Letter to a supporter of US gov't charity

I was wondering if you could explain the difference between the following:

From each according to his ability, to each according to his need.

George Bush spending MY money on international charity to help people who
"need" it.

Are you worried that George Bush has committed money to other nations before Congress approved the spending, as is Constitutionally required?

Does it bother you that America is so far in debt, yet many continue to insist that since "we are the world's superpower" we have some sort of obligation to help others, as if they've never heard of the Roman, British, Japanese, Ottoman, or Chinese empires who have all fallen by the wayside?

Is there a limit beyond which you will feel that we've spent "too much" helping the Sri Lankan, Maldivian, and Indonesian people? Or are you willing to go along with President Bush sending as much money as he sees fit to the SE Asian muslims of the aforementioned countries?

I have to give you credit, though. At least you've steered clear of calling this what it clearly is, that being wealth redistribution or socialism, instead hiding the truth behind the label "international charity" or "our responsibility" or the superpower argument. Once you admit that socialism is acceptable in some circumstances, then the discussion turns away from whether or not to apply socialism, but instead it becomes when and to what degree should it be applied. The problem I have is that the American economy is in trouble. Our dollar is falling, our manufacturing jobs are disappearing, our lower class jobs are being given to immigrants, and our
schools aren't preparing young people to compete in the global marketplace.

Despite all this, we blindly stick to the notion that we are a superpower and that we shall remain so no matter how irresponsible we handle our finances. Let us suppose that America falls into a depression, who will be responsible for defending, feeding, sheltering, and rescuing the world in
times of need?

If each person who voted for George Bush donated $6, the $350 million would have been met. Add the corporate donations and all other private donations above and beyond the $6/Bush voter and any additional funds that come from a Kerry voter or a non-voter, and America would still easily reach the $1 billion mark.

I think that George Bush is not the Christian he professes to be, because if he were he would have far more respect for my personal property, the labor it took to acquire my property, and he would have much more faith in the American public to answer the call of the victims of the natural disaster.

Sincerely,
Me