Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Segami
Segami's Journal
Segami's Journal
July 26, 2012
We Will NEVER STOP Asking YOU For YOUR TAX RETURNS!! This Demand will continue DAILY up until election day or when you decide to release them. Do you understand this Mitt, or would you like this spelled out clearly in pure Anglo-Saxon script?
"..Romney’s European vacation
was supposed to get the tax returns and Bain heat off of him, but even in London, the Republican nominee is greeted with one question. When are you going to release more tax returns?
Transcript from NBC News:
http://www.nbcuniversal.presscentre.com/content/detail.aspx?ReleaseID=11663&NewsAreaId=2
BRIAN WILLIAMS:
On to another topic– and that is your taxes. Can you say that your decision is firm that you’ll not do a walk-back between now and the convention, now and the fall election? That there will be no returns– more returns released by Mitt Romney?
MITT ROMNEY:
I’m following the same precedent that was put in place by John McCain. Two years, and by the way, hundreds of pages (LAUGH) of returns for the Democrat operatives to go through and twist and distort and to turn in different directions and try and make a big deal out of. But, you know, the American people are not real concerned about tax returns. They’re concerned about who can get this economy going and create good jobs again. And I can. The president hasn’t been able to do the job as he had expected to do. And I know how to get it done.
BRIAN WILLIAMS:
But you know– also know what happens in the real world, governor. People hear, “He’s not gonna release the rest of his returns,” and they wonder why. They wonder, “Is there a year there where he paid no taxes?” They wonder about expensive horses and houses and what have you. So I’ll ask another way. What is it that is preventing you from releasing the rest of your returns?
MITT ROMNEY:
Well one, I’ve released all the information about my financial holdings. That’s required by law. And then in addition beyond the law, have released, or will finally release act– when the last year is complete, two years of full returns. 
And what we’ve noted is our Democrat friends, take what’s there, twist it, distort it– dishonestly use it in– in attack ads. 
I just don’t wanna give ‘em more material than is required.
The Romney campaign thought that by going overseas they could flip the narrative, and let Romney try on the Commander in Chief role. Instead, the media continues to ask Romney and his campaign the one question that they definitely do not want to answer. When are you going to release more tax returns? Mitt Romney keeps answering that he will never release more tax returns, which only causes the media to ask again, when are you going to release more tax returns.
Mitt Romney doesn’t seem to grasp the fact that running for president is not the same as being a CEO. As a CEO, Romney had the power to issue answers that were proclamations to his employees. He is now finding out that on the campaign trail he is the potential employee, and the people conducting the job interview expect answers to their questions.
Let’s be honest, the Romney campaign thought they were going to get a breather from the questions about Bain and tax returns.
Their problem is that since their candidate stands for nothing, they have nothing to talk about. Romney isn’t going to Europe and then Israel to outline his foreign policy vision. He is going there to bash Obama surrounded by some neat vacation scenery.
http://www.politicususa.com/mitt-romney-flees-london-escape-questions-tax-returns.html
.
TAX RETURNS!! Mitt Romney FLEES To London But CAN'T Escape Questions About His TAX RETURNS
We Will NEVER STOP Asking YOU For YOUR TAX RETURNS!! This Demand will continue DAILY up until election day or when you decide to release them. Do you understand this Mitt, or would you like this spelled out clearly in pure Anglo-Saxon script?
"..Romney’s European vacation
was supposed to get the tax returns and Bain heat off of him, but even in London, the Republican nominee is greeted with one question. When are you going to release more tax returns?
Transcript from NBC News:
http://www.nbcuniversal.presscentre.com/content/detail.aspx?ReleaseID=11663&NewsAreaId=2
BRIAN WILLIAMS:
On to another topic– and that is your taxes. Can you say that your decision is firm that you’ll not do a walk-back between now and the convention, now and the fall election? That there will be no returns– more returns released by Mitt Romney?
MITT ROMNEY:
I’m following the same precedent that was put in place by John McCain. Two years, and by the way, hundreds of pages (LAUGH) of returns for the Democrat operatives to go through and twist and distort and to turn in different directions and try and make a big deal out of. But, you know, the American people are not real concerned about tax returns.
They’re concerned about who can get this economy going and create good jobs again. And I can. The president hasn’t been able to do the job as he had expected to do. And I know how to get it done.
BRIAN WILLIAMS:
But you know– also know what happens in the real world, governor. People hear, “He’s not gonna release the rest of his returns,” and they wonder why. They wonder, “Is there a year there where he paid no taxes?” They wonder about expensive horses and houses and what have you. So I’ll ask another way. What is it that is preventing you from releasing the rest of your returns?
MITT ROMNEY:
Well one, I’ve released all the information about my financial holdings. That’s required by law.
And then in addition beyond the law, have released, or will finally release act– when the last year is complete, two years of full returns. And what we’ve noted is our Democrat friends, take what’s there, twist it, distort it– dishonestly use it in– in attack ads. I just don’t wanna give ‘em more material than is required.
The Romney campaign thought that by going overseas they could flip the narrative, and let Romney try on the Commander in Chief role.
Instead, the media continues to ask Romney and his campaign the one question that they definitely do not want to answer. When are you going to release more tax returns? Mitt Romney keeps answering that he will never release more tax returns, which only causes the media to ask again, when are you going to release more tax returns.
Mitt Romney doesn’t seem to grasp the fact that running for president is not the same as being a CEO. As a CEO, Romney had the power to issue answers that were proclamations to his employees. He is now finding out that on the campaign trail he is the potential employee, and the people conducting the job interview expect answers to their questions.
Let’s be honest, the Romney campaign thought they were going to get a breather from the questions about Bain and tax returns.
Their problem is that since their candidate stands for nothing, they have nothing to talk about. Romney isn’t going to Europe and then Israel to outline his foreign policy vision. He is going there to bash Obama surrounded by some neat vacation scenery.
http://www.politicususa.com/mitt-romney-flees-london-escape-questions-tax-returns.html
.
July 26, 2012
Tweety on FIRE!!! (rimshot)
Romney is Running on SAME 'CRIMINAL AGENDA' That Got The U.S. into Iraq, Vietnam
Tweety on FIRE!!!
(rimshot)
July 26, 2012
Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner said he knew of irregularities surrounding the LIBOR rate as far back as 2007, but conceded that the rate was used to help structure the bailout of AIG. (July 27)
Timothy Geithner: US Knew of LIBOR Issue; Used for AIG
Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner said he knew of irregularities surrounding the LIBOR rate as far back as 2007, but conceded that the rate was used to help structure the bailout of AIG. (July 27)
July 25, 2012
Excerpt questions from 101 Tax Return Question Must Answer Before This PR Nightmare Goes Away for Him
4. How many years of tax returns will you be asking for from your vice presidential nominee?
5. Why?
6. What sorts of things are you looking for in the tax returns of your prospective VP candidates?
7. What is the sort of thing a prospective running mate might have on a personal income tax form that might make you remove that person from consideration as your running mate?
8. What if a potential running mate paid zero in taxes one year?
9. Would that be a reason for not selecting him or her?
10. What would you do if a potential running mate failed to file a tax return one year?
11. How would you judge a potential running mate who used extraordinarily aggressive techniques in creating tax deductions and was later fined by the IRS, but never found guilty of any criminal wrongdoing?
12. Why did you give John McCain 22 years of your tax returns?
13. Was it inappropriate for McCain to ask for so many tax returns?
14. Why didn’t you tell McCain that is was none
60. Is there anything in your tax returns that will tell us more about your Bain retirement IRA?
61. How did it get to be worth $100 million?
78. Are you afraid someone at the McCain campaign or the IRS could leak your returns to a reporter?
79. If so, do you have a crisis management plan in place?
80. If a candidate for high public office were found to be a tax cheat, would that be a reasonable issue for voters to take into consideration?
81. Have you ever taken part in any form of an amnesty program with the IRS?
82. Do you think that if a candidate for high public office took advantage of a tax amnesty program, that you and other voters might find that information relevant in deciding for whom to vote?
83. People can certainly understand why you would not want to release your personal tax records because no one enjoys that. But why have you seemingly raised this to an issue of paramount moral principle when it is clearly a tactical or procedural issue?
84. You demanded that Sen. Ted Kennedy disclose his taxes to show he has “nothing to hide.” Why?
85. What do you think you would have learned from him releasing more tax records?
86. Were you disappointed that Kennedy did not release tax records?
87. Why did you ask Kennedy to release his tax records when you ran against him and then decided not to release your own tax records when you ran against him?
88. Did you figure that if Kennedy did not have to release his tax records, then you should not have to either?
RELEASE YOUR TAX RETURNS MITT BECAUSE WE WON'T FORGET OR BE SIDETRACKED BY YOUR DIVERSIONS AND MISDIRECTIONS.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/tjwalker/2012/07/24/101-tax-return-questions-mitt-romney-must-answer-before-this-pr-nightmare-goes-away-for-him/
Btw Mitt,..WHERE ARE YOUR TAX RETURNS?
Excerpt questions from 101 Tax Return Question Must Answer Before This PR Nightmare Goes Away for Him
4. How many years of tax returns will you be asking for from your vice presidential nominee?
5. Why?
6. What sorts of things are you looking for in the tax returns of your prospective VP candidates?
7. What is the sort of thing a prospective running mate might have on a personal income tax form that might make you remove that person from consideration as your running mate?
8. What if a potential running mate paid zero in taxes one year?
9. Would that be a reason for not selecting him or her?
10. What would you do if a potential running mate failed to file a tax return one year?
11. How would you judge a potential running mate who used extraordinarily aggressive techniques in creating tax deductions and was later fined by the IRS, but never found guilty of any criminal wrongdoing?
12. Why did you give John McCain 22 years of your tax returns?
13. Was it inappropriate for McCain to ask for so many tax returns?
14. Why didn’t you tell McCain that is was none
60. Is there anything in your tax returns that will tell us more about your Bain retirement IRA?
61. How did it get to be worth $100 million?
78. Are you afraid someone at the McCain campaign or the IRS could leak your returns to a reporter?
79. If so, do you have a crisis management plan in place?
80. If a candidate for high public office were found to be a tax cheat, would that be a reasonable issue for voters to take into consideration?
81. Have you ever taken part in any form of an amnesty program with the IRS?
82. Do you think that if a candidate for high public office took advantage of a tax amnesty program, that you and other voters might find that information relevant in deciding for whom to vote?
83. People can certainly understand why you would not want to release your personal tax records because no one enjoys that. But why have you seemingly raised this to an issue of paramount moral principle when it is clearly a tactical or procedural issue?
84. You demanded that Sen. Ted Kennedy disclose his taxes to show he has “nothing to hide.” Why?
85. What do you think you would have learned from him releasing more tax records?
86. Were you disappointed that Kennedy did not release tax records?
87. Why did you ask Kennedy to release his tax records when you ran against him and then decided not to release your own tax records when you ran against him?
88. Did you figure that if Kennedy did not have to release his tax records, then you should not have to either?
RELEASE YOUR TAX RETURNS MITT BECAUSE WE WON'T FORGET OR BE SIDETRACKED BY YOUR DIVERSIONS AND MISDIRECTIONS.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/tjwalker/2012/07/24/101-tax-return-questions-mitt-romney-must-answer-before-this-pr-nightmare-goes-away-for-him/
July 25, 2012
"..The Wall Street Journal reported Monday that Mitt Romney is recounting a Jim Baker anecdote in which President Reagan ordered Baker, as White House chief of staff, to hold no national security meetings over a hundred day period early in his first term so that President Reagan and his team could focus on the economy. If the Journal's reporting is accurate—and I don't believe the Romney camp has challenged it—Romney should stop telling this false and foolish tale.
Here's the reporting:
[div class="excerpt"
" Mr. Romney made that clear [that he's most focused on the economy] at a July fundraiser in Montana as he rehashed the challenges Mr. Reagan faced when he took office. He recounted how [James] Baker, a former secretary of state, held a national security meeting about Latin America during the first 100 days of Mr. Reagan’s presidency. “And after the meeting, President Reagan called me in and said, ‘I want no more national-security meetings over the next 100 days—all of our time has to be focused on getting our economy going,’” Mr. Romney recalled Mr. Baker saying.."
For one thing, as Marc Thiessen points out, the fact that Romney's recounting this anecdote doesn't reflect well on Romney's understanding of the job he's campaigning for:
"Given the challenges a Romney administration will face – from a spiraling Syria to key decisions on the way forward in Afghanistan to dealing with Iran’s nuclear program and the threats from al Qaeda in Yemen and East Africa – it is unlikely Romney will have the luxury of ignoring foreign policy for his first 100 days....But the fact that Romney thinks it would be desirable to ignore the world for his first 100 days is troubling. Yes, the American people are focused on the economy – and understandably so. But Romney isn’t running for treasury secretary – he is running for Commander in Chief. And those responsibilities begin on Day 1 of his presidency."
What's more, I can't believe the story is true. Or if Reagan did once say what Baker says he said, it was an expression of exasperation after one (presumably unsatisfactory) meeting that neither Reagan nor Baker followed through on. In fact, I'll buy Jim Baker a very good dinner next time he's in Washington if he or anyone else can find a 100-day stretch (or a ten-day stretch) of the Reagan presidency in which President Reagan was involved in no national security meetings. I encourage interested readers to research this eminently researchable topic, and e-mail us what you find at [email protected]. I was able to spend just a few minutes scrolling thought the Reagan Foundation's helpful account of President Reagan's daily schedule, and I see no week, let alone three months, in which President Reagan doesn't seem to have held some sort of national security and foreign policy meetings. To say nothing of the fact that he ran for the presidency highlighting national security issues, and was a historic president in large part because of his national security accomplishments.
http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/did-president-reagan-neglect-national-security_648943.html
.
Bill Kristol to Mitt Romney: "STOP TELLING THIS FALSE & FOOLISH TALE About Reagan's First 100 Days
Did President Reagan Neglect National Security?"..The Wall Street Journal reported Monday that Mitt Romney is recounting a Jim Baker anecdote in which President Reagan ordered Baker, as White House chief of staff, to hold no national security meetings over a hundred day period early in his first term so that President Reagan and his team could focus on the economy. If the Journal's reporting is accurate—and I don't believe the Romney camp has challenged it—Romney should stop telling this false and foolish tale.
Here's the reporting:
[div class="excerpt"
" Mr. Romney made that clear [that he's most focused on the economy] at a July fundraiser in Montana as he rehashed the challenges Mr. Reagan faced when he took office. He recounted how [James] Baker, a former secretary of state, held a national security meeting about Latin America during the first 100 days of Mr. Reagan’s presidency. “And after the meeting, President Reagan called me in and said, ‘I want no more national-security meetings over the next 100 days—all of our time has to be focused on getting our economy going,’” Mr. Romney recalled Mr. Baker saying.."
For one thing, as Marc Thiessen points out, the fact that Romney's recounting this anecdote doesn't reflect well on Romney's understanding of the job he's campaigning for:
"Given the challenges a Romney administration will face – from a spiraling Syria to key decisions on the way forward in Afghanistan to dealing with Iran’s nuclear program and the threats from al Qaeda in Yemen and East Africa – it is unlikely Romney will have the luxury of ignoring foreign policy for his first 100 days....But the fact that Romney thinks it would be desirable to ignore the world for his first 100 days is troubling. Yes, the American people are focused on the economy – and understandably so. But Romney isn’t running for treasury secretary – he is running for Commander in Chief. And those responsibilities begin on Day 1 of his presidency."
What's more, I can't believe the story is true. Or if Reagan did once say what Baker says he said, it was an expression of exasperation after one (presumably unsatisfactory) meeting that neither Reagan nor Baker followed through on. In fact, I'll buy Jim Baker a very good dinner next time he's in Washington if he or anyone else can find a 100-day stretch (or a ten-day stretch) of the Reagan presidency in which President Reagan was involved in no national security meetings. I encourage interested readers to research this eminently researchable topic, and e-mail us what you find at [email protected]. I was able to spend just a few minutes scrolling thought the Reagan Foundation's helpful account of President Reagan's daily schedule, and I see no week, let alone three months, in which President Reagan doesn't seem to have held some sort of national security and foreign policy meetings. To say nothing of the fact that he ran for the presidency highlighting national security issues, and was a historic president in large part because of his national security accomplishments.
http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/did-president-reagan-neglect-national-security_648943.html
.
July 25, 2012
Mitt Romney = Pathological LIAR!
"..A person pretending to have virtues, moral beliefs, principles, and ethics that one does not actually have is a hypocrite, and when they use hypocrisy to deceive others they are, in fact, also a liar. As character traits, lying and hypocrisy inform low moral fiber bordering on vice, and should be the death knell for a politician’s career and yet they are a mainstay of Republican politics. The presumptive Republican nominee for president, Willard Romney, has amassed quite a record as a pathological liar, and now there is substantial proof that besides lying as a matter of course, he is a rank hypocrite. Romney made an issue over an out of context quote by the President regarding his comments about the necessity of government for services such as infrastructure in the success of business.
- In 1984 when Romney founded Bain Capital, he and his partners raised more than a third of their investment fund from wealthy foreign corporations registered in Panama because of tax advantages and questionable banking secrecy. There were questions at the time that some funding was from right-wing death squads in El Salvador, but no evidence of wrongdoing was ever proven. The point is that Romney had significant help (from foreigners) to launch his lucrative investment firm. He, as the President alluded, benefitted because “somebody along the line gave him some help.” In fact, Bain Capital, and Romney, was not reluctant to accept help from the government on the way to earning millions. For example, in 1994, a Connecticut state fund made a $500,000 investment in a Bain company, and the previous year gave Bain a separate $500,000 that would be repaid with royalties from software products. More help for Romney and Bain, but from taxpayers and not private foreign investors, and more rank hypocrisy from Willard.
Fast forward to this past week and a Romney campaign ad featuring an offended New Hampshire businessman indignantly claiming, “My father’s hands didn’t build this company? My hands didn’t build this company? My son’s hands aren’t building this company?” Well, short answer; not without significant government assistance you didn’t. The company, Gilchrest Metal, received $800,000 in tax-exempt revenue bonds from the New Hampshire Business Finance Authority to purchase equipment, and in the 1980s received a $500,000 U.S. Small Business Administration loan as well as matching funds from the federally-funded New England Trade Adjustment Assistance Center. The point is not that the businessman accepted government assistance, it is that he, like Romney, is a hypocrite and a liar for claiming they built their businesses without help from government which was President Obama’s point that “somebody along the line gave you some help.”
Romney has made a staple of assailing the President for “attacking free enterprise” and decrying what he calls “corporate welfare” and “crony capitalism” that he has directly profited from. Going back to January, Romney attacked the President regularly with comments such as, “Capitalism, free enterprise works. Crony capitalism does not. This president has engaged and is engaging in crony capitalism.” It turns out, that Romney’s predisposition to lying is as deeply rooted in his character as his hypocrisy and his arrogance precludes him from comprehending that at some point the public record will expose him for what he really is; a man of the lowest moral character who is devoid of ethics necessary for a small-town dogcatcher, much less a presidential candidate.
Romney’s business record is rife with government subsidies and grants that enabled him to reap huge profits he hides in offshore accounts to avoid paying taxes, and all the while he attacks the President for saying “if you were successful, somebody along the line gave you some help” to make the point that every American, business owner or otherwise, benefits from the sweat, toil, and taxpayer dollars that built roads, bridges, and in many cases, private businesses that drive the economy. Republicans, and Romney in particular, promote laissez faire principles that government has no place in a successful economy and it is their attempt at eliminating regulations that protect every person in America in one form or another.
cont'
http://www.politicususa.com/mitt-romney-ignores-corporate-welfare-bum-history.html
.
Mitt Romney IGNORES His OWN Corporate WELFARE BUM History
Mitt Romney = Pathological LIAR!
"..A person pretending to have virtues, moral beliefs, principles, and ethics that one does not actually have is a hypocrite, and when they use hypocrisy to deceive others they are, in fact, also a liar. As character traits, lying and hypocrisy inform low moral fiber bordering on vice, and should be the death knell for a politician’s career and yet they are a mainstay of Republican politics. The presumptive Republican nominee for president, Willard Romney, has amassed quite a record as a pathological liar, and now there is substantial proof that besides lying as a matter of course, he is a rank hypocrite. Romney made an issue over an out of context quote by the President regarding his comments about the necessity of government for services such as infrastructure in the success of business.
- In 1984 when Romney founded Bain Capital, he and his partners raised more than a third of their investment fund from wealthy foreign corporations registered in Panama because of tax advantages and questionable banking secrecy. There were questions at the time that some funding was from right-wing death squads in El Salvador, but no evidence of wrongdoing was ever proven. The point is that Romney had significant help (from foreigners) to launch his lucrative investment firm. He, as the President alluded, benefitted because “somebody along the line gave him some help.” In fact, Bain Capital, and Romney, was not reluctant to accept help from the government on the way to earning millions. For example, in 1994, a Connecticut state fund made a $500,000 investment in a Bain company, and the previous year gave Bain a separate $500,000 that would be repaid with royalties from software products. More help for Romney and Bain, but from taxpayers and not private foreign investors, and more rank hypocrisy from Willard.
Fast forward to this past week and a Romney campaign ad featuring an offended New Hampshire businessman indignantly claiming, “My father’s hands didn’t build this company? My hands didn’t build this company? My son’s hands aren’t building this company?” Well, short answer; not without significant government assistance you didn’t. The company, Gilchrest Metal, received $800,000 in tax-exempt revenue bonds from the New Hampshire Business Finance Authority to purchase equipment, and in the 1980s received a $500,000 U.S. Small Business Administration loan as well as matching funds from the federally-funded New England Trade Adjustment Assistance Center. The point is not that the businessman accepted government assistance, it is that he, like Romney, is a hypocrite and a liar for claiming they built their businesses without help from government which was President Obama’s point that “somebody along the line gave you some help.”
Romney has made a staple of assailing the President for “attacking free enterprise” and decrying what he calls “corporate welfare” and “crony capitalism” that he has directly profited from. Going back to January, Romney attacked the President regularly with comments such as, “Capitalism, free enterprise works. Crony capitalism does not. This president has engaged and is engaging in crony capitalism.” It turns out, that Romney’s predisposition to lying is as deeply rooted in his character as his hypocrisy and his arrogance precludes him from comprehending that at some point the public record will expose him for what he really is; a man of the lowest moral character who is devoid of ethics necessary for a small-town dogcatcher, much less a presidential candidate.
Romney’s business record is rife with government subsidies and grants that enabled him to reap huge profits he hides in offshore accounts to avoid paying taxes, and all the while he attacks the President for saying “if you were successful, somebody along the line gave you some help” to make the point that every American, business owner or otherwise, benefits from the sweat, toil, and taxpayer dollars that built roads, bridges, and in many cases, private businesses that drive the economy. Republicans, and Romney in particular, promote laissez faire principles that government has no place in a successful economy and it is their attempt at eliminating regulations that protect every person in America in one form or another.
cont'
http://www.politicususa.com/mitt-romney-ignores-corporate-welfare-bum-history.html
.
July 25, 2012
"...In 2002, Mitt Romney put to rest the myth of the self-made man by lecturing the Olympians in the opening ceremonies, that it takes a village to raise an Olympic champion...."
Romney to Olympians - "YOU DIDN'T GET HERE SOLELY ON YOUR OWN POWER"
&feature=player_embedded"...In 2002, Mitt Romney put to rest the myth of the self-made man by lecturing the Olympians in the opening ceremonies, that it takes a village to raise an Olympic champion...."
July 25, 2012
101 Tax Return Questions Mitt Romney Must Answer Before This PR Nightmare Goes Away for Him
Mitt Romney has taken a public relations beating for the last two weeks regarding his decision to release only one year of his Federal Income taxes. Romney’s efforts so far at damage control and changing topics have been unsuccessful. Romney does have a temporary reprieve, given the suspension of campaigning due to the Colorado massacre and several long-planned foreign trips by the Romney campaign. However, the IRS tax return PR nightmare for Romney has not gone away; it has merely been put on hold for a week or two.
Romney’s answers might not ever satisfy the Obama Campaign, the Democrats or members of the media. But now, Romney is facing increased pressure from leading Republican politicians, conservative media outlets and the entire GOP establishment.,Thus far, Romney’s response that he is simply not going to give more than one or two years of tax returns to the public because he is not legally required to do so is not satisfying anyone. The essence of good damage control is that people feel like the big questions have been answered and that there is nothing very interesting left to discuss.
Unfortunately for Romney, every time he talks about his taxes it arouses more and more curiosity and questions from political observers and even his supporters. If Romney wants to contain the issue of his personal tax returns in order to move on to other issues, he is going to have to answer all or most of the following questions:
cont'
http://www.forbes.com/sites/tjwalker/2012/07/24/101-tax-return-questions-mitt-romney-must-answer-before-this-pr-nightmare-goes-away-for-him/
.
101 Questions Mitt Romney MUST Answer About His TAX RETURNS
101 Tax Return Questions Mitt Romney Must Answer Before This PR Nightmare Goes Away for Him
Mitt Romney has taken a public relations beating for the last two weeks regarding his decision to release only one year of his Federal Income taxes. Romney’s efforts so far at damage control and changing topics have been unsuccessful. Romney does have a temporary reprieve, given the suspension of campaigning due to the Colorado massacre and several long-planned foreign trips by the Romney campaign. However, the IRS tax return PR nightmare for Romney has not gone away; it has merely been put on hold for a week or two.
Romney’s answers might not ever satisfy the Obama Campaign, the Democrats or members of the media. But now, Romney is facing increased pressure from leading Republican politicians, conservative media outlets and the entire GOP establishment.,Thus far, Romney’s response that he is simply not going to give more than one or two years of tax returns to the public because he is not legally required to do so is not satisfying anyone. The essence of good damage control is that people feel like the big questions have been answered and that there is nothing very interesting left to discuss.
Unfortunately for Romney, every time he talks about his taxes it arouses more and more curiosity and questions from political observers and even his supporters. If Romney wants to contain the issue of his personal tax returns in order to move on to other issues, he is going to have to answer all or most of the following questions:
cont'
http://www.forbes.com/sites/tjwalker/2012/07/24/101-tax-return-questions-mitt-romney-must-answer-before-this-pr-nightmare-goes-away-for-him/
.
July 25, 2012
" Up until 1978, the Mormon religion said that it was a sin to be black. (but then in 1978, God changed his mind).".....
As far as I'm concerned, the hate has not left for one second. The dog whistles are out in force.
"..A racial subtext certainly isn’t foreign to the Romney campaign’s critique of Barack Obama. But putting it so front and center may raise a few eyebrows. What the London Daily Telegraph calls one of Romney’s “advisors” told the paper that Romney was better positioned to understand and respect the ‘special relationship’ between the US and Great Britain than President Obama, whose father was from Kenya.
Said the advisor: “We are part of an Anglo-Saxon heritage, and he feels that the special relationship is special. The White House didn’t fully appreciate the shared history we have.”
It’s all of a piece with the constant refrains that Obama is an outsider to whatever is essential about the American experience of simply being an American. But it’s getting closer to the surface. And I suspect we’ll hear much more of it — from ‘advisors’ if not from Romney himself — during the trip abroad.
Late Update: It’s interesting as a side note that the Telegraph suggested the Romney aide’s remarks “may prompt accusations of racial insensitivity.” To which one might respond, ya think? The Telegraph does write from 90s era, unreconstructed Tory kind of viewpoint. Or maybe 1930s unreconstructed Tory kind of viewpoint. And casting this as a matter of ‘sensitivity’ seems part and parcel with that.
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/2012/07/romney_camp_mitt_will_bring_a_white_mans_touch.php?ref=fpblg
Romney ‘Advisor’: Mitt Will Bring a WHITE MAN'S TOUCH
" Up until 1978, the Mormon religion said that it was a sin to be black. (but then in 1978, God changed his mind).".....
As far as I'm concerned, the hate has not left for one second. The dog whistles are out in force.
"..A racial subtext certainly isn’t foreign to the Romney campaign’s critique of Barack Obama. But putting it so front and center may raise a few eyebrows. What the London Daily Telegraph calls one of Romney’s “advisors” told the paper that Romney was better positioned to understand and respect the ‘special relationship’ between the US and Great Britain than President Obama, whose father was from Kenya.
Said the advisor: “We are part of an Anglo-Saxon heritage, and he feels that the special relationship is special. The White House didn’t fully appreciate the shared history we have.”
It’s all of a piece with the constant refrains that Obama is an outsider to whatever is essential about the American experience of simply being an American. But it’s getting closer to the surface. And I suspect we’ll hear much more of it — from ‘advisors’ if not from Romney himself — during the trip abroad.
Late Update: It’s interesting as a side note that the Telegraph suggested the Romney aide’s remarks “may prompt accusations of racial insensitivity.” To which one might respond, ya think? The Telegraph does write from 90s era, unreconstructed Tory kind of viewpoint. Or maybe 1930s unreconstructed Tory kind of viewpoint. And casting this as a matter of ‘sensitivity’ seems part and parcel with that.
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/2012/07/romney_camp_mitt_will_bring_a_white_mans_touch.php?ref=fpblg
July 24, 2012
"..Tea Party Congressman Louie Gohmert (R-TX) lashed out at Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) for criticizing him and his fellow conservative members for suggesting that a senior aide to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is affiliated with the Muslim Brotherhood. Gohmert is part of a small group of five Republican members, led by Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN), who are demanding an investigation into whether Clinton deputy chief of staff Huma Abedin is connected to the group.
“Normally you don’t go blast somebody on the floor who is a colleague on the same side of the aisle unless you touch base with them,” Gohmert complained during an appearance on the Dennis Miller Show on Tuesday, referring to McCain’s denunciation of the group’s allegations as “nothing less than an unwarranted and unfounded attack.” The fiery Texan then launched into a personal attack against McCain, calling him “numb nuts”:
GOHMERT: Well, it’s obvious that John McCain didn’t even read the letter because of what he said in accusing Michele and us of making these horrible accusations. There were five letters and there were many things that are stated that are facts in each letter. And I wish some of these numb nuts would go out and read the letter before they make these horrible allegations about the horrible accusations we’re making. But we also know that John McCain himself had said back in the early stages of stuff going on in Egypt that he was, in his words, “unalterably opposed to helping the Muslim Brotherhood.” Well, obviously the unalterable person has been altered, so he is okay with it now.
listen to audio at approximately 1:18
http://thinkprogress.org/security/2012/07/24/576071/tea-party-congressman-calls-mccain-numb-nuts-for-criticizing-bachmanns-anti-muslim-witch-hunt/
.
BWHAHAHAHAHAHA:Tea Party Congressman CALLS McCain ‘NUMB NUTS’ For Criticizing Bachmann’s Anti-Muslim
"..Tea Party Congressman Louie Gohmert (R-TX) lashed out at Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) for criticizing him and his fellow conservative members for suggesting that a senior aide to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is affiliated with the Muslim Brotherhood. Gohmert is part of a small group of five Republican members, led by Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN), who are demanding an investigation into whether Clinton deputy chief of staff Huma Abedin is connected to the group.
“Normally you don’t go blast somebody on the floor who is a colleague on the same side of the aisle unless you touch base with them,” Gohmert complained during an appearance on the Dennis Miller Show on Tuesday, referring to McCain’s denunciation of the group’s allegations as “nothing less than an unwarranted and unfounded attack.” The fiery Texan then launched into a personal attack against McCain, calling him “numb nuts”:
GOHMERT: Well, it’s obvious that John McCain didn’t even read the letter because of what he said in accusing Michele and us of making these horrible accusations. There were five letters and there were many things that are stated that are facts in each letter. And I wish some of these numb nuts would go out and read the letter
before they make these horrible allegations about the horrible accusations we’re making. But we also know that John McCain himself had said back in the early stages of stuff going on in Egypt that he was, in his words, “unalterably opposed to helping the Muslim Brotherhood.” Well, obviously the unalterable person has been altered, so he is okay with it now.
listen to audio at approximately 1:18
http://thinkprogress.org/security/2012/07/24/576071/tea-party-congressman-calls-mccain-numb-nuts-for-criticizing-bachmanns-anti-muslim-witch-hunt/
.
Profile Information
Member since: Tue May 13, 2008, 03:07 AMNumber of posts: 14,923
