Romney 2012?

@Thomas,

It would be my report.

0 Replies

@DrewDad,

DrewDad wrote:

Romney basically said the other day that releasing his tax records would hurt him politically, so he won't do it.

This does tell "us people" all we need to know. All we need to know is that he's an arrogant plutocrat, who will calculate every decision for maximum political gain.

Why do you need to see his tax records? Do you doubt that he is rich? Do you believe there is something illegal in them?

Please tell us, Drewdad, why do you need to see his 1040's?

2 Replies

@Thomas,

Thomas wrote:

DrewDad wrote:
Hell, I can draft a report that avian monkeys are spontaneously created via anal-genesis every time I sneeze.

Hell, I sign it. But even if I didn't, it would still be a report --- as ehBeth points out.

It would probably be a loud report if you lit a match anywhere near the draft created by that spontaneous genesis.

0 Replies

@McGentrix,

McGentrix wrote:

DrewDad wrote:

Romney basically said the other day that releasing his tax records would hurt him politically, so he won't do it.

This does tell "us people" all we need to know. All we need to know is that he's an arrogant plutocrat, who will calculate every decision for maximum political gain.

Why do you need to see his tax records? Do you doubt that he is rich? Do you believe there is something illegal in them?

Oh, I'm quite sure that he hasn't done anything expressly illegal. But immoral? Undoubtedly. I am willing to bet anything that the man used a variety of accounting gimmicks and tricks to manipulate his tax situation to pay little to no taxes in some of the years involved, on millions of dollars of income gained those years.

That's not going to go over well with joe sixpack. It only reinforces that the guy is a rich version of a scumbag: when you have lawyers you can pay hundreds of thousands of dollars in order to save you millions, you simply are in a quantitatively different life situation than the vast, vast majority of other Americans.

There's also the question of how much income his tax returns will show him garnering from Bain, during the time period that he claims he wasn't involved. Never mind the fact that he signed multiple SEC documents stating he was involved, his bio in 2001 listed him as CEO of Bain, and he's on record (and video) claiming that he attended board meetings and other meetings all the time during that time period. If it turns out he was being paid hundreds of thousands of dollars during that time period, his defense will absolutely crumble, and it will be disastrous for his campaign.

This is what happens when you build your image on lies, which is what Romney has done.

Quote:

Please tell us, Drewdad, why do you need to see his 1040's?

He owes it to me if he wants me to vote for him for President.

Cycloptichorn

1 Reply

@McGentrix,

I don't need to see them. I've made up my mind on other issues.

For anyone a) undecided and b) interested in his character, I do believe that it is a telling insight.

0 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

Cycloptichorn wrote:

He owes it to me if he wants me to vote for him for President.

Cycloptichorn

You've made it pretty clear that hell would freeze over before that happened. I am pretty sure a few 1040's are not going to change your mind.

Law requires he hand over last 2 years of tax returns. He's done that. The Obama campaign has already proven they intend to run a dirty campaign so why provide anything more then required at this point? If he is elected, it might be prudent of him to then release his returns. Until then though, I see no reason to do more then required on this topic.

3 Replies

Actually as far as I know he hasn't even shown two years. He's shown one, and said he'd show another as soon as the accountants were done with it, which has always sounded a tad peculiar, since theyshould have been done with it in April.

However, as has been repeatedly noted, the norm for the last several decades has been for presidential candidates to show at least ten years of their returns to answer questions or potential questions about their finances. Even the dad he reveres did that. Mitt is going against recent precedent. There have been persistent questions about offshore accounts, tax shelters, income deliberately paid in ways that minimize taxes, i.e. taking advantage of loopholes available only to the very, very rich, and exactly when and how he continued (or continues) to receive money from Bain. Now he may not legally HAVE to show his returns, but he's a damned fool if he doesn't. It seems probable that if he does he's going to be shown up for a liar or at best trying to really artfully pussyfoot around what he was actually receiving and doing with it. The demands are not going to go away, and the longer he refuses, the worse he's going to look, and the more suspicions of him are going to grow. It really looks like he's caught in a double bind. If he doesn't release the returns, support for him continues to crumble. If he does release the returns, support for him continues to crumble. He made the bed, he's got to lie (in both senses) in it.

1 Reply

@MontereyJack,

Right one actual and one estimate for this year. His accountant probably filed for an extension to complete Romney's taxes.

I am pretty sure Romeny will stick to his guns on this issue and not release any further tax returns. Eventually Obama will have to discuss his lst 3 years and run on that. The US populace is pretty fickle about running an all attack campaign.

0 Replies

@McGentrix,

McGentrix wrote:

Cycloptichorn wrote:

He owes it to me if he wants me to vote for him for President.

Cycloptichorn

You've made it pretty clear that hell would freeze over before that happened. I am pretty sure a few 1040's are not going to change your mind.

Law requires he hand over last 2 years of tax returns. He's done that.

Yet another factual error on your part. Romney has NOT handed over 2 years of tax returns. He's handed over an incomplete version of 2010, and he hasn't released his 2011 taxes yet.

Seriously. Can't you spend one minute looking stuff up before writing?

Quote:

The Obama campaign has already proven they intend to run a dirty campaign so why provide anything more then required at this point?

Because Obama is going to successfully use his secrecy to beat him about the head and neck, and it's going to be very, very effective. Romney has no effective answer for why he won't release them that doesn't make him look bad. I mean, none whatsoever.

It's not just me saying this, either. The editors of the National Review just called on him to release the tax returns for the last several years. Several prominent Republicans have also called on him to do so. Once your party is fractured on this issue, he's screwed, and that's already happened. You better get ready for him to release them before too long, because he's almost sure to be forced to at this point.

Cycloptichorn

1 Reply

And McG, if you weanna talk about attack campaigns, I suggest you look at the Republican, and Romney, campaigns to date. Pretty much all attack, pretty much no actual constructive plans for change, exept to lower taxes on the rich. Which ain't gonna play. Romney has an almost total lack of specifics on anything, except "Trust me". No, I don't.

2 Replies

@MontereyJack,

Romney won't release any real details of his fiscal plans, because that would 'open him up to attack' from the other side.

Seriously.

This whole bit about his time at Bain, by the way, is just an appetizer. The real main course is going to be Obama tying Romney to the toxic Ryan budget. Romney is going to be forced to own the thing (that he has stated he supports), and many of the details of which are completely unacceptable to the voting public - such as drastically cutting Medicare and SS in order to finance huge tax cuts for the rich.

Cycloptichorn

1 Reply

@MontereyJack,

trust me, but you can't see my taxes...

if he wants us to believe he is good at business, and not just good at cheating and manipulating numbers, why should he not let us see the records?

1 Reply

@Cycloptichorn,

Cycloptichorn wrote:

Romney won't release any real details of his fiscal plans, because that would 'open him up to attack' from the other side.

http://www.csmonitor.com/var/ezflow_site/storage/images/media/content/cartoon-images/2012/07/cartoon120719/13193356-1-eng-US/cartoon120719_full_600x400.jpg

http://www.csmonitor.com/Commentary/Monitor-Political-Cartoons/%28photo%29/524943

0 Replies

@McGentrix,

McGentrix wrote:

Law requires he hand over last 2 years of tax returns.

I'm not sure that swing voters want a candidate that does what the law requires and no more.

Time will tell, I suppose.

0 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

Cycloptichorn wrote:

Yet another factual error on your part. Romney has NOT handed over 2 years of tax returns. He's handed over an incomplete version of 2010, and he hasn't released his 2011 taxes yet.

Seriously. Can't you spend one minute looking stuff up before writing?

I sincerely apologize for my unfortunate choice of words in not stating exactly what Romney has released as far as his tax records go Cyc. Please forgive my transgressions in not using the exact words that you wish to see in each of my posts. Please realize that I am only human and that therefore I am prone to mistakes of such grave nature. I recognize that your patronizing tones and underhanded insults are only there to make me write in a more perfect manner so as to allow people such as yourself to be able to recognize my points instead of dwelling on the minutiae of my verbiage. I realize that the concepts that I bring to this board are sometimes difficult for some people to understand. I doubt I change though and I only ask, nay, beg, that future transgressions will also be forgiven.

But, when I read in the New York Times that "That followed an equally emphatic statement on Friday, when Mr. Romney brushed aside calls for him to make public more than the 2010 returns he has released and the 2011 documents that he has said are coming soon. "

USAToday also said "So far, Mitt Romney has released his 2010 tax return amid a clamor in the GOP primaries, a summary of his expected 2011 return, and disclosure reports required under the Ethics in Government Act."

I can only assume that when I state similar, it will be good enough for posting the same on a political forum. Perhaps you have similar disdain for them as well for parsing such falsehoods!

In fairness, I did amend my previous utterly contemptible utterance in the post just above yours.

Quote:

Right one actual and one estimate for this year.

Quote:

Quote:
The Obama campaign has already proven they intend to run a dirty campaign so why provide anything more then required at this point?

Because Obama is going to successfully use his secrecy to beat him about the head and neck, and it's going to be very, very effective. Romney has no effective answer for why he won't release them that doesn't make him look bad. I mean, none whatsoever.

It's not just me saying this, either. The editors of the National Review just called on him to release the tax returns for the last several years. Several prominent Republicans have also called on him to do so. Once your party is fractured on this issue, he's screwed, and that's already happened. You better get ready for him to release them before too long, because he's almost sure to be forced to at this point.

Cycloptichorn

Considering that the RNC has not officially nominated Romney as the Republican Nominee for President, it does not seem like a good idea to play all his cards now. The Obama campaign will run this issue into the ground and the only thing that will result is him no longer being President. I look forward to the next 8 years of a Romney Presidency. It will be good for America to get back on track.

2 Replies

@McGentrix,

Quote:

. Please forgive my transgressions in not using the exact words that you wish to see in each of my posts.

**** that bullshit; it's not about choosing exact words, it's about you reporting things that are FACTUALLY wrong, and not caring enough to look anything up before writing it. It hurts your credibility when others are pointing out error after error you make. It's not a matter of word choice.

What's really funny is that you conservatives will, with one hand, trash the media, while on the other hand point to their reporting as if it were a statement of fact. You can't have it both ways. Actually, if you had read and reported what the NYT said on that issue, you wouldn't have said what you did in the first place. But you didn't look it up before you posted, did you?

Quote:

I can only assume that when I state similar, it will be good enough for posting the same on a political forum. Perhaps you have similar disdain for them as well for parsing such falsehoods!

Both of the links you posted state that he hasn't yet released his 2011 taxes, so they aren't factually inaccurate on that point. However, both are incorrect when they state Romney has released his full 2010 tax return. And yes, I do hold them in disdain for their laziness towards the facts, the same as I would anyone else.

Quote:

In fairness, I did amend my previous utterly contemptible utterance in the post just above yours.

Sure, I didn't see that before my last post. You are correct that it's fair to make errors and then admit that you were wrong later.

No comment on the fact that prominent members of the GOP are already calling on him to release the returns? That's not a bunch of liberals doing so.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

@McGentrix,

The gracious response, when you're found to be in error, is to simply apologize for the mistake.

Of course, the ability to apologize for errors seems to have disappeared from public discourse. It's always, "I'm sorry if I offended you" not "I'm sorry for my offensive remarks."

So you're in good (if you can call it that) company.

0 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

The Republicans really need a find a way to keep Ann Romney from speaking anywhere ever. She makes Teresa Heinz seem incredibly gracious - and that is saying a lot.

1 Reply

@ehBeth,

ehBeth wrote:

The Republicans really need a find a way to keep Ann Romney from speaking anywhere ever. She makes Teresa Heinz seem incredibly gracious - and that is saying a lot.

Hmnm, interesting to hear you say that - I generally see her referred to in the media as a likeable and sympathetic character.

I've never heard her speak, so I couldn't say; just read some of her statements which were a little off-putting to me.

Here's the HuffPo piece on the interview:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/19/ann-romney_n_1685735.html

And the full quote, responding to a question of 'why not just go ahead and release the returns, if there's nothing to hide?':

Quote:

Romney responded, "Because there are so many things that will be open again for more attack... and that's really, that's just the answer. And we've given all you people need to know and understand about our financial situation and about how we live our life. And so, the election, again, will not be decided on that. It will be decided on who is gonna turn the economy around and how are jobs gonna come back to America."

Hmm. That didn't come off the way she wanted, I bet.

Cycloptichorn

2 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

the clips I hear up here are incredibly unflattering

we certainly don't hear much about her, but it is consistent - she sounds like Linkat talking about subway riders Laughing

2 Replies

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know