Btw how does it work that it doesn't have "I am Barrack Obama and I approve this message" in it ? I have no clue what the rules are but I thought campaign ads have to have that.
It's not a talking point. It's just demonstrating the most BASIC level of understanding of the tax filing system.
Not everyone just has to wait for their payroll provider to issue a W-2 and maybe wait for a few bank/mortgage interest statements.
You might be able to do your taxes in 25 minutes with TurboTax. Shocking, I know, but some people can't.
/headasplode
Are you guys really this dense? Surely you must have a relative who owns a business. Maybe they can explain it to you.
Hell, I haven't even STARTED gathering the paperwork to hand to our accountant to do our 2011 business taxes. In fact, reading this thread was the reminder I needed to stop procrastinating, so I'm currently burning a copy of the QB database to get over there. None of the owners can file theirs until the business does. This is not complicated.
I admit I'm one of those "anybody but Obama" voters and have had little interest in the national rhetoric as of late. It just so happens I had two liberals this week in my every day life ask me about Romney's taxes in an accusatory fashion and both of them failed to indicate that the talking point was about 2009 and prior. They had both stopped the conversation when I pointed out that it was highly unlikely his current return was finished.
Then I saw this thread and the OP didn't make that clear either.
Doesn't change the fact that this is just a witch hunt that can only end with some "does she weigh the same as a duck?" logic which will just make me shake my head harder.
The last big story about Romney that I recall was the one where he may or may not have beat up a gay kid in high school. I can see that the strength of the opposition hasn't improved much.
The funny thing here is that if Inso is right then Romney will have his 2011 returns finished around the time he picks his veep just before the debates so he will never be able to get away from this issue. If he releases it before, around the time he picks his veep, then its brought up at the DNC convention, if its released after the DNC convention then its brought up at the debates.
This is a problem which fundamentally cant go away from him because it will always have a part two with the 2011 returns.
So asking a presidential candidate to stay within standard practices since basically nixon and release a decent number of returns for transparency purposes = witchhunt?
Btw how does it work that it doesn't have "I am Barrack Obama and I approve this message" in it ? I have no clue what the rules are but I thought campaign ads have to have that.
TV ads have to have the tag line, but campaign finance/electioneering laws are such a mess, thet perhaps the regs don't apply to things promulgated over the internet, which isn't as heavily regulated as television and radio broadcasts...
Anyway, I think Romney should release his tax records for past years because
(a) doing so has been standard operating procedure for Presidential candidates for decades, and imo, he's presented no compelling reason why he shouldn't follow that example and
(b) more than probably any other candidate this year, he has built his candidacy around the idea that his business background gives him unique insights into the markets, tax policy, the best way to stimulate economic growth, etc... If his returns showed, for example, that he has paid an incredibly low tax rate, or that perhaps he has made and sheltered tons of money in the last few years, even while Barack Obama was supposedly taking all of the money away from the job creators through super high tax rates, couldn't that call some of his economic theories and policy arguments into question?
The funny thing here is that if Inso is right then Romney will have his 2011 returns finished around the time he picks his veep just before the debates so he will never be able to get away from this issue. If he releases it before, around the time he picks his veep, then its brought up at the DNC convention, if its released after the DNC convention then its brought up at the debates.
This is a problem which fundamentally cant go away from him because it will always have a part two with the 2011 returns.
If they're done before late September Id be pretty surprised. He'll end up amending them if he does them earlier.
"If you have nothing to hide, then why not let us search your house?"
"If you didn't do anything wrong, then why not answer our questions?"
Because regardless of what might be in there, the expectation is that something IS there, so even minor quirks will get blown out of proportion and we'll be seeing stories like, "Romney's 2009 tax return SHOCK experts!" and other equally absurd claims. The Right will try and explain why nothing is out of the ordinary, and the media will find the uncrossed T and just run with it.
The entire thing will be a self-fulfilling prophecy, regardless of actual content.
This is a little different, because Romney is using his past experiences in business as an example of why we should vote for him. I dont do drugs, yet I wont let the police just walk around my apartment and look for evidence either. Why? Because **** them, thats why. But if some guy is making a lot of political noise and demanding that we conform to his view on drug enforcement policy, I think his personal life deserves a little scrutiny just to make sure he's not full of ****.
Romney stands a good chance here of being full of ****. He's a top income earner telling the rest of us how much money we should be allowed to have, dictating what kind of sacrifices we should make, when he is potentially making none. If someone is going to tell us he's the best president for this country because he's a businessman, then he deserves to have his businesses investigated, including his personal income and how he spent it.
I feel bad for the hate obama gopers, they have a crappy candidate and are increasingly left with being irrationally butthurt trying to defend said crappy candidate - one that they don't even really like in the first place. But at least he's not obama. It's a crappy hand to be forced to play out...
This is a little different, because Romney is using his past experiences in business as an example of why we should vote for him. I dont do drugs, yet I wont let the police just walk around my apartment and look for evidence either. Why? Because **** them, thats why. But if some guy is making a lot of political noise and demanding that we conform to his view on drug enforcement policy, I think his personal life deserves a little scrutiny just to make sure he's not full of ****.
Romney stands a good chance here of being full of ****. He's a top income earner telling the rest of us how much money we should be allowed to have, dictating what kind of sacrifices we should make, when he is potentially making none. If someone is going to tell us he's the best president for this country because he's a businessman, then he deserves to have his businesses investigated, including his personal income and how he spent it
First bolded gave me a chuckle given who Romney is running against.
Second bolded is a bit too far for me. I dont think we have any right to know how Romney spent his money.
Two Plus Two
![[Phill]'s Avatar](http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/customavatars/avatar10430_40.gif){kind=avatar}
Linear Mode
