New York Primary Election Sept 14: Will you vote?

Teddy R wrote:

<quoted text>
Post your proof that Romney is a "tax cheat" or GTFO, you lying scumbag.

Tax scam - Mitt Romney headed up the scam as a member of the board of the mariott and the case may be going to the supreme court at some point
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Son_of_BOSS

Tax Shelters (aka tax avoidance schemes) Mr. Romney jumped into a speculative deal geared toward “affluent free enterprise capitalists who desire a quality investment with tax shelter benefits,”
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/10/us/politics... (these people pay mitt, to have him pay their mortgage, so he can have a tax shelter...currently)

Using the personal care of their horse as a tax shelter (tax avoidance for personal property...thats a tax scheme)
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/06/18/1100...

there are several others that have been tied from his personal investments that he was legally forced to declare, but these are just what he currently owns.

Point of Order wrote:

<quoted text>
Well that's fairly simple, and it lies in the fact of his overseas bank accounts. He has Cayman AND Swis accounts by his own admission. According to the IRS you only have to report what is in the account itself, you don't have to report the interest on the account like you do in the US. And also ask the question, if he were so interested in the American economy, why wouldn't he keep his fortune in American Banks and markets in order to assist the AMERICAN economy?

He keeps the vast majority of his wealth in the US. He also donates about 19% of his income to charity. The small pecentage in varies overseas accounts is held by a financial management funds in blind trusts. Now was you really wanting an answer or just looking to critize him like some of these scumbags on here? Notice I'm not calling you names just asking a question.

Voting for Obama is like running the Titanic into another iceberg.

philisophical Phil wrote:

<quoted text> He keeps the vast majority of his wealth in the US. He also donates about 19% of his income to charity. The small pecentage in varies overseas accounts is held by a financial management funds in blind trusts. Now was you really wanting an answer or just looking to critize him like some of these scumbags on here? Notice I'm not calling you names just asking a question.

Just criticizing with nothing substantial to back it up. But I appreciate you being so polite!

Obama Blows wrote:

Voting for Obama is like running the Titanic into another iceberg.

and like playing Russian roulette with a fully loaded gun.

Really you are just posting links that are Obama talking points and much ado about nothings. If that is the best you Obummers can come up with Mitt Romney must be the cleanest most honest man to ever run for any plitical office.

Point of Order wrote:

<quoted text>
Just criticizing with nothing substantial to back it up. But I appreciate you being so polite!

gotcha and yes I try to keep it civil :) My rule of thumb is to be just as polite online as if we were sitting in my living room or having a political confrontation in the breakroom at work :)

I'm beginning to think those on the right are big fans of golden showers.

http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m8lz8bbBye1...

philisophical Phil wrote:

<quoted text> gotcha and yes I try to keep it civil :) My rule of thumb is to be just as polite online as if we were sitting in my living room or having a political confrontation in the breakroom at work :)

Well then, just between you and I, I don't go for talking points and what not. My concern is this: he is a Mormon, which is fine with me, as a matter of fact I was fairly intrigued because, while being a registered Democrat, I believe in a person, not a party. I have never met a Mormon that had bad morals, was greedy, or rude. I find it odd that he uses off shore accounts, don't read into it, I just find it odd. Also, he (only) has 5 children, again odd for a Mormon. And he DOES flip flop. I don't REALLY care what position he takes, but find it suspect that he frequently changes positions, NRA for one. Last point is the predominant Republican "hard" stance (see McCain) on foreign policy. I believe that we should have open relations with Cuba, China, and Iran (North Korea is a different topic). Having been the guy that had to go overseas and clean up their messes. That's why I appreciate Obama's foreign policy. Look, we're messed up enough here, why exactly am I giving Egypt (who controls our oil prices)$2 billion a year?(Oops, off track). I just don't know about Romney's credibility. So, I'll be voting for Obama, but if it goes the other way, I look foward to that too. Btw Congressman Bill Owen RETURNED $95,000 that his office didn't use, and the primaries is what this thread is about. Just thoughts, sorry so long.

Point of Order wrote:

<quoted text>
Well that's fairly simple, and it lies in the fact of his overseas bank accounts. He has Cayman AND Swis accounts by his own admission. According to the IRS you only have to report what is in the account itself, you don't have to report the interest on the account like you do in the US. And also ask the question, if he were so interested in the American economy, why wouldn't he keep his fortune in American Banks and markets in order to assist the AMERICAN economy?

Don't deflect - stay on topic. You accused him of being a "tax cheat."

This is your "proof?"

He has offshore accounts. Woh. Duly reported to IRS and totally legal. You are COMPLETELY wrong about not having to report interest income on overseas accounts on your 1040. Where's your evidence Romney has not done so? Oh - you have none. Nothing but scurrilous innuendo. GFY.

Romney like every other American most "assists the US economy" most by deploying his capital in the most productive uses possible. First and foremost is keeping it out of the wasteful hands of Washington to the greatest extent allowed by law.

phul of it phil,calling people scumbags for disagreeing with you is certainly keeping it polite.Check out this bs on blind trusts,what a pile of hokum.If he's done nothing fishy,wh won't he show his tax returns,anyone that believes he is being above board,I have a bridge in Brooklyn I'd like to sell you.Again your side made a big deal of calling obama a non christian,but say nothing when a real non christian runs.As for staying on topic,give me a break,this post is about the 2010 primary.What is the color of the sky in your world,scumbag.Now get back to your assistant to the assistant produce managers' job.

really wrote:

<quoted text>
Tax scam - Mitt Romney headed up the scam as a member of the board of the mariott and the case may be going to the supreme court at some point
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Son_of_BOSS

Parrotting Obama attack ad propaganda again like a good little mindless tool, are we?

"In a campaign advertisement released on August 9, 2012, incumbent President, Barack Obama made specific reference to his GOP opponent Mitt Romney and his presumed involvement in Son of BOSS tax avoidance as a Marriott International board member."

Emphasis on "presumed." You got NOTHING. More baseless slander. GTFO.

really wrote:

<quoted text>Tax Shelters (aka tax avoidance schemes) Mr. Romney jumped into a speculative deal geared toward “affluent free enterprise capitalists who desire a quality investment with tax shelter benefits,”
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/10/us/politics... (these people pay mitt, to have him pay their mortgage, so he can have a tax shelter...currently)
Using the personal care of their horse as a tax shelter (tax avoidance for personal property...thats a tax scheme)
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/06/18/1100...
there are several others that have been tied from his personal investments that he was legally forced to declare, but these are just what he currently owns.

Unless you can cite an IRS enforcement action against Gov. Romney, all totally legal. Good for him - he deserves admiration and accolades. Tax EVASION os a crime. Tax AVOIDANCE is every American's solemn duty as a responsible steward of capital.

You got nothing - nothing but slanderous innuendo.

GTFO.

Blind trusts....yes some of those funds managed by a broker (NOT ROMNEY) are put into overseas accounts if they generate more revenue.
Romney does not know where the money is invested...THUS THE WORD BLIND.
Damn you libs are stupid.

Point of Order wrote:

<quoted text>
Just criticizing with nothing substantial to back it up. But I appreciate you being so polite!

Accusing someone of illegal behavior without a shred of factual evidence isn't just "criticizing."

It's libel.

John wrote:

I'm beginning to think those on the right are big fans of golden showers.
http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m8lz8bbBye1...

Yeah - "In 2001 the Heritage Foundation predicted ..."

1Q 2001.

I love how you lefty Obama apologists work so hard to live in your pretend world where 9-11 never happened.

When you post such rancid tripe, John, you're basically saying you think everyone here is stupid. Even though you are obviously a callow SUNY Binghamton sophomore (intellectually, if not in fact), still it's intellectually dishonest and unbecoming of you.

Teddy R wrote:

<quoted text>
Accusing someone of illegal behavior without a shred of factual evidence isn't just "criticizing."
It's libel.

I'm sorry, I do apologize, you are very much more versed in the legal arts than I. PLEASE don't report my post to the authorities for saying that he has Cayman and Swiss accounts, which is all I said. I don't want them to come and take my children from e! I'm sorry for something that I didn't do...

Teddy R wrote:

<quoted text>
Yeah - "In 2001 the Heritage Foundation predicted ..."
1Q 2001.
I love how you lefty Obama apologists work so hard to live in your pretend world where 9-11 never happened.
When you post such rancid tripe, John, you're basically saying you think everyone here is stupid. Even though you are obviously a callow SUNY Binghamton sophomore (intellectually, if not in fact), still it's intellectually dishonest and unbecoming of you.

How can you say "happened"...? Bush created a 2 front war, which is historically unsupportable, militarily and fiscally. Now, you should be careful here because what you are doing by citing this is admitting that the ENTIRE fiscal problem that we are in now was created by the wars resulting from 9/11, which are a result of the previous administration's malfeasance. Therefore Obama cannot be to blame for "failed economic policies". If it weren't for the wars, we would be much better off economically.

Point of Order wrote:

<quoted text>
How can you say "happened"...?

How?? 9-11 happened, dude. There. Said it again. Wasn't hard.

How would you say it?

Point of Order wrote:

<quoted text> Bush created a 2 front war, which is historically unsupportable, militarily and fiscally. Now, you should be careful here because what you are doing by citing this is admitting that the ENTIRE fiscal problem that we are in now was created by the wars resulting from 9/11, which are a result of the previous administration's malfeasance.

That's your BS strawman argument - not mine. I never made any such statement.

Point of Order wrote:

<quoted text>Therefore Obama cannot be to blame for "failed economic policies". If it weren't for the wars, we would be much better off economically.

Total non sequitur.

Regardless of his predecessor's performance, Obama can and should be blamed for his failed economic policies and the atrocious economic and fiscal performance during his administration.

Just because the previous administration (you argue) fouled things up does not give Obama license to continue fouling things up. He's responsible for what's happened on his watch, and what's happened on his watch is epic and continuing failure by any measure of fiscal and economic performance.

philisophical Phil wrote:

Really you are just posting links that are Obama talking points and much ado about nothings. If that is the best you Obummers can come up with Mitt Romney must be the cleanest most honest man to ever run for any plitical office.

So wait, when you see actual tax scams they can't exist because someone mentioned them....nice straw man. Life must be nice when you can say things that are against what you said dont exist.

Teddy R wrote:

<quoted text>
How?? 9-11 happened, dude. There. Said it again. Wasn't hard.
How would you say it?
<quoted text>
That's your BS strawman argument - not mine. I never made any such statement.
<quoted text>
Total non sequitur.
Regardless of his predecessor's performance, Obama can and should be blamed for his failed economic policies and the atrocious economic and fiscal performance during his administration.
Just because the previous administration (you argue) fouled things up does not give Obama license to continue fouling things up. He's responsible for what's happened on his watch, and what's happened on his watch is epic and continuing failure by any measure of fiscal and economic performance.

So look at it this way, the wars were costing something like $1 billion per day, on each front. The war in Iraq did not need to be fought (different argument). The previous administration created a $2 billion dollar a day (and climbing) debt that we can't just "stop", then walked away. So when Obama took office, he inherited that debt. He stopped one war and the spending that goes along with it (albeit with a plan put in place by the previous administration). That was a promise kept. So now everyone is up in arms about how the country is so far in debt. Well his administration didn't start it. Bush spent 9 years,$billion per day and 4,500 American lives to catch Bin Laden, and failed. Obama did it in 2 years at the cost of 1 Blackhawk helicopter and the price of 1 9mm bullet. No lives lost but 1 (Bin Laden). With the increased spending for the war, and the current Bush taxation plan, that leaves a net budget loss of $2 billion per day. I think he's done good enough to re-elect him and see what he can do in the next 4 years to try to straighten this out.