The big thing right now for liberals is Politifact's choice for Biggest Lie of 2011 I think. Somehow saying that the Paul Ryan budget would end Medicare as we know it ranked as their biggest lie of the year.
I thought they were okay with saying "end Medicare as we know it." Just not "end Medicare," since you know old folks would still get vouchers. (Plus isn't there something about ensuring coverage for old people in the Ryan plan? I remember being outraged initially but then after reading their explanation thinking that they were just being nitpicky.)
I guess I shouldn't derail the thread with this though.
Giving old people vouchers that don't pace with inflation so they can buy private insurance IS destroying Medicare, not just as we know it. I can call my apple a banana, but that doesn't make it a banana.
Politifact rates your bananna mostly bananna!
I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.
Wow Rasmussen is more pro Obama than gallup? That really seems weird, especially prior to the Ryan pick when the none daily polls were showing Obama up big and gallup had it dead even.
I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.
Look guys, Obama and Romney both lie and keep secrets. Obama is a secret Kenyan Muslim who lies about not hating America, and Romney lies about things to get elected so he can save America with his secret tax and budget plan. Both parties lie, vote for the man with so much US pride he saved the Olympics and owns an Olympian.
The best part about the secret Kenyan Muslim claim to be is the fact that Kenya is majority (like 80%) Christian, and only around 11% are Muslim, but in the eyes of the conspiracy theorists, it is some Muslim haven.
Also, thanks for the info @Taramoor! I think it is odd that the incumbent, in re-election situations, get's to go second. It can really help you set the narrative and respond to things coming out of the other party. At the same time that didn't help the Republicans in 2008 so maybe it isn't that helpful.
Look guys, Obama and Romney both lie and keep secrets. Obama is a secret Kenyan Muslim who lies about not hating America, and Romney lies about things to get elected so he can save America with his secret tax and budget plan. Both parties lie, vote for the man with so much US pride he saved the Olympics and owns an Olympian.
I don't say this often to another man, but I think I love you.
BTW, I posted this in the other thread shortly before it closed. I was just wondering if you could respond.
From the very start of the whole Romney tax thing, I've been 100% in the camp who believe that he's absolutely not hiding anything illegal. I didn't really have any doubt that he's been paying what he technically owes, but just wants to hide all the disgusting ways he's able to twist the system. But last night Lawrence O'Donnell put some doubt in my mind. Maybe @spacekungfuman (or for that matter, anyone else knowledgeable in this area) could either confirm or refute his assertion (or at least fill in the details).
I wasn't aware of such a thing, but he was making the claim that Swiss bank accounts (or maybe it was just off-shore accounts in general) used to be used for a bunch of illegal stuff. But sooo many rich people were doing it that the IRS couldn't charge them all with felonies. So they created an amnesty program for it. And supposedly, if Romney had taken advantage of this amnesty program it would have been in the time-frame he's being asked to release.
And if he did take advantage of the amnesty program, it's literally a confession to a felony followed by a pardon. With the way Ann Romney reacts to these questions, Laurence's assertion (if it's an accurate portrayal of reality; and coming from O'Donnell I'd be incredibly surprised if it wasn't pretty close) seem pretty reasonable.
Wow Rasmussen is more pro Obama than gallup? That really seems weird, especially prior to the Ryan pick when the none daily polls were showing Obama up big and gallup had it dead even.
Gallup's sample is a rolling 7 day average, so really bad/really good days take a while to get themselves out of the system.
Also, I love the universe for making the White House comment on Pussy Riot.
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
Yeah, amnesty has been the popular opinion. Whatecer it is, its gotta be bad. Otherwise there would be no reason to keep them hidden when he's already telling us his rate (supposedly)
Wow Rasmussen is more pro Obama than gallup? That really seems weird, especially prior to the Ryan pick when the none daily polls were showing Obama up big and gallup had it dead even.
"Rasmussen Reports, which has had Republican-leaning results in the past, does so again this year. However, the tendency is not very strong – a Republican lean of about 1.3 points."
Well I'll patiently await the Romney camp backing the Soviet Unions states rights.
"By once again attacking one of our closest allies and apologizing for America, the President has shown he has no clue about foreign policy and fails us once again."
Real Americans who love their country give fucks about it, Couscous. They give all the fucks.
(I also question the importance of a single fluff piece from some morning radio station in the middle of who-gives-a-shit.)
I submitted an entry to Lego Ideas, and if 10,000 people support me, it'll be turned into an actual Lego set!If you'd like to see and support my submission, follow this link.
Look guys, Obama and Romney both lie and keep secrets. Obama is a secret Kenyan Muslim who lies about not hating America, and Romney lies about things to get elected so he can save America with his secret tax and budget plan. Both parties lie, vote for the man with so much US pride he saved the Olympics and owns an Olympian.
The best part about the secret Kenyan Muslim claim to be is the fact that Kenya is majority (like 80%) Christian, and only around 11% are Muslim, but in the eyes of the conspiracy theorists, it is some Muslim haven.
Also, thanks for the info Taramoor! I think it is odd that the incumbent, in re-election situations, get's to go second. It can really help you set the narrative and respond to things coming out of the other party. At the same time that didn't help the Republicans in 2008 so maybe it isn't that helpful.
Obama's father was raised Muslim (albeit an atheist by the time Obama was born), Obama's stepfather was Muslim, Obama's middle name is "Hussein," Obama was raised in Indonesia (a Muslim country). Obviously the claims are silly, but it's not just because they think Kenya = Muslim.
Look guys, Obama and Romney both lie and keep secrets. Obama is a secret Kenyan Muslim who lies about not hating America, and Romney lies about things to get elected so he can save America with his secret tax and budget plan. Both parties lie, vote for the man with so much US pride he saved the Olympics and owns an Olympian.
The best part about the secret Kenyan Muslim claim to be is the fact that Kenya is majority (like 80%) Christian, and only around 11% are Muslim, but in the eyes of the conspiracy theorists, it is some Muslim haven.
Also, thanks for the info Taramoor! I think it is odd that the incumbent, in re-election situations, get's to go second. It can really help you set the narrative and respond to things coming out of the other party. At the same time that didn't help the Republicans in 2008 so maybe it isn't that helpful.
Obama's father was raised Muslim (albeit an atheist by the time Obama was born), Obama's stepfather was Muslim, Obama's middle name is "Hussein," Obama was raised in Indonesia (a Muslim country). Obviously the claims are silly, but it's not just because they think Kenya = Muslim.
Look guys, Obama and Romney both lie and keep secrets. Obama is a secret Kenyan Muslim who lies about not hating America, and Romney lies about things to get elected so he can save America with his secret tax and budget plan. Both parties lie, vote for the man with so much US pride he saved the Olympics and owns an Olympian.
I don't say this often to another man, but I think I love you.
BTW, I posted this in the other thread shortly before it closed. I was just wondering if you could respond.
From the very start of the whole Romney tax thing, I've been 100% in the camp who believe that he's absolutely not hiding anything illegal. I didn't really have any doubt that he's been paying what he technically owes, but just wants to hide all the disgusting ways he's able to twist the system. But last night Lawrence O'Donnell put some doubt in my mind. Maybe @spacekungfuman (or for that matter, anyone else knowledgeable in this area) could either confirm or refute his assertion (or at least fill in the details).
I wasn't aware of such a thing, but he was making the claim that Swiss bank accounts (or maybe it was just off-shore accounts in general) used to be used for a bunch of illegal stuff. But sooo many rich people were doing it that the IRS couldn't charge them all with felonies. So they created an amnesty program for it. And supposedly, if Romney had taken advantage of this amnesty program it would have been in the time-frame he's being asked to release.
And if he did take advantage of the amnesty program, it's literally a confession to a felony followed by a pardon. With the way Ann Romney reacts to these questions, Laurence's assertion (if it's an accurate portrayal of reality; and coming from O'Donnell I'd be incredibly surprised if it wasn't pretty close) seem pretty reasonable.
Some of the fine details: The IRS offered this amnesty in 2009, 2011, and earlier this year. Basically, you have offshore holdings and didn't report all/any of the earnings on it, you confess, disclose your holdings and earnings, pay a penalty (the maximum has been getting higher each time, the most recent time the penalty can range from 5% to 27.5%), and you get a pardon on any potential felonies.
It's a reasonable assertion. That doesn't make it true, of course, just reasonable. A lot of people with holdings like his took part, and it wasn't just rich people - a lot of Americans living abroad took part, Americans who work or travel regularly in Canada who have accounts there, etc.
It's possible he was paying his taxes on them all along, but that sounds dubious on its face because... well, the whole reason holdings like that became so popular in the US was to hide them from the IRS. People didn't keep their money in Switzerland just so it could get a nice view of the Alps from its vault.
Of course, just him saying he's paid at least 13% every year is dubious - his portfolio had to be fucking outstanding to maintain that much of a gain through several years of the market taking a prolonged shit. A lot of people paid little to nothing simply because they lost too much in the market.
Obama was born in Hawaii, and lived in Hawaii, Seattle, Hawaii, Indonesia, and Hawaii. He spent less than four years of his childhood there. That's not really "raised".
Giving old people vouchers that don't pace with inflation so they can buy private insurance IS destroying Medicare, not just as we know it. I can call my apple a banana, but that doesn't make it a banana.
It is completely inaccurate to say my wife Marsha disappeared unexpectedly. See? Here is Marsha, right here. Okay, sure, you might be saying to yourself, "The thing you are calling 'Marsha' is actually a rock with 'Marsha' scribbled on it in black Sharpee." But the important thing is that there still exists an entity called Marsha, and thus your claim is unsubstantiated.
I submitted an entry to Lego Ideas, and if 10,000 people support me, it'll be turned into an actual Lego set!If you'd like to see and support my submission, follow this link.
Giving old people vouchers that don't pace with inflation so they can buy private insurance IS destroying Medicare, not just as we know it. I can call my apple a banana, but that doesn't make it a banana.
It is completely inaccurate to say my wife Marsha disappeared unexpectedly. See? Here is Marsha, right here. Okay, sure, you might be saying to yourself, "The thing you are calling 'Marsha' is actually a rock with 'Marsha' scribbled on it in black Sharpee." But the important thing is that there still exists an entity called Marsha, and thus your claim is unsubstantiated.
What really gets to me is the fact that he thinks that paying 13% tax (even if legal) is just dandy, and actually too high! How low do taxes need to go oh holy job creators before you will create any jobs?
Even if his tax returns contain nothing over than what he said 'I paid around 13% tax' then that is too damn low. Much too low. ABSURDLY TOO LOW.
Giving old people vouchers that don't pace with inflation so they can buy private insurance IS destroying Medicare, not just as we know it. I can call my apple a banana, but that doesn't make it a banana.
It is completely inaccurate to say my wife Marsha disappeared unexpectedly. See? Here is Marsha, right here. Okay, sure, you might be saying to yourself, "The thing you are calling 'Marsha' is actually a rock with 'Marsha' scribbled on it in black Sharpee." But the important thing is that there still exists an entity called Marsha, and thus your claim is unsubstantiated.
Jeffe, I want to buy your rock.
I had to read that twice to realize you typed "rock".
You don't want to know what I read the first time.
It was cock.
Battlenet ID: MildC#11186 - If I'm in the game, send me an invite at anytime and I'll play.
In an article published recently, I argued that an organization named Operational OpSec Education Fund's recently released Obama attack was insulting and disingenuous, but I really had no idea how right I actually was.
Ken Dilanian of the LA Times gives further depth, reporting that Fred Rustmann, an OpSec member, CIA retiree and an outspoken Republican, appeared on the Hannity and Colmes show in 2005 in order to downplay the outing of a CIA covert operations officer Valerie Plame.
Disclosing the identification of a covert agent is a felony offense, and Lewis "Scooter" Libby, the "leaker" and chief of staff for Dick Cheney, went to jail, but then later had his sentence commuted by the Bush administration.
The repercussions of that leak were astronomical, not only putting Plame in danger, but all of her sources, her family, and every one of her information exchanges.
The extent of the damage done is so vast it's become conjecture because we'll never know the true cost of that incident.
Dilanian also outs popular, aspiring Republican politician and SEAL frontman Scott Taylor for appearing on a show named, get this, "The Secrets of SEAL Team Six." Taylor appeared on the show despite his colleagues and the Navy urging him to decline.
I have a feeling the Dems know exactly what Mitt is hiding in his returns. It always seemed to me that his Bain years would be the most interesting to see, but if they are asking for 5 years, they must know whatever is most damning is contained in those 5 years. The Amnesty thing seems the most likely.
In a hypothetical situation that Romney is hiding something damning and the Democrats do already know, they'd be smart to wait till perhaps a month(ish) out to reveal it. Don't want to release too soon or it might become old news.
Battlenet ID: MildC#11186 - If I'm in the game, send me an invite at anytime and I'll play.
In an article published recently, I argued that an organization named Operational OpSec Education Fund's recently released Obama attack was insulting and disingenuous, but I really had no idea how right I actually was.
Ken Dilanian of the LA Times gives further depth, reporting that Fred Rustmann, an OpSec member, CIA retiree and an outspoken Republican, appeared on the Hannity and Colmes show in 2005 in order to downplay the outing of a CIA covert operations officer Valerie Plame.
Disclosing the identification of a covert agent is a felony offense, and Lewis "Scooter" Libby, the "leaker" and chief of staff for Dick Cheney, went to jail, but then later had his sentence commuted by the Bush administration.
The repercussions of that leak were astronomical, not only putting Plame in danger, but all of her sources, her family, and every one of her information exchanges.
The extent of the damage done is so vast it's become conjecture because we'll never know the true cost of that incident.
Dilanian also outs popular, aspiring Republican politician and SEAL frontman Scott Taylor for appearing on a show named, get this, "The Secrets of SEAL Team Six." Taylor appeared on the show despite his colleagues and the Navy urging him to decline.
I have a feeling the Dems know exactly what Mitt is hiding in his returns. It always seemed to me that his Bain years would be the most interesting to see, but if they are asking for 5 years, they must know whatever is most damning is contained in those 5 years. The Amnesty thing seems the most likely.
The alternative is that he isn't hiding anything worse than a 13% tax rate, which is still damning enough. The Dems have him backed into a corner on this. He can't release them without looking weak. He can't stop the attacks without releasing them. He really, really, really goofed by not putting some out at the beginning of the year.
If there is something shady (illegal or just "how the hell is that legal?") in those five years then one really has to question Romney's judgement. I mean, he's been running for president that entire time for pete's sake.
+1
Options
spacekungfumanPoor and minority-filledRegistered User, __BANNED USERSregular
Look guys, Obama and Romney both lie and keep secrets. Obama is a secret Kenyan Muslim who lies about not hating America, and Romney lies about things to get elected so he can save America with his secret tax and budget plan. Both parties lie, vote for the man with so much US pride he saved the Olympics and owns an Olympian.
I don't say this often to another man, but I think I love you.
BTW, I posted this in the other thread shortly before it closed. I was just wondering if you could respond.
From the very start of the whole Romney tax thing, I've been 100% in the camp who believe that he's absolutely not hiding anything illegal. I didn't really have any doubt that he's been paying what he technically owes, but just wants to hide all the disgusting ways he's able to twist the system. But last night Lawrence O'Donnell put some doubt in my mind. Maybe @spacekungfuman (or for that matter, anyone else knowledgeable in this area) could either confirm or refute his assertion (or at least fill in the details).
I wasn't aware of such a thing, but he was making the claim that Swiss bank accounts (or maybe it was just off-shore accounts in general) used to be used for a bunch of illegal stuff. But sooo many rich people were doing it that the IRS couldn't charge them all with felonies. So they created an amnesty program for it. And supposedly, if Romney had taken advantage of this amnesty program it would have been in the time-frame he's being asked to release.
And if he did take advantage of the amnesty program, it's literally a confession to a felony followed by a pardon. With the way Ann Romney reacts to these questions, Laurence's assertion (if it's an accurate portrayal of reality; and coming from O'Donnell I'd be incredibly surprised if it wasn't pretty close) seem pretty reasonable.
Some of the fine details: The IRS offered this amnesty in 2009, 2011, and earlier this year. Basically, you have offshore holdings and didn't report all/any of the earnings on it, you confess, disclose your holdings and earnings, pay a penalty (the maximum has been getting higher each time, the most recent time the penalty can range from 5% to 27.5%), and you get a pardon on any potential felonies.
It's a reasonable assertion. That doesn't make it true, of course, just reasonable. A lot of people with holdings like his took part, and it wasn't just rich people - a lot of Americans living abroad took part, Americans who work or travel regularly in Canada who have accounts there, etc.
It's possible he was paying his taxes on them all along, but that sounds dubious on its face because... well, the whole reason holdings like that became so popular in the US was to hide them from the IRS. People didn't keep their money in Switzerland just so it could get a nice view of the Alps from its vault.
Of course, just him saying he's paid at least 13% every year is dubious - his portfolio had to be fucking outstanding to maintain that much of a gain through several years of the market taking a prolonged shit. A lot of people paid little to nothing simply because they lost too much in the market.
This is all correct. One caveat that I would add is that before the proposal of the reporting rules in 2010 and their finalization in 2011 there were some real questions about what reporting was required, and how much reporting the banks themselves had been doing, so many taxpayers took advantage of the amnesty programs after they were made aware that they had been violating the law.
I would completely believe that Romney had a steady return during the downturn, since his profit interests in Bain funds would have continued to reflect gains on investments made prior to the downturn.
0
Options
spacekungfumanPoor and minority-filledRegistered User, __BANNED USERSregular
Giving old people vouchers that don't pace with inflation so they can buy private insurance IS destroying Medicare, not just as we know it. I can call my apple a banana, but that doesn't make it a banana.
It is completely inaccurate to say my wife Marsha disappeared unexpectedly. See? Here is Marsha, right here. Okay, sure, you might be saying to yourself, "The thing you are calling 'Marsha' is actually a rock with 'Marsha' scribbled on it in black Sharpee." But the important thing is that there still exists an entity called Marsha, and thus your claim is unsubstantiated.
“At the end of the day, that same number crunching was voted on by virtually every single Republican in 2011 and then again in 2012. That is fair to say,” O’Brien pointed out, adding that both Romney and Ryan had promised to “save” Medicare by turning it into a “voucher program.”
“No, it’s not!” Chaffetz objected.
“It’s not a voucher program?” O’Brien wondered.
“It is not a voucher program,” Chaffetz insisted. “It is a premium support, and that is totally different than a voucher program. And every time somebody says, ‘Oh, it’s a voucher program,’ it’s false, it’s misleading, it’s derogatory and it’s inaccurate. That is not what it does.”
“You will give people money to go and buy their own insurance, right?” O’Brien pressed. “But we’re arguing over symantics. At the end of the day, isn’t it — you would give someone money to buy their own insurance.”
“No, a premium support program is different than a voucher program,” Chaffetz repeated.
“Walk me through how it’s different,” O’Brien dared the congressman.
“Because some people that have maybe more needs or medical needs or they have less income, they’re going to have more flexibility and more assets to go and do what they need to do in order to have some choice and flexibility and create competition in the marketplace,” Chaffetz explained.
“Which is they get a voucher to go buy something!” O’Brien concluded.
Do you get the feeling someone important to Soledad O'Brien was saved by Medicare?
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
0
Options
spacekungfumanPoor and minority-filledRegistered User, __BANNED USERSregular
The tax returns have become Troy Barnes' jacket. If he releases them, he looks like he is giving in. If he doesn't, it looks like he's scared to release them. Either way it's weak because it's a decision he is making based on the Dems.
Someone else went on her show to trot out the same lies? I'm getting the feeling they keep expecting her to back down, and keep getting kicked right in the mean bean machine.
I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.
In a hypothetical situation that Romney is hiding something damning and the Democrats do already know, they'd be smart to wait till perhaps a month(ish) out to reveal it. Don't want to release too soon or it might become old news.
Hard to say if their knowledge is even something they can act on. It's not like Obama can just release Mitt's returns for him, or that whatever source they have would ever want to be revealed.
I guess my point is they are saying 5 years for a very specific reason. They are not going fishing as they already know what's in the pond.
Maybe. Maybe. They are just throwing out a very reasonable number to make Mittens look worse for not releasing, but wasn't that meant as a private e-mail? So that seems unlikely.
Obama campaign may have something cooking for October, but I imagine it won't be as effective if it's coming from some leak, or vague "source" and not straight from his own released returns.
The tax returns have become Troy Barnes' jacket. If he releases them, he looks like he is giving in. If he doesn't, it looks like he's scared to release them. Either way it's weak because it's a decision he is making based on the Dems.
He could have done the non-retarded thing and have released them before it started becoming a big issue.
Someone else went on her show to trot out the same lies? I'm getting the feeling they keep expecting her to back down, and keep getting kicked right in the mean bean machine.
I have no idea what they think they're doing. I could understand it the first time. Maybe the second time, Pawlenty isn't as old and grumpy and Sununuish as Sununu. But again?
Posts
Politifact rates your bananna mostly bananna!
pleasepaypreacher.net
Gallup still +2 Romney.
Wow Rasmussen is more pro Obama than gallup? That really seems weird, especially prior to the Ryan pick when the none daily polls were showing Obama up big and gallup had it dead even.
pleasepaypreacher.net
The best part about the secret Kenyan Muslim claim to be is the fact that Kenya is majority (like 80%) Christian, and only around 11% are Muslim, but in the eyes of the conspiracy theorists, it is some Muslim haven.
Also, thanks for the info @Taramoor! I think it is odd that the incumbent, in re-election situations, get's to go second. It can really help you set the narrative and respond to things coming out of the other party. At the same time that didn't help the Republicans in 2008 so maybe it isn't that helpful.
I don't say this often to another man, but I think I love you.
BTW, I posted this in the other thread shortly before it closed. I was just wondering if you could respond.
Gallup's sample is a rolling 7 day average, so really bad/really good days take a while to get themselves out of the system.
Also, I love the universe for making the White House comment on Pussy Riot.
pleasepaypreacher.net
A couple months ago Nate Silver posted what he thought the most popular pollsters' biases were. Gallup leaned further red than Rasmussen - it's actually the biggest red lean of them all. Rasmussen seems like they're doing better this cycle, based on his chart.
"Rasmussen Reports, which has had Republican-leaning results in the past, does so again this year. However, the tendency is not very strong – a Republican lean of about 1.3 points."
Yadda yadda concerned about the state of free speech in Russia yadda yadda.
pleasepaypreacher.net
"By once again attacking one of our closest allies and apologizing for America, the President has shown he has no clue about foreign policy and fails us once again."
PSN/Steam/NNID: SyphonBlue | BNet: SyphonBlue#1126
Real Americans who love their country give fucks about it, Couscous. They give all the fucks.
(I also question the importance of a single fluff piece from some morning radio station in the middle of who-gives-a-shit.)
Obama's father was raised Muslim (albeit an atheist by the time Obama was born), Obama's stepfather was Muslim, Obama's middle name is "Hussein," Obama was raised in Indonesia (a Muslim country). Obviously the claims are silly, but it's not just because they think Kenya = Muslim.
Yeah, it's because he's black.
PSN/Steam/NNID: SyphonBlue | BNet: SyphonBlue#1126
Some of the fine details: The IRS offered this amnesty in 2009, 2011, and earlier this year. Basically, you have offshore holdings and didn't report all/any of the earnings on it, you confess, disclose your holdings and earnings, pay a penalty (the maximum has been getting higher each time, the most recent time the penalty can range from 5% to 27.5%), and you get a pardon on any potential felonies.
It's a reasonable assertion. That doesn't make it true, of course, just reasonable. A lot of people with holdings like his took part, and it wasn't just rich people - a lot of Americans living abroad took part, Americans who work or travel regularly in Canada who have accounts there, etc.
It's possible he was paying his taxes on them all along, but that sounds dubious on its face because... well, the whole reason holdings like that became so popular in the US was to hide them from the IRS. People didn't keep their money in Switzerland just so it could get a nice view of the Alps from its vault.
Of course, just him saying he's paid at least 13% every year is dubious - his portfolio had to be fucking outstanding to maintain that much of a gain through several years of the market taking a prolonged shit. A lot of people paid little to nothing simply because they lost too much in the market.
Penny Arcade Rockstar Social Club / This is why I despise cyclists
It is completely inaccurate to say my wife Marsha disappeared unexpectedly. See? Here is Marsha, right here. Okay, sure, you might be saying to yourself, "The thing you are calling 'Marsha' is actually a rock with 'Marsha' scribbled on it in black Sharpee." But the important thing is that there still exists an entity called Marsha, and thus your claim is unsubstantiated.
Jeffe, I want to buy your rock.
PSN/Steam/NNID: SyphonBlue | BNet: SyphonBlue#1126
Even if his tax returns contain nothing over than what he said 'I paid around 13% tax' then that is too damn low. Much too low. ABSURDLY TOO LOW.
I had to read that twice to realize you typed "rock".
You don't want to know what I read the first time.
Battlenet ID: MildC#11186 - If I'm in the game, send me an invite at anytime and I'll play.
wellllllllllllllllllllllllllllll
PSN/Steam/NNID: SyphonBlue | BNet: SyphonBlue#1126
Battlenet ID: MildC#11186 - If I'm in the game, send me an invite at anytime and I'll play.
Was this in the LA Times?
The alternative is that he isn't hiding anything worse than a 13% tax rate, which is still damning enough. The Dems have him backed into a corner on this. He can't release them without looking weak. He can't stop the attacks without releasing them. He really, really, really goofed by not putting some out at the beginning of the year.
If there is something shady (illegal or just "how the hell is that legal?") in those five years then one really has to question Romney's judgement. I mean, he's been running for president that entire time for pete's sake.
This is all correct. One caveat that I would add is that before the proposal of the reporting rules in 2010 and their finalization in 2011 there were some real questions about what reporting was required, and how much reporting the banks themselves had been doing, so many taxpayers took advantage of the amnesty programs after they were made aware that they had been violating the law.
I would completely believe that Romney had a steady return during the downturn, since his profit interests in Bain funds would have continued to reflect gains on investments made prior to the downturn.
What are you, the guy from indecent proposal?
pleasepaypreacher.net
Do you get the feeling someone important to Soledad O'Brien was saved by Medicare?
pleasepaypreacher.net
Hard to say if their knowledge is even something they can act on. It's not like Obama can just release Mitt's returns for him, or that whatever source they have would ever want to be revealed.
I guess my point is they are saying 5 years for a very specific reason. They are not going fishing as they already know what's in the pond.
Maybe. Maybe. They are just throwing out a very reasonable number to make Mittens look worse for not releasing, but wasn't that meant as a private e-mail? So that seems unlikely.
Obama campaign may have something cooking for October, but I imagine it won't be as effective if it's coming from some leak, or vague "source" and not straight from his own released returns.
I guess the Telegraph didn't get the memo that if you're rich enough, the laws of the land do not apply.
So a majority has no fucking clue on what Romney intends to do with healthcare. People also don't like the idea of vouchers or privatization.
I have no idea what they think they're doing. I could understand it the first time. Maybe the second time, Pawlenty isn't as old and grumpy and Sununuish as Sununu. But again?