HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Politics 2014 (Forum) » Sister wives?

Sat Oct 6, 2012, 09:57 PM

Sister wives?

Who are these women who Romney listed as household help on his 2010 taxes? Do they live in? Why are they paid so little only a total of $20,000 total? One that has be identified made about $6,000, has a degree from Dartmouth. Why so little. What other sources of income did they have? This all seems so curious. Is there more to the story?

35 replies, 3230 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 35 replies Author Time Post
Reply Sister wives? (Original post)
broiles Oct 2012 OP
Autumn Oct 2012 #1
broiles Oct 2012 #3
blue neen Oct 2012 #2
Autumn Oct 2012 #4
blue neen Oct 2012 #5
Autumn Oct 2012 #9
treestar Oct 2012 #29
AnotherMcIntosh Oct 2012 #11
Autumn Oct 2012 #12
AnotherMcIntosh Oct 2012 #13
darkangel218 Oct 2012 #27
treestar Oct 2012 #28
DURHAM D Oct 2012 #6
broiles Oct 2012 #8
DemocratSinceBirth Oct 2012 #7
nc4bo Oct 2012 #10
courseofhistory Oct 2012 #14
SheilaT Oct 2012 #15
Autumn Oct 2012 #16
SheilaT Oct 2012 #18
Autumn Oct 2012 #19
muriel_volestrangler Oct 2012 #20
Autumn Oct 2012 #22
muriel_volestrangler Oct 2012 #24
Autumn Oct 2012 #26
muriel_volestrangler Oct 2012 #30
Maraya1969 Oct 2012 #17
muriel_volestrangler Oct 2012 #21
Autumn Oct 2012 #23
muriel_volestrangler Oct 2012 #25
Hydra Oct 2012 #31
muriel_volestrangler Oct 2012 #32
Hydra Oct 2012 #33
muriel_volestrangler Oct 2012 #34
Hydra Oct 2012 #35

Response to broiles (Original post)

Sat Oct 6, 2012, 10:00 PM

1. ??? Can you clear up what you are saying? A link or something

it sounds interesting.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Autumn (Reply #1)

Sat Oct 6, 2012, 10:15 PM

3. I haven't a link at this time, but I will look.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to broiles (Original post)

Sat Oct 6, 2012, 10:15 PM

2. Hmm. You are asking a good question...

although the thread title could maybe be worded a little differently.

"IRS forms released Tuesday by Mitt Romney's presidential campaign show that despite reporting income of $21.7 million, the couple paid only $20,603 in taxable wages for household help in 2010. This figure was divided among four women: Rosania Costa ($4,808), Kelli Harrison ($8,667), Susan Moore ($2,238) and Valerie Cravens Anae ($4,890)."

"According to a number of Boston-based domestic staffing agencies, the salary range for a housekeeper is between $20 and $30 an hour, which adds up to an annual salary of $40,000 to $50,000 based on forty-hour weeks and two weeks of paid vacation a year."

"But this number is only for one house, and the Romneys have three houses -- a 2,000 sq. ft. townhouse in Belmont, Mass., a 5,400 sq. ft. lake house on 11 acres in Wolfeboro, N.H., and a beach house in La Jolla, Calif., that is undergoing renovations to double its size."

"Even if the Romneys avoided spending time in La Jolla in 2010, they spent plenty of time in New Hampshire, with regular visits in the summer from five sons and their families."

"Yet the Romneys still paid only half of the lowest range of an average housekeeper's salary, which raises the question of who cleaned the Romney houses the other 50 percent of the time. A Romney campaign adviser declined to respond to questions from The Huffington Post about the housekeeping salaries."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/24/mitt-romney-maids-salary-tax-returns-election-2012_n_1228843.html

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to blue neen (Reply #2)

Sat Oct 6, 2012, 10:21 PM

4. wait a fucking minute.... they got household help for $2,238 for a year????

No fucking way in hell...........and the most expensive one they paid was $8,667???? That's not hired help, that's fucking slavery or something.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Autumn (Reply #4)

Sat Oct 6, 2012, 10:22 PM

5. Here's another interesting part of the article:

"UPDATE: 5:27 p.m. -- At least one of the four women paid for domestic work by the Romney family in 2010 also worked as chief of staff to the executive director of Mitt Romney's Free and Strong America PAC at the same time."

"Kelli Harrison was paid wages of $8,667 by the Romneys for personal assistant-type tasks and errands, said a source with knowledge of the situation. Harrison was the most highly paid of the four women listed as domestic employees of the Romney family, and the other three women did not work for the Romney PAC at all, the source confirmed. Harrison was paid for her PAC work with PAC funds."

"The designation of household employees is broad, and can include housekeepers, baby-sitters, personal assistants and other house-related tasks. It's possible that the Romney's hired an outside cleaning service to clean their houses and that managed the payroll, but the campaign declined to elaborate on their arrangement. Given the private nature of jobs like these, most high-profile individuals prefer to maintain their own staffs of people who know them well and who they trust."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/24/mitt-romney-maids-salary-tax-returns-election-2012_n_1228843.html

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to blue neen (Reply #5)

Sat Oct 6, 2012, 10:35 PM

9. $8,667 for personal assistant-type tasks and errands

Bullshit. No fucking way in hell any young woman is going to do that job for that amount, that's like around 700 dollars a month. Bullshit someone needs to dig into this crap.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to blue neen (Reply #5)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 01:12 PM

29. Maybe if they live in, then the housing can count as income

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Autumn (Reply #4)


Response to AnotherMcIntosh (Reply #11)

Sat Oct 6, 2012, 10:45 PM

12. Shit, she don't dress like that on around $700 a month. And what the hell is that a radio??

Maybe Mitt is secretly following his grandpas family tradition.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Autumn (Reply #12)


Response to Autumn (Reply #4)


Response to blue neen (Reply #2)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 01:11 PM

28. That's a housekeeper's salary?

Where do I apply?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to broiles (Original post)

Sat Oct 6, 2012, 10:29 PM

6. LOL

Sister Wives

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DURHAM D (Reply #6)

Sat Oct 6, 2012, 10:34 PM

8. That's what morman's call surplus wives.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to broiles (Original post)

Sat Oct 6, 2012, 10:31 PM

7. Is That Like An Uncle/Dad?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #7)

Sat Oct 6, 2012, 10:36 PM

10. I do believe that is exactly what OP is referring to

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to broiles (Original post)

Sat Oct 6, 2012, 11:04 PM

14. I read at one point

that these people were part time employees who did jobs "as needed", not regularly or full time.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to broiles (Original post)

Sat Oct 6, 2012, 11:08 PM

15. I'm sure that the Romneys hire a cleaning service.

It would actually be much cheaper than an actual live-in housekeeper, and it removes the Romneys from any real responsibility for an actual employee.

To speak ill of another rich person, Rose Kennedy was notorious for her cheapness towards her household employees. Every time she left a particular home (they had several) the staff were immediately not being paid any more. She could never, according to one biography I read, figure out why her servants were so unreliable.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SheilaT (Reply #15)

Sat Oct 6, 2012, 11:17 PM

16. So why wouldn't the cleaning services name be listed instead of the names

of their "housekeepers" that worked for them part time?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Autumn (Reply #16)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 12:03 AM

18. I doubt that a cleaning service is a deductible expense.

At least my tax preparers have never asked me if I'm using a cleaning service.

To clarify the way I'm thinking, they use a cleaning service for all of the major cleaning, and the housekeepers are doing more personal assistant kinds of tasks, such as grocery shopping, preparing meals. The housekeepers are direct employees, so they're on the tax returns. The cleaning service isn't a deductible item, any more than a yard service (which they have for sure) or the person who does the finish-up on your car at a car wash.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SheilaT (Reply #18)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 12:17 PM

19. Well those women work for peanuts then. My day care at one time cost

more than what those women get paid , part time at that. I think it shows what cheap asses they are.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Autumn (Reply #19)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 12:33 PM

20. How many hours did they work?

You seem to know.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to muriel_volestrangler (Reply #20)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 12:38 PM

22. Well I don't really know, that's why I was asking questions.

the one seems to do a lot from what the the article said. She seems to have a couple of different jobs and the work they said she does doesn't seem to be an hour a day. So sorry if my questions touched a nerve and offended you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Autumn (Reply #22)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 12:46 PM

24. But you 'know' they're paid peanuts

You are replying to someone saying they think a cleaning service wouldn't appear on the tax return, and the Huffington Post article, in a section to which you replied, also suggests an outside cleaning service; yet you're convinced these women should be getting paid a lot more. You have no idea what they do. Maybe it's to do the grocery shopping before they move into another of their houses. Maybe it's to look in on an empty house once a week.

I'm not offended, so much as disappointed at DUers leaping to conclusions that are irrelevant to the political campaign. Do you really think you could swing a voter by saying "the Romneys spend far too little on household help"? They are out of touch. You can't suddenly say "they should be paying for more people to do stuff for them".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to muriel_volestrangler (Reply #24)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 12:51 PM

26. When my daughter was 16 she worked for a cleaning agency, she made more than

2 of them did just working for the summer. The cleaning company paid her, not the clients she worked for. I find it odd.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Autumn (Reply #26)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 01:16 PM

30. And that is part of the point

Someone paid by a cleaning company would not show up on an individual's tax return. These are people that are paid directly by the Romneys, and we have no idea how long they worked. But going from there to "are they sister wives" is on a par with "Obama is a secret Muslim, because his grandfather was an open one".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to broiles (Original post)

Sat Oct 6, 2012, 11:33 PM

17. This reminds me so much of "Big Love" except they were much more lovable characters

But Bill was politically minded and they had to hide their "situation" from the voters until after the election, (for state senate).

I wouldn't be surprised if Mr. sociopath needed more than one wife. Not at all.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to broiles (Original post)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 12:37 PM

21. This thread sucks.

Luckily, none actually pays attention to DU in the media, but, if they did, we'd look ridiculous. Is that the best you can do? Accuse someone of fucking some women because you think there should be more household help appearing on his tax return, and because you don't like his religion?

There's so much to attack Romney on. 47%. His tax plans. Hell, his plans for just about anything. And yet you have to resort to inventing rumours about his sex life?

Fail.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to muriel_volestrangler (Reply #21)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 12:44 PM

23. Make a list of what you think we can talk about

that way DU won't suck for you, and your delicate sensibilities won't be offended.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Autumn (Reply #23)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 12:47 PM

25. 1. Conspiracy theories about 'sister wives'

That'll do. It's on the same level as birtherism.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to muriel_volestrangler (Reply #25)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 02:11 PM

31. Really? Because we know the Repubs are squeaky clean

When it comes to their marriages and sex lives, right?

BTW, I live in Utah, and polygamy is alive and well. I don't have a problem with it when it works(which is very rarely), but I do have a problem if Mitt is doing something like prostitution with these women.

And yes, we DO have a right to know, and a right to talk about what's screwy or missing in the info he's submitting, just as we have a right to know and talk about his dog on the roof of his car.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hydra (Reply #31)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 02:26 PM

32. So you're thinking some women you've only just heard of could be whores?

Because Romney has them on his payroll?

Listen to yourself. Your mind is in the gutter.

Yes, talk about the dog on the roof - that was real, not the imaginings of a sex-starved brain.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to muriel_volestrangler (Reply #32)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 02:43 PM

33. Oh, and the call boys scandal didn't happen either, I suppose

My concern is what these woman were doing, how much of it, and if they were paid fairly. It's more likely they got paid in a mediocre fashion for doing housework, but as pointed out upthread, these people were probably trusted by the Romneys, and one of them was one of his agents.

Remember John Edward's mistress? The one he kept with him on the campaign trail? Not unusual among this group.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hydra (Reply #33)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 02:56 PM

34. Here's an idea: write to a progressive investigative journalist

like Greg Palast, or Michael Moore. Ask them to investigate the 4 women who appear on his tax return, because their rate of pay makes you suspect they are prostitutes, or 'extra wives'.

How do you think they'd reply?

If you do want to change this to "they aren't paid enough", then edit out the bit about prostituition above, and ask the journalist to look at that instead. Do you think they'd regard it as a worthwhile investigation?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to muriel_volestrangler (Reply #34)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 03:16 PM

35. I'd be fine submitting it either way

But since I'm concerned with abuse, I'd ask them to investigate both options. And I'd add in a part about checking to see if Romney is understating what he paid them(tax fraud). And I'd ask them to see if they can prove his income was really $40 mill, as is suggested by his tithing. And if he was really a resident of Mass when he ran for Governor.

I could go on and on. If you have a problem with the fact that I'm open to the idea he might be paying money for women to give him sexual favors, I'm just going on statistics here. President Obama might have the only WH in the last 30 years where a sexual scandal was not going on, and Congress, especially the Repubs, seem to have a widespread case of it themselves over the last decade or more.

If you think this is trashy, trash the thread. As with everything we've seen from Mitt, it seems fishy, and I'd like to know what it is.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread