Romney releases his returns!

[2_fister]

Right.... Obama didn't pay nearly as much in charitable donations. Despite the fact that he worked as a community organizer and as a civil rights attourney, donating his time to worthy causes when he didn't make nearly as much money as Mitt Romney. Now his income is much higher and his time much more valuable, so instead he contributes financially. Nothing wrong with that there in my eyes.
Some people think that Obama is doing a terrible job, I don't but I acknowledge things could be going better. So I wondered what Mitt Romney had to offer that was different. His plan to jump start the economy? He latched onto a plan the Congressional Budget Office has called "mathematically impossible", one which doesn't reduce any spending for 3 years, has more tax cuts, and doesn't even get the balanced budget in the best case scenario until the year 2040. It's not that hard people. Has everyone supporting this plan forgotten that we HAD a balanced budget for the last two years under Clinton?

The ONE area that Mitt Romney might have a significant amount of expertise coming into the area (the economy, by virtue of his business savvy) is attached to a plan that is deemed by experts on both sides of the aisle to be an utter fantasy. Given his flipflopping on other issues, he is at best an unknown in all other categories. Why would I want a stranger with delusions of competence in macroeconomics running the country?
Yeah, I'm sure that if they were Obama's lapdog, they'd call out the Senate majority leader of the Democratic Party. 4 Pinocchios for Harry Reid’s claim about Mitt Romney’s taxes - The Washington Post

Fact checking is a funny thing, it tends to make Obama look better than Romney as well. Compare:
PolitiFact | Mitt Romney's file vs. PolitiFact | Barack Obama's file Politicians are great at telling half truths, but people really worry about their lying. Who lies more? Romney, by a lot. In fact 9% of his statements are "Pants on Fire" rating by politifact, compared to 1% of Obama's. Maybe Stephen Colbert was right? Do facts have a liberla bias?

You can't argue with the right anymore. There's always been differences between the two parties, but there used to be a slight willingness to at least consider some common ground. But now the right has swung so far right and seems to take pride in their non compromise, that it's making reasonable debate impossible. They(the right) ignore actual facts and instead reply on rhetoric and ideology. It's become comical and sad. Are the Dems perfect? Of course not. But they at least seem to have the ability to see both sides and have demonstrated that they're willing to come to the table and reach a sort of compromise. Obama and the Dems of today are actually right of center and are closer to the Republicans of the 80's and 90's. But the rise of this "Radical Right" has pushed things even further right.

 

[houtx48]

There is something in the not released/summarized returns that would sink Romney's campaign in a heart beat. I'm guessing it has to do with undeclared offshore bank accounts and tax amnesty. Mitt only released the ones he needed to make him look legitimate

 

[deleted15807]

So I wondered what Mitt Romney had to offer that was different. His plan to jump start the economy? He latched onto a plan the Congressional Budget Office has called "mathematically impossible", one which doesn't reduce any spending for 3 years, has more tax cuts, and doesn't even get the balanced budget in the best case scenario until the year 2040.

It's very important to stress that because why he gets a free ride when the question is 'Who would do more to tackle the debt?' and he gets high marks for a lie, a blatant lie. And no balanced budget until 2040? WTF! So in essence he is doing nothing to balance the budget. He's making sure the comfortable are more comfortable and the stressed are more stressed.

 

[theskindiver]

You can't argue with the right anymore. There's always been differences between the two parties, but there used to be a slight willingness to at least consider some common ground. But now the right has swung so far right and seems to take pride in their non compromise, that it's making reasonable debate impossible. They(the right) ignore actual facts and instead reply on rhetoric and ideology. It's become comical and sad. Are the Dems perfect? Of course not. But they at least seem to have the ability to see both sides and have demonstrated that they're willing to come to the table and reach a sort of compromise. Obama and the Dems of today are actually right of center and are closer to the Republicans of the 80's and 90's. But the rise of this "Radical Right" has pushed things even further right.

Pot calling the kettle black.... just sayin'

BOTH sides are about to walk off the deep end! You're too blind to see it!

 

[JTalbain]

Pot calling the kettle black.... just sayin'

BOTH sides are about to walk off the deep end! You're too blind to see it!

Blind ideological statements not supported by fact used to debate the facts, complete unwillingness to compromise, willingness to sacrifice the country's well-being for the purposes of playing politics, etc. I can provide examples of all of the above in Republican actions. Can you do the same for Democrats?

 

[theskindiver]

Blind ideological statements not supported by fact used to debate the facts, complete unwillingness to compromise, willingness to sacrifice the country's well-being for the purposes of playing politics, etc. I can provide examples of all of the above in Republican actions. Can you do the same for Democrats?

I can* provide it for both sides....
The two party system is going to prove to be the downfall of America. Neither side is willing to open their eyes and ears. Anyone that thinks straight down the party line exhibits the symptoms of blindness you mentioned in a previous post. If you really believe the entire Democratic or Republican parties talking points and can't make your own mind up, you've drank the kool aid!!! *but I can't provide EVIDENCE to someone too blind to see it.

Please begin you bombardment of name calling and blind pre-conceived responses to anyone who challenges you ideals now:

 

[h0neymustard]

Romney has also spent countless hours doing community service. He didn't take a salary when gov. of Massachusetts. And here's a heart-warming story:
Mitt Romney Outed By The Milkman: Candidate Anonymously Donates Thousands Of Pints Of Milk To Sick Vets

Even a broken clock is right twice a day. The commentators are attacking the author of that 4 Pinocchios article for being a Romney guy.

And those off shore accounts? I saw this comment:

Putting money in Swiss or Cayman accounts does not save you from paying US taxes. People who say this have seen too many movies. The reason we know Romney has money in foreign accounts (as do several White House staffers) is because he declared them to the IRS and paid the taxes on them. As an American citizen you can buy foreign products and put your money in foreign banks; it is not illegal; and just as when you buy a Japanese care you still pay the sales taxes on it, when you earn money abroad you also pay US taxes on it.

Anyone want to confirm/deny it? I'm actually curious about it.

 

[Dicklicker1]

I'm standing on the sideline looking at this match with a microscope and releasing one year of tax return with an extension just looks bad to give more time to fudge the numbers. (Have we forgotten?) And what I see is a politician going down in flames because of the constant lies. For a man who was a bishop/preacher/teacher and tells more lies makes me wonder what they teaching in his church....... The great deceiver!

I have my own sins to deal with and I will not follow someone who lies to me and his country!

 

[JTalbain]

I can* provide it for both sides....
The two party system is going to prove to be the downfall of America. Neither side is willing to open their eyes and ears. Anyone that thinks straight down the party line exhibits the symptoms of blindness you mentioned in a previous post. If you really believe the entire Democratic or Republican parties talking points and can't make your own mind up, you've drank the kool aid!!! *but I can't provide EVIDENCE to someone too blind to see it.

Please begin you bombardment of name calling and blind pre-conceived responses to anyone who challenges you ideals now:

You've basically proven my point there. :wink: I don't blindly follow either party's ideology. However, my point still stands.


I can provide examples of ideology being used to refute facts: Trickle-down economics has never been shown to work anywhere with taxes as low as ours, and decreasing tax rates on the wealthy has been shown to create a decrease in tax revenues. However, the GOP is currently clinging to the notion that cutting taxes on the rich ALWAYS increases tax revenue, and that it will create jobs and fix the economy, despite the fact it clearly didn't do so under Bush.

I can provide examples of complete unwillingness to compromise, as shown by the many, many filibusters in the Senate from 2009 to 2011. Barack Obama publicly told the Senate to work together for the sake of the country, and despite concession after concession by the Democrats on legislation like the healthcare bill, the GOP failed to provide alternatives or pass the bill until it was forced on them. The Democrats, had they been so inclined, could have passed the whole bill with no effort whatsoever while Senator Kennedy was still alive and they had a filibuster-proof supermajority, but they chose not to, instead trying to get Republican input.

I can provide examples of willingness to sacrifice the well-being of the country for political gain. Bush turned a budget surplus into a huge deficit practically overnight in order to serve Republican foreign policy and economic theory. The GOP resisted the raising of the debt ceiling in order to shame the President, and in the process hurt the country's international credit rating. Romney clings to the "mathematically impossible" Ryan plan because if follows GOP ideology. And so on.

And these were all just off the top of my head. Now, I ask again, can you provide equivalent claims about the Democratic Party?

 

[theskindiver]

You've basically proven my point there. :wink: I don't blindly follow either party's ideology. However, my point still stands.


I can provide examples of ideology being used to refute facts: Trickle-down economics has never been shown to work anywhere with taxes as low as ours, and decreasing tax rates on the wealthy has been shown to create a decrease in tax revenues. However, the GOP is currently clinging to the notion that cutting taxes on the rich ALWAYS increases tax revenue, and that it will create jobs and fix the economy, despite the fact it clearly didn't do so under Bush.

I can provide examples of complete unwillingness to compromise, as shown by the many, many filibusters in the Senate from 2009 to 2011. Barack Obama publicly told the Senate to work together for the sake of the country, and despite concession after concession by the Democrats on legislation like the healthcare bill, the GOP failed to provide alternatives or pass the bill until it was forced on them. The Democrats, had they been so inclined, could have passed the whole bill with no effort whatsoever while Senator Kennedy was still alive and they had a filibuster-proof supermajority, but they chose not to, instead trying to get Republican input.

I can provide examples of willingness to sacrifice the well-being of the country for political gain. Bush turned a budget surplus into a huge deficit practically overnight in order to serve Republican foreign policy and economic theory. The GOP resisted the raising of the debt ceiling in order to shame the President, and in the process hurt the country's international credit rating. Romney clings to the "mathematically impossible" Ryan plan because if follows GOP ideology. And so on.

And these were all just off the top of my head. Now, I ask again, can you provide equivalent claims about the Democratic Party?

You mention Barack Obama asking the senate to work together for the sake of the country, and cite compromise and willingness to work together. Which is what we need. But the man is a hypocrite, he bullied his health care reform into existence without any compromise. Furthermore, his typical lawyer approach to things leaves the American people confused as to how the reform actually affects everyone. Is it a law? Who knows, we were all bamboozled into what appears to be yet another tax.

You may try and call the opposition to the reform "obstructionist", when in fact it's just the other side fighting for what they believe. Not everyone agrees that health care reform needed to be addressed at the moment, and the choice to do so is purely political ideology.

Give us more viable options, because currently both parties are guilty of putting up entry barriers into the political arena.... If you're not a donkey or an elephant, you are irrelevant! .... and that is truly sad.

 

[dude_007]

Honest to goodness question: Since he's been called a flip-flopper so many times (branded as Floppney here by some of the less astute posters), what makes you think he won't just flip-flop back to the "massachusetts moderate" he might truly be?

He's a politician. He's pandering to who he needs in order to get votes. If ye happen to be skeptical of that claim, one needs look no further than Obama's Univision interview from this week.

In doing so, he is losing ground with mainstream Americans who may be his ticket to the White House. A true moderate Republican wouldn't have Ryan as a running mate. He should have picked Scott Brown. Even I might have voted for that.

Tea Party Republicans and the constant pandering to right wing extremes will be the downfall of that political party. When Obama is seen as a lefty socialist, something is wrong. Very wrong.

 

[Phil Ayesho]

I'm surprised this hasn't popped up yet.

Note From Trustee Brad Malt

And get this, Democrats are angry he paid TOO much taxes.
Left outraged Romney paid too MUCH in taxes, gave 30 percent to charity; Reid, Biden hardest hit; Update: CNN/MSNBC’s commentator Goldie Taylor unhinged | Twitchy

Do you actually read what these people say? Or just make up their responses in your fevered conservative pea passing for a brain?

Everyone on the left is LAUGHING at Romney...
He said in the primaries that he thought that anyone who paid MORE than the law minimally allowed shouldn't be considered qualified for president.

Well, guess who paid more than the law minimally allowed? MITT DID.

And guess why? Because if he had taken all the deductions he could, his tax rate would have fallen BELOW the 13% he claimed he "always " pays.

And everyone is laughing even harder because, by waiting this long to file, Mitt will be able to file an Amended return AFTER the election, to get that money BACK from the government when no one is looking.


Romney can't show his taxes from BEFORE 2010 because these are the only two years he actually can show he paid significant taxes...

And because his prior returns reveal that he is not even really a US citizen in terms of his income... he's a Corporation headquartered in the Caymans

 

[dude_007]

yeah, but corporations are people, too. golly.

 

[tamati]

yeah, but corporations are people, too. golly.

I will only agree with that notion after texas executes a few corporations.

 

[HUNGHUGE11X7]

Still more attacking Romney from the Washington Post, who is Obama's lapdog as I stated earlier.

Much to their credit, and completely surprise the WSJ has been very harsh on their Titanic candidate.
Hmmm I guess you think that Ultra left-wing WSJ is on the OBAMA dole as well , since they slammed Flopney on his sad attempt at producing tax returns too. If you detect this is sarcasm you're choking on , may I offer you some Pouilly-Fuisse to wash it down.


HH


Here is the truth about the pathetic attempt of reasing the tax returns .

Rachel Maddow Show

 

[Perados]

I will only agree with that notion after texas executes a few corporations.

they are "legal persons" and to execute a company means to let them go bust - maybe thats why you will never see texas executes a corporation. they would miss the smell of burned meat

 

[dude_007]

And those off shore accounts? I saw this comment:

Anyone want to confirm/deny it? I'm actually curious about it.

Deny

Why Do Offshore Banking in the Cayman Islands? :: Panama Offshore Legal Law Firm

 

[Calboner]

Deny

Why Do Offshore Banking in the Cayman Islands? :: Panama Offshore Legal Law Firm

But what if you withdraw money from an account in the Cayman Islands to spend or invest in the US? I think it becomes taxable income in the US then.

 

[petite]

But what if you withdraw money from an account in the Cayman Islands to spend or invest in the US? I think it becomes taxable income in the US then.

I'm not sure I'm understanding you. Money is taxed by sales tax when it's spent or as income when it's earned, or by capital gains tax when invested money creates a return but it is not taxed when it's invested. Merely withdrawing money from a bank account doesn't accrue any taxes, as far as I'm aware.

 

[h0neymustard]

I think what Cal meant was once it's back in the States, they'll spend it and the money will be taxed then.

Obama just now: "Romney sure can afford to pay more." Wow. Just wow.