Tax returns are a deal breaker

[Red Arrow]

Let me say for the record that I am fine with Mitt losing the election by not releasing his tax returns.

My impression is that you are fine with Mitt losing the election by any means possible.

[Red Arrow]

Everyone except for Biden.  He doesn't seem very good at reporting his graft ahem, personal finance management as the rest.

That's why he is only the Vice President.

[AquaMan]

Evidently not enough.  There has not been a mass exodus to the Obama camp by TNFers.

No one has moved one way or the other.

I don't think there is much wiggle room for political thought in Okieville. Wouldn't matter much if everyone in Tulsa suddenly saw a vision in the clouds and changed their vote to the "angelic one". We'd fall short of the concentrations of purple south and west of us!

[Ed W]

Evidently not enough.  There has not been a mass exodus to the Obama camp by TNFers.

The people who will decide this election are the independent voters, not the committed partisans here on TNF. We can argue endlessly about politics, but Oklahoma will remain the reddest of red states.  And as Red noted, there's no mass exodus to the Obama camp because like the rest of the state, the demographics here are not unlike the state as a whole. 

In the last presidential, Oklahoma voted for McCain and Palin in even greater numbers than they had for Bush and Cheney, showing that Oklahoma voters were far out of the national mainstream.  I expect that will be true of this election as well.

For those critical independent voters, the tax return issue brings up several questions.  Is Romney believable?  Should he be trusted given the doubts raised by this issue?  I don't think any of us on the right or the left can answer those questions.  We'll continue arguing about it, of course, because that's what we do, and most of us are capable of making those arguments without engaging in rancor or making the attacks personal.  Most of us.   

[nathanm]

I think Mitt Romney's taxes are very important. Not what he paid, which is very likely to be a joke given the statistics we know, but I can be fairly certain it was all legal. Not that legality and propriety are even in the same ball park. No, the more important part about Mitt Romney's taxes is his joke of a tax "plan." I hesitate to call it a plan because it lacks the details necessary for it to be anything but meaningless mumbo jumbo. Nonetheless, given the details that have been released, he's going to do a fantastic job of raising taxes on every single one of us while lowering his own taxes. Go figure.

Deductions don't mean much to him because their dollar amount is limited thanks to his very high income. They mean a lot to all of us because they are much higher as a proportion of our income. Nonetheless, his solution is to lower the rates, helping himself, while eliminating deductions, which screws us.

How do I know this is his ultimate goal? Rather than fixing AMT so it does what it was originally intended to do, which is make sure that the ultra-rich pay at least something, by raising the income amount where AMT takes effect and indexing it to inflation as the normal brackets, standard deduction, and exemption amounts are, he wants to eliminate it entirely, opening up a whole new raft of loopholes for him and his ilk to take advantage of.

I will say this for him: There has never been a candidate in history so open and honest about how he intends to use the office to benefit himself over the vast majority of the country.

[Conan71]

I dont know anything about Creeper, but this is creepy. You made several deductions and inferences from Biden's income disclosures which likely came from his tax returns. Yet you see no hypocrisy in supporting refusal of the same information to make the same analyses of Romney?!

This is just crazy. No way you guys would have tolerated a Democrat running on a platform of economic recovery based on a history of business success without perusing their tax returns. Its cowardly for Romney to refuse and its hypocrisy to not see that.

There's a full 2010 Romney return for you to peruse and critique, a partial 2011 and when it's done it's all yours.  You can even look up his FEC filings for free. 

Again, not much there which points to business acumen, since personal 1040's really don't other than what people own and what they earn from them.  But there again, I'm replying to someone who suggested that since Mr. Obama reads a lot, he's imminently qualified to lead us out of this economic funk.

[Red Arrow]

But there again, I'm replying to someone who suggested that since Mr. Obama reads a lot, he's imminently qualified to lead us out of this economic funk.

It only counts if he read that stuff in a Holiday Inn Express.

[Hoss]

Love the way Republicans on here counter and block with this issue.  And it is an issue if you have Republican crooners on Fox News saying it will be if Willard doesn't resolve it by September.

If he's using his experience in business to say he's the better candidate, then do what your father said all candidates should do and pony up the returns.  Why is it really even a debate at this point?  People who don't think he should are going to continue to think that in hopes that he will shuffle his feet through it.  People who do think he should do it will continue to hammer away at him until he does.  It's really a lose-lose for him now.

If Obama used his grades in college to tell us he'd make the country better, then I'd ask him for his transcript.  But did he?

[nathanm]

There's a full 2010 Romney return for you to peruse and critique, a partial 2011 and when it's done it's all yours.  You can even look up his FEC filings for free. 

This is a ridiculous counter. One or two years prepared after you know you have to be on your best behavior because you're running for President isn't illustrative of anything at all. It's loosely analogous to the non-apology apology. He's done something meaningless so as to create the appearance of having done something. You seem to think that the tax returns are of no value whatsoever, so why even bother with pointing out what is there?

More important than his past tax returns is a straight answer on how he came to have $100 million in his 401(k) and how he managed to give a $100 million gift to his kids tax free. Whether or not you think this should be allowed, a plain reading of the law appears to make these things impossible. I doubt he did anything illegal, so why not let us all in on the secret so it can be discussed as it deserves to be? His past tax returns would shed light on these and other oddities shown by the financial information that has been released.

I understand his desire for privacy in these matters, but I don't care about the why, which is actually private, only the how, which is not really. There's no point in him releasing anything if he refuses to discuss the legitimate issues raised by those releases.

[Conan71]

This is a ridiculous counter. One or two years prepared after you know you have to be on your best behavior because you're running for President isn't illustrative of anything at all. It's loosely analogous to the non-apology apology. He's done something meaningless so as to create the appearance of having done something. You seem to think that the tax returns are of no value whatsoever, so why even bother with pointing out what is there?

More important than his past tax returns is a straight answer on how he came to have $100 million in his 401(k) and how he managed to give a $100 million gift to his kids tax free. Whether or not you think this should be allowed, a plain reading of the law appears to make these things impossible. I doubt he did anything illegal, so why not let us all in on the secret so it can be discussed as it deserves to be? His past tax returns would shed light on these and other oddities shown by the financial information that has been released.

I understand his desire for privacy in these matters, but I don't care about the why, which is actually private, only the how, which is not really. There's no point in him releasing anything if he refuses to discuss the legitimate issues raised by those releases.

I'm surprised with your level of intelligence you fell for the "Romney needs to release his returns" meme.  You even said yourself you think he acted within the law. 

I guess since Seamusgate, Bullygate, and Copgate didn't stick the Obamites are getting more desperate to keep their candidate from taking about his own record.

[Conan71]

Love the way Republicans on here counter and block with this issue.  And it is an issue if you have Republican crooners on Fox News saying it will be if Willard doesn't resolve it by September.

If he's using his experience in business to say he's the better candidate, then do what your father said all candidates should do and pony up the returns.  Why is it really even a debate at this point?  People who don't think he should are going to continue to think that in hopes that he will shuffle his feet through it.  People who do think he should do it will continue to hammer away at him until he does.  It's really a lose-lose for him now.

If Obama used his grades in college to tell us he'd make the country better, then I'd ask him for his transcript.  But did he?

Most of the Republican crooners are complete morons.  Non-issue.  I don't do everything my father did.  Do you?  George Romney was never even a serious candidate- total outlier.

[Hoss]

Most of the Republican crooners are complete morons.  Non-issue.  I don't do everything my father did.  Do you?  George Romney was never even a serious candidate- total outlier.

But it's something that's going to haunt him, though.  If you are denying that, then deny away.  It doesn't make it GO away, however.  This is going to haunt him until he puts it to rest.

[nathanm]

I'm surprised with your level of intelligence you fell for the "Romney needs to release his returns" meme.  You even said yourself you think he acted within the law. 

It's not about scoring political points, bucko, it's about not passing up a historic opportunity to see how it is our tax code is being used/abused by the very wealthy. I'm happy that individual tax information is normally kept completely confidential, it prevents much political abuse. However, that secrecy comes at a cost. It's perfectly reasonable to request financial disclosures from candidates, and if the Democrats can browbeat Romney into releasing past returns, I think that may shed some light on both Romney and how our tax system actually operates where it arguably matters most.

As I have said before, legal behavior and ethical behavior are not necessarily the same thing, which is as it should be. Romney should not be legally penalized for "hiding" money offshore if it is indeed legal. That does not mean I or anyone else has to approve of the practice. Many distasteful things are legal.

As far as George being an outlier (in the sense that he is far from the mean and median), that is true. Mitt is also an outlier in that sense, however.

[Hoss]

It's not about scoring political points, bucko, it's about not passing up a historic opportunity to see how it is our tax code is being used/abused by the very wealthy. I'm happy that individual tax information is normally kept completely confidential, it prevents much political abuse. However, that secrecy comes at a cost. It's perfectly reasonable to request financial disclosures from candidates, and if the Democrats can browbeat Romney into releasing past returns, I think that may shed some light on both Romney and how our tax system actually operates where it arguably matters most.

As I have said before, legal behavior and ethical behavior are not necessarily the same thing, which is as it should be. Romney should not be legally penalized for "hiding" money offshore if it is indeed legal. That does not mean I or anyone else has to approve of the practice. Many distasteful things are legal.

As far as George being an outlier (in the sense that he is far from the mean and median), that is true. Mitt is also an outlier in that sense, however.

Oh, but your source there is factcheck.org.   Don't you know they have a notorious lib'rul slant?

[Gaspar]

Does anyone else think that is is weird of gaspar to study in-depth the tax returns and financial standing of VP Biden and not care at all to see Mitt's returns

He is obsessed with Joe and blase with Mitt when it comes to financial disclosure. I wonder why the difference.

Actually I did go through Romney's tax return.  If you remember, back when you were weaving one of your typical threads around Romney's Olympic experience, and you made an implication that he paid NO taxes by using his wife's horse as a deduction.  I posted his 2010 return to show that you were full of it as usual.  He paid $4.6 million in taxes that year and the deduction from his wife's horse only amounted to $46 out of the $77,682 loss he incurred.

http://www.tulsanow.org/forum/index.php?topic=19173.msg242908#msg242908

You then posted:

That is your defense?

Fine. His company posted a "loss" of $77,000 on his wife's hobby.

You are right, gaspar. That is much clearer.

Then you attempted to attack him for setting up his wife's horse in a LLC.  Why, I don't know, because it doesn't make a lick of sense, but for some reason I guess you think than anyone who sets up a company is somehow trying to game the system.  If you have a muliti-million dollar investment like that horse, its care, facilities, training and do not set it up as an LLC you are a moron. 

Your goal was to make his sacrifice of $77,682 a year supporting his wife's dream sound like some evil conspiritory way to avoid taxation, ignoring his return, ignoring the taxes he actually paid, ignoring the fact $77,682 was essentially a total loss, and basically just ignoring. 

I admire you RM, and I'm sorry to be so pointed in this post.  My style is usually not to attack the poster, but when facts are presented and they refute your posts, you conveniently duck away and allow the lesser minds to create a garbled tapestry of one liners and playground retorts to cover your escape.  You then emerge on a new thread only to repeat the process.  We are all guilty of this to some extent, but lately you seem to have made the practice into an art form.

. . .here come the booger-flingers.