Skip to comments.
Bleeding Heart Tightwads
The New York Times ^
| December 21, 2008
| NICHOLAS D. KRISTOF
Posted on 12/21/2008 5:52:27 AM PST by Amelia
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-45 next last
Interesting findings. Conservatives give more to churches, liberals give more to institutions that cater to the wealthy. Conservatives are also more likely to give time, give blood, etc., than liberals are. Also finds that gays are quite generous to charities.
1
posted on
12/21/2008 5:52:28 AM PST
by
Amelia
To: Amelia
In other news:
The Sun Rises in the East
Bears Sh*t in the Woods
To: Amelia
It’s easy to give away OTHER people’s money.....is it any wonder Libs are gutless?
To: Amelia
If you subtracted from “liberal giving” the amounts “donated” to Foundations that they run and continue to live off “liberal giving” would be nonexistent.
4
posted on
12/21/2008 5:58:12 AM PST
by
wastoute
To: wastoute
Note Barack Obama’s “charitable” contributions to the Congressional Black Caucus!
5
posted on
12/21/2008 6:00:42 AM PST
by
Tax-chick
("And the rum is for all your good vices.")
To: WorkingClassFilth
One reason I posted it is because it’s research by liberals validating what we’ve always thought.
6
posted on
12/21/2008 6:01:10 AM PST
by
Amelia
To: Amelia
I would include this:
Liberals donate more money in an attempt to gain power than they do to help the poor, needy and unfortunate among us.
That should tell you all you need to know about their true motives.
7
posted on
12/21/2008 6:03:11 AM PST
by
Erik Latranyi
(Too many conservatives urge retreat when the war of politics doesn't go their way.)
To: Amelia
Progressives are compassionate, but only with other people’s money.
8
posted on
12/21/2008 6:06:00 AM PST
by
LiberConservative
(Stop climate change! I want a spring day, 70 degrees and sunny, 24/7 and 365)
To: Tax-chick
Does Obama really count political contributions as charitable contributions?
9
posted on
12/21/2008 6:13:38 AM PST
by
fhayek
To: Amelia
If you’re surprised and disappointed, Kristof, you’re even more a fool than I’d thought. Liberal equivalent of the Salvation Army? Ain’t none. Liberal Boy Scouts? Only in San Francisco, and they’re primarily engaged in scouting for more boys. Hell, the biggest charity in New York was the Democrat-donating Madoff Investment Securities LLC, hayna?
10
posted on
12/21/2008 6:17:10 AM PST
by
flowerplough
("The demagogue is one who preaches doctrines he knows to be untrue to men he knows to be idiots.")
To: oblomov
Ping!
In light of our conversation on another thread: I wonder if liberals are less generous with their own contributions but because they figure they "give" through their taxes.
11
posted on
12/21/2008 6:17:20 AM PST
by
Alia
To: LiberConservative
Progressives are compassionate, but only with other peoples money. Yes, and it would have been far more honest for George W. Bush to run as a "Compassionate Progressive."
12
posted on
12/21/2008 6:18:27 AM PST
by
Gondring
(Paul Revere would have been flamed as a naysayer troll and told to go back to Boston.)
To: Gondring
13
posted on
12/21/2008 6:18:59 AM PST
by
Gondring
(Paul Revere would have been flamed as a naysayer troll and told to go back to Boston.)
To: Amelia
Republicans the ones who try to cut health insurance for children. Always the dig.
14
posted on
12/21/2008 6:20:29 AM PST
by
McLynnan
To: Amelia
I suggest Freepers go to this author’s blog site and post a comment. No registration necessary.
http://kristof.blogs.nytimes.com/
I suggest you be respectful as it seems liberals cannot believe this study. Use it to tell them that conservatives are not uncaring, cold bastards.
15
posted on
12/21/2008 6:28:24 AM PST
by
Erik Latranyi
(Too many conservatives urge retreat when the war of politics doesn't go their way.)
To: Amelia
households headed by conservatives give 30 percent more to charity than households headed by liberals. That's because conservatives are all rich and can afford it, because they oppress and steal from liberals.
/insane liberal knee jerk reaction
16
posted on
12/21/2008 6:30:31 AM PST
by
Hardastarboard
(Why do I find the Toyota "Saved by Zero" ads so ironic?)
To: Amelia
fifteen or twenty five[I forgot which] cities with the worse poverty in the nation are all run by dems. They haven’t had a Republican administration since 1962. I wish I could find that study.
17
posted on
12/21/2008 6:36:31 AM PST
by
Shooter 2.5
(NRA - Vote against the dem party)
To: Amelia
The Bidens and the Obamas are walking examples of charitable stinginess
Two presumptious hypocrites
Now zerO is calling for everyone to do a “day of service” on the MLK birthday. They are clueless that tens of millions of American provide charity through service and giving- routinely
18
posted on
12/21/2008 6:37:18 AM PST
by
silverleaf
(Fasten your seat belts- it's going to be a BUMPY ride.)
To: Amelia
The upshot is that Democrats, who speak passionately about the hungry and homeless, personally fork over less money to charity than Republicans the ones who try to cut health insurance for children. That's right - it's the intentions that really matter. Republicans want children to starve and die. The same old, tired demagoguery.
To: Hardastarboard
That's because conservatives are all rich and can afford it, because they oppress and steal from liberals. Well, sure, that's what they'd have you believe. But, from the article:
Amazingly, the working poor, who have the least resources, somehow manage to be more generous as a percentage of income than the middle class.
Another liberal sacred cow bites the dust?
20
posted on
12/21/2008 6:44:10 AM PST
by
Amelia
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-45 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson