Romney said if he paid more than he owed he'd be unfit to be president...then promptly over paid to get his average above 13% so he wouldn't flip flop on another promise.

This is exactly the stuff you live for, I'm astounded you're not all over it :hihi:

-spence

Probably because it's taken out of context and hence isn't very newsworthy.

Listen to the full statement.

-spence

WSJ reports Romney paid an effective tax rate of 14.1% for 2011 and
an annual effective rate of 20.2% for the 20 year span from 1990 to 2009.
Prolly about right for a guy who pays most of his taxes based on IRS capital
gains income law.

Why do you think bankers give so much to Congress? To give them tax loopholes to defer their income with.

-spence

I was just very surprised to hear the words. Especially since everything seems to get taken out of context.

Probably about right for a guy that gives away 30% of his income. All those that top that,feel free to tell us what a cheat Romney is !!

Of course, everyone gives to a candidate or party because they want something.

However, the purpose of a lower long term capital gains tax is to keep the
money invested in a company for long term use so it helps to capitalize,
grow the company, and hire more employees. Nothing wrong with that.

Any why Romney's tax plan will fall apart, every deduction has a constituency and he's not going to name names before the election.

No, those are the tax rules that you and I follow.

A fund manager get's to set the initial value of profit they're entitled as part of their contract at zero if they want and be listed as a partner...even if they know the value should be higher...

It's even more crazy when you look at Romney's retirement account. He can then take these "worthless" profit shares and sell them into his 401K, where they grow like mushrooms tax free and circumvent contribution limits.

Worse, Romney then cut a deal where he gets his profit share for 10 years after employment...even though he's not working? These aren't priced options that any top exec would get...they're special.

I'm still curious to understand if he's really used Cayman firms so his IRA can invest back in Bain and avoid the tax hit.

Bottom line...there's a lot of tax talking points out there...but we're talking about someone who doesn't even reflect the 1%.

This is like fingers on one hand kind of stuff.

-spence

Brutal...

When These 6 People Think You Blew It, You Know Your Campaign Is In Trouble

-spence

you are kidding, right???

desperately scraping the bottom of the barrel for anything....

that may be your "Magnum Dope-us" :uhuh:

Brooks(still impressed with Obamas pant crease) and Scarborough....who cares what they think?

Lowry and Foster hardly think he "blew it" or his campaign is in trouble...historically he's in awfully good shape

Linda McMahon? suddenly her opinion matters to you?...or anyone on the left....haaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!!!!

Bill Kristol....a portion of his comment was conveniently left out...this should infuriate Paul S

"It remains important for the country that Romney wins in November (unless he chooses to step down and we get the Ryan-Rubio ticket we deserve!). But that shouldn’t blind us to the fact that Romney’s comments, like those of Obama four years ago, are arrogant and stupid."



there is and should be far more concern at the Obama campaign at this point, but you/they will never admit it

pretty funny....

By Deroy Murdock
September 24, 2012 4:00 A.M. No good deed goes undemagogued.

Republican nominee Mitt Romney on Friday released his 2011 tax return. Democrats instantly hammered him for doing exactly what they have demanded of the rich throughout their dirty class war.
Romney is mean, cold-hearted, uncaring, and incapable of connecting with his fellow man — or so Democrats insist. And yet Romney and his wife earned $13,696,951 in 2011, paid $1,935,708 in taxes, and donated $4,020,772 to charity. The Romneys’ donations equaled 208 percent of what they paid in taxes. The Romneys gave away 29.4 percent of what they made last year. This goes beyond tithing, the Biblical appeal to render onto others one tenth of what one reaps. This tops a 25 percent gratuity — considered a genuine example of generosity. The Romneys handed out nearly one third of their winnings in 2011.

How does this compare with Romney’s opponents for the White House?

The President and Mrs. Barack Obama made $789,674 last year, placing them deep within the dreaded “1 percent” — as luck would have it. (That notorious threshold applies to tax returns that report at least $343,927.) They gave $172,130 to charity, or 21.8 percent of their income.

And what about Vice President Joe “Back in Chains” Biden? He and his wife, Dr. Jill Biden, scored $379,035 in 2011. These 1 percenters gave away $5,540 — a whopping 1.5 percent of their income. As parsimonious as this seems, this actually is an improvement for the bleeding-heart Bidens. As Politico’s Josh Gerstein noted Friday, “When the Obama campaign released past tax returns for Biden in 2008, it was revealed that the Bidens donated just $3,690 to charity over 10 years — an average of $369 a year.”

So, confronted with this evidence that Romney’s heart might not be made of dry ice after all, Democrats paused and heartily applauded his philanthropy.


And then I woke up.

?Heads, I Win; Tails, You Lose? - National Review Online

what I find hilariousl is that the people who cackle the most about Romney and his taxes are the same people that have long overstayed their usefulness in the House and Senate, how long has Harry Reid been there???, what has he really accomplished??? these are the same people that have crafted much of the tax policy over the countless years and many other policies that they either bitch about or try to prop up depending on the advantage that they feel it provides them.....Romney has never been shown to have done anything wrong regarding his taxes or anything else, they just "imply" the he must be doing something wrong in much the same way that Spence is now implying racism out of desperation, frustation and who knows...maybe intoxication ...:)

"racist, tax-dodging babies" :rotf2:

You'll have to complain to the IRS,or better yet have them change the rules.

OK, so now Spence thinks that Linda McMahon's opinions are significant.

Spence, since you obviously give great credibility to Linda McMahon's opinions...what do you suppose she thinks of Obama?

Amazingly, she is in a neck-and-neck campaign with liberal empty suit Chris Murphy. Incredible to me that she has a shot here in the People's Republic Of Konnecticut-stan.

Oh man,now that is funnie. :grins:

The money guys get to make the rules, that's the entire point.

-spence

For all of 2009, Obama and the Democratic Congress made the rules. If they had issues with the tax code, they could have changed it. They chose not to. So why, then, is it fair to attack Romney for playing by the rules that the Democrats indirectly endorsed, by opting not to change them when they had the opportunity to change them?

Filibuster proof majority from September 24, 2009 to February 10, 2010. The two years and "all of 2009" statements are incorrect.

There were more than 100 Republican filibusters in 2009.
How Filibusters Are Strangling the Senate - Political Hotsheet - CBS News

(1) What happens while the MN Senate seat wwas contested? Who voted for that seat? No one?

(2) Regardless of how long there was a fillibuster-proof majority...unless the GOP defeated a proposed immigration bill by fillibuster, Obama cannot blame the GOP for killing immigration reform. He just can't. There has been no immigration reform because the Democrats didn't propose any such bill, not because of the GOP.

This is pretty friggin funny....

"SNL" to Obama: Stop talking - YouTube

dfas

Zimmy, the Democrats absolutely had the White House and the majority of Congress. They did not have a fillibuster-proof majority, but they absolutely, 100% had a mathemaytical majority until January 2010.

The DREAM Act is not immigration reform. It's another entitlement program.

If you'd been paying attention you'd know that that doesn't really matter...

Clearly you don't have a clue what the DREAM Act even was then.

Please do some homework before posting, it's getting distracting.

-spence

I'm still worried about Romney by the way. The hit he took over the 47% debacle has him this week touting his MA health care plan and how he cares so much for all Americans. When he's unscripted the man can find a way to contradict himself multiple times in the same statement.

And I thought my Audi had a tight turning radius! :hihi:

-spence

Audi's are sooooooo gay.......
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

It was two cars ago...

-spence

I'm worried about you :uhuh: you're never voting for him so don't worry about the troubles that you percieve for him, celebrate them in your mind:)

today Rasmussen Obama 47 Romney 46

you should focus your concern on your hero...

Posted 09/27/2012

The final revision for the second quarter is in, and it isn't pretty: GDP grew at a yearly rate of just 1.3%, not 1.7% as earlier estimated. Worse, durable goods orders plunged 13.2% in August, the biggest drop since the recession and an ominous sign the second half will be just as bad.





it will be hilaroius if Obama ends up with 47%:uhuh:

I just choked on my coffee:rotf2: People that skip this forum miss out on some pretty funny sheet.

just hope you weren't laughing at how I spelled hilarious:)

I've left my mind open until we get more data. Romney is vacillating so hard on some key issues I'm not sure which Mitt Romney is going to be there come election day.



Durable goods orders in some sectors like aero were sky high earlier this summer and the market is just stabilizing. Other manufacturing indicators were positive in August, you can't just strip out a metric that makes you happy and pretend it paints a full picture.

The global slowdown is going to be a drag on the economy and there's little President Obama or Gov. Romney can do about it.

Perhaps the biggest thing we can control is a resolution on planned Government spending cuts if Congress can't get their act together...this would put a real and immediate dent in GDP.

-spence

now that's funny!!!! :rotf2:

Would have been funnier if you said it...

based on what Bryan?

not something that I'd claim because I find that the people who claim or brag about their "open-mindedness" are usually some of the most closed-minded and idealogical individuals that you could ever want to meet, they just view their own narrow version of "open-mindedness" as "superior" to other's open or closed-mindedness depending on how you measure it :uhuh:

I'm concerned that Mitt and Obama are allegedly the two "best" options this country has to lead us out of the economic collapse and towards unifying the country as a whole.

Btw, anyone keeping track of the Student Loan Bubble that's primed to burst? Aside from Warren claiming we should provide event more debt support (with what funds is still confusing), I haven't heard much in the way of our two main presidential candidates opinions on the student loan debt that people voluntarily signed up for.
The Student Loan Bubble In 19 Simple Charts | ZeroHedge
The guys at Zero Hedge have been doing an excellent job (and probably the only job) tracking yet another possible financial collapse.

the Federal Government should institute a "fee" on everyone's phone bill and call it the "Universal Education Fee", which is very different from a tax as we've learned from Spence, and then apply that money to help pay for the student loans that former students can't or won't pay for, after all...they are "guaranteed".....I think that's "open-minded" thinking :)