Damn!! THIS MAKES ME MAD!!!

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • Paul

    Master
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jan 16, 2008
    1,554
    36
    Brownsburg
    Obama’s Global Tax Proposal Up for Senate Vote

    AIM Column | By Cliff Kincaid | February 12, 2008

    It appears the Senate version is being pushed not only by Biden and Obama, a member of the committee, but Lugar, the ranking Republican member.

    A nice-sounding bill called the "Global Poverty Act," sponsored by Democratic presidential candidate and Senator Barack Obama, is up for a Senate vote on Thursday and could result in the imposition of a global tax on the United States. The bill, which has the support of many liberal religious groups, makes levels of U.S. foreign aid spending subservient to the dictates of the United Nations.

    Senator Joe Biden, chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, has not endorsed either Senator Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton in the presidential race. But on Thursday, February 14, he is trying to rush Obama's "Global Poverty Act" (S.2433) through his committee. The legislation would commit the U.S. to spending 0.7 percent of gross national product on foreign aid, which amounts to a phenomenal 13-year total of $845 billion over and above what the U.S. already spends.


    The bill, which is item number four on the committee's business meeting agenda, passed the House by a voice vote last year because most members didn't realize what was in it. Congressional sponsors have been careful not to calculate the amount of foreign aid spending that it would require. According to the website of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, no hearings have been held on the Obama bill in that body.

    A release from the Obama Senate office about the bill declares, "In 2000, the U.S. joined more than 180 countries at the United Nations Millennium Summit and vowed to reduce global poverty by 2015. We are halfway towards this deadline, and it is time the United States makes it a priority of our foreign policy to meet this goal and help those who are struggling day to day."

    The legislation itself requires the President "to develop and implement a comprehensive strategy to further the United States foreign policy objective of promoting the reduction of global poverty, the elimination of extreme global poverty, and the achievement of the Millennium Development Goal of reducing by one-half the proportion of people worldwide, between 1990 and 2015, who live on less than $1 per day."

    The bill defines the term "Millennium Development Goals" as the goals set out in the United Nations Millennium Declaration, General Assembly Resolution 55/2 (2000).

    The U.N. says that "The commitment to provide 0.7% of gross national product (GNP) as official development assistance was first made 35 years ago in a General Assembly resolution, but it has been reaffirmed repeatedly over the years, including at the 2002 global Financing for Development conference in Monterrey, Mexico. However, in 2004, total aid from the industrialized countries totaled just $78.6 billion-or about 0.25% of their collective GNP."

    In addition to seeking to eradicate poverty, that declaration commits nations to banning "small arms and light weapons" and ratifying a series of treaties, including the International Criminal Court Treaty, the Kyoto Protocol (global warming treaty), the Convention on Biological Diversity, the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women, and the Convention on the Rights of the Child.

    The Millennium Declaration also affirms the U.N. as "the indispensable common house of the entire human family, through which we will seek to realize our universal aspirations for peace, cooperation and development."

    Jeffrey Sachs, who runs the U.N.'s "Millennium Project," says that the U.N. plan to force the U.S. to pay 0.7 percent of GNP in increased foreign aid spending would add $65 billion a year to what the U.S. already spends. Over a 13-year period, from 2002, when the U.N.'s Financing for Development conference was held, to the target year of 2015, when the U.S. is expected to meet the "Millennium Development Goals," this amounts to $845 billion. And the only way to raise that kind of money, Sachs has written, is through a global tax, preferably on carbon-emitting fossil fuels.

    Obama's bill has only six co-sponsors. They are Senators Maria Cantwell, Dianne Feinstein, Richard Lugar, Richard Durbin, Chuck Hagel and Robert Menendez. But it appears that Biden and Obama see passage of this bill as a way to highlight Democratic Party priorities in the Senate.


    The House version (H.R. 1302), sponsored by Rep. Adam Smith (D-Wash.), had only 84 co-sponsors before it was suddenly brought up on the House floor last September 25 and was passed by voice vote. House Republicans were caught off-guard, unaware that the pro-U.N. measure committed the U.S. to spending hundreds of billions of dollars.

    It appears the Senate version is being pushed not only by Biden and Obama, a member of the committee, but Lugar, the ranking Republican member. Lugar has worked with Obama in the past to promote more foreign aid for Russia, supposedly to stem nuclear proliferation, and has become Obama's mentor. Like Biden, Lugar is a globalist. They have both promoted passage of the U.N.'s Law of the Sea Treaty, for example.

    The so-called "Lugar-Obama initiative" was modeled after the Nunn-Lugar program, also known as the Cooperative Threat Reduction (CTR) program, which was designed to eliminate weapons of mass destruction in the former Soviet Union. But one defense analyst, Rich Kelly, noted evidence that "CTR funds have eased the Russian military's budgetary woes, freeing resources for such initiatives as the war in Chechnya and defense modernization." He recommended that Congress "eliminate CTR funding so that it does not finance additional, perhaps more threatening, programs in the former Soviet Union." However, over $6 billion has already been spent on the program.

    Another program modeled on Nunn-Lugar, the Initiatives for Proliferation Prevention (IPP), was recently exposed as having funded nuclear projects in Iran through Russia.

    More foreign aid through passage of the Global Poverty Act was identified as one of the strategic goals of InterAction, the alliance of U.S-based international non-governmental organizations that lobbies for more foreign aid. The group is heavily financed by the U.S. Government, having received $1.4 million from taxpayers in fiscal year 2005 and $1.7 million in 2006. However, InterAction recently issued a report accusing the United States of "falling short on its commitment to rid the world of dire poverty by 2015 under the U.N. Millennium Development Goals..."

    It's not clear what President Bush would do if the bill passes the Senate. The bill itself quotes Bush as declaring that "We fight against poverty because opportunity is a fundamental right to human dignity." Bush's former top aide, Michael J. Gerson, writes in his new book, Heroic Conservatism, that Bush should be remembered as the President who "sponsored the largest percentage increases in foreign assistance since the Marshall Plan..."

    Even these increases, however, will not be enough to satisfy the requirements of the Obama bill. A global tax will clearly be necessary to force American taxpayers to provide the money.

    $845 Billion / 300 Million people = $2,800 for every man, woman and child in the U.S.

     

    Paul

    Master
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jan 16, 2008
    1,554
    36
    Brownsburg
    It mad me so mad, i emailed Senator Lugar about this.

    Dear Senator Lugar,

    I saw that you are a co-sponsor to bill S. 2433 that would have the President develop and implement a comprehensive strategy to further the United States foreign policy objective of promoting the reduction of global poverty, the elimination of extreme global poverty, and the achievement of the Millennium Development Goal of reducing by one-half the proportion of people worldwide, between 1990 and 2015, who live on less than $1 per day.

    I would like to know why you co-sponsored this bill? I highly disagree with this bill and this is why:


    $845 Billion divided by lets say an average of 300 million people in the U.S. equals to $2,800 per person.



    The legislation would commit the U.S. to spending 0.7 percent of gross national product on foreign aid, which amounts to a phenomenal 13-year total of $845 billion over and above what the U.S. already spends.

    • This is outrageous! We do NOT need to be spending this money when we have problems in the United States that need solved.
    In addition to seeking to eradicate poverty, that declaration commits nations to banning "small arms and light weapons" and ratifying a series of treaties, including the International Criminal Court Treaty, the Kyoto Protocol (global warming treaty), the Convention on Biological Diversity, the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women, and the Convention on the Rights of the Child.
    • According to the bill that you co-signed, this would also take away my 2nd Amendment right to bear arms. It is my constitutional right to keep and bear arms and it shall not be infringed.
    • [SIZE=+1]A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the [/SIZE][SIZE=+1]right of the people [/SIZE][SIZE=+1]to keep[/SIZE][SIZE=+1] and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.[/SIZE]
    I do not like this bill and it saddens me that you co-sponsored this bill, and I will remember this when I vote.



    Paul Wayne Lucas
    Pittsboro, IN 46167






    More people should email Senotor Lugar about this and ask why he Co-sponsored this bill.

    If you do email, another thing to add would be:

    the fact that it will diminish US sovereignty and give the UN some very dangerous leverage

    and

    the UN is a corrupt and criminal regime on par with the Hussein family. None of this money will make it into the hands of those nominally intended. We'd be better off just skipping the middle man and just depositing it directly into the various UN administrators' bank accounts.
     

    TraderJack

    Shooter
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Feb 10, 2008
    202
    16
    This is part of the plan by George Soros to strip the US of it's Constitution and be placed under the auspices of the UN - and his other minions.

    Soros is a real bad guy. He nearly brought down England when he made a run on the British pound. He's trying the same tactic here with a few other political twists. He's the guy behind the 527 groups - remember campaign finance reform?

    Many feel that John McCain is a Soros stooge. Some have even called McCain 'The Manchurian Candidate'.
    Who knows what they did to him in the Hanoi Hilton???

    Keep a sharp eye guys.
     

    HoosierShooter

    Plinker
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jan 22, 2008
    27
    1
    Shelby
    Obama and Luger are both douche bags. Luger keeps getting back in on his name, it's way past time for him to go. I am really scared about the possibility of Obama getting the POTUS, that scares the crap out of me!
     

    TraderJack

    Shooter
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Feb 10, 2008
    202
    16
    McCain might be the less of two evils.
    I believe you're absolutely correct!
    I'm afraid we should elect McCain for 2008 and then, find a 'true conservative' for 2012.

    I just don't see any other choice?:dunno:
    But we still need to stay alert and 'hold his feet to the fire'.
     

    BloodEclipse

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Apr 3, 2008
    10,620
    38
    In the trenches for liberty!
    This is what was discussed at the Millennium Forum. The UN is wanting a one world order.
    Our vision
    [FONT=Arial,Helvetica][SIZE=-1]Our vision is of a world that is human-centred and genuinely democratic, where all human beings are full participants and determine their own destinies. In our vision, we are one human family in all our diversity, living on one common homeland and sharing a just, sustainable and peaceful world, guided by the universal principles of democracy, equality, inclusion, voluntarism, non-discrimination and participation by all persons, men and women, young and old, regardless of race, faith, disability, sexual orientation, ethnicity or nationality. It is a world where peace and human security, as envisioned in the principles of the Charter of the United Nations, replace armaments, violent conflict and wars. It is a world where everyone lives in a clean environment with a fair distribution of the earth’s resources. Our vision includes a special role for the dynamism of young people and the experience of the elderly, and reaffirms the universality, indivisibility and interdependence of all human rights — civil, political, economic, social and cultural.[/SIZE]
    [/FONT]

    Poverty is a violation of human rights. With some 1.3 billion people living in extreme poverty, it is the most widespread violation of human rights in the world. Poverty not only exists in the developing countries but is also a dramatic and hidden reality in the industrialized countries. Particularly affected are disadvantaged and under-represented groups — indigenous people, people with disabilities, women, children, youth and the elderly. Hunger and the HIV/AIDS pandemic are also closely related to poverty. Processes of impoverishment inherent in the global economic system are resulting in increasing inequity, social injustice and violence worldwide.
    [FONT=Arial,Helvetica][SIZE=-1]The eradication of poverty has become a matter of urgency. Poverty eradication is not an automatic consequence of economic growth; it requires purposeful action to redistribute wealth and land, to construct a safety net and to provide universal free access to education. We call on our Governments and the United Nations to make poverty eradication a top political priority.[/SIZE]

    [/FONT]
    The United Nations:

    [FONT=Arial,Helvetica][SIZE=-1]1. To act as an independent arbitrator to balance the interest of debtor and creditor nations and to monitor how debt cancellation funds are spent. [/SIZE]

    [FONT=Arial,Helvetica][SIZE=-1]2. To introduce binding codes of conduct for transnational companies and effective tax regulation on the international financial markets, investing this money in programmes for poverty eradication.[/SIZE][/FONT]
    [FONT=Arial,Helvetica][SIZE=-1]3. To immediately establish at the United Nations a global poverty eradication fund, which will ensure that poor people have access to credit, with contributions from Governments, corporations, the World Bank and other sources.[/SIZE][/FONT]
    Didn't we just try that here with absolute failure??
    [FONT=Arial,Helvetica][SIZE=-1]4. To adopt cultural development as the focus theme of one of the remaining years of the International Decade for the Eradication of Poverty (1996-2007).[/SIZE][/FONT]
    [/FONT]


    Governments:

    [FONT=Arial,Helvetica][SIZE=-1]1. To increase substantially the regular and peacekeeping budgets of the United Nations. The United Nations cannot carry out its many urgent tasks without substantially more resources and more staff. This budget could be doubled immediately, to very good effect. United Nations budget problems have had a serious negative effect on peacekeeping. In addition, the budgets of United Nations agencies should be increased to better support their work.[/SIZE]

    [FONT=Arial,Helvetica][SIZE=-1]2. To pay United Nations dues on time, in full and without conditions. United Nations discussion of global taxes and fees have been stifled by the threat of a funding cut-off by a single Member State. This blackmail must be rejected, and the United Nations must vigorously explore the possibilities of alternate funding from such sources.[/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Arial,Helvetica][SIZE=-1]3. To move towards creation of alternative revenue sources for the United Nations. The United Nations should set up expert groups and begin the necessary intergovernmental negotiations towards establishing alternative revenue sources, which could include fees for the commercial use of the oceans, fees for airplane use of the skies, fees for use of the electromagnetic spectrum, fees on foreign exchange transactions (i.e., the Tobin Tax) and a tax on the carbon content of fuels.[/SIZE][/FONT]
    [/FONT]Entire document here: Millennium Forum Declaration

    There is so much more in this. I think this is in line with what Obama and Lugar want.
     
    Last edited:

    VN Vet

    Master
    Rating - 100%
    8   0   0
    Aug 26, 2008
    2,781
    48
    Indianapolis
    $845 Billion divided by lets say an average of 300 million people in the U.S. equals to $2,800 per person.

    Do you think anyone in Washingto DC has the smarts to check the math?
     

    Jack Ryan

    Shooter
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Nov 2, 2008
    5,864
    36
    $845 Billion divided by lets say an average of 300 million people in the U.S. equals to $2,800 per person.

    Do you think anyone in Washingto DC has the smarts to check the math?

    The tax payer has bottomless pockets. You can just tax them all you want. They'll work harder, work more over time, get a second job. In fact the more you tax them the better, when people get second jobs it means we are creating jobs in the state.
     

    Dogman

    Master
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    May 5, 2008
    4,100
    38
    Hamilton County
    And yet we have people here in America that can barely afford to feed their children and put shoes on their feet. JMO I've never understood why we have to save the rest of the world.
     

    rjwin1967

    Plinker
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Aug 2, 2008
    81
    6
    Lugar is nothing but a RHINO. He may as well just get it over with and call himself a democrat. He voted for the AWB and everything that went with it.
     
    Top Bottom