2687 replies to this topic

[brvheart]

DJ Vu, on 24 May 2012 - 01:07 PM, said:

I'd vote for him.

That was super well rehearsed. I wonder how many cuts they went through.

[FCP Bob]

Anybody have a theory on why Romney won't make his tax returns before 2010 public ?There's a very slim chance he did anything illegal but there has to be something that he doesn't want revealed.Everybody knows he's super rich so showing a very large income can't be the issue.

[akoff]

FCP Bob, on 18 July 2012 - 05:19 AM, said:

Anybody have a theory on why Romney won't make his tax returns before 2010 public ?There's a very slim chance he did anything illegal but there has to be something that he doesn't want revealed.Everybody knows he's super rich so showing a very large income can't be the issue.

maybe similar reasons why BHO didn't or won't produce a birth cert or college transcripts?? of course this will matter to people where as the press does everything they can to hide the other.

[CaneBrain]

Obama has actually produced two versions of his birth certificate but hey, otherwise, great points as usual.Bob, it's because there is going to be a year between 2000 and 2009 where he made a lot of money ($25,000,000+) and paid an effective tax rate of 7-8%. Guaranteed. It won't be illegal but it won't endear him to most of the electorate either.

[DJ Vu]

CaneBrain, on 18 July 2012 - 06:45 AM, said:

Bob, it's because there is going to be a year between 2000 and 2009 where he made a lot of money ($25,000,000+) and paid an effective tax rate of 7-8%. Guaranteed. It won't be illegal but it won't endear him to most of the electorate either.

This wouldn't surprise me. But it also wouldn't bother me. Good for him for taking advantage of the tax law. Are there really people out there who wouldn't try to pay less taxes for reasons other than laziness?Isn't Romney in some sort of scandal (or possibly pseudo-scandal) about his involvement with some company? Would that have anything to do with it? I have no idea what that is about.

[DJ Vu]

Also, did anybody here see that thing with Obama and the Kiss-Cam? He was at the Team USA basketball game and they showed him and Mrs. Obama on the jumbotron with the kiss-cam and he kind of leaned in, but she basically snubbed him. This was early in the game. But then, in possibly the first time in kiss-cam's history, they ran it back towards the end of the game and she gave him a little lovin' this time. So the question I have (while trying to establish the least significant question ever asked about politics) is this, was that second kiss-cam ordered for political reasons? Like, somebody saw that and said, "hey, we can't have this lasting image of the President trying to kiss his wife and being rejected; make them do it again." And maybe somebody said something to the First Lady about how she needs to kiss him?I was just thinking about that because I've been to a lot of basketball games and seen a lot of kiss-cams and they never run it twice. And if you were the people running it and you saw that the President of the United States didn't get a kiss, there's no way you put him up there again on your own, right?On the other hand, Mark Cuban has said he would run it at every time out if they let him. I don't know who "they" are since he's the owner of the team, but whatever.

[akoff]

CaneBrain, on 18 July 2012 - 06:45 AM, said:

Obama has actually produced two versions of his birth certificate but hey, otherwise, great points as usual.Bob, it's because there is going to be a year between 2000 and 2009 where he made a lot of money ($25,000,000+) and paid an effective tax rate of 7-8%. Guaranteed. It won't be illegal but it won't endear him to most of the electorate either.

which version was real?? i know this is all a reach for you but your boy barry spent months and months dragging out the birth cert (probably had his various version confused or being fabricated) and he never did produce the college stuff. i am not even saying he should just that it was swept under the rug asap. This on the other hand will be constant news i am sure.you sound angry, you back in jersey?you

[akoff]

DJ Vu, on 18 July 2012 - 07:19 AM, said:

Also, did anybody here see that thing with Obama and the Kiss-Cam? He was at the Team USA basketball game and they showed him and Mrs. Obama on the jumbotron with the kiss-cam and he kind of leaned in, but she basically snubbed him. This was early in the game. But then, in possibly the first time in kiss-cam's history, they ran it back towards the end of the game and she gave him a little lovin' this time. So the question I have (while trying to establish the least significant question ever asked about politics) is this, was that second kiss-cam ordered for political reasons? Like, somebody saw that and said, "hey, we can't have this lasting image of the President trying to kiss his wife and being rejected; make them do it again." And maybe somebody said something to the First Lady about how she needs to kiss him?I was just thinking about that because I've been to a lot of basketball games and seen a lot of kiss-cams and they never run it twice. And if you were the people running it and you saw that the President of the United States didn't get a kiss, there's no way you put him up there again on your own, right?On the other hand, Mark Cuban has said he would run it at every time out if they let him. I don't know who "they" are since he's the owner of the team, but whatever.

everything the man does is for political reasons, he has never done anything else...was this event one of them, who knows, but don't ever believe he is sincere about anything outside of taking care of himself.

[DJ Vu]

akoff, on 18 July 2012 - 07:53 AM, said:

you sound angry, you back in jersey?

In what world does that sound like an angry post?And are you trying to take back your crown from colonel feathers?

[CaneBrain]

DJ Vu, on 18 July 2012 - 07:19 AM, said:

This wouldn't surprise me. But it also wouldn't bother me. Good for him for taking advantage of the tax law. Are there really people out there who wouldn't try to pay less taxes for reasons other than laziness?Isn't Romney in some sort of scandal (or possibly pseudo-scandal) about his involvement with some company? Would that have anything to do with it? I have no idea what that is about.

He apparently left Bain Capital in 1999 on leave to run the Olympics. They kept his name as CEO on the SEC filings from 1999-2002. They also say he retroactively retired after the Olympics after deciding to not end his leave. Jon Stewart had some fun with retroactive retirement; it sounds pretty silly. They should have taken his name off the SEC filings; however, it's probable he really was just focusing on Salt Lake at the time and it merely looks bad because they figured he would return to Bain in '02 and Mitt decided to launch a political career instead.I don't blame him for taking advantage of tax loopholes but we both know that it won't play well and that, more importantly, it gives credence to the Democratic talking point: "Our tax revenues are at the lowest levels in half a century because rich people get crazy tax breaks. Any comprehensive deficit reduction plan should include revenue increases based on closing these loopholes and giving the wealthiest Americans a tax rate that makes sense." It's going to be hard for Mitt to rebut that argument if he is making bushels of money some years and paying the same tax rate as a janitor.Also, according to this article: http://www.cnn.com/2....html?hpt=hp_c2, the one full tax return Romney has disclosed suggests some odd irregularities. Nobody wants to hear about a Presidential candidate with a Swiss Bank account. Maybe he actually did do some shady and borderline illegal shit back in the day. I don't believe that is the case but I suppose it's possible.

[mrdannyg]

DJ Vu, on 18 July 2012 - 07:19 AM, said:

This wouldn't surprise me. But it also wouldn't bother me. Good for him for taking advantage of the tax law. Are there really people out there who wouldn't try to pay less taxes for reasons other than laziness? Isn't Romney in some sort of scandal (or possibly pseudo-scandal) about his involvement with some company? Would that have anything to do with it? I have no idea what that is about.

Cain basically covered this. To take it a step further, in the period where Romney may or may not have been running Bain Capital, the company invested in some things that were perfectly legal and good investments, but Romney is either now against them or they're bad for the environment or some shit. It's similar to his taxes - no one really thinks he cheated on his taxes or invested in anything illegal, but I guess people think that someone should pay more taxes than legally required or only invest in solar power if they ever want to become President in the future.Cain and I are both anti-Romney, and neither of us give a crap about any of that. The only "problem" with the Bain stuff is how poorly and confusingly the Romney camp is refuting it in attempts to not contradict things that were said years ago.

DJ Vu, on 18 July 2012 - 07:19 AM, said:

Also, did anybody here see that thing with Obama and the Kiss-Cam? He was at the Team USA basketball game and they showed him and Mrs. Obama on the jumbotron with the kiss-cam and he kind of leaned in, but she basically snubbed him. This was early in the game. But then, in possibly the first time in kiss-cam's history, they ran it back towards the end of the game and she gave him a little lovin' this time. So the question I have (while trying to establish the least significant question ever asked about politics) is this, was that second kiss-cam ordered for political reasons? Like, somebody saw that and said, "hey, we can't have this lasting image of the President trying to kiss his wife and being rejected; make them do it again." And maybe somebody said something to the First Lady about how she needs to kiss him? I was just thinking about that because I've been to a lot of basketball games and seen a lot of kiss-cams and they never run it twice. And if you were the people running it and you saw that the President of the United States didn't get a kiss, there's no way you put him up there again on your own, right? On the other hand, Mark Cuban has said he would run it at every time out if they let him. I don't know who "they" are since he's the owner of the team, but whatever.

I don't doubt for a second that the President's PR peeps had them run it again, and made sure the FLOTUS planted a real one this time. I didn't think anyone was even questioning it.

akoff, on 18 July 2012 - 07:53 AM, said:

which version was real?? i know this is all a reach for you but your boy barry spent months and months dragging out the birth cert (probably had his various version confused or being fabricated) and he never did produce the college stuff. i am not even saying he should just that it was swept under the rug asap. This on the other hand will be constant news i am sure. you sound angry, you back in jersey? you

Good point, because the whole birther thing was only in the news for like 5 minutes, then everyone stopped talking about it.

[DJ Vu]

mrdannyg, on 18 July 2012 - 10:38 AM, said:

I don't doubt for a second that the President's PR peeps had them run it again, and made sure the FLOTUS planted a real one this time. I didn't think anyone was even questioning it.

Yeah, I think that had to happen. And that's really funny, right?

[FCP Bob]

The Emerging Theory on Mitt's Taxes: It's 2009

[mrdannyg]

DJ Vu, on 18 July 2012 - 01:39 PM, said:

Yeah, I think that had to happen. And that's really funny, right?

Oh definitely. I'd say it's sad, but someone on twitter recently linked an article that said both parties are now requiring anyone wanting to use an actual quote from a live interview submit the quote to their PR people, and that the "quotes" often come back altered and can only be used in their altered form. Which is pretty much the end of the world in terms of hoping for actual journalism or reality from people's public personas.But yeah, it is pretty funny. I can imagine the PR staffers at the highest level in the world debating it, then finding arena management and forcing them to...re-run the kiss cam? And telling them to be sure to put it on obama and michele? And telling the First Lady that this time, she has to kiss her husband when the camera says so, otherwise people might remember that...the last Democrat President actually did have an unhappy (adulterous) relationship in office, and his First Lady would've certainly known about the adulterous behaviour before it became public...I kind of went off there.

[Balloon guy]

Romney should not turn over any tax returns beyond what he's already done.This is just a fishing expedition, and he'd be stupid to give the other side whatever they ask for.No one else has been asked for this stuff before, why now?Because Team Obama has nothing to point to from his accomplishments, so he needs to paint a picture that a successful man in this country isn't to be admired.How dare someone risk his own money investing it into poorly run companies and turn them around or part them out when they will fail...then hire a tax professional to follow the laws and pay the fewest taxes he is required to pay, followed by donating 100 times more than his democrat rival ever dreamed of doing when he was running for office the first time.

[mrdannyg]

Balloon guy, on 18 July 2012 - 06:01 PM, said:

Romney should not turn over any tax returns beyond what he's already done.This is just a fishing expedition, and he'd be stupid to give the other side whatever they ask for.No one else has been asked for this stuff before, why now?Because Team Obama has nothing to point to from his accomplishments, so he needs to paint a picture that a successful man in this country isn't to be admired.How dare someone risk his own money investing it into poorly run companies and turn them around or part them out when they will fail...then hire a tax professional to follow the laws and pay the fewest taxes he is required to pay, followed by donating 100 times more than his democrat rival ever dreamed of doing when he was running for office the first time.

Has anyone ever entered office as wealthy as Romney? This is a serious question, not a dig. Though you're arguing terribly, we agree that Romney should not turn over his tax returns, and if all he did was invest and follow tax laws, he has nothing to be ashamed of, even if he *gasp* paid a low tax rate. I'm curious of your opinion and others - what if it turns out that Romney did have an illegal Swiss account, and turned it over during the amnesty period in 2008-2009. There is no evidence that he did, but in my opinion, that's the only thing that could potentially found in all this that is actually a problem. Does it mean something to you if he was keeping an "illegal" account?

[colonel Feathers]

FCP Bob, on 18 July 2012 - 05:19 AM, said:

Anybody have a theory on why Romney won't make his tax returns before 2010 public ?There's a very slim chance he did anything illegal but there has to be something that he doesn't want revealed.Everybody knows he's super rich so showing a very large income can't be the issue.

Ill give you a good reason. If he releases 12 years of taxes which are prolly a few thousand pages, the rest of the election cycle will be cluttered with the media doing an anal exam on every page. He would have to explain in detail every little item somebody wouldnt understand. Also if he was involved in any kind of partnerships, these other people would be scutinized to the end of the earth trying to find some dirt on them. I can just picture the new york times headline, ROMNEY PARTNER IN DWI SCANDAL>

[Balloon guy]

mrdannyg, on 19 July 2012 - 04:25 AM, said:

Has anyone ever entered office as wealthy as Romney? This is a serious question, not a dig. Though you're arguing terribly, we agree that Romney should not turn over his tax returns, and if all he did was invest and follow tax laws, he has nothing to be ashamed of, even if he *gasp* paid a low tax rate.I'm curious of your opinion and others - what if it turns out that Romney did have an illegal Swiss account, and turned it over during the amnesty period in 2008-2009. There is no evidence that he did, but in my opinion, that's the only thing that could potentially found in all this that is actually a problem. Does it mean something to you if he was keeping an "illegal" account?

John Kerry was probably on par if not richer, of course it wasn't his money it was his wife's.Algore is worth 3 times Romney's net worth, but only after he exploited the GW scam for his personal gain and a free Nobel Prize.If he did anything illegal, then of course I want him to pay the price. But as CF just said, this is really just a fishing expedition that sets a precedence of Democrats getting to ask anything and Republicans having to jump through the hoops to avoid the appearance of hiding something. No one should get to say: "I want my opponent to perform this act or else he is a scumbag" and get a willing media to parrot this over and over.The funny thing is last week it was the Republicans asking the Obama administration for the paperwork, (that is supposed to be public), regarding Fast and Furious, and Obama declared Executive Privilege and the media dropped the story since Obama has a 'right to not release things just because the Republicans ask him too'

[FCP Bob]

My understanding is that anybody who has to be approved by Congress for a position in the Gov't such as an Ambassador and much lesser positions has to reveal multiple years of their financial records.For somebody running for President to not think that their own financial records will be expected to be disclosed is pretty head scratching. As soon as Obama won last time Romney knew that he would be running in 2012 so you would think that he would have factored that into his decision making.

[JustDoIt]

FCP Bob, on 18 July 2012 - 05:19 AM, said:

Anybody have a theory on why Romney won't make his tax returns before 2010 public ?There's a very slim chance he did anything illegal but there has to be something that he doesn't want revealed.Everybody knows he's super rich so showing a very large income can't be the issue.

Bob the answer is simple.Welcome to day 1278 of President Chaos Term.President Chaos forewarned us in the speech he gave in his acceptance speech in Denver in 2008. "If you don't have a record to run on, then you paint your opponent as someone people should run from. You make a big election about small things".We understand that if Romney bows to pressure that will take President Chaos record off the table for a month or so, then on to the next diversion.Out of all this Chaos has produced nothing. I repeat NOTHING. Just innuendo, NO FACTS.Really CainBrain you call this journalism, innuendo not facts.“Also, according to this article: http://www.cnn.com/2....html?hpt=hp_c2, the one full tax return Romney has disclosed suggests some odd irregularities. Nobody wants to hear about a Presidential candidate with a Swiss Bank account. Maybe he actually did do some shady and borderline illegal shit back in the day. I don't believe that is the case but I suppose it's possible”."Our tax revenues are at the lowest levels in half a century because rich people get crazy tax breaks. Any comprehensive deficit reduction plan should include revenue increases based on closing these loopholes and giving the wealthiest Americans a tax rate that makes sense."Easy way to solve this. Tax the super rich at 75 % then we will understand the real problem, SPENDING.The following link is the best thing I have seen. Play with it, you can plug in the rate to change and see the results.http://finance.townhall.com/columnists/mikeshedlock/2012/04/13/buffett_tax_hype_use_our_interactive_graph_to_see_hype_for_yourself/page/2Of course there is another problem, you go crazing like France is doing and that money goes bye byeDemocrats voting for President Chaos budget’s the last two years, ZERO..