It is sad to see debunked stuff here. It insults OEN peeps.

Crafting false claims and misrepresentations about Obama, is the preoccupation of hateful FUXNews and hate-filled Rash Lamebrain, (whose seditious insurrection invective aims to float Hillary to the top of a pool of 'Chaos Op' he causes), and such massmind broadcasted sources are worse than unnewsworthy -- they are anti-News.

Fox News' MacCallum allowed GOP strategist to falsely claim Obama is "pushing for this global tax that would require America to pay tax to the U.N."

As Media Matters documented, the bill would establish no specific funding source; it would not commit the United States to any targeted level of spending.

 

Quoting Kincaid, Limbaugh falsely asserted Obama bill "would commit the United States to spending 0.7 percent of GDP on foreign aid"

On the February 14 edition of his nationally syndicated radio show, Rush Limbaugh read a portion of a February 12 column by Cliff Kincaid, editor and writer at the right-wing "watchdog of the news media" organization Accuracy in Media, in which Kincaid falsely asserted that the Global Poverty Act, sponsored by Sen. Barack Obama, "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." Limbaugh also read Kincaid's false statement that the bill "could result in the imposition of a global tax on the United States."

In fact, the bill does not impose a tax on the United States or allow any other body to impose a tax. In his column, Kincaid further falsely asserted that the legislation "makes levels of U.S. foreign aid spending subservient to the dictates of the United Nations."

In fact, while the Global Poverty Act would proclaim that "[i]t is the policy of the United States to promote the reduction of global poverty, the elimination of extreme global poverty, and the achievement of the Millennium Development Goal ....

In fact, the Global Poverty Act, while noting several Millennium Project goals and declaring that the goal of reducing global poverty by 2015 "is the policy of the United States," does not address the recommendation of spending 0.7 percent of GNP on foreign aid to achieve the Millennium Project goals. According to the Millennium Project website, the 0.7 percent of GNP recommendation "was first made 35 years ago in a General Assembly resolution." The Global Poverty Act directs the president, acting through the secretary of state, to develop a strategy to meet the goal of reducing poverty. It also states that strategy "should include" among its components "[i]mproving the effectiveness of development assistance and making available additional overall United States assistance levels as appropriate," but it does not require that foreign aid be increased or mandate a funding level for foreign assistance.

All there is to know of what FUXNews and Lamebrain says, skipping the piercing eardrum ache of listening to their lies and agitation-propaganda -- and, ya' know, Lamebrain went stone-dumb deaf having his oxycontin orgy in his own headphones, and now suffers a cochlear implant in his waning demise -- is to read all about the fascist liars flap-traps at Media Matters for America, daily.

by meremark (1 articles, 3 quicklinks, 23 diaries, 423 comments) on Sunday, May 11, 2008 at 10:56:56 AM
 

sad piece of commentary

Since when do OpEd writers get their information from FOX? 

by Helen (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 17 comments) on Sunday, May 11, 2008 at 12:03:24 PM
 

Information not from FOX News

I didn’t get any information from FOX News.  I researched the legal citations mentioned within the bill itself. 

by Susan Allen (16 articles, 0 quicklinks, 3 diaries, 19 comments) on Monday, May 12, 2008 at 3:54:24 PM
 

All three candidates are Globalists

Look, if we want to hold on to our national sovereignty, it's time we looked beyond the bait and switch staged show these three stooges are putting on for us.  Evidence reveals McCain, Clinton and Obama are Globalists.  All three are guilty of treason for voting to fund murder of the innocent in the war in Iraq, (Iraq didn't invade the U.S.) and expectedly all three are related to European royalty or U.S. "royalty" here in the U.S.    Check it out.  Obama is said to descend from the Duchess of Windsor.  Reporters claim Bill Clinton's Jay Rockefeller's son and McCain's people state McCain is descended from Robert the Bruce. 

 It's all in the family -> nepotism.

A spokesman for McCain said last night: "The ancestry claim is based upon a genealogical study the McCain family had in their possession, which traced the McCain family roots back to Robert the Bruce." http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/mar/21/johnmccain.uselections2008

 

by Susan Allen (16 articles, 0 quicklinks, 3 diaries, 19 comments) on Sunday, May 11, 2008 at 10:13:58 PM
 

Central Bank Counterfeiters behind Global Tax

UN PUSHES FOR GLOBAL TAXES

INTERNATIONALIST SCHEME PROPOSED BY KOFI ANNAN

http://www.americanfreepress.net/html/global_taxes.html

 

Ron Paul on latest UN Global Tax Scheme

A dangerous precedent would be set, however: the idea that the UN possesses legitimate taxing authority to fund its operations.

The latest UN tax scheme was revealed at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, in January. At this conference of the world’s financial elite, the United Nations Development Program (UNDP) unveiled a UN plan to take $7 trillion from developed nations for use by the UN to save the rest of the world from all of its problems.The United Nations remains determined to rob from wealthy countries and, after taking a big cut for itself, send what’s left to the poor countries. Of course, most of this money will go to the very dictators whose reckless policies have impoverished their citizens. …

The UN global tax plan also resurrects the long-held dream of the “Tobin Tax,” and doubles the targeted income from such a tax to a whopping $3 trillion.

The “Tobin tax,” named after the Yale professor who proposed it, would be imposed on all worldwide currency transactions. Such a tax could prove quite lucrative for the UN, given the vast amount of currency that trades hands at certain times.

… I have been fighting continuously against these UN efforts to pick your pocket. … I successfully amended the Foreign Operations Appropriations Act … to prohibit … funds ..to develop … . taxation or fees … to raise revenue for the UN

I also introduced H.R. 1017 in the current Congress, which would permanently prohibit United States contributions to the United Nations if that organization develops, implements or publicizes any proposal to tax Americans.

… my preference is that the United States end its participation in the corrupt UN entirely, and I introduce H.R. 1146 in every Congress to do just that.

But until my colleagues are willing to take this important step, I will continue to offer measures like my amendment last year to help protect your hard-earned money from the greedy hands of the globalist United Nations.

by Susan Allen (16 articles, 0 quicklinks, 3 diaries, 19 comments) on Monday, May 12, 2008 at 5:14:38 PM
 

What do we spend our money on?

Has Ms Allen complained about paying for the war in Iraq, the millions spent on mercenaries in the Middle East and on an enormous embassy-fort in Bagdhad? If less than 1% of our GNP is such a monstrous amount of money to spend on helping starving and dying human beings, well let's not. Let's give it to Halliburton, the Pentagon, the pharma's, agribusiness, the Saudis, Ms Allen will think it money well-spent.

by Bryna Hellmann (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 1 comments) on Sunday, May 11, 2008 at 12:50:00 PM
 

Look at the Big Picture

If members of Congress are so "proud" of this bill, why was it voted on by voice vote, not roll call?  Make no mistake about it.  This bill seeks to subvert the constituted government of the U.S. to the U.N.   The goal is Internationalist Monopoly on all Governments.  

by Susan Allen (16 articles, 0 quicklinks, 3 diaries, 19 comments) on Sunday, May 11, 2008 at 6:28:05 PM
 

International control on all nationalists is not a bad thing

Nationalistic hubris, which fosters nationalistic SupremeRacism against other nationalistics, that is a bad thing. Your country and people are NOT better persons than any other country and people.

World social conscience is the counterweight of powermad autocrats. Thank Evolution for the internet.

International control, since it regards and governs the only planet and 'international ultimate' that we, humankind, have, then of course it is a monopoly.

Monopoly is not the same as predatory. Monopoly business gives 'monopoly' a bad name, yet there are ways granted monopoly license with public oversight -- a Post Office, or broadcast media facilities, for examples -- can be done right.

Let there be no 'second' United Nations. Let all nationalistical-obsessed powercrazies obey this one.

 

by meremark (1 articles, 3 quicklinks, 23 diaries, 423 comments) on Sunday, May 11, 2008 at 8:24:47 PM
 

Obama: Globalist

The Internationalists are rolling on the floor with laughter at us because they think we’re too dumb to see through their staged show.  Rothschild and Rockefeller created Communism as a cover for them to create a dictatorship in Russia.  They sought and gained total ownership of all property (monopoly) and took total control of Russia’s people.  Communism is a carrot to lure idealistic, trusting people into accepting a non-representative.  Think about it.  The “People” didn’t run Russia after the Communists took over, and China doesn’t have a representative government now.   Consider, Obama was probably set up to submit this bill, because the Internationalists thought people would believe Obama, being African American, would truly be interested in helping the poor.  Don’t bet on it.  He’s said to be descended from the Duchess of Windsor.  Consider hidden nepotism is going on behind the scenes.    If Obama checked out as a dedicated public servant, I would vote for him.   An African American in our town advised our peace group not to vote for Obama.   He advised us to vote for Cindy McKinney.  I voted for her in the Primary by write in.  She’s recommended by a lot of activists groups who do their homework.  She does check out as a dedicated public servant.  If she makes it on the ballot this November, I’m voting for her. 

by Susan Allen (16 articles, 0 quicklinks, 3 diaries, 19 comments) on Sunday, May 11, 2008 at 11:01:17 PM
 

Lotsa 'yes'

Spot-on about Rothschild and Rockefeller.

However, their formulation of communal- and social-interest governance, and the Soviet and Sino formulations cited, are inconsiderate.  Particularly, socialistic economics in autocratic dictatorial administration is still a dictatorship.

Communism is not a dictatorship, socialism is not a dictatorship, capitalism is not a dictatorship.  These are economic and financial inceptions usually defined in 'currency' or 'money' precepts in trade and commerce.

Dictators, (autocrats, monarchs), are a dictatorship. Cultism and iconic ('Christ') worships are similar.

---

And, right on about voting for Cynthia McKinney -- she rocks!, the real deal.

 

by meremark (1 articles, 3 quicklinks, 23 diaries, 423 comments) on Monday, May 12, 2008 at 12:12:37 PM
 

By FOX,

I meant that you left out all of the debunked items in the post above me, which you never did answer.  OpEd definitely needs to get some quality writers who research their arguments better.  This isn't the Susan Allen married to former Senator George Allen, is it?

by Helen (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 17 comments) on Tuesday, May 13, 2008 at 12:55:20 PM