That article was priceless. I've never laughed so hard this early in the
morning.Is there anyone in the Democrat leadership that has a clue?
Why are they reliving their days in kindergarten where they had to be told,
"Now, now Barry and Nancy and Harry, we don't tell lies in
Lies scorecard..Democrats 1 Republicans 1,000....oh I give up.
Extremely poor analogy, the right is desperate and they should be, it's
become obvious to the reasonable middle class voter that the GOP is in the
pocket of big business and big business is out to gut the middle class.
Obama has been proven to be born in this nation... the Southern Strategy has
been used for decades. After all, Romney made a welfare-queen like reference
when he suggested the NAACP members who booed just wanting free stuff. And what
about the Republicans (several on these comment boards) calling them racist for
booing? Nevermind that they didn't boo Biden, or the fact that a white tea
party crowd...that was redundant... would heavily boo Obama, because in both
cases it's a political matter not racial.
Although Mitt definitely wanted to show his base he could stand up to the NAACP,
he appeared genuinely surprised when they started booing him. This wasn't
a clever plot by Romney to play on racist elements in the GOP, but it does show
how out of touch he is with many Americans. I think most main stream Democrats
are over this incident. Now about those tax returns..........
So the birther movement, a lunatic conspiracy that has been going on since the
day President Obama announced that he was going to run, is the same as a few
newspaper comments that will be forgotten by next week? A recent poll found that
only 31% of Republicans are sure that the president was born in the U.S.
Thanks for the fun article pointing out the nuts on both political sides. As to
V.P.jokes Repubs had Quayle and now the Dems have Biden.
Romney was "surprised" because the NAACP was rude enough to boo
him...not because he was surprised at their disagreement. Larry, do you
honestly believe Romney is so out of touch as to not know that the NAACP
supports Obamacare? I think even you know he's smarter than that.As for "those tax returns" - releasing anything more than 1 or 2 years
of tax returns is the rare exception; many past presidents only released tax
summaries. So don't go making it sound like Romney is the exception to the
rule; Obama actually was in releasing his modest, politically safe tax returns.
Everyone knows that there is absolutely zero evidence of Romney doing anything
illegal or unethical with his taxes, but releasing them will hand an enormous
pile of gift-wrapped opposition research to the Obama Chicago political machine
to distort to their advantage, as they hav with their obviously shameless lies
about Bain, a nonissue if there ever was one. They even accused him of a FELONY
with zero evidence!
I respect someone who can get boos and standing o's in the same setting.
That tells me he knows what he is talking about and doesn't shy away from
the unpopular, if he plans on doing it. @Bob A. Bohey: I find your
argument "big business is out to gut the middle class" interesting.
Let's say you're right. Big business succeeds in gutting the middle
class. Now, how do those big businesses stay in business now that their
customer base [the middle class] is gone, their employee base [the middle class]
is gone, and their investor base [the 401Ks of the middle class] is gone? Most,
if not all, business owners actually want returning life-long customers, happy
employees, and a decent return for their investors. Businesses that don't
have these things usually go out of business. So, I would argue that even if
big business wanted to gut the middle class, as you put it, the marketplace
(middle class shopping decisions) would remove those types of business from the
market. Unless, of course, they are propped up by a controlling government
because they are too important to that government to fail.
Re:VORYou are factually incorrect.Like all other
citizens, U.S. presidents enjoy this protection of their privacy. Since the
early 1970s, however, most presidents have chosen to release their returns
publicly. In the hope of making this information more widely available, the Tax
History Project at Tax Analysts has compiled an archive of presidential tax
returns.Obama: tax returns for years 2000-2011George Bush:
2000-2007Clinton: 1992-1999HW Bush 1989-1991 (3 yrs)Carter:
1977-1979 (3 yrs)Reagan 1981-1987Ford (released summaries only)
1966-1975Nixon 1969-1972Romney doesnt need to have done
anything illegal.No doubt Romney's returns will provide fodder for
his opponents to use against him, in the great debate about the need for more
tax cuts for the wealthy and the 99% vs 1%. Tax experts, looking at clues from
Romney's 2010 return, believe he very likely paid very little tax in 2009,
even less than the 13.9% he paid in 2010.
sadly just another in a string of the type of childish article and comments that
have come to permeate our political world.
Here's the excerpt from Romney's speech at the NAACP that garnered the
standing ovation:"For every one of us a particular person comes
to mind, someone who set a standard of conduct and made us better by their
example. For me, that man is my father, George Romney.It
wasn’t just that my Dad helped write the civil rights provision for the
Michigan Constitution, though he did. It wasn’t just that he helped
create Michigan’s first civil rights commission, or that as governor he
marched for civil rights in Detroit – though he did those things, too.
More than these public acts, it was the kind of man he was, and the
way he dealt with every person, black or white. He was a man of the fairest
instincts, and a man of faith who knew that every person was a child of God.I’m grateful to him for so many things, and above all for the
knowledge of God, whose ways are not always our ways, but whose justice is
certain and whose mercy endures forever."Mitt, what a shame you
aren't more like your dad....
Obama birth record definitely fraudulent Investigators for an
Arizona sheriff's volunteer posse have declared that President Barack
Obama's birth certificate is definitely fraudulent. Members of
Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio's posse said in March that there was
probable cause that Obama's long-form birth certificate released by the
White House in April 2011 was a computer-generated forgery. Now,
Arpaio says investigators are positive it's fraudulent. Mike
Zullo, the posse's chief investigator, said numeric codes on certain parts
of the birth certificate indicate that those parts weren't filled out, yet
those sections asking for the race of Obama's father and his field of work
or study were completed. Zullo said investigators previously
didn't know the meaning of codes but that the codes were explained by a
95-year-old former state worker who signed the president's birth
certificate. Zullo said a news reporter who has helped out in the probe let
investigators listen in on an interview he concluded of the former state
worker.So-called "birthers" again maintain Obama is
ineligible to be president because, they contend, he was born in Kenya.Anymore citizenship questions here?.MY VIEWS.
"Now the left is sounding nutty as the 'birthers'"Birthers are not sounding so nutty These days. As of yesterday the now famous
Joe Arpaio of Maricopa County has just disclosed that his research and that of
the Cold Case Posse found the Obama Hawaii birth certificate, provided the world
by the president, is... bogus. Yes, bogus. So, we have, as president of the
United States a foreigner. Heavens to murgatroid! Now what?
I laughed my head off at Kathleen Parker's comments. She was obviously
joking. Nobody could have said what she said, and meant to have it taken
seriously. Thanks for the laugh, Ms. Parker.
@atl134:"Obama has been proven to be born in this
nation..."Have you not read today's Drudge Report? The
certificate is bogus.
And what's so wrong using the word 'Obamacare?' The illustrious
president use the same term.
@liberal larry:"Now about those tax returns..."Yeah, and what about those Fast & Furious documents, the college
application papers, grade transcripts, the SS number application form, huh?
Where are they? For a person who promised transparency as a candidate he
certainly pulled the wool.Oh, I forget. Politicians say what people
wanna hear until after the election.America can't afford to
give this guy a second term. He'll snip the last thread that the
Constitution is hanging by.We need to remember his own words: if he
couldn't fix things he would be a one-term president. Let's take him
up on that.
With all due respect President Obama's mom is an American citizen. No fan
of the President but can we talk about something else like solutions to the
nations problems? That would be too easy.
I strongly recommend Republicans continue to promote the birther conspiracy and
ask for Obama's school records. Most certainly those will be winning
issues. Drudge. Another reliable source--conduit to conspiracy
theorists arguing that 9/11 was an inside job, FEMA concentration camps etc.
All of the pro-birther commenters have totally convinced me that President Obama
was NOT born in the United States!I encourage all of you to keep pressing
this issue, and maybe you can even get Mitt Romney to address the nation and
expose the evils of our cagey, Kenyan President.
Truthseeker,Ah, no...you missed the target. This whole issue is
about releasing tax returns as candidates, but the vast majority of the years
you listed were for returns revealed while the presidents were in office. Well,
in that case, every single president except Ford released their tax returns
while in the White House; this has always been pretty much procedural.But of course, that's not the issue here. We're talking about
CANDIDATES releasing their private tax returns. That list, the one
everyone's referring to on this issue, is as follows:Nixon:
None.Ford: None.Carter: None.Reagan: None.Bush I:
None.Clinton: Released only one year prior to being president, his salary
as Arkansas Governor, which was already public information anyway.Bush II:
One year prior to being president, his salary as Texas Governor, also already
public.Obama: Unprecedentedly released all since 2000, all public anyway
as Legislator and Senator.In other words, if Romney wins, he will be
the first presidential candidate in history to release his PRIVATE tax return.
In fact, all four of the candidates the Tax History project tracks as revealing
their tax returns are Republicans. Apparently, not one Democrat.
What about jobs and the economy? Sheez.
The facts so far: Romney made a statement at the NAACP that was not well
accepted. Everyone knew that said statement would not be well accepted.The interpretation: Romney purposely made the statement not to get the
attention of those he was addressing but to get the attention of those who would
hear about the poor reception the statement received.This
interpretation is considered by some as a whack-a-doodle interpretation.The other possible interpretation is that Romney
didn't/doesn't care enough about the group he is addressing to tailor
his speech to them - he just gives the same speech no matter who is
listening.Hmmm - neither interpretation is favorable to Romney -
but, whack-a-doodle or not, the first interpretation at least implies Romney has
some connection to those who are receiving his message.
Kalindra - Are you seriously suggesting that Romney should have avoided one of
THE biggest reasons he's running against Obama just because his audience
may have disagreed with him? I'm glad he had the courage and integrity to
stand up for his principles - repealing the economy-killing Obamacare - even in
the face of an overwhelmingly opposed audience. I think he shared his platform
respectfully, and said what he always says as a candidate. The NAACP knew who
he was, and knew his views, and still invited him. They knew what they were
getting. If they didn't want to have their ears soiled by anti-Obamacare
statements, then they shouldn't have invited the one man who is running
largely on that very position. To the NAACP's credit they still did invite
him. Too bad a few in the audience were disrespectful and booed...there's
no need for that among adults in a democratic society with free speech.
>Brother ChuckOh please please please please keep it up. I would love
nothing more than to have this race focus on Obama's birth certificate.
The nuttier the Right sounds, the better it is for Democrats. So please, keep
Re:VOR"if Romney wins, he will be the first presidential candidate in
history to release his PRIVATE tax return."How many Democratic
and Republican candidates in the general election have not served in any public
office before running for president? Do we have Romney's tax
returns for the years he served as Gov. of MA? Hillary Clinton
waited until April to release tax records dating back to 2000 for herself and
former President Bill Clinton. Sen. Chris Dodd, D-Conn., also released tax
returns during the primary, but Joe Biden didn’t release his returns until
September, when Obama selected him as a running mate. John Edwards did not
release tax returns, though he had released a decade of returns in September
2004, when he became John Kerry’s running mate.In the 2004
presidential campaign, Kerry released tax forms covering years 1999 through
2003. Presidential candidates began releasing their returns
consistently starting in the early 1970's according to the Tax History
Project Director. How many years of tax returns did candidate George
For most of those Democrat candidates, you must be getting your info from other
sources besides the Tax History Project, since they say "...incoming
presidents do not release returns for the year before they assumed
office..." which isn't always true, but is generally the rule
throughout history. The idea of candidates publicly releasing tax returns is a
very new idea, mostly thanks to recent Republican candidates. Maybe Dodd,
Edwards, Kerry, etc. really did, I don't know.You can certainly
see how much Romney made in his governor years. And while his father released
quite a few returns, he didn't have to deal with a dishonest opponent who
can be depended on to twist & distort facts to means something they
don't. Such as trying to claim he was a felon and lied on his taxes, when
everyone else - including the liberal MSM - have found that there's nothing
to the accusations at all. Anything, anything to distract from Obama's
actual record, I suppose. Which is why I think Romney was wrong in reacting so
defensively to his Bain years, since Bain saved far, far more jobs than they
ever "lost". It's not even close.
I don't think the left has it in 'em to be that far fetched and
Most Obama supporters will do anything they can do to ignore or divert attention
from the fact that Romney was given a standing ovation and that "the
boo" was a minor, very predictable, hardly newsworthy event.This
reality doesn't fit in their agenda of portraying Romney as a conniving,
mean and rich racist. Ignore Obama's outsourcing. It is always easier to
perceive the kookiness of the fringe on the other side. Especially when we have
a mainstream media that will never point out the ideology blindness,
inconsistencies and blatant use of double standards that can also exist within
the left wing. Their daily focus is on branding the entire right wing as all
being kooks, mean or stupid. All because they (media) tend to have their own
limited, "group think" view of the world.
I find it odd that so many people accept Joe Arpio as the last word in document
authentication. He's not unbiases and he's definetly not a expert in
the field. What he is good at is self publicity.
"Oh please please please please keep it up. I would love nothing more than
to have this race focus on Obama's birth certificate."That,
right there, is why Romney needs to stay on-message about Obama's record
just as he is doing right now. The left wants nothing more than to focus on
anything - anything - but his dismal record, since it basically ends the debate
on whether leftist economic philosophy is bad for the country; there's
really no question that it is after four years of Obamanomics.And
for you lefties who love to harp about the fact that some on the fringe are
"birthers," I think somebody threw out that 30% of Repubs believe this
(it's actually 23%, and 5% of Demos), just remember that 35% of Democrats
still believe 9/11 was an inside job by Bush & Cheney, and 26% are
“maybes”. Think about that - 61% of Democrats believe Bush/Cheney
knew about 9/11 beforehand, or believe it’s a real possibility! Both
sides have their fringe...it's just that the fringe is the mainstream on
@ EJMYou're exactly right!Lay off the birther
conspiraciesand lay off the tax fraud conspiracies.What
what do we talk about when we have no solutions to offer for the nations
problems? Just pick one of the above.
@ VOR: "Are you seriously suggesting that Romney should have avoided one of
THE biggest reasons he's running against Obama just because his audience
may have disagreed with him?"Of course I am not suggesting that
- the idea of a political speaker tailoring his comments to his audience would
be totally absurd!
Well, if Romney didn't intend to provoke, why did he refer to it as Obama
care, or knowing has he did that mentioning repeal would provoke his audience,
why was he not simply silent on the issue. Romney is very good about being
silent on issues when he wants to do that. Yes his comment was most
likely a dog whistle to his extreme right wing supporters, a group that he knows
he has a tenuous hold on at best.