Sunday Open Thread [7.15.12]
This ad has a lot of truth to it.
The Washington Post reported that Mitt Romney had turned over twenty-three years of tax returns to John McCain’s vice-presidential team. Those returns covered Romney’s entire Bain career, from 1984 until 2002, and also included his returns from 2002 until 2008. Obviously, McCain understood how damaging Bain could be, and he wanted to know the details of Romney’s business and what income he derived from and taxes (or lack thereof) he paid on it. Romney, hungry for power, happily obliged and turned over everything.
Booman asks:
McCain wanted the records from Bain Capital because he wanted to know whether Mitt Romney had any vulnerabilities that might embarrass him and potentially cost him the chance to win the election and become president. Now, why should we the people not operate with these same assumptions? Shouldn’t we, like McCain, refuse to consider Romney’s candidacy if he won’t show us his records? And shouldn’t we, like McCain, be worried that he’ll embarrass us and our country if it turns out that he has things in his record that he had good reason to hide? What makes John McCain more important than the voters? He looked at those twenty-three years of tax returns and thought Sarah Palin, a person he met once and barely knew, would be a better more responsible choice. If Romney won’t let us make up our own minds about his tax returns, maybe we should just defer to McCain’s judgment then. We’ll assume that Romney is worse than Palin.
Meanwhile, I love this photo.
We have his tax returns, which is more than he should have turned over. Why do you guys want 25 years worth. No one else has ever done that? Your guys want to make opposition research easier so your guys can lie and distort. Why would he do that?
If you press that issue, you lose. President Obama wouldn’t even turn his birth certificate over without ceaseless badgering and certainly not 20 years of tax returns. It is like the foolish request to see his college records. This has nothing to do with the Presidency. People see through it on both sides.
Candidates need to start practicing this line. None of your business. I believe invasion privacy is one of the biggest issues of our time and I am not going to feed into it.
We don’t want 20 years of tax returns David all we want is the same amount of years his father made public. What is Mittens hiding????
We have one year at 2010, and an estimate for 2011.
David, why is John McCain more important to Romney than the American people?
Why are Republican strategists and Republican Governors from across the land demanding their own nominee fully release all his returns like he did with John McCain?
Because they know this issue will destroy Mitt Romney’s candidacy. Luckily for us Mitt Romney is so arrogant and narcissistic that he will not buckle, and as a result he will lose the election in a massive landslide, taking down the House GOP majority with it.
And you know that to be true.
David is simply wrong that pressing this is a political loser for Team Obama. The longer Romney fails to comply with tt he “Romney Rule” as established by his father, the worse he looks.
Martin O’Malley made this point the other day about McCain picking Palin once he saw Romney’s tax returns. What is remarkable to me is that he didn’t spend the past several years he’s been running for President getting his army of accountants to come up with a better answer than stonewalling on this thing. Romney called for Ted Kennedy to release *his* tax returns when the ran against him for Senate. Wonder why that kind of demand for transparency is no longer operative?
Taking a break from the Rmoney tax returns — this is a “must read article from and ESPN reporter who covered Joe Paterno and defended him when the Sandusky horror broke. Now he feels betrayed and misled, things you almost never hear from reporters about their subjects.
I don’t watch TV polical panel shows, but I saw a minute Iof George Stephonopolis, and it looks like the Romney strategy is to stonewall this and hope it goes away.
LMAO.
@ Republican David
“Candidates need to start practicing this line. None of your business. I believe invasion privacy is one of the biggest issues of our time and I am not going to feed into it.”
er..at least not in this case. Of course you could provide some evidence that you have said this before about other candidates (Obama) and I will accept that you have not prosituted you principles and are not a hypocrite.
Worst Person in the World – the guy who turned off the microphones mid-song while Bruce Springsteen and Paul McCartney were performing at a massive outdoor concert in London, because of a 10:30 curfew.
SOMETHING SHINY! SOMETHING SHINY! PAY NO ATTENTION TO THE MAN BEHIND THE CURTAIN!!
Romney seems to be suffering from a distinct lack of Teflon. Political Teflon is a gift bestowed by the media, usually to Republicans, but they are not giving it to Romney. Which is sort of a mystery.
With any other Republican by now the press would be helping them label the Bain attacks as super-liberal attacks on capitalism, and condemning Obama for questioning Romney’s patriotism. Maybe that’s too big a load for even a modern journalist to swallow.
Or perhaps the press is simply sensing the mood of the public and deciding not to go there with this Republican candidate.
Whatever the reason, Romney’s got Velcro instead of Teflon.
Does anyone have information about Ron Fitzgerald, the person running as a Libertarian for the 35th Rep. District?
Is he a 9/12-Patriot-meeting-attending, Bill-Colley-listening, Jeff-Christopher-supporting, uber-conservative?
Since no one registered as a Dem to take on Wilson, Fitzgerald is my only other choice on election day.
Back up to the battle between David A. and DelDem. …
Turning in a current tax form is fair. Not turning that in would imply one had something to hide. However going back twenty-five years and turning that over to every Tom, Dick, and Harry to scrutinize and find things inside that even you didn’t know, is a little extreme.
There is a huge difference between opening up oneself to attack from all sides, and letting a trusted friend look over what could be damaging material in ones past.
This whole idea of saying … “why won’t you show us your tax returns”, and trying to impune a character flaw over something NO AMERICAN WOULD EVER DO, is absolute nonsense.
I know of no American stupid enough to post all twenty five years of his past income up on the internet.
Plugs instead should be given to Romney for at least, not being THAT stupid.
If you truly think its a great idea, put your last twenty five years of tax forms up for us to see? If you can’t, then you need to drop this entire issue, because it simply makes Democrats look like they are currently on acid.
We didn’t find out abut the secret Swiss bank accounts until Romney amended his 2011 taxes. How many other shady schemes is he hiding?
Welcome back Dominique. You’ve got the Romney talking points down. (talking point). Everything is off limits except for how much you personally dislike the black guy.
Who is asking for 25 years? The Obamas’ released theirs from 2000, the Bidens’ from 1998. Even Bush and Cheney released years of tax info. The only people who won’t are the current crop of wingnut Rs who have tax shelters and wingnut welfare to hide.
Presidential Tax Forms
jason330 @10.47. Exactly the point. Probably a lot. But that is true of all business who earn their income off of bankruptcies, investments, and international intrigue. I’m afraid unless you are a small business person, every business is tainted with similar shades of blame, simply because it is legal.
We already have enough information to make a decision on who should be president. Romney’s plan will bankrupt America. Obama’s plan will pull us out of the hole. It is all about increasing taxes. Raise taxes, the economy roars back. Drop taxes more, it flies overseas.
Duh. We’ve lived it for 12 years. What more evidence does one need?
I’d love for Team Obama to do a hard hitting ad going after Romney’s policy proposals. Once Romney puts out some policy proposals, of course.
It might be over America’s heads. I’m looking around the store I’m in right now, thinking, nope, he won’t get it. Naw, she won’t get it. Unh-unh, they won’t get it.
Obama is doing fine with what he’s got. The message is clear and is being absorbed. That message is:
Romney’s policies are exactly why our jobs went overseas. Electing him will continue that same tired old process.
Agreed.
Cass @10.54 You are missing my point. Would you turn your tax forms in since 1998?
There is a reason both Biden and Obama could. They weren’t venture capitalists by trade. They were public figures who got a public salary so of course they could legitimately and willingly turn theirs over.
Seriously, all of us. It would take a lot for most of us to turn our income statements over to public scrutiny. Even if just for the fact that people would actually find out how little we were actually earning. “Oh, look at this honey, we’ve got to stop befriending these people. They have no net worth. We can’t be seen with them. They are so far beneath us.”
In that case, Romney is probably a lot more like each of us than are Biden or Obama, as much as it hurts me to have to say it…
Obama is getting away with murder by proposing to let the tax cuts for the rich expire, considering he signed them less than two years ago. Nobody is calling him out for it. Romney isn’t even calling him out for the flipflop (which would make a helluva Romney ad).
Basically, Obama is getting a free ride by campaigning on a popular position (let them expire), while everybody knows he will extend them again. Now that’s some serious Teflon.
If I was running for President, I would turn over my tax forms. Why not?
It doesn’t make sense to ask if I would release my tax data since I’m not running for anything. And making this release into some kind of hidden class question is just plain silly. People who are running for President of the United States owe some transparency — a standard that most who came before them (in recent history, at any rate) have been able to live with. Since Rmoney won’t release his returns, it is absolutely fair to wonder why. As Jason points out, it was via a tax return that we understood that Rmoney was paying way less in taxes than the rest of us. It is also how we understand that he is running for President to further reduce his tax liability (and that of his friends). It is also how we know he got a 77 or 78K tax break for his horse.
Nobody is calling him out for it.
And why would they? You would be in the extreme minority of people who never understood that the extension also came with stimulative measures for other parts of the economy.
You can take a time out today if you are going to continue with this fraud.
Not releasing relevant tax returns brings Romney’s judgement into question. Did he really think that this would not be an issue? Does he not comprehend what running for President means? Is he naive or so wealthy that brazen disregard for tradition has become part of his personality?
“And why would they?”
Are you saying one’s record has no bearing on one’s campaign promises? That is after all what we are talking about with Romney’s Bain record. Obama’s record is fair game too.
“the extension also came with stimulative measures for other parts of the economy.”
*yawn* And now the results are in. That deal was two steps forward, three steps back for wage-earners and the unemployed. But a giant leap for the rich.
“You can take a time out today if you are going to continue with this fraud.”
Classic Cassic!
I’m saying that the record is abit broader than you ever want to admit. So take this fraudulent shit elsewhere.
This is not the republican primary. Mitt romney will not get one more vote by releasing a bunch of tax returns. All he would accomplish by releasing a bunch of returns is give the liberal msm a bunch of information they dont understand anyway, which would allow them to continue to mi constrew infirmatuon, and jump to false conclusions. Besides, the people asking for these returns have not even thouroly read the rerurns already released. Also, not one person wanting and asking for these returns is going to vote for him. So keep waisting everyones time asking, but they are not going to get them
I think Romney will turn them over. At some point he has to gnaw off his leg to get out of the trap.
“the liberal msm…”. Hilarious.
Free trampoline. All you have to do is get it out of the tree and it’s yours.
Agree w/ kavips. A QUARTER CENTURY of tax returns and it’s still not enough….for those who aren’t going to vote for him anyway. Great way to distract people though….oh, and was Obama even filing taxes 25 years ago? Or was he still a student, generating an essential pass….? Get real.
What about the George Romney standard? 12 years.
But there aren’t a QUARTER CENTURY of tax returns that he has released. Just 2010 and an estimated 2011. The Obamas released theirs since 2000. If the shoe was on the other foot, this wouldn’t be a distraction — it would be an issue of trust and transparency.
“That deal was two steps forward, three steps back for wage-earners and the unemployed. But a giant leap for the rich.”
You have a link for that?
kavips: Speak for yourself. If releasing tax returns were standard procedure in your field of endeavor, you wouldn’t release them? I’m pretty sure you would.
The notion that business people would for some reason be more reluctant than politicians to engage in such transparency makes no sense to me. What’s that meme conservatives love to conjure when they’re calling for drug testing and other intrusive measures? Oh, yeah — the only people with anything to worry about are those with something to hide.
And I never needed to see the Obama’s either–Let the IRS look at taxes, if they suspect something. All this has have ever done was embarrass the Bidens of their lack of charitable dollars, and disclose others wealth, lack of wealth, and personal/quiet charity. Private citizens and their private money, should be held as private as their health. I suppose we’ll go round #2 now with physicals. And those supportive of Obama will get all twisted that he smokes, and indignant about him not allowing himself to be photographed smoking. Let’s get back to issues: jobs, education, healthcare, national security….leave distant taxes in the last century.
“And I never needed to see the Obama’s either … leave distant taxes in the last century.”
To each his own. I couldn’t care less about what either one has to say about any of those issues, since they’ll be far from truthful about any of it. The tax returns, on the other hand, are hard data.
What they say is far less important than what they do, and what they have done.
You mean like work and pay taxes? Give it up, it’s not the citizenry’s business to be tintillated by somebody else’s revenue and report. It’s sensationalizing a private matter that the IRS has every authority to call into question if needed, and not a financial sideshow for the public to look and either covet or comment. This is personal wealth/earnings–not some public institution accounting records.
All you delaware liberals better sharpen up your socialist pencils. Tough 2 or 3 weeks coming for the president. First, on tuesday, sheriff arpaio holds another press conference to further show evidence of the massive cover up concerning the presidents fake birth certificate, and forged selective service card. the news conference is being streamed live.
Second, romney is annoucing his vp before is middle east trip. And its going to be a douzy.
Third, 2016, the movie opens nationally on july 27th. This cant be good for obama. So, as I said, to combat all this, you all better sharpen up your very best socialist pencils
Rusty – I’m curious. Do you have the post-election 2012 analysis of why Obama won already written, or are you going to try to bang out a few lines in the heat of the moment?
Painesme, everyone here knows where I stand, romney will win 40 states. For at least three months I offerred to bet anyone on the dl a dollar. But, sadly, no one took me up on it
40 states, eh? Does that bet still stand? I’ll also accept a photo of you giving Obama a thumbs up in lieu of currency.
Wow. They should save Arpaio as an October surprise. If he reveals his shocking new material now, the liberal msm has months to undermine the good sheriff’s credibility.
Save it, Joanne. Your bad government stance aside, everyone has done it for years now — ever since Mitt’s dad set the standard.
I think Rusty is using a cheap store-brand type of tin foil instead of Reynold’s Wrap – those voices he’s trying to keep out are seeping in and making him write crazy things.
What’s that? That’s his normal behavior?
Never mind.
Listening to WGMD replay of Pires saying Carper is sick and demanding he release his physical. WOW.
“That deal was two steps forward, three steps back for wage-earners and the unemployed. But a giant leap for the rich.”
You have a link for that?
Geezer, you know there isn’t one single link. But I just looked at some of the major numbers – U6 unemployment, household income, foreclosures, consumer confidence, polls on CEO plans to hire.
Just about every statistic that means anything to economic security for an average family is stagnant, down, or growing imperceptibly at best. And the long-term damage is accumulating in deferred educations and loss of career growth, among other effects.
Most of all, workers have no sense of economic security – the sense that if they lose their job, they can find another one before they lose their house.
Supporters of the 2010 deal are left with saying “But it would have been worse without it.” I don’t agree with that. I think the full expiration would have gone a long way toward fixing the structural imbalances that are the root cause of the shrinking middle class. And the tax cuts for the rich just suck up and nullify any stimulus we dump into the economy.
I think you are misreading those statistics. They indicate only that the economy didn’t recover. If you place all the blame for that on Obama, you might as well be in the Republican camp — that’s their claim, too, and they’re careful to ignore the role of Republican intransigence in his “failure.”
Your blithe embrace of “fixing the structural imbalances” ignores the human suffering ending all the tax cuts would have caused — even impartial economists estimate it would have put us back into recession. If you’re saying that only the rich should have had their tax cuts expire, you’ll have to acknowledge than an extra $70 billion a year in the budget is meaningless if the Republicans won’t let you spend it on helping the middle class.
fixing the structural imbalances that are the root cause of the shrinking middle class
Eliminating those tax cuts would not address these imbalances, period. And I’m still waiting for you to produce data (or at least a real economist) that would point to that.
“the human suffering ending all the tax cuts would have caused ”
Now there’s an argument from the Republican camp.
“you’ll have to acknowledge than an extra $70 billion a year in the budget is meaningless if the Republicans won’t let you spend it on helping the middle class.”
I do acknowledge that stimulus is meaningless as long as the tax structure is tilted so it all runs into the pockets of the rich.
That’s why it is a greater kindness to workers and the unemployed to fix the job creation enviroment (by raising investment taxes), rather than to try to give them more money to hand over to the rich.
Politically, the tax cuts can never be decoupled until after they expire.
“Now there’s an argument from the Republican camp.”
No, that’s the argument of the Obama camp, too. Note the presence of the word “all” in my sentence.
What you’re talking about is “tax reform,” and I agree with you on it. But you’re wrong about all the stimulus spending ending up in the pockets of the rich, unless you’re talking about capitalism itself, which is a system designed to put as much money as possible into the hands of people who had money in the first place.
“it would have put us back into recession”
The recent CBO bulletin says that the fiscal cliff (full expiration of the tax cuts this year coupled with the automatic spending cuts) would put us into recession next year. But it also says growth would resume by the third quarter. And it also says extending current policy would cause greater short-term growth, but would cause greater pain in the long term.
Every extension of the tax cuts will be taken out of the hide of working people and unemployed down the road. Your bleeding heart is misplaced. It’s better to rip off the band-aid now and fix the tax imbalance.
If we have a mild short-term recession for two quarters next year – how will we tell the difference from what we are experiencing now? I’d take that recession, because at least there would be light at the end of the tunnel. Right now we have jobless recovery as far as the eye can see.
And the projected recession isn’t even sure thing; the CBO projection is only if we hit the full fiscal cliff. If we can’t get the middle-class tax cuts, my vote is for full expiration coupled with moderate spending cuts developed by Democrats, not Republicans or conservadems.
The 15% investment taxes (and the 20% before that) are a large factor in what motivated Mitt Romney to lay off and offshore workers and strip money out of his companies instead of hiring and reinvesting. Back then there was plenty of consumer demand. Demand has fallen since then because of the labor practices of the Mitt Romneys of the world, unrestrained by heavier investment taxes. We need to make it more expensive to behave like Mitt Romney.