Guidelines for posting on bangordailynews.com

The Bangor Daily News encourages comments about stories, but you must follow our terms of service.

In brief:

1. Keep it civil and stay on topic
2. No vulgarity, racial slurs, name-calling or personal attacks.
3. People who harass others or joke about tragedies will be blocked.

The primary rule here is pretty simple: Treat others with the same respect you'd want for yourself. Here are some guidelines (see more):

It should be noted this is not a comprehensive list.

• Don't insult one another or the subjects of BDN stories. You may be ticked off at what someone did or said, but you can explain that without resorting to name-calling or obscenity. Remember that young people are on this site too.
• That nasty line that makes your buddies go "haw, haw"? You're better than that.
• Comments should be your own work, not copied and pasted from elsewhere, though brief quoted passages to make your point are fine. And please don't use all capital letters. There's no need to shout.
• Stay focused on the issue in the article. Off-topic posts will be deleted.
• This isn't a forum to chat about your personal life.
• Some ideas — the fate of the earth, abortion, gun control, the nature of God — aren't going to be resolved in a reader forum, so no need to get frustrated if others don't see your point of view. State your position once and leave it at that.
• If you mouse over each comment you will see a "Flag" button. Please use it if you feel comments on the site are out of line. Quite often, we won't see a comment until it's reported.
• Questions about why a comment was — or wasn't — deleted? E-mail us at web@bangordailynews.com and let us know your username and where you posted or saw the comment.

That's about it: Stick to writing about the stories; be civil; be kind; enlighten your neighbors. And we'll keep moderating posts to try to ensure everyone meets those standards.

• Anonymous

  This jobs act is just another bandaid that will, of course, provide a temporary spike in the economy. But, just like the last one, it will be short lived and end up leaving us worse off than before it was implemented. The Progressives know this, but they are hoping that if the AJA is passed, that they can drag it out long enough for it to positively effect the 2012 elections before it takes its dive. And, if it doesn’t get passed, then they can blame it on the Republicans and the Tea Party. Sounds like it might be a win-win for the Dems. But it won’t.

• Anonymous

  Whatever the Republicans say is irrelevant. They’re hypocrites. They say they’re against new taxes, but now they’re fighting to allow for a payroll tax increase. That’s more money out of your paycheck just so millionaires and billionaires can keep their tax loopholes and deductions. They’re the ones engaging in class warfare. 

• Anonymous

  Lets spend even more money we do not have because its been working out so great so far right?

• Anonymous

  Just a point of information on the payroll tax reduction. It was put in place last Jan 1St. for one year and is set to expire. Paying for your social security and medicare is nothing new. You are just going to have to do it again unless the tax break for it is extended.

• Anonymous

  Let’s see.. Social Security is on death watch.. and what does Obama do? Why he reduces or will eliminate thev 7% ”Payroll Tax” .. a mis-named payroll deduction which used to be called “Soc Sec” in the 70′s and changed to FICA in the 80′s on your check-stub and now it called a “Payroll Tax” which really isn’t a tax at all.. it’s an social insurance premium to fund future withdrawals after retirement. So, this mis-named ”Trust” is destined to be exausted sooner and federal debt in the out years will hit the proverbal wall.   Are you scared – you should be.

• Anonymous

  Just a point of information, the Bush tax cuts were set to expire as well and we all know that’s not how the narrative was presented. Taxes go to fund things, that’s nothing new in general. Cut taxes for millionaires and billionaires and you still have to pay for wars and corporate welfare regardless. You aren’t making an actual point. 

• Anonymous

  It was in the heat of July that we had to wait for Obama to finish his August vacation to announce something was in the works that had something to do with jobs. Then we had to wait another week before the teleprompter spokes words about something that he would detail the following week. The dog days of August vanished before we heard but never was allow to view the details .. but no matter because we have to wait another week before the teleprompter speaks again to inform us how it’s going to be paid for.  But.. it’s a stealth bill because as of today .. because it’s hasn’t even been filed on the congressional docket.   And.. it won’t be called “The American Jobs Act” for a bill by that title has already filed by a Republican with an alternate plan - last week.
  The In-crowd .. incompetent, ineffective,  incapable, and inept to state the obvious.

    

• Anonymous

  No sale. Pres. Obama is completely unconvincing in his AJA tour. Only the very naive or the extreme ideaologues believe that more massive government spending is thew answer. Daily, we have evidence of how European countries edge closer to the brink of economic collapse, yet Obama continues to emulate the European approach of big govt spending, esp. on entitlements.

  If the BDN editorial page ever wishes to regain its credibility, long ago since lost, it must give up on his extreme leftist agenda and wake up to a simple reality: it is the private sector that creates jobs that support, rather than drain, as public sector employment does, our economy.

  Mr. Obama is indeed a “transformational” president. Instead of the typical Tax and Spend Democrat, he is a Spend and Tax president, blowing trillions on wasted spending, then pointing a finger at successful upper income earners and shouting “PAY UP”.

  A very bad, very likely one-term president. Perhaps our worst ever.

• Anonymous

   You sounded like you didn’t know how social security was paid for. I kindly explained.

• Anonymous

  I obviously know. But you can’t make the argument that those things are underfunded if you’re not going to advocate for the Bush tax cuts to expire as well. All taxes are for different uses and we’re running a deficit, so it’s a phony argument to just say the payroll tax cut should expire and not others. 

• Anonymous

  It’s funny and telling that when a Democrat utilizes Republican ideas, it’s still labeled “incompetent, ineffective, incapable, and inept”. The hypocrisy is so obvious and it demonstrates that the disdain for Obama isn’t about his politics at all.

• Anonymous

  If you obviously know then don’t speak as if you don’t. It is not a new tax as you indicated. It has been in place in some form or other since the 1930′s. It makes you sound silly and uninformed.

• newportres

   ”If only the sharply-divided Congress will show the same urgency”
  What Urgency?
  It took him years to focus on the problem after playing games with a trillion first and then he decided to go on vacation AGAIN before bothering to request some urgency.
  Carter is loving this loser. 
  Obama makes him look like a winner.

• Anonymous

  It took him 2.5 years and the election of  a Republican Congress before he knew we had a high unemployment rate.

• http://www.facebook.com/people/John-Day/100000234116470 John Day

  Pass what “right away?”  This was never anything more than Obama’s grab for prime time TV, with the trappings of a speech using Congress as a prop to dig out some new cliches for his reelection campaign. Does anybody remember, he called members of Congress who opposed this plan “un-American?” This is how a great leader unites America to confront a crisis? Bush jumped to a 90 percent approval after his post-9/11 Joint Session speech. Funny thing, on a poll taken in Florida, a state he can’t lose and is losing big right now, Obama’s approval number went down AFTER this speech. Congress gave him $1.2 trillion (money spent, plus interest) for his first Stimulus, which was a lot of pork (public employee and bankrupt“green” energy  projects designed to enrich campaign contributors)… that went to mostly Democratic congressional districts… and the jobless rate went up, going from 7.4 percent when Bush left to 9.1 percent today. So Congress should give Obama another half-trillion to prove he’s trying to do something useful, even if it’s only to get him over the Nov. 2012 election? 

• http://www.facebook.com/people/John-Day/100000234116470 John Day

  Pretty amazing. Close to a unanimous reader pan of Obama after an editorial supporting Obama. A staunch liberal, who writes a column for this newspaper, told me on FB he now considers Obama an “empty suit” and no longer wastes his time defending the president. 

• Anonymous

  Obama’s approval rating may be low, but Congress’ is astronomically lower.

• Anonymous

  When the Bush tax cuts were set to expire (on their own, as they were a temporary cut), the narrative was that Obama wanted to raise taxes. It is PURE hypocrisy to say now that the payroll tax cut is set to expire that that is not a raise in taxes. You can’t have it both ways.

  I never spoke as if I didn’t know. I was merely pointing out the fact that you and those like you are not being consistent in your narrative. If allowing the Bush tax cuts to expire is considered “raising taxes” then allowing the payroll tax cut to expire is “raising taxes” as well.

• Anonymous

  “They say they’re against new taxes, but now they’re fighting to allow for a payroll tax increase.” ~~~~~~~ fwteagles   You were referring to payroll taxes, Social security.

• Anonymous

  “They say they’re against new taxes, but now they’re fighting to allow for a payroll tax increase.” ~~~~~~~ fwteagles   You were referring to payroll taxes, Social security.

• Anonymous

  “They say they’re against new taxes, but now they’re fighting to allow for a payroll tax increase.” ~~~~~~~ fwteagles   You were referring to payroll taxes, Social security.

• Anonymous

  Your wrong as usual, Bush left with a 8.6 % Unemployment rate and was rising steadily, Obama stopped it and is trying to plug the hole.

• Anonymous

  Your wrong as usual, Bush left with a 8.6 % Unemployment rate and was rising steadily, Obama stopped it and is trying to plug the hole.

• Anonymous

  Your wrong as usual, Bush left with a 8.6 % Unemployment rate and was rising steadily, Obama stopped it and is trying to plug the hole.

• Anonymous

  Your wrong as usual, Bush left with a 8.6 % Unemployment rate and was rising steadily, Obama stopped it and is trying to plug the hole.

• Anonymous

  The Unemployment rate January 2009 was 7.6% with 11.6 million unemployed.

  http://www.bls.gov/opub/ted/2009/feb/wk2/art02.htm

  The unemployment rate in August 2011 is 9.1% with 14 million unemployed.
  http://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/empsit.pdf

  A growing economy needs to produce 200k-300k jobs per month just to keep even. In order for the economy to produce that number of jobs GDP needs to grow at a rate approaching 3% annually. It is currently less than 1%. Projections are that unemployment will reach 12-13% sometime in the next few years. There is no way the government can produce that number of jobs much less garner the tax money from the remaining workers to pay for the growth. Only business can do that. They can’t/won’t until government allows them too.

  Obama has not stopped anything. Only exacerbated the problem.

• Anonymous

  The Unemployment rate January 2009 was 7.6% with 11.6 million unemployed.

  http://www.bls.gov/opub/ted/2009/feb/wk2/art02.htm

  The unemployment rate in August 2011 is 9.1% with 14 million unemployed.
  http://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/empsit.pdf

  A growing economy needs to produce 200k-300k jobs per month just to keep even. In order for the economy to produce that number of jobs GDP needs to grow at a rate approaching 3% annually. It is currently less than 1%. Projections are that unemployment will reach 12-13% sometime in the next few years. There is no way the government can produce that number of jobs much less garner the tax money from the remaining workers to pay for the growth. Only business can do that. They can’t/won’t until government allows them too.

  Obama has not stopped anything. Only exacerbated the problem.

• Anonymous

  The Unemployment rate January 2009 was 7.6% with 11.6 million unemployed.

  http://www.bls.gov/opub/ted/2009/feb/wk2/art02.htm

  The unemployment rate in August 2011 is 9.1% with 14 million unemployed.
  http://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/empsit.pdf

  A growing economy needs to produce 200k-300k jobs per month just to keep even. In order for the economy to produce that number of jobs GDP needs to grow at a rate approaching 3% annually. It is currently less than 1%. Projections are that unemployment will reach 12-13% sometime in the next few years. There is no way the government can produce that number of jobs much less garner the tax money from the remaining workers to pay for the growth. Only business can do that. They can’t/won’t until government allows them too.

  Obama has not stopped anything. Only exacerbated the problem.

• Anonymous

  A mere sequence doesn’t prove cause. The unemployment rate was already rising.

• Anonymous

  Can you respond to the point of my message though? It is inconsistent to claim letting one cut expire is raising taxes, while letting another expire not to be raising taxes. Don’t be a hypocrite. Either both are a tax increase or neither are a tax increase.

• Anonymous

  http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2011/09/obama-jobs-speech-right-now-dick-durbin.html

• Anonymous

  Correction: In the spring of 09, the Obama administration changed the way the unemployment percentage is figured in order to keep it lower than it actually is. If the unemployment percentage was figured as it was for so many years, it would be closer to 11% today. And that doesn’t even take into consideration those that have just given up and are no longer filing for unemployment benefits.

• Anonymous

  Yes, it was rising. But, it was rising as a result of the legislation and actions of a Congress controlled by the Democrats for the last two years of the Bush administration. That is a heavy fact that the left seems to selectively forget.

• Anonymous

  And the Dems approval rating is at the bottom of the barrel.

• Anonymous

  I was responding to one aspect of your initial post that was misinformed and by slight of hand slipped away from acknowledging. I was not making any judgement call on whether the tax should or should not be increased. My instinct tells me to let people have their own money in their own pockets in times like these. That includes the Social security tax.

• Anonymous

  Again. I was merely correcting bobsafe’s inaccurate numbers.  Why do have a problem with accuracy?

• Anonymous

  LOL, the President’s approval rating is about 4 times higher than Congress. You know, the House where Republicans are in charge and the Senate where the tyrannical minority rules with their constant filibuster threats.

• Anonymous

  No, I was not misinformed. It is not my fault you aren’t reading what I wrote correctly. Republicans called allowing the Bush tax cuts to expire a tax increase. Allowing the payroll tax cut to expire then is also a tax increase based upon that earlier definition. What the taxes go to fund is irrelevant to the point.

• http://pulse.yahoo.com/_SHNOU64ZBOBIKWUF5IM6WSH7WA entitled4life

  Congress should enact Obama’s jobs bill without a single change.  Its time for “sink or swim” for this administration and I hope that the bill is the answer to this country’s economic problems.  If it’s not, then he should be sent back to Chicago in the next election.

• http://pulse.yahoo.com/_CV75L5RVCGKUD52QQTHND64CJM Robin B.

  Wouldn’t it be nice, if for a change, both major parties, and ordinary citizens, accepted that things are not going well for the lower and middle class, and united to do something about it? All I read here in comments are childish playground taunts.
  The issues facing the nation are not the sole responsibility of the current President. We allowed astronomical spending during the previous 8 years, much of it hidden from view, in the name of “Homeland Security”. We allowed tax cuts for rich to get out of hand, and benefits for the lowest earners to be limited. We allowed jobs to be sent overseas, and current workers, such as those at some large retailers, to be paid such a low wage that they rely on government programs just to get by, while the corporation itself reaps record profits.
  Things need fixing. All of us need to contact our Representatives, Senators and President and give some concrete suggestions, not this endless name-calling and bellyaching.

• Anonymous

  This American Jobs Act is paid for.

• Anonymous

  Tell me, if the Republicans are responsible why are Democrats in Congress and the Senate howling about Obama campaigning against Congress? The Dem’s are part of Congress and acknowledge they are being bashed by the President as they prepare to run for reelection.
  They are not happy he keeps bringing up that number. 

  Regardless of that, what really matters is where the numbers of The Presidents approval come from and the states he needs for reelection.  A funny thing about the Congressional numbers is that we all seem to like our OWN Congresspeople and hate the other persons. That why that number doesn’t mean as much as the Presidents.

  Historically its been impossible for a President to recover from numbers this low.  He has high disapproval numbers in states he took last time. Virginia Pennsylvania Ohio North Carolina Nevada Florida. He is even under 50% approval in California. A Republican Congressman won in New York in a 3-1 Democratic district by running against the President.
  IMO his days are numbered.

• Anonymous

  Worked for Regan

• Anonymous

  No it isn’t. Where money comes from and where it goes always matters. The only time in real life it doesn’t seem to matter is when I had my kid his allowance.

• Anonymous

  http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2011/09/obama-jobs-speech-right-now-dick-durbin.html

• Anonymous

  You’re changing the issue. The discussion of approval ratings isn’t about reelection chances. We’re talking about performance and what people want.

• Anonymous

  It’s not relevant to the point that you’re purposefully trying to avoid addressing.

  Why is the allowing the payroll tax cut to expire not a tax raise, but allowing the Bush tax cuts to expire a tax raise?

• Anonymous

  And the people, in increasing numbers, don’t want 4 more years of this President.

• Anonymous

  And a huge majority wants tax increases on the wealthy. Guess “what the people” want is only your mantra when it is convenient.

• Anonymous

  I don’t think I said that at all. Copy and paste please.

• Anonymous

  So the numbers are only important for purposes you say they are. You are one funny person.

• Anonymous

  They’re important for the purpose of the discussion. You can’t have a discussion if one person is constantly changing the issue. The numbers were brought up in a discussion that was completely unrelated to reelection chances.

• Anonymous

  Not according to the speech the President just made this morning. Not paid for by a long shot.

• Anonymous

  What you mean is we can’t have a discussion unless the topics, facts, presumptions and  assumptions and conclusions are are all yours.  That’s what it sounds like. I’m out.

• Anonymous

  I just read a columnist from the Chicago Tribune.
  He wrote:

  “When Ronald Reagan ran for re-election in 1984, his slogan was “Morning in America.” For Barack Obama, it’s more like midnight in a coal mine.”

  http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/columnists/chi-chapman-obama-reelection,0,622512.column

• Anonymous

  It’s essentially like discussing the color of the ocean and you come along to talk about the color of the sand.

• Anonymous

  That’s completely and factually untrue. It is paid for and it includes cuts in addition to the ones from the debt ceiling debate.

• Anonymous

  Predetermining outcomes is not discussion.

• Anonymous

  Speaking of extremism …

• Anonymous

  And the accuracy of your stats is how good …?

• Anonymous

  And the R’s ratings?  To quote Chubby Checker’s (in)famous Limbo Rock, “How low can you go … “

• Anonymous

  Thousands of jobs and tens of thousands of businesses?

• Anonymous

  Not likely.

• Anonymous

  I do not think that this is really relivant. Congress has had a low rating almost all of the time, big deal.

  But if the people try they can throw the bums out.

• newportres

  How can you say that something that does not yet exist is paid for?
  That is the definition of factually untrue!

• Anonymous

  Yeah..right.  Cuts to Medicare that will never happen and taxes on job creators that will hurt employment. This joke of a president had his moment in 2009 with the stimulus disaster that got us 900 billion of NOTHING.

• Anonymous

  3 dollars in taxes for every 1 dollar in “cuts”. Paid for? I love how progs/libs like to lie through their teeth. Its not paid for..not by a long shot.

• Anonymous

  LOL! Just like, though the Jobs bill has just been proposed and though it contains numerous Republican ideas, “I already hate it and oppose it”? Or is that something completely different?

• Anonymous

  No, those “job creators” all have their money tied up in financial devices and markets. That’s a phony meme and it’s a lie. People like Katie Couric and Glenn Beck have millions of dollars, but beyond their personal assistants, they’re not creating jobs. We don’t need to bribe the rich with tax cuts in order to beg them to create jobs. A thriving middle and working class is what we need. 

• Anonymous

  Well it is. I know facts don’t get in your way, but I’m just telling you for the record, it is paid for. 

• Anonymous

  If it doesn’t exist yet, then you can’t say it is not paid for either. 

• Anonymous

  I realize that the messiah has said that is paid for, but it is not even a bill yet.

  Besides can you name even one program that has been underbudget or was fully paid for?

• Anonymous

  I don’t think I said that. Copy and paste please.

• Anonymous

  I don’t think I said that. Copy and paste please.

• Anonymous

  If I heard correctly Beck just started a new internet TV show and still has his syndicated gig on radio. You’re right, he employs nobody doing that stuff. My boss is no “millionaire or billionaire” and yet he employs 30-some workers between here and Waterville. He already has said if the tax rates go up it may stall hiring he planned to do. (He’s a democrat btw) You dont have to be Warren Buffet to be a “job creator” you just have to run a small business and hire some help. And everyone in small business is worried about the bottom line, now more so than ever. Increasing taxes on these “millionaires and billionaries” will do what for hiring? You act like the “rich” stole their money from you you envy it so much. What they did was work for it.

• Anonymous

  Nah, sorry sweet pea. They didn’t and they don’t. The Bush tax cuts have been in place for almost a decade. No new jobs. Didn’t work, it’s a lie.

  Second, they didn’t work for the money. Most of the millionaires and billionaires got their money through artificial financial devices. Are those hedge funds creating jobs? Answer is no. 

  30 years ago the average American CEO made about 30-40 times more than their average worker, today, they make about 350 times what their average worker does. Just because you have more money doesn’t mean you’re a smarter or harder worker. Just means you’ve got greed. I’d sooner die before being envious of that. I’m happy with my life and my job, but just because I’m happy, that doesn’t mean I can’t recognize that millions out there are struggling while the rich are richer than they have ever been.

• Anonymous

  The sun is shinning these warm mornings in Georgia as Jimmy and Rosylynn Carter can again enjoy reading the daily newpapers over coffee and toast without the threat of encountering articles containing references of being labled the worst president in our history.

• Anonymous

  The sun is shinning these warm mornings in Georgia as Jimmy and Rosylynn Carter can again enjoy reading the daily newpapers over coffee and toast without the threat of encountering articles containing references of being labled the worst president in our history.