The Rich Get Richer

I think both parties are primarily interested in demagoguery. Originally Posted by WTF

True that! The problem is that anyone who tells you the cold, hard truth renders himself instantly unelectable, given the obvious metastasization of our nation's entitlement mentality. We've been told for years that we can travel a long way down the path toward becoming a European-style social democracy, while big-spending politicians insinuate that we can finance it by raising taxes only on those making over $250K annually. The Europeans impose far higher income taxes on the middle class, plus a VAT. And even with all that, they can't even come close to financing their welfare states.

Did you watch the GOP primary? Brutal. Originally Posted by WTF

If you're asking whether I watched any of the debates, no. I did happen to see a few clips here and there. Painful to watch.

Obama over promised, no doubt about it. My contention is that no matter who had been in office, the housing bubble was not going to call for a norvmal recovery. Originally Posted by WTF

You are correct with respect to the fact that recoveries following debt deflations are generally more difficult than those of the more typical business cycle variety. But it doesn't help if you exacerbate the fiscal picture by spending hundreds of billions of dollars on political payoffs that have nothing to do with "stimulating" the economy.

But as bad as Obama obviously is, I think we're in for just about the same set of long-term problems no matter who gets elected. Does anyone seriously think Romney is going to pursue anything other than a politically-focused agenda, or that he's going to be more likely to make any tough decisions than Obama has been?

The recent Stockman article to which I linked makes that point:

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/14/op...=1&ref=opinion

Partisans on both sides need to realize that neither party is even remotely serious about real fiscal responsibilty.

I get very little response when I bring that up too

The recent Stockman article to which I linked makes that point:

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/14/opinion/paul-ryans-fairy-tale-budget-plan.html?_r=1&ref=opinion

Partisans on both sides need to realize that neither party is even remotely serious about real fiscal responsibilty. Originally Posted by CaptainMidnight

I get very little response when I bring that up too Originally Posted by CJ7

If you bring up Stockman , it is if people go deaf and do not want to have a serious discussion about real solutions. They'd rather shit on the living room floor and act like they are Tootsie Rolls

The central question here is why does Romney continue to refuse to show us his tax returns?

He said that he looked at them and they were just fine.

Thank you, very much!

Well, that should settle the entire debate right there, shouldn't it?

. . . Even that clown should know that man cannot act as his own witness in the court of public opinion!

FastGoon has me on ignore. Would someone ask him if there would be anything in Romney's returns that would convince him to vote for Romney? If not, why should Romney show them to him? Seems to me the only ones adamant about seeing them are those that won't vote for him come hell or high water.

Thanks.

He said that he looked at them and they were just fine.


Originally Posted by Fast Gunn

Trust but Verify!

...one decade our redneck repubs love that slogan a couple decades later, they act like they ain't never heard it!

FastGoon has me on ignore. Would someone ask him if there would be anything in Romney's returns that would convince him to vote for Romney? If not, why should Romney show them to him? Seems to me the only ones adamant about seeing them are those that won't vote for him come hell or high water.

Thanks. Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

Me thinks Team Obama think that Indy's voters might want to see it. That is why they won't let up. It makes it look like ole Willard has something to hide. The Indy voters do not like surprises. Other than that your analysis is spot on...

Why don't the Dims just run with Reid's claim that Romney hasn't paid any taxes for the last ten years? That should be enough for the gullible.

The central question here is why does Romney continue to refuse to show us his tax returns?

He said that he looked at them and they were just fine.

Thank you, very much!

Well, that should settle the entire debate right there, shouldn't it?

. . . Even that clown should know that man cannot act as his own witness in the court of public opinion!

Originally Posted by Fast Gunn

COG says hello!

FastGoon has me on ignore. Would someone ask him if there would be anything in Romney's returns that would convince him to vote for Romney? If not, why should Romney show them to him? Seems to me the only ones adamant about seeing them are those that won't vote for him come hell or high water.

Thanks.

Why don't the Dims just run with Reid's claim that Romney hasn't paid any taxes for the last ten years? That should be enough for the gullible. Originally Posted by I B Hankering

Tax returns for fast and furious documents, that'd be my offer to prince Obama

Full disclosure for the American people all the way

I nominate never as the Presidential debate moderator

The central question here is why does Romney continue to refuse to show us his tax returns?

He said that he looked at them and they were just fine.

Thank you, very much!

Well, that should settle the entire debate right there, shouldn't it?

. . . Even that clown should know that man cannot act as his own witness in the court of public opinion!

Originally Posted by Fast Gunn

Romney told me to tell you (car elevators are great tax write offs). You are WELCOME.

Tax returns for fast and furious documents, that'd be my offer to prince Obama

Full disclosure for the American people all the way Originally Posted by nevergaveitathought

Naahhh. Fast and Furious is a different problem. All Boehner has to do on that is tell the House Sergeant-At-Arms to arrest Holder for contempt of Congress and throw him in the DC jail. "Held on the order of the Speaker of the House" is, according to at least one authority, a valid answer to a writ of habeas corpus, meaning Holder won't get out of jail until either (a) a new Speaker is elected (meaning the Dimocrats have to win big) or (b) his toadies hand over the Fast and Furious documents.

Boehner doesn't want to do that, as it is a thermonuclear weapon, and he'd rather not give the Democrats any precedent for its use.

There's a much more fun way to do it. For each year, pick an appropriate Obama document. Say, 2003 tax return for his Columbia transcript. 2004 for his passport records. 2005 for the REAL long-form birth certificate. 2006 for his Social Security number records. And so on. It won't be hard to make a list of all the documents Obama himself has spent MILLIONS of dollars in legal fees to keep locked up.

Publish the list in, say, the New York Times, or the Washington Post. Or put it on Drudge Report. Say "Tellyawhat, Barry: You release these and I'll release my tax returns, document for document, according to the list. Whaddaya say?"

And watch the fun.

As usual, your cockeyed assumptions are wrong, old geezer, but what's new?

This disclosure is strictly a matter of honor and Mitt is sorely lacking in that department.

If a man has not done anything wrong then he would not be reluctant to show the evidence to prove that innocence.

However, when he knows he has skirted the law by a only few nanometers, then of course, he would not be so forthcoming.

He has everything to lose and nothing to gain by telling the truth now.

. . . No, I wouldn't vote for Romney either way, but those people in his camp who think like he does might more inclined to. However, he's not helping his base with this reluctance and he's only giving more ammunition to his adversaries to come after him by not disclosing.

Fast Gunn has me on ignore. Would someone ask him if there would be anything in Romney's returns that would convince him to vote for Romney? If not, why should Romney show them to him? Seems to me the only ones adamant about seeing them are those that won't vote for him come hell or high water.

Thanks. Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

There's a much more fun way to do it. For each year, pick an appropriate Obama document. Say, 2003 tax return for his Columbia transcript. 2004 for his passport records. 2005 for the REAL long-form birth certificate. 2006 for his Social Security number records. And so on. It won't be hard to make a list of all the documents Obama himself has spent MILLIONS of dollars in legal fees to keep locked up.

Publish the list in, say, the New York Times, or the Washington Post. Or put it on Drudge Report. Say "Tellyawhat, Barry: You release these and I'll release my tax returns, document for document, according to the list. Whaddaya say?"
Originally Posted by Sidewinder

Dude, you can be my assistant