“Ignorance is bliss.”

Since: May 11

West Bloomfield, MI

#357 Aug 21, 2012
FKA Reader wrote:
<quoted text>
I think we need to pity imagine.
She seems to be a textbook example of someone saturated with off-the-charts far-right pseudo-religious whackery on a regular basis.
It's a "she"? Well that certainly explains things a little better...the hysterics and all. Even the most ignorant male posters don't resort to those sorts of hysterics.

“Ignorance is bliss.”

Since: May 11

West Bloomfield, MI

#359 Aug 21, 2012
gokeefe wrote:
<quoted text>
There is no proof he violated, he's complied with the law for disclosures, so therefore, there is no argument regarding Romney and his tax disclosures. See the ending to this story (hehehehehe)...
So your argument really is?????
Therefore, you've proven my point somewhat. Liberals tend to believe being wealthy is wrong. What exactly is driving this force?
There really is no IRS or other statute requiring this. I suggest, as Ayn Rand would say, check your premises. Tax disclosure has always been VOLUNTARY on the part of presidential candidates...
http://www.taxhistory.org/www/website.nsf/web...
Your turn.
You're not someone whose mind will be changed by anything I say, so I'm not about to waste time trying to or explaining myself. Suffice to say, no, I don't hate wealthy people or begrudge them for being wealthy. You can harp on it if you like and claim otherwise, but you'd still be wrong.

One question I would like to pose (again): If Romney has nothing to hide, and there are no issues with his tax returns, why has he not released them as he has criticized others for not doing? Why will no one answer this question?

“Ignorance is bliss.”

Since: May 11

West Bloomfield, MI

#360 Aug 21, 2012
Spookhereskcuszipot wrote:
<quoted text>
No you wouldn't want a schizophrenic preforming surgery on your larynx would you? So why would you want someone with the mental defect of homosexuality interpreting the law and evidence? Homosexuality used to be considered a mental illness before liberalism, another mental disorder, invaded everything
Inexplicable animosity toward strangers is more of a mental disorder than anything. You're clearly affected.

“Ignorance is bliss.”

Since: May 11

West Bloomfield, MI

#361 Aug 21, 2012
Fred Gee Sanford wrote:
<quoted text>The response you got was appropriate for what you posted. Your utter ignorance is lucky to elicit two sentences from me or any other person with a clue.
I've quite often not responded to your gibberish, so by all means, continue to not respond. It matters not. You have nothing to add to anything ever. Please, stop responding so I don't waste my precious time glancing at your ridiculous posts.

“Ludibrium est onus genio”

Since: Dec 11

Planet Earth

#362 Aug 21, 2012
Conservative wrote:
<quoted text>
The only reason the public may be calling for Romney to release more of his tax returns than the law requires is that it has been set in their minds that Romney is hiding something by the MSM and obama campaign. The constant drone of, "What is he hiding?".
I can't speak for Romney, but I think if I had something to hide, my tax return would be among the last places I'd hide it.

“Ludibrium est onus genio”

Since: Dec 11

Planet Earth

#363 Aug 21, 2012
Mpnf1979 wrote:
If Romney has nothing to hide, and there are no issues with his tax returns, why has he not released them as he has criticized others for not doing?
Who exactly did Romney criticize for not releasing their tax returns?

“Queen of my domain”

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#364 Aug 21, 2012
Mpnf1979 wrote:
<quoted text>
You're not someone whose mind will be changed by anything I say, so I'm not about to waste time trying to or explaining myself. Suffice to say, no, I don't hate wealthy people or begrudge them for being wealthy. You can harp on it if you like and claim otherwise, but you'd still be wrong.
One question I would like to pose (again): If Romney has nothing to hide, and there are no issues with his tax returns, why has he not released them as he has criticized others for not doing? Why will no one answer this question?
In a nutshell: he is not obligated to. IRS returns are PRIVATE, are considered PRIVATE, and Romney is free to disclose or not as he so sees fit. A number of candidates have provided summaries.

Why is the underlying assumption that he has something to hide? There is an awful lot of personal data on a tax return. You think he wants to release personal information? Hell, I make way less than Romney and don't think you have a right to that data.(And BTW, I do work with the federal government/DOD and am heavily vetted for security reasons--and never has my income tax return been a part of the vetting process.) It's fairly easy to discern tax fraud, cheats, illegal activity with out them.

The whole basis for the arguments for him to provide tax returns is insane. There is NO legal requirement and it is NONE of our business. This "requirement" is pure posturing on the part of the Obama camp.

“Queen of my domain”

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#365 Aug 21, 2012
TonyD2 wrote:
<quoted text>
I can't speak for Romney, but I think if I had something to hide, my tax return would be among the last places I'd hide it.
The hidden agenda seem to me (MHO) is to criticize for any tax shelters or methods he's used to reduce his personal tax liability--in order to compare his with Obama's. Romney's returns would likely be much more complicated than Obama's as well due to the investment income and other income streams he has. I as a typical usual middle class tax filer probably would need a tax expert to interpret them. Not sure how helpful that type of data would be to determine whether someone is deserving of my vote, other than to think possibly "wow, this guy is successful, he must be doing something right." But that is me.

Nonsense in my book. You are dead right in that a tax return is the last place to hide something.
anonymous

Akron, OH

#366 Aug 21, 2012
Mpnf1979 wrote:
<quoted text>
I intend to. I typically do avoid those who have little to no substance to their posts. Some individuals seem to have problems replying without resorting to juvenile retorts. Conservative is one of the few who can actually reply in an effort to engage himself in an intelligent conversation. Most of the others are just anger-hungry people with no lives who get their kicks out of yelling at strangers on the internet. Really sad.
you are right. I personally am an independent that leans more to the Democratic side. At least with conservative you and I can have an intelligent discussion. A lot of these people on here are so brainwashed by Fixed Noise and Rush Laimbrain that ther only thrill in their pathetic lives is to put down and call "dumb"someone that does not see things their way. I actually feel sorry for Imagine. Probably her upbringing in life was to see things the same way as a horse with blinders on plowing a field. Her version of Christianity is really sad She reminds me of something I read from Mark Twain a long time ago when he stated seeing the hypocrisy of so called Christians back in his days which seems to also apply today which was"If Jesus came back on this earth today he would be anything but a Christian".

Since: Aug 12

Location hidden

#367 Aug 21, 2012
gokeefe wrote:
<quoted text>
The hidden agenda seem to me (MHO) is to criticize for any tax shelters or methods he's used to reduce his personal tax liability--in order to compare his with Obama's. Romney's returns would likely be much more complicated than Obama's as well due to the investment income and other income streams he has. I as a typical usual middle class tax filer probably would need a tax expert to interpret them. Not sure how helpful that type of data would be to determine whether someone is deserving of my vote, other than to think possibly "wow, this guy is successful, he must be doing something right." But that is me.
Nonsense in my book. You are dead right in that a tax return is the last place to hide something.
Wonder why Romney is the only politician thats being attacked when there are many in office today that are as rich or richer than he.

http://www.topix.com/forum/columbus/T1L4Q61M1...
anonymous

Akron, OH

#368 Aug 21, 2012
Get out and vote wrote:
<quoted text>
Wonder why Romney is the only politician thats being attacked when there are many in office today that are as rich or richer than he.
http://www.topix.com/forum/columbus/T1L4Q61M1...
It is not a question of his wealth. It is the fact that he has an inability to relate to what the average person goes through and cannot even communicate properly with average people without pissing someone off. The Roosevelts and Kennedys were very wealthy but they could COMMUNICATE with average Americans. Romney has this irritating superiority complex like the old nobility of Europe. He is a rich phony born with a silver spoon up a certain place. What is his greatest enemy is his condescending attitude towards those of lesser affluence. His Choice of Paul Ryan does not help his situation either. These lemmings and Sheeple at "The Villages" in Florida looked like nothing but a herd of lackeys for
Romney and Ryan. "The Villages" would be the last place on earth I would want to live in. All I saw there was a bunch of conforming brown nosers that probably if you do not conform to their ways and think like them you are "banished"from their precious BS community.However this is an ideal place for Romney and Ryan to sell their BS since they have a mesmerized captive audience that all look like they came out of an "assembly line" waving their made in Shangai American flags yelling yeah and nooo and giving their phony laughs at Romney and Ryan's corny humor as if on cue.
anonymous

Akron, OH

#369 Aug 21, 2012
gokeefe wrote:
<quoted text>
In a nutshell: he is not obligated to. IRS returns are PRIVATE, are considered PRIVATE, and Romney is free to disclose or not as he so sees fit. A number of candidates have provided summaries.
Why is the underlying assumption that he has something to hide? There is an awful lot of personal data on a tax return. You think he wants to release personal information? Hell, I make way less than Romney and don't think you have a right to that data.(And BTW, I do work with the federal government/DOD and am heavily vetted for security reasons--and never has my income tax return been a part of the vetting process.) It's fairly easy to discern tax fraud, cheats, illegal activity with out them.
The whole basis for the arguments for him to provide tax returns is insane. There is NO legal requirement and it is NONE of our business. This "requirement" is pure posturing on the part of the Obama camp.
I agree with you as far as Romney's tax returns are concerned. I could care less about that. What I strongly despise about him is his attitude towards working people like his "Let Detroit go Bankrupt" and when campaining in the primari in Las Vegas which had the largest number of foreclosures his statement of not helping people keep their homes but to "Let the foreclosure process take place" so that a bunch of vultures like him can buy houses that have been foreclosed for pennies on the dollar. But the thing that I despise the most about him is that while Nam was going on like many rich kids he was "exempted from military service for religious reasons" to teach mormonism in France as a missionary in a country that is primarily Catholic and secular while the children of the poor and middle class were getting killed and maimed in Nam. Yet today he wants a "strong defense" to do the bidding of that pig Adelson who offered his campaign 100 million dollars if we went to war with Iran to protect Adelson's precious Israel. Those are the reasons among many others that I detest Romney. I could care less about his tax returns. We all know that the tax system is rigged by guys like him and his corporate and billionaire cronies dictating to their congressional flunkies on both sides of the isle
through lobbyists where to put the loopholes, exemptions .credits and deductions in the tax code.
Wait what

Dublin, OH

#370 Aug 21, 2012
Mpnf1979 wrote:
<quoted text>
I intend to. I typically do avoid those who have little to no substance to their posts. Some individuals seem to have problems replying without resorting to juvenile retorts. Conservative is one of the few who can actually reply in an effort to engage himself in an intelligent conversation. Most of the others are just anger-hungry people with no lives who get their kicks out of yelling at strangers on the internet. Really sad.
Wait, what?
Mpnf1979 wrote:
<quoted text>
I rarely reply to this obvious cries for attention, but I just want to take a few seconds to say that if you were smashed by a Mack truck tomorrow, the world would be a better place. You sound like a miserable, bigoted, angry, bitter a**hole that deserves the worst. Now I'm sure you're licking your lips trying to drudge up a reply, but don't bother me. Anything negative you could say about me would be a compliment and I tend to pass your posts. Unfortunately this one caught my eye...I won't make that mistake again. Ugh...what a terrible human being.
anonymous

Akron, OH

#372 Aug 21, 2012
Conservative wrote:
<quoted text>
You are correct, we all have our biases, even me but I can set aside fiction from fact regardless of the side.
The horse. I fear it will be an issue but an unwise one. She has chosen it as therapy and the level at which she competes is far above what an average rider would normally achieve. I have no problem with it. The horse is therapy for her, how she chooses to display her achievements is irrelevant. Do we know that they don't have others with MS coming to their ranch to ride?
They have trials for therapy and working animals to show what they can do and how well they perform in their tasks, whether that be police K9's, drug sniffers or anything else.
I don't have a problem with the obamas's giving monetary gifts to their children but as you said it's hypocritical to point at someone and say he's not paying his fair share while you're giving lavish, unneeded gifts to your children which just happen to be tax deductible. I should have done it years ago.
I only brought up your bias because of the statements you were making. They weren't rational. To me a bias is when an assertion can't be substantiated, like Bushes 2 wars, unpaid for. They were obama's also and both presidents had or have approval of Congress and are funded by supplementary bills. We look even further back before "W" Bush, comments and speeches given by members of Congress on both sides implicated they agreed with the assessment made and war powers justified.
I accept differences in opinions but they should be backed with resemblance of truth whether we like the truth or not.
I was going to use a horse for "therapy" too and deduct it from my taxes until the guy from Walmart unplugged it!

Since: Oct 11

Columbus, OH

#373 Aug 22, 2012
Fred Gee Sanford wrote:
<quoted text>Naturally, prejudices exist, but the decision would be accepted more readily than one made by a member of the group in question.
Wonder how this philosophy works with the fact that Clarence Thomas made rulings on healthcare reform given that he and his wife were in receipt of over $1 million both monetarily and in gifts from healthcare reform opponents....

Conflict of interest????? You betcha...
Wait what

Dublin, OH

#375 Aug 22, 2012
Progressive Ohioan wrote:
<quoted text>
Wonder how this philosophy works with the fact that Clarence Thomas made rulings on healthcare reform given that he and his wife were in receipt of over $1 million both monetarily and in gifts from healthcare reform opponents....
Conflict of interest????? You betcha...
You must've missed the articles on what those who supported Obamacare got.

“With Attitude”

Since: Jan 12

.

#376 Aug 22, 2012
Ryan, the proposed republican vp, & Aikens, the republican who thinks a woman can't become pregnant from rape, plus thinks women lie about rape, both want abortion banned even for rape & incest. There are a dozen different things I could list for why this would be a horrendous thing for rape victims ~~ a further victimization of the victim.

But here's one of the top most horrible things about forcing rape victims to have a rapist's baby.

How many of you know this? In 31 states in america it's legal for a rapist to gain visitation rights & access to the baby. In other words a rape victim who's impregnated during rape can be forced by law to allow her rapist into her life forever ~~ or at least until the child is old enough to move out of her home. Can you imagine how horrible that is for a rape victim? A lifetime chained to her rapist? This is a cruelly that goes beyond a violation of a victim. And republicans want this forced upon even more women?

The biggest lie in republican politics & in religion right now is that there isn't a war against the rights of women.

Vote for women's rights ~~ vote democrat.

“With Attitude”

Since: Jan 12

.

#378 Aug 22, 2012
Fred Gee Sanford wrote:
<quoted text>When you can get the guy's name right, maybe people will read past the first sentence.
Thanks. I have a friend named Aiken. I accidently typed his name out of habit.

Akin, not Aiken.

Instead of trolling do you have anything else ~~ maybe in response to the text of my post?
Reality Speaks

Columbus, OH

#379 Aug 22, 2012
DayStar_ wrote:
Ryan, the proposed republican vp, & Aikens, the republican who thinks a woman can't become pregnant from rape, plus thinks women lie about rape, both want abortion banned even for rape & incest. There are a dozen different things I could list for why this would be a horrendous thing for rape victims ~~ a further victimization of the victim.
But here's one of the top most horrible things about forcing rape victims to have a rapist's baby.
How many of you know this? In 31 states in america it's legal for a rapist to gain visitation rights & access to the baby. In other words a rape victim who's impregnated during rape can be forced by law to allow her rapist into her life forever ~~ or at least until the child is old enough to move out of her home. Can you imagine how horrible that is for a rape victim? A lifetime chained to her rapist? This is a cruelly that goes beyond a violation of a victim. And republicans want this forced upon even more women?
The biggest lie in republican politics & in religion right now is that there isn't a war against the rights of women.
Vote for women's rights ~~ vote democrat.
excuse me!!!!

war on women?

Romney & Ryan are both married; and Romney has kids almost Ryan's age.

The war is on murdering babies for the sake of birth control.

just because a girl gets pregnant does not give her the right to kill it.

rape, incest, potential of mother dieing are a choice a family must make.

for sake of ending a burdon because you were drunk and forgot to use protection is not a vialbe reason to kill.

as a man, if we had sex together and you were terrible in bed, can I kill you?

no

so why kiil the baby that is the most innocient thing in the world?

personel responsibility is not a war on anyone; and to use your fake war on women is a crime in itself. you should be embarassed to even suggest it.

the war is the lack of morality of our entire society; and it must end, or we are 3rd world savages.
anonymous

Akron, OH

#381 Aug 22, 2012
Reality Speaks wrote:
<quoted text>
excuse me!!!!
war on women?
Romney & Ryan are both married; and Romney has kids almost Ryan's age.
The war is on murdering babies for the sake of birth control.
just because a girl gets pregnant does not give her the right to kill it.
rape, incest, potential of mother dieing are a choice a family must make.
for sake of ending a burdon because you were drunk and forgot to use protection is not a vialbe reason to kill.
as a man, if we had sex together and you were terrible in bed, can I kill you?
no
so why kiil the baby that is the most innocient thing in the world?
personel responsibility is not a war on anyone; and to use your fake war on women is a crime in itself. you should be embarassed to even suggest it.
the war is the lack of morality of our entire society; and it must end, or we are 3rd world savages.
Who are you to judge what an individual women's circumstances in life are? Abortion should not be a "political football" it should be strictly between the woman, her circumstances, and her conscience. It is none of your business whether someone that you or politicians have no knowledge of. Do you think abortions would end if Roevs Wade was overturned?. All that would happen is that more women would die from "back alley abortions" or doctors would perform them and charge the medical provider whoever that may be for something else. There is something you right wing "teavangelicals" do not realize is the YOU CANNOT LEGISLATE MORALITY!

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Bremen Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Is Barack Obama Doing a Good Job as President? (Aug '13) 6 min Male 4,982
Joe Cocker is dead. 18 min Politics anyone 70
African American Male Initiative seeks to help ... 6 hr Truthful 22
Marriage Vows 6 hr Mandy 1
COPS lives MATTER 7 hr Police Crimes 227
Critics ignore benefits of cameras 9 hr zep 11
Jacqueline Remington (Jun '13) Jun '13 p545hdu 1
Bremen Dating
Find my Match
More from around the web

Bremen People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Bremen News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Bremen

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]

NFL Latest News

Updated 4:00 pm PST

Bleacher Report 4:00PM
Cincinnati Bengals vs. Pittsburgh Steelers: Live Cincinnati Score and Analysis
Bleacher Report 4:32 PM
Making the Case for Watt as MVP
Bleacher Report 4:37 PM
Cincinnati Bengals vs. Pittsburgh Steelers: Live Pittsburgh Score and Analysis
NBC Sports 5:05 PM
Ben Roethlisberger has upset stomach, hasn't warmed up
Bleacher Report 5:15 PM
NFL Playoff Bracket 2015: Postseason Format and Super Bowl Odds for All 12 Teams