Wouldn't they donate all their money but like a million dollars or less? After all, it isn't like they aren't going to keep making money and they sure have plenty.

Isn't it kind of anti-liberal to keep all that money while at the same time calling for redistribution of wealth to "end poverty"?

__________________
Qur'an:8:39 Fight them until all opposition ends and all submit to Allah.
Qur'an:8:67 It is not fitting for any prophet to have prisoners until he has made a great slaughter in the land.
Qur'an 8:12 I will terrorize the unbelievers...Strike off their heads and cut off each of their fingers and toes.
Qur'an 9:5 Fight and kill the disbelievers wherever you find them, take them captive, torture them, and lie in wait and ambush them using every stratagem of war.

No...that's retarded.

Well, I agree. So, why do they want to MAKE OTHER rich people do it?

__________________
Qur'an:8:39 Fight them until all opposition ends and all submit to Allah.
Qur'an:8:67 It is not fitting for any prophet to have prisoners until he has made a great slaughter in the land.
Qur'an 8:12 I will terrorize the unbelievers...Strike off their heads and cut off each of their fingers and toes.
Qur'an 9:5 Fight and kill the disbelievers wherever you find them, take them captive, torture them, and lie in wait and ambush them using every stratagem of war.

I haven't read anything to that effect. Can you post a link to where Clinton lays out her plan to make the uber rich give away every dime they earn?

Are you kidding?

__________________
Qur'an:8:39 Fight them until all opposition ends and all submit to Allah.
Qur'an:8:67 It is not fitting for any prophet to have prisoners until he has made a great slaughter in the land.
Qur'an 8:12 I will terrorize the unbelievers...Strike off their heads and cut off each of their fingers and toes.
Qur'an 9:5 Fight and kill the disbelievers wherever you find them, take them captive, torture them, and lie in wait and ambush them using every stratagem of war.

Exaggerating a bit?

Its very hard for me to understand how liberals, who usually view the RICH as the enemy, are so accepting of rich democrats not giving their money to the poor.

Why do the Clintons need so much money? They are always talking about how the poor deserve a better share. Why not give them all that money they don't need? They can't possibly spend it all on anything worthwhile. Do you know how many people they could lift out of poverty if they gave it all away but a million? How many middle class Americans would be satisfied to have a million dollars?

For their class warfare rhetoric to seem at all sincere, they need to give away that money.

__________________
Qur'an:8:39 Fight them until all opposition ends and all submit to Allah.
Qur'an:8:67 It is not fitting for any prophet to have prisoners until he has made a great slaughter in the land.
Qur'an 8:12 I will terrorize the unbelievers...Strike off their heads and cut off each of their fingers and toes.
Qur'an 9:5 Fight and kill the disbelievers wherever you find them, take them captive, torture them, and lie in wait and ambush them using every stratagem of war.

Because, that would make it so they are not hypocrites.

__________________
Someone hijacked my sig again.

Liberals have no problem with being wealthy themselves, they just don't want anyone else to be.

In 2003, 8 of the top 10 wealthiest Senators were dems.

John Kerry, D-Massachusetts: $163,626,399
Herb Kohl, D-Wisconsin: $111,015,016
John Rockefeller, D -West Virginia: $81,648,018
Jon Corzine, D-New Jersey: $71,035,025
Dianne Feinstein, D-California: $26,377,109
Peter Fitzgerald, R-Illinois: $26,132,013
Frank Lautenberg, D-New Jersey $17,789,018
Bill Frist, R-Tennessee: $15,108,042
John Edwards, D-North Carolina: $12,844,029
Edward Kennedy, D-Massachusetts: $9,905,009
Jeff Bingaman, D-New Mexico: $7,981,015

That's the thing about libs. They wanna take "other peoples money". Someone like Hillary will make speeches about how the gap between the wealthiest and the poorest has never been greater and that something must be done. The rich should take a heavier burdon of the tax load according to her (Obama too and he's far from poor either). But why the Clinton family needs $109 million over 8 years is beyond me. It's overkill. How much is too much? Certainly they could give away 75% of their earnings and STILL have more than $25 million left and be far richer than most Americans could ever dream of.

And libs are awful when it comes to making personal sacrafices. Look at Al Gore and John Edwards, two very outspoken environmental libs who are filthy rich and live in mansions and fly on private jets and ride in limos. But they make speeches asking the rest of us to ride bikes to work. LOL! How much fuel do you think is used to heat and AC the mansions Gore and Edwards live in?

http://www.businessandmedia.org/prin...320125451.aspx


Edwards Claims His Mega-Mansion is Carbon Neutral
Presidential candidate promotes carbon caps for business, but carbon 'offsets' for himself.

By Dan Gainor
The Boone Pickens Free Market Fellow
Business & Media Institute
3/20/2007 12:57:22 PM


Call it “Dancing with the Stars”: Global Warming Edition. Democratic presidential hopeful John Edwards showed his best dance moves trying to avoid questions about how energy efficient his 28,000-square-foot mansion really is and how much the power bill costs each month.



The March 20 edition of CNN’s “American Morning” showed Edwards hyping global warming, promoting his energy plan that mandates carbon caps and claiming that his new mega-McMansion was actually being operated in a “carbon-neutral way.” He has recently declared his campaign “carbon neutral.”



Edwards also avoided how he holds himself to one standard but wants to hold businesses to another. As anchor Miles O’Brien put it: “One of the keys to your plan is the so-called cap plan which would institute, as it suggests, caps on the amount of carbon dioxide industry can put into the environment.”



But when it comes to Edwards’ own life, he doesn’t cap his carbon efforts, preferring instead carbon offsets. “We have committed to operate this house in a carbon-neutral way, which means in addition to using energy saving devices in the house itself, to the extent that doesn’t cover it, we’re going to purchase carbon credits on the market,” said Edwards.



Such offsets have been big news lately as even the Oscars claimed they were “carbon neutral.” The March 26 issue of BusinessWeek questioned the nature of such offsets and said “some deals amount to little more than feel good hype.”



Former Vice President Al Gore has received criticism for his own carbon offsets, though the media have been supportive. “If more people do it over time, it’s a good thing,” said reporter Russ Mitchell during the “Early Show” on CBS February 22.



During the CNN preview of his new energy plan, Edwards called for both a cap on current carbon dioxide emissions and “reducing carbon dioxide emissions by 80 percent by the year 2050, which is aggressive but achievable.”



When O’Brien asked him about jobs going overseas instead of new jobs being created in the United States, Edwards danced again. “Well, the reason first of all is the planet has to survive. So we have a pretty simple question to begin with.” His second point merely asked “How do we deal with this issue in a smart way” and moved into boilerplate about creating jobs.



O’Brien asked about Edwards “getting Americans to conserve more.” Edwards responded with talk of conservation and then requirements. “One of the things that’s going to be required is for Americans to be willing to drive more fuel-efficient vehicles and to be willing to conserve and we want to help them do that.”



When O’Brien asked specifically about his house, Edwards turned into a dancing king. Asked about the cost of energy for the home, Edwards tried several answers:



“It’s actually not bad.” And followed that up with talk of how energy efficient the home was.
“I’m not telling you. It’s actually, it’s actually not bad. It’s about three or four hundred dollars, the last one I saw.”
Following that claim, Edwards backed off a bit and said “the power bill is several hundred dollars a month.”