Republicans slam Sen. Reid over Romney tax claim

xnutmegger wrote:

<quoted text>
I'll disclose mine when Dirty Harry discloses his...how is that for fair play ?
Dirty Harry Reid = Joe McCarthy.
Both slimballs.
One GOP.
One Dem.

Lawrence Wolf wrote:

<quoted text>Speak for Joe. I would imagine Harry had wideballs.
By the way, xnutcase, I don't really care who your source is. More than likely, it's yourself.

Judged:

1

xnutmegger wrote:

<quoted text>
I'll give you a hint , he is a very well known billionaire .
That's more than Dirty Harry will disclose.
Hey I got more cajones than you do..... I have the guts to call both Reid and McCarthy slimeballs but you hedge on Harry. But I expect nothing less from a political hack.

Lawrence Wolf wrote:

<quoted text>Does this billionaire appear to you while you're in bed, or does he summon you and the others to his coven?
And of course your everyday billionaire has nothing to hide.

Robert wrote:

<quoted text>
You are an idiot if you believe supply side economics caused the mess. You say that then go on to talk about people borrowing money and real estate deals. Even if you had made a bad argument about how supply side economics caused the crisis then I could give you more respect but you make no argument for it at all, I presume because you don't even know what it means. This is what makes me so mad that people are so stupid as not to spot something that wrong.
The mess we got in was all about derivatives, mortgage backed securities, credit default swaps, and de-regulation (signed by Bill Clinton). Obama can ignore all this and just say it was caused by "the previous 8 years" because it is slightly complex and people like you can't see through it because it hurts you brain to look at something complex.

Lawrence Wolf wrote:

<quoted text>Mitt Romney has been banging the American people.
Your analogy is peurile and stupid, because in Romney's case, the evidence exists one way or another.

Outta Luck wrote:

<quoted text>
I don't need your respect.
This GOP plan of giving the wealthy all the breaks so they will be soooo happy, they will just use their money to save us by creating jobs, and investing is total BS. IT does not work, never did work, sure Regean ws super awesome, but "Trickle down" did not do 1 thing good for the economy.
I saw the housing bubble first hand. So many people became real estate agents and players. People who had absolutely no business buying a second house, were not only getting a loan for the house but also geting an equity line for the house, while still having a mortgage on their origional house. It was about GREED. I know so many people who lost their homes, or business, or they managed to flip a few houses, got paid really nice, then did not pay the taxes on their returns and had it all taken away by the IRS.
It was a rough time, and the only ones who really profited were the ones who bet against our own economy at the very top of the economic food chain.
As far as Mitt's tax returns go...
Whatever. Personally I believe there will be a HUGE difference in the tax stratagies applied when Mittt was not in politics, as opposed to the ones he released while he was the Gov.
Reid is not a good man, he made a bad play.
But I still have to wonder...What is the deal with Mitt's taxes????

Mr_Bill wrote:

MIFF?
Did you file years in which you paid ZERO ?
MIFF? MIFF?.... MIFF?
Did'ya MIFF?
C'mon MIFF, come clean.
Tell us how it is both fair, and equitable that you pay less than me.
MIFF?
MIFF ??????

GoodNewz wrote:

<quoted text>
if you are going to call someone stupid, at least learn to spell correctly when insulting them.(puerile) by the way, the analogy i used is exactly the same as harry reid's. are you still beating your wife? to defend a slime ball like reid says everything we need to know about your high standards!

xnutmegger wrote:

<quoted text>
You and I both know your figures are lies so I won't even debate them.

Mr_Bill wrote:

MIFF?
Did you file years in which you paid ZERO ?
MIFF? MIFF?.... MIFF?
Did'ya MIFF?
C'mon MIFF, come clean.
Tell us how it is both fair, and equitable that you pay less than me.
MIFF?
MIFF ??????

WeTheSheeple wrote:

<quoted text>
The majority of American know the truth, which is why Romney will lose the election.

Robert wrote:

<quoted text>
Don't get your hopes up too high. The republicans will take back the senate without question I have already got it figured, I guess the people are not happy with the path to European socialism. So even if Obama were to win he would have a republican house and a republican senate.
But I would not count on Obama yet if I were you, the real poll data goes against the media myth that Romney is loosing and does not connect to the American public. Romney is leading in every state which McCain carried in 08, no surprise there. He is also leading in some of the states which Obama carried in 08, Indiana, New Hampshire, Wisconsin, Nevada, North Carolina, and Colorado. If he wins all those states were he is actually ahead he will have 228 electoral votes, Ohio, Florida, and Virginia are almost tied with Obama having only slim majority, if Romney were to win those he would have 288 game over. In elections the undecided vote usually goes against the incumbent so in states where both candidates are under 50% expect Romney to come out on top, that is Iowa, Michigan, New Mexico Minnesota, Pennsylvania and even perhaps New Jersey, that would make 388 EV.
Obama does not have this in the bag not even close, your man is going to be desperate before this is over, I expect to hear more outrageous statements from him
"If you’ve got a business -- you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen."
Rugged individualism, it fits well on a bumper sticker but it doesn’t work. It has never worked.
In America, there's a failure to appreciate Europe's leading role in the world

WeTheSheeple wrote:

<quoted text>
That's a whole lotta "ifs"......
Even the GOPasaurs admit Romney is going to lose and lose badly.
Congrats President Obama on your reelection.

Mr_Bill wrote:

MITT?
Have you proved your 'story' yet that you "broke no tax laws?"
How about, more importantly, did you actually pay, or did you not pay any taxes over the last dozen years?
MITT?
MITT?

GoodNewz wrote:

In 2008, Harry Reid condescendingly attributed presidential candidate Barack Obama's success to the fact that he was "light-skinned" and spoke "with no Negro dialect, unless he wanted to have one."