- Thread starter
- #41
I see it everyday. One of the things I do is get volunteers for a large charity at events. When an event is in the farm belt I barely need to ask for a hundred volunteers. When the same event moves to leftist LA it's like pulling teeth.Millions of Americans volunteer a majority of their time helping those in need. But their names aren't Clinton.If she'd volunteered on regular basis, it probably wouldn't be a big deal.
I wouldn't be surprised if she volunteered just for an award that was probably created for sheer purpose of giving it to Chelsea.
And studies show most of 'em are conservative.
![]()
From the book pictured above:
1. Brooks finds that households with a conservative at the helm gave an average of 30 percent more money to charity in 2000 than liberal households (a difference of $1,600 to $1,227). The difference isn't explained by income differential—in fact, liberal households make about 6 percent more per year.
2. Poor, rich, and middle class conservatives all gave more than their liberal counterparts. ... "People who do not value freedom and opportunity simply don't value individual solutions to social problems very much. It creates a culture of not giving."
3. In 2004, self-described liberals younger than thirty belonged to one-third fewer organizations in their communities than young conservatives. In 2002, they were 12 percent less likely to give money to charities, and one-third less likely to give blood." Liberals, he says, give less than conservatives because of religion, attitudes about government, structure of families, and earned income.