Michelle Obama does a ad for the red cross and Haiti.

T

theMAJORITY

MAJORITYrules-sorry
Isn't it funny, the queen of government controled redistribution of wealth--is asking people with money to give to charity. Is she asking her ACORN supporters? Probably not--they alread blew their redistribution of wealth a week after they got it. Who is Michelle Obama talking to? The people who actually make money. The same people she threatens to redistribute their wealth to anybody who will blow it.

The red cross must be going progressive also, becuase if they wanted donations from caring people who have the money---they would not have used Michelle Obama in the ad.

Clinton gave Haiti a lot of money from 92 to 2000, and the corrupt government stole it all. How do I know my donations will not meet the same fait---especialy when a progressive teams up with the private charity?
 
Last edited:
theMAJORITY said:
Isn't it funny, the queen of government controled redistribution of wealth--is asking people with money to give to charity. Is she asking her ACORN supporters? Probably not--they alread blew their redistribution of wealth a week after they got it. Who is Michelle Obama talking to? The people who actually make money. The same people she threatens to redistribute their wealth to anybody who will blow it.

The red cross must be going progressive also, becuase if they wanted donations from caring people who have the money---they would not have used Michelle Obama in the ad.

Clinton gave Haiti a lot of money from 92 to 2000, and the corrupt government stole it all. How do I know my donations will not meet the same fait---especialy when a progressive teams up with the private charity?
Click to expand...

Are you incapable of understanding that this is a humanitarian issue?

God forbid we should have a first lady who cares about the tragedy.

She could have made a Barbara Bush-like comment instead, would that have worked for you?

"What I'm hearing, which is sort of scary, is they all want to stay in Texas. Everyone is so overwhelmed by the hospitality. And so many of the people in the arena here, you know, were underprivileged anyway, so this is working very well for them."
 
theMAJORITY said:
Isn't it funny, the queen of government controled redistribution of wealth--is asking people with money to give to charity. Is she asking her ACORN supporters? Probably not--they alread blew their redistribution of wealth a week after they got it. Who is Michelle Obama talking to? The people who actually make money. The same people she threatens to redistribute their wealth to anybody who will blow it.

The red cross must be going progressive also, becuase if they wanted donations from caring people who have the money---they would not have used Michelle Obama in the ad.
Click to expand...

Point taken. I think the US of A should use Rush Limbaugh and Pat Robertson as the public face of American relief efforts.

We all know that private charity is totally sufficient and superior to government at humanitarian assistance. It’s been proven over and over, from the Great Republican Depression of the 1930s, to Aceh after the tsunami.

I’m with Rush in the sense that we shouldn’t be using tax dollars, public resources, and government Air Force planes to deliver assistance. I’m sure there’s a flotilla of luxury yachts docked in Miami, and they could easily be piloted by compassionate conservative billionaires over to Haiti to deliver/distribute aid and medicine.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top