Morning Must Reads: Clear

  • Share
  • Read Later
524 comments
jensensah
jensensah

Doesn't  matter if he did, or he didn't, liberals will concentrate on the fact that he didn't release his prostrate exam!! There is more that Obummer has hidden, that WE will never find out, then the Liberals will ever dream up for Romney!!! Yet, what the liberal media asks for, will have more meaning, then what we we don't know, will never know, and what we should of known, about Obama!!!! That is just the way it is!! Hypocrisy at its best!!!! The New World, that we now live in, thanks to the liberal media, agenda!!!  

Kent R
Kent R

Perhaps in 2016 Romney can be retroactively elected  to a term  but not in 2012

La_Randy
La_Randy

Deleted due to wrong placement.

bobcn
bobcn

Show of hands: 

Who thinks the reason Romney is only releasing two tax returns is because even though releasing 8 or 10 years worth would have nothing but beneficial effects for his campaign, he's just a modest  guy who doesn't like to brag?

outsider2011
outsider2011

 

I love it. The more he says he won't

release more, the worse this becomes.

I know it's early, but i feel like the ground is sinking below him:

 

What’s hiding in Mitt’s taxes?

If releasing his tax returns is more

damaging than hiding them, there must be something worth concealing.

 

Ed Gillespie got the most attention for telling CNN’s Candy

Crowley that Mitt Romney “retired retroactively” from Bain Capital in

2002, seeming to acknowledge that he remained as CEO after February 1999, which

the Romney campaign denies. But the Sunday-show drumbeat for Romney to release

more than two years of tax returns may be equally damaging — especially because

it was led by Republicans.

 

George Will made a point Democrats have made before him, but

his conservative credibility and capacity for pronouncements from on high gave

it special resonance: Romney’s older tax returns must contain more damaging

information than what we already know, since he’s so intent on hiding them.

 

“The cost of not releasing the returns are clear,” Will

said. “Therefore, [Romney] must have calculated that there are higher costs in

releasing them.” The Weekly Standard’s Bill Kristol and Bush-Cheney advisor

Matthew Dowd also joined the chorus of supposed allies asking Romney to release

more returns.

 

“You’ve got to release six, eight, ten years,” Kristol said,

calling Romney’s reluctance to do so “crazy.”

 

So what would be more damaging than what Romney’s 2010 and

2011 returns told us? We already know that he’s insanely wealthy, that he’s got

his money in offshore tax havens like the Cayman Islands and Bermuda, and that

he paid an obscenely low 13.9 percent tax rate because he made his money from

investment, not work, a result of the way our tax system privileges the

investor class over even rich people who have to labor for a living. If that’s

the kind of thing that outrages you, you’ve got enough to be outraged about.

 

But what if Romney had years where he paid no taxes at all?

The New Yorker’s John Cassidy surveys the list of

possible reasons for Romney to hide his returns and seems to think that’s the

most plausible explanation. Cassidy admits he’s in the realm of “speculation” –

but that’s where Romney has left the electorate with his refusal to release

more than two years of filings.

 

Other explanations Cassidy considers include even higher income,

even more offshore accounts and investments in businesses or industries that

might be politically embarrassing. But since we already know Romney is

ridiculously rich and that he has damaging offshore accounts, the first two

don’t seem a reason to hide his returns. The third is possible, but as Cassidy

observes, since we know Bain Capital invested in businesses that ruthlessly

laid off workers and even one that disposed of aborted fetuses, it’s hard to

imagine many more politically damaging revelations.

 

“But there may have been a year in which Romney’s federal

tax rate was in the single figures, and possibly even close to zero,” Cassidy

posits, since the two years he was willing to release are when he was the

nominal front-runner for the GOP nomination, and was probably more cognizant of

the political risks to aggressive tax-avoidance. Romney’s accountants might

have written off a big loss, or used other legal ways to minimize or even

eliminate his tax burden. To be fair, I should note that although Cassidy seems

to think that’s the most likely reason for Romney to conceal his returns, he

calls it “pretty unlikely.” I don’t. As Will says, there’s got to be a

cost-benefit calculus behind Romney’s stonewalling, and I can’t think of a

better one.

 

Taken together, Romney’s shady “retroactive” retirement, his

Bain Capital profiteering and his low tax rate add up to a big problem for the

presumptive GOP nominee, because the white working class has become the bedrock

of the Republican base. David Frum puts it this way, in a CNN piece headlined “Mitt Romney’s painfully bad week:”

Romney’s core problem is this: He heads a party that must

win two-thirds of the white working-class vote in presidential elections to

compensate for its weakness in almost every demographic category. The white

working class is the most pessimistic and alienated group in the electorate,

and it especially fears and dislikes the kind of financial methods that gained

Romney his fortune.

 

So maybe this is the year white working class voters wake up

to the real agenda of the party they’ve come to support? Democrats have hoped

that before, and been disappointed. But there’s never been a GOP candidate so

perfectly tailored to expose the party’s real base, the  top 1 percent.

 

 

http://www.salon.com/2012/07/1...

apr2563
apr2563

Help me out.  Who is the most "b**sh*t" crazy right winger in congress?

Steve King

Virginia Foxx

Trent Frank

Louie Gohmert

Jean Schmidt

Joe Walsh

Allen West

apr2563
apr2563

What the reactionary, crazy right has been sharing with us:

Words of wisdom from Steve King

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...

David Dreier, GOP Rep., Says Patient With 'Massive Tumor' Shouldn't Have Health Insurance Provided (VIDEO)

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...

"Let's talk about [US Supreme Court Chief Justice John] Roberts. I'm going to tell you something that you're not going to hear anywhere else, that you must pay attention to. It's well known that Roberts, unfortunately for him, has suffered from epileptic seizures. Therefore he has been on medication. Therefore neurologists will tell you that medication used for seizure disorders, such as epilepsy, can introduce mental slowing, forgetfulness and other cognitive problems. And if you look at Roberts' writings you can see the cognitive disassociation in what he is saying,"
  Michael Savage, conservative talk radio

http://andrewsullivan.thedaily...

apr2563
apr2563

http://www.guardian.co.uk/comm...

Mendacious Mitt: Romney's bid to become liar-in-chief

Spin is normal in politics, but Romney is pioneering a cynical strategy of reducing fact and truth to pure partisanship

cin
cin

Speaking of Obamacare (OK, nobody was, but I'm bringing it up anyway).

I just got a rebate check in the mail from my insurance co. for 328 dollars. Never had that happen before.

Thank you, Mr. President!

And I think I'll donate a good chunk of that to his campaign.

cin
cin

Speaking of Obamacare (OK, nobody was, but I'm going to bring it up anyway)...

I just got a rebate check in the mail from my insurance company for $328. Never had that happen before.

Thank you, Mr. President! I think I'll donate a good chuck of that to his campaign.

apr2563
apr2563

I haven't read through all comments today.  Is Paulie the only remaining reactionary troglodyte left commenting here?  If so, it is sad.  He is so repetitive.

outsider2011
outsider2011

Norquist jumps the shark

The anti - tax king goes postal on a conservative Republican senator.

Has Grover Norquist gone too far? The uncompromising starve - the - beast

activist — before whom ( nearly ) all Republicans bend a cowering knee,

for fear of violating his anti - tax - hike pledge — has always had a way

with the over - the - top sound bite. On Monday, he reaffirmed his penchant

for lethal toxicity and may have finally stepped over the line, when he

called a conservative Republican senator a liar who appears to have

developed Stockholm syndrome.

The senator in question is

Oklahoma’s Tom Coburn, and there’s some history here. Coburn and

Norquist have been tussling with each other for years, providing much

delight to liberal spectators who are probably hoping that neither party

is left standing after a 12-round heavyweight fight. Their most recent

disagreement centered on Norquist’s contention that abolishing a tax

break for ethanol constituted a tax hike that must be matched by other

cuts.

Coburn, who introduced the amendment to get rid of the tax break,

argued that Norquist’s position was ridiculous: Getting rid of tax

loopholes negotiated by special interests should not be considered the

equivalent of tax hikes.

In a Monday op - ed in the New York Times,  “ A Greater American Pledge , ”

Coburn upped the ante. Not only did he reiterate his scorn for

Norquist’s position on matching every tax loophole eradication with

another tax cut, but he also took matters a serious step further,

declaring that Republicans were willing to cut a “ grand bargain ” with

Democrats that included revenue increases.

Crazy talk! In the

Church of Norquist, Coburn’s assertion is equivalent to saying that the

Vatican is ready to cut a deal with Planned Parenthood that would allow

some abortions. Norquist wasted no time communicating his dismay to The Hill.

Norquist

told The Hill that the piece is filed with “ lies ” and said that Coburn

is violating, and trying to get colleagues to violate, a pledge they

made to voters…

He also said that Coburn’s claims about his colleagues turning their backs on the pledge are false.

“When Coburn stands up and says,  ‘ I want to raise taxes , ’ he stands alone ,” Norquist said.

Norquist said that Coburn … appears to have “ gone native or developed

Stockholm Syndrome ” from spending too much time with Sen. D|ck Durbin

(D-Ill.) in Gang of Six meetings.

While

the notion that Tom Coburn is the 21st-century’s equivalent to

Hearst - heiress - turned - Symbionese - Liberation - Army - terrorist Patty Hearst

is amusing to contemplate ( who knew that liberal Democratic senators

were so adept at psychological warfare ! ) the real story here is that

cracks in the GOP’s Great Wall of Anti - Taxes are finally starting to

show. Coburn makes a convoluted case that the real villains here are

Democrats who have been pumping up Norquist as a political “ boogeyman ”

as part of their evil plan to make Republicans look intransigent, but

he’s fooling nobody. Republicans have indeed been extraordinarily

intransigent, to the point that the government’s ability to accomplish

even the most trivial legislation has been  hamstrung. And Norquist is a

big reason why, which of course explains why Coburn’s been taking him

on in such high - profile fashion.

How big will those cracks spread?

It’s hard to be optimistic in a world where someone as conservative as

Tom Coburn is playing the role of liberal, compared to the rank and file

of House Republicans. But some kind of deal on taxes and the budget is

going to be cut before the “ fiscal cliff ” at the end of this year, and

if Democrats hold firm, the Coburn - Norquist squabbling is a sign that

there may be some weaknesses to exploit in the GOP united front.

http://www.salon.com/2012/07/1...

outsider2011
outsider2011

 

Norquist jumps the shark

The anti - tax king goes postal on a conservative Republican senator.

Has Grover Norquist gone too far? The uncompromising starve - the - beast

activist — before whom ( nearly ) all Republicans bend a cowering knee,

for fear of violating his anti - tax - hike pledge — has always had a way

with the over - the - top sound bite. On Monday, he reaffirmed his penchant

for lethal toxicity and may have finally stepped over the line, when he

called a conservative Republican senator a liar who appears to have

developed Stockholm syndrome.

The senator in question is

Oklahoma’s Tom Coburn, and there’s some history here. Coburn and

Norquist have been tussling with each other for years, providing much

delight to liberal spectators who are probably hoping that neither party

is left standing after a 12-round heavyweight fight. Their most recent

disagreement centered on Norquist’s contention that abolishing a tax

break for ethanol constituted a tax hike that must be matched by other

cuts.

Coburn, who introduced the amendment to get rid of the tax break,

argued that Norquist’s position was ridiculous: Getting rid of tax

loopholes negotiated by special interests should not be considered the

equivalent of tax hikes.

In a Monday op - ed in the New York Times,  “ A Greater American Pledge , ”

Coburn upped the ante. Not only did he reiterate his scorn for

Norquist’s position on matching every tax loophole eradication with

another tax cut, but he also took matters a serious step further,

declaring that Republicans were willing to cut a “ grand bargain ” with

Democrats that included revenue increases.

Crazy talk! In the

Church of Norquist, Coburn’s assertion is equivalent to saying that the

Vatican is ready to cut a deal with Planned Parenthood that would allow

some abortions. Norquist wasted no time communicating his dismay to The Hill.

Norquist

told The Hill that the piece is filed with “ lies ” and said that Coburn

is violating, and trying to get colleagues to violate, a pledge they

made to voters…

He also said that Coburn’s claims about his colleagues turning their backs on the pledge are false.

“When Coburn stands up and says,  ‘ I want to raise taxes , ’ he stands alone ,” Norquist said.

Norquist said that Coburn … appears to have “ gone native or developed

Stockholm Syndrome ” from spending too much time with Sen. Dick Durbin

(D-Ill.) in Gang of Six meetings.

While

the notion that Tom Coburn is the 21st-century’s equivalent to

Hearst - heiress - turned - Symbionese - Liberation - Army - terrorist Patty Hearst

is amusing to contemplate ( who knew that liberal Democratic senators

were so adept at psychological warfare ! ) the real story here is that

cracks in the GOP’s Great Wall of Anti - Taxes are finally starting to

show. Coburn makes a convoluted case that the real villains here are

Democrats who have been pumping up Norquist as a political “ boogeyman ”

as part of their evil plan to make Republicans look intransigent, but

he’s fooling nobody. Republicans have indeed been extraordinarily

intransigent, to the point that the government’s ability to accomplish

even the most trivial legislation has been  hamstrung. And Norquist is a

big reason why, which of course explains why Coburn’s been taking him

on in such high - profile fashion.

How big will those cracks spread?

It’s hard to be optimistic in a world where someone as conservative as

Tom Coburn is playing the role of liberal, compared to the rank and file

of House Republicans. But some kind of deal on taxes and the budget is

going to be cut before the “ fiscal cliff ” at the end of this year, and

if Democrats hold firm, the Coburn - Norquist squabbling is a sign that

there may be some weaknesses to exploit in the GOP united front.

http://www.salon.com/2012/07/1...

outsider2011
outsider2011

 

Norquist jumps the shark

The anti-tax king goes postal on a conservative Republican senator.

Has Grover Norquist gone too far? The uncompromising starve - the - beast

activist — before whom (nearly) all Republicans bend a cowering knee,

for fear of violating his anti - tax - hike pledge — has always had a way

with the over - the - top sound bite. On Monday, he reaffirmed his penchant

for lethal toxicity and may have finally stepped over the line, when he

called a conservative Republican senator a liar who appears to have

developed Stockholm syndrome.

The senator in question is

Oklahoma’s Tom Coburn, and there’s some history here. Coburn and

Norquist have been tussling with each other for years, providing much

delight to liberal spectators who are probably hoping that neither party

is left standing after a 12-round heavyweight fight. Their most recent

disagreement centered on Norquist’s contention that abolishing a tax

break for ethanol constituted a tax hike that must be matched by other

cuts.

Coburn, who introduced the amendment to get rid of the tax break,

argued that Norquist’s position was ridiculous: Getting rid of tax

loopholes negotiated by special interests should not be considered the

equivalent of tax hikes.

In a Monday op - ed in the New York Times,  “ A Greater American Pledge , ”

Coburn upped the ante. Not only did he reiterate his scorn for

Norquist’s position on matching every tax loophole eradication with

another tax cut, but he also took matters a serious step further,

declaring that Republicans were willing to cut a “ grand bargain ” with

Democrats that included revenue increases.

Crazy talk! In the

Church of Norquist, Coburn’s assertion is equivalent to saying that the

Vatican is ready to cut a deal with Planned Parenthood that would allow

some abortions. Norquist wasted no time communicating his dismay to The Hill.

Norquist

told The Hill that the piece is filed with “ lies ” and said that Coburn

is violating, and trying to get colleagues to violate, a pledge they

made to voters…

He also said that Coburn’s claims about his colleagues turning their backs on the pledge are false.

“When Coburn stands up and says,  ‘ I want to raise taxes , ’ he stands alone ,” Norquist said.

Norquist said that Coburn … appears to have “ gone native or developed

Stockholm Syndrome ” from spending too much time with Sen. Dick Durbin

(D-Ill.) in Gang of Six meetings.

While

the notion that Tom Coburn is the 21st-century’s equivalent to

Hearst - heiress - turned - Symbionese - Liberation - Army - terrorist Patty Hearst

is amusing to contemplate ( who knew that liberal Democratic senators

were so adept at psychological warfare ! ) the real story here is that

cracks in the GOP’s Great Wall of Anti - Taxes are finally starting to

show. Coburn makes a convoluted case that the real villains here are

Democrats who have been pumping up Norquist as a political “ boogeyman ”

as part of their evil plan to make Republicans look intransigent, but

he’s fooling nobody. Republicans have indeed been extraordinarily

intransigent, to the point that the government’s ability to accomplish

even the most trivial legislation has been  hamstrung. And Norquist is a

big reason why, which of course explains why Coburn’s been taking him

on in such high - profile fashion.

How big will those cracks spread?

It’s hard to be optimistic in a world where someone as conservative as

Tom Coburn is playing the role of liberal, compared to the rank and file

of House Republicans. But some kind of deal on taxes and the budget is

going to be cut before the “ fiscal cliff ” at the end of this year, and

if Democrats hold firm, the Coburn - Norquist squabbling is a sign that

there may be some weaknesses to exploit in the GOP united front.

http://www.salon.com/2012/07/1...

BOLTFANDAN
BOLTFANDAN

Obama should release all the Fast and Furious documents to congress . He should aslo unseal his college records,  and the records that show why he was dis barred in Illinois.

What is he hiding ??? Isn't he the  Transparent President ???

outsider2011
outsider2011

 

Norquist jumps the shark

The anti-tax king goes postal on a conservative Republican senator.

Has Grover Norquist gone too far? The uncompromising starve-the-beast

activist — before whom (nearly) all Republicans bend a cowering knee,

for fear of violating his anti-tax-hike pledge — has always had a way

with the over-the-top sound bite. On Monday, he reaffirmed his penchant

for lethal toxicity and may have finally stepped over the line, when he

called a conservative Republican senator a liar who appears to have

developed Stockholm syndrome.

The senator in question is

Oklahoma’s Tom Coburn, and there’s some history here. Coburn and

Norquist have been tussling with each other for years, providing much

delight to liberal spectators who are probably hoping that neither party

is left standing after a 12-round heavyweight fight. Their most recent

disagreement centered on Norquist’s contention that abolishing a tax

break for ethanol constituted a tax hike that must be matched by other

cuts. Coburn, who introduced the amendment to get rid of the tax break,

argued that Norquist’s position was ridiculous: Getting rid of tax

loopholes negotiated by special interests should not be considered the

equivalent of tax hikes.

In a Monday op-ed in the New York Times, “A Greater American Pledge,”

Coburn upped the ante. Not only did he reiterate his scorn for

Norquist’s position on matching every tax loophole eradication with

another tax cut, but he also took matters a serious step further,

declaring that Republicans were willing to cut a “grand bargain” with

Democrats that included revenue increases.

Crazy talk! In the

Church of Norquist, Coburn’s assertion is equivalent to saying that the

Vatican is ready to cut a deal with Planned Parenthood that would allow

some abortions. Norquist wasted no time communicating his dismay to The Hill.

Norquist

told The Hill that the piece is filed with “lies” and said that Coburn

is violating, and trying to get colleagues to violate, a pledge they

made to voters…

He also said that Coburn’s claims about his colleagues turning their backs on the pledge are false.

“When Coburn stands up and says, ‘I want to raise taxes,’ he stands alone,” Norquist said.

Norquist said that Coburn … appears to have “gone native or developed

Stockholm Syndrome” from spending too much time with Sen. Dick Durbin

(D-Ill.) in Gang of Six meetings.

While

the notion that Tom Coburn is the 21st-century’s equivalent to

Hearst-heiress-turned-Symbionese-Liberation-Army-terrorist Patty Hearst

is amusing to contemplate (who knew that liberal Democratic senators

were so adept at psychological warfare! ) the real story here is that

cracks in the GOP’s Great Wall of Anti-Taxes are finally starting to

show. Coburn makes a convoluted case that the real villains here are

Democrats who have been pumping up Norquist as a political “boogeyman”

as part of their evil plan to make Republicans look intransigent, but

he’s fooling nobody. Republicans have indeed been extraordinarily

intransigent, to the point that the government’s ability to accomplish

even the most trivial legislation has been  hamstrung. And Norquist is a

big reason why, which of course explains why Coburn’s been taking him

on in such high-profile fashion.How big will those cracks spread?

It’s hard to be optimistic in a world where someone as conservative as

Tom Coburn is playing the role of liberal, compared to the rank and file

of House Republicans. But some kind of deal on taxes and the budget is

going to be cut before the “fiscal cliff” at the end of this year, and

if Democrats hold firm, the Coburn-Norquist squabbling is a sign that

there may be some weaknesses to exploit in the GOP united front.http://www.salon.com/2012/07/16/norqu...

outsider2011
outsider2011

 

Norquist jumps the shark

The anti-tax king goes postal on a conservative Republican senator.

Has Grover Norquist gone too far? The uncompromising starve-the-beast

activist — before whom (nearly) all Republicans bend a cowering knee,

for fear of violating his anti-tax-hike pledge — has always had a way

with the over-the-top sound bite. On Monday, he reaffirmed his penchant

for lethal toxicity and may have finally stepped over the line, when he

called a conservative Republican senator a liar who appears to have

developed Stockholm syndrome.

The senator in question is

Oklahoma’s Tom Coburn, and there’s some history here. Coburn and

Norquist have been tussling with each other for years, providing much

delight to liberal spectators who are probably hoping that neither party

is left standing after a 12-round heavyweight fight. Their most recent

disagreement centered on Norquist’s contention that abolishing a tax

break for ethanol constituted a tax hike that must be matched by other

cuts. Coburn, who introduced the amendment to get rid of the tax break,

argued that Norquist’s position was ridiculous: Getting rid of tax

loopholes negotiated by special interests should not be considered the

equivalent of tax hikes.

In a Monday op-ed in the New York Times, “A Greater American Pledge,”

Coburn upped the ante. Not only did he reiterate his scorn for

Norquist’s position on matching every tax loophole eradication with

another tax cut, but he also took matters a serious step further,

declaring that Republicans were willing to cut a “grand bargain” with

Democrats that included revenue increases.

Crazy talk! In the

Church of Norquist, Coburn’s assertion is equivalent to saying that the

Vatican is ready to cut a deal with Planned Parenthood that would allow

some abortions. Norquist wasted no time communicating his dismay to The Hill.

Norquist

told The Hill that the piece is filed with “lies” and said that Coburn

is violating, and trying to get colleagues to violate, a pledge they

made to voters…

He also said that Coburn’s claims about his colleagues turning their backs on the pledge are false.

“When Coburn stands up and says, ‘I want to raise taxes,’ he stands alone,” Norquist said.

Norquist said that Coburn … appears to have “gone native or developed

Stockholm Syndrome” from spending too much time with Sen. Dick Durbin

(D-Ill.) in Gang of Six meetings.

While

the notion that Tom Coburn is the 21st-century’s equivalent to

Hearst-heiress-turned-Symbionese-Liberation-Army-terrorist Patty Hearst

is amusing to contemplate (who knew that liberal Democratic senators

were so adept at psychological warfare!) the real story here is that

cracks in the GOP’s Great Wall of Anti-Taxes are finally starting to

show. Coburn makes a convoluted case that the real villains here are

Democrats who have been pumping up Norquist as a political “boogeyman”

as part of their evil plan to make Republicans look intransigent, but

he’s fooling nobody. Republicans have indeed been extraordinarily

intransigent, to the point that the government’s ability to accomplish

even the most trivial legislation has been  hamstrung. And Norquist is a

big reason why, which of course explains why Coburn’s been taking him

on in such high-profile fashion.How big will those cracks spread?

It’s hard to be optimistic in a world where someone as conservative as

Tom Coburn is playing the role of liberal, compared to the rank and file

of House Republicans. But some kind of deal on taxes and the budget is

going to be cut before the “fiscal cliff” at the end of this year, and

if Democrats hold firm, the Coburn-Norquist squabbling is a sign that

there may be some weaknesses to exploit in the GOP united front.http://www.salon.com/2012/07/16/norqu...

sacredh
sacredh

It's the Scarsdale Diet. Chris ate everyone named Scarsdale.

.

DISQUS strikes again.

paulejb
paulejb

nflfoghorn,

When Mitt Romney was engaged in saving the Winter Olympics, Barack Obama was a State Senate backbencher known for voting present when he was not voting to defend infanticide.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12...

paulejb
paulejb

nflfoghorn,

Willard Mitt Romney should reveal his tax returns on the day that Barack Hussein Obama releases the documents that he is hiding on Fast amp; Furious.

paulejb
paulejb

nflfoghorn,

"You cannot blow this off, Paulie."

-----------------------------------------

No? Watch this.

In the same time period that Mitt Romney gave up a lucrative career to save the Winter Olympics, Barack Hussein Obama was a backbencher in the Illinois State Senate voting to defend infanticide. 

http://www.nationalreview.com/... 

fhmadvocat
fhmadvocat

It is funny listening to the Republicans demand an apology from the Obama campaign on their commercials concerning Mitt Romney.  Don't they know that the boys in Chicago learned from Karl Rove?  And the Obama's campaign has decided to go hard and fast.  Get out there and define your opponent.  Romney has helped by not releasing his tax returns and working on responses to the Obama campaign.  Mitt, you are playing into Obama's game!  Team Obama doesn't want to talk about the economy.  They want to talk about you.  Why don't you release your tax returns.  It's July and people will not remember what was in them by November.

It would help if Mitt would own up to Bain did.  As far as people losing jobs, hey, without Bain stepping in, they would have lost those jobs anyway.  Bain was just trying to save dying companies.  Sometimes you are successful, sometimes you are not, but at least Bain tried.  Stop trying to say you did not have anything to do with the decision making at Bain after 1999.  It makes you sound like you don't want to take responsibility.  Trust that the American people are not jealous of success and that they embrace it.  Success is not a zero sumgame!  If you can succeed, we all can succeed!

paulejb
paulejb

53_3,

"Are you telling me that free market solutions aren't working?"

----------------------------------------------

No. I am telling you that Barack Obama's crony socialism is not working.

paulejb
paulejb

53_3,

"You actually think these people would rather be back in the darkest days of the recession, when economic collapse was only a few days away unless Bush signed off on TARP I?"

------------------------------------------

There you have it people. 53_3 believes that economic collapse was averted only through the actions of George W Bush. 

It's big of you to admit that, 53. I congratulate you on your recognition of the truth.

outsider2011
outsider2011

 Mitt Romney's refusal to take responsibility for the actions of Bain

Capital from 1999 to 2002 says a lot about the kind of president he

would be.

Friday night, Romney persisted in denying that he was responsible for

the behavior of Bain during the period, even though he was listed on SEC

documents as the firm's CEO, Chairman, President and sole stockholder.

Romney claims he "left" Bain Capital to run the Olympics back in 1999

and is not in the least responsible for the actions it took over the

next three years, notwithstanding the fact that he was CEO, Chairman,

President and sole stockholder until 2002.

There is mounting evidence of specific decisions and actions that

undercut Romney's case that he was no longer involved in the day-to-day

decisions of Bain Capital after 1999.

But the central, indisputable fact is that the CEO, Chairman, President

and sole stockholder of a company is responsible for whatever the

company does -- by definition. For normal people, any argument to the

contrary simply defies common sense

Romney can dance around the issue, parse words, argue he gave up

"management control" until he is blue in the face. But however he

structured the decision making process at Bain Capital while he was also

running the Olympics, he was ultimately in charge -- and he was

ultimately responsible for -- and benefited mightily from its actions.

In every business the buck stops with the CEO, Chairman, President and

sole stockholder -- it's that simple.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...

outsider2011
outsider2011

 WASHINGTON -- Democrats are mocking Republicans in the House of

Representatives for voting to repeal the health care reform law and keep

their own enhanced medical care.

When Congress passed the health care law, it required members of

Congress to get their insurance on exchanges with the rest of the

public. But in voting to repeal that law, Republicans and a handful of

Democrats were also voting to go back to the old system where the

lawmakers get a sweeter deal than most of the rest of the country.

They also voted against

a Democratic motion that said members of Congress who support repealing

the health care law must also repeal the good stuff they get, such as

lifetime care and insurance regardless of pre-existing conditions.

Democrats tried to demonstrate how Republicans distanced themselves

from voting to protect their own deal by capturing a slew of GOP members

on video saying they didn't vote to protect their own care, as seen

below. The clip features a number of Republicans in tight races this

year, as well as GOP budget guru, Rep. Paul Ryan of Wisconsin.

“House Republicans refuse to admit they voted to give themselves

taxpayer funded lifetime guaranteed health care instead of having the

same health care as their constituents,” said Jesse Ferguson, spokesman

for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, referring to the

fact that members of Congress are eligible for retirement benefits after

just five years.

“House Republicans didn’t just vote to protect insurance company

campaign donor profits this time, they’re even helping themselves to

lifetime taxpayer-funded government health care and now they need to be

honest with their constituents and admit it,” Ferguson said.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...