The Mother Teresa Standard and how Hillary fails against it
When Mother Teresa visited the White House during Ronald Reagan’s presidency, she pointed out the lavishness of the meal and, if memory serves correctly, she also said how many hungry people the cost of such a meal would feed. When she won the Nobel Peace Prize in 1979, Mother Teresa refused the banquet given to laureates, asking instead that the $192,000 funds be given to the poor of India. Wow, someone who lives what they preach. To turn down all that attention, a wonderful meal, the pomp and circumstance… well, to do that you have to be a truly great person. It is a shame that those pretending to care so much about the poor in the United States don’t have the same dedication and do not measure up to Mother Teresa’s standard. Or maybe it’s not that they lack dedication- as they are truly dedicated to taking YOUR money for their charitable urges - but that they lack the true concern for helping others that they claim they have.
Take this piece, for instance- Clinton spent what can only amount to over $75 per person (I figure there are about 20 meals based on the order placed) for a dinner from a fine steakhouse while in Vegas. If she really cared about “insuring fairness” would she spend over $1,500 for dinner for a handful of her staffers? If you can afford it, fine- but when she advocates stealing money out of my pocket (I’ve never ate a $75 meal before, by the way) to redistribute to somebody else I find that a bit hypocritical. Ask yourself- if she truly cared about the poor rather than her own power and ambition - would she spend that much money for all that food or would she help the poor? You can feed ever one on your staff at McDonalds for about $100 and give the other $1400 to a charitable organization.
Hillary explains how much she cares about the poor while pointing to who she thinks ought to pay for it.
I’m sure all the candidates on both sides are this way; Democrat or Republican. It just goes to show how far removed from reality they all really are. But in Clinton’s case it adds that hypocrisy I noted earlier on top of the wastefulness. If she cares so much, if she wants to “insure fairness,” if she has to “take more from” us for the common good then shouldn’t her crusade start at her own doorstep rather than in my paycheck?
January 26th, 2008 at 1:47 pm
Actually if you have never had a $75 meal then you probably fall directly into the demographic of people that Hillary’s programs would help the most. Of course, it is much easier to simply hate her then think about these pesky issues.
I noticed you like Huckabee. Many commentators have said that Huckabee and Clinton have a large number of program proposals in common … however, Huckabee is a safe white male and Clinton is a scary smart female so it’s much easier for surface thinkers like you to canonize him and demonize her even as they are saying many of the same things.