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.
They why don't they attack him for being an atheist? Last I heard, they were hated even more than Muslims :rotate:
I don't think the Obama camp broke the law to check into Romney's tax returns, five years is more than reasonable, if only again still less than the president, but it just shows the Rmoney camp to be the dicks they are, including releasing the Obama camp managers personal email.
I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.
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.
Yeah, similar to Obama being attacked for politically unpopular things in his last primary.
Also, I've been curious about something else: why do people quote things but not give the source. I would like to read/see the O'Brien thing, and it would be easier with the link.
Edit: I didn't mean to sound bitchy, it is just helpful to see links to see what people are quoting and for context.
I wonder if they want to see the returns for 2008+ so they can hammer Mitt on a "job creators" wealth going up during the recession.
That's kind if what I'm wondering. Amnesty would be great, and getting a decade or whatever and aging sharpness around the Bain separation would be too.
But couldn't it be as simple as showing that Romney has made lots of cash, so where does he get off saying Obama is so bad for the economy? I mean, the stock market is way, way up since 08, and Romney's not the kind of guy to have really bad years, the kind of years that would legitimately have brought his tax rate down on huge losses.
The rest is just icing if It's in there. Now Romney either needs to argue that Obama is only helping rich people...like me...or he's not so bad on the economy.
And by saying 2008, he's boxed in more. By only showing Obama's years, it first form as complete a picture of how he was doing before the recession. And Romney can't give more years to build context, or hes even weaker and giving out more.
This is one of the dumbest corners I could imagine a politician getting backed into. He KNEW he was running since 08. Why oh why didn't he start massaging his taxes back then?
I really can't believe how bad they are, and how this race is even somewhat a close thing.
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?
I'm guessing deep down they hate the idea of being beaten, let alone by a Hispanic woman.
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.
Yeah, similar to Obama being attacked for politically unpopular things in his last primary.
Also, I've been curious about something else: why do people quote things but not give the source. I would like to read/see the O'Brien thing, and it would be easier with the link.
“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?
Her husband, after she comes home every day and has her way with him? Poor guy is probably in traction by now.
EDIT: Whoa, left an important word out of that sentence...
I don't think the Obama camp broke the law to check into Romney's tax returns, five years is more than reasonable, if only again still less than the president, but it just shows the Rmoney camp to be the dicks they are, including releasing the Obama camp managers personal email.
I don't even see the point of them Releasing that email. It just reinforces the story more, and makes the Obama campaign look more reasonable
I don't think the Obama camp broke the law to check into Romney's tax returns, five years is more than reasonable, if only again still less than the president, but it just shows the Rmoney camp to be the dicks they are, including releasing the Obama camp managers personal email.
I don't even see the point of them Releasing that email. It just reinforces the story more, and makes the Obama campaign look more reasonable
Romney's camp is lead by a couple of assholes who directly lie and don't ever apologize, why would the campaign be any less incompetent?
I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.
So, something I've heard a lot about is how smart and good at business Romney was, etc.
Yet not seeing any of that in evidence here.
Is it possible that he's not actually so good and brilliant, but rather was in the right place at the right time with the head start daddy's money and connections gave him?
Is it - gasp - possible the same is true for many other job creators?
Or is it just that Tue skills of being super good at PE don't translate to politics at all?
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.
Yeah, similar to Obama being attacked for politically unpopular things in his last primary.
Also, I've been curious about something else: why do people quote things but not give the source. I would like to read/see the O'Brien thing, and it would be easier with the link.
Well his skills at Bain were buying up companies, loading them up with debt and then cutting his company for "management fees" paid out by those debts on the company. So yeah you really can't take that into presidential politics.
I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.
I guess O'Brien also bagged one of the new dumb ass swift boaters today.
So, uh, why was Candy Crowley picked to moderate the presidential debates instead of Soledad?
Probably because Romney will never agree to show up if she does. I think even Obama would get uneasy if she got within ball kicking distance.
I doubt it, since Obama is telling the truth on the majority of issues. She's not some insane firebrand. She's just a regular journalist. She only seems crazily agressive due to how passive the rest of the media is. Obama has faced the media in the UK, and the questions you get there would make this woman swoon and collapse onto her fainting couch.
I've always liked Soledad O’Brien but wow... she's really stepping up her game.
Despite the fact that I know Newsroom is at its core liberal left wing propaganda from Sorkin it has made me keenly aware of the lack of true Journalism in the TV news media. Makes me appreciate stuff like the Soledad interviews more.
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.
I'm beginning to suspect it's his tithing to the church. There was an article posted earlier where he added something along the lines of "if you include that number goes up past 20%!"
My first thought was "Tithes to your church aren't taxes you fucking imbecile!"
My second thought was "Wait, aren't tithes supposed to be 10%? Shouldn't that number be at least 23%?"
It's probably pedantics and nitpicking, but it's had me thinking all morning.
I've always liked Soledad O’Brien but wow... she's really stepping up her game.
Despite the fact that I know Newsroom is at its core liberal left wing propaganda from Sorkin it has made me keenly aware of the lack of true Journalism in the TV news media. Makes me appreciate stuff like the Soledad interviews more.
I know everyone wants to slobber sorkins nob over the newsroom, but Maddow has been providing quality news coverage ever since she came on the air following Olberman's outrage hour.
I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.
ShadowenSnores in the morningLoserdomRegistered Userregular
I know I don't slobber Sorkin's knob over the Newsroom because he's wrong and sexist and hidebound and hindsight is 20/20 but he still needs glasses on his show set in the real world two years ago.
+1
Options
HenroidMexican kicked from Immigration ThreadCentrism is Racism :3Registered Userregular
So, something I've heard a lot about is how smart and good at business Romney was, etc.
Yet not seeing any of that in evidence here.
Is it possible that he's not actually so good and brilliant, but rather was in the right place at the right time with the head start daddy's money and connections gave him?
Is it - gasp - possible the same is true for many other job creators?
Or is it just that Tue skills of being super good at PE don't translate to politics at all?
All of the above, with an emphasis on the third. He started second to the top and moved to the top, as a lot of "job creators" do. It's true, but not the problem here.
From SKFM's attempts to explain the whole system (Or, rather, the fact that no amount of explaining made it any less repugnant), PE is not the world that most people want to live in. It's amoral, pitiless, and remorseless. People are just numbers on the balance sheet, like a truck. It's kind of necessary for the function it serves, but that's a function working people fear on a deep level, all the more when times are hard.
All that shit happens in politics, but campaigning is the art of not letting it show. You've got your Joe the Plumber, or that poor old lady in Pennsylvania who can't vote because of the ID law, and you've got candidates who cover their glaring inability to speak or assert themselves with the suggestion that they could just walk into your living room and have a beer with you because they're just swell guys.
Romney has none of that. He's a terminator with his mask off. He might not be any more dangerous, but Jesus Christ those eyes.
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.
I'm beginning to suspect it's his tithing to the church. There was an article posted earlier where he added something along the lines of "if you include that number goes up past 20%!"
My first thought was "Tithes to your church aren't taxes you fucking imbecile!"
My second thought was "Wait, aren't tithes supposed to be 10%? Shouldn't that number be at least 23%?"
It's probably pedantics and nitpicking, but it's had me thinking all morning.
Under Tithing has been a suggestion from other sources (and would explain Reid being all up in the taxes bidness because he's a mormon as well). And unlike christian church's, under tithing in the mormon church is a pretty hefty offense.
I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.
So, something I've heard a lot about is how smart and good at business Romney was, etc.
Yet not seeing any of that in evidence here.
Is it possible that he's not actually so good and brilliant, but rather was in the right place at the right time with the head start daddy's money and connections gave him?
Is it - gasp - possible the same is true for many other job creators?
Or is it just that Tue skills of being super good at PE don't translate to politics at all?
With the success of Bain, I don't really think anyone could accuse him of being a bad businessman. Yes, his father's wealth and political connections absolutely helped, but successfully running something like a PE firm isn't something you do in spite of your own failure or even by accident.
The one thing Romney has emphatically proven is that successfully running PE doesn't translate into any semblance of a competent politician.
I don't think the Obama camp broke the law to check into Romney's tax returns, five years is more than reasonable, if only again still less than the president, but it just shows the Rmoney camp to be the dicks they are, including releasing the Obama camp managers personal email.
I don't even see the point of them Releasing that email. It just reinforces the story more, and makes the Obama campaign look more reasonable
That's probably what's most curious about the whole issue. A good 70% of the time, it's the Romney camp dredging the story back into the news when the media is ostensibly moving onto something new.
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.
Ah, finally, a serious crime! Race over, Romney disqualified by preemptive impeachment.
I don't think the Obama camp broke the law to check into Romney's tax returns, five years is more than reasonable, if only again still less than the president, but it just shows the Rmoney camp to be the dicks they are, including releasing the Obama camp managers personal email.
I don't even see the point of them Releasing that email. It just reinforces the story more, and makes the Obama campaign look more reasonable
That's probably what's most curious about the whole issue. A good 70% of the time, it's the Romney camp dredging the story back into the news when the media is ostensibly moving onto something new.
It's either the most grotesque demonstration of incompetence in modern politics or the most epic rope-a-dope the world has ever seen.
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.
I'm beginning to suspect it's his tithing to the church. There was an article posted earlier where he added something along the lines of "if you include that number goes up past 20%!"
My first thought was "Tithes to your church aren't taxes you fucking imbecile!"
My second thought was "Wait, aren't tithes supposed to be 10%? Shouldn't that number be at least 23%?"
It's probably pedantics and nitpicking, but it's had me thinking all morning.
Under Tithing has been a suggestion from other sources (and would explain Reid being all up in the taxes bidness because he's a mormon as well). And unlike christian church's, under tithing in the mormon church is a pretty hefty offense.
The Tithing argument never made sense to me. This would be such a bone-headed reason to not release returns. It would hurt him in what? Two states? While not releasing hurts him in all states. Also it's a big gamble for the Dems to push, if he did release his returns it could really backfire on them if the only thing in them was he wasn't giving the required amount to his church. It could work by bringing his unpopular religion to the forefront, but that seems like an unusually large gambit for the Obama campaign.
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.
I'm beginning to suspect it's his tithing to the church. There was an article posted earlier where he added something along the lines of "if you include that number goes up past 20%!"
My first thought was "Tithes to your church aren't taxes you fucking imbecile!"
My second thought was "Wait, aren't tithes supposed to be 10%? Shouldn't that number be at least 23%?"
It's probably pedantics and nitpicking, but it's had me thinking all morning.
Under Tithing has been a suggestion from other sources (and would explain Reid being all up in the taxes bidness because he's a mormon as well). And unlike christian church's, under tithing in the mormon church is a pretty hefty offense.
The Tithing argument never made sense to me. This would be such a bone-headed reason to not release returns. It would hurt him in what? Two states? While not releasing hurts him in all states. Also it's a big gamble for the Dems to push, if he did release his returns it could really backfire on them if the only thing in them was he wasn't giving the required amount to his church. It could work by bringing his unpopular religion to the forefront, but that seems like an unusually large gambit for the Obama campaign.
Worst case for the Dems: he's paying a lower rate than 60% of Americans despite being one of the richest couple thousand while asking to pay an even lower rate.
Best case: he committed several felonies.
enlightenedbum on
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
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.
Was this in the LA Times?
Business Insider, which has become one of the best sites to go to this year.
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.
I'm beginning to suspect it's his tithing to the church. There was an article posted earlier where he added something along the lines of "if you include that number goes up past 20%!"
My first thought was "Tithes to your church aren't taxes you fucking imbecile!"
My second thought was "Wait, aren't tithes supposed to be 10%? Shouldn't that number be at least 23%?"
It's probably pedantics and nitpicking, but it's had me thinking all morning.
Under Tithing has been a suggestion from other sources (and would explain Reid being all up in the taxes bidness because he's a mormon as well). And unlike christian church's, under tithing in the mormon church is a pretty hefty offense.
The Tithing argument never made sense to me. This would be such a bone-headed reason to not release returns. It would hurt him in what? Two states? While not releasing hurts him in all states. Also it's a big gamble for the Dems to push, if he did release his returns it could really backfire on them if the only thing in them was he wasn't giving the required amount to his church. It could work by bringing his unpopular religion to the forefront, but that seems like an unusually large gambit for the Obama campaign.
Romney can only be president for 8 years, but he'll be a mormon for the rest of his life. So if he's been shafting the church he could face penalties within the church.
And Romney's tax returns are guarenteed to show he's an extremely rich guy who pays less than most americans, his previous lies about his tax returns and continued failure to release them can in no way backfire on the democrats.
I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.
Posts
pleasepaypreacher.net
Yeah, similar to Obama being attacked for politically unpopular things in his last primary.
Also, I've been curious about something else: why do people quote things but not give the source. I would like to read/see the O'Brien thing, and it would be easier with the link.
Edit: I didn't mean to sound bitchy, it is just helpful to see links to see what people are quoting and for context.
That's kind if what I'm wondering. Amnesty would be great, and getting a decade or whatever and aging sharpness around the Bain separation would be too.
But couldn't it be as simple as showing that Romney has made lots of cash, so where does he get off saying Obama is so bad for the economy? I mean, the stock market is way, way up since 08, and Romney's not the kind of guy to have really bad years, the kind of years that would legitimately have brought his tax rate down on huge losses.
The rest is just icing if It's in there. Now Romney either needs to argue that Obama is only helping rich people...like me...or he's not so bad on the economy.
And by saying 2008, he's boxed in more. By only showing Obama's years, it first form as complete a picture of how he was doing before the recession. And Romney can't give more years to build context, or hes even weaker and giving out more.
This is one of the dumbest corners I could imagine a politician getting backed into. He KNEW he was running since 08. Why oh why didn't he start massaging his taxes back then?
I really can't believe how bad they are, and how this race is even somewhat a close thing.
I'm guessing deep down they hate the idea of being beaten, let alone by a Hispanic woman.
Because I'm lazy.
Story/video here.
I guess O'Brien also bagged one of the new dumb ass swift boaters today.
pleasepaypreacher.net
Her husband, after she comes home every day and has her way with him? Poor guy is probably in traction by now.
EDIT: Whoa, left an important word out of that sentence...
Games: Ad Astra Per Phalla | Choose Your Own Phalla
She's stimulating the economy by getting so many trophies she'll need to spend money to expand her house to display them all.
I don't even see the point of them Releasing that email. It just reinforces the story more, and makes the Obama campaign look more reasonable
So, uh, why was Candy Crowley picked to moderate the presidential debates instead of Soledad?
Romney's camp is lead by a couple of assholes who directly lie and don't ever apologize, why would the campaign be any less incompetent?
pleasepaypreacher.net
Because it's a town hall and they figured even she couldn't fuck it up.
pleasepaypreacher.net
She's pretty much going to topple the government by the end of the month at this rate.
Do you think Romney would actually agree to Soledad being a moderator (at this point in time)?
Viva la Soledad!
Oooh, you edited that in before I could reply. Yeah, two weeks ago, maybe one, he might have agreed.
Yet not seeing any of that in evidence here.
Is it possible that he's not actually so good and brilliant, but rather was in the right place at the right time with the head start daddy's money and connections gave him?
Is it - gasp - possible the same is true for many other job creators?
Or is it just that Tue skills of being super good at PE don't translate to politics at all?
Thanks!
And like I said earlier, I wasn't trying to be grumpy or anything, it just helps to see who wrote the article and be able to read it if we want to.
pleasepaypreacher.net
I doubt it, since Obama is telling the truth on the majority of issues. She's not some insane firebrand. She's just a regular journalist. She only seems crazily agressive due to how passive the rest of the media is. Obama has faced the media in the UK, and the questions you get there would make this woman swoon and collapse onto her fainting couch.
Andrea Saul claimed it was accidental, other than being a petty dick so that GOP operatives could spam the email their hatemail? Uhh nothing.
pleasepaypreacher.net
Despite the fact that I know Newsroom is at its core liberal left wing propaganda from Sorkin it has made me keenly aware of the lack of true Journalism in the TV news media. Makes me appreciate stuff like the Soledad interviews more.
Nintendo ID: Incindium
PSN: IncindiumX
Because she's a Villager in good standing.
I'm beginning to suspect it's his tithing to the church. There was an article posted earlier where he added something along the lines of "if you include that number goes up past 20%!"
My first thought was "Tithes to your church aren't taxes you fucking imbecile!"
My second thought was "Wait, aren't tithes supposed to be 10%? Shouldn't that number be at least 23%?"
It's probably pedantics and nitpicking, but it's had me thinking all morning.
I know everyone wants to slobber sorkins nob over the newsroom, but Maddow has been providing quality news coverage ever since she came on the air following Olberman's outrage hour.
pleasepaypreacher.net
People who sacrifice someone else's privacy don't deserve it themselves.
All of the above, with an emphasis on the third. He started second to the top and moved to the top, as a lot of "job creators" do. It's true, but not the problem here.
From SKFM's attempts to explain the whole system (Or, rather, the fact that no amount of explaining made it any less repugnant), PE is not the world that most people want to live in. It's amoral, pitiless, and remorseless. People are just numbers on the balance sheet, like a truck. It's kind of necessary for the function it serves, but that's a function working people fear on a deep level, all the more when times are hard.
All that shit happens in politics, but campaigning is the art of not letting it show. You've got your Joe the Plumber, or that poor old lady in Pennsylvania who can't vote because of the ID law, and you've got candidates who cover their glaring inability to speak or assert themselves with the suggestion that they could just walk into your living room and have a beer with you because they're just swell guys.
Romney has none of that. He's a terminator with his mask off. He might not be any more dangerous, but Jesus Christ those eyes.
Under Tithing has been a suggestion from other sources (and would explain Reid being all up in the taxes bidness because he's a mormon as well). And unlike christian church's, under tithing in the mormon church is a pretty hefty offense.
pleasepaypreacher.net
With the success of Bain, I don't really think anyone could accuse him of being a bad businessman. Yes, his father's wealth and political connections absolutely helped, but successfully running something like a PE firm isn't something you do in spite of your own failure or even by accident.
The one thing Romney has emphatically proven is that successfully running PE doesn't translate into any semblance of a competent politician.
That's probably what's most curious about the whole issue. A good 70% of the time, it's the Romney camp dredging the story back into the news when the media is ostensibly moving onto something new.
Ah, finally, a serious crime! Race over, Romney disqualified by preemptive impeachment.
3DS: 0473-8507-2652
Switch: SW-5185-4991-5118
PSN: AbEntropy
It's either the most grotesque demonstration of incompetence in modern politics or the most epic rope-a-dope the world has ever seen.
twitch.tv/Taramoor
@TaramoorPlays
Taramoor on Youtube
The Tithing argument never made sense to me. This would be such a bone-headed reason to not release returns. It would hurt him in what? Two states? While not releasing hurts him in all states. Also it's a big gamble for the Dems to push, if he did release his returns it could really backfire on them if the only thing in them was he wasn't giving the required amount to his church. It could work by bringing his unpopular religion to the forefront, but that seems like an unusually large gambit for the Obama campaign.
Worst case for the Dems: he's paying a lower rate than 60% of Americans despite being one of the richest couple thousand while asking to pay an even lower rate.
Best case: he committed several felonies.
PSN/Steam/NNID: SyphonBlue | BNet: SyphonBlue#1126
Romney can only be president for 8 years, but he'll be a mormon for the rest of his life. So if he's been shafting the church he could face penalties within the church.
And Romney's tax returns are guarenteed to show he's an extremely rich guy who pays less than most americans, his previous lies about his tax returns and continued failure to release them can in no way backfire on the democrats.
pleasepaypreacher.net