This is Low Even for Harry Reid and Democrats … Bain Investor Told Me Romney “Did not Pay Taxes for 10 Years” … Have You No Shame!

 

SHAMEFUL, SIMPLY SHAMEFUL …

Harry Reid cannot pass a budget in the Senate for 4 years, but he can throw old wild slanderous accusations with no knowledge whether they are true or not. This is how desperate Democrats are, they will resort to and say anything, rather than talking about the economy. What ever happened to Obama’s call for civility?

Yes, it’s true I am a low life and have no shame

Democrat Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid have you no shame. What a disposable, rotten piece of human waste. Without any confirmed facts, not knowing what he was spewing from his mouth was true or false and worse yet, not caring, Reid made a comment about Mitt Romney that he heard from an unnamed Bain investor that Romney had not paid taxes for 10 years. This miserable excuse for a human being also went on to say that, “His poor father must be so embarrassed about his son.”  Exactly how far in the gutter are you? What kind of a person makes such an irresponsible comment? What would Reid do if some one said he heard from an unknown person on the Internet that he slept with farm animals or had ‘Affairs With Pet Dogs, Lights Own Farts’?

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) has what he says is an informed explanation for why Mitt Romney refuses to release additional tax returns. According a Bain investor, Reid charged, Romney didn’t pay any taxes for 10 years.

In a wide-ranging interview with The Huffington Post from his office on Capitol Hill, Reid saved some of his toughest words for the presumptive Republican presidential nominee. Romney couldn’t make it through a Senate confirmation process as a mere Cabinet nominee, the majority leader insisted, owing to the opaqueness of his personal finances.

“His poor father must be so embarrassed about his son,” Reid said, in reference to George Romney’s standard-setting decision to turn over 12 years of tax returns when he ran for president in the late 1960s.

Imagine if a Republic made such a comment about Obama. The MSM in lock step would be to his defense. Where are they pressing Reid as to whether this smear is true or not? As stated at Hot Air, who in their right mind really believes that ‘a person who had invested with Bain Capital’ know about Romney’s personal tax returns anyway?”

One thing is for certain, Reid needs to apologize. Voters, you can end this reign in the Senate this November. Sadly, the Democrats and Obama are only going to get more desperate to closer we get to the elections because they cannot run on their failed record.



If you liked this post, you may also like these:

  • Mitt Romney Says … It’s Time for Harry Reid to “Put Up or Shut Up”
  • Republican Chairman Reince Priebus Calls Harry Reid a “Dirty Liar” in Response to Dingy Harry’s Tax Accusations (Video)
  • Nancy Pelosi Doubles Down … ‘It Is A Fact’ That Somebody Told Harry Reid About Romney Not Paying Taxes
  • Democrat Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid Says It Would be Foolish for Democrats to Propose Their own Federal Budget
  • Daily Commentary – Tuesday, July 26th, 2011 – Harry Reid: No New Taxes




  • Comments

    45 Responses to “This is Low Even for Harry Reid and Democrats … Bain Investor Told Me Romney “Did not Pay Taxes for 10 Years” … Have You No Shame!”

    1. rightknight on August 1st, 2012 9:28 am

      Someone began to train this fellow to be a
      boxer at one time. Reid should have learned
      that throwing wild punches invites the opponent
      to score a knockout. He may be depending on
      the fact that a gentleman would not KO a
      little old woman.

    2. A Texas Grandfather on August 1st, 2012 9:45 am

      This is “dirty Harry’s last chance to make noise. He is going to loose his position in November.

      He is just another socialist/democrat that is following the party line. More Alinsky tactics of attack your opponent with anything negative you can find. Truth doesn’t matter.

    3. RT on August 1st, 2012 10:05 am

      If Romney had done something illegal, I am sure he would have been brought to trial by the IRS by now. So what is the problem with having employed expert tax attornies and CPAs? Reid is a
      P_S!

    4. Greg the Great on August 1st, 2012 1:11 pm

      Harry Reid sleeps with young boys.

    5. publicenemy2u on August 1st, 2012 2:38 pm

      If Mitt can have $1,200,000 in his IRA with a $30,000 a year limit for contributions it’s not impossible to believe he paid no tax for 10 yrs.
      He COULD prove if he paid taxes (if he really wants the job) or not. Just don’t ask him how much he made for the LDS church during the Olympics. That $1,500,000,000 in tax dollars is coming back to him from his lucky Utah friends as dark money. Ain’t it sad!
      ______________________
      SM: I guess you must be the unnamed Investor as you know everything of Romney’s taxes.
      R

    6. flippy on August 1st, 2012 5:35 pm

      Has the same kind of support behind it as the “Birther” movement; in a kind of “If he won’t release the documents that he doesn’t have to release then they must say what I want them to say” kind of mindset.

    7. RK on August 1st, 2012 8:35 pm

      This trap has been set perfectly. Perhaps the Mittster is more clever than he sometimes gets credit for. And to see that such a prominent Dem took the bait. Didn’t he realize there are solid facts and actual evidence to prove himself wrong on this?

      And the best part is; we don’t need to wait until Nov to end this; once Willard releases just a few select tax returns; even just the 1040 page itself, the truth will be plain and clear, and Reid will be toast.

      Heck, I’ll bet even the word of McCain clearly stating that the returns he saw 4 yrs ago would be sufficient to show Reid’s source and/or story is not accurate.

      Now who wouldn’t want to see Reid and the Dems squirm once the truth is out? There should be a national call for the facts to be released, and I begin that here with my single voice.

      I hope this gets the appropriate non-partisan support so we can restore honor and integrity to our political discourse.

    8. Rob Miller on August 1st, 2012 9:40 pm

      Thanks for the link…much appreciated!

      All Good Things,
      Rob

    9. rightknight on August 1st, 2012 11:54 pm

      Even a rabble-rousing ‘Community Organizer’ can become
      wealthy and politically connected as exemplified by Barry
      Soetoro himself. His hidden records are not even a factor
      in his meteoric rise to the throne. He certainly did not
      ‘build that himself’; he obviously had ‘help’ along the way.

    10. publicenemy2u on August 2nd, 2012 10:36 am

      If Mitt can have $1,200,000 in his IRA with a $30,000 a year limit for contributions it’s not impossible to believe he paid no tax for 10 yrs.
      He COULD prove if he paid taxes (if he really wants the job) or not. Just don’t ask him how much he made for the LDS church during the Olympics. That $1,500,000,000 in tax dollars is coming back to him from his lucky Utah friends as dark money. Ain’t it sad!
      ______________________
      SM: I guess you must be the unnamed Investor as you know everything of Romney’s taxes.
      R

      I know that if someone comes into my office applyng for a job and has a decade of no job history he was probably dealing drugs or in prison. If he can’t explain the lost decade the application gets tossed. I don’t think Mitt’s been dealing drugs but can/will he explain why he placed financial bets against the US. He took Brazilian front money, used it to leverage, buyout, bankrupt and close factories and offshore US jobs. He is the FIRST canidate to have a Swiss bank account. HE has proudly proclaimed “if I tell you what I plan to cut you wouldn’t vote for me” His missing taxes are like the applicant’s missing decade. As a taxpayer I was a unnamed Investor in many of Mitt’s friends bussiness’s.

    11. Tamikosmom on August 2nd, 2012 9:09 pm

      John McCain is not my favorite Republican by a long shot but … considering the truth is documented I doubt that McCain would outright lie regarding this issue
      .
      .
      McCain: Palin was ‘better candidate’ than Romney
      7/17/12

      McCain received more than two decades worth of Romney’s tax returns as the former Massachusetts governor was undergoing the vetting process four years ago, far more than Romney has released publicly in the 2012 campaign. Democrats have questioned whether McCain saw something untoward in those tax returns and decided to choose Palin instead.

      But on Tuesday, McCain flatly rejected that assertion and grew angry at questions over his decision to choose Palin over Romney.

      “Of course not,” McCain told POLITICO when asked if the contents of Romney’s tax returns disqualified him from the selection process. “I don’t know what depths these people won’t reach. Obviously, it’s just outrageous. That’s just outrageous. It shows the – it’s so disgraceful for them to allege something that they have absolutely no knowledge of.”

      http://www.politico.com/blogs/on-congress/2012/07/mccain-i-wasnt-scared-off-by-romney-tax-returns-129201.html

      Romney to Reid: ‘Put up or shut up’ on source of ‘untrue’ tax claims
      Published August 02, 2012

      “Harry’s going to have to describe who it is he spoke with, because, of course, that is totally and completely wrong,” Romney said. “It’s untrue, dishonest and inaccurate. It’s wrong.

      “So, I’m looking forward to have Harry reveal his sources, and we will probably find out it’s the White House.”

      http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/08/02/romney-to-reid-put-up-or-shut-up-on-source-untrue-tax-claims/

    12. Mitt Romney Says … It’s Time for Harry Reid to “Put Up or Shut Up” | Scared Monkeys on August 3rd, 2012 9:07 am

      [...] response to Democrat Majority Leader Harry Reid’s shameful comments about what he heard from some unnamed Bain Capital investor with regards to Mitt Romney not paying [...]

    13. super dave on August 3rd, 2012 10:04 am

      Harry Reid, like Mulehammed Ali, has taken too many blows to his pinhead and now what little brain he had, has turned to jelly. supposedly Reid was a boxer ? ha ha !!! boxing up gay toys maybe.

    14. NGBoston on August 3rd, 2012 6:02 pm

      Public Enemy to You:

      Just for the record, Dipshit- you can bet your left gonad that in his lifetime Mitt Romney has paid, MILLIONS in taxes. If he hadn’t paid in 10 years, as a Governor, as a Business Owner and successful Entrepenuer- don’t you think the Feds would have nailed him by now? Please do not tell me you are THAT STUPID.

      Now, let’s take a thief like, say BARNEY FRANK or Charlie Rangel or (how’s the Yacht, John Kerry—they bagged him on that luxury tax though and he finally paid up)- let’s have the same scrutiny towards these thieving Bastards Tax Returns, shall we????

      What a green, envious Monster you are. We can see right through you and your agenda.

      Pitiful.

      Get a life, Idiot.

    15. RK on August 4th, 2012 12:09 am

      Wow; are you saying that those 3 guys never released any of their tax returns?

    16. NGBoston on August 4th, 2012 12:54 pm

      #15. Don’t make me laugh. While I appreciate your sarcasm, I am simply saying that Mitt Romney has, indeed filed for AND paid his taxes.

      Certainly you are not going to comment on a blog like this and suggest that ANYONE, DEM, IND or REP who amasses the kind of wealth the elite group of Politicians in our Country have anyway are not going to take advantage of the occassional “legal” tax filing or loophole.

      However, for Reid to come out and make an accusation such as this is completely bogus and untrue, not to mention, completely hypocritical.

      There are PLENTY of THIEVES on BOTH sides of the aisle, to be fair. Are the smart ones the only ones that get caught? I don’t know.

      What I do know is that, a THIEF and a LIAR are just exactly that. Same with truly corrupt Politicians. I have an equal amount of disdain and disrespect towards those types of elected or appointed Officials and Representatives of my local, State or Federal Government.

      I do not believe Mitt Romney to be one of those. The Man is just trying to keep his head above water in that Cesspool that is Washington, DC and serve his Country.

      I think he deserves a shot because the inexperienced Man behind the Green Curtain right now is very dangerous and inexperienced.

      And full of shit.

    17. NGBoston on August 4th, 2012 12:55 pm

      *don’t* get caught

    18. RK on August 4th, 2012 11:44 pm

      #16 – I can see you have a certain level of faith in Mitts Robme, and considerably less in Reid. However, to be clear; you, nor anyone else has provided documented proof that either’s statements over Willard’s “paying taxes” are truthful.

      In fact, the only proof that exists are the tax returns themselves. Releasing them would either destroy Reid or destroy Mittens (politically, of course).

    19. NGBoston on August 5th, 2012 8:42 am

      #18-While you have a valid point, Romney has released one of his recent returns—let me ask you this:

      What is America’s obsession with demanding Romney to release more?

      What is your obsession with it? He is a Multi Millionare who earned his money over his Career, why does that intimidate the masses? Barack Obama was officially a millionare himself by the time he became a Congressman running in the Presidential election. Was he put through the ringer like this regarding his Tax Returns?

      No, not that I recall.

      I am not naive enough to believe that over the years, Mr. Romney and his team of Accountants have not placed some of his money overseas or in to legal accounts where Uncle Sam could not greedily take his chunk. However, that in no way, shape or form means that Romney has cheated the Feds out of anything. The Man has paid his taxes.

      Mittens may not be the strongest Candidate ever to have run for the office of President, but I daresay at this point, he is the only qualified individual I see before me to restore the economy of the United States which is the least I can say for your inexperienced boy Barack.

      Since you seem to be such a numbers guy, Dude- look at the numbers since he has been in office.

      Without manipulating the data, the NUMBERS DO NOT LIE.

      Look at them across the board for the last four years and then get back to us.

      P.S. And don’t give me any lame BS about what Obama inherited or what GWB left behind- he took the job, has been at it four years and things have gotten worse, not better.

      End of Story.

    20. Scared Monkeys on August 5th, 2012 9:38 am

      NGBoston,

      If God forbid Obama actually won in 2012 I would who he would then blame for the inherited economy, himself?

      Of course if that happens, the US will be consumed by the Hellmouth and fall into the abyss.

      R

    21. NGBoston on August 5th, 2012 12:15 pm

      #20-R- Sometimes, I actually believe Obama still has a shot at winning his bid for re-election this year.

      And, as the narcissistic, socialistic, hpyocritical, egomanicial liar that he is, he will do exactly as you state above.

      The “Chosen One” will not take the blame for any of his failures or shortcomings. Hell, I bet he still believes he even deserved that bogus Nobel Peace Prize he won.

    22. RK on August 5th, 2012 12:24 pm

      #19: Your post is rather long, and covers new topics unrelated to this thread or my comment. It may take me a few replies to address the many topics you raise.

      1: ‘Romney has released one of his recent returns’

      ‘Was he (Obama) put through the ringer like this regarding his Tax Returns?’

      CNN: March 25, 2008 (http://goo.gl/NC5KO)

      “Sen. Barack Obama is challenging Sen. Hillary Clinton to release her 2006 tax returns.

      Barack Obama and his wife released their tax returns from 2000 to 2006 on his campaign Web site Tuesday.”

      By Obama & Michelle releasing a number of tax returns, there was no issue to “put him through the ringer” on.

      Facts make this easy!

    23. RK on August 5th, 2012 12:39 pm

      #19:

      2. “However, that in no way, shape or form means that Romney has cheated the Feds out of anything. The Man has paid his taxes.”

      I understand your opinion on this, but nothing you or anyone else says can prove this idea to be true. Only his tax returns have the proof. You are free to believe what you like, but I find it unusual you would deny anyone the right to think there may be something to this.

      That may be especially so, since Romney has already lied about his taxes when he said, with no possible misinterpretation, that he would find out about ever paying less than 13.9% during his overseas trip. Quoting him: “I’m happy to go back and look” (http://goo.gl/z4vBG).

      Of course, his campaign reneged within a day (no surprise there). Are you defending his lies about what he said on this matter? Wouldn’t his lying concern anyone or everyone?

    24. RK on August 5th, 2012 12:46 pm

      #19:

      “boy Barack” – nice historic racially charged language.

      I’m sure you didn’t mean it (and of course would respond accordingly).
      _____________________
      SM: I guess you would call ‘Boy Clinton’ racially charged as well seeing that he was the first black President?

      http://www.amazon.com/Boy-Clinton-The-Political-Biography/dp/0895264056

      RK, its foolishness like this and the LEFT that will see fit to never have another black be elected. Nothing can be said and everything is considered racial. You know long before there was Obama, there were idiot Leftists like Kerry, Clinton, Mondale, Carter, Dukakis, etc that were all pathetic. Obama just happens to be the biggest socialist of em all and some how because he is black, no one is supposed to say anything against him, otherwise you are deemed a racist.

      R

    25. NGBoston on August 5th, 2012 1:09 pm

      RK: No, I am not defending any of his lies. Do you defend all of the lies of Barrack Hussien Obama?

      And, you are correct. You are free to believe what you wish, as am I.

      Q: What is the most dangerous type of Politician there is?

      A: An honest one.

      A completely honest Politician DEM OR REP? I don’t believe they exist.

      Facts make that statement easy, RK.

      Name me ONE. Just one!

    26. NGBoston on August 5th, 2012 1:14 pm

      #22 and #23

      Even though you took the time to respond with two posts, in neither of those two posts did you provide any numerical data or facts about the ONE question I asked you.

      In fact, you completely avoided the question.

      Show me some number comparisons about the State of our US Economy, Globally and Internationally from 2008 to present day.

      Will you? Can you?

      No, because you would rather concentrate on the Tax Return BS.

      Not that I am now or ever was a Birther, but do you think at this point (speaking of original and legal documents) would you care to address why Obama has never, repeat- NEVER been able to produce a copy or his ORIGINAL BIRTH CERTIFICATE.

      You know, the one where being Born in Kenya (perhaps) was not changed to Hawaii?

      As you say, why not silence all the critics by simply producing the original? He never has.

      Thanks

    27. NGBoston on August 5th, 2012 1:29 pm

      LOL, color me happy and not at all surprised that when the Moonbat LEFT has no where else to go- they always pull the race card.

      RK- the term “boy” was merely a figure of speech. Referring to a “Boy” in place of “Man”.

      From Websters:

      boy? ?[boi] noun

      1. a male child, from birth to full growth, especially one less than 18 years of age.
      2. a young man who lacks maturity, judgment, etc.
      3. Informal . a grown man, especially when referred to familiarly: He liked to play poker with the boys.
      4. a son: Sam’s oldest boy is helping him in the business.
      5. a male who is from or native to a given place.

      Funny, but nowhere in the legal definition is race mentioned.

      LMAO

      Don’t even bother with a response. Just keep drinking the Moonbat Kool Aide and stop wasting my time.

      Have a nice day.

    28. RK on August 5th, 2012 1:51 pm

      #19:

      3. “Since you seem to be such a numbers guy, Dude- look at the numbers since he has been in office.

      Without manipulating the data, the NUMBERS DO NOT LIE.

      Look at them across the board for the last four years and then get back to us.

      P.S. And don’t give me any lame BS about what Obama inherited or what GWB left behind- he took the job, has been at it four years and things have gotten worse, not better.”
      _____________

      Well, data & facts, presented without bias, do not know of things like whether GWB or BHO are/were in the White House, they are just numbers. To state that ‘bias must be applied’ is a non-starter if the facts are to be looked at for what they are. To do otherwise would be “manipulating the data”, as you are so against (me too). Also, limiting the data to a select time period could introduce bias, so the data again should speak for itself in that matter.

      Since you’ve not provided a clue as to what numbers to refer to out of all that are collected, I’ll have to wing it. BTW, numbers are not able to be explained in lofty prose or simple sound bites; they take time to explain, as well as time to read and comprehend; so please bear with me in answering your request.

      _____________UE / Jobs_____________

      The 2007 Bush recession set off a wave of job losses and UE rates that were second only to the Great Depression. According to the BLS, UE climbed from 5.0 in Jan 2008 to somewhere between 7.8 and 8.3 when he left office in 2009.

      However, the economy that was in place as a result of Bush policies continued large job losses throughout much of 2009, peaking at 10.0 in Oct 2009. By then, new policies from Obama had stabilized the job losses, although they took another 6 months before positive job growth (however weak) began to drop UE below the 9.8-10.0 mark. What affect GOP recalcitrance had on UE is indeterminate, AFAIK. However, the Jobs, Jobs, Jobs talking-point of Boehner and other GOP leaders never led to any action (Amercia says Thanks!!)

      There is also the so-called “bikini graph”, which shows the steep decline in private sector job growth beginning in early 2008, peaking (negatively) one year later, and then rapidly turning around by May 2009, reaching positive growth in March 2010.

      Something must have caused the remarkable reversal of the coming bottomless pit of job losses that began with the 2007 Bush recession. I wonder what was happening in early 2009 that could have altered this ongoing job growth decline. Coincidentally, this was when the stimulus was just getting under way. Hmmm; could there be a connection?

      Perhaps some think the new administration have immediate accountability for economic conditions on day 1. I’d like to hear the explanation behind such thinking, as I doubt a faltering and crashing economy can be quickly shifted off its course prior to any new policies being enacted. After all, the govt was primarily operating under the Bush budget through Sept 2009.

      With the large job hole created by the recession, I’m not aware of any clear correlations of what exactly led to UE changes following the peak of 10% in Oct 2009, other than the stimulus initially, and GOP inaction later on.

      Basic facts and figures as to what companies were or were not doing; consumer spending; Public sector job changes are all factors in moving the economy. As that seems rather complex, given the do-nothing Congress and other possible factors, I have no explanation for events over the last 2 years or so, other than to say a simple sound-bite that Obama was the president and he caused the economy to act as it did is exceedingly simple.

      _____________Deficit_____________

      I seem to recall that the last fiscal year for Pres Bush reached a deficit in the $1.2-1.4T range. If Pres Obama made no changes to any part of the Federal budget, it seems likely that deficits for the next few years, while in a recession, would be similar or larger than FY2009. If UE grew uncontrolled with no Federal intervention actions, then revenues would drop while spending would increase; who knows what size deficit we would have.

      _____________(Borrowed) Related References_____________:

      VIPER – http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Viper/mitt-romney-john-kerry-tax-returns_n_1435604_148997680.html

      National Debt Increased by 75% under Bush:

      2001 – $5.871T
      2008 – $10.640T

      National Debt Increased 25% Under Obama:

      Jan 31st 2009 = $10.569T
      Jan 31st 2011 = $14.131T

      But of the $3.56-trillion increase, 98% was carry over from Bush programs:

      Bush: $910B = Interest on Debt 2009/2011
      Bush: $360B = Iraq War Spending 2009/2011
      Bush: $319B = TARP/Bailout Balance from 2008 (as of May 2010)
      Bush: $419B = Bush Recession Caused Drop in taxes
      Bush: $190B = Bush Medicare Drug Program 2009/2011
      Bush: $211B = Bush Medicare Part-D 2009/2011
      Bush: $771B = Bush Tax Cuts 2009/2011

      Bush’s contribution:

      2001 to 2008: $4.769T
      2009 to 2010: $3.181T
      Total: $7.950T

      Increase Since 2001 = $14.131 – $5.871 = $8.26T

      Bush’s contribution: $7.95T / $8.26T = 96%

      Increase caused By Bush’s Programs: 96%
      Increase caused by Obama’s Programs: 4%

      http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2011/07/the-chart-that-should-accompany-all-discussions-of-the-debt-ceiling/242484/

      http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2008/10/14/opinion/20081014_OPCHART.html/

    29. RK on August 5th, 2012 1:59 pm

      #26: Patience, patience.

      As you recall, I began with: “Your post is rather long, and covers new topics unrelated to this thread or my comment. It may take me a few replies to address the many topics you raise.”

      I also began each reply with a portion of your comment so you might see what I was responding to. I guess I try to please too hard sometimes.

      re: #22 – I gave a specific reply to the comment you made, and you choose to avoid discussing it. Care to try again.

    30. RK on August 5th, 2012 2:04 pm

      #25:

      As you recall, I was asking you about one lie from Romney, which you deflected, and avoided answering. Cat got your tongue?

      You (so far) also totally avoided acknowledging the one true method of knowing the truth on his tax situation; releasing more tax returns.

      I suspensefully await a reply to see what you avoid next.

    31. RK on August 5th, 2012 2:16 pm

      27: LOL! What’s there to respond to? With all that gobbledygook and scattered nonsense, it would be impossible.

      However; one nugget calls out: on the one hand, ““boy” was merely a figure of speech”. While on the other hand, looking up “boy”: “nowhere in the legal definition is race mentioned”.

      Conclusion: “boy” never had a historic racial aspect to it as I mentioned (although what more succinct figure of speech could this be?), on top of the duality that a figure of speech can be proven to not exist by looking for it’s “legal” definition.

      Someday I’ll find out what “legal” definition of a word means. Unlikely I’ll be asking you, however; I get the sense you don’t respond well to questions from us (kool-aide drinking) moon-bats.

      BTW, I’d advise you to limit your use of “boy” in public when in reference to some folks as you did here; if you have to explain it, it won’t be funny.

    32. Scared Monkeys on August 5th, 2012 3:21 pm

      #22,

      I will ask one simple question. Other than the fact that they have been asked for in the past, what is really the purpose of releasing a tax return? To try and use the fact that some one made money?

      Honestly, I could care less about some one releasing their tax return. I personally believe there is too much personal info in a tax return that is no one’s business.

      Now, should a candidate release college transcripts, birth certificate … things that could vet a candidate, yes. A tax return is like one’s financial health reports. I highly doubt that those would be released either, HIPAA or not.

      Just saying. Other than showing that someone made a lot of money, what purpose could it serve. There are so many things that are actually more important to determine a President’s qualification, other than a tax return.
      R

    33. RK on August 5th, 2012 10:48 pm

      I appreciate your question, and I’ll do my best to answer it.

      In general, it has been a rather common practice for Pres. candidates and current office holders to release Tax forms for much of the past 30-40 years. There have been some gaps and varied years released, but the majority of releases cover 5 or more years (http://goo.gl/7z0i1). For an average candidate, I might agree that tax returns may not offer any particular insight into the person, or help consider their suitability for the job.

      More specifically, for Romney; his own candidacy has included significant emphasis on his time and economic experience at Bain Capital. As this part of his background was examined, questions as to the business activities at Bain have been asked; including his role and time served as an executive, as well as company actions where there was negative societal impact (primarily facility closings & job out-sourcing/off-shoring). There is also the factor of many prominent voices, from almost every part of the political spectrum, asking or recommending more tax return years be released. Romney has refused.

      After a while, these factors may have caused some people to wonder if Romney has something to hide, which could be embarrassing or worse for his candidacy. The latest kerfuffle with Reid, however accurate the claim, feeds a notion of secrecy. After all, showing Reid was full of it by releasing a little truth from his taxes should be a powerful weapon to counter-attack Reid, and Dems in general. Unless he can’t because he has to hide what’s there. Who really knows?

      In the end, making a lot of money is not much of an issue; there have been richer people who ran and held this office. However, their path to wealth was unlikely to have been like Romney’s has. There is also the notion that for all his wealth, Romney’s tax rate for the one year we’ve seen was only 13.9%, below even the rate for the lowest level tax bracket at 15%. Average Americans relate to this factor in a powerful way, and may wonder what other years were like.

      Sorry for the lengthy comment; I was trying to help too much, I think (at least that’s what my wife says of my language style).
      ________________________________
      SM: I appreciate your answer but it really does not explain the reason why one would need to have someone’s tax return and for what purpose. We know Romney is rich. Heck, so were the Kennedy’s and we know how they amassed their fortune.

      The point basically is that they only reason by Obama and his minions would want it is to make some pathetic class warfare accusation. But I guess if we are to make it fair as President Obama says, all politicians need to release their taxes returns which would include Reid and Pelosi.

      If Romney’s tax expose is low it is because he makes most of his monies from capital gains and/or he uses the present tax code, like all people who make big money including Obama, to their favor. However, as we saw from the return that Romney did make public he provides huge charitable contributions.

      FYI, when or if Mitt releases anything, they are personal tax returns, you are not getting company ones. Therefore, what does this tell you about what he did at Bain? Nothing.

      However, I digress.

      My main point is that I think the release of tax returns is ridiculous. It tells us nothing about his work at Bain or his ability to fix the economy. Personally, one’s college transcripts and thesis would be more telling as to their ability and thought process.

      Just because it has always been done is one of my #1 pet peeves of business and life. So why did we do things this way? That’s the way we have always done it.

      R

    34. RK on August 6th, 2012 4:11 pm

      #26:

      RE: “In fact, you completely avoided the question.

      Show me some number comparisons about the State of our US Economy, Globally and Internationally from 2008 to present day.

      Will you? Can you?

      No, because you would rather concentrate on the Tax Return BS.”

      I would think by now you’ve been able to see that, although slightly delayed (according to your ability to wait), I have, in fact, provided some numbers. Separate as to whether or not these numbers are as expected, they are a valid response to the open-ended request for said “numbers”.

      I’m just wondering if you care to comment on your sentiment that I “would not” or “could not” achieve this task, and whether or not I “completely avoided the question”.

      Will you do the decent and honest thing and acknowledge that your prior comments as quoted above were premature, and in the end, I actually did what I said I would do when I began my reply to you back in #22?

    35. NGBoston on August 7th, 2012 8:21 am

      RK- For someone as intelligent as you, I would not consider the NY Times, HuufPo, or the Atlantic as credible sources for accurate numbers.

      Also, you have insulted me twice by referring to my posts as “gobbly gook” and then trying to call me a racist.

      I’m all set with you, Boy. Oh, and one other thing- I do not need your suggestions on how or what I say. I am free to speak and think the way that I wish in my own country.

      I appreciate your responses and would rather leave it the fact that we can agree to continue to disagree. On just about everything.

      Thank You!

    36. NGBoston on August 7th, 2012 8:21 am

      *HuffPo

    37. RK on August 7th, 2012 7:34 pm

      #35 If there was anything wrong with the stories from the sources I linked, please do take the stories on. Avoiding or hiding from their information by damning them by simply by name is meaningless and ridiculous, IMO.

      Hypothetically, what if someone said “those comments from NGBoston are full of it”, without reading them or referring to what was actual said in them. According to your response, you seem to think that is an acceptable and meaningful manner of discourse! Not me.

      Regarding Insults: moonbat – dipshit – green, envious Monster – idiot ; apparently these terms you use to refer to the PEOPLE posting here are not insults when you use them. But when I refer to your COMMENT as gobbledygook, and describe your Obama reference as “boy” to be a “historic racially charged language”, I’m insulting you. The comparison is remarkable, from what I see.

      And as I suspected, your answer did not, IMO, take the decent and honest step of acknowledging you were wrong. You may think this is just disagreement, but I stand firm that what I described was 100% factual; the words are all there for anyone to see.

      I do agree we can agree to disagree, but I will continue to refer to specific details as much as possible, and avoid ad hominem attacks and simplistic generalities.

      p.s. – if you ever care to explain, I’d love to understand how “boy” is not “historic racially charged language” when referring to an African-American.

    38. RK on August 7th, 2012 7:55 pm

      ##### I had a comment disappear from about 7-15 minutes ago.
      ___________________
      SM: Found the post in the spam folder.
      R

    39. NGBoston on August 7th, 2012 9:18 pm

      RK. I stand by my initial posts #14 and #16.

      Perhaps they are too general for you but so be it.

      For additional clarification as to the intended definition of the use of the noun “boy”, please re read again post #27 and also I would suggest carefully reviewing the context of the entire sentence in which it was used.

      At this point your posts are redundant and ridiculous. Stick to the original thread and subject and can you have the dignity to let it rest?

      You are now carrying on about unrelated tangents and honestly I see no point in entertaining you further on unrelated matters. I don’t know what American history classes you took, or English Comprehension either but I am not aware of any correlation of the word “boy” being historically racially charged.

      That, Sir, is a complete crock of bullshit.

    40. RK on August 7th, 2012 11:20 pm

      Since I would get a better response explaining your sense of “dignity” and knowledge of “unrelated” to a brick wall, I’m going to call it a day.

      And please, for your sake, don’t go around calling AA men “boy”, as I feel you may finally learn the lesson of that word in context, but it won’t be pretty.

    41. NGBoston on August 8th, 2012 11:21 am

      #40-RK- You cannot be serious? You insult your own intelligence.

      I have never, in my life, seen such ignorance. Take your PC bullcrap and go whine about it to someone else.

      I am not a Racist, and I do not judge any person by the color of their skin. Please, take care to separate the topics, and I might remind you that you brought up the race issue, then basically called me a Racist.

      Do you know me? No. Do you have a right to judge me based upon me calling Barack Obama your “Boy” in a figure of speech only? Hell, No you DO NOT.

      It was meant to be used in the context as like

      “he is your Man, person, Guy”

      or as another phrase is sometimes used, “That a Girl! or That’s my Girl”.

      ARE YOU FREAKING SERIOUS, Dude? You are off, way off but I will stand up for myself when you unnecessarily pull the race, card too. And you did. And you are wrong, and do not EVER tell me what I need to do or say for MY SAKE.

      For your sake, please stop being so over-sensitive. I do not need you scolding me in a blog or trying to teach me any lessons.

      Isn’t Freedom of Speech in both of our First Amendment Rights?

      As to the original topic of this thread, I can see you still carrying on in other threads and standing by your point that, all parties involved could silence all the critics by revealing their own Tax Returns in question.

      I agree with the response to you by the Editor of this blog on your Post in #33.

      We are all entitled to our own opinions, RK. That is in the end, what makes America so great.

      I look forward to your continued participation with us all here on Scared Monkeys. I am always willing to listen to other perspectives ideas and am of the school of thought that, knowledge is power.

      I am not afraid to ever learn anything new, or admit to mistakes if I am wrong. As you say, Facts make that easy.

      Peace!

      New Girl Boston, MA

      =)

    42. RK on August 8th, 2012 9:08 pm

      RE: “I am not afraid to ever learn anything new, or admit to mistakes if I am wrong.”

      LOL.

    43. NGBoston on August 9th, 2012 10:57 am

      #43-

      Glad I could provide a laugh.

      Nice distraction technique. At least I can admit when I am wrong.

      Something you obviously don’t have the integrity to do.

      You were 100% wrong to call me a Racist based upon your own PERSONAL misconception of a word I typed in a sentence.

      You won’t admit it, but that’s cool. I’m calling you out on it.

      Your words “speak” for themselves and now all you can do is “laugh”.

      Grow up, you frickken’ HYPOCRITE.

    44. RK on August 9th, 2012 5:50 pm

      I guess I missed your admission to me about your being wrong in a response to me. Would you care to remind me which comment that was?

      p.s – I never called you a racist. If you think you can prove it; please provide the exact and complete quote of mine that says that. When you can’t, you’ll have another chance to admit you were wrong. :-0

    45. Tamikosmom on August 10th, 2012 8:26 am

      UPDATE

      Reid aide divulges details on source of Romney tax claim — then retracts
      Published August 10, 2012

      Reid aide Jose Parra first made the claims in an interview on Los Angeles’ KTLK radio, defending his boss’ decision to trumpet the tax charge last week on the Senate floor and explaining a bit about the source.

      “This person is an investor in Bain Capital, a Republican also, and somebody … who has been dealing with Romney’s company for a long, long time and he has direct knowledge on this,” Parra said. …

      However, after some media attention on Parra’s radio interview, Parra issued a statement to The Huffington Post taking those remarks back.

      “I do not know the party affiliation of the source, how long he invested with Bain, or his relationship to Romney beyond the fact that he was an investor with Bain Capital, as Senator Reid has previously stated,” he said

      http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/08/10/reid-aide-divulges-details-on-source-romney-tax-claim-then-retracts/

    Leave a Reply




    Support Scared Monkeys! make a donation.

     
     
    • NEWS (breaking news alerts or news tips)
    • Red (comments)
    • Dugga (technical issues)
    • Dana (radio show comments)
    • Klaasend (blog and forum issues)
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
    Close
    E-mail It