Paul Ryan, like Romney, will only release two years of tax returns

[Recliner Pilot 61]

Well it depends what we're talking about. If it's just that he's obscenely wealthy and doesn't pay a lot of taxes, then I agree that it isn't a big deal. It's a little unsettling because it underscores the fact that the rich play by a different (and much more favorable) set of rules in this country, but that is hardly breaking news.

 

Now if it's that Romney paid much less than the 13% he claims, or that he took advantage of the offshore amnesty, well that could be explosive. Taking advantage of the amnesty is basically an admission to having committed a felony prior to 2009.

 

50% of income earners at the bottom pay ZERO income taxes at all, and many of them get a "refund" on taxes they didn't pay.

 

Seems "much more favorable" to me.

[Recliner Pilot 61]

Pretty much.

 

Statements like this confirms the fact there is no way you are an attorney.

[titans&bucs&bearsohmy! 2,745]

The fact of the matter is, there are a bunch of little things that point to Romney being a doosh, one that has absolutely NO IDEA what it is like out there for a common man. Taken one at a time? Each is no big deal. Collectively? It paints a picture many don't like.

 

The "dog on the car" incident.

The "I like firing people" quote

The "I own a dancing horse" thing

The "I pay a lower tax rate than damn near anybody thing"

The "has to be illegal IRA" thing

 

Now, as for the tax returns, if what he HAS shown is dooshy, what does that say about what he WON'T show? The only person we know has seen them (John McCain) then declined to put him on his ticket, picking a batsh!t crazy political neophyte instead.

 

So that leads reasonable people to believe there is something there. You know damn well if he had (D) next to his name, it would be RP et al that were leading the charge to see them. But because its an ®, they don't care, and we're just wealth enviers.

 

Its not wealth envy. We know he's rich. Its doosh dislike.

[Recliner Pilot 61]

 

 

The "dog on the car" incident.

 

 

Confucius say: "Dog in kennel on roof of car better than dog on roof of mouth".

[Patriotsfatboy1 1,432]

Confucius say: "Dog in kennel on roof of car better than dog on roof of mouth".

 

So, now you are Chinese Commie?

[Strike 5,748]

 

Now Mitt Romney is refusing to release his tax returns. Why? And this is costing him a political price. It has become an issue and it makes it look like he's a man with something to hide. Despite this liability, Romney has decided that it is better to take the hit for not releasing his tax returns than take whatever huge hit he would apparently take if he did release them.

 

 

the only people who care about this are people like you who would never vote for him anyways. The "political cost" is minimal no matter how much you whine about it.

[phillybear 366]

The "dog on the car" incident.

 

How is that even an issue? It boggles my mind. In There's Something About Mary, the dog took a ride on top of the car and was perfectly fine. It only got hurt when it fell out the window trying to bite off Ben Stiller's d!ck. Fock, man. I think New Jersey just passed a law where you have to put a dog in a seat belt.

[KSB2424 3,148]

The fact of the matter is, there are a bunch of little things that point to Romney being a doosh, one that has absolutely NO IDEA what it is like out there for a common man. Taken one at a time? Each is no big deal. Collectively? It paints a picture many don't like.

 

The "dog on the car" incident.

The "I like firing people" quote

The "I own a dancing horse" thing

The "I pay a lower tax rate than damn near anybody thing"

The "has to be illegal IRA" thing

 

Now, as for the tax returns, if what he HAS shown is dooshy, what does that say about what he WON'T show? The only person we know has seen them (John McCain) then declined to put him on his ticket, picking a batsh!t crazy political neophyte instead.

 

So that leads reasonable people to believe there is something there. You know damn well if he had (D) next to his name, it would be RP et al that were leading the charge to see them. But because its an ®, they don't care, and we're just wealth enviers.

 

Its not wealth envy. We know he's rich. Its doosh dislike.

Honest question.

 

Instead of worrying about stuff like that, or the whole 'perception is reality' schtick that I've heard where it doesn't matter the truth it's what people 'perceive'. Instead of all that mularky, why not take the two canidates put them up side by side, look at their takes on all of the important issues like economy, education, debt, national security, health care, etc. and simply pick the guy that you think would help our country the most on the actual issues? Instead of worrying so much about nonsensical things like dogs on cars and taken out of context blurbs and stuff like that?

 

Seriously?

 

If you do that and you say, I'm voting for X as his belief system on important issues for our counrtry align with what I believe, then I'd have a lot more respect for folks. Moreso than stupid crap that doesn't matter or lies that people 'percieve'.

[kutulu 1,688]

How is that even an issue? It boggles my mind. In There's Something About Mary, the dog took a ride on top of the car and was perfectly fine. It only got hurt when it fell out the window trying to bite off Ben Stiller's d!ck. Fock, man. I think New Jersey just passed a law where you have to put a dog in a seat belt.

 

Did Mitt jerk off into Ann's hair nest or did he let her horse do the honors.

[kutulu 1,688]

Honest question.

 

Instead of worrying about stuff like that, or the whole 'perception is reality' schtick that I've heard where it doesn't matter the truth it's what people 'perceive'. Instead of all that mularky, why not take the two canidates put them up side by side, look at their takes on all of the important issues like economy, education, debt, national security, health care, etc. and simply pick the guy that you think would help our country the most on the actual issues? Instead of worrying so much about nonsensical things like dogs on cars and taken out of context blurbs and stuff like that?

 

Seriously?

Cause most people are retarded and easily swayed.

[Recliner Pilot 61]

Honest question.

 

Instead of worrying about stuff like that, or the whole 'perception is reality' schtick that I've heard where it doesn't matter the truth it's what people 'perceive'. Instead of all that mularky, why not take the two canidates put them up side by side, look at their takes on all of the important issues like economy, education, debt, national security, health care, etc. and simply pick the guy that you think would help our country the most on the actual issues? Instead of worrying so much about nonsensical things like dogs on cars and taken out of context blurbs and stuff like that?

 

Seriously?

 

If you do that and you say, I'm voting for X as his belief system on important issues for our counrtry align with what I believe, then I'd have a lot more respect for folks. Moreso than stupid crap that doesn't matter or lies that people 'percieve'.

His Hero can't run on his disastrous record, so these are the things they have to rely upon.

[titans&bucs&bearsohmy! 2,745]

the only people who care about this are people like you who would never vote for him anyways. The "political cost" is minimal no matter how much you whine about it.

 

Not true. There are actually people in the middle who could go either way. Him being an unlikeable pr!ck hurts him with those people. Those people decide elections. HTH

 

Honest question.

 

Instead of worrying about stuff like that, or the whole 'perception is reality' schtick that I've heard where it doesn't matter the truth it's what people 'perceive'. Instead of all that mularky, why not take the two canidates put them up side by side, look at their takes on all of the important issues like economy, education, debt, national security, health care, etc. and simply pick the guy that you think would help our country the most on the actual issues? Instead of worrying so much about nonsensical things like dogs on cars and taken out of context blurbs and stuff like that?

 

Seriously?

 

Of course, you are right.

 

I catagroically disagree with every policy that comes out of his mouth, so my voting for him was never going to happen anyway.

 

That said, I like to analyze politics from a somewhat objective viewpoint at times, and if you think his "unlikability" or "doosh quotient" isn't hurting him, you're crazy. It is the main reason Obama is in this election.

 

The bottom line is, both candidates are bought and paid for stuffed suit liars. Which won you vote for matters little. I'm just trying to get SOME entertainment out of the entire year long bullsh!t fest.

[phillybear 366]

Did Mitt jerk off into Ann's hair nest or did he let her horse do the honors.

 

That's a question best asked of the high faluting fancy pants at NaturallyCurly

[Strike 5,748]

Not true. There are actually people in the middle who could go either way. Him being an unlikeable pr!ck hurts him with those people. Those people decide elections. HTH

 

 

This election is going to be decided by the debates in October. Period. Not on Romney's tax returns.

[KSB2424 3,148]

Cause most people are retarded and easily swayed.

But even halfway smart people fall into this trap too. It's mind numbing.

 

Voters need to think of the next couple months as if they are a hiring manager and we are all interveiwing a person for a job. When you hire somebody for a job your main focus is "Can this person succeed in doing what I need them to do, the way I need them to do it". It's not, which person would be the coolest to have a beer with. Or which person has the best commercials. Or which person is the less rich.

[Patriotsfatboy1 1,432]

Honest question.

 

Instead of worrying about stuff like that, or the whole 'perception is reality' schtick that I've heard where it doesn't matter the truth it's what people 'perceive'. Instead of all that mularky, why not take the two canidates put them up side by side, look at their takes on all of the important issues like economy, education, debt, national security, health care, etc. and simply pick the guy that you think would help our country the most on the actual issues? Instead of worrying so much about nonsensical things like dogs on cars and taken out of context blurbs and stuff like that?

 

Seriously?

 

If you do that and you say, I'm voting for X as his belief system on important issues for our counrtry align with what I believe, then I'd have a lot more respect for folks. Moreso than stupid crap that doesn't matter or lies that people 'percieve'.

 

Well, I think that the character of the individual is a key component in voting. I am stuck in the middle in these elections. I really can't stand either Party and their policies, so I find myself choosing for the lesser of 2 evils in every Presidential election.

 

If a politician tells me that he is going to do X or Y with respect to those important issues, I have to weigh as to whether I believe them. If a particular candidate has a history of lying, stretching the truth or flip-flopping, then that weighs on my decision.

 

I think that it is extremely ironic that Romney's father was the one who started this transparency with tax returns and Romney is the one bucking the trend. I don't know that it is going to sway me one way or the other, but it is all part of the package.

[Strike 5,748]

 

I think that it is extremely ironic that Romney's father was the one who started this transparency with tax returns and Romney is the one bucking the trend. I don't know that it is going to sway me one way or the other, but it is all part of the package.

 

You know, I read this criticism of Romney a lot and all I keep thinking is "I didn't agree with my Dad on everything either." And that's not necessarily a bad thing. Different people have different opinions on the same issues.

[Patriotsfatboy1 1,432]

You know, I read this criticism of Romney a lot and all I keep thinking is "I didn't agree with my Dad on everything either." And that's not necessarily a bad thing. Different people have different opinions on the same issues.

 

I keep waiting for Romney to say that and his reasons as to why he differs with his father on that issue. Again, it is more of a character question.

[NorthernVike 2,087]

Statements like this confirms the fact there is no way you are an attorney.

 

 

I never said I was.

[NorthernVike 2,087]

It doesn't matter what worms thinks...it's how it is collectively being perceived. maybe it shouldn't matter...fact is, many thinks it does. If the result is very close and mitt loses most will point to the 2 year's worth of tax returns and no more as a major reason why..whether it really is or not.

Bulllshit. It's nothing more than a distraction from the real problems this country is facing.

[KSB2424 3,148]

Again, it is more of a character question.

Unless Mitt Romney was doing something illegal then how is it a character question?

 

Once again, we are interveiwing a person for a job. If he passes the criminal backgroud check, passes the piss test, and isn't on some watch list then I'm hiring the best man for the job.

 

News Flash: Any candidate who has risen to the level of running for POTUS probably has some small skeleton in the closet or has flip flopped on some issue from time to time. My word are you saying Obama is some moral compass that when compared to antoher politician he is some shining light or something? Of course not. So lets focus on the issues at hand, and not the nonsensical mularky.

 

And if you agree with Obama on the issues then fine, please vote for him, you should. But for the love of the baby Jesus can we stop with the ridiculous stuff.

[kutulu 1,688]

Bulllshit. It's nothing more than a distraction from the real problems this country is facing.

Of course it is and of course there are real problems that should take precedent over this and many of the other "issues" that are out there. Still doesn't change the fact that it could have an effect on who wins this race since right now it seems like it is going to be a very close one...imo.

[titans&bucs&bearsohmy! 2,745]

Unless Mitt Romney was doing something illegal then how is it a character question?

 

Once again, we are interveiwing a person for a job. If he passes the criminal backgroud check, passes the piss test, and isn't on some watch list then I'm hiring the best man for the job.

 

News Flash: Any candidate who has risen to the level of running for POTUS probably has some small skeleton in the closet or has flip flopped on some issue from time to time. My word are you saying Obama is some moral compass that when compared to antoher politician he is some shining light or something? Of course not. So lets focus on the issues at hand, and not the nonsensical mularky.

 

And if you agree with Obama on the issues then fine, please vote for him, you should. But for the love of the baby Jesus can we stop with the ridiculous stuff.

 

Because "legal" merely represents the floor of behavior. That is the point that your behavior is SO bad, we will punish you for it.

 

That does not mean that we do not encourage someone to aim a little higher ethically. That should especially apply to someone applying to be the most powerful person on Earth.

 

Is focking around on your wife illegal? What about focking around on her with a dood? Neither of those things are llegal either, but both would seriously dent your presidential hopes.

[Patriotsfatboy1 1,432]

Unless Mitt Romney was doing something illegal then how is it a character question?

 

Once again, we are interveiwing a person for a job. If he passes the criminal backgroud check, passes the piss test, and isn't on some watch list then I'm hiring the best man for the job.

 

News Flash: Any candidate who has risen to the level of running for POTUS probably has some small skeleton in the closet or has flip flopped on some issue from time to time. My word are you saying Obama is some moral compass that when compared to antoher politician he is some shining light or something? Of course not. So lets focus on the issues at hand, and not the nonsensical mularky.

 

And if you agree with Obama on the issues then fine, please vote for him, you should. But for the love of the baby Jesus can we stop with the ridiculous stuff.

 

WTF are you talking about? Are you really saying that, as long as Romney is not doing anything illegal, his character should not be questioned? Is that the litmus test for character, doing things illegally?

 

I live in a state where Romney was Governor. He will have you believe that he was a savior who balanced the budget and fixed years of wrongdoing by Democrats who overspent. If that sounds familiar, it is because that is the platform that he is running under now.

 

The truth is that he played a political game with the state and made cuts in such a way so that he looked good, the state was damaged and he left.

 

What is shocking to me is that I am actually trying to give him the benefit of the doubt and trying to see if I can see that what he did here is different than what he is going to do in DC.

[mobb_deep 920]

Bulllshit. It's nothing more than a distraction from the real problems this country is facing.

 

How is this not related to the "real problems" with this country? The biggest problem is we're operating at a massive deficit. Electing a guy who exploits tax loopholes and operates businesses with his buddies within the "gray area" of the law is only going to make matters worse. If the IRS can audit me whenever they want, then I damn well want the right to audit the guy I might be picking to lead our nation! You want me to play fair and pay my share, show me you're doing the same!

 

PS> Neither of these guys are going to be able to cut taxes, because our national debt is already 65% of GDP! This economy is based on consumer borrowing and spending. Since 99% of the population isn't filthy rich, the only way we can have a a strong economy is if the rich guys are lending money and the middle class feels comfortable borrowing and spending it.

[Recliner Pilot 61]

I never said I was.

Oops!

 

Thought I was quoting worms.

[KSB2424 3,148]

WTF are you talking about? Are you really saying that, as long as Romney is not doing anything illegal, his character should not be questioned? Is that the litmus test for character, doing things illegally?

What I'm saying is if he released two more years tax records as long as he was within the tax code then who the fock cares how much money he made, how much he saved or how much he gave. If he was circumventing the tax code (illegal) then we have an issue.

 

Every single person on this bored and 99.9% of Americans pay as little taxes as they have to. If it is legal to claim your house payment interest, you do. You take advantage of pre tax savings (401k) items I'm sure. You are simply taking advantage of the tax laws. We all do it, we all pay as little taxes as we HAVE to. So on and so forth.

 

If Mitt Romney was committing some kind of fraud (illegal) then yes that is a character issue. If not, then he was just doing what every single mutherfocker in the USA does with his taxes.

 

So yes, unless he was doing somethign illegal then I don't see how this is somehow some HUGE character issue that would decide if he is the best canidate for the job over Obama. That should be decided on the real, actual, issues.

[titans&bucs&bearsohmy! 2,745]

What I'm saying is if he released two more years tax records as long as he was within the tax code then who the fock cares how much money he made, how much he saved or how much he gave. If he was circumventing the tax code (illegal) then we have an issue.

 

Every single person on this bored and 99.9% of Americans pay as little taxes as they have to. If it is legal to claim your house payment, you do. You take advantage of pre tax savings (401k) items I'm sure. You are simply taking advantage of the tax laws. We all do it, we all pay as little taxes as we HAVE to. So on and so forth.

 

If Mitt Romney was committing some kind of fraud (illegal) then yes that is a character issue. If not, then he was just doing what every single mutherfocker in the USA does with his taxes.

 

So yes, unless he was doing somethign illegal then I don't see how this is somehow some HUGE character issue that would decide if he is the best canidate for the job over Obama. That should be decided on the real, actual, issues.

 

I respectfully disagree.

 

If he is standing on a plant floor in Ohio, telling American workers that he is all about the American worker, while in reality, he has tens of millions parked overseas, and outsources like a mofo, that is relevant to his character, i.e. being a lying doosh.

[Patriotsfatboy1 1,432]

What I'm saying is if he released two more years tax records as long as he was within the tax code then who the fock cares how much money he made, how much he saved or how much he gave. If he was circumventing the tax code (illegal) then we have an issue.

 

Every single person on this bored and 99.9% of Americans pay as little taxes as they have to. If it is legal to claim your house payment interest, you do. You take advantage of pre tax savings (401k) items I'm sure. You are simply taking advantage of the tax laws. We all do it, we all pay as little taxes as we HAVE to. So on and so forth.

 

If Mitt Romney was committing some kind of fraud (illegal) then yes that is a character issue. If not, then he was just doing what every single mutherfocker in the USA does with his taxes.

 

So yes, unless he was doing somethign illegal then I don't see how this is somehow some HUGE character issue that would decide if he is the best canidate for the job over Obama. That should be decided on the real, actual, issues.

 

It sounds like you are saying that the tax returns are the only question of his character. For me it is merely one of many. Because Romney is deviating from standards that his father started some 5 years ago, I have no choice but to question why.

 

BTW - there is a difference between the average person taking deductions that they are entitled to and millionaires paying people to try to find loopholes in the tax code. A good portion of George Romney's campaign was based on the fact that he was trying to do more than what was legally required of him.

[Recliner Pilot 61]

This thread is hilarious.

 

Not a single person here who is all butthurt over Romney releasing 2 years of returns would vote for him under ant circumstances.

If he released all of his returns going back to when he was a high school bully, and every onr was squeeky clean, not one of you would vote for him.

 

Carry on.

[phillybear 366]

This thread is hilarious.

 

Not a single person here who is all butthurt over Romney releasing 2 years of returns would vote for him under ant circumstances.

If he released all of his returns going back to when he was a high school bully, and every onr was squeeky clean, not one of you would vote for him.

 

Carry on.

 

And the same folks were outraged that Clinton was impeached.

 

The insanity carousel never stops spinning.

[Brad GLuckman 519]

trying their hardest to keep this in the news!. Here's an open letter from Obama's campaign manager to Romney's.

 

Dear Matt:

 

I am writing to ask again that the Governor release multiple years of tax returns, but also to make an offer that should address his concerns about the additional disclosures. Governor Romney apparently fears that the more he offers, the more our campaign will demand that he provide. So I am prepared to provide assurances on just that point: if the Governor will release five years of returns, I commit in turn that we will not criticize him for not releasing more--neither in ads nor in other public communications or commentary for the rest of the campaign.

 

This request for the release of five years, covering the complete returns for 2007-2012, is surely not unreasonable. Other Presidential candidates have released more, including the Governor's father who provided 12 years of returns. In the Governor's case, a five year release would appropriately span all the years that he has been a candidate for President. It would also help answer outstanding questions raised by the one return he has released to date, such as the range in the effective rates paid, the foreign accounts maintained, the foreign investments made, and the types of tax shelters used.

 

To provide these five years, the Governor would have to release only three more sets of returns in addition to the 2010 return he has released and the 2011 return he has pledged to provide. And, I repeat, the Governor and his campaign can expect in return that we will refrain from questioning whether he has released enough or pressing for more.

 

I look forward to your reply.

 

Jim Messina

Obama for America Campaign Manager

 

My link

 

Are they this desperate to avoid the issues? This is pathetic.

[Patriotsfatboy1 1,432]

This thread is hilarious.

 

Not a single person here who is all butthurt over Romney releasing 2 years of returns would vote for him under ant circumstances.

If he released all of his returns going back to when he was a high school bully, and every onr was squeeky clean, not one of you would vote for him.

 

Carry on.

 

I still have not decided yet who to vote for.

 

On one hand, I have questions about Romney's character and whether he is going to really try to cut spending (and do it in the right areas). On the other hand, I think that we have to stop the spending free-for-all and entitlement that is happening under the current administration.

 

I think that I may just throw up instead.

[KSB2424 3,148]

I still have not decided yet who to vote for.

 

On one hand, I have questions about Romney's character and whether he is going to really try to cut spending (and do it in the right areas). On the other hand, I think that we have to stop the spending free-for-all and entitlement that is happening under the current administration.

 

I think that I may just throw up instead.

Do you have ANY questions about Obamas character? Do you believe he will do everything he campaigns on (unlike in 2008)?

 

If your answer is yes and no in that order then just throw this whole 'character' nonsense out and vote on the issues.

[Patriotsfatboy1 1,432]

Do you have ANY questions about Obamas character? Do you believe he will do everything he campaigns on (unlike in 2008)?

 

If your answer is yes and no in that order then just throw this whole 'character' nonsense out and vote on the issues.

 

Right now, my answers are:

 

1. Yes, but not as many questions as I have about Romney. I have been lied to my face by Romney. I have not had the opportunity to have Obama lie to my face (in person).

2. Not at all. However, I at least know what I am getting with Obama (as bad as that is).

 

You seem to get hung up on black-and-white answers, when that is not even remotely possible.

[mobb_deep 920]

I still have not decided yet who to vote for.

 

On one hand, I have questions about Romney's character and whether he is going to really try to cut spending (and do it in the right areas). On the other hand, I think that we have to stop the spending free-for-all and entitlement that is happening under the current administration.

 

I think that I may just throw up instead.

 

+1.

 

Do you have ANY questions about Obamas character? Do you believe he will do everything he campaigns on (unlike in 2008)?

 

If your answer is yes and no in that order then just throw this whole 'character' nonsense out and vote on the issues.

 

Yes, I do question his character.

 

As for the issues, I don't think either of these guys will lower spending or reduce the deficit. I think Obama has much better foreign policy, largely because he's just a more likeable person, and Romney will create a more favorable environment for companies to hire (which they still won't be able to, because Americans aren't recklessly borrowing and spending money at the pace that pretty much drove the economy for the last 20+ years).

 

I think the common misconception here is that those of us who question Romney are Obama ###### gobbling lefties. I can only speak for myself when I say that I'm a registered independent, who has NEVER voted along one party line or another. I vote for each candidate as an individual, based on a number of factors (including but not limited to integrity, ethics and general charisma/likeability). I don't believe either of these two are fiscally conservative, so issues like foreign policy and transparency and general ethics play a big part for me this cycle. If Romney is sitting here claiming he's this god loving mormon with all this integrity and a strong ethical foundation, then is acting very suspicious about releasing documents that pretty much every candidate releases, I got to wonder WTF is this guy hiding.

[Frank M 181]

Honest question.

 

Instead of worrying about stuff like that, or the whole 'perception is reality' schtick that I've heard where it doesn't matter the truth it's what people 'perceive'. Instead of all that mularky, why not take the two canidates put them up side by side, look at their takes on all of the important issues like economy, education, debt, national security, health care, etc. and simply pick the guy that you think would help our country the most on the actual issues? Instead of worrying so much about nonsensical things like dogs on cars and taken out of context blurbs and stuff like that?

 

Seriously?

 

If you do that and you say, I'm voting for X as his belief system on important issues for our counrtry align with what I believe, then I'd have a lot more respect for folks. Moreso than stupid crap that doesn't matter or lies that people 'percieve'.

 

It's not schtick, it's what works. Do you think Obama is a Muslim? That he doesn't deserve to be president? That his birth certificate or college records are important issues? I guarantee you that a proportion of people will vote for Romney because they don't want a Muslim as President.

 

Not everyone who enters a voting booth has examined the issues.

[KSB2424 3,148]

You guys remind me of a co-worker. He is always stating how he is an Independent!@#! Yet on 95% of the issues he leans left. He went to an Obama rally. He mocks every republican he sees. He doesn' t like guys like Ron Paul all that much either and constantly picks out flaws.

 

Yet he's a independent, because one time back in 1996 he voted for a Libertarian congressman in his district.

 

Some of you folks would make fine politicians.

[mobb_deep 920]

You guys remind me of a co-worker. He is always stating how he is an Independent!@#! Yet on 95% of the issues he leans left. He went to an Obama rally. He mocks every republican he sees. He doesn' t like guys like Ron Paul all that much either and constantly picks out flaws.

 

Yet he's a independent, because one time back in 1996 he voted for a Libertarian congressman in his district.

 

Some of you folks would make fine politicians.

 

I would of voted for Ron Paul. HTH.

[KSB2424 3,148]

It's not schtick, it's what works. Do you think Obama is a Muslim? That he doesn't deserve to be president? That his birth certificate or college records are important issues? I guarantee you that a proportion of people will vote for Romney because they don't want a Muslim as President.

 

Not everyone who enters a voting booth has examined the issues.

Well at least we agree then. This whole 'release more tax records' is akin to the whole 'release your birth certificate' nonsense. We had birthers, now we have taxers.