What would that prove? That he got a B instead of an A?

Or maybe a C-... the point is we don't know. The college courses a president took, which shape his views are also important. It's also important to know if the President is a stinking liar who said he was born in Kenya to get scholarship money and acceptance. Well, we know he's a stinking liar..... and he's going to lose....

I'm sorry, but test scores are not as important as playing your taxes.

If his college records showed any reference to his being a foreign national, it could explain much. I doubt even that would dissuade his base, but independents would take notice.

I don't think College grades are important. Heck, this country elected an actor for heaven's sake.

Nefadork.... he paid his taxes. You just don't like the percentage he paid, which is determined by law and the tax code. You pay nothing, like most democratic bums.

Bob:
Perhaps Harvard Law School doesn't really exist at all. I'll bet you didn't go there did you? Anybody can teach law at the University of Chicago, any right wingnut know that, right?
Doubting Thomas

Mr. Byrne - They are asking that only because they can't say that President Obama also needs to release his tax returns.

Romney didn't pay FEDERAL taxes in 2009 on his Investment Income and it is that amount of tax free income that he does not want the American people to have knowledge of because the majority of Americans have had to try to support their families on stagnate wages for thirty plus years. (Following the 2007-2008 market downfall Investment income earners did not pay Federal tax on that income).

Now, line that up with who knows how many other ways that he walked the fine line of not doing what the majority of American people do... faithfully each year (pay taxes) on ALL income and don't have off shore and Cayman hidden accounts, with the fact that Romney and Republicans would eliminate taxes on capital gains (investment income).

Mr. Byrne - It is also pretty clear that the Republican's who are trying to make an issue of the Presidents college transcripts are those who have designed the psychological "dog whistles" used to defame and stereo type President Obama...."how could a man of color possibly have earned high marks, attend an Ivy League College, and be the editor of the Harvard Review."

Romney destroyed all of his GOP challengers by filling the airways with half truths and flat out lies, and then refusing to answer any questions. He continues to be a liar and dog whistler, projecting the attitude that he doesn't need to answer "you people."

And when they were produced, some would say they were forged. What's the point? Some just don't like the President and they are entitled not to like him. However, they should say so and drop all the nonsense.

Idiots are easily distracted.

Morgan, a degree from Columbia in political science certainly does indicate a radical anti-American flavor, seeing as the Frankfurt School(do you even know what that is?) set up shop at Columbia, and seeing as Obama's own book describes how he "chose his friends carefully," making sure to associate closely with the radical Marxist professors and various counter-culture figures on campus. Furthermore, Harvard Law, especially at the time of Obama's attendance, was a hotbed of radical Marxist activism--Derrick Bell, et. al., and Critical Race Theory, Critical Legal Theory, and so on--where have you been while the revelations of Andrew Breitbart's team tumbled forth these past months?

Everything Crestor has said is exactly true.

Not the same

Why is somebody from Herndon, VA commenting on the Nazareth Patch, trying to sell breitbart.com conspiracy theories? I smell a shill...

Jeff, you seem not to grasp that when we post on our local Patch editions, we have no control over where our remarks appear in various editions of Patch around the country which may carry the same article. At least, that's how it appears to work, based on what I have been seeing happening.

Obama never relinquished his Indonesian citizenship from when he was adopted by Lolo Soetoro in that country. That's one of the reasons why he won't release his transcripts; he registered as a foreign student to benefit from special aid and scholarship programs for foreigners. He traveled to Pakistan on a foreign passport. He may even have been born in Kenya. Either way, he acknowledges having been born with dual citizenship, which is a disqualifier, and we have an ineligible usurper in the White House.

How does that have any bearing on anything? What remotely valuable information would be gleaned from grades earned decades ago when we're talking about a man who's been the actual President of the United States for 4 years? A D+ in an undergraduate course from 1980 is simply moot. I don't care what Romney did as a Mormon missionary when he was in his early 20s, because it has no bearing on a grown man's policy when we have countless current articles, interviews, and policies to evaluate.

Did you even read his book? He was able to use dual citizenship because he IS a dual citizen. His father is from Kenya. Why can't he use his benefits to his advantage? Romney is sure quick to tell us how he uses his to hide all his money in the Cayman's-and "it's all legal".

Cumudgeon, you just proved my above point. Thank you for showing your true colors.

Idiots are easily distracted.

And even easier to spot.

U r nuts

Debbie, that makes him ineligible for the presidency.

Willingness to say he was born in Kenya? When/where exactly did he ever say he was born in Kenya?

You need to take off your tin foil hat.

As a child of the middle class and raised by a single mother and her white, Kansan parents, Obama didn't have the influence of wealth or heritage to get him into Columbia and Harvard Law. While his background might have made him an intriguing candidate to the admissions boards of these institutions, he didn't get admitted on the basis of his family name. And It's hard to claim that nepotism got him named Editor of the Harvard Law Review.

Unless, of course, you are a conspiracy theorist who is completely detached from reality.

No foil hat here... he said he was born in Kenya to publicize his first book. Fact.

Put your plastic helmet back on... like most libs, you likely have a head injury.

And you're right...how did he get into those schools? Maybe because he was a foreign born student? Did that help? Ahhh... I bet..... he admitted in his book he did nothing but smoke pot and lay around in high school... think he had awesome grades? Dolt.

And what 'radical position' classes could those even be? Intro to Concealing Your Secret Religion In Case You Are President Someday? Advanced Enslaving the Perpetual Underclass?

Unless this has changed a lot in 25 years, a BA in Political Science at Columbia is hardly a hotbed of brain-warping radicalism:
http://polisci.columbia.edu/courses/undergraduate-courses
or a JD at Harvard Law:
http://www.law.harvard.edu/academics/degrees/jd/pos/index.html
Funny how neither a Political Science track nor graduate-level Law School courses have anything to do with 'Islamic Studies' (as if understanding a major world religion - the religion of the people we have been warring with for a decade - is somehow a bad thing for a leader to have).

Crestor - we've spent much of the last week going back and forth, and you consistently base your arguments on hearsay and supposition, you describe your opponents in virulently hateful, paranoid, and simplistic terms, and what little actual details you provide have been easily disproved with a few minutes of following them to their actual source data. If you are going to continue to draw your information from pundit sources, at least take a moment to consider how confirmation bias is - I think clearly - affecting your judgment:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias

I'm not going to waste any more time debating you, but I truly hope you can find a way to not view people different from yourself as your enemies.

Do you have anything intelligent to say other than name calling everyone who posts a comment. Come on, you really don't believe all that Islam studies propaganda stuff do you?
Think back to when you were 18 or 20 years old. Do you think the same way about things that you did decades ago? It doesn't matter what classes he took.
And if you look at what Romney donated to his church-he tithed 10%-which is what is REQUIRED by the Mormon church. If he was really so upstanding and generous, he would have donated a lot more than the minimum requirement seeing as how he has so much money. He could have given it to the church instead of hiding it overseas.

Did you take the short bus fro mars?

Idiots are easily distracted.

And u r a right wing nut

ow much $$$$ have you donated to the Romney-Ryan campaign? annonymous posting is cheap, we need money NOW to help Romney-Ryan, please donate today

Crestor, have enough dignity for your argument to register by a name not the medications you are taking....I mean really calling someone a jealous liberal?

Once Romney releases his taxes, the race will be over.

@Crestor What the hell does that have to do with anything? Do you seriously think the President's school records are as important as tax evasion?

Service records, Mr. Bush.

nefanon, when their are so many questions about Obama's background, I do think it is as important, if not more important. I would like to know for sure that he did not lie and said he was from Kenya. I would like to know what grades he got and what courses he took. Just like you want to know about Romney's taxes.

Nefadork. Tax evasion? Sure. The IRS didn't check his taxes. Right. Moron.

In 2010 there was amnesty given to those evading taxes. If his returns show that he took this opportunity of amnesty because he was a tax cheat, it would mean he would be unelectable.

Suze1011, it has nothing to do with a black man as president! Hate the way your side always has to drag race into everything. You should be ashamed of yourself.

Daniel Pipes
9:41 pm on Wednesday, August 22, 2012

Bush cut taxes for the rich along with everyone else. Here are some numbers from the Office of Management and Budget. Revenues fell the first two years of Bush because of the Tech bust and the start of the tax cuts. After taking in $1.7 Trillion in tax revenues in 2003, $1.8 trillion in '04, $2.1 trillion in '05; $2.4 trillion in '06; and $2.56 trillion in '07. That's a 44% increase from '03 to '07. Revenues dropped off in '08 and '09 when the financial crisis hit .
Defisits also shrank. After the Clinton surplus in '01 Bush ran up deficits of $158 billion in '02; $378 B in '03 and $413 B in '04. Then, with renenues pouring in the deficits began to fall : $318 Billion in '05; $248 B in '06 and $161 B in '07. the 2007 deficit, with the tax cuts in effect, was 1/10 of today's $1.6 trillion deficit.
Deficits went up in '08 with the beginning of the econmic downturn and not coincidentally, with the first full year of a Democrsatic House and Senate.

When the Bush Tax Cuts were enacted , it did generate revenues according to the Office of Budget and Management. Here are the numbers.

Brendon, Thank you. I agree. The problem with politics is the sniping back and forth and the blame game on both sides and the fact no good ideas come from that. We have to take a step back and look at the problems from both sides. ie When dems question Romney's tax rate, gop says he is just following the law and legally taking advantage of what's available. But isn't that what people on food stamps, ssi and welfare are doing? Why is it good for one and not the other? From that perspective, we can see there are problems with both things and both need changing. Just because it is legal doesn't make it right. Or how about the guy making $200,000 whose tax deductions phase out at a certain income level. Is it far to him that corp tax deductions do not phase out at any income level? This is what I mean when I say level the playing field. It is not class warfare or distracting rhetoric.

Another idiot.

Are you in Congress? If so, where? Were you elected?

When, Crestor Januvia, did a president or presidential candidate EVER release his college transcripts? Do you think he didn't go to and graduate from Columbia and Harvard? (And if he lied that he did, don't you think that COLUMBIA and HARVARD would have made this information public years ago?)

And if you see his transcripts from Columbia and Harvard, will you want HS transcripts next? Then maybe his progress reports from pre-school to know if he played well with other kids on the swing set or had talent for finger painting?

This is nonsense. Frightening that YOU are allowed to vote.

Rosie... you're a moron.
Bush released his, Kerry did his. Many others.

He lied and said he was born in Kenya to get in, and get money. He's a liar from day one.

You're an idiot from day one.

no Crestor..Bush never did release..it was leaked.....But what I really want to say to you is..he was born in Hawaii..as much as you hate that a black man is President..get over it...I have not heard you say 1 thing about policy..only personal attacks...If there was a notorized copy of his trranscripts...you still wouldnt believe it...if there was a video of his birth..you'd say it was fake...Talk about policy Cres...and we can have an intellgent conversation...till then...can it..

You have to be aFauxSpews watching teatard.

Suze1011, it has nothing to do with a black man as president! Hate the way your side always has to drag race into everything. You should be ashamed of yourself.

Dont complain about the left leaning patch, because you too can blog

I would like to propose that everyone stop replying to Crestor Januvia, a person trolling for attention. I suspect he gets very little out there in the walking around in world. Attention is his oxygen. Stop providing it.

You, BB, Liberty 1, and a number of other choice jokers on the patch pack are so much fun to read -- like cartoon strips. I've lived in Horsham for 20 years and Allyson attends events and speaks here regularly. Her office is very responsive to calls from citizens ... unlike Rep. Murt, for instance. Allyson holds senior positions on important committees and has the clout and the experience to get things moving in a tough economy.

If you all feel you have to spend your time posting this nonsense repeatedly every day between now and Nov., then I think it's safe to assume that Schwartz's opponent has a very small ... advertising budget.

Jolene- I aim to amuse. "Allyson holds senior positions on important committees and has the clout and the experience to get things moving in a tough economy." Now THAT is really funny!!! You can now join our club. She is as lost as Obama is.

A lack of a mind and gone to waste. Where's you're mother?

BLC He did not stop work for welfare. The only one that believes that is Mitt Romney. All the major news outlets have made that clear except for FOX News. Please, just get the facts straight.

BLC - you are correct but you forget that this group of dems don't believe in states rights.

He did stop it by giving states the right to define what "work" is. In many states, just watching your own kids will now be called "work". Taking a walk will be called "work". Getting a massage will be called "work".

IF NOTHING WAS CHANGED, WHY THE CHANGE? Simple to give liberal craphole states the ability to define all sorts of things that are not work, as work.

In a Washington Post article is explains: "In other words, the Obama administration opened the door to states’ defining “work” as everything from self-help classes to weight-loss programs. "

SO HE IS GUTTING IS, BY TAKING OUT THE WORK. BUT YOU LIBERALS HAVE NO IDEA WHAT IS ACTUALLY HAPPENING, JUST WHAT ED SCHULTZ AND RACHEL MADDOW ARE TELLING YOU.

actually that is incorrect. Romney consistently stated his RomneyCare would be needed nationally. That is a fact.
www.whichmitt.com/videos

The changes in Work for Welfare enacted by Obama were done at the request of governors to have more flexibility in how welfare is administered. And Romney supported changes like this when he was governor of Massachusetts.

The criticism of Obama's work for welfare rules have been declared a "pants on fire" lie by every fact checker in the country.

Try reading. It helps.

You got it right Liberty 1.... the train is coming. Remember the Wisconsin recall election of Scott Walker? Remember how all the polls before the election said it was a super close race? Remember how Scott Walker blew him away? Same effect here... when pollsters call or ask people who they will vote for, they are reluctant to tell the truth. A tsunami is coming to wash this turd of a president away.

Yes he did... and his grades were better than Kerry's.

http://www.conservativedailynews.com/2012/08/did-obama-gut-welfare-reform/

So much hatefulness in that paragraph. Anyway, he didn't 'gut' the work requirement, he gave it to the states to regulate - you know that whole 'state's rights' thing?
http://www.factcheck.org/2012/08/does-obamas-plan-gut-welfare-reform/

Sorry, it's federal money, covered by federal law. And Obama doesn't have the rights to tell states to redefine work requirements. But he doesn't care... He's king.

Don't be ridiculous - it's not a monarchist's decree, nor does it demand states redefine work requirements - it's simply a 'memorandum to notify states of the Secretary’s willingness to exercise her waiver authority under section 1115 of the Social Security Act to allow states to test alternative and innovative strategies, policies, and procedures that are designed to improve employment outcomes' - as in, the waiver authority that has already been existence since 1967 (federally funded and everything). And, despite what your link to conservativedailynews implies about legality, section 402 - which is the entire extent of what the memo details - is what covers state plans that "provides assistance to needy families with (or expecting) children and provides parents with job preparation, work and support services to enable them to leave the program and become self-sufficient.' and which clearly already covers that '[the State intends to] Require a parent or caretaker receiving assistance under the program to engage in work (as defined by the State)'

The memo is purely a reminder to States of a completely optional provision has already been written into law for 45 years.

It was red states with republican governors that asked for the waiver!

If you check the facts this was requested by the states and the majority of those requesting this were republicans...

Crestor...you should create your own blog and stop boring us here. The more you write, the more you expose yourself as a fool. What has the Republican Party ever done for you?

You are kidding right?

Erin you're absolutely correct. Writers often reveal more about themselves than they do about the subject matter they write about. The first sentence of this article was the "window into his soul". Any factual discussion is lost once you give any credence to the main thrust of this piece.

Erin, please read my posts, I am trying to elevate the discussion. There are also other people who post that try to retort with facts, not rhetoric. We are out there and need to be heard more. Hopefully we will raise the bar. I also feel that name calling is not the way to go.

Steve: the teaching of Rev Wright racist rhetoric, Black Americans call it truth. Rev Wright teaches how the White man has use Christianity as his way of seeking power, while using trickery and manipulations to try and control the black man. We learn how the White man is ruthless in quest to suppress the black vote. We learn about how the white man acts like the devil in virtually all he does to gain power. We are reminded of what the white man has done to the Native Indians, Asian and Africans empires. This is truth not racist rhetoric.

partially true. but there are other issues at play. Just like Romney/Ryan do not want to speak about their position and bills that Ryan signed on "forcible rape" they also do not and have not released many solutions to the deficit either. The party of "just elect me" its an etch a sketch. The Romney/Ryan budget calls for more spending overseas and giving away our tax dollars to re-build other countries, which I believe some people on here are probably okay with rather than pumping that money back here...but thats another story. Here is a break down and effects of their budget. Tell us which you like:

http://economyincrisis.org/content/what-a-romney-ryan-budget-would-mean-for-americans

And also, since church came up, when is Romney going to stand up and disclose everything about his church. Morminism. The church that believes god is in human form with Jesus and mary on planet Kolob. Can't drink beer. Come on. What a wacko. I would like to know what kind of brainwashing Romney has had sitting in a church that believes wearing magic underwear will protect one from fire. cant be serious. and this guy says he is going to govern the U.S with his faith "in mind". That is sick

Travon, I hope you also learn to judge people by the content of their character and not by the color of their skin.

That leaves out Obama, don't you know.

when was the last one who knew what he was doing?

Dan, did the last Rep. Administration know what they were doing? Why should we believe that Romney's plan (what little we know about it), which is basically a continuation of Bush's policies (tax breaks for the rich,blah blah blah) is going to lead to prosperity? That dog has been proven not to hunt. If you don't believe me look at the job losses at the end of the Bush administration, And yes I am blaming Bush for cratering our economy and turning a surplus into a deficit. And yes I fully expect you to me a liberal, socialist,Marxist, etc; when I would describe myself as a moderate--oh well.

@ Rosemary B: I don't have to judge, U SHALL KNOW THEM BY THEIR FRUITS/WORKS.

That leaves almost everyone out.

If he paid 13% federal tax then he paid more than twice as much as my firmly middle class family. We paid 6%. I know cause we use Turbo tax and it tells you.

Rosemary, it doesn't include social security and Medicare taxes which would double the amount of taxes you paid.

Are comparing Apples to Apples here or apples to oranges? I thought we were just talking about Federal Income Tax.

There is a comparison rosemary, since no social security and Medicare taxes are paid on capital gains. Going for more of an effective rate, but you can look at it the other way.

"Left-Wingers Are only Generous with other People’s Money"
http://danieljmitchell.wordpress.com/2012/08/23/left-wingers-are-only-generous-with-other-peoples-money/

On another note: The theory is that Obama denounced his US citizenship and entered school as an Indonesian student. That is why all the speculation as to why he will not release his school records.

Another theory as to why so many Democrats want to see Romney's tax returns is because, well they themselves have never seen one before. They do not pay taxes.

i know its not the best of credible sources but it provides all the links needed to prove the point and reference the findings at the bottom of the page if one actually believes this crap. Just more radical right wing propaganda

http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/birthers/occidental.asp

All these rumors would be put to rest if he would release his college records.

I may be mistaken (wouldn't be the first time) but didn't both Gore and Kerry have their grades released? The point of contention are not the grades, he has already proven how smart he is, it is the fraud he may have perpetrated to enter school. Jimmy Carter is widely acknowledged as a very smart man being a graduate of the Naval Academy but almost led this country into an abysis and it took a "dumb actor" to fix it.

Not a very observant observer are you. The House has passed multiple bills and then once sent ot the senate - Democrat Harry Reid will not allow a vote.

The Democrats have not approved a budget for over 1,000 days.

For the first 2 years of Obama's presidency he had party control of Congress that was filibuster proof. Republicans were not the party of 'No', no matter what the Democrats say.

Obama has overstepped his power as President (Bush did too) - please refer to Article 2 of the US Constitution to see what powers are delegated to the executive branch.

If you want to move the country forward then you need governmnet to get out of the way. Less government and more freedom will bring prosperity - but you will have to work for it. At least prosperity means moving forward to me.

FA, having govt out of the way had brought us Love Canal, rivers that couldn't support fish, constant smog over LA , the savings and loan crisis and our newest financial crIsis. Did the businesses that created that mess clean it up? No our tax dollars paid for it. Is that what you want again? I feel govt should get out of the bedroom and women's private parts. There's the place govt doesn't belong.. What really is sad is I said almost this same exact thing during the Reagan years. Would be great if history was taught.

Adrian - Love Canal?? Have not heard that in a very long time. In fact when it was discovered that the company when it sold the property to the city was completely open about the ground and even testified against homes being built near the canal, the news media had other fish to fry and moved on to lower heights. The government was completely at fault for that disaster. And the S&L and the current mess is due to the government OVER involvment. Yes there is a role for government but it should be a very limited one.

Sorry liberty S&L & financial crisis due to deregulation, corruption and greed. Were all the superfund sites govt fault? There is a place for regulation, problem is the big guys buy exemptions that the little guy can't and then taxpayers pay for the cleanup. A nice return on investment.

@mike patton I agree about the bias of the blog and articles but we have to let them use their freedom of speech. I enjoy reading their articles, especially the comments, because I see that the liberal agenda has no merit and they are full of resentment and jealousy. They know that they cannot produce wealth so they have to take it from someone else. They then enlist the government to td that for them.

Really you just have to read what they say and laugh. It is comical

My pleasure. Keep up the good fight.

I don't think you understand what serfdom is. Serfdom is where you basically owe your life to those who you work for and cannot leave your job unless granted leave by your boss. They basically only pay taxes through what you pay them and the wealth disparity is huge between you (absurdly poor) and them (very wealthy). If you are really paying attention to what is happening, then you would think Romney represents the party for serfdom (although I don't think even most hardcore liberals would think this would ever happen).

Not quite accurate Joe. Serfdom in this case has to do more with what you lose as you let government do more. Central planning is bad - no matter who is doing it. The link offers a very good description as what Hayek meant by serfdom.

http://townhall.com/columnists/johnstossel/2010/02/10/hurtling_down_the_road_to_serfdom/page/full/

I am fully aware of this version, which is historically inaccurate (as it was written about in the 40s though serfdom had been gone for quite a while at that point). As a history teacher, I am a stickler for people stating things that would confuse others (this would easily confuse children more than Abraham Lincoln hunting vampires). Serfdom is a very specific economic situation, which Hayek bastardized for his own purpose.

Well Joe I would agree with you but then we would both be wrong.

No, Hayek's version of serfdom was historically inaccurate and even he wasn't so afraid of centralized government as people who profess to follow his work today are. That is a completely true statement. It seems you just want to be wrong.

If you want a more close comparison for American serfdom, check out welfare-to-work programs.

As someone who read Hayek and studied his work and others I can tell you again sir, that for me to agree with you we would both be wrong. From your comments you have very little understanding of his econonmic theory.

Then please enlighten me as to how "central control" is much like being a serf from the middle ages.

I have read his work and others as well. He wasn't completely afraid of centralized government. He thought it did have its place, though it could get too unwieldy (an obvious statement).

Please, if you know his work so well, dispute what I have said instead of just stating that I am wrong.

Again, welfare-to-work is modern serfdom at its finest.

First off you have not said anything of any consequence.

Now - I think it is safe to assume that we can agree that people of Cummunist Russia and Nazi Germany were not free. Their governments gave them the illusion of freedom but actually every one was working for the State. The State owned and controlled everything. The people worked and the State took it away. They did not have a free economy. They did not have many choices of what to buy just whatever the State allowed or distributed. A simplistic and high level description of serfdom.

Hayek did believe that there should be a social safety net. It should be at the local level though, not managed by central planners.

It is very easy for us to say someone should do something baout that and let the governmnet do it. We then give up our personal responsibility and with it our freedom.

Actually, serfdom, as I have stated multiple times, is nothing like Hayek describes it (my main gripe here). Serfdom is very decentralized (serfs work for their lords, not some sort of centralized authority). Also, the state did not own everything as the state (I'm assuming you mean the king) did not actually own much and did not have real power as to how the lords ran their manors. This is what I am talking about.

Also, we have a very decentralized safety net in America (most of the control of social programs is on the state or local level), so I don't know why you are criticizing it.

Also, you descriptions of the USSR and Nazi Germany are simplistic at best. Yes, they were totalitarian regimes, but people could choose what to buy and sell on a personal level, especially in Nazi Germany. These were still, nothing like Middle Ages serfdom.

Like I said, I teach this stuff and bastardizing terms because they sell books (like Hayek did) is the wrong way to go about it because it confuses otherwise intelligent people.

serf - the state of being under the control of another person. The meaning has grown from the feudal system you seem to be stuck in.

The people could only buy and sell what was permitted by the state. Your job was determined by the state. Both versions of centralized planning failed economically. Maybe you should reread Hayek.

I don't know where you got that definition from, probably Hayek (because he made it up). Here is the correct one: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/serf

The state didn't determine your job in either the USSR or Nazi Germany. Also, the economy of Germany was doing great under the Nazi regime. This was partly why we waited so long to fight them, because everybody liked what Hitler and the Nazis had done for Germany's economy. You should start reading some history books instead of dated economists.

Also, with regard to what you could and could not buy, that was only partly true in Russia and not true in Germany. You could make the point that your government technically sanctions or makes illegal everything which would be why you can buy a loaf of bread but not a rock of crack.

Government teaches what they want you to believe.

I actually learned most of that from independent study, not the government.

@Joseph Finnick - I wonder what would happen to a person in your Nazi Germany to go and ask for a pound of kosher meat? And what of those who chose to have a career as a Rabbi? Or are you one of those who do not believe any of that history? What made the German economy hum? How did Herr Hitler get it moving? Russia and China apparently believed that the way to improve their economies was to starve millions of people to death. Yea, centralized planning is the way to go!

Way to take what I said to the extreme. Of course I think about that history, but I think about the entirety of the history without just making assumptions as you have just done. The government of Germany didn't outlaw buying Kosher food (though it would be an obvious tip for them). Hitler got the economy humming through government spending through a variety of means (although one would be an arms race so he could wage his wars). Government spending was how we got out of the Great Depression as well (again, a good deal of it was because of the war, but the continued prosperity of America during the 1950s was through other spending).

China was never mentioned and it is a microcosm unto itself.

To say that America is in danger of becoming like China or the USSR is an absurdity that any serious historian would laugh it. We are still much closer to England (has centralized planning), Canada (has centralized planning), the majority of Europe (has centralized planning), etc.

Government isn't all bad and is needed to more of a degree than people who push extreme neo-liberalism would have you believe.

If we had more centralized planning in the case of derivatives, credit default swaps, etc. there is a good chance we wouldn't have had the housing bubble and the recession that followed.

I am sorry that you think I took your thoughts to an extreme. Your earlier comments imply that Germany and Russia through their centralized planning was not all that bad. No they may not have outlawed Kosher food, they didn't have to with their centralized planning of those who consumed kosher. The bulk of their spending went to arms and infrastructure to support their armies. The German people were free to purchase what they wanted BUT their choices were limited and their complaint line was very short for obvious reasons. Yes, the European war kicked off our economy otherwise we would have continued on in the malaise that the excessive spending started by Hoover and continued with Roosevelt kept us.
The boom after the war was more due to pent up demand of 15 years. And as far as the current mess with the housing bubble and the subsequent fallout, it was the result of government planning. The democrat congress who used Freddie Mac and Sallie Mae programs to manipulate the housing market that put people into homes they could not afford created the housing mess. Yes, there were banks and brokerage houses that took advantage (oddly some of them work for the Obama Admin.) but they acted as most people would in similar circumstances. But it was created by the same pols that you want to plan for us? No thanks. Government does have it's place in society. It is behind the Constitution and a Free Market system.

Never said those things about Germany and Russia.

Also, you need to read up on what caused the economic downturn because you have only the Republican talking points instead of the full story.

For a more nuanced reply because I was tired last night:

1. I never said Germany and Russia weren't that bad. I was just correcting inaccuracies.

2. Saying it was just military spending in Germany is completely inaccurate. That would ignore huge infrastructure programs that were being carried out.

3. German people's choices were not that limited. I have no idea where you are getting this from.

4. Pent up demand? Silly. It was continued spending from the New Deal and the fact that we were one of the few developed nations that wasn't destroyed during the war and could supply other nations. Hoover also didn't have excessive spending. He actually did very little.

5. The housing bubble was caused by excessive non-regulation and fraud in the housing market as well as the derivatives (credit default swaps, loan applications, ratings agencies, etc.). This was done under the noses of people from both parties. To assign blame to a single party is still silly. If you are going to blame a single place to start I would blame the lowering of the capital that banks were supposed to keep to loan out money and the allowing of people to sell off their loans to have others "invest" in it, then have people repackage it to make it look not risky so that people could use their pension funds to invest and then lose everything. Yes, even this was a simplified explanation, but still a whole lot more comprehensive than blaming one cog in the machine like Freddie, Fannie, and Sallie.

Serfdom is exactly were we are headed. People are afraid to leave their jobs because they can't get or afford medical insurance. They can't say anything when their bosses pile more and more work on them for the same pay. Most of the jobs available are minimum wage or in the food services where most of your salary comes from tips. There is a greater disparity of wealth distribution at any time since right before the great depression. If all the wealth is at the top and consumers make up 80% of our economy, do the math. Businesses can't grow without customers.

Michael the funny thing is there is no law that state anyone running for president has to release their tax records.

If Obama wasn't born in america, don't u think we would have found that out before he was elected? Wouldn't his republican rival looked into that?

no one is debating that. it's clear from the newpaper records at the time that obama was born in the u.s.a. a more interesting question is if he used the advantages of dual citizenship to get into the elite schools he went to.

back to the relavant topic at hand, if Romney had a scintilla of improper reporting on his tax returns, you can be sure that the obamian's in controll of the IRS would have jumped all over that, unless they are waiting for an october surprise! time will tell.

Obama has discussed the issues, but to get into it will have to wait for debates. Romney hasn't fully disclosed any plans either. Just 'I'll fix it'. But how? Lets get some details. The CBO took a look at the Romney budget that he doesn't like discussing and stated it will add to the deficit and increase taxes on the middle class. just wonderful

How are the issues being discussed by either party? What's the plan, not this get America moving stuff. Specifics not generalities. Where do the candidates stand on the war in afganistan? How are they going to get jobs created? Would be nice to make an intelligent decision rather than listen to fox news and msnbc.

What is the "Fair Share"?

Just a note everyone pays the rate on the income bracket for that amount for example if you make 100k, the first 17,400 is 10% and 17,400-70,700 is 15% and the 70,700 to 100k is at 25%.

I think the taxes under Clinton were pretty good. The economy was doing pretty well then as far as I remember it. Let's go back to then. Oh, also, let's find a way to close the loopholes so people that are super rich don't pay a smaller percentage of their income than I do.

You are avoiding the question. What is the "Fair Share"?

50% of American taxpayers pay no federal income tax. There are not enough rich people in the country to pay for Obama's fiascoes, even if you used a 100% tax rate on all income above $100,000.

How much more 'fair' do you want to make it?

a fair share...it depends. when you have somebody running for President where they want to lower the tax rate for the top and increase taxes for the middle all while running on the notion that they want to use those tax dollars to give away to foreign countries. giving our tax dollars away to rebuild other countries...to me thats not fair in anyway. Romney says he wants to boost that type of tax give away even more. all while increasing taxes on the middle class and cutting american benefits while pumping up foreign ones. (this is found in CBO report and Romney's own words of spending more on foreign aid and military operations overseas) In a perfect world....I should be able to choose where I want my tax dollars go. I am with Ron Paul on stopping giving away our tax dollars to other countries. I would pay my fair share to keep our country safe....here. Not some where else. The billions (close to trillion) being wasted there are crazy. Once that is stopped lets focus here and see how we can fix things here. But Romney is running on pumping more money in foreign aid and less money here. Ironic

Fair share would be all income taxed at the same graduated rates and be subject to social security and Medicare taxes. Fair share would be if deductions phase out for people who make over a certain amount they should phase out for corporate people too.

The 50% of Americans that don't pay income taxes don't get paid a living wage from their employers so we wind up subsidizing them. (earned income tax credits and food stamps) They do pay social security, Medicare, state, local and sales taxes though. They don't have a free ride.

You realize it has nothing to do whether he did something illegal or not, it's the fact that if he only paid around 10-20% in taxes his records will be used as an example of why the tax code needs to be reformed and why someone who makes millions pays less of a % of their income then people making less when we are supposed to have a progressive tax code. This has nothing to do with him doing anything illegal, if Mitt Romney was smart, he would release his records and use it as his own talking point for a need to reform taxes which ever way he would desire.

Johnson.. you are math challenged. Your argument is based on the assumpion that lower earners pay taxes. 50% pay nothing, no matter what those brackets say. people who earn well into six figures usually have a tax rate about 15%. You are math and fact challenged. And also there is a law of the land called "Capital Gains" which is the amount of tax you pay on the money you earn using money you ALREADY PAID TAXES ON. That rate is 15%. Most rich people have a lot of capital gains.... BECAUSE THEY INVEST THEIR MONEY IN BUSINESSES, AND THAT CREATES JOBS. You are part of the simpleton class that democrats try to court with all their class warfare crap.

Private equity firms invest other people's money their money isn't at risk. Social security is also taxed twice. What's your point? A waitresses income is at risk because she make $2.13/ hr and has to depend on the kindness of her customers for the balance of her salary which is at risk because there are people who don't tip.
Crestor, that 50% still pay social security, Medicare, state, local and sales taxes. And if they were being paid a living wage you and I wouldn't have to subsidize them with food stamps, earned income tax credit and medicaid. Oh a question , why is it okay that Romney and others use the system to their benefit, but not okay when someone poor uses the system to survive?

Also jobs are not created without customers, doesn't matter how much investment there is if no one is buying your product. That's why businesses have billions in reserves, people are investing, but no one is buying. You can't learn economics from fox news.

An education helps. Try reading. If you apply yourself, it prevents ignorance.

Not short sighted Madam just pointing out an observation. After reading alot of the comments here I see people that want the governmnet to take more from the rich. By their comments they are jealous of the wealthy and instead of striving to be wealthy they just want to take from those that have as if they are somehow entitled to what someone else has.

WHat one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving.

Jealous of the wealthy? No, not at all, but we live in a country that is supposed to have a progressive tax that taxes people within their means, the more wealthy people have more means and are therefore taxed more and the less wealthy obviously pay less. The fact that this is not happening through loopholes and such is wrong.

That is a very marxist comment Scott. A progessive tax is described in the Communist Manifesto as a way to destroy free enterprise.

Who determines a persons means?

You have to right to another person's wealth.

Johnson... 50% pay NOTHING. The top 2% of earners pay 40% of the taxes. The top 10% pay 70% of the taxes. You're right... we need a fix. The bums in the bottom 50% need to pay something. And this is HUGELY progressive.

wearing magic underwear ...ROTF...LMFAO...WTF!!!!!! Money makes u crazy!!!!

Thus removing the incentive to create wealth and sending the very ones you want to steal from away. Look at what the wealthy are doing in France when the news came out that the rates would go to 75%. The rich will move to where they will be able to keep most of what is theirs. When they are gone who will fund your government entitlement programs?

Yeah that'll work. History shows that higher tax rates foster economic growth and prosperity for all. Way to create a tax rate structure that provides an incentive to not increase taxable income.

Maybe we should shift things so 75% of the American taxpayers pay no federal tax and get all kinds of free stuff, all paid for by the other 25% - think how great that would be!

Why does it go from 25 to 38, which is an increase of 13, then from 38 to 48, which is only an increase of 10?
You can't even get the math right when you are making up the rules. This is the exact "problem" you pointed out earlier....

What's underware ?

Makes the most sense to me Richard...You are right!

No kidding! I am sure there is something in his tax returns that the Media would blow way out of proportion to take the focus off what is really important. THE ECONOMY and OBAMA's RECORD! Let's all try and focus now on the important stuff. Not the Tax returns, not what some congressman said out west. Let's try and focus on the real issues that will dictate the future of this country!

I bet you're hiding money in an IRA and 401K as we speak... putting money in there and not paying ANY taxes on it... then letting it grow and still not paying any taxes on it. You tax cheat !! You bum !! You are taking money from the poor. You could be paying taxes on that money, right now, and at a higher rate then when you retire. You are taking food out of the mouths of fat welfare children.

We do have an agreement on that we are both tired of the BS. I never said though that I think Romney/Ryan can fix it and cannot defend the Republican party on spending.

The Federal Tax Code is over 40,000 pages and is contained in 20 volumes. It is too much and no one can know all of the rules contained there in. Especially since it is rewritten every single year.

I like what I have read about the fair tax where everyone pays the same percenatge on their income with no deductions. Everyone pays say 10%.

Democrats do not want to cut entitlement programs and Republicans do not want to cut Defense spending. Both sides give too much in foreign aid. Need to cut spending across the board.

Both give too much foreign aid?
"In poll after poll, Americans overwhelmingly say they believe that foreign aid makes up a larger portion of the federal budget than defense spending, Social Security, Medicaid, Medicare, or spending on roads and other infrastructure. In a November World Public Opinion poll, the average American believed that a whopping 25 percent of the federal budget goes to foreign aid. The average respondent also thought that the appropriate level of foreign aid would be about 10 percent of the budget - 10 times the current level. Since the 1970s, aid spending has hovered around 1 percent of the federal budget."

And Republicans have supported foreign aid even more than democrats: Reagan was a strong supporter of foreign aid. Republicans have long sent major amounts of aid to Israel. And W?
"Declaring that America needed to lead the fight against the HIV/AIDS pandemic, George W. Bush established the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief in 2003. This fund, along with money for Iraq reconstruction, was part of the largest appropriation for foreign aid in three decades."

As for waste, one of the biggest wastes is mandated by Congress:
"Congress mandates that 75 percent of all U.S. international food aid be shipped aboard U.S. flagged vessels — ships registered in the United States. A study concluded that this subsidy of elite U.S. shipping companies cost American taxpayers $140 million in unnecessary transportation costs during 2006 alone."

I love people who are still making the birther conspiracy theories. Because I can place them right up there with the 9/11 "truthers". All in your rightful place, as absolute f'in nutjobs.

Do you still have your original birth certificate? I sure don't. Guess what I do have? A COPY. Ugh. This is such a retarded argument to even be having.

Do you have any proof of this? Why do you believe that he was deceitful? Any reason why? Certainly sound like a birther to me... So its not ok for the president to keep his college transcripts from being public but its OK for Romney not to release say the last 7 years of his taxes. Is that a bit hypocritical?

Actually he released his birth cert during the campaign. He then released the formal long form doc after becoming President. Even most sane Republicans have gotten off the "birther" issue at this point.

Thank you for your comment. Shows how much smarter you are than I. Nice mouth. Just like a right winger - slap slap and belittle others. Nice.

Better have that original if you want ID to vote. Not really, state dept overruled that.

It is obvious that based upon such an immature/childish comment, my 5 year old has a higher IQ than you Glenn !

Watching this video helps back up your claim Glenn from Ron Paul 2012

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EQwrB1vu74c&feature=g-vrec

Frankie, you aren't even worth responding to any further. You just make stuff up so facts, logic, and reason have no place in your world.

Good luck with that....

PS - If you are interested calling me a "douche bag" (you spelled it wrong it your post) to my face, I would happy to meet you some where in town to "discuss" it further. Just name a place and time.....

According to various sources available on the internet....the White House released the Certificate of Live Birth for Obama on April 26, 2011.

Here's the white house press release:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2011/04/27/president-obamas-long-form-birth-certificate

I live in "the Grove" tough guy. Pick a place and time.

Hey Frankie DePuss, what or where the funk is "the Grove"? I'll be at Molly's tonight after work around 6:30 PM out on the balcony having a beer. Just come out and ask for Rich. I can't stay long but I doubt I will need much time to expose you as a fraud and coward.

See you then (yeah right).....

Mollys ? Is that dress store ?

Dude, if you don't know "Mollys" you aren't from Phoenixville or the surrounding area so why are you on the Phoenixville patch? Is the "Grove" Pottsgrove? LOL! Yeah, that is a cool town....Do you "grovers" still think you are better than the people in Pottstown? Either way, take your nonsense to the Pottstown patch already (because Pottgrove isn't enough of a town to get their own patch).

Man, thanks for the laugh buddy. Best I had today. My offer still stands if you can catch a bus to Phoenixville by 6:30 PM and make sure to brush your tooth before you come as Molly's is a step up from the dives you have in the "grove".

Pheonixville, where the men are men and the woman are men too. Or is that where the men are men and the sheep are scared ? I cant remember. " the Grove" is Willow Grove. I will agree with you, you probably haven't had this much fun since you lost your virginity in the back of the corrections bus on the way to Eagleville.

"brushing your tooth", thanks for the levity after a hard days work where I am paying a higher effective rate than Romney. Enjoy your beer and watch for any low blows from the Puss.

According to Romney "Romney's Tax Returns Would Become Campaign Fodder"

With both sides creating lies from "half truths".....giving Obama more fodder would be foolish.

Steve, you are so right. Just another way to distract people from the issues.

An education helps. Try reading. Putting your puss on the front page doesn't imply credibility.

Neither does the name Mohandus.

Romney says his private sector experience is what qualifies him to be President. That's why his tax returns matter.
So experts can see how that experience was reflected in paying taxes on the remarkable profits he earned. That's all, he is making it a big deal by keeping them secret when every candidate in the last 20 years has released at least 5 years returns... plus he has bank accounts all over the world in places such as Switzerland and the Cayman Islands which are known for places to hide taxes from the IRS.
Romney's own father set the bar by releasing 10 years of returns when he ran for President...
Look, Romney was born a millionaire. He made many more millions but came into the free enterprise system with a pretty big advantage to start out.
I don't begrudge him being rich or making millions but if that's part of his resume to be President then he has to produce enough returns to be sure he paid all taxes that were due. If he did, why is he willing to take so much heat and still not release them?
What's in there that's worth taking all this discussion unless he's hiding something?
Won't it be even worse if he wins and then its found out he evaded taxes?
That could be a felony and create a Constitutional crises and even mean impeachment.
He should release them and put this issue to bed if there's nothing to hide.

Enjoy your debate. Like I said, this election is about the future of America, not taxes. Pick a side. America or Occupy.

The future of Hawaiians and tax returns maybe? Another dope!

It's funny to think anybody would believe that Romney's tax returns haven't already been turned upside down and sideways by the Obama Administration-controlled IRS! If there was anything "damaging" there, the details would already have been leaked faster than a Special Ops mission!

There's nothing in Romney's tax returns other than the opportunity for the Democrats to jump up and down, screaming "Look how RICH he is!!" as if that's a crime.

Well, actually to Liberals that is THE a crime!

The media will find something stupid and perfectly legal to bash Romney over the head with. I think it is a good decision to not release his returns. Just the type of decision I expect a good leader to make. Now I just hope he stands by it!

Where did you come with " fact" that he had no advantage from his wealth???
He did it all on his own... please provide some proof to back that up.
He was born to the father of great wealth, he was sent to the best schools, he inherited millions of dollars.... self made man???
Yea, right!
As far as Obama's IRS knows what's in his returns, that's just stupid.
He should release the returns... the Bain documents raise concern about carried interest and his returns account.
Put down the koolaide already...!!

Except, he didn't inherit a dime. His father gave it ALL to charity. Please check your facts before running your mouth.

His comment about the birth certificate was a well aimed shot AT THE BIRTHERS!! He has already disavowed their position. It was a funny comment. Just as Obama's comments about the dog on the roof were humorous. Lefties really do not have a sense of humor. And with the people you elect YOU are the guys who need it most!

No sense of humor? Do you watch the Daily Show? Have you seen the Colbert Report? Hilarious stuff!! They make fun of both sides of the aisle, but they definitely have a liberal spin. The difference is they are clear about being comedic entertainment. Fox News likes to represent their spin as actual trustworthy news. Not nearly as funny....

"It is legal but we need some help in the economy and his taxes protected by these maneuvers could very well come into play."

Trying to figure out what the hell that means!
It's perfectly legal, but his taxes could come into play??
In what way???

Fact is, with no other indication to contradict, everything Romney has done is legal and is available - as a way to protect wealth from taxes - to EVERYONE.

Anyone who wouldn't attempt to maximize what they keep out of the hands of Uncle Sam would be considered by most of us to be an idiot.

Mike, why is Romney so brilliant for taking advantage of tax laws, but poor people are despicable for taking advantage of food stamps, earned income tax credit and Medicare? Both are legal.

I don't know, Adrian. I never said " ... poor people are despicable for taking advantage of food stamps, earned income tax credit and Medicare."

All I said was that Romney has done nothing wrong by legally protecting his assets.

Mike, I was just asking the question. I know you didn't say that.

Mom - I rest my case.

Novice indeed...NOT READY FOR PRIME TIME, you mean...I dread to see his governance if elected because of his unreadiness...And why is it that only the Democrats have their talking points down pat?..Your ilk are all over this place, too, patting down their talking points...This is a place of exchanges of opinions so say what you will and everyone else do the same.

Dedicated dope to ignorance. Try reading a book, you know, an alternative to Fox News and Rush Limbaugh. They're not very enlightening.

It's funny to hear people, who voted for Barack Obama the first time, complaining about Mitt Romney's readiness for governance. What exactly were President Obama's amazing credentials before he was elected? His 140 days as a Senator? His office as a State Rep/Senator?!? What did he ever manage?

Until two months ago, no Republicans thought Romney was ready for governance. Romney rose to prominence after Michelle Bachmann, Rick Perry, Newt Gingrich, Rick Santorum, Ron Paul, Herman Cain, and Tim Pawlenty all stepped backwards and pooped the bed.

Who is Mitt Romney, the liberal Massachusetts governor, author of Obamacare, champion of women's rights or cum lately right-wing zealot? A man who completely changes stripes and who won't disclose clearly demostrates serious character issues. Remember the leader of the free world can't compare measuring Olympic security in rural Utah with London.

Supporters of Romney as well as teabaggers are self-loathers. These are people without squat-ta wannabees, getting on the Romney bandwagon. Please, the guy is a joke, who's relying upon gerrymandering, voter suppression and a short memory to get elected. He has no cache on the American stage or the world stage.

"TRUST ME", Romney said...If that's not the scariest one can ever hear from a candidate...We wouldn't want our financial adviser say that to us, would we?..So let's see what you are hiding already, sir.

Joe, I don't know if you didn't read all the comments (i don't blame you if you didn't but I stated I'm sure he did everything legal but that it won't look pretty to normal people. If he was smart he would release them and state that everything he did was legal but that we should reform the tax code, but because he delayed instead of manning up it will only be a negative for him.

As for College transcripts no president has released them purposely, Bush's were leaked, and honestly I could care less about college transcripts, it's kinda like after you had your first job, you tend to list experience instead of your GPA in college. Because after you have 10 years of experience doing something, who cares what your college grades are.

Or maybe you were talking about the other Scott, these forms need a better respond to comment tree format.

Our Tax system is already working as you describe.

"The latest data show that a big portion of the federal income tax burden is shoul­dered by a small group of the very richest Americans. The wealthiest 1 percent of the population earn 19 per­cent of the income but pay 37 percent of the income tax. The top 10 percent pay 68 percent of the tab. Meanwhile, the bottom 50 percent—those below the median income level—now earn 13 percent of the income but pay just 3 percent of the taxes. These are proportions of the income tax alone and don’t include payroll taxes for Social Security and Medicare."
http://www.american.com/archive/2007/november-december-magazine-contents/guess-who-really-pays-the-taxes/

Right. I know that. I think it is the best system. The bottom 50% make less than 32,000 a year. Why would we put a big tax burden on them? They are just trying to make enough to live. The fact that the top 1% pay 37% of the tax revenue just goes to show the gigantic incomes they have (plus they all have lawyers who can hide their money in all sorts of ways) - they have so much money that 20% of their income results in a massive amount of money. I am totally ok with that - I'm ok with taxing them at an even higher rate. That makes sense to me. Why, if you have so much, would you complain about people making minimum wage not paying taxes? If that isn't the definition of greed, I don't know what is.

Because people who do not pay taxes don't care about government spending, except that they just want more "free" stuff. Let everyone pay something, and all of a sudden, everyone cares about what it is spent on.

@ Tim, I don't think that is true. Many young people work part time and do not receive any "free stuff". Young couples often make very low salaries, pay little to no taxes, an get no free stuff. College students often have jobs at minimum wage salaries. They also do not receive free stuff. It is very possible to make a small salary and not receive anything from the government. But if you were to tax that small salary, it could possibly decrease their income enough that they would need government assistance. Yes, there are some who abuse the system - and I think we need better ways to find them and change the rules. However, the majority only take government assistance out of pure necessity - and they hate the fact that they must resort to taking it.

I am a little confused here. In earlier posts your mother is a millionaire - now they don't pay for dinner because of being on a fixed income. A little disconnect there.

@Liberty. Good point. I was referring to my in-laws. We often go to big family dinners with my husband's family. They are both disabled and although they do have savings, they also rely on social security and VA medical benefits. My mother prefers to cook at home, and we rarely go out to dinner with her. She is a very conservative spender.

At any time you or your mother or Warren Buffet can volunteer to pay more taxes. This dividend money is money that has already been taxed. It is not "lazy money" It worked very hard to get to where it is going.

"the capital gains tax is merely part of a long line of federal taxation of the same dollar of income. Wages are first taxed by payroll and personal income taxes, then again by the corporate income tax if one chooses to invest in corporate equities, and then again when those investments pay off in the form of dividends and capital gains."
http://taxfoundation.org/blog/why-capital-gains-are-taxed-lower-rate
"Not only has a low capital gains tax rate worked to encourage savings and increase economic growth, a low capital gains rate has historically raised more in tax revenue. At a 2010 talk at the Cato Institute Dr. Daniel J. Mitchell and Dr. Richard W. Rahn argued that the government has actually raised more revenue with a lower long term capital gains tax rate than a higher rate. For example, in 2007 the IRS raised $122 billion with a 15% tax rate as opposed to $7.8 billion in 1977 ($26.7 billion in 2007 dollars) with a 40% tax rate. In fact, when President Bush signed into law a cut in the top rate from 20% to 15%, revenue increased from $51.3 billion in 2003 to $137.1 billion in 2007 (although it fell significantly after the 2008 financial crisis, understandably)."

http://backintheblackblog.org/2012/04/13/do-capital-gains-tax-increases-reduce-revenue/ Or it could be that you are comparing years were we had explosive growth to years where we were in currently in a recession. If you look at the second graph on this page you'll see that capital gains does not fall when it's raised, it falls around a recession and then rises when we come out of them. Note that 2008 there was a dive in revenue but no change in the rate. Cherry picking two years should not really prove the point. You easily could have used 2008 and said that cuts decrease revenue.

Sorry. The first sentence should read "Why would they volunteer..."

"it is about what is best for the country. We all have to do what we can do to take care of our country." That is why they should voluntarily pay more taxes!

Right. When the taxes are raised on capital gains and the Bush cuts are rolled back, she will doing her part to pay more taxes. I guess she could just write an extra check to the IRS in the meantime. I'm not sure how that would work, but I will look into it.

Oh, my...Thank you, Walter Brasch...Could indictment be far behind once Romney's returns are out in public?.."Management fee conversions are illegal"...Will we ever have the luxury of looking at them?..How can he ask for our vote if he is not forthright?..Hey, Mr. Romney...You might convince your base to vote for you, but the undecideds/independents will vote for the more honest Obama.

"In this article, from one of the more credible political journals..."

The article is written by Joe Conason on a site, "The National Memo" , where he is also the editor-in-chief. In 1992 he wrote an article for Spy magazine accusing George H. W. Bush of cheating on his wife, Barbara. You can look up other articles he wrote - pretty much the same sort of one-sided partisanship drivel. Looking over the other authors writing for "The National Memo" it looks like more of the same.

This is what this Patch columnist considers "one of the more credible political journals" - yet another window into *his* soul...

Nice catch, Wayne! Somehow after reading what this clown wrote, I'm not surprised.

Are you a classic liberal, moderate liberal or a prog? Trying to figure that out but I am leaning towards a prog. I have to ask though - do you really think Romney's tax returns are the FOCUS of the election in 71 days? Let me be blunt... WHO CARES what Mitt Romney paid in taxes? This election is about the future of AMERICA and it stared in the mid-term elections. I recall when my district ran out of ballots. America will rise up yet again.

Ok. Your explanation makes sense. High tax rates generally make people keep their money in an investment instead of taking it out and getting it back into circulation. I hear what you are saying about the Constitution, but I believe is was a document designed to evolve so that it continues to be "for the people, by the people". The original Constitution didn't want me to have a right to vote. I'm glad and proud that we have - and continue to - develop the Constitution to meet our citizen's needs. It was a different world 200 years ago - we are a HUGE country and we need much more than a common defense from our government. We need a government who "provides for the common good" - roads, bridges, education, health systems, police and fire forces, welfare services, protection of our environment, etc.
Also, I think it is great that Romney gives money to charity. So do I (no where near to 3 million, of course.) I would would think everyone gives as much to charity as they can, right? But I don't donate to the "76 reconstruction" project, or the "clean up this toxic dump" charity. Our government needs to do these things with our tax money. I do wish both parties shent the money more wisely without ear marks and back room deals. Do you think that will ever happen? I wish.

You wouldn't pay any taxes on that because the first $500,000 profit on a home is not taxable. That is after all the repairs and improvements you made like that new roof.
There's billions in waste in the defense budget and Romney and Ryan want to spend more? Guess I know who some of their donors are.

Adrian, of course you know that gains are deferred on the sale of your personal home if you are under 55 and lived in the home during a 5 year period and buy another home within 2 years. If you don't buy another home you would taxed at either the ordinary tax rate or capital gains tax rate depending on how long you have owned the home. If you are over 55 and have lived in your home for at least 2 years. you can exclude up to $250,000 per person. But of course, you already knew that I assume.

Joe, get a clue.

For chrisakes this guy tried to claim his dancing horse as a tax deduction. Maybe I should try to claim my greens fees on the golf course as a deduction; I am sure good ole Mitts tax attorney could find a loophole or two in that regard. No doubt about it, he has got to come clean and level with the American people if he wants our vote.

Moron... 1/2 the people in the country pay no taxes. 40% more pay less than 15% effective rate after all their deductions. Just because you make up lies does not make it true.

David Curran, and so what? Warren Buffet, Obama and all of his very wealthy supporters also pay a smaller percentage of their "real wealth" and get around it through the same loopholes that Romney does. But no matter how you cut it 15% a year on his millions in taxes is a heck of a lot than most of us will earn in a lifetime. And by his business acumen, he has caused the employment of many in the public sector. Obama is guilty of the same only he has managed to employ more government positions while the public sector is diminishing. And you call Romney a liar, just go back and listen to all of his campaign promises....every time he opens his mouth he lies. So, let's just understand that lying is part of the political landscape. But a man who knows nothing about running a business certainly cannot (and he's proven it) run a country...

You are absolutely incorrect there Adrian. If someone treats a family pet like Romney has (never disputed), that goes to facets of his judgement and empathy; two qualities which I feel are necessary to be our President. Do you know of anyone that has been callous enough to put a dog on the roof of their for 1200 miles?
If you object to me calling him a liar, then perhaps it is you who should look at the facts.

Do you really know about this story? It began when a reporter asked the Romney kids for a story about their dad. It was about the time dad had to pull over and hose down the car because of an "accident" on the roof. This also involved cleaning up Seamus (the dog) and his kennel.

First, the dog was not strapped to the roof! It was a specialized kennel that was attached to the roof rack of the family station wagon (and it was equipped with a windshield!). All accounts claim the the dog would voluntarily jump up on the car to enjoy his ride.

And what could be more "middle class" than an all day car ride to your destination in a station wagon? And a desire to bring the family pet rather than board him where he would probably spend the better part of the week caged up. The political opposition has taken an endearing childhood memory and twisted it out of all proportion - Because the idea of their evil capitalist nemesis hosing poop off the family station wagon goes against narrative they have built up against him!

See, no new ideas on how we can get out of this mess. What I get is the dog issue. If you can quote something Romney said with the facts that disprove it, then you can call him a liar, ( how hard is it to look something up with Google) but just to call people names is unproductive, which I think is why it is done, more distraction, less substance. .

And Wayne, when u do purchase the ant farm, make sure you deduct that from your taxes just like Mitt.

Adrian, there are no new ideas- just who is better prepared and qualified to be President. A person who has lied (Medicare, work requirements for welfare, and maybe his taxes), in my mind is not suitable to be President. Mitt does not fill the bill.
I appreciate you taking the high road as far as discourse goes, just remember how the Rep.s villified Kerry (combat veteran) and praised Bush (combat avoider). They are not playing softball. They play hardball, and I suggest you do the same

@David Curran - Didn't Obama claim that he ate a dog once? It may not have been his pet but that is splitting hairs isn't it? It may have been somebody's pet.

Dave, Dave, Dave - Romney has not lied about Medicaid or work for welfare requirements. In fact, it was the President himself that Lied when he said that "I was only giving the Governors, including the Republican ones, what they asked for", which was so over the top lying. Clinton lied because he was good at it. Obama lies because he can't help it. Talk about fit for President.

David, I prefer to fight with the facts. When someone fights with name calling it is because they don't have an answer. I am also working to get anyone, who doesnt have an ID for this election, get one. Talk is basically cheap, you have to get off your a**.

Can someone please tell me why Oiho (Obama's new spelling of the state) citizens continue to support and vote for Sen. Sherrod Brown-nose and Barack Obama. They have the same ideology and are driving Ohio business's to Indiana and Pennsylvania and other states. Evidently these citizens place the Democratic Party before there families and jobs! Sad..............and true! Thank you Ohio for the jobs! Keep up the good work. I like the paycheck instead of an unemployment check! Ha, ha, ha!

Thanks for posting that - honest, educated arguments are both rare and insightful when it comes to this sort of discussion.

@Mom - I always found The Cato institute to be quote fair and honest. What is their very biased and flawed POV?

Liberty - I am only quoting my economist friend. I don't even know what the Cato Institute is. She is a very respected PhD. economist who has worked with people who have advised Presidents (both Bush and Obama). I would trust her opinion.

Mom -- Advised Bush and Obama? I don't think I would trust her advice if she told me I needed an umbrella because it was raining.

Trust who you want. She is a top PhD economist who has worked with other highly respected ecomomist. She is an expert. Maybe you know more about economics than she does, but I seriously doubt it. You can close your eyes when the truth doesn't match your opinion, or you can try to learn something.

Uh - the Cato group is an openly Conservative Libertarian think tank - it's right on their webpage - it's a Koch Brothers project.

Mom - I know several economist - studied economics - and I have found that a good portion of homemakers and business people have a better understanding then most economist. Especially when they are breathing the rareified air of DC. No disrespect meant to you or your friend but if she advised both Bush and Obama - looking at the state we are in - get the stars out of your eyes, it is not working. I only fear that she is educating future "advisors".

I wonder how many people realize the maximum loss allowed on any investment in any one year is $3,000. So if you loose $10K, $50K or $100k or $1M ....the most you can right off is $3,000. The $3,000 is a deduction and not a credit. So if you're in the 30% tax bracket you get about $1,000 back. On the other hand, you pay taxes on 100% on your investment income although at a lower rate if held for more than 1 year. So for the government it's "Head I win, tails you loose". The investor takes the risk, the government makes out on the profits but the investors takes almost all the loss.

Steve, not quite right. Your losses are deducted from your gains and than you can take another $3000 off. If you only had losses, that would be true, but why would you sell if you had no gains to offset the taxes. Those deductions do not expire and you can take that $3000 off your taxes every year until it is used up. I suggest you get a better financial advisor.

Also Steve, if you have a loss that is not capital gains related, you can only deduct the amount that is more than, I believe, 7.5% of your income so if you get robbed, your house floods, you don't get to deduct all that loss like an investor would be eventually able to do.

I think that would be the "death tax" or estate tax not capital gain tax.

I'lll give you the point. They still need a better financial advisor. lol

Investment advisors are a mostly scams. Their main interest is the fees they generate from their clients and they simply focus on keeping their client "alive" to generate their annuity of fees year after year. The success of the clients is a secondary thought. It's all about sales, revenues, commissions, 12b-1 etc. But I guess you still need an advisor for those tough decisions.....LOL ... Good luck !

obviously you are not educated to understand.

so says the anonymous poster

A 4 party system would be just as polarizing. Anymore then 1 party would have the same effect. Do you want just 1 party? This bickering is not new. What made the Roman Republic last was they usually killed their opposition, THAT I might consider. Only kidding!

What a joke. If he's leading us over a cliff (which he is) and he won't compromise (which he won't), I want republicans to block him every step of the way. What a STUPID COMMENT to see he's a leader, but nobody will follow. DUH.

Where are Obama's school records? Did he lie to get into school and get scholarships? This is a measure of his character.

Yikes!..Now I heard everything...How did Romney do in school other than bully gay classmates...Obama wouldn't have done such a despicable thing...Give it up, Mary...You have nothing on Obama but innuendos from Fox News...Romney has no character but to pile on more money at the expense of his employees, you know, closing up companies once they have served his greedy purpose, then hides the "loot" from public scrutiny...SHOW US YOUR TAX RETURNS, SIR!

Adrian, take note of Mary's comments-does that sound like a person who could be convinced of objective facts? Mary, like Mitt is just a bald-faced liar who will do anything and say anything to damage our President.
Here is a article from Robert Reich on Romney's penchant for lying, or stretching the truth if that term makes you feel better.
romneys-lying-machine_b_1827787.html

Reich link
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mobileweb/robert-reich/romneys-lying-machine_b_1827787.html

Wilfred! Shame on you! That story about bulling has been proven false. I tell you this because I know you would not knowingly lie.

Mary, What a great script for a movie! It could be an update of the Manchurian Candidate. You could call it the Pakistani Candidate.After all he reads books and that's dangerous. You could turn the evil mother character, greedy for power into his wife, because she wants to take over your food choices. That's good and you need his medical records to find out about all the stuff that was implanted in his brain. I like it.

Adrian, I cannot recall the poster, but several days ago someone suggested that Valerie Jarrett was the "puppeteer" behind the Obama administration. If you do go ahead with this movie, please reserve a cameo for Miss Jarrett. LOL

Romney's bullying was false because he said so...Trust me.

Wrong again Wilfred! The so called "victim" has even denied it.

Steve, not only Dems think he is a liar. That icon of the right wing and Serial Adulterer in Chief, Gingrich feels the same way.

http://m.cbsnews.com/fullstory.rbml?catid=57351153&feed_id=null&videofeed=null

Except that video is complete nonsense - is it really a 'lie' that he quoted 'Sunlight is the greatest disinfectant' instead of 'Sunlight is the best disinfectant'? Is following through on only half of your transparency promises 'lying' when it's still more transparent than previous administrations?

At least Gingrinch didn't do it in the Oval Office like Clinton amongst his many other trysts while Governor.

@Daniel - Man, THAT is a low blow :O

Charlie, where is your proof that he ever was audited? I for one would run for the hills if a proven liar said: "trust me". He is hiding something. It is as simple as that. Time to come clean Mitt.

You're neither sly nor a fox.... really.... just shut up. You are clueless.

congratulations on drinking the koolaid

Steve if you actually believe that businesses went overseas, because people wanted to pay less for goods, you have bought into the propaganda and false belief that those who are only interested in profit, are and have made those choices to benefit the American people. Seriously, think about that twisted logic... It may make them feel better about destroying a country of American manufacturers over a period of 30 to 50 years, slowly killing off the American Dream of hard work that provided parents with the ability to make sure their kids had better opportunities and/or choices for their education and future business endeavors. But, the line they feed themselves and have been telling Americans, is as I said before, nothing but propaganda. A cover for anti-Country decisions made for personal gain.

The bottom line is that companies that have shut down and put the American people out of work have moved overseas, where workers are cheap. Drone assembly lines where nets have even been hung from the roof tops because the conditions are so horrific for workers that they commit suicide.

It is our history of invention, ingenuity, and production is a great history and using the "we are now part of a more global economy" to justify self serving endeavors of businesses that brought in foreign workers to be trained by American's and then eliminated those same American peoples jobs, is a sham.

True American Patriots support and put country first.

Probably unsweetend too from the sounds of them.

There are 20 companies in the world making shoes...... 5 in the USA and 15 elsewhere. Since the 5 in the USA pay more to their US employess, their profit margins are 10%. The others companies throughout the world have an average profit margin of 15%. They all sell to the USA. If you were to start or expand a shoe company and wanted to attract investors to invest in your company who have thousands of investment choices, where would you locate or move your manufacturing facilities too ? The companies overseas make more than the American companies......which companies generate more cash for expansion, re-investment or R&D ? Which company is behind the eight ball ? Which company will have a lower cost of capital because of better margins and better cash flow ? Llke I said, your are clueless to the real world of business and you are locked up in your little world where you think that money for investment comes from the fairy godmother and that investors would rather have a lower rate of return on the investment than a higher rate of return because of morality. So how often do you something purchase made in USA vs made overseas and pay the higher price with a smile ? When you wake up to reality, let me know.

@ steve- Not sure why you suggest I think investment $ comes from the fairy godmother and that investors would want a lower rate of return due to morality. Nothing a stated implies that. I simply stated that there is an argument that profit not consumers wanting lower costs drives jobs over seas. What would be nice would be an import tax on goods produced over seas so the price to consumers for a product made in the US would be less expensive than the one made somewhere else.

I just disagree that the reason why jobs go overseas is because consumers want them cheap, I think its because companies are responsible to share holders and need to make a profit. How much profit is enough? Fact is there is truth to both points on why goods are made over seas. How much more would the ralph lauren olympic outfits have costs if they were made in america? I am sure ralph could keep his business open if he used US manufacturers but the fact is he doesn't and the main reason why is due to profit margin. I think most americans would be willing to pay more for things if they knew it was made in america.

Ulitmately there is very little difference between the republican and democratic parties (why ralph nader ran) all politicians lie, 99% are bought out by special interest groups. The fact is a very few rich people have been able to manipulate the system via special interest money for their own personal gain. Politicans do this through gerrymandering. The entire system is corrupt and no one is really willing to change anything except divide the country and make dems point fingers at republicans and vice versa. Until a true alternate 3rd party is developed that is socially tolerant and fiscally conservative, one that refuses special interests and has this countries best interest at heart instead of their personal well being, things will continue to get worse.

These idiots don't even know that to sell stuff in many countries, especially China, you have to have 50% chinese produced content.... so you have to build a factory there to sell to them.... even when you design a complex item, like a generator, you need 50% of the engineering work done in China. SO YOU HAVE TO OPEN OFFICES AND FACTORIES IN OTHER COUNTRIES to compete there.

DERP. Again, DEMOCRATS killed the Unions by giving them too much power, power to put their companies out of business.

Crestor- All that proves is that the US should have more nationalistic polices IE like china in your example to help US manufacturing.

If you really think Unions killed all industry in the US you are extremely foolish, as usual the problem is way more complex then any one issue, between companies with management who decided to rack in short term profits in lieu of expensive long term investment which in the end made them not competitive to Free trade agreements with countries that don't even come close to our labor standards (pursued by Mostly Republicans but also a lot of democrats I.E. Clinton) to Some unions becoming too powerful or not wanting to give up on pensions (or companies not fulfilling their promises to employees), to a tax policy that incentives moving jobs over seas, the issues are endless. It was our Neo-Liberal policies that screwed us over in the long term. Why do we allow countries to raise tariffs against our products but allow theirs to come in nearly tariff free. I am all for free trade with countries like Canada who have our standards of living and have great working conditions but we should never make a trade treaty with a country without making them hold to a certain standard, otherwise we will just be joining the race to the bottom.

Crestor- Read the fortune magazine article on the fast and the furious. You will find the ulitmate blame is with the NRA. But I agree, he should release all the documents as should romney release his tax returns. Everybody and everything should be held to the same standards.

Obama is not the issue. Mitt’s tax returns are the issue and his refusal to release them speaks volumes about how he would govern… arrogantly and in secret, like Cheney and Nixon. Mitt won’t release his returns because he’s embarrassed that he paid so little in taxes relative to working Americans and that he stashed his millions overseas for the sole purpose of avoiding U.S. taxes. Mitt is terrified of the Democrats. He says those meanies will use his tax returns as “ammunition” (his word). Ya think? It’s an election. It shows how gutless he is. What is he going to do when he has to face Khomeini or Ahmadinnerjacket, or Bibi Netanyahu, all of whom are itching to start World War III. As for Obama’s college transcripts, even if he releases them, the nutbar right will claim that they are fraudulent, that Obama and the libs at Harvard conspired to phony them up, so Obama can proceed with taking everyone’s guns away, instituting Sharia law, and turning the country over to the United Nations.

So says Crestor the Magnificant. Are we to take your mindless, paranoid rants seriously? Don't be so full of your selve Crestor. Your faux outrage is sickening and brings nothing to the table. What a tool!!

In one of his wackier posts from 8/12, Crestor in a exchange about problems the black community is facing stated:

"Without as much of a social net. They won't breed so quickly. We make it easy to be a bum."

Now Crestor I know the Rep.s convention is in FL, and the Dem's is in NC; where are the Nazi party holding their convention?

Right.. the NRA.... they sold the guns to the Mexicans. Oy vey.

David.... more correctly, I am Crestor the Correct.

David... you're the party of eugenics. You support the abortion of 10's of thousands of black and low income babies every year. You are actually most closely aligned to the Nazi's. And you LOVE socialism... do you know what the full name of Nazi party was? I'll give you a hint.... it contains the word "Socialist".

Not bitter at all... just correct, and so tired of dealing with liberal dolts who have no reasoning power.

How about this for starters....
**Spent a trillion dollars on a wasted stimulus (hello solyndra)
** Unemployment is a disaster
** keeps giving people free money for being lazy
** health care disaster...

stay tuned

- Shut down drilling on Federal land
- Blocked Canadian pipeline
- Illegally sold guns to Mexican drug lords
- Used executive priv. to cover up his involvement in Fast and Furious
- Increased food stamps by 50%
- Selected an Attorney General who only upholds the law when minoriites are wronged
- Has overseen an explosive growth in regulations that result in businesses either not starting or expanding, or taking their business overseas
- Only focuses on economic actions that will help PUBLIC UNION workers
- Thinks private sector is doing fine
- Wants to do ANOTHER stimulus when first one didn't work
- Is bankrupting the country with 5 trillion in new debt
- Has hired tens of thousands of new federal workers, and expanded all regulatory agencies
- Has written off Israel
- Call what happened in the Middle East an Arab new beginning, and now we just have the Muslim Brotherhood in charge, crucifying people
- Focused on getting a healthcare bill when he should have focused on the economy
- Has created the most devisive political atmosphere EVER... basically by cramming health care reform down everybodies throat when he controlled house and senate
- Created a debt commission and then IGNORED EVERY RECOMMENDATION THEY MADE

If we went to a depression or continued to recess then I would agree that the stimulus was wasted but the fact is we are in a slow recovery. Also the stimulus was favored by both parties and started by Bush.

Unemployment although not great has improved and we are not longer losing jobs at the rate we were losing them 100,000's per month that started under bush, then Obama got in office and after a year of inacting his policies employment started to improve. If we kept the same policies as bush, then maybe things would have continued down that spiral path.
Free money for being lazy is just BS rhetoric. I think all republican presidents did the same.
Health care... many would disagree that its a disaster and the final result will not be known for some years but I would bet that the premiums of the middle class will start to go down.

Crestor... did you even read the link I posted from the NY times? Why deny the actual facts? All you do is spew hate and ignorance and really bring nothing to the table that is constructive. I feel sorry for you as you have so much hate and nothing better to do than troll on these forums. Misery loves company which is probably why you put everyone down that does not agree with you. Hope you find happiness at some point in your life. good luck

Domestic drilling is UP because of the private sector. Obama shut down drilling on most federal land. Drilling could be WAY UP if need be

The Fortune article has no idea what really happened because Obama has blocked documents

Private sector is doing horribly... or we would not have 15% unemployment and record people on food stamps is the private sector doing well

Muslim brotherhood is crucifying people. Google it.

How is Israel written off? Google it.

Federal employees UP... I'll Google it for you
http://money.cnn.com/2012/01/25/news/economy/obama_government/index.htm

We have more than enough building code standards... Like most liberals you think we should continually add more and more regulations. There are never enough. You choke out business. Dorks.

I looked it up... you're right, food stamps are only up 44% under Obama.

So, basically you are wrong on just about everything. Typical liberal. No idea what you are talking about.... just what Rachel Maddow says...

http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/01/06/under-obama-a-record-decline-in-government-jobs/

Crestor, If business paid people a living wage they wouldn't have to be on food stamps. You are subsidizing their salaries.
Govt doesn't drill only the private sector does. It is the private sector who also leaves their mess for the taxpayer to clean up, so it's a good thing they can't drill on public lands.
US just gave Israel new weapons system. Israel knows the US stands behind it.
There are a lot of regulations that don't make sense and many that do. Problem with the regulations is that they are gerrymandered to the benefit of some (big donors) and to the chagrin of others (their completion)

Crestor, as usual, is wrong again. Let's just look at his Food stamps "facts." He believes that food stamps increased 44% under President Obama. Check out factcheck.or, an INDEPENDENT non-aligned site. Below is just a little bit of the TRUTH.

"We asked the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Food and Nutrition service for month-by-month figures going back to January 2001. And they show that under President George W. Bush the number of recipients rose by nearly 14.7 million. Nothing before comes close to that. And under Obama, the increase so far has been 14.2 million. To be exact, the program has so far grown by 444,574 fewer recipients during Obama’s time in office than during Bush’s."
http://www.factcheck.org/2012/01/newts-faulty-food-stamp-claim/

A fact check (factcheck.org or snopes.com) of most of Crestor's claims will reveal that he apparently picks up these facts out of his ass.

To Walter Brasch, who responded to Crestor: Obama increased the number of food stamp recipients by 14+ million.... that's over and above the already high numbers on food stamps he (ahem) inherited from Bush. Great job, way to grow and market those entitlements, Barry....

Crestor as usual is right. Liberals are dumb asses as usual.

http://dailycaller.com/2012/06/07/sessions-food-stamp-spending-up-100-percent-since-obama-took-office/

Ego.... duh.... FEDERAL JOBS ARE WAY UP !!!!! The ones that Obama has direct control over !!!!!!!!

Ya, state and local jobs are DOWN, because of this horrid economy he has done nothing to improve. DUHHHHHH. Where he can, HE HIRES CONSTANTLY AND GROWS GOVERNMENT. His whole stimulus package was just a payoff to states to KEEP government jobs. But becuase he is SOOOOO stupid and SUCH an amateur, he did NOTHING to improve the private sector, so the economy is STILL IN THE TOILET, and now state and local government jobs are being lost.
DUUUUUUUUUUHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH.

@Crestor Januvia - you really are on a roll again. Do you get dizzy? Or do you just get so mad your vessels burst? You give me a good laff every day; thanks for that.

By the way, is it the drug "Crestor" or is it "Januvia" that gives you this gift of blab, I mean gab?

Since you obviously are smarter than anyone, can fix it all and have all the answers, why don't *you" run for political office? Love to see you spew on tv. I'd vote for you.

http://www.politicususa.com/big-government-obama-reagan.html

For such a short article, that a whole lot of 'If, could, is closer, if, could, whether or not" to be of any real legitimacy.

I know I shouldn't respond to trolls, but it's been standard middle-eastern policy of almost all past presidents that Israel must go back to pre-1967 borders in an agreement. Both Bush's and Clinton all supported that.

As for "if you have a business you didn't build that" you are completely taking that quote out of context, but hey that's what people do I guess.

I find it funny that you are using two names in this conversation John McCrook and Kenyan Muslim. (you accidentally posted on the other name :-p)

Are you nuts, your not even making any sense. Ask who? it's been the standard position of the US of A to have Israel return to it's 1967 borders.

http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2011/05/nothing-new-in-the-idea-that-67-borders-should-guide-peace-talks-updated/239162/

http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2011/05/nothing-new-in-the-idea-that-67-borders-should-guide-peace-talks-updated/239162/

Exactly - what is so hard to understand or inflammatory about realizing we are all part of a greater network and legacy of Americans? Here's the actual quote for those that may never have actually read it:

"...[I]f you've been successful, you didn't get there on your own. You didn't get there on your own. I'm always struck by people who think, 'Well, it must be because I was just so smart.' There are a lot of smart people out there. 'It must be because I worked harder than everybody else.' Let me tell you something — there are a whole bunch of hardworking people out there. If you were successful, somebody along the line gave you some help. There was a great teacher somewhere in your life. Somebody helped create this unbelievable American system that we have that allowed you to thrive. Somebody invested in roads and bridges. If you've got a business, you didn't build that. Somebody else made that happen."

I mean, that's completely, unarguably, obviously true, right?

You left a few out...
"you're doing a heckuva job Brownie" ...GW Bush
"I like to be able to fire people"...Romney
"PETA is not happy that my dog likes fresh air."...Romney
" Corporations ARE people my friend"...Romney
"We should double Guantanamo!"...Romney
"My sons are all adults and they've made decisions about their careers and they've chosen not to serve in the military and active duty and I respect their decision in that regard. One of the ways my sons are showing support for our nation is helping me get elected because they think I'd be a great president"....Romney

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6W73v4p6Yyg *cough*

http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2012/08/16/obama_has_been_good_for_israel

Ummm, that was Pelosi.

Ya, Pelosi, another dumb ass liberal. Just like all liberals. Do what feels good.... the hell with understanding what the actual outcome is of your actions.

Perhaps you don't understand the difference between 'society' and 'socialism' ?

Kenyan Muslim, I know you. No more hiding behind your "rainbow". Just cause you drive a pick-up doesn't mean you can't like boys. It's okay sweetie.

Reagan as Nostradamus now. You know that Reagan raised taxes don't you. He'd be a rino by today's "standards". Presidents can't control gas prices, or at least that's what we were taught during the Bush era. Every time someone hiccups in the middle east gas prices go up. Just keep Romney talking about attacking Iran. It will be $6 before you know it.

You are right about Reagan there Adrian; Reagan, and a host of past Rep. Pres. (Ford,Nixon, T Roosevelt) would not have a chance in any Rep primary today. It has become a cliche but it is " not the Republican party of our grandparents anymore"

Sorry I left out Ike. Not Ike from the patch but Eisenhower. LOL

It's not like the President gets up every morning and calls the gas stations to tell them what price to put on the pumps. The dollar is weak, and other countries are using more gas than they used to. http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2011/04/what-determines-the-price-of-gas-a-visual-guide/237968/

Idiot. Read your own article. Supply/Demand is the biggest factor influencing price. Obama has done everything he can to kill the supply, while wasting money on solar panels. Damn stupid liberal socialist commie marxist president that he is.

Reagan raised taxes 7 times

Funny Ms. Kenyan, I saw you at the park near the river. I hope you got the right change back for your ten.
You go BOY!!!!!!
I love your lisp when you talk.

Crestor, you are wrong. Liberals understand math. It goes something like this...

The amount of free stuff I get from Obama equals one vote. Also the amount of whining I do is in direct inverse proportion to the amount of work I do and money I earn

no

Ha ha. I am a genius. I see things for what they really are. You, see things like a little child... how you want them to be in fairy land. I assure you I know far more about energy production and consumption than you ever will. I also know enough to know that solar panels are not the answer. Neither you nor our dumb ass president know that. He lost half a billion dollars funding a solar panel company that his own administration told him was not viable. He hates oil and natural gas, but those are the only hope FOR NOW. Want to do R&D ? Figure out how to make a fusion reactor work. Any brain damage I may have incurred came from reading the drivel stupid liberals post. You were all brainwashed by your union parents, who are now unemployed. Many come from school teacher parents, the worst union wonk heads of all. You are all just pathetically incapable of analyzing an issue and coming to anything but a dumb ass conclusion (told to you by the drunk Chris Mathews).

I guess I should have included paranoia and delusions (of grandeur no less), eh Crestor?

proves that he is a success, knows finance and can SAVE thee UNITED STATES of AMERICA from 4 years of idiocy

It's so wearying to read inferences (or outright charges) that Gov. Romney has cheated on his taxes as a way to press for ever more private data. Does anyone really believe that such a high-profile, high-income person would escape close scrutiny by the IRS?

The IRS is part of the executive branch. I think it's fair to assume that the returns of the person running to unseat the incumbent have been reviewed quite closely. So let's stop with the unfounded, unending -- and yes, unseemly -- charges of tax abuse.

TO BOTHER YOU!!!! I think it was better when you were holding your breath.

John Dallas Bowers, The reason that their is a call for Romney to release his tax returns is not about "charges of abuse" which is the spin that the Republicans and their surrogates.

The call for Romney to release years of taxes is to provide Americans with a clear picture of exactly how invested the man is in America. It's about his integrity and his patriotism. It's about his pursuit of a title for personal gain vs pursuit of the highest office of the land to do good works for ALL American's, Country, and around the world.

Being the President of the United States of America is much bigger and broader than I'm a business man therefore I have all the right answers. Are you aware that the last President that we elected with the same type of "business man" experience as Romney, was President Jimmy Carter? How about the last couple of "business men" that sat in the Oval Office? The last one over saw the economic disaster that was handed over to our current President.

The problems with Romney is that he has been on every side of every issue, depending on which position was expedient in obtaining the title he was seeking. He wants to be Commander In Chief of the Armed Forces, but sought numerous deferments, while others went in his place, where is the integrity and patriotism in his making that choice?

He says, just trust me. Every woman knows exactly what that means when a man makes those kinds of statements.

tldnr

If you are getting your info from the post or ny times you don't understand basic math or economics either.

143 words is too long for you? That's pretty sad.

Ah, math, such a notoriously subjective and politically-biased art.

When the dems get involved it becomes such!

Then that would make him a Republican. Those seem to be the qualifications these days.

Good comeback!!! I appreciate people with humor, regardless of political persuasion. It is an unfortunate fact that as republicans go - he may be!

I couldn't resist, you left yourself wide open. I love a sense of humor myself.