Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums

Romney, The Inevitable Nominee


Michael Hardner

Recommended Posts

yes - I expect the Obama campaign knows, with certainty, exactly what Romney is hiding. Letting this play out, day by day, drip by drip... having it dominate the 'media/air waves'... this is gold, real gold! Do they, does the Romney campaign, does Romney, think this is going to go away???

of course, the word parsing around Romney's statement from yesterday, began immediately. Romney says, "I did go back and look at my taxes and over the past ten years I never paid less than 13%. I think the most recent year is 13.6 or something like that"

so... Romney says, "Trust me... I've looked at it"! :lol: "I don't need to show you - just trust me"!

but about that word parsing on Romney's statement. Was Romney's choice of words... precise... intentional... pointedly vague? He says "taxes" - he doesn't say, "income taxes". So, of course, are his state taxes in that mix, or any other form of tax... generic tax, at large... in that mix? Notwithstanding what paying a 13% rate, if it actually was "income tax", says to Joe Middle Class. Oh, Mitt Romney... the gift that keeps giving!

Heck I pay 13% on every purchase I make. That doesn't mean crap about my income tax.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 1.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

so... apparently, U.S. citizens are being apprised that the "Romney Medicare Plan"... is not the "Ryan Medicare Plan" - a clear distancing attempt is being made. Of course, actual details of the "Romney Medicare Plan" are not available... the plan isn't out there - is there actually a "Romney Medicare Plan"? :lol:

which brings forward the most recent official Obama campaign response... where the "Romney Medicare Plan"... is the "Ryan Medicare Plan":

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The thing is that of the two candidates Romney simply has to present himself as a more competent candidate by a margin of miles. Otherwise he has no hope as if it came to choosing between the two based on which one of them is a nicer guy Obama would win hands down.

As for Obama, he can't keep on blaming the previous administration for the economic mess. How long can a government or a president blame the previous government or president for all the problems? Up to a point but there is a limit. Even though most people agree that Obama is not to be blamed for the economic troubles caused by the financial crisis four years ago, he has been put in his position to fix things. If he can't do that he is useless.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's what you said about the birth certficate. :lol:

I think that Obama was f***g stupid for giving a hard time on the birth certificate. I feel the same way about Romney and the tax returns.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest American Woman

I think that Obama was f***g stupid for giving a hard time on the birth certificate. I feel the same way about Romney and the tax returns.

It wasn't Obama giving a "hard time." He wasn't responsible for Hawaii's policies. But yeah, Romney is definitely 'hiding' something by not releasing his returns.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It wasn't Obama giving a "hard time." He wasn't responsible for Hawaii's policies. But yeah, Romney is definitely 'hiding' something by not releasing his returns.

I suspect it's the overall aspect of being wealthy that he's "hiding". I doubt there is anything nefarious, especially since there was a very short span between his service as Massachusetts' governor and his running for President in 2008 (and of course this run).

The fact is his wealth and earnings are an embarrassment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest American Woman

I suspect it's the overall aspect of being wealthy that he's "hiding". I doubt there is anything nefarious, especially since there was a very short span between his service as Massachusetts' governor and his running for President in 2008 (and of course this run).

The fact is his wealth and earnings are an embarrassment.

I suspect that it's the tax deductions and 'shelters' that he took advantage of to pay a lower tax rate than many less "wealthy" Americans paid. I'm not suggesting that it wasn't legal, but it's not going to go over well with less wealthy Americans who paid a higher percentage of taxes, or even the same percentage - and it's not exactly going to make him someone all Americans feel they can have confidence in to make changes and/or reform our tax system to help deal with our debt without sticking it to the the less wealthy while looking out for the wealthy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The thing is that of the two candidates Romney simply has to present himself as a more competent candidate by a margin of miles. Otherwise he has no hope as if it came to choosing between the two based on which one of them is a nicer guy Obama would win hands down.

As for Obama, he can't keep on blaming the previous administration for the economic mess. How long can a government or a president blame the previous government or president for all the problems? Up to a point but there is a limit. Even though most people agree that Obama is not to be blamed for the economic troubles caused by the financial crisis four years ago, he has been put in his position to fix things. If he can't do that he is useless.

So you're in favour of government control over the economy then?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I suspect that it's the tax deductions and 'shelters' that he took advantage of to pay a lower tax rate than many less "wealthy" Americans paid. I'm not suggesting that it wasn't legal, but it's not going to go over well with less wealthy Americans who paid a higher percentage of taxes, or even the same percentage - and it's not exactly going to make him someone all Americans feel they can have confidence in to make changes and/or reform our tax system to help deal with our debt without sticking it to the the less wealthy while looking out for the wealthy.

The reason I think the hiding of the returns is stupid is I think it would be August's issue and would be lost in the sauce by the time of the election.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest American Woman

The reason I think the hiding of the returns is stupid is I think it would be August's issue and would be lost in the sauce by the time of the election.

Can't say I disagree. When something is not put out in the open, it grows in people's minds. People will make of it whatever they want, as there's no evidence put out by Romney to refute it. His refusal to release them doesn't make one conclude that there's nothing in them that he doesn't want us to see - quite the opposite.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This may well be the reason Romney will not release his tax returns.
The concern was triggered this summer when Switzerland's largest bank, caught up in an international tax evasion dispute, said it would disclose the names of more than 4,000 of its U.S. account holders.

The decision shattered a long-held belief that Swiss banks would guard the identities of its American customers as carefully as they did their money, and it raised concern that other international tax havens might be next. Under an amnesty program, the IRS is allowing taxpayers to avoid prosecution for having failed to report their overseas accounts. As a result, tax attorneys across the nation have been besieged by wealthy clients who are lining up to apply even though they will still face big financial penalties.

Romney might well have thought in 2007 and 2008 that there was nothing to fear about a non-disclosed offshore account he'd set up years earlier precisely because it wasn't disclosed. But then came the settlement and the rush of non-disclosers to apply for the amnesty. Failing to apply for the amnesty and then getting charged by the IRS would have been both financially and politically disastrous. So amnesty it was. But even though the amnesty would eliminate any legal or financial liability for past acts, it would hardly eliminate political liability.

yup... I called that a month back - the "IRS amnesty" related to Romney's (former) Swiss Bank Accounts. Now, of course, I'm sure it's only coincidental that amongst the world's tax havens, Romney has only closed his Swiss Bank Accounts... still leaving open his Cayman Islands & Bermuda accounts. I'm sure that had nothing to do with the Swiss bank intending to disclose the names/details of it's U.S. account holders! :lol:

notwithstanding the Mitt refuses to release his tax returns... other than his single 2010 release, it now surfaces that key documents associated with that 2010 tax return were not a part of what was released. In particular, Romney failed to disclose the documents he filed with the IRS in 2010 that detail his
former
Swiss Account holdings... the former Swiss Account as Romney closed it... and only closed it... while keeping his like tax haven accounts open in the Cayman Islands and Bermuda. Now, some are speculating, certainly not the waldo, that Romney received an amnesty from the IRS for income tax evasion related to his former Swiss Account holdings.

end the speculation Mitt! Release the
hounds
tax returns!

oh baby! It just keeps getting better... not only did Romney's incomplete released 2010 tax return not include the related IRS form that would have possibly shed light on the suspected IRS amnesty for tax evasion that Romney received... Romney's incomplete released 2010 tax return also fails to include a "990-T" form... a form that would show if Romney's expansive IRA funds were being held in offshore accounts in order to shield them from taxation. Mitt, release your tax returns! What are you hiding?

Presidential candidate Mitt Romney's tax returns may be more incomplete in their public release than was previously thought. Filings related to Romney's individual retirement account, already subject to press scrutiny, indicate that the presumptive GOP nominee should have filed a form accounting for unrelated business income taxes.

The unrelated business income tax is set up for tax-exempts like nonprofits and IRAs that engage in commercial activity. Not filing the form, known as a 990-T, may indicate that Romney's IRA funds are held by an offshore account in order to shield them from taxation.

From what Romney has disclosed, there is mounting circumstantial evidence that the IRA may hold offshore investments through what are known as "blocker corporations," which help him avoid paying taxes.

"We know Romney's IRA has Bain funds in it," explained Rebecca J. Wilkins, senior counsel for federal tax policy with the nonpartisan Citizens for Tax Justice. "Bain private equity funds are listed in those assets and those funds are located in the Cayman Islands."

Wilkins says that if Romney's IRA held those funds directly, instead of through a blocker corporation, a 990-T should have been filed. "Typically it doesn't even have to file a tax return," Wilkins says. "But if it has unrelated business income, then it has to pay the unrelated business income tax." And a 990-T would need to have been filed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Derek L

Adviser says Romney to release 2011 US tax return by Oct. 15

Aug 19 (Reuters) - Republican U.S. presidential challenger Mitt Romney plans to make public his 2011 tax return by Oct. 15, a senior campaign adviser said on Sunday, as President Barack Obama's re-election team pressed its criticism of Romney's decision not to disclose more about his personal taxes.

Romney, a former private equity executive who is one of the richest men ever to run for president, has come under pressure for months from the Obama campaign to release more years of tax returns.

He has released his 2010 tax return and estimates for 2011 but does not plan to reveal more years of returns. In April, he requested an extension from the Internal Revenue Service to file his 2011 tax forms, while estimating his tax liability at $3.2 million for last year.

Ed Gillespie, a senior Romney adviser, indicated the former Massachusetts governor would release the 2011 return by Oct. 15, about three weeks before the Nov. 6 election, but refused to say exactly when.

There we go, he’ll release them once they’re finished…………I’d think if there was anything nefarious to be told by them, he’d rather release them now as opposed to only three weeks before the election in hopes of repairing any “damage” by said returns………..Now maybe the discussion can be directed towards the economy, job creation, debt and social entitlements………..

Something tells me it won’t though, instead we’ll keep hearing about tax returns, dogs riding on roofs of cars, eating of dog, collage transcripts, birth certificates, ones (secret) religion etc………

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Something tells me it won’t though, instead we’ll keep hearing about tax returns, dogs riding on roofs of cars, eating of dog, collage transcripts, birth certificates, ones (secret) religion etc………

says the guy who quotes from the Daily Caller about, "Biden's good friend receiving a federal loan"! :lol: Stay classy, hey?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There we go, he’ll release them once they’re finished…………I’d think if there was anything nefarious to be told by them, he’d rather release them now...

:lol: is Romney still working on his 2007, 2008, 2009 returns as well? Or a full and complete 2010 return? Is that why he won't release them... they're still not finished!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Huh?

In Canada, about 1/3 of tax filers pay no federal income tax whatsoever. Link (This is 2002 data. The percentage in the US now is probably higher.)

IOW, we are quickly moving to a society where less than half the population pays all the taxes for the government services received by the entire population.

The question people like me are asking is why the Mitt Romneys of the world should be part of that half that pays no taxes.

The majority can vote itself whatever public service it desires because the entire cost is borne by someone else.

Let's keep in mind who these people who pay no income taxes are. Most of them are retirees, students, and the unemployed. Some of those unemployed may be the chronic deadbeats that we hear about, but many-- probably most-- are temporarily unemployed people who will be back to paying taxes sooner or later. The students will also be paying taxes sooner or later.

By definition, kimmy, anyone who sets up a business and makes a profit is creating value for society. The money earned through revenues is greater than the cost of operating the business - assuming, of course, that the revenues were obtained voluntarily through market transactions.

Well that's nonsense. The financial news of the past several years has had numerous examples of profits that were created despite generating nothing of value. A couple of examples:

-the mortgage shenanigans in the United States. Risky mortgages were bought, then repackaged into complicated financial products, and sold as "AAA"-rated investments to people who had no way of knowing that what they were actually buying was risky mortgages. Generating a profit by buying risky assets and deceiving your customers into thinking they're safe investments is clearly not "creating value for society". The "value" added by the financial institutions that made their profits this way was created entirely by deception.

-Nortel was able to show profits for years, boosting their share prices so that their executives could obtain ludicrously large bonuses. But these "profits" were generated using accounting tricks that couldn't be sustained indefinitely, and when the jig was up, the stock price collapsed and countless investors were left high and dry.

I recently bought strawberries "produced in Quebec". The strawberries may have been grown on Quebec soil but the workers who picked them were probably from Mexico. Do I care? No. Do I care that the owner of the strawberry farm probably spends nothing on R&D? No. Do I worry about whether his "profits" trickle down or not? No.

Yes, it's a wonderful system. You get your strawberries, and the vendor made a sale. Everybody wins! Yay!

But we're not asking why the free market system is a good thing. We're asking why the Mitt Romneys of the world ought to pay less taxes while American Woman and Bush-Cheney2004 pay higher taxes.

Your delightful little tale about the strawberries adds no insight to that question.

Sticking with the strawberries, though: let me give you a couple of scenarios and you tell me which is better for the strawberry merchant.

(1) A tax cut of $1.2 million per year for Willard, balanced by a tax increase of $1200/year for AW and BC2004 and 998 of their friends.

(2) A tax cut of $1000 per year for AW and BC2004 and 998 of their friends, balanced by a $1.2 million tax increase for Willard.

Well, in situation 1, 1000 people have $100 less per month of disposable income. They might have to cut some things out of their budget. They might not buy strawberries. Willard has more money to buy strawberries with, but he's just one guy. He can't eat that many strawberries.

In situation 2, 1000 people get $100 a month more to spend on strawberries or whatever else it is that they want to spend it on. If you're the strawberry merchant, you've got to like that scenario better.

The people who support tax cuts for rich-guys will say "Bah! You've vastly oversimplified this! There are many great reasons why it would be smarter give the tax cut to the rich guy! He could do great and wonderful things with that money! He could put 2000 people to work and the strawberry guy would have twice as many customers!"

Well, maybe, but if that's the theory, then we *do* care whether those benefits trickle down and whether he's actually using his $1.2 million to put Americans to work and so on.

Whether it's Goldman Sachs, Bain or a strawberry farmer, our main concern should be whether they turn a profit or not. Why? Because a society that does not generate value will not long exist.

I agree that your strawberry merchant creates value. I'm considerably more skeptical about Goldman Sachs and Bain.

Kimmy, yours is the terrifying logic of misguided common sense. If Obama wins this election (and I suspect that he will), it will be because of such reasoning - due in part to the Occupy gang, and Obama's mother. P. J. O'Rourke wrote a book about such logic: "Eat The Rich".

Your logic impoverished billions of ordinary people for a century longer than need be. Heaven help us if America goes down that misguided path.

Apparently people have been conned into thinking that if you oppose tax-cuts for rich-guys then you must Hate Capitalism. :rolleyes:

-k

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Derek L

says the guy who quotes from the Daily Caller about, "Biden's good friend receiving a federal loan"! :lol: Stay classy, hey?

Why not? If the personal lives of both Romney and Ryan are fair game, why not Obama or Biden?

Both sides attacks border upon National Inquirer like distractions and take away from talk of the economy etc……….Advantage Obama……….Hope n’ Change indeed :lol:

The one difference between the examples of Romney’s taxes and Biden’s largess is that there is no proof of wrong doing on Romney’s part and the Biden camp hasn’t denied the charges of pandering………

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Who the hell is Grover Norquist, anyway?" asked George H.W. Bush, discussing the stupidity of Norquist's Taxpayer Protection Pledge.

George's son, former Florida governor Jeb Bush, also scoffed at the Pledge while criticizing today's brand of Republicans who are committed to dogma and orthodoxy rather than finding solutions to problems.

Who the hell is Grover Norquist? He's the head honcho of "Americans for Tax Reform", and he's a big deal becausehis "Pledge" has become a de-facto requirement for Republicans seeking public office. If you're a Republican and you're not down with Grover, you could have trouble on your hands, especially from other Republicans in Congress who have mostly signed the pledge. Mitt Romney has also signed the pledge.

Anyway, here's Grover explaining why Mitt Romney is the right man to be president:

All we have to do is replace Obama. ... We are not auditioning for fearless leader. We don't need a president to tell us in what direction to go. We know what direction to go. We want the Ryan budget. ... We just need a president to sign this stuff. We don't need someone to think it up or design it. The leadership now for the modern conservative movement for the next 20 years will be coming out of the House and the Senate.

(...)

Pick a Republican with enough working digits to handle a pen to become president of the United States. This is a change for Republicans: the House and Senate doing the work with the president signing bills. His job is to be captain of the team, to sign the legislation that has already been prepared.

Mitt Romney: Enough Fingers To Operate A Pen!

Catchy slogan!

-k

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Derek L

:lol: is Romney still working on his 2007, 2008, 2009 returns as well? Or a full and complete 2010 return? Is that why he won't release them... they're still not finished!!!

I don't know.......Why does it mater? But the more and more Shady brings up the lack of Obama releasing his collage transcripts, the more I’d like to see what he’s hiding…………..Did Obama enrol as a foreign student, thus obtaining greatly discounted tuition? What were his grades like?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

says the guy who quotes from the Daily Caller about, "Biden's good friend receiving a federal loan"! :lol: Stay classy, hey?

Why not? If the personal lives of both Romney and Ryan are fair game, why not Obama or Biden?

Both sides attacks border upon National Inquirer like distractions and take away from talk of the economy etc……….Advantage Obama……….Hope n’ Change indeed :lol:

The one difference between the examples of Romney’s taxes and Biden’s largess is that there is no proof of wrong doing on Romney’s part and the Biden camp hasn’t denied the charges of pandering………

pandering? Just who is making your Daily Caller referenced charges that Biden influenced the loan provided to 'his friend'? More pointedly, just who is fabricating that loan as a 'federal loan; i.e., taxpayer monies'... who is doing that, hey? Perhaps you should actually investigate the nature of that loan, where it came from and that all monies are sourced as private money. Save yourself further embarrassment, do a bit of research on the Overseas Private Investment Corporation (OPIC)... if you'd like, perhaps I could quote from Sir Ronny Reagan - he had a lot to say about OPIC, it's mobilizing private investment mandate, it's foreign policy extensions... cause, you know... you just know, if it was good enough for Sir Ronny Republican, surely it's good enough for today's private capital investing conservative toadies... like you, hey?

yes, I expect your next routine to be a stepped-up National Enquirer linked reference! :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know.......Why does it mater? But the more and more Shady brings up the lack of Obama releasing his collage transcripts, the more I’d like to see what he’s hiding…………..Did Obama enrol as a foreign student, thus obtaining greatly discounted tuition? What were his grades like?

don't you know... today's college scripters are yesterday's birthers reinvented!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Derek L

pandering? Just who is making your Daily Caller referenced charges that Biden influenced the loan provided to 'his friend'? More pointedly, just who is fabricating that loan as a 'federal loan; i.e., taxpayer monies'... who is doing that, hey? Perhaps you should actually investigate the nature of that loan, where it came from and that all monies are sourced as private money. Save yourself further embarrassment, do a bit of research on the Overseas Private Investment Corporation (OPIC)... if you'd like, perhaps I could quote from Sir Ronny Reagan - he had a lot to say about OPIC, it's mobilizing private investment mandate, it's foreign policy extensions... cause, you know... you just know, if it was good enough for Sir Ronny Republican, surely it's good enough for today's private capital investing conservative toadies... like you, hey?

yes, I expect your next routine to be a stepped-up National Enquirer linked reference! :lol:

Clearly the minions of Tucker Carlson…………..Who mixes the mud intended for Romney/Ryan?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Clearly the minions of Tucker Carlson…………..Who mixes the mud intended for Romney/Ryan?

yes, clearly... you had no qualms in extending upon the "depth and accuracy" of Tucker Carlson's minions. Is this your distraction away from actually addressing the loan and OPIC? :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Derek L

don't you know... today's college scripters are yesterday's birthers reinvented!

In our age there is no such thing as 'keeping out of politics.' All issues are political issues, and politics itself is a mass of lies, evasions, folly, hatred and schizophrenia.

George Orwell

Beware of dog eating Muslims and tax cheating Mormons ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




  • Tell a friend

    Love Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
×
×
  • Create New...