Conservatives more generous to charities than liberals?

I'm shocked.
Liberals are always demonizing conservatives for not caring about the poor.

Rob Jensen...

And liberals happen to be right on this, too. Social Security, best
charity program ever instituted. Why do conservatives hate God so
much that they want to destroy such magnificence?

-- Rob

How is it that the evil conservatives give 30% more of their money to
charity than liberals?

BTR1701...

Liberals don't like anyone giving directly to the poor. They prefer the

FDR...

Tell me how conservatives give DIRECTLY to the poor?

They prefer the

government to confiscate the money first, then waste 90% of it on
bureaucratic nonsense, and then give the remaining pittance to the poor.

wdstarr...

Or, you could be wrong.

BTR1701...

Sure and the sun could rise in the west tomorrow. Equally likely on this
issue.

Victor Velazquez...

Seriously? You're going to stand by the assertion that liberals *don't*
like anyone giving directly to the poor? Or do you simply mean to say that

BTR1701...

Not as much as they prefer the government confiscate the money first,
run it through a stupendously inefficient and often incompetent
bureaucracy, and only then hand out what's left the actual poor.

liberals *prefer* that the gov't do it (that would be less controversial, I
think).

BTR1701...

Yes, that's why I used the word "prefer" in my original statement. Check
it out, it's right up there at the top.

Indeed, I'm sure liberals would prefer that the gov't solve the problems of
poverty just as I'm certain that most liberals aren't complete moonbats and
understand that isn't going to happen.

BTW, how much "bureaucratic nonsense" is in your average charity? And have
you ever tried running an organization without a bureaucracy? Good luck
with that (not saying it needs to be "90%" or anything).

This has to be all lies.

Mojo...

Is that just an overall total? Or is it per capita? Is the amount adjusted
for weight? Don't those who call themselves conservative outnumber those who
call themselves liberal?

tomcervo...

"This has to be all lies."

Isn't that an anagram for "John Stossal Reports"?

omarenoryt...

That's what you'll be hearing from the hysterical liars on the left.

Victor Velazquez...

What about the hysterical liars on the right? Are they going to continue
spouting half-truths and conjecture as rock-solid, god-given fact or is
there a new strategery in light of recent set-backs?

Ubiquitous...

And there you go accusing people of what you practice again...

The fact that their money is NOT where their mouths are is surprising
to exactly no one.

Martin Phipps...

1) They have more money to begin with.
2) Genuine charities are good tax write offs.

Rick...

Wrong a study showed that conservatives in South Dakota 1500 of them gave
more than 1500 San Franciscans even though the Sanfrancisons made more.

Victor Velazquez...

Maybe that just shows that South Dakotans are more generous than San
Franciscans?

senna...

Liberals don't demonize conservatives, they just try to relay the true
Conservative agenda to the people-- the rare moment that they are

Rick...

Yeah it's probably 95%

actually permitted any airtime, that is.

Anim8rFSK...

I heard that, and I'd love to see the data. I bet they're counting
church tithing.

Obveeus...

It would make for interesting data.
Church tithing should not count as charity.

Rick...

And if you took out donating to churches conservatives would still beat out

Victor Velazquez...

Do you know if that would include religious charities like the Salvation
Army?

liberals.

Victor Velazquez...

Oh, I definitely agree. My kids' school is great in that they give all
donations that exceed their goal to far needier schools (which usually turns
out to be ~2/3 of their total take). Plus, it's a K-8 so no marching band
and the Washington trip is a side thing that the 8th graders have to raise
their own money for (ugh...candy bars again?).

Just depending on which side Bill Gates' donations were placed would
probably change the overall percentage by a few points. ;-)

Ubiquitous...

Nope, it's the truth.

jmpc...

who's your source, John Stossel?

Kinik...

The information comes from a book by Arthur Brooks called "Who really Cares"

Victor Velazquez...

I knew I should read all posts in a thread before responding! Your theory
makes much more sense than regional bias. I know I never give to the SA
because they are such raging douchebags (like lecturing to the poor about
the evils of not being Christian). People in SD, sadly, are less likely to
be informed of such shenanigans.

Victor Velazquez...

I'm far too curious to be intolerant. Furthermore, I have nothing but the
utmost respect for religious charitable organizations.

However, when their help comes with an agenda, then the charity itself comes
under the same scrutiny as the agenda. In the case of the SA, that agenda
has been found wanting, therefore better-educated people (like, say, those
you might find in a major metropolis) will avoid funding that charity in
favor of other, less agenda-driven organizations.

Anim8rFSK...

That's the problem -- who do you choose? The SA is out (and frankly I
find those bell ringers annoying. We seem to have especially lazy ones,
slumped in a chair, smoking outside the entrance to the store, don't
even vouchsafe you a smile or a Merry Christmas), The Red Cross stole my
9/11 donation. When I went to try and give tsunami money, it was tough
to find somebody to donate to. The Red Cross sure wasn't getting any
more. The United Nations? They don't exactly have a great track
record. Nowadays we end up giving to local charities like back to
school drives, that sort of thing.

tomcervo...

Another study with some valid points, some less valid points, and
adopted wholesale by the Right Wing Gas Machine as The Book of Life.
They full well that they can praise its points as gospel, knowing full
well that their uncritical audience will not read it, or, reading it,
not see the flaws in its methodology. It will get mediocre reviews in
the professional journals, sell by the gross, and end up in resale
shops all over the nation, thus second-handedly proving its point.

FDR...

Rush limbaugh

Tony Calguire...

Liberals probably started the charity, and are running it. Conservatives
were probably responsible for whatever injustice created the need for the
charity.

FDR...

If you consider the RNC a charity, then yes they do.

record hunter...

Guilt. Their tax cuts made more poor people need charity.

senna...

If this is from John Stossel, then it's a complete lie. He's just one
of the hundreds of liberal-bashers that are given as much air time as
possible because of his slanted view of the world.