On the Huffington Post, operated by a woman who acquired her
wealth by marrying a rich gay guy connected to Big Oil, liberal
blogger Steven Clemons gloated that, unlike John McCain, Biden
wouldn't "forget the number of houses he owns," adding that, in
2006, Biden was ranked the poorest U.S. senator.
And at his high school reunion Biden was voted "most likely to
try to bum a ride off of somebody." Vote Biden!
According to tax returns for Biden and his public
schoolteacher wife, in 2006, their total income was $248,459; in
2007, it was $319,853 -- putting the couple in the top 1 percent
of all earners in the U.S.
This, my friends, is the face of poverty in America. At least
in the Democratic Party. It's located just below that row of hair
plugs. The Bidens are yet another heart-rending example of
America's "hidden poor" -- desperately needy families hidden
behind annual incomes of a quarter million dollars or more paid
by the taxpayer. My fellow Americans, we can do better.
The national median household income was $48,201 in 2006 and
$50,233 in 2007. Working for the government pays well.
If liberals are going to show how in touch they are with
normal Americans by demanding a Marxist revolution against the
rich every time they control the government, how about taking a
peek at the charitable giving of these champions of the little
guy?
According to their tax returns, in 2006 and 2007, the Obamas
gave 5.8 percent and 6.1 percent of their income to charity. I
guess Michelle Obama has to draw the line someplace with all this
"giving back" stuff. The Bidens gave 0.15 percent and 0.31
percent of the income to charity.
No wonder Obama doesn't see what the big fuss is over his
decision to limit tax deductions for charitable giving. At least
that part of Obama's tax plan won't affect his supporters.
Meanwhile, in 1991, 1992 and 1993, George W. Bush had incomes
of $179,591, $212,313 and $610,772. His charitable contributions
those years were $28,236, $31,914 and $31,292. During his
presidency, Bush gave away more than 10 percent of his income
each year.
For purposes of comparison, in 2005, Barack Obama made $1.7
million -- more than twice President Bush's 2005 income of
$735,180 -- but they both gave about the same amount to
charity.
That same year, the heartless Halliburton employee Vice
President Dick Cheney gave 77 percent of his income to charity.
The following year, in 2006, Bush gave more to charity than Obama
on an income one-third smaller than Obama's. Maybe when Obama
talks about "change" he's referring to his charitable
contributions.
Liberals have no intention of actually parting with any of
their own wealth or lifting a finger to help the poor. That's for
other people to do with what's left of their incomes after the
government has taken its increasingly large cut.
As the great liberal intellectual Bertrand Russell explained
while scoffing at the idea that he would give his money to
charity: "I'm afraid you've got it wrong. (We) are socialists. We
don't pretend to be Christians."