Bush started this process.
Republicans are going along with it.
But since Obama/Hagel introduced this bill, we lay it all at their feet.

All this from one small paragraph on Becks’ website.

And then there is this:

It is Barack Obama’s response to the call of the Bali Global Warming Conference for a global carbon tax

You know where that came from?

Since the original UN resolution calling on the G8 nations to pony up was followed by the Bali global warming conference also calling on wealthy nations to support a global tax to empower poorer ‘powerless’ states, I concluded that Barack Obama, a committed internationalist, was responding to the call.

Now I know we don’t adhere to the strict rules of journalism..but that’s absurd.

The next time Hannitized and Puzzelfeet complain that we are biased...What should we tell them?

“To love is not to stare steadfast at one another...it is to look forward, in the same direction.”
Saint-Exupéry

No matter who proposed it, it’s a load of crap.

If you don’t know by now, don’t mess with it.

My dispute with blogs such as this is that we constantly complain about the libs ignoring the facts… then we turn around and attack Obama with
untruths.

Despite your generalization, it isn’t anything like a regular occurrence with the conservatives on this blog; with the lefties, though...you have it about right.
Nobody’s perfect, but we generally get things right.

If you don’t know by now, don’t mess with it.

Am I the only person that is astounded by how many people are buying into this guy’s garbage. His ideas have less substance than a cup of Jell-O but if a person points out that fact then they are accused of being a racist. I believe that when he wins the nomination there will be a mass exodus of Hillary supporters flocking to McCain. I’m not going to try and make a prediction, but either McCain is going to get “Doled” or Obama is going to get “Dukakased.”

Obama is anti-american, this is his plan to ‘CHANGE’ us from a super-power down to a poor 3rd world country. Some people are blind to this.  This is 845 Billion over & above the 300 Billion we provide in foreign aid already. The thugs & theives at the U.N. will get this money, and give it to every country hostile to the U.S.  This will bankrupt & weaken us to where we will be forced to be subordinate to control by the U.N. or simply concquered by other countries.  Thanks, Obama, you dick.