Maybe you are not seeing reports because you are not looking for them AND because Stewart is not running for President.

And Romney destroyed businesses?

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/142/3...f641aa9afb.jpg

It's hidden from taxation Ronald. He didn't put money in foreign accounts to get better access to European ATM machines. We have no idea what is or isn't on his tax returns, because he chose not to release them... even though his father's political legacy is built on the idea that he made releasing his tax returns a staple of his own campaigns. Any idea why he didn't release his tax returns? It couldn't be that he is 'hiding' anything, could it? :2 cents:

Never heard that story, but assuming it is accurate, your point appears to be that the management group handling Jon Stewart's money made a 400 dollar error and he had to pay a penalty on the amount? Or that his wife made a $3,225 error which he had to pay a penalty and interest about? And you are equating that to funneling money off shore to avoid taxation on millions of dollars, bankrupting healthy companies using a bustout scheme to drain their equity and taking advantage of carried interest loopholes to pay less than 1/3 of the tax rate that people pay on similar payroll earnings? Those seem like fairly different blips on the radar, one is a massive dot indicating an incoming warhead, and the other is a sparrow flying at low altitude... :2 cents:

I don't think he's "hiding" anything at all.

But the social liberals in this country are completely hung up on what the percentage of Capital Gains tax is (you know, the tax rate that is also used for RETIRED people's 401K and other investments...money that was already earned long ago and taxed at that time as well).
If he were to release it, it would just cause another stupid barrage babbling about percentages.

Romney wants and needs to focus on the big issue of the economy. Not his personal money.

As for "foreign accounts" and taking every tax loophole availabe...so does EVERYBODY. You take every deduction and money saving legal way to not give away your money on your taxes. So do I. So does everyone.
No, you and I may not have enough money to put it in foreign accounts. But if you did...you would.

And is that Romney's "fault"? No.

It's the stupidity and greed of the federal govt.
When you set tax rates too high...people move their money to countries smart enough to know how to draw money to them.
That has ALWAYS been the case. If you're really worried about whether all multi-millionaires put their money in the local Bank Of America OR overseas...then the federal govt. needs to stop penalizing people for saving and investing in this country.

Why aren't any of you up in arms over the Federal govt. spending 7 MILLION DOLLARS PER MINUTE. And borrowing 3.5 BILLION dollars per day???
No, let's don't worry about that.

The feds BORROW more money in a day than Romney has made in 20 years. But let's don't worry about that. Let's just keep getting distracted from the real problems in this country. Wars, debt, jobs....these are the things that should be discussed.
But Democrats want no part of that discussion it seems.

Did liberals come after Kennedy when he was President? He and his family had money all over the world to avoid taxes. Did they go after their beloved Roosevelt?
NOPE.

That's an excellent point. I am not seeing reports about Jon Stewart's tax payments because he is a comedian doing satire on television, while I am seeing plenty of reports about Mitt Romney because he is attempting to become the leader of our nation while leaving a wake of economic damage in his past and making vague promises that he will fix things, though his own history makes that promise preposterous.

If you point is that Jon Stewart should not be elected President... I'm inclined to agree with you. I think he does just fine at what he does now. Including incisive commentary that rips through the layers of veneer and gets to the core of why Romney is an even worse choice than Obama. None of that makes Obama a good choice. It's probably the worst set of candidates in my lifetime... but when choosing between an F and another F, I'd rather choose the F who is ineffectively leading us in the right direction than the F who would likely more-effectively lead us in the wrong direction. :2 cents:

n/m -- 8 chars

he's doing exactly what he's legally allowed to do. sorry you *wish* he'd do what YOU would like.

its so funny watching little stewart piss and moan about his betters and their money in every political thread. He's obama's target audience.
worrying about someone else's money is about as low as it gets.
spend more time worrying about your own and watch how it grows

If you are correct that there is nothing wrong with his tax returns, he made a serious political miscalculation by refusing to make them available to public scrutiny. If he released them and all they showed was that he is massively successful, that show would have been over in a day or two. Instead he has caused liberals, conservatives, academics and independents to question his honesty and past history. So, either he is hiding something, or he got terrible political advice from his advisers on this issue. It's a big sore point for his campaign either way... and would not have been if he released clean returns.

"Everyone" isn't running for President. Romney is....
If you made a fortune on tax loopholes for decades and you are campaigning on the promise to fix tax loopholes... you damn well have to have a SPECIFIC set of which ones you would close and why. You need to articulate that to voters before, not after, the election. His decision to give very vague, nearly meaningless replies to requests for specific policy agenda regarding tax loopholes is absolutely his "fault"? Yes.

Tax rates are almost irrelevant. 47% don't pay federal income tax. Billionaires pay less than their secretaries as a percentage of income. People in the middle have the biggest burden by far... you can not fix our tax policy by raising or lowering any stated tax rate. If you made the top rate 90% tomorrow, Romney would still be paying 13% or less. First you have to clean up the code, then you can get an accurate understanding or revenue and adjust rates accordingly.

Personally I think our tax rate system is idiotic. We ought to have a very low flat tax rate (somewhere around 10-15%) with a one time exclusion of 50K for every income earner. And we ought to have a federal sales tax of 3-5% on all items except basic substance staples like milk, home heating oil, diapers, etc... No other exclusions, no other loopholes for anyone. Then tax policy becomes a very simple matter of adjusting the flat tax rate and the sales tax rate each year based on revenue and budget. It's pretty much the only system that actually makes sense... and yet you'll never see either party actually push to implement it.

I am very concerned about that. I also am aware that it is not a 'democrat' or a 'republican' doing it... they are in bed together. Republican Congress, Democrat Congress, Republican President, Democrat President... the results are the same. Why is that? Because both parties are being funded by post-nationalist interests. People who have zero nationalistic of patriotic belief in the country. If the United States existed tomorrow or disappeared completely, people like the Koch brothers, Goldman Sachs, Romney and the rest would be just fine. Their wealth is no longer tied to any particular nation. They already sucked out enough equity to make borders irrelevant. Now they are buying our government, having it do what benefits them the most and ignoring the impact it will have on 300 Million citizens. Poor people aren't running up massive debt, they don't lobby and they can't understand financial policy. In case you haven't figured it out yet, post-nationalists are bankrupting us and blaming anyone they can to muddy the waters.

I am all for true Conservative government... the GOP is not. I am all for Pragmatism... the Democrats are not. These are the parties of Romney, Obama, Bush, Pelosi, Bachman, Plain, Santorum, Biden, Ried ... do you really think any of them will solve the problems we face? They are all bought and paid for by the same group of post-nationalists... and you get what you pay for.... :2 cents:

Actually Ronald, posting on message boards has earned me quite a bit of money over the years. Especially in the threads where you lie and get spotlighted for doing so. Remember the last one where you had employees lie on your behalf and then I showed you specific urls to prove they were lying. That was a fun one. I work tirelessly to earn a good living and have managed to do so for quite a while. I'm quite happy with my life so far, thanks for your concern. I also take an objective interest in the health and strength of my nation because I believe that is the responsibility of every citizen.

I have voted Republican, Democrat, Third Party Candidate and will continue to do so based on issues and the character of the candidates. I don't wear a blue or a red shirt politically and I think people who do are doing themselves a disservice. I don't think Obama has done a good enough job, and the ONLY thing likely to get him reelected is the fact that GOP ran a retard-go-round of candidates that allowed Romney to become the pick of the litter. Had they run ANYONE sensible they would have won by a landslide. Now, instead of having 25% under/unemployement and an easy win in the election, Romney has managed to give Obama quite an easy path to reelection. Your idiocy won't change that. :2 cents:

still trying to keep yourself paying zero income tax, eh? :1orglaugh

Yep, they are all bought and paid for.

I'm just addressing this whole "Romney's Money" non-issue that is being used to distract all of us from what the Federal govt. is doing to destroy our economy.

Romney hires an accountant...just like everybody else with money does. He hires investment firms. They move his money in ways to capitalize on it's optimal financial gain.
Just like everybody with money does.

As for him running for President...Kennedy didn't show his tax returns, and his family money came from his daddy (bootlegging liquor) and they kept money in offshore accounts and did WAY more shady things than Romney has ever done (mob ties, criminal activities, etc)
Did it have any bearing whatsoever on Kennedy's ability to be the President.
No.

How about Roosevelt? One of the most famous wealthy families of all times. He never showed his tax returns. Was he "hiding" something? And his money too was old family money.
Does that mean he shouldn't have been President?
I think history proves otherwise.

As far as I know we have never had a President who wasn't a multi-millionaire. And it's only in the past couple of decades that candidates VOLUNTARILY showed their tax returns.

If I were running for President...I'd tell the press to "kiss my ass" in exactly those words when it comes to my personal life.
Of course I'd also legalize drugs and prostitution...so don't expect to see "President Robbie" in office anytime soon in this uptight country. lol

Relentless is shooting all of yalls BS down one by one like he was shooting ducks at a carnival

uh, no. I remember my employees outing you for lying. I remember them refreshing my memory of how we had you stop working for us halfway thru, pay you the $600 you wanted, and send you on your way so we didn't have to have ALL of the work redone.


And I'm SURE you made just TONS of money posting on boards over the years. Thats EVERY trolls claim to fame.:1orglaugh

Isn't it strange then that all the other candidates released their returns and didn't move massive amounts of money off shore to avoid taxation. Shouldn't it be considered that other candidates didn't make their living bankrupting corporations and bleeding out their equity through a combination of debt and fees exactly the same way mobsters bustout restaurants before burning them down for the insurance money?

And if Kennedy was running for President those would be very valid reasons not to elect him. You may have missed the point here. Romney and Obama are running for President... so it's their records that count. Whether or not a syphilis-ridden hermit in Transylvania also ran a private equity firm busting out companies in the 1820s really wouldn't hold much relevance either. This campaign has two choices... so what 'everyone does' really doesn't matter... what the two of them do or don't do, does matter.

It sure is ironic that the guy who famously made showing your tax returns such an important part of Presidential campaigns happens to be Romney's own father. He seemed to think it was awfully important that everyone running for the office do so. :2 cents:

Dude...I was referring to PRESIDENT John F. Kennedy.

And he was elected and was a great president. Just like Roosevelt was as well.

https://gfy.com/showthread.php?t=1059111 found it for you.

The part where Cyn chimes in to agree with you and then I post specific links to her recommending me to other clients AFTER my work for you was completed speaks volumes. So does your testimonial from the wayback machine. There are dozens of top companies I have worked with over the years at this point Ronald who are happy with my services. Your petty axe to grind because I refused to send you any xsales not withstanding. Though it is interesting that each time you fail to argue a topic on the merits you resort to failed attempts at deriding the other people in the discussion. Perhaps you should stop making ridiculously wrong predictions about Giuliani or Newt being the next President and people would take your political rants with a bit more credibility.

Threads like this do prove one important fact... I can supply large quantities of marketable original text in a very short period of time, reliably - with an excellent impact on ranks, conversion ratios and branding. It's one of the many services I offer and I continue to work tirelessly to improve my entire product line every day.

Oh great, I didn't know we could vote for them this time.
I thought we had to choose Obama, Romney or Johnson.
So I was under the impression it was their records that count this time.
Please let me know how to reelect Kennedy, Roosevelt or Lincoln in 2012.

Of the three choices, it seems to me only Romney has shifted millions of dollars off shore, bankrupted profitable companies for his own profit and suggested plutocracy is the way we ought to go. :2 cents:

I was very specific in my original post that in the PAST we didn't elect our Presidents according to their tax returns. That was my whole point.

I then gave you very specific examples of great Presidents that you would have said were not qualified because they inherited their money, moved it offshore, and even had criminal ties.

But as history showed...that had absolutely NOTHING to do with their ability to be effective Presidents.

That was my whole point. Either you just don't want to see what I was trying to say...or you are just disregarding it to go with the media's narrative of how important Romneys money and taxes are (even though I don't see that they have ANY importance or effect on whether the President can create a business friendly environment to grow the economy)

In the past we elected slave owners. They did a fairly good job running the country. Jefferson was no slouch. However, if it turns out that one of these three present candidates owns a bunch of slaves, they will have a fairly difficult time getting elected. Kennedy wasn't a good President just because he didn't release his tax returns, his tax return confidentiality didn't improve his Presidency in any way. In fact, he would have been an even better candidate if he did release them.

If Romney gave specifics of his tax policy plans, we could discuss them. He hasn't and said he won't until after he is elected. He said I'll fix it if you elect me... and expects us to take his word for it. That makes his past deeds and credibility even more important. I am sure he told the people at Kaybee Toys he would help grow their business... it is very unlikely that he said 'Hi, let me bankrupt all this for you and put all your employees out of work so I can profit from the debt you incur.'

If Steve Jobs said 'Hey I can be a bit of an asshole to work with, but Ill fix this economy for you, just vote for me' I would take him over Obama in a heart-beat. With or without his tax returns. He could probably do a better job while dead than Obama and Romney can do alive. Bloomberg, Mort Zuckerman (if he wasn't Canadian-born)... there are people out there with the track record to make those kind of bold 'trust me' campaign statements. Romney isn't one of them. Donald Trump isn't either, but Trump isn't running... so his lack of financial credibility doesn't matter. Romney's does.

I'm not talking about Slave owners.

I deliberately chose two liberal Democrat party ICONS of the 20th century who moved our country forward.

You are trying to deflect what I said and not address it.

Neither Kennedy or Roosevelt "earned" their VAST fortunes...they inherited them. Kennedy's money came from his dad Joe's bootlegging operations during prohibition and he had lots of mafia ties.

Neither ever showed their tax returns.And both families were well known for their "Swiss Bank Accounts" throughout history.

My question to you is: You wouldn't have voted for either man according to your criteria. Does that mean that maybe, just maybe.....tax returns and how much money you inherited don't really have a thing to do with leadership abilities?

I'm not attacking you by the way. I'm sincerely presenting this to you in hopes that maybe it's something you hadn't considered before and maybe sway you to think about it and perhaps come to a different conclusion.

It is in fact very strange .....

:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

I am addressing exactly your point. Your point is that "successful past presidents didn't release their tax returns... so Romney not releasing them also shouldn't be an issue." Right? Logically, one is not the proximate cause of the other. Not releasing tax returns didn't make anyone a better President. Having prohibition ties is not the reason Kennedy was a good President. Those things are true, but the man was much more than that.

If Romney had the track record and credibility to overcome his decision to skip releasing his returns he would be in good political position. He doesn't have the military record Kennedy had... He doesn't have a history of successful policies that he sticks with and fosters... during his time as Governor he did just about everything he now says is wrong.

Putting the tax returns completely aside... what about Romney makes him likely to be as good a President as Kennedy? What has he shown you that makes him the next Roosevelt or Eisenhower? Romney ran the most expensive Olympics in US history and squandered a fortune doing it. Romney created the precursor of Obamacare as Governor of Massachusetts. Romney isn't a self-made man, he was handed a fortune by his daddy. Romney didn't serve in the military during wartime as Kennedy did... he got an exemption to do Missionary work in Paris from his father. I agree with you, no candidate should be rejected SOLELY for failing to supply his tax returns. In this case, it's just one of a very long dirty-laundry-list of problems Mitt faces... and it becomes especially poignant because much of the economic policy he espouses relies on closing unspecified loopholes in the tax code.

Romney isn't the conservative business leader the GOP should have run. He isn't the statesmen they could have run. He isn't the war veteran... hell he managed to piss off just about every country he visited from the UK to Palestine in a single trip, so he is no diplomat. What he is, is an opportunist looking for the next big score. If you know people like that, when they tell you they will 'fix it and we will all make money if you just trust me' you are smart enough to know that's not how things turn out. He is in it for himself... not for the nation... and that is the most dangerous kind of candidate that can run. :2 cents:
-----

I am not attacking you either. Attack my ideas all you want... it's usually the best way for anyone to learn something. Spirited honest discussion without personal attacks is something this country badly needs more of... not less.

~sigh~

Federal govt. spending $10.46 BILLION dollars per day
Federal govt. borrowing $3 BILLION dollars per day
Fighting wars all over the world.
A war on drugs at home that has the U.S. incarcerating more of it's citizens than ANY country in the world.
And most important...high unemployment for the 4th year in a row as the economy still has not recovered.

These are the things we need to talk about. What will Obama do differently if anything to change this course? What will Romney do to change it?

Instead...they use the media to distract us with dogs on a roof, how many years of tax returns, class warfare, etc., etc. ,etc.

Everything BUT the actual issues that we face as a nation.

You cant compare FDR and JFK for today.They lived in a very different world. Tax returns weren't released until the 1970's. Before TV there weren't supreme court confirmation hearings. Its a different time

NOW you are talking!!!
THIS is what the campaign SHOULD be about. We were driven into a deep ditch by eight years of Bush and Obama has been walking around the overturned car ignoring the gas fire to look for the car keys during much of his four years in office. That is an excellent reason to vote for anyone other than Obama.

Unfortunately, instead of real candidates, the GOP ran a slate of retards. Bachman, Herman Cain, Santorum, Perry, Newt... and Romney. That was what they decided would be the best possible field. Compared to the rest of that field Romney looks like a rockstar. Compared to almost anyone else... he looks like a plutocratic bustout salesman.

Instead of talking about the issues you mentioned, and Gitmo still being open, US citizens being assassinated, Citizens United gutting our Democracy, the BP oil spill resulting in 0 arrests, just like the banking meltdown 0 arrests... We are left to deal with Romney being Romney and Obama being Obama... because nobody honestly expects either of these two "F" grade candidates to fix anything.

I honestly truly wish either party had a better candidate.

Nothing.

And neither did Obama.

What's your point? Kennedy BARELY was elected in a squeaker over Nixon. Nixon has a much bigger and "better" record than young Kennedy.

If I were to just take the measure of Obama and Romney as LEADERS...I would definitely give the nod to Romney. Obama never led anything in his life until he became President (probably why his first two years sucked so bad)

And my point wasn't that NOT showing tax returns made Kennedy a great President. You are deflecting again. My point was that his tax returns had NOTHING to do with his capabilities.

Just like Obama's tax returns didn't help him turn the economy around in 3 years like he claimed he could in the election or it would : "be a one term proposition" for him (his words).

A person's personal finances have nothing to do with their abilities or lack of them.
Reality is that Romney is qualified. More qualified than Obama was in 2008 for sure.

Not saying Obama wasn't qualified...he was and is. Theoretically you and I are supposed to be qualified to be President...but it turned out that only multi-millionaires really need apply. :(

Your opinion is that Romney has shown nothing in his career.
That's what the media is preaching.

Reality is...the guy has been a success. Whatever you think about some of the companies going belly up...(KB toys? Come on! ALL brick and mortar toy store chains went out of business because kids didn't want those toys anymore...they want video games. Seen any Toys R Us Stores lately?) Romney's company did turn around more than failed. And made a lot of money for a lot of people.

Yeah. the companies that went down are going to scream about that if they lost their jobs. I understand that 100%.

But KB Toys was going DOWN one way or another. Just like any of the financially troubled companies that went down.
Do you seriously think that KB Toys would still be in business today no matter what? Hell no.

And the fact that I'm even taking the time to debate that with you is proof that we are being distracted from the REAL issues facing our country.
I hope you can at least see what I'm saying about that.

We should be debating HOW to get our country out of the trouble it is in and reign in the greed in Washington.

Someone might want to mention that to Romney. He seems to disagree with you.

Not true...damn, why are you making me defend Romney! lol

He said very plainly that the majority of people who are dependent on govt. will NOT vote Republican.

And also...the reverse is true. The majority of people who own their own businesses will not vote Democrat.

Of course there are plenty of exceptions...but overwhelmingly that's the way it shakes out.

And I would definitely say that a guy who lives on welfare for 10 years (just grabbing any number out of thin air for this hypothesis) wouldn't make much of a LEADER.

Neither would guys who are hard working but are more "worker bee" employee types who work hard but have no desire to take risk or lead.

Certain people have the type of personality and ability to get people to follow them. Those are the people we elect.

Well, let's see. Romney came in and borrowed a massive amount of debt, took consulting fees all the way down the line... and did what to help the company succeed? Did he buy www.toys.com with the money the company borrowed based on his promises? Did he transform them into the world's largest online toy retailer? Did he make deals with distributors or designers to bring in exclusive toys? Did he have a great marketing campaign in mind for the company? Nope. What he had in mind was "I can borrow a lot of money on their good credit, pay myself a fortune, and not care what happens to the company as the end result."

So Robbie, now he is essentially telling American taxpayers... 'give me access to the Fed and let me fix things. I just need you to trust me to do unspecified things while I turn the economy around. Then after we borrow some more money and I have leadership authority things will be fine'. Doesn't that smell an awful lot like the same scam he pulled at KB all over again? The United States isn't just KB Toys... and I wouldn't trust Romney with a prepaid credit card at a gas station quickie-mart, let alone grant him the ability to print money. He is a bustout salesman looking for an even bigger score.

Dude...everybody borrows money to buy out other companies. You use your own capital to secure the loan.

And kids don't BUY toys anymore. They buy video games.

KB wasn't set up for anything remotely close to that. They were going bankrupt.

Why the fuck are we talking about that?

And by the way...the President has NO access to the Fed. That's one of the problems of The Federal Reserve. They are unelected and answer to nobody.

If you think Romney is somehow inept and unable to create a business friendly environment that could help the economy and create jobs (I could do it in one day just by opening the Keystone Pipeline and approving some new nuclear energy plants)...then by all means vote for Pres. Obama.

There is a good chance that he might have learned enough over the last 4 years to finally make a couple of moves that would be helpful in turning things around.

I'm not trying to get you to vote Romney. I'm just trying to say: "why are the American people being deliberately distracted away from the real issues facing us"

You do not seem to understand how leveraged buyouts work. Romney didn't use his own money to buy out KB or any other company. He used tiny amounts of capital to secure big loans so he could access the company's credit to get even bigger loans to pay him off. His goal wasn't to grow the company he bought... he didn't care if it made money or went under... His fees were guaranteed by the bustout scheme.
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics...pital-20120829

That makes not buying KB a great idea... if it is such a bad investment. It doesn't make buying it with borrowed money and using its good credit to siphon off a fortune while accelerating its demise and leaving everyone else holding the bag a good idea.

Because it is what he does for a living. People say Obama is too professorial because he spent so much time in academia. What does that tell you about the kind of President a bustout salesman would be? What candidates did in their life matters.

Honestly, are you that naive? It seems to me Bush accessed the Fed just fine. He launched an unfunded war at a country that never attacked us and paid contractors a trillion dollars with money printed by the Fed. Obama seems to be accessing the Fed at will too... TARP and GM bailouts... where did that money come from? I'll give you a hint, it starts with "FED" and ends with "."


Inept... hell no. I think Romney is VERY shrewd. I am sure he could create a business friendly environment... that serves his own interests... at the expense of the American people.


Because that is EXACTLY what both candidates want. If Romney announced which loopholes he wants to close, we could discuss that. If Romney explained what steps he plans to take to fix the economy we could evaluate them. So far he has done none of that (during more than 3 years of campaigning). He has a super secret plan... one we do not need to know until after he gets elected apparently. Because he wants what is best for us but only AFTER we elect him. If we don't elect him, he will keep his magic economic fixes to himself and let us flounder. That is the implication of his campaign rhetoric. :2 cents:

I'm pretty sure that's what I just said.

EVERYBODY borrows money to buy other companies. Nobody uses their own money.

I learned that from my grandfather in the Citrus industry in Fla.

He never went to the bank and pulled out a million dollars to buy an orange grove.
He put up a small bit of his own capital and the bank put up the rest.

What Bain did afterwards with the company is irrelevant. If the company had a chance to survive and make profit, that's what Bain did. If it was going down anyway...they were smart and made money out of it.

Again..why are we discussing this? What does any of that have to do with the ability to be President of the United States?
Or is Romney the first really smart, aggressive guy to ever run for the office?

I keep wondering why Obama didn't take that TARP money and start building solar panels here in NV.

I read that solar panels across the Mojave desert here would power the entire country.

And wind power would KICK ASS here in the desert as well.

Yet...the federal govt. doesn't do ANYTHING.

Instead he funneled money to his cronies at Solyndra.

The govt. COULD have just hired Solyndra to build the damn panels out here in the desert...instead, they just handed them money with no clear directive or mission.

It's called stealing taxpayer money. :(

For the record, JFK (the pres) was not as popular as the youth of today think. If he had not been assassinated there would likely be a different picture of him. Like Tony mentioned, back before there was an Internet the press was pretty President friendly.

You think he could get away with banging MM in 2012?

Yep FDR played poker with them

I think you're right.
But popularity isn't necessarily the measure of a Presidency.

Clinton was so unpopular at the end of his term that Al Gore wouldn't even allow him on the campaign trail.

But a few years later he is recognized as a great president.

What exactly is the "federal government" doing to "destroy our economy"? I'm confused here; The economy wasn't destroyed during Obama's watch. Republicans keep saying that Obama is "destroying our economy" without understanding you cannot pin this on Obama. This happened BEFORE Obama took office. There is no way around this.

Yes, I do it too. But I'm not hiding millions of dollars tax free in foreign accounts off shore while promising to fix the economy. Romney isn't the solution, he's the problem.

Your talking about a very different time when it was improper to ask such questions. Kennedy was banging everything with breasts, but there was never so much as whisper about it. Now everything is on the table.

But every aspect of your personal life would be open to investigation. Every kid you so much as rough housed in grade school will come forward and tell the world about you.