If you ever want to infuriate a Democrat, mention that you could never see yourself as a Democrat because you care too much about the poor, and say it in such a way as to imply that it’s just understood that Democrats hate the poor. The more casually you say it the better. Guaranteed hilarity will follow.
And when the breathless and hysterical objections come — and they will — ask your target to defend this:
Recently, evil corporate giant Walmart (that’s a quadruple redundancy to liberals), was issued a cease and desist letter signed by a majority of New York City’s council members, all Democrats, demanding an end to Walmart’s patently pernicious practice of donating large sums of money to charitable causes in New York City. Of the $3 million in despicable donations that Walmart has recently given, some of it went to distribute groceries to low-income residents, and $1 million went to the New York Women’s Foundation, which in turn funds anti-violence and safety programs for women, HIV/AIDS testing and services, and something about reproductive sexuality “within a social justice context,” whatever that means.
To make matters worse, Walmart’s eponymous Walton family nefariously donated $16 million to NYC charter schools founded by Eva Moskowitz, so that parents of poor black children can have an alternative to the pathetic NYC school system, where only 65% of kids graduate, and of those, only 38% of graduates are considered “college ready.” (38/65 comes out to 25% of all students leaving school college ready, for all you Rutgers professors trying to do the math at home). These donations were especially egregious, because the success of Moskowitz’s methods and her schools disprove liberals’ casually racist notion that union controlled public schools in minority districts fail because they’re replete with poor black and Hispanic children who are either outright incapable of learning, or highly unlikely to do so without overpaid (read: unionized) teachers and administrators.
Thankfully, the Democrat City Council members were there to stand up to this corporate reverse-pillaging, heroically telling Walmart to “Stop spending your dangerous dollars in our city.” City Council Speaker Melissa Mark-Viverito used stronger language, calling the donations “toxic money.”
Following suit, many liberals are now desperately trying to save young black kids from receiving millions of dollars in scholarship money to attend colleges. Just this past month, the United Negro College Fund (UNCF) was thrilled to receive a $25 million donation for the purpose of “broadening educational opportunities so that aspiring African American students can better understand how entrepreneurship, economics, and innovation contribute to well-being for individuals, communities, and society.”
Not so fast!
As it turns out, the UNCF was concealing a dirty little secret. Hidden deep within the first sentence of the UNCF’s press release one finds the identity of the donor: Koch Industries, Inc., and the Charles Koch Foundation. Koch Industries is owned and operated by the evil Charles and David Koch, who insist on employing 60,000 Americans to work for them, even though the brothers are already worth a combined $70 billion, and do not need to make more money. In fact, David is thought to be the wealthiest resident of New York City. And what’s even more repugnant than that, is that the Koch brothers are libertarian conservatives who have been known to support free market causes, and, in addition to the hundreds of millions of dollars they have donated for medical research and the arts, they have also given money to groups sympathetic to the Tea Party!
Those sick bastards!
As you can imagine, liberals were quick to express outrage that the UNCF would accept money from such a scandalous source. Twitter saw such comments as:
“#UNCF Literally Sells Their ‘Souls To The Devil’ Accepting Checks From The #KochBrothers W/Out Knowing Their Evil History. Craziness.”
“#Koch donation to @UNCF tells children everywhere that money is first and integrity is unnecessary. Sends the wrong damn message. Period.”
“Why are you personally in favor of UNCF accepting the money? Just curious”
“does the accepting of the $$ put you in their pocket as their puppet?”
“I do not believe you should accept the money from the Koch Brothers unless you’re prepared to lie in bed with them.”
“They bankroll Tea Party & Conservative politicians who do not speak up or stand up for our interests.”
“[UNCF] needs to research koch bros and see how systematically that are buying America’s politicians thus America”
Heck, had I known that a conservative donating to the UNCF would cause so much angst among liberals, I’d have done it years ago!
Of course, nobody is demanding that the NAACP give back the money that racist LA Clippers owner Donald Sterling donated, because after all, he’s a long-time supporter of Democrats. But conservatives try to help black people and it’s treated like the money came from a drug dealing child pornography ring.
The irony is that none of these liberals would have issue with taking more of Walmart’s or the Koch’s money coercively through taxation. Liberals want the money alright, they just want the pleasure of taking it by force! We’re constantly being told, to the point of nausea, that Walmart should be legally forced to pay its employees more, and how rich one-percenter s.o.b.’s like the Koch’s don’t pay enough in taxes (even though the top 1% of taxpayers pay more than the bottom 95% combined!). But a voluntary donation? Well, that’s unforgivably offensive for a couple of reasons.
First, liberals hate private initiative, because it disproves the very thesis of liberalism, which is that people are incapable of doing things for themselves, and therefore need government to make decisions for them. Although, when it comes to liberals donating to charities, they may have a point, as study after study has shown that liberals are especially parsimonious as compared to conservatives, and what little money they do give tends to go to museums and the arts, rather than to poor people who actually need the money. This penuriousness is especially true of our Commander in Chief and his Vice President, (Obama gave less than 2% of his income to charity before becoming a US Senator; Biden, to this day, gives about $369 per year to charity) despite their professed compassion for the poor. Perhaps it is not surprising then that Obama the Altruist also proposed to place a limit on charitable donations, saying such would raise hundreds of billions of dollars for the government. And if the government benefits, who cares that it’s at the expense of institutions set up to help the poor?
Secondly, because liberals can never defend their ideas, their only rhetorical weapon is to demonize their opponents. So it is particularly frustrating to them and their efforts when their opponents refuse to act like demons. The logic follows then that they have to defend the poor from private charity because the poor might actually be grateful to the people who made the donations in the first place. And we can’t have that. Sure, the poor might suffer by losing all that money, but in the long run, liking conservatives is more detrimental to the poor than starvation.
And liberals have no compunction about this because, after all, the Left isn’t about raising people up, it’s about keeping people down so that they can be exploited for political gain. So they shrug their shoulders and say “Let them eat cake,” or better yet, nothing.
 To be candid, figuring out exactly what the Federation does was something of a challenge, as the “mission statement” on its website was little more than a hodgepodge of loosely related liberal buzzwords strung together in sentence form. In the first paragraph alone there were no less than eleven such buzzwords and phrases: “force for change,” “cross-cultural,” “alliance,” “catalyzing,” “leveraging,” “sustained,” “economic security,” “justice,” “mobilize,” “equitable,” and “just.” I still don’t know what thought they were trying to convey, and just about the entire website reads like that. It’s like whoever wrote it learned how to write by reading nothing other than college admissions catalogues, graduate policy papers, and Planned Parenthood pamphlets.