Rep. Harris: Weak Unemployment Report is “Another Sign that the President’s Policies Aren’t Working”

From the office of Congressman Andy Harris:

Rep. Andy Harris Statement on September Unemployment Report

Rep. Andy Harris released the following statement regarding the Department of Labor’s unemployment report for September 2012:

“Today’s weak unemployment report which showed that we created just 114,000 jobs is another sign that the President’s policies aren’t working. When the President passed his nearly trillion dollar stimulus bill in 2009 he promised that the unemployment rate would be around 5.5 percent this month but we are still at a high rate of 7.8 percent. I agree with what Vice President Joe Biden recently said when he stated that the middle class was “buried” over the past four years.”

“That is why the House voted to stop President Obama’s tax hike proposal on small business owners and the middle class, which would destroy over 700,000 jobs. We need the President and the Senate to work with House Republicans instead of continuing to promote job-destroying policies that the American people can no longer afford.”

Comments

  1. Doug says

    How about the report that CEO’s income continues to skyrocket? In todays paper, read it. Why? Because they are shipping American jobs overseas where they pay no benefits, next to nothing wages and have to obey no regulations, just slave labor. That is why job reports have been so dismal, and will continue to get worse. It is largely republican CEO’s who have bought out the formerly American government and made themselves outrageously rich by off-shoring jobs and entire companies overseas.
    Maybe if you blame Obama, enough uninformed voters will put Romney in office and you both can sell out what jobs are left in this country.

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 13 Thumb down 14
  2. Cathy says

    You/been drinking the Kool Aid too long. It’s Obama’s policies that are killing jobs in this country. Businesses don’t know what’s coming down the pike at them with Obamacare and the fiscal cliff.Wonder how all those folks in California like gas prices pushing up toward $5 a gallon? You should get your own house cleaned up in Maryland, but that won’t happen because you have O’Malley and the Democrats running things. The states that have elected Republican governors are doing much better than those run by Democrats. People and businesses are leaving Maryland. Virginia is cleaning your clock, and you liberals are too stupid to know what’s happening to you.

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 11 Thumb down 14
    • Free State defender says

      What about all the issues in PA to clean up. Last time I looked Obama was way ahead there in the polls. You should spend more time dealing with your own state and quit trashing our state.

      Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 7 Thumb down 4
    • says

      Baloney!! I have started several businesses over the past 30 years and my most recent was 3 years ago! Tax rates are much better today than they were in 1980 and unless you are a business that thrives on pollution-causing manufacturing or processing, “regulations” are not as prohibitive as the GOTP would like everyone to believe. STOP listening to the ideologues and the Koch Brothers puppets (like Harris) and start thinking for yourself, doing your own research.

      Regarding Harris…tell me what he has done for the Eastern Shore? Jobs? Money for infrastructure? His big claim to fame in 2 years is to pass a law that reduces tariffs on foreign-made shoes! Yeah…that will help the economy, Andy! It’s time to get rid of “Dr. No” (Harris) and write in “Dr. Yes” (Dr. John LaFerla)…a man who knows the ES and understands what it will take to make a real difference for small business and workers.

      Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 7 Thumb down 5
  3. Bruce O'H. says

    Obama isn’t the biggest problem. He wouldn’t be a problem at all if there weren’t so many uninformed, propaganda believing, voters.

    Those voters that lean Left need to decide whether they want jobs, or do they want to cheer the govt for putting their boot on the throat of the hated rich guy, and his business, that creates those jobs.

    It’s funny, you never hear the Left despising actors or sports figures for making obscene amounts of money. I suppose they don’t realize that sports and entertainment are businesses, too, not to mention the majority of those figures are Democrats. Rich Democrats-Good, rich Republicans-Bad.

    It’s also easy to blanketly hate the “Republican” businessmen that take jobs overseas, like Jeffry Imelt of GE and the recently deceased Steve Jobs. Imelt, a Democrat, is on the Presidents job council, and has relocated whole depts of GE to China WHILE sitting on that council. Steve Jobs was a known Democrat, so he was immune from being publicly excoriated, while in the past and as recently as last week, workers have rioted at his Chinese plants.

    When even such Democrat luminaries as these are fleeing the U.S. business climate, then govt is making that climate hostile.

    I know, too much fact and common sense. I also know it won’t knock down the walls of hate and envy that so many on the Left prefer to live behind.

    Sad…

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 12 Thumb down 9
  4. David A. Porter says

    Good thing Mr Harris runs unopposed, the only thing he has to run against is his own record. Just show up Andy and get your check; that’s all you have to do, and that’s all your constituents want from you.

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 7 Thumb down 14
  5. Arturro Nasney says

    Porter your simplistic bias is showing again. Andy Harris was sent to Congress to assist in stopping ALL tax increases. All of us that voted for him had that mandate in mind. He has done exactly what we asked of him. As your savior Barry has said; “the election is over, get over it”!

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 9 Thumb down 8
    • says

      Arturro…”simplistic” seems to be your by-line, my friend. You and your puppet, Harris, are ideologues, pure and simple. You have one “mandate in mind”, without understanding that problems are never solved with just one limited approach. When will you GOTP folks realize that there is only one way to achieve greatness…COMPROMISE! From the founding fathers, to Lincoln, to FDR, to Kennedy, Nixon, Reagan and yes, even Dubya…anything else is theocracy, plutocracy, monarchy and all the other “acys” and “chys”…except Democracy.

      Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 6 Thumb down 7
      • Bruce O'H. says

        The only problem is, when you say compromise, your side always means WE have to compromise. Somehow, your side is never the ones doing the compromising.
        We’re tired of that. If you like compromise so much, you compromise with us for a change. Otherwise forget it.

        Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 5 Thumb down 6
  6. says

    I certainly hear nothing approaching a “case” coming from you “Bear.” If you’re trolling, fine; if you want to engage in discussion, I’m ready!

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 5 Thumb down 4
    • Bear says

      OK Ron. Where do you think the President and Democrats should have compromised with the Republicans and chose not to? Just what do you believe could have been accomplished and didn’t as a result of the President and Democrats failure to compromise?

      Thumb up 4 Thumb down 3
  7. David A. Porter says

    Pete Sessions: “If they [democrats] do not give us those options or opportunities then we will then become Insurgency … I think Insurgency is a mindset and an attitude that we’re going to have to search for and find ways to get our message out and to be prepared to see things for what they are, rather than trying to do something about them”

    Kevin McCarthy: “We’ve gotta challenge them on every single bill.”

    “Show united and unyielding opposition to the president’s economic policies.”

    Senators: Jim DeMint, Jon Kyl, Tom Coburn, John Ensign, and Bob Corker have:

    - Filibustered more Bills (over 300) than any Congress combined in US History.
    - Voted NO on every single piece of Legislation brought to the Floor including:
    NO on Al Franken’s Anti-Rape Amendment,
    NO on Lilly Ledbetter,
    NO on Fair Pay Act,
    NO on Anti-Outsourcing Bill (2010)

    This is from the party in the House that has two members on the Science Committee that espouse the notion that women’s biological defenses prevent pregnancy from occurring and that the Earth is only 9,000 years old.

    Is this who you are allied with?

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 9 Thumb down 10
    • Bruce O'H. says

      Yes, Mr. Porter, I weighed my options. they broke down to this, would I rather be allied with people of principles and faith, or with anti-American, anti-Constitutionalists, anti-God, pro-perversion of every stripe, anti-morals, pro savage jihadist, communists.

      I chose the former.

      Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 11 Thumb down 9
      • says

        Bruce…I fear terrorists less than I fear people like you! You hide behind religion and the Constitution, but you are contrary to both. Have you even read the Constitution? What about James Madison’s personal notes about the Constitutional Convention in 1787? How dare you assume to be the voice and hand of God, when you espouse hate towards anyone who disagrees with your brand of Americanism. You are nothing more than a racist, bigoted pimple on the ass of ignorance! Your so-called “principles and faith” are so opposed to anything Jesus taught that you are laughable…you are no more than a hate-filled, home-grown terrorist. Luckily, there are enough intelligent, compassionate and critical-thinking Americans who will re-elect our President next month. Do us all a favor and stay in your own little world…in the 19th century!

        Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 11 Thumb down 17
        • Bruce O'H. says

          You can go to Hell.

          I am none of those things…but that you believe that I am…that your ilk are so full of self righteous hate and judgmental surety…that is to be feared.

          No, sir, your Leftist, tyrannical, law breaking govt, will be soundly rejected next month. History has shown what your frame of mind does when in power and we want none of it.

          Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 12 Thumb down 8
          • says

            Your quote, Bruce: “anti-American, anti-Constitutionalists, anti-God, pro-perversion of every stripe, anti-morals, pro savage jihadist, communists.” OK…maybe not racist…although “pro savage jihadist” comes awfully close. As dar as everything else I said…spot on!

            Thumb up 3 Thumb down 4
          • says

            You don’t really believe that the Romney/Ryan theocrat/plutarchs will be elected next month, do you? And as far as “judgmental surety”…I think it was Republicans like Bachmann, Perry and Pat Robertson who said they had a direct line to God. Now, THAT’S judgmental surety, thinking that God has directed you personally, to speak out against gays and judge them. There is the self-righteous hate you speak of.

            Obama by 7, my friend!! Romney can keep his offshore accounts, make billions off the backs of workers, send jobs overseas…after all, this is America, right? But, enough intelligent people can see through his charade of “caring” for the “poor people”…er…I mean, “the lower income people!”

            You see…the Constitution was created by rich, white men. When you talk about “states’ rights”, which is what the Southern states wanted, you’re talking about the right to keep slaves…that was the only way that the Northern states could keep the country together…by giving in to the Southern slaveholders. Great way to start a country, huh?

            Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 5 Thumb down 7
    • Cdev says

      Did you know Ryan and Akin sponsored a bill to decriminalize date rape together?

      Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 8 Thumb down 7
      • The Money Tree says

        Want to provide the bill no? If you’re referring to HR 3 – the intent was to exclude federal monies for abortion and called “No Taxpayer money for Abortion Act” however it did allow for a short list of exceptions to include health of the “mother” and rape. It was signed off by nearly every republican congressperson. I know the temptation is to try to suggest the bill meant something much different and that there’s some friendship between Akin and Ryan – helps feed this nonsensical made up “war on women”. That war doesn’t exist except in the wish-list fantasies of liberals seeking to demogogue an argument in hopes to securing a demographic using false narratives and smears. It assumes that demographic – women, won’t research it themselves…very typical of liberals to insult thier own targeted constituents assuming they’re too ignorant, too lazy, too useless, too incapable of independent thought or the ability to do for themselves without being spoon fed information from the nanny state.

        Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 7 Thumb down 4
        • Cdev says

          The bill which would have defined the term rape in the rape exception of the federal abortion funding bill which was cosponsored in the house by Ryan and Akin. It was pulled and did not pass. Additionally the pair sponsored the Sanctity of Life Act which would have conferred Constitutional Rights on a Zygote!

          Thumb up 3 Thumb down 4
          • The Money Tree says

            And what was the number of that bill? Can you be specific about what piece of legislation your getting that from?

            Thumb up 3 Thumb down 3
          • The Money Tree says

            To the later…again I know it’s to your liking to try to pair Akins and Ryan, but that Sanctity of Human Life Act was co-sponsored by 65 other house members – Akins and Ryan being among a much larger group. You don’t think it’s a bit of a misrepresentation to pretend it was some mutual partnership just between these two? Ryan has made no bones that he is anti-abortion as are most americans now. The people that signed onto the bill knew it had zero chance of actually passing – I think there are some that truly feel abortion is wrong and vote accordingly. That hardly makes Ryan a monster…

            Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 5 Thumb down 3
          • The Money Tree says

            I do find it slightly bemusing and odd that you don’t think a child has any right to be born, but you think Walmart has a right to put their store anywhere they want.

            Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 4 Thumb down 4
          • Cdev says

            Both Bills where referred to by the name of the act.

            Secondly. What study suggests MOST americans are anti-abortion? By the way I noticed you said anti-abortion and not pro-life. It is possible to be pro-choice like myself and still find abortion morally reprehensible. My libertarian view is that it is not the government’s place to legislate morality and medical decisions. Yes one bill had 65 co-sponsors. They still both co-sponsored it. If you co-sponsor it you are more than voting for it.

            I find it slightly bemusing you ASSUMED you knew my personal religious beliefs even though my libertarian beliefs on government tell me that my religious belifs do not need to be forced on someone else!

            Thumb up 1 Thumb down 3
          • The Money Tree says

            One is full of himself/herself aren’t they…nowhere did I assume anything about your religious belief. Yet another example of liberals whom feel free to make it up as they go along. As far as the latest polls on abortion…

            This from an article of May, 2012.

            “PRINCETON, NJ — The 41% of Americans who now identify themselves as “pro-choice” is down from 47% last July and is one percentage point below the previous record low in Gallup trends, recorded in May 2009. Fifty percent now call themselves “pro-life,” one point shy of the record high, also from May 2009.”

            Thumb up 3 Thumb down 2
          • Cdev says

            COuld you link the poll link or an actual article cite? From what I read it is still ruffly unchanged about a 50/50 issue. Again Pro-life and Pro-choice are not exclusively oposites!

            Thumb up 1 Thumb down 3
          • The Money Tree says

            I’d provide the link but it takes forever to load so you can easily find it yourself. It’s a Gallup poll – tracking since 2009 where the percentage of self proclaimed pro-choice fell below pro-life respondents. It’s been widely reported that pro-choice has now become the less popular identify.

            Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1
          • Cdev says

            Luckily popularity has nothing to do with it. It is a matter of personal choice. The Supreme Court ruled in Roe v Wade. One has the choice to make. If we force people into a religious construct they do not believe in than we are no better than Iran. I am a fiscally conservative social libertarian. I am registered in the Republican Party for voting in primaries only because I believe the Harford County Democratic party is light years from fielding serious candidates. Since I know that the decisions with the most impact are made at the local level I feel it behoves me to vote in that primary. If we had Jungle primaries I would register with no party. You also keep substituing Liberal instead of Libertarian. I almost think you do not understand what eaither term really means; or you are trying to paint with a broad brush. Liberals are generally Democrats but not all democrats are liberals. Libertarians belive in less government intrusion and personal responsibility. I part ways with them on the belief in not paying taxes, fiat currency etc.

            Thumb up 1 Thumb down 5
    • B says

      The votes against all four of these bills were to prevent government from extending its reach into the private economy.

      The republicans were voted overwhelmingly into office in 2010 to stop such intrusion.

      Bruce, stay strong. The liberals will continue to attack since their policies are failing so miserably. We will be called racist over and over, and that will probably be one of the nicer names….

      Again Mr. Porter attacks Christians. He is against everything American, yet makes his living off of us. It is ironic that a Conservative is currently saving the ultra liberal state that had to close its base to get rid of him.

      Intelligent, compassionate and critical thinking? 16 trillion in debt and counting. Very Intelligent thinking Ron. All attack, no facts. Again a liberal espouses the virtues of compromise. How can we compromise when your side wants to spend more money we don’t have?

      Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 8 Thumb down 6
      • David A. Porter says

        Don’t be so full of yourself B. When you say I attack Christians, that would be wrong… I instead focus my attention on those that claim to be Christian but behave in very un-Christian like ways. Un-American am I? Also amusing, I work for the Department of Defense, in part, because I believe the soldiers, Marines, sailors and airmen when placed in harm’s way by unthinking self absorbed politicians, should never be hurt by the equipment they use in training, and should always have a technical advantage when forced to go against an adversary for nebulous and sometimes stupid reasons. Your disparaging me for what you see as un-American and Anti-Christian values speaks volumes of your belief in the power of labels. That is the domain of simple minds… of course you will draw your own conclusions regardless of the facts as presented.

        Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
  8. Rivan says

    Mr Pagano explain to me why whenever someone of your ilk disagrees with someone elses beliefs you resort to “racist, bigoted a$$” etc. That is my biggest problem with Liberals their’s is the only answer/oppinion and if you don’t agree with them you refer to them in such a manner. Grow up please…. There is always two sides to an argument and sometimes you back up walk away and AGREE to Disagree……

    Well-loved. Thumb up 11 Thumb down 6
    • says

      Rivan: Here is Bruce’s quote that I was responding to: “anti-American, anti-Constitutionalists, anti-God, pro-perversion of every stripe, anti-morals, pro savage jihadist, communists.” OK…maybe not racist…although “pro savage jihadist” comes awfully close. As far as everything else I said…spot on!

      Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 3 Thumb down 5
      • Presage says

        The racist just have the “Identifiable Inflammatory Racist Word” list that they refer to so they can know what words not to use.

        Let’s be honest they do not abhor racism. They do not decry the existence od racism. AND,…they certainly do not deny being racist out of any moral conviction. They just believe that it is an unpopular negative connotation to be associated with. It doesn’t play well in the company of some. They fear the rejection of those of a broader perspective than their usual provincial background they may be trying to impress.

        If, you listen to premises and what they espouse they are racist and bigoted.

        Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
  9. monster says

    Mr. Pagano, other Democrats, and liberals, Please address the following statements:
    Subject: Only in America

    1. Only in America could a president talk about the ‘greed of the
    rich’ at a $40,000 a plate campaign fund raising event in Hollywood.
    2. Only in America could people claim that the government still
    discriminates against black Americans when we have a black President,
    a black Attorney General, and roughly 18% of the federal workforce is
    black, while just 12% of the population is black.
    3. Only in America could we have had the two people most responsible
    for our tax code, Timothy Geithner, the head of the Treasury
    Department
    and Charles Rangel who once ran the Ways and Means Committee, BOTH
    turn out to be tax cheats – who are in favor of higher taxes on those
    who pay their taxes!.
    4. Only in America can we have terrorists kill people in the name of
    Allah and have the media primarily react by fretting that Muslims
    might be
    “..harmed by the backlash.”
    5. Only in America would we make people who want to legally become
    American citizens wait for years in their home countries and pay tens
    of
    thousands of dollars for the privilege — while we discuss letting
    anyone who sneaks into the country illegally just become American
    citizens.
    6. Only in America could the people who believe in balancing the
    budget and sticking by the country’s Constitution be thought of as
    “extremists.”
    7. Only in America could you need to present a driver’s license to
    cash a check, buy alcohol or board an airplane — but not to vote.
    8. Only in America could people demand the government investigate
    whether oil companies are gouging the public because the price of gas
    went
    up when the return on equity invested in a major U.S. Oil company
    (Marathon Oil) is less than half of a company making tennis shoes
    (Nike).
    And the feds collect four times more in tax than the oil company makes.
    9. Only in America could the government collect more tax dollars from
    its people than any nation in recorded history, and still spend a
    trillion
    dollars more than it collects per year, spending which equals $7
    million PER MINUTE, and still complain that it doesn’t have nearly
    enough money.
    10. Only in America could the rich people, who pay 86% of all income
    taxes, be accused of not paying their “fair share” by people
    who pay little or no taxes
    I would really like your comments on these statements so that I can understand what you really believe.

    Well-loved. Thumb up 16 Thumb down 6
  10. ALEX R says

    Mr Porter,

    Why is Harris running without opposition in Maryland, a state where the Democrats have a strangle hold on all thing political? Easy. The Democrats nominated and vigorously supported a candidate that likes to vote illegally. And she got caught. Oops. Now they are left holding the bag and don’t even have the common sense to apologize to those they purport to lead. But that is the way of the Democratic Party in Maryland. Arrogance and hypocrisy on steroids. I have had it with them and with the Democratic Party nationally. I didn’t leave them, they left me.

    And why will no one respond to Monster? Because what he says is right. And when I read it I am ashamed that I have allowed America to sink to the level it is in today. I have many issues with Republicans but I will work as hard as I can until the day that I die to make sure the Liberal/Democratic influence on this nation is broken. I don’t worship at the altar of compromise for the sake of compromise. It doesn’t interest me. I believe in America but I don’t believe in the Liberal/Democratic view of America and I never will.

    Well-loved. Thumb up 11 Thumb down 4
    • Mike Welsh says

      Alex,

      I agree 100%. Real democracy does not require agreement or even compromise…it requires participation. When we get off our behinds and participate, real democracy steers the course.

      Thumb up 4 Thumb down 1
  11. Monster says

    Since none of the liberal Obama supporters would answer my last post, let me try again. See if you can figure this one out

    Teddy Roosevelt 3
    Others to FDR NONE

    FDR 11 in 16 years
    Truman 5 in 7 years
    Ike 2 in 8 years
    Kennedy 4 in 3 years
    LBJ 4 in 5 years
    Nixon 1 in 6 years
    Ford 3 in 2 years
    Carter 3 in 4 years
    Reagan 5 in 8 years
    Bush 3 in 4 years
    Clinton 15 in 8 years
    George W. Bush 62 in 8 years
    Obama 923 in 3 1/2 years!

    If you don’t get the implications you’re not paying attention. How
    many warnings do you need?

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 4 Thumb down 5
  12. Brianc says

    I truly enjoy the discourse on Dagger. So I have posted the following on other sites but always fail to get a response. I would truly like to hear what both sides say.

    Can you please define MY fair share? Some facts about me to help:
    1) I am married
    2) never had the police, fire, ambulance visit my house
    3) I am almost 45
    4) I save a significant portion of my income for my own future retirement
    5) I have one child now in his senior year at a private school.
    6) I do drive a lot
    7) I am part owner in a company that pays 80% of the healthcare premium for our employees.
    8) I tithe to my church.
    9) I have been paying state and federal income taxes for 25 years and have never been unemployed.
    10) our company employs 5 people who make between 39K and 90K per year. along with other perks.
    11) I have been a homeowner since 1994; hence been paying property tax that whole time.

    Now, What is my fair share?

    Some food for thought: If I go to a grocery store to buy an apple, the grocer tells me the apple costs $0.50. It doesn’t matter whether I have $0.25 or $25000.00 in my pocket. The apple still costs $.50.

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 5 Thumb down 3
    • says

      Hi Brianc: I’m a former attorney, independent businessman and entrepreneur. I assume that you meant your “fair share” of taxes, right? Honestly, it sounds like you’ve done a good job of taking care of your family, your employees, your church/charities and yourself, over the years. And, as far as paying taxes, I would guess from what you said, that you’ve paid what you should fairly pay. I do, however, “hear” a little sarcasm in your writing…am I wrong? Aside from the obvious…that many people, from the very top, to the very bottom, pay what the law requires, I’m not sure what your point is. “Fair share” is certainly relative, based upon where you fall in the income ladder and what your resources are. Since the economic calamity, brought on by the greed of our financial institutions, many of those folks who were paying their “fair share”, are now losing/lost their homes, jobs and savings. They are now the “poor people” referred to by Romney in the debate last week. Some of us were lucky enough or smart enough to have made it through the meltdown without much pain; some, like Romney, made it through the meltdown while still making 10s of millions, much of it in overseas interest and dividends…not taxable in the US. If you’re asking whether I think Mr. Romney has paid his “fair share”, my answer would have to be, “No!”

      Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 3 Thumb down 7
      • Mike Welsh says

        What would be Mr. Romney’s fair share Ron? Would you prefer that he not give money to charity and instead give it to the government for them to distribute? One of the main reasons for his lower effective tax rate was the amount he gave to charity, almost $4,000,000.

        I have money invested in foreign companies, many doing the majority of their business in this country, along with money invested in companies in this country that do a major part of their business in foreign countries. Does that make me a bad person who is doing something underhanded?

        Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 7 Thumb down 4
        • says

          Mike: First, there is the principle of progressivity. To expect people making tens of millions of dollars per year, such as Romney, to merely give the same percentage of their income to charity as people making less than one million dollars, is the equivalent of a flat tax. But, our tax code is progressive for a reason: the more you make, the more of your income is disposable. And so, richer people should give a higher proportion of their income to charity just as they should pay a higher proportion of their income in taxes.

          Given that Romney has already amassed a fortune of of more than $200 million, and his children are grown, he could afford to have given away all of his income in 2011 and every year to come.

          Second, Romney only just seems to have suddenly found his inner philanthropist. As George Zornick reports (quoting Romney’s trustee, Brad Malt), “Over the entire 20-year period period [of 1990-2009, the Romneys gave to charity an average of 13.45 percent of their adjusted gross income.” To be a Mormon in good standing one must donate 10 percent of one’s gross income to the Mormon church. If Romney did so, that means he gave only 3.45 percent of his vast fortune to all other charities.

          I could give you the full breakdown of where Romney’s charitable monies go, but I’m guessing you already know that over 80% of it goes to the Mormon Church, in one way or another. So, to imply that Romney’s contributions help anyone but himself, is overblown, to say the least. Under a Romney charitable Presidency, I’m afraid that the poor and hungry will remain that way!

          Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 2 Thumb down 8
          • Mike Welsh says

            I don’t care where his or your charitable contributions go. If it recognized by the IRS as a legitimate deduction I don’t have a problem.

            Since you have determined that Mr. Romney does not pay his fair share of income tax, please share with us how much tax should he pay?

            Well-loved. Thumb up 6 Thumb down 1
      • AnotherHCPSTeacher says

        Ron, I won’t pretend to speak for brianc, but I think he means that the president’s intention to define who has not paid their fair share will include him by definition. In other words, you seem to agree he has paid his fair share, but the president you admire does not agree.

        I’m not sure what point you are trying to make by bringing legally earned money by Mr. Romney into the discussion… are you suggesting the U.S. government be able to reach into foreign jurisdictions to collect taxes?

        Thumb up 5 Thumb down 2
      • Brianc says

        There was definitely sarcasm in my comments. I simply don’t believe people that have been blessed to have made it through the past “Financial crisis” without that much pain should be “encouraged” by the government to pay more. How many people that are or have been foreclosed on had a gun to their head and were forced to take out that extra home equity loan to build that inground pool or remodel that basement?

        How ’bout scrimping and scrapping and pay that mortgage down so it doesn’t even matter what the real estate property values becomes. IF people would only pay attention to the amortization schedule and see what they really pay for a house-maybe they would pay a couple bucks extra towards their principal, instead of using on other things. “What other things?” one might ask–just take ride through Belair on a Friday night and see the stores and restaurants..

        I wish I was more like Jesus and didn’t mind paying for other peoples mistakes(based on an individuals greed and stupidty-not a corporations); but I am not. I don’t mind helping out with others misfortunes–to me there is a difference.

        Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 6 Thumb down 3
        • says

          Brian…I was hoping from your comments that you wouldn’t be so “black & white” when discussing people’s misfortunes. You imply that only stupid people were injured by the meltdown…again, caused mostly by the greedy mortgage firms and Wall Street banks that packaged the loans together, into poorly-credited CDOs and other mystical investment vehicles.

          I dare say that you see everyone who failed as over-spenders and chipmunks who refused to put anything away for winter. You are missing the millions of families who were hit with job losses, couldn’t afford their mortgage payment anymore, went through their life’s savings and then were forced onto public assistance. As much as we don’t want to think of it, it could be either one of us in those positions. We weren’t “blessed” so much as being prepared because our previous business or employment gave us the wherewithal to be prepared. Most people have lost income over the past 30 years, while prices have continued to rise.

          Your comment about “an individual’s greed and stupidity-not a corporation’s”, presupposes that most of those people hurt in the meltdown were negligent in some way and that if they failed, it was their own fault; that is a very narrow view and one that is not supported by the facts. Making generalizations from a few stereotypes is not how you want people to see you…you shouldn’t see them that way, either.

          Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 3 Thumb down 5
          • Brianc says

            I did differentiate between Mistakes(Ie greedy and stupid) and misfortunes(the people that lost jobs through no fault of their own.) Please re-read. I want and do help the misfortunate.. The Government wants to force me to help the stupid–I will but I only want to do it once. Many don’t learn their life lessons.

            And as for generalizations-it that what you do on your blog concerning the tea party? If I am a member of the tea party-according to you I am a “bigot and racist”. Please clarify that.

            And as an aside concerning these posts–thanks for no name calling, derogatory junk like many on both sides start….

            Well-loved. Thumb up 7 Thumb down 2
        • Cdev says

          Brian consider this. You believe (I infer) that since the fire department has yet to visit your house you should not fund it. What about the person who bought the right amount of house and got laid off and could no longer afford it. Do you blame them or the financial crisis. It might not be their fault but it is their problem. They planned OK just hit an unexpected pitful. Just like one day a random person may light your house on fire and you need the fire, police and ambulance, which you object to paying for!

          Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 4 Thumb down 6
          • Brianc says

            CDEV, That guy you described is misfortunate and I would help him/her. That’s what Ron Pointed out and I addressed.

            Ron, Please disregard my generalization comment-I was thinking of something else–I DID NOT READ TEA PARTY GENERALIZATIONS on your blog. Sorry.

            Well-loved. Thumb up 8 Thumb down 1
    • Cdev says

      I don’t see what some of your points have to do with the question.

      So the Police, Fire or Ambulance have not visited your house. If your house catches on fire do you wish them to come or would you like a system as is the case in parts of Tennesse in which you pay for Fire as a service.

      What does Married have to do with it? Should you get a special benefit since you have paid a tax to the state to recognize your life partner?

      Is age germaine to fair share? Are taxes like auto insurance where you go in certian risk catagories.

      I am glad you are saving for your own retirement, I do to as Social Security will not cut the mustard for anyone by itself!

      What does your child in Private school have to do with fair share of taxes? Are you implying that since you send your kid to private school and CHOOSE not to use the public school you should not pay for it? How nice if we only paid for the services we used at that time. Guess what they would all cost more if that was the case! By extension since you admit to using the roads more than us perhaps you should pay more for maintaining them! It is not relevent.

      You own a company, part of doing buisness is employee compensation and benefits. I bet you pass those costs on to the consumer. If Healthcare goes up you just charge more for the product.

      Do you want a cookie? You give 10% to the church. That is great. Infact our govt. subsidizes that in the form of a tax deduction. We have govt subsidized belief in a tax system to a supreme being! Sorry it has nothing to do with “fair share.”

      OK you have paid for 25 years and always had a job. Alot of unemployed people now once said that and they collect benefits.

      It sounds like your beef is with the progressive tax system which has been inplace in some form since 1862. Perhaps you would like a per capita distribution. Than you can fund your portion of alot of things that Mitt Romney and Barak Obama fund from the even greater than fair share they pay than you!

      Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 5 Thumb down 8
      • Brianc says

        I do have a beef with a progressive complicated tax code. And as usual when I post this-no one can tell me what my fair share is. What else would you like to know?

        Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 7 Thumb down 4
        • Cdev says

          Using our current tax policy your fair share is a function of income after adjusted for certian factors, which I do not believe are all relevent. Although a Per Capita tax would be the govt expendetures for a year/population. I garuntee this method would yield a number higher than what you pay now. That would be “Fair” if you believe “fair” means equal!

          Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 5 Thumb down 7
  13. Monster says

    Brian C., I doubt you sleep well at nightimes worrying about making the payroll each week. The fact that you employ yourself and others and probably are successful, tells me that you made good decisions in your life. Now, the liberals will tell you that you probably make too much and because you are successful should give more money to others who have never made good decisions, or else expect instant gratification. To me, your story symbolizes what we should respect in America.

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 8 Thumb down 4
    • Brianc says

      Thanks and you’re right. Most people don’t reply because they know if they do(at least in public) they will be called to the mat also. As long as someone else pays the bill–right???

      Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 7 Thumb down 3
  14. Monster says

    None of the Democrats-liberals seem to want to address my statements. This makes me sad. Here’s something else to think about:
    Chinese Proverb–The Democrat Way

    Original Chinese Proverb:
    Give a man a fish and he will eat for a day.
    Teach a man to fish and he will eat for a lifetime.

    2012 White House Revision:
    Give a man a welfare check, a free cell phone with unlimited
    free minutes, cash for his clunker, food stamps, Section 8 housing,
    free contraceptives, Medicaid, ninety-nine weeks of unemployment,
    free medicine, and he will vote for Democrats the rest of his life.
    Even after he’s deceased.

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 6 Thumb down 8
    • Cdev says

      Funny some of those programs where developed by Republican Presidents!

      Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 5 Thumb down 5
      • Arturro Nasney says

        Cdev, I would be very interested to know which of the cited programs you think were initiated by a republican president.

        Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 5 Thumb down 5
        • monster says

          So would I, Arturro. As Romney said to Obama during the debatE: “you have a right to the white house and an airplane, but you do not have a right to have your own facts.”

          Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 3 Thumb down 5
        • Cdev says

          99 weeks of unemployment. Since Hover and Bush decided to run the economies in the ground! Folks this is the Depression all over again because we removed the safe gaurds we put in place afterwards and banks did the same things and people did the same things. The difference is Obama is no FDR and neither is Romney.

          Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 5 Thumb down 3
          • Mike Welsh says

            “Obama is no FDR and neither is Romney”.

            Thank God!

            Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 5 Thumb down 4
          • monster says

            Cdev, you call yourself a Libertarian. How can you possibility support Obama and be a libertarian?

            Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 2 Thumb down 6
          • Cdev says

            I can support Obama because he is the President of the United States. I always support the President of the United States while he is President. I will not be voting for him this time around. I will not be voting for Romney either. Currently I think I will be voting for Gary Johnson. I could be persueded to vote for Romney if he actually presented more specifics about his plan for governing. Hermain Cain was far more specific than Romney. If I felt I could trust Romney was the same guy who ran in 2008 but I don’t think he is.

            Thumb up 5 Thumb down 1
          • Arturro Nasney says

            HOOver and Bush had nothing to do with the socialist programs you cited. Every one of those programs came from the soico-marxists, FDR, LBJ and enhanced by the current POS in the people’s house.

            Thumb up 3 Thumb down 4
          • Cdev says

            The unemployment enviornment did come from them. This is flashback to the 30′s over again. This time we did not learn from the mistakes of the 20′s and removed the safties to prevent a reoccurance and we are now paying the piper. All of those programs will initiated under democrat presidents have been expanded by republican presidents and republican members of congress participated in them. This is not a D/R thing.

            Thumb up 4 Thumb down 2
    • Bear says

      The Democrat version of the Chinese Proverb is:

      Give a man a fish and he will eat for a day.
      Teach a man to fish and he will be drinking beer in the boat by 9am, having used his welfare check to buy the beer.

      Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 5 Thumb down 6
    • Q says

      Hey everyone, look! Monster is back to doing what he loves. Being the bigoted fool that he/she is.

      Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 4 Thumb down 9
    • David A. Porter says

      Monster, you and I have disagreed before, but on this point I believe we can agree. Welfare as it is practiced in the United States only enables a class of people that have no ambition to do better. I support drug testing for people on any form of government and state support. I will go one step further: I believe the majority of people on welfare (Whatever form it takes) have some degree of mental illness and require direct intervention through training or counseling. Until you address the root cause of their dependence, you will not end their exploitation of state programs for the underprivileged. There is no value in throwing money at a problem and hoping it will go away, or praying they will leave the rest of us alone.

      Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 8 Thumb down 4
      • lulsecz says

        Monster, you and I have disagreed before, but on this point I believe we can agree. [Government employment] as it is practiced in the United States only enables a class of people that have no ambition to do better. I support drug testing for people on any form of government and state [employment]. I will go one step further: I believe the majority of people on [government employment] (Whatever form it takes) have some degree of mental illness and require direct intervention through training or counseling. Until you address the root cause of their dependence, you will not end their exploitation of state programs for the underprivileged. There is no value in throwing money at a problem and hoping it will go away, or praying they will leave the rest of us alone.

        Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1
      • Presage says

        The rabbit hole is accurately, identifying ALL the variables in the root cause of dependency needing to be addressed. Some who qualify and receive welfare after they have been diagnosed as having a mental illness actually are not mentally ill. That’s not all. It is not the majority. However, it is a significant enough percentage.
        Some who are impoverished are so due to continuous willful indiscretion. That’s not all. It is not the majority. However, it is a significant enough percentage.

        Some are societally conditioned so, much that they have no idea what self determinstion is. They can be encouraged and enabled by a negative subculture. Some circumstances both external and internal have been constituent to creating the negative subculture within races.
        However, they are neither indigenous nor particular to a specific race. The case is to what degree have the variables been applied both past and present and have they helped to solve or exacerbate the problem. I too, support drug testing for people on forms of government and state support in circumstances that could have been caused by indiscrete practices. It is highly unlikely that someone was raped five times to have 5 kids. I do support means testing (even though, it supposedly is) and welfare should be in exchange for work, some degree of education and strictly guided by lifestyle requirements. Education doesn’t necessarily mean post high school but, commensurate with life and academic skills necessary for post high school education.
        Those in authority and power claiming to have an interest in solving the problem and the rest of us on both sides of the equation often exacerbate the problem. Both sides are many times disingenuous. Self interest, demagoguery of the issues and a genuine lack of sincerity in a desire to eradicate the problems from society are the major problems. Programs need to be reviewed, modified, made more efficient and eliminated.

        However, conversations such as the one that took place between Ron Pagano JD, BrianC, and CDEV are a start.

        Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1
  15. monster says

    Q., what you have to say is trite and meaningless. You have never answered any of my questions. Do us a favor, go back to the shadows.

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 5 Thumb down 6
  16. monster says

    Mr. Pagano, what was your hourly rate when you were practicing law? My non-profit organization will pay over $2,500 just to incorporate so that we can get exempt (following very specific laws) from paying taxes. Then, the Board members will lay out more money when they file during tax time, and will have to pay an accountant to make sure it is done correctly. Then, Board members will have to pay to have liability insurance. All of this just to try to help less fortunate people.

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 4 Thumb down 4
    • says

      Monster…are you complaining because lawyers are making money and being successful?? ;) BTW…I’d shop around…$2500 sounds high to me!

      When you ask for an exemption from taxes, you are requesting something that most individuals can’t avoid…paying taxes. So, in return for that, the government, on behalf of everyone, asks you to do those things necessary to keep track of the moneys you receive and handle as a fiduciary. Now, you obviously have a choice…no one is holding your foot over a flame…Board members pay for liability coverage in order to save the non-profit from being sued for everything it has, in the event the BoDs do something improper. Errors and Omissions insurance is a requirement for most BoDs, profit or non-profit.

      Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 4 Thumb down 4
  17. monster says

    Mr. Pagano, No, I am not complaining about anyone who is successful. So, why are you and other liberals? My point, which you chose not to answer, was do lawyers charge an aburd amount for doing something that is on a computer program and takes an LA or paralegal to do. Everyone can be accused of making too much money, now can’t they? I hope you pay your fair share of taxes, whatever that is.

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 4 Thumb down 4
    • says

      monster: I don’t know what type of work you do, but, when I was practicing law, nothing ever went out of my office without me reviewing it and making sure that the client was best-served. As with most every business, there are assistants who help with preparation of documents, however, neither LAs nor Paras have the license or education to provide legal advice and direction. Your assumption that a person can go to a computer program for legal advice is absurd…but, I guess if you don’t care about the work, then it’s fine.

      Computers…like corporations…are not people!! ;)

      Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 5 Thumb down 3
      • Q says

        Let’s be fair, Counselor. Monster probably doesn’t pay much in taxes. I mean really, how much money could there be in cross burnings and lynchings?

        Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 4 Thumb down 7
  18. monster says

    Mr. Pagano, good lawyer trick. Change the emphasis of my message. You are not telling the truth. You have a computer program that has various legal documents for quick preparation. You interview a client to get the specific boiler plate and personal needs, which you charge the client your time. By the time those documents are produced, it could cost thousands of dollars. You give the specific info. to a LA or paralegal who then puts in the document and prints it out. Yes, you had better review it because your neck is on the line. My point that you sidestepped was that you didn’t think you were making too much, now did you? I only hope that you paid your fair share of taxes, whatever that is. You have no idea of my background so don’t patronize me.

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 6 Thumb down 4
  19. frankly speaking says

    there are societal benefits to keeping the poor at some standard of living however meager. the cost of homelessness, higher crime and disorder cost society, govt and business $$$ too. Society needs people at all levels for the economic scale because someone has to do the jobs and we won’t, don’t or can’t do. EITC, other tax credits give the poor a fighting chance and don’t have a greater benefit than your average mortgage tax deduction, IRA’s or capital gain deductions that we the tax payer see as our “hard earned” tax benefits. What is the fair share of taxes? I don’t really know, but they are lower now than they have ever been while we borrow as a nation to fund wars and ever growing military complex and untold number of programs, policies and corporate welfare that doesn’t seem to equate with lower unemployment, upward mobility for the middle class or an equitable distribution of the burdens for the taxpayer. The rich pay less in taxes than they ever have and the poor pay little in income taxes but a high percentage when you take into account social security, state taxes and sales taxes which are not progressive and thus the burden for a family of 4 making 40k a year is much greater than a family of 4 making 80k per year. the rich should pay more because they earn more and in many ways the infrastructure is built for them to enjoy the fruits of their hard earned $$$. Museums, colleges, airports, harbors, transportation hubs and waterways really don’t benefit the poor as much as they benefit those whom get to enjoy them. Yes, we pay for police, emergency services, social services and fire for their use mostly but also to keep the rich, middle class and general public in relative safety that comes from providing a workable society that functions for the greater economic good. The fact that some will never use some of these services really means that you are lucky, prepared or a better planner than most but that doesn’t mean that govt isn’t needed. You may never have to lift an arm to protect your country but you do want someone to do it don’t you?

    Thumb up 4 Thumb down 2
    • B says

      Frank, the top 20 percent already pay 70 percent of federal taxes. Haven’t they already paid for everything you list above? The argument that the rich don’t pay their fair share is class warfare, pure and simple. Your list above did not include a federal government exploding in size, as well as entitlement enrollment.

      Thumb up 3 Thumb down 4
      • lulsecz says

        Despite paying 70% as per CBO numbers the top 20% also had:(from CBO)
        The share of income going to higher-income households rose, while the share going to lower-income households fell.
        The top fifth of the population saw a 10-percentage-point increase in their share of after-tax income.
        Most of that growth went to the top 1 percent of the population.

        All other groups saw their shares decline by 2 to 3 percentage points.

        despite paying 70% the top 20% are taking home more money

        go cry somewhere else

        Thumb up 3 Thumb down 2
        • Bruce O'H. says

          As more members of the lower and middle classes are added to the rolls of the unemployed, then on to welfare, food stamps, disability, etc…the less wealth is generated by and flowing to those sectors of society.

          JOBS, not entitlements, will encourage that flow of prosperity.
          Yet the Left continues to push for more and more people to become “entitlement class” participants.

          So their policies aid and abet the very disparities that you are so compassionate about.

          The Free Market gave America her prosperity, not Socialism. Yet somehow, many want to supplant the known engine of prosperity with a known failure of a system, no matter where it has been tried.

          Makes no sense…

          Thumb up 1 Thumb down 3
          • lulsecz says

            Jobs yes, other than McJobs.
            Jobs are not being created by investing in financial markets that amount to little more than pyramid schemes.
            When the financial outlook does not go beyond the next quarter we will continue to maximize daily profits at the expense of long term growth.
            The prospects of maintained growth decrease with ever more complex and improbable financial derivatives being sold as the next big thing.

            Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
        • B says

          So Lulsec, what you are saying is, that despite their claims, the presidents policies are not working for the middle and lower class. You are the typical entitled liberal who thinks they have the right to other peoples money. I will call you what your are… a thief.

          Thumb up 1 Thumb down 3
          • lulsecz says

            Both sides think they are entitled to other people’s money. The difference is whether they are upfront about it.
            All politicians are thieves.

            Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1
  20. Phil Dirt says

    Ron Pagano JD’s Twitter page tells you all you need to know about his ability to judge character:

    “Retired Attorney & Entrepreneur…a long-time political activist, now committed to retiring Dr. No (Andy Harris) & electing Wendy Rosen to Congress!”

    Vote early and vote often.

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 5 Thumb down 5
  21. Monster says

    Yes, Phil Dirt, we need a guy like Pagano, who won’t answer my question, to tell us what is right and wrong.

    Thumb up 3 Thumb down 2
  22. B says

    Two of my neighbors have been laid off in the past two weeks, from different companies. Several acquaintances have been released as well recently. Benches at the union halls are packed. I don’t know anyone who has actually been hired in months.

    I nominate Barack Obama for another Pulitzer, this time for fiction. The recent unemployment numbers are such a betrayal of trust. I don’t know how any of you can vote for another four years of failure.

    Thumb up 3 Thumb down 4
  23. lulsecz says

    From the Orifice of Congressman Andy Harris:
    I was elected to reverse a trend that has already taken hold and is actually benefitting the community at large. Despite anecdotal reports of layoffs, the economy is improving and my plan is to deny facts and confound voters with disingenuous press releases in hopes of being reelected.

    Thumb up 3 Thumb down 3
    • monster says

      lulsecz, if you want to be humorous, be humorous. If you want to discuss facts, use facts. Your statement does neither.

      Thumb up 0 Thumb down 2