Romney's Olympic Horse Ballet Dressage

[THE KOD]

But how does he define "middle-income"? The Republican presidential nominee defined it Friday as income of $200,000 to $250,000 a year and less.

The definition of "middle income" or the "middle class" is politically charged as Romney and President Barack Obama fight to win over working-class voters. Romney would be among the wealthiest presidents, if elected, and Democrats have repeatedly painted him as out of touch with average people.

Obama also has set his definition for "middle class" as families with income of up to $250,000 a year.

Romney's comments came an interview broadcast Friday on ABC's "Good Morning America."

"No one can say my plan is going to raise taxes on middle-income people, because principle number one is (to) keep the burden down on middle-income taxpayers," Romney told host George Stephanopoulos.

"Is $100,000 middle income?" Stephanopoulos asked.

"No, middle income is $200,000 to $250,000 and less," Romney responded
.................................................................

Willard is such a out of touch dumb ass.


we will be in a world of hurt with this guy


WWIII to Iran with WILLARD !


SHOULD BE FUN .

 

[THE KOD]

 

[THE KOD]

these are the sick fawks that burn down US embassys because someone said a bad thing
about their religion

 

[Skulnik]

these are the sick fawks that burn down US embassys because someone said a bad thing
about their religion

PussyChop cowards IMO.

:0074

 

[THE KOD]

GOP lawmakers say Romney campaign needs to change course

09/15/12 03:00 PM ET

Republican lawmakers are grumbling about the direction of Mitt Romney?s campaign and say he needs to change course.

The complaints come as polls show that Romney lost ground on President Obama following the party?s respective conventions in Tampa, Fla. and Charlotte, N.C.

The GOP members say Romney must do a better job of communicating to voters what to expect of him, either by making a bold pledge akin to George H.W. Bush?s 1988 ?no new taxes? promise or fleshing policy proposals with more details.

?Papa Bush was down after the Democratic convention in 1988, people worried he couldn?t come back and then he made his ?read my lips, no new taxes? pledge,? said one senator who requested anonymity.

The Republican said Romney should make a concise, bold promise to reform wasteful spending in Washington.

?He should say, ?I?m a money manager and I will manage your money in Washington.

Some GOP senators are worried that Romney has yet to give voters a clear vision of what to expect if he is to become president.:142smilie


Another GOP lawmaker said the aura Romney?s advisers are trying to create around the candidate has muddled the most compelling rationale for his candidacy: he is a no-nonsense problem-solver who can turn the economy around.:142smilie

?My advice is don?t try to turn him into something he?s not,? said the senator. You?re never going to turn him into a teddy bear.

?He needs to say if you elect me, this is what you?re going to get, someone who?s going to bring common sense to the White House,? he said.

Lawmakers spoke to The Hill about Romney?s campaign on background to avoid publicly criticizing their party?s nominee.

The Romney campaign did not comment for this article.

Two legislators said Romney?s image as a seasoned Mr. Fix-it is undermined by the perceived vagueness of his policy agenda.:SIB

Romney has taken hits from conservative allies and media critics alike for not fleshing out his positions on tax reform, entitlement reform and the war in Afghanistan with more detail.

?If you?re going to bring it to the American people, you?ve got to show details,? said the lawmaker who questioned what he saw as efforts during the GOP convention to cast Romney as a warm and fuzzy candidate.

But lawmakers who are more concerned about Romney?s campaign progress than protecting their turf, privately say the lack of detail on taxes could become a liability.

Another member said he fretted that middle-income voters may feel popular tax breaks such as the mortgage interest deduction under threat from Romney?s tax plan.

Romney?s performance on NBC?s ?Meet the Press? on Sunday failed to impress lawmakers who thought it lacked sufficient detail.

When pressed by host David Gregory about the details of his tax plan?s math, Romney answered vaguely.:142smilie
[Size]
?The specifics are these which is those principles I described are the heart of my policy,? he said. ?And I?ve indicated as well that ? that contrary to what the Democrats are saying, I?m not going to increase the tax burden on middle-income families. It would be absolutely wrong to do that.?[/Size]

Romney did not help his relationship with GOP lawmakers by criticizing the deal they struck with Obama and Democrats to cut the deficit in exchange for raising the debt limit. It led to an awkward exchange between Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and reporters Tuesday.

?Look I don?t have any interest in getting into a debate with the nominee of our party,? McConnell said. ?You?ll have to ask him why he said that.:shrug:

GOP senators by and large agree with conservative pundits who have criticized Romney?s communications strategy.

Wall Street Journal columnist and former Reagan speechwriter Peggy Noonan on Wednesday said Romney struck the wrong note by calling Obama?s response to the deadly attack on American diplomats in Libya ?disgraceful.?:SIB

?I don?t think in his statement on what happened in Libya last night and in his remarks today I don?t think he did himself any favor. At a moment of crisis like this, I think it?s kind of a water?s edge moment,? she said during an interview on WSJ Live.

?Romney looked weak today, I feel,? she added.:SIB

Senior Republicans did not rush to defend Romney?s slam of Obama in the midst of an international crisis. Sen. John McCain (Ariz.), the senior Republican on the Armed Services Committee, criticized Obama for having a ?feckless foreign policy? but declined during an appearance on NBC?s ?Today? show to comment on Romney?s response.:scared

Republican senators, even those who rank among his biggest supporters, have complained privately about the execution of his campaign.

?It could be better,? said one Senate supporter.

GOP senators have said for weeks that Romney would have a chance to gain traction in the race when he announced his vice presidential nominee and during the Tampa convention. With Election Day less than eight weeks away, however, Romney continues to trail Obama in national polls.

One GOP lawmaker said that Romney is behaving too cautiously by discussing few details about his plans for reforming the tax code and entitlement programs.

While Romney has embraced Vice Presidential nominee Paul Ryan?s budget plan, he has not offered an in-depth discussion of how he would implement Medicare reforms if elected. He added to confusion about his healthcare stance over the weekend by stating ?I?m not getting rid of all of healthcare reform? after repeatedly calling for the repeal of ?ObamaCare? earlier in his campaign.

?He doesn?t want to piss people off,? said one Republican senator.

The lawmaker expressed concern that Romney?s refusal to release more than one year of tax records combined with the lack of detail in his tax plan could create an impression among voters that he has a hidden agenda. This has allowed Democrats to gain some traction with their charge that the Romney-Ryan plan would raise taxes on the middle class, the source said.

?You really have none that anyone can remember and that?s what people are telling you,? said a Republican aide when asked about Romney?s 59-point roadmap.

The Republican senator said Romney has a chance to turn around the race during the October debates.

?The race will change when he shows he is presidential,? said the lawmaker
................................................................

what a dork Willard is

he always manages to say the wrong thing at the wrong times.

He is going to look silly in the debates.

He is unable to think on his feet.


" I will bet you 1o,ooo dollars, a car elevator, and a sum bitch dressage horse. "



what a dork the Neo Cons are pinning everything on.

pity really

 

[Skulnik]

When pressed by host David Gregory about the details of his tax plan?s math, Romney answered vaguely

Scott, if he tells, Obama will sign an Executive Order to implement Romneys plan, then it becomes his, Obama is like that.

:0008

 

[THE KOD]

When pressed by host David Gregory about the details of his tax plan?s math, Romney answered vaguely

Scott, if he tells, Obama will sign an Executive Order to implement Romneys plan, then it becomes his, Obama is like that.

:0008

..............................................................

Ronnie

Williard has no plan. What a dork

He just wants to be President.

you know it, I know it, America knows it

nuff said

pity really

 

[THE KOD]

Moments like this are not uncommon in presidential elections, and when they come, they tend to matter. For unlike the posturing and platitudes that constitute the bulk of what occurs on the campaign trail, big external events provide voters with something authentic and valuable: a real-time test of the temperament, character, and instincts of the men who would be commander-in-chief. And when it comes to the past week, the divergence between the resulting report cards could hardly be more stark.

Anyone doubting the potential significance of that disparity need only think back to precisely four years ago, when the collapse of Lehman Brothers triggered a worldwide financial panic. In the ten days that followed, Obama put on a master class in self-possession and unflappability under pressure; his rival, John McCain, did the opposite. When the smoke cleared, the slight lead McCain had held in the national polls was gone and Obama had seized the lead. Though another month remained in the campaign, the race was effectively over.

For Romney, the first blaring sign that his reaction to the assault on the consulate in Benghazi had badly missed the mark was the application of the phrase ?Lehman *moment? to his press availability on the morning of September 12. Here was *America under attack, with four dead on foreign soil. And here was Romney, defiantly refusing to adopt a tone of sobriety, solemnity, or seriousness, instead attempting to score cheap political points, doubling down on his criticism from the night before that the Obama administration had been ?disgraceful? for ?sympathiz[ing]? with the attackers?criticism willfully ignoring the chronology of events, the source of the statement he was pillorying, the substance of the statement, and the circumstances under which it was made.:scared


That the left heaped scorn on Romney?s gambit came as no surprise. But the right reacted almost as harshly?with former aides to John McCain, George W. Bush, and Ronald Reagan creating an on-the-record chorus of disapproval, while countless other Republican officials and operatives chimed in anonymously. ?This is worse than a Lehman moment,? says a senior GOP operative. ?*McCain made mistakes of impulsiveness, but this was a deliberate and premeditated move, and it totally revealed Romney?s character; it revealed him as completely craven and his candidacy as serving no higher purpose than his ambition.?




This bipartisan condemnation would have been bad enough in itself, but its negative effects were amplified because it fed into a broader narrative emerging in the media across the ideological spectrum: that Romney is losing, knows he is losing, and is starting to panic. This story line is, of course, rooted in reality, given that every available data point since the conventions suggests that Obama is indeed, for the first time, opening up a lead outside the margin of *error nationally and in the battleground states. So the press corps is now on the lookout for signs of desperation in Romney and is finding them aplenty?most vividly in his reaction to Libya, but even before that, in his post-convention appearance on Meet the Press, where he embraced some elements of Obamacare (only to have his campaign walk back his comments later the same day).
............................................................

That bolded statement is the most intelligent thing I have read in a Huffington article in a long time.

 

[THE KOD]

A senior Israeli official signalled on Saturday that there would be no unilateral attack on Iran in the coming weeks, saying that international pressure had kept Tehran's controversial nuclear programme in check."

So, Mitt, it seems Obama's foreign policy approach was correct while you run over there and pal around with Netanyahu and declare war on Iran.

Israel had no intention of starting war with Iran.

But Netanyahu sure did your bidding for you by coming over here and demanding a meeting with the president to try to bully him into action against Iran. So, your attempt to enlist a "foreign agent" to make the president look bad just didn't work, did it, Mitt?

Obama was right not to meet with him...and Obama will likely need to get a butt-sized chap stick to deal with all of the kissing Netanyahu will be doing when Obama is re-elected.

So, Mitt, do you still want to start your war with Iran, or is sending troops to Syria to find those WMDs (like you said before) enough to satisfy your need for a war your sons will never serve in?


......................................................


Mitt ditched his military obligation as he was in France when the Vietnam war was going on .
Two years of missionary position rounded out his France campaign.

Notice none of his sons have ever worn a military uniform.

Now he wants to start WWIII with Israel vs Iran
Its always the draft dodgers that want to start wars. George W comes to mind exept at least he hid in the US.

nice work Willard

Willard is beginning to unravel .

pity really

 

[THE KOD]

1). Mitt Romney has no guiding principles when it comes to foreign policy -- or anything else for that matter -- but one: his own personal ambition. Tuesday night Romney demonstrated once again that he would take any cheap shot that he thought would serve his ambition to be president, regardless of its impact on American national security or our people on the ground.

Of course this is nothing new. Romney has demonstrated time and time again that he has no lasting commitment to principle whatsoever. He has gone from being pro-choice to ardently anti-abortion; morphed from a Massachusetts moderate to a "severe conservative"; demonstrated his willingness to buy companies, load them with debt, bleed them dry and destroy the lives of workers and communities all to make money for himself and his investors.

After favoring immigration reform in the past, Romney became the most anti-immigrant major presidential candidate in modern history.

Romney drafted and passed RomneyCare and then promised to repeal a similar bill when one was passed by President Obama and a Democratic Congress. Why? Because that's what the thought was necessary to get the Republican nomination for president.

Romney has no North Star guiding his behavior except his desire to enhance his own personal wealth and his own driving ambition.

Someone like that is the last guy you want to trust to make the tough decisions to protect American national security. Great statesmen are people who think more about the next generation than the next election. They are people who are willing to take the political heat because they are committed to doing what is right to protect the American people. They are heroes of John Kennedy's Profiles in Courage, not the men described in John Dean's book on the Nixon White House, Blind Ambition.

2). Mitt Romney has no vision. In his acceptance speech to the Republican Convention he made fun of President Obama's concern for global climate change and his commitment toward the elimination of nuclear weapons. Romney actually opposed passage of the START II Treaty with Russia that reduced nuclear weapons to their current levels.

Romney flat-out opposes -- makes fun of -- investments in renewable energy sources that would begin the process of freeing us from the tyranny of Big Oil -- and oil dictators -- and addresses the problem of climate change.

Rather than support movements to limit the exploding growth in the world's population, Romney actually opposes support for birth control.

Have you ever heard word one from Romney about protecting our natural resources, or investment in de-salinization, or strengthening the international co-operation needed to deal with cyber-security, or frankly any of these critical issues?

Mitt Romney seems to have absolutely no interest in or knowledge of history or the forces that are changing the world. And he certainly has never expressed a long-term view of how he might hope to shape the world as president of the United States. Let's face it, the guy is shallow.

Voters correctly want leaders with vision, because as the great baseball player Yogi Berra used to say: "If you don't know where you're going, any road will take you there."

3). The Romney-Ryan team has less experience in foreign policy than any two candidates for America's top offices since World War II.

Barry Goldwater may have scared the bejesus out of many Americans, but at least he was a Lt. Colonel in the Army Air Corp during World War II and had served on the Armed Services Committee in the Senate.

When Senator Barack Obama ran for president, he chose the Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Joe Biden, as his running mate.

Collectively Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan have zero foreign policy experience. And it shows.

4). Romney has demonstrated he has no capacity to empathize with other people. He has no idea how to put himself in their shoes -- or even to understand how they hear the things he is saying. That's one of the main reasons why, as Senator Kerry said at the Democratic Convention, Romney's "foreign policy tour" earlier this summer was more like a "blooper reel." It's why, when it comes to foreign affairs, Romney is a bull in the china closet.

Romney seems incapable of understanding that when you're asked about your opinion of preparations for the London Olympics in London days before the event, the Brits might be offended when (presumably to demonstrate how much he knew about running Olympic games) he questioned their readiness. He apparently had no clue that Palestinians might take offense when he said he thought that their economic problems stemmed from their "culture."

Romney is typical of wealthy people who think they are very "cosmopolitan" because they can jet around the world and stay in first-class hotels, but don't have a clue how normal people -- or other cultures -- experience the world. He is upper-class parochial. He thinks everyone thinks and talks and believes the same way as his classmates at prep school or colleagues in the Bain boardroom.

5). Romney has surrounded himself with many of the same neocon foreign policy advisers that got America into the horrific war in Iraq. One of those advisers, Richard Williamson, actually had the audacity to argue that "respect for America has gone down" under President Obama. Maybe in some parallel universe.

In fact, every international poll showed that George Bush, Dick Cheney and their neocon crew caused respect for the United States to plummet to new lows. And under President Obama respect for America and its values has massively increased. But then again, as the Romney campaign has made clear, they won't allow their campaign to be governed by "fact checkers."

If we needed reminding, this week made indelibly clear that a guy with no principles except his own ambition, and no vision whatsoever, will allow himself to be led around by the nose by the passionate Neo-Cons who want a restoration of the Bush-Cheney years. Romney's performance should serve as a warning to all Americans: If you liked the Iraq War, you'll love Mitt Romney's foreign policy.
..........................................................

Ouch Willard

Ouch Ouch Ouch Ouch..........

 

[THE KOD]

Romney's idea: "I'll give you all the details after the election, but not now, because you wouldn't vote for me."


................................................................

Wisconsin congressman Paul Ryan, the GOP vice presidential candidate, on Saturday said that he and Mitt Romney would improve the economy, preserve Medicare and strengthen defense.

and he forgot to say cut taxes and -

Everyone gets a pony !

:142smilie

 

[THE KOD]

BEIJING, Sept 14 (Reuters) - U.S. Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney's attacks on China and promise to name the country a currency manipulator if elected are foolish and hypocritical, China's official Xinhua news agency said on Friday.

In a strongly worded English-language commentary, Xinhua said Romney's anti-China rhetoric, if converted into policy upon him assuming office, would trigger a catastrophic trade war and damage the already weak global economic recovery.

"It is rather ironic that a considerable portion of this China-battering politician's wealth was actually obtained by doing business with Chinese companies before he entered politics," Xinhua wrote.

"Such blaming-China-on-everything remarks are as false as they are foolish, for it has never been a myth that pushing up the value of China's currency would be of little use to boost the chronically slack job market of the world's sole superpower, not to mention to magically turn the poor U.S. economic performance around."

Romney has repeatedly pledged to get tougher with China on its trade and currency practices, including pledging to quickly declare China a currency manipulator if elected.

His opponent, President Barack Obama, has accused Romney, who founded and led private equity firm Bain Capital, of outsourcing jobs to both India and China.

China says the yuan's exchange rate is essentially set by market forces, and that the currency has appreciated about 30 percent against the dollar since a landmark revaluation in 2005.

The Chinese government has generally been silent in the run-up to the November presidential poll due to a policy of non-interference in the affairs of other countries.

But state media has waded into the debate to lambaste what it sees as attempts to play the "China card", in a reflection of official thinking and concern the country's name is being unfairly dragged through the mud overseas.

Xinhua said such China-bashing had been "a cancer in U.S. electoral politics, seriously plaguing the relations between the two countries.

"It has also become a handy tool for U.S. politicians who try to court the votes and support of ill-informed voters by ratcheting up antagonistic sentiment towards China, while truly serious social and economic woes within the United States have been left unfixed."

The United States should "put its own fiscal house back in order, substantially slash its tremendous military expenditure, and optimise its economic structure", it added.:SIB

"It is advisable that politicians, including Romney, should abandon ... short-sighted China-bashing tricks and adopt at least a little bit of statesmanship on China-U.S. ties."

................................................................
Willard . dont be such a dork

Willard is clueless

pity really

 

[THE KOD]

THIS is why he is not " killing Obama"

Let's see...

Gays - deny them the right to marry, reinstate

DODT, clamp down on DOMA--CHECK

Women- defund planned parenthood, support states in stopping abortion rights-- CHECK

Middle class- increase taxes $2000 per family --CHECK

Latinos- self deport, --CHECK

Education- cut funding for pell grants and the entire Ed. Budget 40%-- CHECK

The poor - cut funding for Medicaid, welfare and food stamps --CHECK

The American workforce - support states in Union busting and a federal stance on eliminating the minimum wage -- CHECK

Health care - repeal The Affordable Health Care Act -- CHECK

Senior Citizens - turn Medicare into a voucher system and destroy SS--CHECK

Military-add $2trillion to the budget , and evoke a preemptive strike against Iran--CHECK

Committee appointments -- Expand "Faith Based" Overlords to Chair all Committees-- CHECK

The wealthy, corporations and big business - give big tax breaks -- CHECK


,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

Nice going Willard.

Keep it up.

 

[Duff Miver]

Romney's idea: "I'll give you all the details after the election, but not now, because you wouldn't vote for me."

<script type="text/javascript" src="http://charts.realclearpolitics.com/widget_embed.js?id=1171&width=450&height=338&key=general_election_romney_vs_obama"></script>


:00x4

 

[THE KOD]

A candidate must seem to at least represent the majority of the American
people not just the 1% and corporate interest. Dismissing 47 percent
of Americans as government-dependent ?victims,? is true class warfare no
matter how Republicans want to spin the statement. Romney mess up
plain and simple and while hardcore Republicans will not admit it they
cannot deny the fact that even Vegas odds have increased against their
candidate.

No, I am not sayig that entitlements should continue for all without criticism or change. Unless your talking about SS, then they should continue with possible changes. What I am saying is it is wrong to demoralize the people that do get help. Should college students not get Pell Grants or Gov't backed loans? Should we not give Vets medical care and support if they are injured serving? Romney is not acknowledging that the president is buying votes, Romney instead is saying that he is basicly writing these people off and he does not care about them. And the worst statement is that these people will not take personal responsibility for themselves. It is shamful. It is wrong. I've now seen several articles that make the point of many millionaires and wealthy people are not paying any federal taxes because of deduction and write offs. Romney has now insulted those people also. But instead of proposing to change the tax code to reduce that part of the non-tax payers, he is proposing to reduce the tax burden on more wealthy people. This is what I consider talking from both sides of his mouth. It's either bad with no personal responsibility or we should make their burden less.
If you don't know any conservative person who votes based on race, then you should travel the country. I hear republicans talking about the black man in the white house everyday. I live in a red state and the attitudes of some here are disturbing. There is no excuse for it, but there is also no possible way to state that it doesn't exist. It exists in very large numbers.


Why would the people vote for someone that doesn't have our best interest. Being President shouldn't be about who has the most votes at the end of the Ballot, it shout be about the party that has the best interest for our country. I know i wouldn't vote for someone thats out for the richer to get richer and the poor stay poor. Would we vote for someone that stood up and told us that they didn't care about us No, so why would we vote for Mitch Romney, someone that's just plain out Opaque.


I am 62 years old and have it well figured out. Romney is an elitist arrogant entitled One percent criminal.


Not irrelevant if he was granted amnesty for his illegal Swiss accounts like so many of the 1% were. And I think knowing he pays a much lower rate than me is very relevant since he advocates Bush's failed tax policies.


No, many rich people are actual human beings. But just like some poor people, some are , you know, pricks. See, Romney does have something in common with some poor people.


Yeah right Barro - just like the dog on top of the family car did him in - why don't you write about your boy's policy turning the middle east into a war zone.


Nope, Obama may tip the snob meter a little, but ole car elevator draft dodger Mitt puts it off the scale!!


Robert, they propose to be a party of 'small government', yet they want to use the force of federal government to dictate what she can and cannot do with her body. Not only is that wrong, but they've always turned out to be the party of 'big government' when it comes to rights over a woman's own body.


ll the REAL Mitt Romney please stand up! How can you TRUST someone that talks one language behind closed doors and another when he is on the campaign trail? I just cannot get behind a candidate that is excluding 47% of our population thinking they are all losers. This guy should NEVER have considered a run for public office - NEVER!!!!!!


My father the 87 yr old WWII veteran on SS and medicare a man who worked all of his life. My mother the same. My grandparents before they passed the same. All people who worked, paid taxes, contributed to America and lived their elder years on SS and Medicare. Moochers the lot of them, NOT. Rumor has it the in 5 of his past generations no Romney's were veterans. Perhaps we should begin looking for moochers there.



Romney's Daddy paid for his boarding school, his IVY LEAGUE education and his first home. Then he formed Bain capitol with some of daddy's business friends and proceeded to 'pull himself up out of the muck by his bootstraps'. A truly self made man, if self = rich daddy. Not to mention the coward dodged the draft 4 times.


10.3% were elderly who usually do not work so do not pay these taxes.

6.9% were non-elderly poor who work, but make less than $20,000 a year. Too poor to even pay social security or medicare taxes. However, they do often pay property taxes and of course sales taxes.

1% of "others" who are often wealthy people who are able to use deductions to eliminate their federal tax burden.

It should be stated that prior to 2007, the standard figure for those who do not pay federal income tax is 40% - so even under Bush, this figure was typical.

arned for SS. Where did you get the idea that people who make under $20,000 per year don't pay payroll taxes. I have a paycheck stub that proves this and also a tax return that shows federal income tax paid.


I was gonna reply about seniors, and the military being in the 47%, or how Romney took government assistance to to tune of millions when he bailed out the olympics (which he saved singlehanded). But I can tell you're a ditto head, so why bother?


................................................................

i love blogs like this

the truth always comes out

:142smilie

 

[THE KOD]

whats funny to me is that in atl there is Boortz who says this same thing everyday.

the moochers and parasites are killing America


then Romney says it and it goes public and Willard is in a world of shit over it.

nice going neo con radio

 

[THE KOD]

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/pJpebtIXROw" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>


first and last time Rush L ever went on Letterman

Rush called Hillary a hood ornament and then

Letterman called Rush a no neck fat fawk at one point. :142smilie

 

[THE KOD]

WASHINGTON -- Mitt Romney on Friday released a letter from his tax accountant, PricewaterhouseCoopers, promising that Romney paid an "average annual effective federal rate" of 20.2 percent over 20 years. The number is being released instead of the tax returns themselves, and is being used to rebuff Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's charge that Romney didn't pay taxes over a 10-year period.

But it is a meaningless figure.

According to the letter from PwC avowing the number, it is based on Romney's adjusted gross income. That means that, for instance, if Romney made investment profit of $20 million, but had losses of, say, $19.9 million, his adjusted gross income would only be $100,000. Paying 20.2 percent of $100,000 would cost Romney just over $20,000.

If Reid's comment is interpreted strictly -- that Romney paid literally $0 in taxes over 10 years -- then the PwC letter undermines that charge. But if Romney paid only a very small amount -- say, $20,000 on $20 million -- it would be hard to award Reid many pinocchios for calling that nothing.

Such a low-payment scenario is considered quite plausible by tax experts, who noted that investors can pick which investments to realize each year to maximize their tax benefit. In a year such as 2008, when the global markets tanked, an investor would likely have more than enough losses to offset gains. Indeed, Romney's 2010 tax returns show a carryover capital loss credit, meaning he had more losses than he could use the year before.

In other words, without seeing Romney's actual return -- or at least without knowing what Romney declared as his adjusted gross income -- it's impossible to know if the rate he paid bears any relation to Romney's economic reality

..............................................................


So Willard makes a stab at silencing the masses.

But he aint told anything

he is fawking hiding shit


this guy is golden

 

[THE KOD]

But I'll subscribe to a theory advanced by David Brooks in The New York Times today: that Romney is a "decent man who says stupid things because he is pretending to be something he is not -- some sort of cartoonish government-hater."

Maybe that's what Romney thought he needed to be to cut the deal. But the problem is, presidential politics isn't just business. It's personal.
....................................................................

 

[THE KOD]

Herman Cain, the one-time frontrunner for the 2012 GOP presidential nomination, offered reporters in Florida Thursday some speculation on what could have been if he had remained in the race.

According to the Gainesville Sun, Cain said he would have a "substantial lead" over President Barack Obama if he were the Republican nominee instead of Mitt Romney.
...................................................................


Too bad Herman couldnt have kept his dick in his pants

coulda woulda shoulda gets you no where