Mitt Romney’s unnecessary lie - Salon.com (http://www.salon.com/2012/07/12/mitt_romneys_unnecessary_lie/)


you’re planning on running for president, here are a few quick things you should probably do:
•Make sure your tax returns and finances are in order
•Make sure you’re not blatantly lying about some major portion of your biography.

Mitt Romney seems to have decided to do neither, I guess because he thought no one would check? Maybe Romney should have taken his fortune out of the various offshore tax havens where he stores it before he decided to run for president, because the thing is every presidential candidate is going to be prodded to release his tax returns and financial information. If you don’t want to be criticized for a Swiss bank account and a mysterious $102 million IRA, either don’t run for president or don’t have those things!



........:coffee:

This is right out of the Obama liars handbook.

...

Mitt Romney’s unnecessary lie - Salon.com (http://www.salon.com/2012/07/12/mitt_romneys_unnecessary_lie/)


you’re planning on running for president, here are a few quick things you should probably do:
•Make sure your tax returns and finances are in order
•Make sure you’re not blatantly lying about some major portion of your biography.

Mitt Romney seems to have decided to do neither, I guess because he thought no one would check? Maybe Romney should have taken his fortune out of the various offshore tax havens where he stores it before he decided to run for president, because the thing is every presidential candidate is going to be prodded to release his tax returns and financial information. If you don’t want to be criticized for a Swiss bank account and a mysterious $102 million IRA, either don’t run for president or don’t have those things!



........:coffee:

Old lies by the Obama water-carriers that were debunked yesterday. Are you that far behind the times?

Associated Press Repeats Discredited Bain Smear


The Democrats’ smear is based largely on ignorance of securities law. In her phone call today, Obama staffer Stephanie Cutter cited SEC filings which listed Romney as a “controlling person” after 1999. If Romney was controlling Bain Capital, Cutter argued, then obviously he was responsible for Bain Capital’s investments after 1999 and has been lying about his relationship with the company. But being a “controlling person” doesn’t mean that you are running the company. The term is defined in the SEC’s Rule 405:The term “control” (including the terms “controlling,” “controlled by,” and “under common control with,” means the possession, direct or indirect, of the power to direct or cause the direction of the management and policies of a person, whether through the ownership of voting securities, by contract, or otherwise.
Associated Press Repeats Discredited Bain Smear | Power Line (http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2012/07/associated-press-repeats-discredited-bain-smear.php)

BTW, the blog is written by lawyers. I guess the ad calling Obama a liar is true on this subject too.

Old lies by the Obama water-carriers that were debunked yesterday. Are you that far behind the times?

Associated Press Repeats Discredited Bain Smear | Power Line (http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2012/07/associated-press-repeats-discredited-bain-smear.php)

BTW, the blog is written by lawyers. I guess the ad calling Obama a liar is true on this subject too.

Why does it not surprise me that everyone on the Obama team is that ignorant of the way businesses operate?

On another note, a reporter yesterday asked Jay Carney about Obama's college records, to which he sneered. We're supposed to be all atwitter about Romney's financial past, which he has disclosed, but something as insignificant as college transcripts are off limits.

By the way, John Kerry was every bit as miffed at the thought - until they were leaked. Yeah. He sucked at being a student even WORSE than Bush. There's usually a reason for hiding information.

If I was on Team Obama, I wouldn't wanna talk about the job he's done either.

Well since the current POTUS has zero experience in business, never turned a profit other than with his lying ass book (cry me another river Barry on how bad it was going to Punaho, the 2nd most prestigious and hard to get into H.S. in Hawaii) and the only money he ever raised was either campaign money or our taxes?

Without class and racial warfare in his campaign, wtf does he actually have to run on?

Romney is evil because he made a lot of money for himself and his investors... Wait for it.... "at the expense of the poor and middle class"....

Freakin stupid libtards.

Romney is evil because he made a lot of money for himself and his investors... Wait for it.... "at the expense of the poor and middle class"....

Freakin stupid libtards.


It finally dawned on me that liberals react to wealth as though acquiring it is some kind of zero sum game - if one person gets richer, another must get poorer. Thus, the wealthy are only that way by taking more than their fair share, and social justice demands they "give back".

It emphatically does not work that way - wealth is created. Otherwise, we're all still in the stone age trading furs for food.

But, once you get that they think this way, you can understand their grumbling over "the rich" - at least, the rich on the conservative side. They never rail against the rich on their own side, even if they're stingier with their largesse.

It finally dawned on me that liberals react to wealth as though acquiring it is some kind of zero sum game - if one person gets richer, another must get poorer. Thus, the wealthy are only that way by taking more than their fair share, and social justice demands they "give back".

It emphatically does not work that way - wealth is created. Otherwise, we're all still in the stone age trading furs for food.

But, once you get that they think this way, you can understand their grumbling over "the rich" - at least, the rich on the conservative side. They never rail against the rich on their own side, even if they're stingier with their largesse.

Oh, I beg to differ. Market is market. People are only going to eat so many burgers a day. McDonald's mission is to see that as many of them are theirs as possible.

Now, wealth can be and is created when markets are under served or you've created a new one. MS created enormous new wealth. Staples put mom and pop office supply shops out of business. WalMart put most everyone else out of business. They created wealth for themselves but, there is absolutely loss in many ways. If mom and pop are nimble enough to go be part of a big box food chain somewhere, somehow, good for them. If not, they end up being checkers. The differences between small business and new business, the difference between creating market share, new pies, and getting more of existing pies is very real. This is not to excuse inefficiencies and waste. It is to say that quality of life, who were are MUST be more important than every last dollar or America is nothing but money. Too Big to Fail is toxic to individuality.

The GOP is all too happy to use government to create wealth in many of the same ways as the left.

Well since the current POTUS has zero experience in business, .

And just how did the MBA before him do, huh?

Obama is clueless. What's Dubbya's excuse?

And just how did the MBA before him do, huh?

Obama is clueless. What's Dubbya's excuse?

Once again, firmly proving my point that you have Bush Derangement Syndrome, because you can't resist taking a shot at him when it isn't germane to the subject.

"How 'bout them O's"
"They don't suck as much as George Bush"

Dude, get over it. One day some kid's gonna ask "who the hell is George Bush?"

Once again, firmly proving my point that you have Bush Derangement Syndrome, because you can't resist taking a shot at him when it isn't germane to the subject.

"How 'bout them O's"
"They don't suck as much as George Bush"

Dude, get over it. One day some kid's gonna ask "who the hell is George Bush?"

Or, you have Bush Denial Syndrome.

The man is an MBA for crying out loud. It is fine to criticize Obama; he has no experience. He's done a poor job. So, what of the MBA? It's one of the reasons we wanted the guy; "He's not a lawyer! He's an MBA, by golly!" So, what of results?

That my points and questions make you feel uncomfortable is your problem, not mine.

:buddies:

Oh, I beg to differ. Market is market. People are only going to eat so many burgers a day. McDonald's mission is to see that as many of them are theirs as possible.

Now, wealth can be and is created when markets are under served or you've created a new one. MS created enormous new wealth. Staples put mom and pop office supply shops out of business.

I'm not sure you realize what I'm talking about. The idea that there is a finite amount of wealth and that commerce just moves it around is an old idea finally addressed by Adam Smith and dispensed with ever since. Liberals operate on the premise that the entire wealth in the world is finite, thus, rich people get rich ONLY by taking it from the mouths of the poor. In your first sentence, you dismiss the notion, only to affirm it in the next paragraph.

Liberals whine about social justice and actually use the phrase "give BACK" because they honestly believe that the rich are rich by TAKING wealth from those with less. Since they don't "need" that money as much as the poor, it is wrong for them to keep it.

Fundamentally, wealth is raw materials, labor, craftsmanship and knowledge. Rocks in the ground becomes a gun in your hand. Sand on the beach and rare chemicals become electronics and computers. We create wealth by the sweat of our brow, the ability to transform raw materials and the knowledge of what to do with them.

Making a living, getting richer, marketing, sales, competition - that's another discussion COMPLETELY. I'm talking about the WHY of how much money you have versus how much money there is in the whole world. Liberals think you should distribute it evenly - I say, go out and actually make it yourself.

Dude, get over it. One day some kid's gonna ask "who the hell is George Bush?"

Now that I do find disturbing, the very idea that time is going to erase the wars and their results, TARP, Med Part D, explosion of the housing bubble, runaway immigration.

Washington
Lincoln
Grant
Teddy
Wilson
Hoover
FDR
LBJ
Nixon


It takes two seconds for anyone remotely interested in our government to being able to describe, in essence, what those guys were about, their time.
Clinton will forever be President Blue Dress.

And you think, for one second, 43 is going to just fade away, obscure, like Benjamin Harrison?

You are in denial.

Or, you have Bush Denial Syndrome.

Which one of us brought George Bush into this discussion? The thread is about Mitt.

Your turn.

Hint - it was you. On every thread, it's gonna be you.

Dude, the guy is retired. Give it up already.

Or, you have Bush Denial Syndrome.

The man is an MBA for crying out loud. It is fine to criticize Obama; he has no experience. He's done a poor job. So, what of the MBA? It's one of the reasons we wanted the guy; "He's not a lawyer! He's an MBA, by golly!" So, what of results?

That my points and questions make you feel uncomfortable is your problem, not mine.

:buddies:

Maybe it's because it always comes from you. You have railed against Bush so many times that it doesn't matter if your point is 100% valid. As soon as you mention Bush, most of us think "crap, there he goes again" and completely shut out anything you may be saying.

You use Bush the way that some others use Hitler. It's gotten so old that it has lost any effectiveness at all.

Let someone else bring him up for once.

I'm not sure you realize what I'm talking about. The idea that there is a finite amount of wealth and that commerce just moves it around is an old idea finally addressed by Adam Smith and dispensed with ever since. Liberals operate on the premise that the entire wealth in the world is finite, thus, rich people get rich ONLY by taking it from the mouths of the poor. In your first sentence, you dismiss the notion, only to affirm it in the next paragraph. .

I'm not sure you realize what I am talking about. In some markets, mature ones, there is only so much to go around. At some point, X number of restaurants are simply fighting over the market share and not creating new wealth. In other markets, undeserved or new ones, there is wealth to be created.

Libs have a point. You are correct to point out they see all economies that way and are wrong to do so. The right is wrong to argue that every problem is fixable by free markets. There are core functions only gummint can serve within the ideas of what America is.

And you think, for one second, 43 is going to just fade away, obscure, like Benjamin Harrison?

Yup. Like Taylor. And Fillmore. You have to be a despot for history to remember you as being lousy at your job, and despots are usually kind of good at what they do. They just do something awful.

Mission accomplished. You killed the thread, which I suppose was your intent.

Maybe it's because it always comes from you. point taken You have railed against Bush so many times that it doesn't matter if your point is 100% valid. That says more about you than it does me. Obama stinks on the economy. So did the MBA before him. The reason is that their policies are very similar. I'd like us to learn from that. We, the people, chose Mitt. You can see my concern, yes? As soon as you mention Bush, most of us clearly, it is not most of 'us'. think "crap, there he goes again" and completely shut out anything you may be saying.

You use Bush the way that some others use Hitler. It's gotten so old that it has lost any effectiveness at all. Again, that is a reflection on you, not me. Hitler was evil from the get go and delivered. Bush had great promise for good and great opportunity and screwed this nation over but bad and bequeathed us Obama.

Let someone else bring him up for once.

I'm all ears. :popcorn:

I'm all ears. :popcorn:

Okay Cleopatra. Keep on keeping on.

Yup. Like Taylor. And Fillmore. You have to be a despot for history to remember you as being lousy at your job, and despots are usually kind of good at what they do. They just do something awful.

Mission accomplished. You killed the thread, which I suppose was your intent.

This was the point I responded to;

Well since the current POTUS has zero experience in business, .

Potus has zero business experience = bad econmy. What did we expect.

So.....


"And what of the MBA before him?" Maybe it's not business experience.

That that makes you uncomfortable doesn't change that my response was in keeping with the thread.

As I say, your problems and issues are not mine. That you don't think my question was in context of the thread is your problem. Clearly, it was.

:buddies:

Okay Cleopatra. Keep on keeping on.

Hey! Didn't George Bush put babies in baskets and ship them down the river or something like that?


:lol:

Hey! Didn't George Bush put babies in baskets and ship them down the river or something like that?


:lol:

Cleopatra and Moses were only separated by about 800 years. Kind of like putting Charlemagne and Napoleon on the same battlefield, or Patton against King Arthur.

Cleopatra and Moses were only separated by about 800 years. Kind of like putting Charlemagne and Napoleon on the same battlefield, or Patton against King Arthur.

Oh. Drat.

back to the 'ol drawing board...

"George Bush is a dick because_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________"


:lol:

Or, you have Bush Denial Syndrome.

The man is an MBA for crying out loud. It is fine to criticize Obama; he has no experience. He's done a poor job. So, what of the MBA? It's one of the reasons we wanted the guy; "He's not a lawyer! He's an MBA, by golly!" So, what of results?

That my points and questions make you feel uncomfortable is your problem, not mine.

:buddies:

He did a ####ty job, too; who disagrees with that :confused:

Once again, firmly proving my point that you have Bush Derangement Syndrome, because you can't resist taking a shot at him when it isn't germane to the subject.

"How 'bout them O's"
"They don't suck as much as George Bush"

Dude, get over it. One day some kid's gonna ask "who the hell is George Bush?"

Much like Obama Derangement Syndrome runs rampant around here.

Any moneys held in foreign banks/brokerages owned by US Citizen must be declared annually on TDF form. Foreign Banks/brokers prepare and file 1099's for money made in overseas accounts. There is no more hidden accounts allowed. Keeping money in foreign accounts lets one buy investment instruments not available through US firms. Only advantage.

Much like Obama Derangement Syndrome runs rampant around here.

Help me out on that one. Is Obama the current prez? Is Obama running for re-election?

He did a ####ty job, too; who disagrees with that :confused:

Fewer than the number of people who used to think he did a good or OK job as his policies and longer examination of them unfold. It's been an evolution in coming to grips with his choices and the results. Now that most of the Middle East is now pretty much being run by Islamist's and A'stan is as bad, if not worse, than before, as well as Pakistan, even less people are arguing 'well, wait and see!' on those issues as well.

You freely admit far more people see Bush policy for what it was now than, say, 3 years, or even 2 years ago? I think we are clearly seeing less and less apologists. :shrug:

Who did Bush surround himself with?

Who did Obama surround himself with?

And just how did the MBA before him do, huh?

Obama is clueless. What's Dubbya's excuse?

Where in what I wrote do you see anything about having a degree makes you qualified? Bush43 is a liberal. And his 'business' experience was pretty pathetic overall...

what business experience is that ....


..... and what business did Obama Work at


:tap:

what business experience is that ....


..... and what business did Obama Work at


:tap:


...."goverment".:coffee:

...."goverment".:coffee:

omg

omg

Yes...'tis only because life forms like "Giantone" can vote.

This was the point I responded to;

Potus has zero business experience = bad econmy. What did we expect.

So.....

"And what of the MBA before him?" Maybe it's not business experience.

That that makes you uncomfortable doesn't change that my response was in keeping with the thread.

As I say, your problems and issues are not mine. That you don't think my question was in context of the thread is your problem. Clearly, it was.

:buddies:

For the most part Romney was wildly successful, what successes did Bush have?

For the most part Romney was wildly successful, what successes did Bush have?

Well, he;

passed no child left behind
did med part D
created the DHS and TSA
gave us the Patriot Act
fed the military/industrial complex 2 wars
gave us millions and millions of brand new Americans
saved the UAW
got oil prices up to levels suppliers were happy about
and gave us Too Big To Fail as the new world order; TARP

Then, on the next day...

By an measure, if you like an active federal government, he was wildly successful. I don't think he gets near the recognition he deserves.

Well, he;

passed no child left behind
did med part D
created the DHS and TSA
gave us the Patriot Act
fed the military/industrial complex 2 wars
gave us millions and millions of brand new Americans
saved the UAW
got oil prices up to levels suppliers were happy about
and gave us Too Big To Fail as the new world order; TARP

Then, on the next day...

By an measure, if you like an active federal government, he was wildly successful. I don't think he gets near the recognition he deserves.

Just goes to show how freakin absolutely stupid liberals are... He was the best friend in office they ever had... But no matter what they demonize him and blame all the 'annointed' One's problems on him... It's actually quite hilarious... I think it's still PTSD over Al Bore's and Hanoi John Kerry's loses... :evil:

Well, he;

passed no child left behind
did med part D
created the DHS and TSA
gave us the Patriot Act
fed the military/industrial complex 2 wars
gave us millions and millions of brand new Americans
saved the UAW
got oil prices up to levels suppliers were happy about
and gave us Too Big To Fail as the new world order; TARP

Then, on the next day...

By an measure, if you like an active federal government, he was wildly successful. I don't think he gets near the recognition he deserves.

Don't forget the credit downgrade that costs us trillions in additional interest expense

Just goes to show how freakin absolutely stupid liberals are... He was the best friend in office they ever had... But no matter what they demonize him and blame all the 'annointed' One's problems on him... It's actually quite hilarious... I think it's still PTSD over Al Bore's and Hanoi John Kerry's loses... :evil:

OK, but, that takes a level of mass strategic thinking that mobs are not capable of, left or right. Look at the TEA party; Obama mobilized them and crystallized a moment but, the TEA party's goal was status quo; not to push for market reforms in health care.

As for Bush, if you are a progressive, Bush truly was a god send; the Patriot Act and DHS alone give whomever is in power, which is very much what the left is about, centralized power, enormous new ways to control we, the people, that they never could have achieved with a D potus. But, again, when you are busy making the case that this R, who is spending money and growing gummint like crazy is, somehow, a conservative, well, kinda hard to sit back and say "Go, George, go!" as he does what they, in general, like; grow gummint.

Don't forget the credit downgrade that costs us trillions in additional interest expense

Yet another way TARP failed because it worked.

Well as I have found out most people equate conservative to religious.

Where in what I wrote do you see anything about having a degree makes you qualified? Bush43 is a liberal. And his 'business' experience was pretty pathetic overall...

The point was that you were, rightly, hammering Obama for his failures and pointing out that it should be no surprise given his resume and I wanted to then say hey, here is, ostensibly, a good resume and here are the results.

It's not the resume of the potus; the problem is the new faith, left and right, in Too Big To Fail, aka 'socialism'.

Well as I have found out most people equate conservative to religious.

Not JUST that, but irrational, judgmental, hypocritical, sanctimonious - religious.

Not Ghandi or Dalai Lama religious.

Because if you're Christian, you're a jerk. But if you're Buddhist or Hindu, you're a saint.

Well as I have found out most people equate conservative to religious.

And as a die-hard heathen that definitely irritates the crap out of me... :buddies:

For the most part Romney was wildly successful


lol..out out osurcing and spending "Daddy's" money:killingme