Liberals claim to care more for the poor and needy and essentially claim conservatives are greedy people who make their riches from the sweat of the poor. It would seem if such were the case, liberals would give more to charity than conservatives. Nothing could be further from the truth.
The Truth
In 2006 Arthur C. Brooks, a professor at Syracuse University published a book titled “Who Really Cares: The Surprising Truth About Compassionate Conservatism.”
Some glaring examples he found in his research:
Vice President Al Gore’s charitable giving in 1997 was only $353.
Senator John Kerry, presidential candidate in 2004, gave nothing to charity in more than one year when he was a U.S. Senator. Kerry’s 1991–1995 charitable contributions were ($0, $820, $175, $2039, $0), less than one-half of one percent of his income for the period.
In contrast, private citizen George W. Bush gave ($28,236, $31,914, $31,292) in 1991–1993. His highest giving was 15.7 percent of income and his average 9.1 percent. As Texas governor he gave $27,000 (6.5 percent of income) and $9,178 (2.3 percent) in the next two years, after which his giving returned to higher levels.
Conservatives Give More Than Blue Dems
Although Blue Dem liberal families’ incomes average 6 percent higher than those of conservative families, conservative-headed households give, on average, 30 percent more to charity than the average liberal-headed household ($1,600 per year vs. $1,227).
Conservatives also donate more time. Conservatives give more blood.
Residents of states which voted for John Kerry in 2004 gave smaller percentages of their incomes to charity than did residents of states that voted for George Bush.
Bush carried 24 of the 25 states where charitable giving was above average.
In the 10 Reddest states, in which Bush got more than 60 percent majorities, the average percentage of personal income donated to charity was 3.5. Residents of the Bluest states, which gave Bush less than 40 percent of the vote, donated just 1.9 percent.
People who reject the idea that “government has a responsibility to reduce income inequality” give an average of four times more than people who accept that proposition.
Two Fabulous Quotes
“Everyman must decide whether he will walk in the creative light of altruism or the darkness of destructive selfishness. This is the judgment. Life’s persistent and most urgent question is ‘What are you doing for others?’” ~ Martin Luther King Jr.
“Continued dependence on [government support] induces a spiritual and moral disintegration fundamentally destructive to the national fiber. To dole out relief in this way is to administer a narcotic, a subtle destroyer of the human spirit” ~ Franklin Roosevelt.
Liars Lie
Blue Dem Liberals are lying. When you look into the data, the data proves yet again that conservatism reigns supreme over liberalism. Liberals think it’s appropriate to TAKE other peoples’ money and give to the poor. Liberals don’t GIVE their own.
For example, in 2000 Vice President Al Gore’s charitable contributions, as a percentage of his income, were below the national average. He gave 0.2 percent of his family income, one-seventh of the average for donating households, but Gore “gave at the office.” Using public office to take other peoples’ money for failing government programs is not charitable. It’s a wasteful appropriation.
Next time a Blue Dem liberal whips out the “greedy conservative card”, share this data with them.
Data NEVER lies. Liberals do! Keep rising! We are a Red Nation Rising against Blue Dem Liberal Liars.
Written by: Naet
Follow Red Nation Rising: On Twitter and Facebook
rednationrising.wordpress.com 
One thing to always remember is that Liberals want to force everyone to “give” in a largely equal by income amount. This means a overall drop in the available wealth of the productive but NOT a drop in their relative wealth as compared to their financial peers. A Liberal just won’t give money to charity if it will disadvantage him or her vs. his or her own general peer group but will have no problem, or not much of one, in calling for all of their peer group to be lessened objectively.
With Liberals it’s always about who has less and who has more and rarely, if ever, about how much people have. Hence, why they rant about “income inequality” and remain silent on the overall lifestyles and wealth of the various quintiles.