...Obama and company are asking for them for a reason.

What could it be that Mitt is concerned about? I say this given that, no matter what, it won't matter on the right or left, won't change a thing. So, what could be on there that the middle cares about? That he's made lots of money??? Not a big enough number of donations?

I say this with the view that if Mitt just releases them, there can't be anything on there that's gonna much matter and it forces Obama to come up with the NEXT THING to bytch about as the economy continues to drift.

They should meet in a dark alley and exchange tax returns for a legit birth certificate. :whistle:

...Obama and company are asking for them for a reason.

They're playing a game, which I'm familiar with - when you want to win a battle in politics, don't play their game - make them play yours.

As long as the headlines are about Mitt's taxes, they're not about the unemployment claims, or failed initiatives, or about how stimulus money was just lost, or how much of it really just went overseas - as long as they can keep the news on HIM, even if its pointless, he'll chase his tail and waste his time.

It's basically running out the clock, and Obama is in trouble if he is doing this IN JULY.

They're playing a game, which I'm familiar with - when you want to win a battle in politics, don't play their game - make them play yours.

As long as the headlines are about Mitt's taxes, they're not about the unemployment claims, or failed initiatives, or about how stimulus money was just lost, or how much of it really just went overseas - as long as they can keep the news on HIM, even if its pointless, he'll chase his tail and waste his time.

It's basically running out the clock, and Obama is in trouble if he is doing this IN JULY.

So, why not release them? Certainly, Team O is only asking because they think he won't which is why I am curious as to how bad it could be.

To me, releasing them tosses an anchor to Obama in the deep end. They can, of course, pick them clean and raise hell over every deduction. However, their risk is in moderates seeing it for what it is, a witch hunt.

Same as Obama only looks like he's hiding something on his records and transcripts, same for Mitt.

And, what could possible be the problem? Deductions for his secret puppy mill? Tax credits for travel and entertainment to Slayer shows?

:shrug:

...Obama and company are asking for them for a reason.

What could it be that Mitt is concerned about? I say this given that, no matter what, it won't matter on the right or left, won't change a thing. So, what could be on there that the middle cares about? That he's made lots of money??? Not a big enough number of donations?

I say this with the view that if Mitt just releases them, there can't be anything on there that's gonna much matter and it forces Obama to come up with the NEXT THING to bytch about as the economy continues to drift.

Whatever it is, obviously Romney thinks more damage will come from releasing them than not. He's currently getting it from both sides, still he refuses. So whatever it is, it's got him bothered.

I've read speculation that one of the reasons could be that there may be a year where he paid almost no taxes. :shrug:

Whatever it is, it's not going to go away. You'd think he would figure this out, release them now, and then have it all explained and out of the spotlight by November. The longer he stretches it out, the less time he has to make it a non-issue.

Whatever it is, obviously Romney thinks more damage will come from releasing them than not. He's currently getting it from both sides, still he refuses. So whatever it is, it's got him bothered.

I've read speculation that one of the reasons could be that there may be a year where he paid almost no taxes. :shrug:

Whatever it is, it's not going to go away. You'd think he would figure this out, release them now, and then have it all explained and out of the spotlight by November. The longer he stretches it out, the less time he has to make it a non-issue.

Mitt could make it go away by Monday morning; release 'em all.

Using your reasoning, do you then think the same of Obama concerning his records people keep asking for?

Mitt could make it go away by Monday morning; release 'em all.

Using your reasoning, do you then think the same of Obama concerning his records people keep asking for?

He could, but as i said, it seems Mitt knows doing so will open up an entirely new can of worms that would make the current one seem trivial.

Obama released his birth certificate long ago. As for whatever else people are wanting to see, I don't really keep up on that, so I can't comment on wheteher he should release them or not. If they are documents that are typically expected to be released by a candidate, then maybe he should.

But if these documents are not typically expected to be released, and people were crying about them since before the last election, well...they'll just have to get over it. (Or not, as the birthers chose.) Crying about the same stuff they were crying about before the last election is pointless. Cry about what he's done since the last election.

Releasing them is a no win. If he does, he caved to pressure and showed weakness. It also gives that much more for the "Bainers" to pore over and search for anything to latch onto for their next distraction from the economy.

"Look what we found! In 2004, you claimed that you gave $150,000 to the Mormon church, but we contacted your Bishop and he said that he only remembers you donating $149,000. Explain the discrepancy! Tax evasion is a felony!"

What is the upside of releasing them, other than to try to do the impossible - silence the Bainers?

Obama released his birth certificate long ago.
He just recently released a tampered with document dated 2007. What a coincidence the same time he announced his run for POTUS.

Where are his college transcripts?? Who paid for his college??

Most transparent administration my ass!!

I am completely uninterested in Mitt's tax returns. Like Sam said, they're using it as a smoke screen. If Mitt releases the returns, they'll find some stupid thing to blow up and THAT will become the smoke screen.

Was it Bill Clinton who deducted donating his underpants to a thrift store? Yeah, I didn't care about that, either, but the Right sure wasted energy on it. Obama is desperate and they're just throwing stuff against the wall. What else is he going to talk about? The economy? The debt? The budget? Unemployment?

The Dems will use the #'s to make the case how disenfranchised Mitt is and how he is against middle America, the uneducated will take this bait with a vengeance. He earned millions each yr and all the info will be used against him whether it's legitimate or not. I'd tell them go F themselves and turn over the required 2 yrs and be done with it.
We all know he's a rich guy who made millions, no good will come from him releasing the returns.

He could, but as i said, it seems Mitt knows doing so will open up an entirely new can of worms that would make the current one seem trivial.

Yes, yes... unlike releasing the 'Fast and Furious' documents, which everyone knows wont open up anything about Holder and Obama.... right?

What is it about you liberals that refuse to hold your guy to the same standard as you are with Romney?

...Obama and company are asking for them for a reason.

What could it be that Mitt is concerned about? I say this given that, no matter what, it won't matter on the right or left, won't change a thing. So, what could be on there that the middle cares about? That he's made lots of money??? Not a big enough number of donations?

I say this with the view that if Mitt just releases them, there can't be anything on there that's gonna much matter and it forces Obama to come up with the NEXT THING to bytch about as the economy continues to drift.

Larry, I sometimes don’t get you. I really think you’re being sarcastic with all of this.

As with another thread where I said the same thing… I’ll assume you’re being serious:

When Obama has been so secretive with so many things (his BC, his connections with REAL felons, his taxes, his college records, Fast and Furious), and yet you think Romney should have a different set of rules at this point?

Once this is put to rest Obama will move on to the next attack and Americans will forget that Obama has falsely accused Romney of being a felon. As annoying as this is on the surface, I think it’s a very serious accusation that has to be held into account. The President of the United States falsely accused a legitimate presidential candidate of being a felon. What other lies is Obama willing to do stoop to in order to avoid talking about his record and the issues in order to win?

Wirelessly posted

...Obama and company are asking for them for a reason.

What could it be that Mitt is concerned about? I say this given that, no matter what, it won't matter on the right or left, won't change a thing. So, what could be on there that the middle cares about? That he's made lots of money??? Not a big enough number of donations?

I say this with the view that if Mitt just releases them, there can't be anything on there that's gonna much matter and it forces Obama to come up with the NEXT THING to bytch about as the economy continues to drift.

Larry, I sometimes don’t get you. I really think you’re being sarcastic with all of this.

As with another thread where I said the same thing… I’ll assume you’re being serious:

When Obama has been so secretive with so many things (his BC, his connections with REAL felons, his taxes, his college records, Fast and Furious), and yet you think Romney should have a different set of rules at this point?

Once this is put to rest Obama will move on to the next attack and Americans will forget that Obama has falsely accused Romney of being a felon. As annoying as this is on the surface, I think it’s a very serious accusation that has to be held into account. The President of the United States falsely accused a legitimate presidential candidate of being a felon. What other lies is Obama willing to do stoop to in order to avoid talking about his record and the issues in order to win?

These are the standards that those on the right have been saying we should hold our candidates to. Why shouldn't we hold the ones with R's behind their names to the same standards? Obama didn't come completely clean and was ridiculed for it, where is the ridicule of Romney?

In 2008 Barak Obama released 8 years of tax returns, but he is asking Mitt to release 12 years....

Releasing them is a no win. If he does, he caved to pressure and showed weakness. It also gives that much more for the "Bainers" to pore over and search for anything to latch onto for their next distraction from the economy.

"Look what we found! In 2004, you claimed that you gave $150,000 to the Mormon church, but we contacted your Bishop and he said that he only remembers you donating $149,000. Explain the discrepancy! Tax evasion is a felony!"

What is the upside of releasing them, other than to try to do the impossible - silence the Bainers?

This and you can only imagine the volumes of information on a multi millionaires tax returns. Income, dividends, interest, investments, losses, capital gains and the list goes on. If he releases them he gives the Obama hacks time to pick through them number by number. If everything is in order what is the issue one might ask......Well we know how the "other side" can take the smallest thing and blow it into a Mount St. Helens. You would be giving them REAMS and REAMS of data to use against you. Even if nothing is "bad" or "illegal" they will find something.

Of course given the tax cheats in Obama's own cabinet I can't imagine they would risk taking Romney to task for taxes else they might pick off a scab that could backfire.

I am completely uninterested in Mitt's tax returns. Like Sam said, they're using it as a smoke screen. If Mitt releases the returns, they'll find some stupid thing to blow up and THAT will become the smoke screen.

Was it Bill Clinton who deducted donating his underpants to a thrift store? Yeah, I didn't care about that, either, but the Right sure wasted energy on it. Obama is desperate and they're just throwing stuff against the wall. What else is he going to talk about? The economy? The debt? The budget? Unemployment?

He'll talk about how nobody did anything on their own and how anyone who has done anything with themselves owes the government/other people

Why should anyone be forced to disclose tax returns? Ever hear of identity theft? And as people said, supposed somewhere in the volumes there was a $.01 difference? An ordinary person's tax return is complicated enough.

Why is it a crime for a rich Republican to run for President, but no big deal for rich Democracts? Think JFK and FDR. Also RFK and Teddy.

Just jealous people who do not understand how money is earned, saved, invested and donated. There are no "secret" offshore accounts, all must be reported on US Tax form, ask Richard Hatch.

And, what could possible be the problem? Deductions for his secret puppy mill? Tax credits for travel and entertainment to Slayer shows? :shrug:

Larry, this got me thinking, you could take a customer to a Slayer show and deduct it as a business/entertainment expense, what maybe $1000 for the night? Hell that wouldn't even put a dent in the fuel cost for his corporate jet flying here for the same concert.:buddies:

Larry, this got me thinking, you could take a customer to a Slayer show and deduct it as a business/entertainment expense, what maybe $1000 for the night? Hell that wouldn't even put a dent in the fuel cost for his corporate jet flying here for the same concert.:buddies:

Reid said that Romney wouldn't get confirmed as a dog catcher without releasing his tax returns. Why are dog catchers held to a higher standard than Congress :confused:

In 2008 Barak Obama released 8 years of tax returns, but he is asking Mitt to release 12 years....

He and Joe Biden released their last 12 this time.

In the immortal words of Ann Romney

“We've given all you people need to know.”

In the immortal words of Ann Romney

“We've given all you people need to know.”



...LOL... what she really said this morning on GMA......



"so much more will be open for more attack"

....really?

play the vidio...
Ann Romney “We’ve Given Enough to You People” ABC GMA | Politicol Commentary News (http://www.politicolnews.com/ann-romney-weve-given-enough-to-you-people-abc-gma/)

In the immortal words of Ann Romney

“We've given all you people need to know.”

Which I read as "We've given all that we want you to know."

Yep, they're hiding something. :smile:

Which I read as "We've given all that we want you to know."

Yep, they're hiding something. :smile:


...zing!!!:killingme

In the immortal words of Ann Romney

“We've given all you people need to know.”

Why is that bad?

He and Joe Biden released their last 12 this time.

So the prior 8 that had already been released and the 4 since they have been in office. I guess this is the "transparency" he had been talking about. Wonder if it includes the "gifts" that him and his wife had given to their daughters, so that it would not be taxed.

Reid said that Romney wouldn't get confirmed as a dog catcher without releasing his tax returns. Why are dog catchers held to a higher standard than Congress :confused:

They are probably smarter and definately more useful.

Which I read as "We've given all that we want you to know."

Yep, they're hiding something. :smile:

Willard's already said he won't release them because it gives the Obama campaign more ammo.

Um, EVERY word someone says in politics can be used against them. Look at how Willard attacked Obama for the "you didn't build that" remarks (while agreeing with the context of Obama's remarks). Or look at Obama's attacks on Willard's time at Bain.

In fact, Romney's campaign has been an endless attack machine since 2007. Look at how they went after Huckabee and McCain. In this year's primaries, they ran the most disgusting campaign imaginable against Newt Gingrich in Iowa. Willard hid behind TV ads attacking Newt Gingrich at a very personal level.

Willard knows how ugly politics is, being a career candidate for President of the United States. The fact that he won't release more of his returns for fear of being attacked tells me there's something extremely damaging in there.

No one ever got rich by paying their fair share of taxes :yay:

Willard's already said he won't release them because it gives the Obama campaign more ammo.

Um, EVERY word someone says in politics can be used against them. Look at how Willard attacked Obama for the "you didn't build that" remarks (while agreeing with the context of Obama's remarks). Or look at Obama's attacks on Willard's time at Bain.

In fact, Romney's campaign has been an endless attack machine since 2007. Look at how they went after Huckabee and McCain. In this year's primaries, they ran the most disgusting campaign imaginable against Newt Gingrich in Iowa. Willard hid behind TV ads attacking Newt Gingrich at a very personal level.

Willard knows how ugly politics is, being a career candidate for President of the United States. The fact that he won't release more of his returns for fear of being attacked tells me there's something extremely damaging in there.

1. It's funny how you call him Willard, like he is some old geek. Using his first name and all. :lol: He is you in 45 years, minus the successful businessman part, oh and minus being somewhat personable.

2. Being you are an Obama voter it is beyond hypocritical to say someone practices ugly politics. Obama is perhaps the nastiest of the nasty.

3. How does Willard hide behind ads he paid for and did the voice over for?

4. To a democrat ANYTHING is potentially a mechanism for attack, Like being wealthy, or being Mormon, or having a DUI 40 years ago, or a library book 30 days past due when you were in 8th grade...........unless of course your name is Kennedy or Clinton.

If Obama and his henchmen believe Romney did not pay his legal taxes why don't they go ahead and make the accusation? They just want to sift through the mounds of info for anything they can seize upon to spin out of control.

"Oh look Mitt donated a pair of Chino's to Salvation Army and he wrote off $20 :ohwell: He is so out of touch." :rolleyes:

"Oh look, Mitt deducted mortgage interest on TWO houses. Must be nice to own multiple houses."

I wouldn't show #### to Obama. If he wants to make an accusation bow up and do it. He gots no balls.

I like how Obama didn't give any money to charity until he realized people would see his tax returns, what an ####### :yay:

2005: $77,315 out of $1.66 million (4.6 percent)

2004: $2,500 out of $207,647 (1.2 percent)

2003: $3,400 out of $238,327 (1.4 percent)

2002: $1,050 out of $259,394 (0.4 percent)

Why is that bad?

Watch the vidio.:coffee:

Watch the vidio.:coffee:

............crickets:coffee:

............crickets:coffee:

Can't think for yourself?

...Obama and company are asking for them for a reason.

What could it be that Mitt is concerned about? I say this given that, no matter what, it won't matter on the right or left, won't change a thing. So, what could be on there that the middle cares about? That he's made lots of money??? Not a big enough number of donations?

I say this with the view that if Mitt just releases them, there can't be anything on there that's gonna much matter and it forces Obama to come up with the NEXT THING to bytch about as the economy continues to drift.

President Obama and his supporters are asking for more returns because it makes sense politically to do so, and not necessarily because they think they know what the returns will show. What's the downside? Releasing returns is typical enough for presidential candidates that it probably doesn't seem unreasonable to ask for them, at least not to most of the people whose votes are in play. As long as Mr. Romney doesn't release them, it gives the other side something to talk about; and if he does release them, that may give them something to point to and talk about as well. Politically it's win-win. This election is pretty simple, and much the same, for both of the candidates. They want to see and hear their opponents name written and mentioned more often than their own. Any time Mr. Romney spends responding to accusations or insinuations is a win for President Obama's campaign.

As for Mr. Romney's reasons for not wanting to release more returns, a number of possible ones come to mind. But my guess would be that it's about optics - especially regarding the 2009, and perhaps the 2008, returns. I think there's a good likelihood that the optics of the 2009 return would be quite bad - that numbers that could be pulled from it could look particularly bad to people that weren't paying much attention and didn't put much thought into what they meant (and such people are the stock-in-trade of political pundits on both sides).

Never mind the why. Never mind that they may not have done anything wrong. A return that shows Mr. Romney and his wife paying a single digit effective tax rate, or shows someone (believed to be) so wealthy paying relatively little in federal taxes in a given year, won't look good. And given what happened in 2008 and 2009, and what the Romney's 2010 return shows, I think there's a good chance that their 2009 return would do just that. The 2010 return takes into account almost $5 million in capital loss carryover. That means they either had net capital losses in 2009 or, more likely, net capital gains in 2009 that were less than their net capital losses from 2008. If their return from 2009 looks similar to the one from 2010 otherwise (e.g. a similar amount of charitable giving and deductions), effectively having no capital gains income could mean that they paid a relatively small amount of income taxes that year.

Yes, yes... unlike releasing the 'Fast and Furious' documents, which everyone knows wont open up anything about Holder and Obama.... right?

What is it about you liberals that refuse to hold your guy to the same standard as you are with Romney?

Romney doesn't give them that tingly feeling. You know libs: seething, writhing masses of raw emotions, and little else of substance.

Reid said that Romney wouldn't get confirmed as a dog catcher without releasing his tax returns. Why are dog catchers held to a higher standard than Congress :confused:

Dog catchers make an honest living?

Too bad Dingy Harry didn't apply the same criteria toward vetting the current occupier of the oval office. That occupier would still be in the senate, voting "present," instead of living la vida loca on the taxpayers' dime.

Watch the vidio.:coffee:

I want you to explain it to me.

1. It's funny how you call him Willard, like he is some old geek. Using his first name and all. :lol:

He thinks it makes him sound clever. Like calling George Bush "Chimpy".

Never mind the why. Never mind that they may not have done anything wrong. .

All understood, all valid points. However, I think we all know and understand that no matter what the returns say, even if he gave every dime to charity, he will STILL be attacked and vilified. It does not matter. So, why concern yourself with defusing a bomb that is going off, dribs and drabs now? Why not take control, release them and throw your opponent on the defensive? Why wait? Why have it hang over your head? There is NO upside for Romney to not release them. Releasing them lets the opponent *gasp* point out that Mitt is a rich white guy. Releasing them now takes control of the issue and lets just that much more air out of the opponents attack and leaves them with one less place to hide and one less issue to avoid the job they've done and makes it more clear that this is just that; a diversion.

I do not understand the defensive mentality. Everyone, the political 'experts' agrees that the cover up is normally worse than the offense, be what it may, but, then they all go about advising their clients to engage in what amounts to cover ups. Professional politics is a game and, if you win a close one, the announcers will say, as experts, that whatever you did was the right thing to do and, if you lose, whatever you did was wrong. It is a laughable profession. James Carville, just to use a name, could not have beaten Obama if he ran the McCain show. Likewise, James Carville didn't beat Ross Perot and Bush 41; the player on the field did and he had a great one in a great position.

Mitt Romney is the odds on favorite to beat Obama because of, to use your word, the 'optics'; the economy sucks and has stunk and Obama, no matter how hard he argues otherwise, has, in fact, been president for nearly four years. Foreign affairs are a mess. Energy, housing, immigration, Gitmo, assassination of US citizens, entitlements, healthcare, race relations, there is not even one area of policy, of issues, where Obama can let his record speak, positively, for his work. Nothing.

His, Obama's, ONLY hope is Mitt totally screwing the pooch. By relentlessly being seen as upfront, as open, as honest, as having nothing to hide, a part of the game he and he alone controls, he takes away the ONLY chance his opponent has. It leaves them NOWHERE to go but "He's a rich white guy!!!"
If he was the worst outsource-er of all time, lowest tax payer ever, it WILL get old in a week. What then?

I simply do not understand this desire for Mitt to play the same game as Obama. I do not understand the desire to play tit for tat, to lower the bar. I just don't get this playground attitude. I do not get this incessant desire to play 'gotcha' or expect ANY fairness from the media. Why not stand above? Why not stick it in the opponents face and just ask them "Whatchu got now, loser? That it? That you're best punch? You are so lame."

Why not beat the guy instead of play to not lose? :buddies:

Larry, I sometimes don’t get you. I really think you’re being sarcastic with all of this.

As with another thread where I said the same thing… I’ll assume you’re being serious:

When Obama has been so secretive with so many things (his BC, his connections with REAL felons, his taxes, his college records, Fast and Furious), and yet you think Romney should have a different set of rules at this point? Why in the hell do you want the person you support to play down to their level? Why do you NOT want clear distinctions every chance he gets??? Why do you NOT want the guy you support to be the better man??? There is no, repeat, NO GAIN from the media whatsoever. No way. No how. Repeat and clarify; it does NOT matter what Mitt says or does or did or will do, it WILL be spun negatively. So, why play a losing game? Why not control the issue and throw it back in Obama's face? Why is this difficult, at all, to understand???

Once this is put to rest Obama will move on to the next attack and Americans will forget that Obama has falsely accused Romney of being a felon. No. Only people on Obama's side will. People in the middle will see that Mitt was consistently open and forthcoming. You seem to be concerned with rationalizing out how to get people who will never support one side to do so. One of my favorite quotes of all time; George Washington did not try to reason with the British. He shot them. So, wouldn't Mitt be better served to 'shoot' the opponent, not play their game? Just be open, be transparent?Be the better man? Constantly seize the initiative? Why in the hell do you want him to play Obama's game??? As annoying as this is on the surface, I think it’s a very serious accusation that has to be held into account. The President of the United States falsely accused a legitimate presidential candidate of being a felon. What other lies is Obama willing to do stoop to in order to avoid talking about his record and the issues in order to win?

WHO CARES WHAT OBAMA THINKS OR DOES??? Does that matter, at all, to voters on the right or the handful in the middle who WILL decide this race???

Another favorite quote; US Grant came east to take over the Army of the Potomac, he of a sterling record of wins, they of miserable record of losing to Robert E. Lee time after time. After hearing his new subordinates worry once more than he could stand about what Lee was going to, once again, do to them, he told them to spend less time worrying about what Lee was going to do to them and more time worrying about what they were going to do to Lee.

Why worry, AT ALL, about the predictable stuff the opponent is going to do? You can't control it. So, screw it. Being open and transparent makes Mitt, day by day, the better man and Obama, day by day, stuck with his record.

Isn't THAT where the war is to be won, Obama's record?

Which I read as "We've given all that we want you to know."

Yep, they're hiding something. :smile:

All the while we sit and wait for the info about 'Fast and Furious' DEMANDED by congress: The highest law enforcement officer in this country held in contempt of congress, and you people on the left aren't interested in that. Yet, somehow, Romney not releasing his taxes is criminal.

Why is a person's personal financial information far more important to you than the work of our government; work that was criminal and resulted in people dying? You're not the least bit worried about what Holder and Obama are hiding?

WHO CARES WHAT OBAMA THINKS OR DOES??? Does that matter, at all, to voters on the right or the handful in the middle who WILL decide this race???

Another favorite quote; US Grant came east to take over the Army of the Potomac, he of a sterling record of wins, they of miserable record of losing to Robert E. Lee time after time. After hearing his new subordinates worry once more than he could stand about what Lee was going to, once again, do to them, he told them to spend less time worrying about what Lee was going to do to them and more time worrying about what they were going to do to Lee.

Why worry, AT ALL, about the predictable stuff the opponent is going to do? You can't control it. So, screw it. Being open and transparent makes Mitt, day by day, the better man and Obama, day by day, stuck with his record.

Isn't THAT where the war is to be won, Obama's record?

I don’t care what Obama thinks; I care about what the voter thinks. Right now, with all that is going on in our government: insane spending and debt, crumbling jobs, the CRIME called ‘Fast and Furious’ and Holder being held in contempt, our bleeding economy… And this is what we’re focused on? Romney’s taxes? Right now democrats own the dialog. Whoever owns the dialog owns the minds of voters.

You really believe people will see Mitt as the better guy simply because he yields to every little stupid demand by Obama? You do realize once Romney clears this up they will launch their next attack? THAT will rule the dialog for the week; NOT the REAL issues we are suffering from. When you have people out there that are struggling to find jobs and keep afloat, they are waiting to hear what each candidate will do to relieve their pain. Instead they are hearing this nonsense. That’s why Obama is running from his record; because he knows it will destroy him.

So yes, I believe the war can be won on Obama’s record. Romney’s game plan was to go after Obama’s record. He didn’t set up an attack machine to go after Obama personally like Obama has done with Romney. If Romney has to remain on the defensive through Nov people will go to the polls thinking Romney is a criminal and complete forget what Obama has done to get this country in this place. It’s all Obama has to rely on; people forgetting about his failures.

I don’t care what Obama thinks; I care about what the voter thinks. Right now, with all that is going on in our government: insane spending and debt, crumbling jobs, the CRIME called ‘Fast and Furious’ and Holder being held in contempt, our bleeding economy… And this is what we’re focused on? Romney’s taxes? Right now democrats own the dialog. Whoever owns the dialog owns the minds of voters.

.

Dems ALWAYS own the dialogue. ALWAYS. Most of the major media is left leaning if not flat our falling over leftward. They do not, have not and will not concern themselves with just reporting. Write that down somewhere so you don't forget it.

So, what's a Mitt to do? Seize the initiative. Take the issue off the board. It harms him ZERO. It takes away another excise for...

Never mind. It just occurred to me that what you really want is the left wing major media to not be the left wing major media.


Sorry. I can't help you with that. They're easy to beat, especially if you just deal with them as they are and not as you wish they were.

Dems ALWAYS own the dialogue. ALWAYS. Most of the major media is left leaning if not flat our falling over leftward. They do not, have not and will not concern themselves with just reporting. Write that down somewhere so you don't forget it.

So, what's a Mitt to do? Seize the initiative. Take the issue off the board. It harms him ZERO. It takes away another excise for...

Never mind. It just occurred to me that what you really want is the left wing major media to not be the left wing major media.


Sorry. I can't help you with that. They're easy to beat, especially if you just deal with them as they are and not as you wish they were.

What? You’re finally admitting the influence of the MSM? Say it isn’t so :ohwell:

You’re suggesting Romney bend over to every little petty demand by Obama:

Obama – Produce 12 years of tax records.

Romney – Okay done. Can we talk about the issues and YOUR record now?

Obama – We want to see your birth certificate since we suspect you weren’t born in the US.

Romney – Okay done. Can we talk about the issues and YOUR record now?

Obama – We want school records and details about your bullying in high school.

Romney – Okay done. Can we talk about the issues and YOUR record now?

Obama – We want documents showing how you outsourced while at Bain.

Romney – Okay done. Can we talk about the issues and YOUR record now?

Obama – We need you to explain how it is you are so rich and Ann is gallivanting around on horses and fancy restaurants while so many people are suffering.

Romney – Okay done. Can we talk about the issues and YOUR record now?

Obama – We want you to prove to us you’re not a felon.

Romney – Okay done. Can we talk about the issues and YOUR record now?

It will go on and on and on while struggling folks are waiting to hear about the issues. I think a candidate has to draw the line in the sand somewhere. The harm isn’t Romney answering to these petty demands. The harm is constantly pounding the drum that Romney is dishonest and a criminal. Even though he can effectively prove otherwise, the negativity this places around Romney’s neck is what will stick in peoples’ minds. Voters will associate Romney will a negative air. Obama knows this and that’s why he has taken this tactic rather than talk about, BRAG about, HIS record.

What? You’re finally admitting the influence of the MSM? Say it isn’t so :ohwell:

.

Uh, no. What I am 'admitting' is that it is a given. Been saying that for years. If the 'influence' you and others are so terrified of really mattered then the R's would never win an election. What bothers me is when the R's win by campaigning right and then governing left and people want to blame it on the media.

You’re suggesting Romney bend over to every little petty demand by Obama:



Fascinating. Just fascinating.

While I would tend to agree with what you are inadvertently suggesting, Mitt doesn't do politics very well, it would seem a relatively easy concept to understand, and manipulate, that you want to give the opponent enough rope to hang themselves and then...get out of the way.

What? You’re finally admitting the influence of the MSM? Say it isn’t so :ohwell:

You’re suggesting Romney bend over to every little petty demand by Obama:

Obama – Produce 12 years of tax records.

Romney – Okay done. Can we talk about the issues and YOUR record now?

Obama – We want to see your birth certificate since we suspect you weren’t born in the US.

Romney – Okay done. Can we talk about the issues and YOUR record now?

Obama – We want school records and details about your bullying in high school.

Romney – Okay done. Can we talk about the issues and YOUR record now?

Obama – We want documents showing how you outsourced while at Bain.

Romney – Okay done. Can we talk about the issues and YOUR record now?

Obama – We need you to explain how it is you are so rich and Ann is gallivanting around on horses and fancy restaurants while so many people are suffering.

Romney – Okay done. Can we talk about the issues and YOUR record now?

Obama – We want you to prove to us you’re not a felon.

Romney – Okay done. Can we talk about the issues and YOUR record now?

.

A ha! You are very much one of those generals that spends all your time worrying about what the other guy is going to do to you.

A ha! You are very much one of those generals that spends all your time worrying about what the other guy is going to do to you.

The one thing I do know from my military experience is you don't win wars staying on the defensive.

Fascinating. Just fascinating.

While I would tend to agree with what you are inadvertently suggesting, Mitt doesn't do politics very well, it would seem a relatively easy concept to understand, and manipulate, that you want to give the opponent enough rope to hang themselves and then...get out of the way.

Well, Romney's campaign strategies may be for a different thread. The point I'm trying to make here is that Romney needs to seize these attacks as an opportunity to point out how Obama is running from his own record by attacking Romney on personal matters. And, to a small degree, he is. But he can't do this if he is going to answer to every little demand by Obama; then have to face the prospect of abject lies; like being called a felon.

Uh, no. What I am 'admitting' is that it is a given. Been saying that for years. If the 'influence' you and others are so terrified of really mattered then the R's would never win an election.

Well, you were in denial about the influence of the media on war. But that's a different discussion.

What bothers me is when the R's win by campaigning right and then governing left and people want to blame it on the media.

I'd hope you think I'm smarter than that.

Well, you were in denial about the influence of the media on war. But that's a different discussion.
.

That would be one interpretation. Another would be that the President of the United States chose paths and made strategic decisions that made both wars un-winnable well out of the sight and influence of any media. If they mattered, we'd have never gone.

I'd hope you think I'm smarter than that.

Now, I really don't know what to say. Isn't that EXACTLY what you are saying, it's the media's fault????

Well, Romney's campaign strategies may be for a different thread. The point I'm trying to make here is that Romney needs to seize these attacks as an opportunity to point out how Obama is running from his own record by attacking Romney on personal matters. And, to a small degree, he is. But he can't do this if he is going to answer to every little demand by Obama; then have to face the prospect of abject lies; like being called a felon.

It's like you get it but you don't. Mitt's job is to focus on two things; why Obama needs to be replaced and why he, Mitt, is a better choice. Obama can NOT hide from the job he has done. It serves Mitt's interest to point out how bad Obama has done by tossing the little bones Obama wants via the media; "here, chew on my taxes while I focus on pointing out how bad Obama has done and why I am a better choice."

The diversion is getting caught up in putting reasonable requests off. Mitt sounds like Al Gore when he says he has 'complied with the law'. So ####ing what? It's no big deal to turn over some more returns. People, reasonably, like to know this kind of stuff. Hell, use it as one more reason to be potus; to fix the tax code OBAMA HAS FAILED TO FIX.

Mitt is defusing a bomb that has already gone off. Let it go. Move on. Focus.

That would be one interpretation. Another would be that the President of the United States chose paths and made strategic decisions that made both wars un-winnable well out of the sight and influence of any media. If they mattered, we'd have never gone.

Have you considered Bush molded his decisions around the pressure he felt from the negative reporting and how it was shaping the sentiments of the people?

Now, I really don't know what to say. Isn't that EXACTLY what you are saying, it's the media's fault????

The media does what it does. I am not debating that. I'm debating your demand that Romney answer to these accusations and put them to rest. I'm saying he shouldn't because it wont end with this current issue with his taxes. If Romney chooses to answer to every demand that comes from Obama, that’s all he will be doing. He will spend no time talking about what he intends to do as president. He will spend no time trying to talk about Obama’s record. He will stay on the defensive. That is a terrible position to be in come Nov.

Have you considered Bush molded his decisions around the pressure he felt from the negative reporting and how it was shaping the sentiments of the people?

Yup. But then, I looked at his decisions as a whole and noticed a pattern. It's who he is.

The media does what it does. I am not debating that. I'm debating your demand that Romney answer to these accusations and put them to rest. I'm saying he shouldn't because it wont end with this current issue with his taxes. If Romney chooses to answer to every demand that comes from Obama, that’s all he will be doing. He will spend no time talking about what he intends to do as president. He will spend no time trying to talk about Obama’s record. He will stay on the defensive. That is a terrible position to be in come Nov.

You are totally looking at this from a reactionary viewpoint. THAT, in my view, is a terrible place to be.

You are totally looking at this from a reactionary viewpoint. THAT, in my view, is a terrible place to be.

And that is the place Romney is in, reacting every little allegation rather than talking about the REAL things that affect Americans; and Obama’s record on those things. It's what you're suggestioning Romney should do: stay in reactionary mode. There has to come a point where Romney gets to talk about the issues; you know those reasons he’s running for POTUS? Obama doesn’t want that to happen. If Obama has his way he won’t allow that to happen.