Romney charitable giving has outpaced Obama’s

posted at 6:31 pm on August 26, 2012 by Howard Portnoy

In a rare moment of candor in 2008, candidate Barack Obama famously let slip his fundamental belief—a tenet of socialism—that “when you spread the wealth around, it’s good for everybody.” In a sense, spreading the wealth around is something that Mitt Romney has experience doing.

Romney’s wealth sharing is not the government-mandated-shakedown variety that Obama promulgates on the campaign trail. Rather, the former Massachusetts governor has freely and generously given to charity. Keith Koffler at White House Dossier writes:

[D]uring a comparable period before Obama and Romney were running for president, Romney’s giving probably was at least ten times Obama’s as a percentage of their incomes, and possibly much more.

Romney has stated that he has long given at least 10 percent of his earnings to his Mormon church. Assuming this is true—and he’d probably have to be classified as a pathological liar if it’s not—the Romneys’ giving has dwarfed that of the Obamas, whose charitable contributions only increased in direct proportion to President Obama’s political activity.

Although Obama deserves some credit for his charitable contributions in recent years—in 2011, he gave 21.8% of his $789,678 adjusted gross income to charity, which actually surpasses Romney’s 19.6%—he has not always “walked the walk,” and the Joe Bidens never did. Biden’s most recent return reveals that gave a paltry 1.5% of his income to charity.

But that percentage is a veritable king’s ransom compared with Obama’s charitable giving as reflected in his earliest available tax returns. In 2000, the Obamas jointly earned $240,505, of which they gave $2,350—or less than 1%—to charity. In 2001, the couple earned even more, reporting an adjusted gross of $272,759, but donated less: They gave away a total $1,470, equivalent to about one half of a percent.

Granted, there is a good deal of speculation in Koffler’s post, signaled by words like probably and phrases like assuming this is true. It is also clear that Romney could put the questions about his largesse to rest once and for all by releasing more tax returns. But Romney is not the candidate preaching economic equality or demanding that the government be empowered to take a pound of flesh (aka fair share) out of the hides of everyone earning over a quarter million dollars. Obama is. And it would be nice to hear him explain his miserly tendencies during years when he was making a very comfortable living.

Related Articles

Follow me on Twitter or join me at Facebook. You can reach me at howard.portnoy@gmail.com or by posting a comment below.

 

This post was promoted from GreenRoom to HotAir.com.
To see the comments on the original post, look here.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Bark believes in PUBLIC not personal charity….

*You* give, he cuts the pie.

harlekwin15 on August 26, 2012 at 6:32 PM

Ah yes but charity given to church rather than state is no charity at all.

abobo on August 26, 2012 at 6:33 PM

Anyone wanna see my shocked face?

This is my shocked face.

=O

Red Cloud on August 26, 2012 at 6:34 PM

Obama thinks that he himself is enough of a gift to the world.

Wethal on August 26, 2012 at 6:34 PM

Ir’s really none of my business what eitrher one gives.

I just don’t want the goverment mandating charitable giving.

davidk on August 26, 2012 at 6:35 PM

Maybe Obama just can’t spell TITHE.

Like OIHO.

profitsbeard on August 26, 2012 at 6:37 PM

Ir’s really none of my business what eitrher one gives.

I just don’t want the goverment mandating charitable giving.

davidk on August 26, 2012 at 6:35 PM

somehow the media is never quite as interested in bark claiming to have paid taxes on real estate he doesn’t own in his tax file as they are in Romney’s “missing” ones….

harlekwin15 on August 26, 2012 at 6:37 PM

It’s not charity when you are using other peoples’ money. i.e., Jugear’s comment about “spreading the wealth around” is really not being charitable, it’s him forcing others to do his bidding.

I have no doubt that Romney has donated at least 10% of his income; that is a Mormon tenet and would simply be a part of his religious life. Now, it would be interesting to see whether Dingy Harry has done the same. I have the feeling that Dingy Harry is as good a Mormon as Teddy Kennedy was a good Catholic.

AZfederalist on August 26, 2012 at 6:43 PM

somehow the media is never quite as interested in bark claiming to have paid taxes on real estate he doesn’t own in his tax file as they are in Romney’s “missing” ones….

harlekwin15 on August 26, 2012 at 6:37 PM

We all know what the lsm is all about, and it is very frustrating.

Not the hypocracy so much, it’s their sop, but the Repub wimps who won’t speak out against this blatant bias.

davidk on August 26, 2012 at 6:44 PM

All Charitable contributions are the gov’ts to give hence the lack of tax exemptions for contributions in bo’s plan. The gov’t is the sugar daddy that you must bow to.

tim c on August 26, 2012 at 6:53 PM

And it would be nice to hear him explain his miserly tendencies during years when he was making a very comfortable living.

He was obviously making his own case — that the rich are not willing to give on their own and therefore must instead be forced to give.

Left unsaid is the fact that Mr. Obama gets to choose the charities for everyone, and gets to fund those charities with money which other, more charitable rich, might have given to their own causes.

unclesmrgol on August 26, 2012 at 6:59 PM

Donks are very generous with other peoples’ money. Their own money not so much. The great humanitarian Billy Jeff Clinton gave a pair of used underwear and took a deduction for them.

jukin3 on August 26, 2012 at 7:04 PM

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA, LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

If this doesn’t brighten your day I don’t know what could?

This new email from Obama begging for money.

Daniel –

When I’m out there talking to voters, we talk about what we’ve done, what we plan to do over the next four years, and why the other guys have dangerous plans to go back to the policies that failed America for almost a decade.

But there is another question that keeps coming up, and you need to know about it: “Why do I see so many more ads for the other guys?”

You don’t need me to tell you that the Romney campaign is outraising us — that billionaire ideologues and corporate interests are piling on tens of millions more in negative ads trashing us, and that all of it means that undecided voters in battleground states like Iowa could be seeing false, misleading, negative attacks at a rate almost twice as often as they hear from us.

Last week, when I was in Iowa, voters told me they were feeling it. The numbers back it up: Our side is getting outspent 2-to-1 on the air there.

But the folks asking me about this don’t want an explanation — they want to know what I’m going to do about it.

And the fact is that solving this problem is up to you.

Close the gap on the air by making a donation of $5 or more now.

You’re getting this email because you know what the stakes are in this election. You know the facts about what we’ve done to prevent a deeper crisis and to start building an economy that works for the middle class.

But for someone who’s not as engaged, these ads may be an important and possibly even primary source of information about the choice in this election.

So it’s a bad situation if 90 percent of them are false, negative attacks on us.

WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH, Mommy they are spending more than us, WAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHH!!

PappyD61 on August 26, 2012 at 7:04 PM

Barry ‘gives’ when the spotlight is on him. Otherwise, forget it.

GarandFan on August 26, 2012 at 7:05 PM

Maybe Mitt could make a charitable donation to the Obama campaign?

Sounds like they need the cash.

BWWWWWHAHAHAHAHAHAHWAHHHAAAA.

PappyD61 on August 26, 2012 at 7:06 PM

Just like with Jobs/Gates, the lefties who will tell you that the only good thing a rich person can do is give their hard-earned money away, Favor the one who doesn’t over the one who does.

TedInATL on August 26, 2012 at 7:08 PM

It’s not like Obama has to pay for housing, food, transportation, utilities, insurance, medical care, etc. So, his charitable giving is still dismal.

Blake on August 26, 2012 at 7:11 PM

When I grow up, I wanna be a jug-eared idiot.

Lanceman on August 26, 2012 at 7:14 PM

Just like with Jobs/Gates, the lefties who will tell you that the only good thing a rich person can do is give their hard-earned money away, Favor the one who doesn’t over the one who does.

TedInATL on August 26, 2012 at 7:08 PM

Why? Does Romney give too much of his money away? And do you look down at Steve Jobs for donating his wealth to charity for lacking a true mastery of capitalism?

It’s a tenant of the Mormon religion that you give 10% or more of your income to the church. Don’t hold it against him.

bayam on August 26, 2012 at 7:15 PM

So lemme get this straight: Or last three ‘rat Presidents have been a bumbling hillbilly, a sociopath and a narcissist.

Nowhere to go but up, I guess.

Lanceman on August 26, 2012 at 7:17 PM

But how does Obama fair in giving somebody else’s money away?

CW on August 26, 2012 at 7:17 PM

*fare

CW on August 26, 2012 at 7:17 PM

CW on August 26, 2012 at 7:17 PM

Your buddy is here braying again.

Lanceman on August 26, 2012 at 7:18 PM

…well this will be a troll free thread…what are they going to talk about?…Timmy G’s generous tax writeoffs?…Generous Joe Biteme?…the underwear and socks BJ gave to charity?…Al Gores clothes he kept growing out of?
Come on in DBear…I read what you said last night…I know you’re lurking!

KOOLAID2 on August 26, 2012 at 7:20 PM

But, but, uhhh, Obamao is much more generous with other peoples money…

Doomsday on August 26, 2012 at 7:20 PM

Your buddy is here braying again.

Lanceman on August 26, 2012 at 7:18 PM

Say -where is the queen of the fallacious argument anyways?

CW on August 26, 2012 at 7:22 PM

What happened to Barack giving all his $Million Peace Prize to charity?

txhsmom on August 26, 2012 at 7:22 PM

But the folks asking me about this don’t want an explanation — they want to know what I’m going to do about it.

And the fact is that solving this problem is up to you.

PappyD61 on August 26, 2012 at 7:04 PM

“Hey, buddy; the bucks all stop here! Got anymore to spare?”

rwenger43 on August 26, 2012 at 7:23 PM

Your buddy is here braying again.

Lanceman on August 26, 2012 at 7:18 PM

…it’s ok!…CW has oats!

KOOLAID2 on August 26, 2012 at 7:24 PM

There was a good article on Mitt and Ann Romney in Parade today. I’m paraphrasing, but the gist of his giving is that they view it as something between them and God. He said its a shame that it has become public from his tax returns and they consider their giving a private matter.

In a funny moment, Ann said she cries with joy when they write the check each month. Mitt saie he sometimes cried too, but for a different reason!

BacaDog on August 26, 2012 at 7:26 PM

What happened to Barack giving all his $Million Peace Prize to charity?

txhsmom on August 26, 2012 at 7:22 PM

…I think it went to the $Million Mooch fund!

KOOLAID2 on August 26, 2012 at 7:28 PM

BacaDog on August 26, 2012 at 7:26 PM

For it to be true charity, it must remain anonymous.

Expecting (and receiving) accolades here on earth does not bring you brownie points on the other side.

Lanceman on August 26, 2012 at 7:29 PM

to Mr. Obama, the word “tithe” means “pay up sucka.”

ted c on August 26, 2012 at 7:29 PM

Although Obama deserves some credit for his charitable contributions in recent years—in 2011, he gave 21.8% of his $789,678 adjusted gross income to charity


*golf clap*

Meanwhile…

Barry’s Half-Bro — Still struggling in a hut in Kenya

Barry’s illegal alien Auntie Z — Still living in govt housing in Boston

red winger on August 26, 2012 at 7:34 PM

Obama had better not get into the charity war with Mitt Romney or he’ll be thoroughly embarassed. In fact, Obama really needs to be careful about a lot of things. Mitt Romney has helped a lot of people over the years and really doesn’t make a big deal of it. Obama would be hard pressed to find many people he’s helped since he just doesn’t seem to be the compassionate type who would go helping anyone. Now, if he can community organize and agitate to help someone, he’s more than willing to do that.

bflat879 on August 26, 2012 at 7:38 PM

bflat879 on August 26, 2012 at 7:38 PM

Don’t worry. I’m certain obama can come up with hundreds, nay thousands of people who’ve had their gas paid for or their mortgage taken care of or kitchens remodeled.

Peggy Joseph, you wonderful moronic dupe!

Lanceman on August 26, 2012 at 7:42 PM

This is racist on it’s face. Afterall just look at how much the marxist has given away with other peoples money.

bgibbs1000 on August 26, 2012 at 7:42 PM

Obama gave Mitt’s money to Solyndra…

Mitt on the other hand…
had no access to Obama’s money.

Electrongod on August 26, 2012 at 7:44 PM

It’s not charity when you are using other peoples’ money. i.e., Jugear’s comment about “spreading the wealth around” is really not being charitable, it’s him forcing others to do his bidding.

[AZfederalist on August 26, 2012 at 6:43 PM]

Ditto.

Dusty on August 26, 2012 at 7:52 PM

Hmmmm…. now where was it that Professor Obama taught? Oh, right–the University of Chicago. Founded thanks to a generous gift of cash from John D. Rockefeller and a generous gift of land from Marshall Field. I wonder if Obama ever thinks about how what they did by founding a world class research university was more important than the government taxing them.

radjah shelduck on August 26, 2012 at 7:54 PM

For it to be true charity, it must remain anonymous.

Expecting (and receiving) accolades here on earth does not bring you brownie points on the other side.

[Lanceman on August 26, 2012 at 7:29 PM]

I don’t agree it must remain anonymous, but there is a danger in expecting more thank thanks by expecting accolades and bragging about it is one of those dangers.

Dusty on August 26, 2012 at 7:58 PM

I don’t agree it must remain anonymous, but there is a danger in expecting more thank thanks by expecting accolades and bragging about it is one of those dangers.

Dusty on August 26, 2012 at 7:58 PM

Then perhaps you should re-read your Bible.

Lanceman on August 26, 2012 at 8:02 PM

Obama’s brother lives in a hut.

Obama’s brother lives in a hut.

Obama’s brother lives in a hut.

Obama’s brother lives in a hut.

Repeat until November.

faraway on August 26, 2012 at 8:04 PM

Barry’s Half-Bro — Still struggling in a hut in Kenya

Barry’s illegal alien Auntie Z — Still living in govt housing in Boston

red winger on August 26, 2012 at 7:34 PM

Christ had something to say about people who would give money they should have given to help their relatives but instead gave it to the synagogue in order to get the praise of the pharisees and others.

AZfederalist on August 26, 2012 at 8:06 PM

Reports that billionaire hotel developer Steve Wynn picked up the tab for Prince Harry’s stay last week lend credence to scuttlebutt that he’s unhappy with his security team…

Wynn, who has been vacationing in St-Tropez, reportedly comped all of Prince Harry’s expenses, according to London’s Daily Mail, including the now infamous suite where a racy game of pool turned into an embarrassing security breach for the royal palace, and something more.

Can Steve write this off? I mean, there’s charity, then there’s charity.

Akzed on August 26, 2012 at 8:09 PM

I don’t agree it must remain anonymous, but there is a danger in expecting more thank thanks by expecting accolades and bragging about it is one of those dangers.

Dusty on August 26, 2012 at 7:58 PM

Then perhaps you should re-read your Bible.

Lanceman on August 26, 2012 at 8:02 PM

When you read the context of the biblical passages, it really comes down to the attitude of the heart giving. It’s not that the gift absolutely must remain anonymous (that is nearly impossible, somebody will know), but it is the reason for giving. If one is giving to receive accolades, that is not the proper motivation, whether one is recognized for it or not. A person who gives anonymously can still be doing so for the wrong motivation: i.e., to hear the words, “an anonymous donation of …” knowing that it is their donation can have the same improper intent as if they heard their name proclaimed with the donation.

AZfederalist on August 26, 2012 at 8:12 PM

Is it really “charitable giving” when Obama gives away money like the $1 million prize he “won” when he was given the Nobel Peace Prize (for nothing more than having black skin), or money he “earned” on royalties for books that someone else wrote (and put Obama’s name on)?

AZCoyote on August 26, 2012 at 8:16 PM

Christ had something to say about people who would give money they should have given to help their relatives but instead gave it to the synagogue in order to get the praise of the pharisees and others. AZfederalist on August 26, 2012 at 8:06 PM

Mark 7:11-12.

They didn’t necessarily even give it to the synagogue, it was just “dedicated” whether they gave it away or not.

So, win-win. For them.

Akzed on August 26, 2012 at 8:20 PM

Akzed on August 26, 2012 at 8:20 PM

Thanks, I was looking for that passage and couldn’t find it quickly enough.

AZfederalist on August 26, 2012 at 8:23 PM

There’s no law that says you HAVE to claim donations to non-profits on your taxes, I often don’t, and if you relied on my taxes to verify my charitable giving, you wouldn’t get an accurate idea of what I give. And that doesn’t even take into account the hundreds of dollars I spend on my classroom each year, most of which is not deductible.

Bob's Kid on August 26, 2012 at 8:23 PM

Obama’s brother lives in a hut.

Obama’s brother lives in a hut.

Obama’s brother lives in a hut.

Obama’s brother lives in a hut.

Repeat until November.

faraway on August 26, 2012 at 8:04 PM

Yes, and I’m thinking Romney will say he’ll take the Prez job for $1/yr.

Then maybe somebody will call on Øbama to help his brother who lives in a hut.

petefrt on August 26, 2012 at 8:25 PM

Is it really “charitable giving” when Obama gives away money like the $1 million prize he “won” when he was given the Nobel Peace Prize (for nothing more than having black skin), or money he “earned” on royalties for books that someone else wrote (and put Obama’s name on)?
AZCoyote on August 26, 2012 at 8:16 PM

Technically yes, although it wouldn’t be from “his need” as the poor widow did in scripture. My point is that Obama said he would give it to charity, but he didn’t. So he’s a hypocrite and a liar.

txhsmom on August 26, 2012 at 8:33 PM

Go see the film 2016 and you’ll understand why. Barack doesn’t care about America’s poor — they, too, are part of the evil American empire in his view. His only concern is the Third World. If he could rip the food out of an American poor person’s mouth and hand it to a Marxist in Africa, he would. His efforts to inflate the welfare rolls have nothing to do with the poor, and everything to do with hastening America’s economic collapse. Because we deserve it. All of us.

Rational Thought on August 26, 2012 at 8:39 PM

Then perhaps you should re-read your Bible.

[Lanceman on August 26, 2012 at 8:02 PM]

Perhaps. Perhaps you should read more of it and understand it better.

Dusty on August 26, 2012 at 8:45 PM

In a rare moment of candor in 2008, candidate Barack Obama famously let slip his fundamental belief—a tenet of socialism—that “when you spread the wealth around, it’s good for everybody.”

Let me fix that for you obamanation: “when you spread other peoples wealth around, it is good for me, particularly if I and my cronys get first shot at it.”

Old Country Boy on August 26, 2012 at 8:59 PM

Good luck if you are expecting a lefty to act like a Christian. They worship the government and themselves. It is all about them. barry supports perverted marriage and ending innocent life. How contrary to Biblical teaching. If this were the only thing that a Christian could harp about with him, there are Christians that do not tithe or give generously. barry supports evil and is supported by evil. His aim is destroy this country and if Christianity takes a hit, he cares not. I hate to tell barry but we been around a long time and will until Christ returns.

crosshugger on August 26, 2012 at 9:09 PM

You have to understand, no one is better than the Democrats for giving away other peoples’ money.

RJL on August 26, 2012 at 9:21 PM

Your buddy is here braying again.

Lanceman on August 26, 2012 at 7:18 PM

Say -where is the queen of the fallacious argument anyways?

CW on August 26, 2012 at 7:22 PM

Right ahead of the princess of ad hominem attacks. You know, using a big boy word like ‘fallacious’ before a pigeon English word such as ‘anyways’ undermines your credibility. You may think about taking a remedial class- perhaps one of those liberal startups trying to make education universally free can help you:
http://www.udemy.com

bayam on August 26, 2012 at 9:22 PM

For marxists like barack, it isn’t so much a worship of government over the poor, it’s that the poor only exist in their minds (and their hearts) as a tool, as a means to an end — power. It’s like the old Stalin quote: One death is a tragedy; one million deaths is a statistic. To men like Stalin and barack, the poor are merely a statistic, something with which to bludgeon the producers in society and rationalize confiscating more and more of their property. Notice, though, that in the marxist world, that property is never “redistributed” beyond the doors of the marxist rulers and their inner circle. Once ensconced in power, the poor cease to exist in the mind of the marxist. They are no longer needed. Marxists aren’t charitable because they haven’t the capacity to see the individual, or his suffering; they, in fact, loathe individual men and women, because as individuals they have no use to the marxist and his insatiable lust for power. They are only valued as a statistic, en masse.

Rational Thought on August 26, 2012 at 9:28 PM

Right ahead of the princess of ad hominem attacks. You know, using a big boy word like ‘fallacious’ before a pigeon English word such as ‘anyways’ undermines your credibility.

bayam on August 26, 2012 at 9:22 PM

It’s pidgin, not pigeon.

Dusty on August 26, 2012 at 9:33 PM

Actually, most liberals consider taxes “charitable giving.” If they didn’t they wouldn’t tell the rest of us that we were selfish for not wanting to give our “fair share.” “What else,” they wonder, “are my taxes being used for if not charitable causes like welfare and food stamps and health care?” It is a fundamental difference of belief. For liberals, paying taxes EQUALS charitable giving, so giving MORE to a non-profit or a church, or whatever, is above and beyond their former generosity (expressed by their payment of taxes). Just remember.

kburchard on August 26, 2012 at 9:35 PM

For marxists like barack, it isn’t so much a worship of government over the poor, it’s that the poor only exist in their minds (and their hearts) as a tool, as a means to an end

Here we go again, blaming the poor as willing participants in the destruction of this country. The poor make up a very small part of the population and are far less likely to vote than suburbanites.
In fact, the people actively supporting and advising Obama on a day to day basis consist of beltway insiders and economic advisers from top Wall Street and investment banking firms (not necessarily a good thing). But socialists… not so much. So you can take the night off and step away from the Glenn Beck paranoia and bizarre, coded language.

bayam on August 26, 2012 at 9:44 PM

Obama’s brother lives in a hut.

Obama’s brother lives in a hut.

Obama’s brother lives in a hut.

Obama’s brother lives in a hut.

Repeat until November.

faraway on August 26, 2012 at 8:04 PM

Obama Dinesh D’Souza is his brother’s keeper.

22044 on August 26, 2012 at 10:25 PM

You don’t need me to tell you that the Romney campaign is outraising us — that billionaire ideologues and corporate interests are piling on tens of millions more in negative ads trashing us, and that all of it means that undecided voters in battleground states like Iowa could be seeing false, misleading, negative attacks at a rate almost twice as often as they hear from us.PappyD61 on August 26, 2012 at 7:04 PM

The way he says that suggests that he wants to have the ability to put out just as many false, misleading, negative attacks as the other guy; not that he needs money to refute the other guys false ads.

KW64 on August 26, 2012 at 10:26 PM

Is “Auntie Z” actually his father’s (half) sibling, or is she Stanley’s sister-wife?

PKO Strany on August 26, 2012 at 10:48 PM

Here we go again, blaming the poor as willing participants in the destruction of this country. The poor make up a very small part of the population and are far less likely to vote than suburbanites.
In fact, the people actively supporting and advising Obama on a day to day basis consist of beltway insiders and economic advisers from top Wall Street and investment banking firms (not necessarily a good thing). But socialists… not so much. So you can take the night off and step away from the Glenn Beck paranoia and bizarre, coded language.

bayam on August 26, 2012 at 9:44 PM

No coded language. In fact, the code was cracked a long time ago, which is why you’re so hysterical. Barack is a marxist who sees poor Americans as a useful tool in his arsenal to gain power. If he cared about them, he’d dig deep into his millions to help them. But he doesn’t. He hoards his wealth. The suffering of the poor means nothing to him except as a statistic he can use to amass power — and more wealth — for himself and his inner circle of fellow marxists.

Rational Thought on August 26, 2012 at 11:08 PM

Here we go again, blaming the poor as willing participants in the destruction of this country.

[bayam on August 26, 2012 at 9:44 PM]

You’ve undermined your own credibility once via usage, do you really need to undermine it a second time in one night, this time via reading comprehension?

Rational Thought does not suggest the poor are willing participants. In fact, he is silent on that point.

Dusty on August 26, 2012 at 11:21 PM

I like the cut of this Dusty person’s jib :)

mikeyboss on August 27, 2012 at 1:19 AM

I. Don’t. Care.

Well, that is, I wouldn’t care, if neither of the candidates was trying to claim that people who don’t support entitlement programs “don’t care”. But, since one side is campaigning almost purely on how much it cares and the other side doesn’t, it’s perfectly reasonable to show your individual charitable giving as proof that you care, and then it’s equally ok to compare that with the giving of your opponent, to find out who really does walk the walk, and who is only talk.

But we already knew what the results would be. The Left is only “charitable” with OPM. Creeps.

Freelancer on August 27, 2012 at 1:54 AM

Also got to account Romney working for relatively no salary as Governor and other events. Romney gave his inheritance away to charity as well.

grosven on August 27, 2012 at 2:03 AM

bayam on August 26, 2012 at 9:22 PM

It’s pidgin, not pigeon.

Dusty on August 26, 2012 at 9:33 PM

:) And it wasn’t really even that.

Axe on August 27, 2012 at 4:40 AM

Why? Does Romney give too much of his money away? And do you look down at Steve Jobs for donating his wealth to charity for lacking a true mastery of capitalism?

It’s a tenant of the Mormon religion that you give 10% or more of your income to the church. Don’t hold it against him.

bayam on August 26, 2012 at 7:15 PM

I’m not holding anything against Mitt. I worded it poorly, but I’m holding the left’s cognitive dissonance, and their valuing “cool” of over substance, against them.

TedInATL on August 27, 2012 at 7:54 AM

The good news on Obama’s tax return is he didn’t give a lot to Jeremiah Wright

RADIOONE on August 27, 2012 at 8:04 AM

This is the clearest indication you can find of the difference between conservatives and liberals. Liberals think the government should be in charge of charity where as conservatives think the people whose money it is should be. In terms of the total amount out of their paychecks (combining taxes and charity) in the two years before the election Obama and Romney are not too far from one another. I would guarantee however that Romney’s charitable dollars were spent far more efficiently than Obama’s tax dollars.

Who would you rather call if your child was in danger… Romney or Obama?

imperfectamerica on August 27, 2012 at 8:16 AM

Romney has served as both a Bishop and Stake President in the Mormon Church. As a Mormon I can safely state that would not happen if he did not tithe. That is a basic requirement.

Liberals are only generous with other people’s money, never their own.

On another topic, I say we hit Romney with a money bomb. If he hit $200,000,000 in August or September the look on the teleprompters face would be priceless.

The Rock on August 27, 2012 at 8:29 AM

When he was running for Governor he told the press and the state election board that he filed Mass. state income taxes while he was in Utah. This was a lie.Governor Romney now says he has given 10% or more to his Church. Take him at his word won’t you.

plewis on August 27, 2012 at 8:57 AM

Hey bro, can you spare me a dime?

– George Obama

Steve Z on August 27, 2012 at 9:35 AM

Sooo, Romney was able to visit the holiest site in Judaism. And when is that invitation coming to visit the holiest site in Islam? Hmmm? How about it O Tolerant and Peaceful religion?

Nutstuyu on August 27, 2012 at 3:55 PM

If I’m not mistaken, a big chunk of Obama’s deductions were donations to funds for this daughters, not a traditional “charity.”

Colony14 on August 27, 2012 at 4:18 PM

Romney spent 2 1/2 years on a mission for his church $0;
5 years as Bishop of the LDS Church $0; (that includes counseling singles, marrieds with problems, people who lost jobs, people who need help of all kinds, camping and hiking with the youth – and they say he doesn’t understand people’s problems and poor people in particular!);
8 years as Stake President $0; (that includes the above but over 4 – 6 Bishops and their congregations);
Gov of Mass 4 years and took $0;
Saved the Olympics 4 years and took $0.
So I figure that adds up to 15 1/2 years donated. So if we added that up to his hourly salary – just wow!
Then you add 4 + 4 = 8 years in government and Olympics with no remuneration.

So let’s talk about the real difference in the years given freely by Gov Romney and what obama has donated!

Bambi on August 27, 2012 at 11:07 PM