Obama Gave Only 1% Of Income To Charity
Bloomberg:
Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama and his wife Michelle gave $10,772 of the $1.2 million they earned from 2000 through 2004 to charities, or less than 1 percent, according to tax returns for those years released today by his campaign.
The Obamas increased the amount they gave to charity when their income rose in 2005 and 2006 after the Illinois senator published a bestselling book. The $137,622 they gave over those two years amounted to more than 5 percent of their $2.6 million income.
Read the whole story: Bloomberg
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Tithing Romney gave millions to church
Given Mitt Romney has yet to publicly disclose his full tax returns (he says he might in April), it’s not exactly known what his charitable donations have been. But a new report by ABC says his family charity, the Tyler Foundation, gave $600,000 to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in 2009.
That’s some heavy tithing.
And if that’s 10 percent (the suggested giving amount in the Christian Bible) of Romney’s income for 2009, he made $6 million that year.
In the past give years, Romney’s charity has donated a total $4 million to the church, according to the report.
http://www.theblaze.com/blog/2012/01/18/tithing-romney-gave-millions-to-church/
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Most liberals don't like to give their own money....they like to give other peoples money...and not for charity either...for polical gain and power under the guise of helping the poor.
SEC It is a major tenet of Romney's church that they give a tenth of their increase to the service of God.
GoldenPig2012 So, the Obamas gave more as their income increased. Romney's "charity" is still a mystery. Well, damn the Obamas, damn them for giving more as they had more to give. Gee whiz! Liberals do give their money, I do, every year, and I make less than $30,000 a year. It isn't a guise, helping the poor, it's a need and a calling to give to those who have less than me, and I don't have much. So, suck it up.
Brn2bfreetaxed2death It isn't a guise, helping the poor, it's a need and a calling to give to those who have less than me, and I don't have much.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
God bless you for giving...especially when you don't have much.
I still think that the damn liberals don't walk the walk and talk the talk...
GoldenPig2012 Stereotyping is never attractive. Thanks for the blessing, Lord knows I need it, but, liberals are like republicans in the sense we are individuals and don't always conform to the overall belief of who we are. Perhaps, republicans and their ilk might want to consider that before alienating those of us who don't adhere to "party lines', but humanity.
alwander What don't you understand about percentage? I suspicion you love Biden's widows mite more.
tommarg Dear Goldenpig2012
You state that "stereotyping is never attractive", then you use the term " republicans and their ilk". Whao! Humanity is precious in the eyes of God. Yet, most democrates(liberals) support and vote for the murder of innocence(abortion)! God help us!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
GoldenPig2012 First, I suppose I forgot to add the caveat: I'm as human as the next and tend to lump certain peoples together when they show no ability or will to separate themselves, yep, I'm human. Next, yes, life is precious to God and to us humans, also. But, Republicans announce, seemingly, unilaterally that abortion and even contraception should be illegal, sigh. So, who will pay for prenatal care, the child itself until majority when conceived by accident. And, please don't talk to me about "accidents shouldn't happen", well, duh, the reality is, they do. So, then what? A country of increasingly unwanted, illiterate, "system" raised people with a HUGE chip on their shoulder? Think about it.
mrmacq who the frig cares?
why would you figure
the obamas giving of personal monies
as opposed to the romneys family charity, ----"the Tyler Foundation" and what the FOUNDATION gives
would even compare?
you cant read can you?
"it’s not exactly known what his charitable donations have been."
however the FOUNDATION that romney's family believes is a good charity gave oh so much more than the obamas
give that head a shake dude
Brn2bfreetaxed2death Here's some food for thought...
Obama gives only 1% and Romney is part of top 1% who pay for:
The top 1 percent of taxpayers paid 40.42 percent of federal income taxes ... 55% of all taxes and the top 10% ($100k+) pays 70% of all taxes.
I would say lot of that goes to welfare and food stamps...eh comrade?
mrmacq what are you going on about now?
have you even got the right thread?
rhrebel Oh you know him mac...gotta print shit wherever he can,
Brn2bfreetaxed2death I try to print the shit on usapolitics more than less....so that I can slap you around once or twice....(figuratively speaking)
jillsthoughts Romney paid 15% in taxes in 2011.
What did you pay, Brn?
GoldenPig2012 But Romney didn't, about 15% is his rate. No, I fear the "middle class" pays for the bulk of food stamps, medicaid, medicare, social security and every other safety net held out for those of us who seem always to be on tenuous ground.
Grockizback I know you don't care Mrmacq, but that is besides the point. I don't see how you could be impartial, since giving tithes is a joke to you anyway.
mrmacq another one that cant frickin read
Grockizback What are you going on about now- can't read what?
mrmacq theres a difference between what romney gives and what his family's favorite charity gives
yet heres herr brn trying to compare what the charity gives as being way more than what the obamas gave
hello?
Grockizback But Mitt Romney did give a lot of money to his church- I have to find the article I saw on it, but I will post it in the thread when I do.
mrmacq the point being
that herr brn through re posting this crap
is purposely disseminating lies
told by some right wing rag
and guess what
a lot of really dumb repulsive leaning individuals
will take it as truth
Grockizback But the truth really is- Mitt Romney gave more to his church percent wise and numbers wise than Obama did--- 1%----- Obama is robbing America and God!
mrmacq although it matters not
in the land that prides itself as distancing religion from state...
where are you getting your figures from?
Grockizback top of this post's page.
mrmacq read it again dude
ive already pointed out the problems with the post
Grockizback I get it mac- That figure for Mitt Romney does not represent what "he" actually gave, but what his family's favorite chartiy gave to his chruch- which is still more than what Obama did for his own church.
mrmacq well of course its more
can you (singular) compete dollar to dollar with a group of people
should anyone expect you to?
glad to see youve seen the error
beware those republican rags
Grockizback Hell no! Not if I'm giving 1% and they are giving 10%---- the selfish liberal
mrmacq did you miss this part?
"it’s not exactly known what his charitable donations have been"
(speaking on romney)
so how can you say he gave ten percent?
Grockizback Me knowing Mormons- I'd be willing to bet he did- but ofcourse- how do we know something is true even if it is printed- you say they are liars anyway- and EVERYONE knows not to trust any of the liberal when they are talking.
mrmacq well congrats dude
youve found a non liberal non republican in me
(canadian remember?)
Grockizback The SEC records, which cover a period from 1997 to 2008, reveal several donations worth millions of dollars of stock in Bain deals to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
Read more on Newsmax.com: In Bain Deals, Romney Gave Stock to Mormon Church
Do You Support Pres. Obama's Re-Election?
mrmacq anyone but that troop they call republican
bunch of lying deceitful swindlers
the lot of them
Grockizback It doesn't matter anyway- Canadians don't vote in Ameria- anyway (off topic) what about Obama shutting down the Canadian pipe line deal- what do you think of that?
mrmacq theres two threads on that
it would be best to put your question there
Grockizback The media seems to be trying to make it look wrong that Romeny gave money to his church, but that's another thing I like about Romney- his running for office has opened more doors to talk about God in the political world. It not just political talk now: it's who is the best Christian (or Mormon) for the job.
mrmacq only in your view dude
not every american believes in gawd
Grockizback But it is a big issue in this election- wanting a "Christian" to be president- so most people must believe that God is an important issue----- got to go buddy---- class tommorow---- pick it up tommorow?
mrmacq nooooooooo
its only important to those repulsives
that a gawd believer be installed
mrmacq and yes have a good night
Brn2bfreetaxed2death Mr. Grockizback, I applaud you in your effort to converse with Mr. Mac-dude...he speaks liberal giberish.
mrmacq uh huh
oh
you mean english
guess what dude
i also understand the written word
so how are you doing on that?
Grockizback I hope you don't mean The Word (scripture) Mr. Mac- only those who have been born again can truly understand scripture.
Grockizback Thanks- I know it is pointless, he has been brainwashed with liberal doctrine.
mrmacq did i not just point out to you
im not a liberal?
why yes
yes i did
right up there
do you even read what you post to?
Brn2bfreetaxed2death Give up Mr. Mac-dude...
I'm not the only one thinks you are a liberal....Because you are embarrassed to be called a liberal then let's go with independent... Would you preffer progressive? It's all the same...
Part of healing is realizing you do have a problem...Are you ready for the 12 step program and kick that liberal in you to the curb...Here, I'll be your sponsor. I can't wait to give your 3 mo chip...of sobriety from liberalism.. It's going to be tough..I'll be there every step of the way...
mrmacq youre the one with the problem dude
are you that provincial?
just because america only has the two party's
you then figure everyone else also only has two
yeah thats some hick thinking
i recall giving you a link that displayed all the canadian political party's
my guess is i wasted my effort
cause you obviously didnt bother perusing it
PS
go fuck yourself
Grockizback I have pointed out to you that I am not a bigot, but it doesn't seem to stop YOU.
mrmacq you dont think youre a bigot
cause you dont understand the meaning of the word
i know im not a liberal
and the FACT that ive never once voted for them
proves that
think of it this way
how can one thats never painted be a painter?
see the difference?
alwander Being Canadian I'm "not a liberal " (?) ha ha. Do you read your own posts ?? Gibberish...
mrmacq let me guess
youre another that believes its an either or situation
in the rest of the world
simply because its that way in yours
another provincial
sure we have a liberal party up here
same as we have a conservative
however we also have a few others
it might also serve you well
to use my actual words
not those youre putting in my mouth
i find repulsives are quite adept at doing that
saves them some thinking
Grockizback Do you support Romeny? Or were you just showing how Obama can't even keep it real with God (seeing as to how he "robbed" God for 9% of what he was supposed to tithe to him)
Malachi 3:8-9:
8Will a man rob God? Yet ye have robbed me. But ye say, Wherein have we robbed thee? In tithes and offerings.
9Ye are cursed with a curse: for ye have robbed me, even this whole nation.
Brn2bfreetaxed2death Mr. GrockI'mgladyou'reback,
I like all the Republican candidates with last being Ron Paul...his anti military stance isn't right with me. I say walk softly ..but carry a big stick. I've been enjoying Newt blasting the liberal media...last night with CNN ...he tore into CNN commentator at the begining of the debate....He is not afraid to go after Obama, calling him 'The foodstamp president'...
Lately the mainstream media has been beating the drum about Romneys rich and all that ...and give the impression that he's that they don't give and that Obama really cares...I wanted to show the hypocracy of how liberals are.
Grockizback Liberals don't even know what the truth is anymore. They believe their own lies.
Pauligan It didn't say how much Obama gave to his church. A person's church and his charities are two different things. The comparison is apples and oranges.
Brn2bfreetaxed2death With the mormans when you give to the church you are giving to charities... that's what I think...but I was wrong once.
davecottrell You need to take a closer look at what charity means...
Brn2bfree davecottrellYou need to take a closer look at what charity means...
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Mr. Dave, I don't understand what you're getting at...can you be more specific?
Delmarva I don't mean to burst your bubble Brn, how do you know that he gave 10% of his income to charity when he hasn't released his income tax records? Can you answer that for me please? I'm confused. Thank you for your time. Oh, and by the way, Rock on!
Brn2bfreetaxed2death Delma, His past tax records show he has given his 10% and I'm sure most mormans are consistant....To help you with your confusion...When Obama loses his job..you will nead charity..
Earlisms I see your point (Brn). It is the right in our face hypocracy that amazes me also. Even though the top 1% pay 40+ % and the top 10% pay 70%. Those that give the least in charity and pay the least in taxes have the gall to claim, they do not pay their fare share.
Now keep in mind, they are also the same self-righteous elites that beleives, they not only have on sort of right to determine what that fare share is, they have been given some sort of moral authority to determine what is a so called "reasonable profit" or how much income is too much, from their high minded perspective.
Brn2bfreetaxed2death Mr. Earl, I wish I could put in light what you said so that the country can see.
'Those that give the least in charity and pay the least in taxes have the gall to claim, they do not pay their fare share'
Can I get your permission to use this.?.. You have such a way of getting to the point in a clean and articulate way.....Thank you.
Earlisms Thank you mr Brn. Feel free to use what ever I pen... It's all about my grand children's future.
Earlisms ps please clean up my spelling and typepos LOL.
Brn2bfreetaxed2death Mr. Earl,
Thank you sir... You're a great American..I too have grandkids... God bless you and your family...
Earlisms Thank you! you too are a graet American,GOD Bless you and yours.
mrmacq holy crap
7686 views
is this an error?
SnoopsMama Obama didn't give me 1% of anything. Neither did Romney for that matter...bahahahahahahaha!
karencitizen can't believe so called news orgs are referencing this post as some kind of fact. See the actual returns and calculate the charity giving for yourself here: http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2012/01/24/us/politics/the-candidates-tax-returns.html
mrmacq excellent link
welcome aboard
it will be nice having another around
that actually deals in facts
FlRESBREATH Brn, this blog lists 9,144 views, BRAVO.
Brn2bfree Something happened with thoughts management I think. It's as if my account was reset to when I first came here to thoughts back in 08. I was Brn2bfree then.......Notice, I am no longer Brn2bfreetaxed2death......All those posts on my history apparently was put into views on the first post that I opened up...
Unavailable This comment has been deleted.
Brn2bfree You sure get around ....good to see you. This is a no holds barred kinda place...can you handle that?
Delmarva Boring!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
wirelessguru1 9223 views! WOW!!!!!!!
sunnyboycj Hey just a few points and you guys can tear me apart and make yourselves feel better by tearing down a complete stranger.
1 If Mr Romney is a temple recommend holding Mormon he is REQUIRED to give 10% of his income to the mormon church as is every member of his family...the mormon law of tithing, a requisite of holding a temple recommend and in order to be considered "in good standing" within that church extends to every individual in the household including the children! So, if we are going to be fair, we need to know what Malia and Sasha's charitable contributions were as well because the number the Obamas gave obviously was for Michele and Barracks contributions only...I have no doubt that Mr Romney's "contributions" were the sum of his family's "required" tithes put together as required by his faith. So please use that measuring stick in your charitable contribution math.
2 Grockizback stated that " Mitt Romney gave more to his church percent wise and numbers wise than Obama did--- 1%----- Obama is robbing America and God!" well I have got to mention that mormon doctrine states that "their church is the TRUE church of jesus christ on this earth" that statement uttered by EVERY member of that religion adnausium is a direct implication that ALL other religions on the planet are NOT true so unfortunately when Grockizback insinuates that "Obama is robbing America and God!", he's inferring that Mr Romney is NOT robbing God which makes Mormon doctrine the word of God and so unless you are a Mormon Grockizback, newsflash, you are in the wrong church. I know I know personal attack but logic is painful! Just needed to throw that out there.
3 If you are going to analyze Mr Obamas charitable contributions from 2000 - 2006 then please also be fair and analyze Mr Romney's contributions from 2000-2006 not 2010 and 2011. Its awful easy to say one pipe is longer than the other when you are using two different rulers to measure them.
4 Last I checked if something is "REQUIRED" and is contingent of you receiving something in return that thing is
a. NOT charitable
b. a payment not a contribution
that would be the case with Mr Romney's tithes to the Mormon church. Those tithes are a requirement for him to enter mormon temples and to be considered "in good standing" with that organization. So based on this fact, 10% or more per year of Mr. Romneys "contributions" to his "favorite charity" cannot be considered "charitable" or "contributions".
Please judge the candidates with all facts in consideration. I haven't picked who I want to represent me yet as the chief executive of my government, but I will be doing my best to judge everyone under those rules. If I am forced to be represented by the person others elected then I demand that they have judged and elected him/her by the same standards. Thank you
mrmacq now what would give you the impression that some might tear into you?
(busily looking for a sarcastic smiley at the moment i'll get back to you once ive found it)
FlRESBREATH As a former employer if given the chance of having to pick a employee from either the Activist group or a Mormon, I would choose the Mormon. Even if I had to train that person because I wind up with a better employee. Howard Hughes choose Mormon employees for his needs.
The POTUS is an employee and I want the best. And today that best is Romney. Obama has never run a company, never, He had a whole 2 years knowledge when hes was forced on us as President. America does not need an activist, it needs some one that understands companys and how they run.
Making Obama President is like Walmart making a cart pusher head of the company.Its the act of an Idiot and nothing more.
mrmacq i believe arseswipe's post was directed at you sunnyboycj
Delmarva All I can say is that Obama is doing a mighty fine job of getting us out of this recession that the Bush regime got us into. All you have to do is ask yourself this, "Do you want to go back to the same administration that got us into this mess. The answer is obvious - Hell no!
jillsthoughts Bush ran every company he ever owned into bankruptcy, and then he did the same thing to our country. Romney's business practices are less than ethical and do not serve anyone but the elite, so I fail to see how he will be an asset to this country. Obama, meanwhile, has worked diligently to try to build a relationship with the republicans who made it well known that their only goal was to make him a one-term president. Because the republicans cannot get past that goal, they have been ineffective in running the House and have been lame in the Senate.
I don't agree with Obama's compromising with the do-nothing republicans on issues like health care, but from his background as a community organizer, it would make sense to expect that from him.
jillsthoughts Just saying, a person's history will foretell what to expect of them as president. And looking at ALL the candidates running for the republican party, they have some serious problems suggesting any of these guys can be BETTER than Obama. Maybe the same, and probably worse, but certainly not BETTER.
FlRESBREATH Your a little shy on history, you see IKE had the last balanced budget. JFK got us in to the war in Vietnam and started some social programs. LBJ got them passed but had no money to pay for them. So he moved SS from its trust fund to the general fund to pay for the programs and the war.
Every president since then has been spending funds we dont have with Obama the leading spender. Clinton did not leave a surplus, read the words careful it says "projected" surplus. Projected is some ones Idea of maybe, not proven.
"Going back to the regime that caused this"............No thank you as that would mean going back to the days southern Democrats were still burning, hanging and beating African Americans. That would mean going back to their Jim Crow laws. That would mean a return to segragation in schools, cafes and hotels. That would put the Democrats back in the fold with George Wallace and the KKK.
That was poor leadership for America then and would be worse now.Going back? Not an option. But to some extent our level of debt is, its whay 15.3 trillion TODAY. The expected debt level of Obamas programs in ten years is 85 trillion dollars. Thats more then the entire world makes today, about 3 times. We need to re-vamp the programs of the 30s and 60s and discard Obamas if we as a nation expect to survive.
Delmarva Clinton did leave Bush a surplus. I read factual material, not comics.
Delmarva For those conservatives who like to twist the facts -
Q: During the Clinton administration was the federal budget balanced? Was the federal deficit erased?
A: Yes to both questions, whether you count Social Security or not.
FULL ANSWER
This chart, based on historical figures from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, shows the total deficit or surplus for each fiscal year from 1990 through 2006. Keep in mind that fiscal years begin Oct. 1, so the first year that can be counted as a Clinton year is fiscal 1994. The appropriations bills for fiscal years 1990 through 1993 were signed by Bill Clinton’s predecessor, George H.W. Bush. Fiscal 2002 is the first for which President George W. Bush signed the appropriations bills, and the first to show the effect of his tax cuts.
Chart will follow.
Delmarva A continuation of the article. For some reason, the chart won't copy, but I have included the link to the whole article.
The Clinton years showed the effects of a large tax increase that Clinton pushed through in his first year, and that Republicans incorrectly claim is the "largest tax increase in history." It fell almost exclusively on upper-income taxpayers. Clinton’s fiscal 1994 budget also contained some spending restraints. An equally if not more powerful influence was the booming economy and huge gains in the stock markets, the so-called dot-com bubble, which brought in hundreds of millions in unanticipated tax revenue from taxes on capital gains and rising salaries.
Clinton’s large budget surpluses also owe much to the Social Security tax on payrolls. Social Security taxes now bring in more than the cost of current benefits, and the "Social Security surplus" makes the total deficit or surplus figures look better than they would if Social Security wasn’t counted. But even if we remove Social Security from the equation, there was a surplus of $1.9 billion in fiscal 1999 and $86.4 billion in fiscal 2000. So any way you count it, the federal budget was balanced and the deficit was erased, if only for a while.
http://factcheck.org/2008/02/the-budget-and-deficit-under-clinton/
FlRESBREATH "Projected" surplus according to the CBO. Central Budget Office.
jillsthoughts Clinton and the budget surplus
President Bill Clinton did not support a constitutional amendment, but in his 1992 campaign he called for balancing the budget through ordinary fiscal policy. He came into office facing a large deficit. Clinton signed into law the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993, which attacked the deficit by raising taxes. Beginning with the 1998 budget year, during his second term, the country ran a yearly budget surplus through 2001.[23]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balanced_budget_amendment
Delmarva Read the article sonny, it says a surplus. Don't try and twist the truth, I know it hurts. You must be new to political blogging. Watch and you'll learn something.
wirelessguru1 10,197 views!!!
IrvingKing .......you need a blogsite ASAP
Temblor Romney gave $2,980,615 to Cesar & $2,983,974 To Charity...
Hmmm interesting, heard someone say that once.