ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics
 

Notices


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 30th August 2012, 03:45 PM   #1321
TragicMonkey
Poisoned Waffles
 
TragicMonkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Monkey
Posts: 33,216
It does seem rather arrogant to insist everyone else take him on faith when he did not extend that faith to others. Either he's hiding something or he's just a jerk.
__________________
One cannot expect wisdom to flow from a pumpkin.
TragicMonkey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th August 2012, 03:51 PM   #1322
mikedenk
Graduate Poster
 
mikedenk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,030
Originally Posted by BenBurch View Post
You guys can squirm all you like. It's fun to watch. But it will be why you lost a winnable election.

I thought the selection of Paul Ryan handed the election to Obama?

Before that it was haircut-gate that had sealed the deal.
Before that it was dog on roof.

Why would the tax returns make any difference at this point?
mikedenk is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th August 2012, 03:59 PM   #1323
JoeTheJuggler
Penultimate Amazing
 
JoeTheJuggler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 27,770
Originally Posted by IchabodPlain View Post
Seriously? Let's recap:

You asked for me to provide an outlandish claim
I did that by quoting remirol who said he believes Romney cheated on his taxes and participated in the amnesty program
You ask if i think remirol was serious
When you find you need to act out both sides of a dialogue, it's a pretty good sign you're probably arguing against a straw man.

I did not ask if you thought Remirol was serious. I asked if you thought he believed what he said he believed. (If his claim was outlandish, it would mean he doesn't believe it.) He made a statement of what he believes.




Quote:
You admitted that Reid's claim was outlandish,
And Reid isn't participating in this discussion here, is he?

Quote:
That he "may" have, Joe? Speculating on speculation?
Yes, Ichabod. Unless and until Romney releases the returns as is customary with presidential candidates, that's all we can do is speculate. And I contend that speculation on his Swiss account is entirely reasonable because we know for sure he had a Swiss account.

Quote:
And to get this straight - you agree it's an outlandish claim, but it's entirely reasonable outlandish claim?
You don't have it straight. The claim that Romney paid no taxes at all for 10 years is outlandish. Speculation that Romney might have participated in the Swiss account amnesty program is entirely reasonable.




Quote:
We both know that the amnesty program prevented prosecution for those who participated. Still, claiming that Romney participated in the program necessarily means you believe Romney engaged in a criminal offense, because by definition, you can only participate if you previously cheated on your taxes. You're being obtuse.
Insults now?

I've pointed out to you that your silly notion that the criminal law principle of innocent until proven guilty doesn't apply to the question before us (is Romney fit to be POTUS).

If you wish to talk about the criminal aspect of participation in the amnesty program it still wouldn't apply since participation is effectively an admission of guilt. I've explained this already, but you act as if you don't get it.



Quote:
No. This is a skeptic's forum. Maybe for you (and especially perhaps in an election year) shifting the burden from those making the claim to those to disprove one's claim, saying "Romney is a tax cheat until he proves me wrong" is acceptable. But, unfortunately, it isnt for a skeptic's site.
Again, if you have to invent fake quotes and attribute them to your opponent, you're probably arguing against a straw man. (Nobody here said that;that quote is your invention only, right?)

The claim at question is whether or not Romney is fit to be POTUS. And the burden of evidence is on him, not on us. That's why his father invented what has become the de facto requirement of candidates to release about 10 years or so of their tax returns to the public.


Quote:
Indeed, and I responded.
You only repeated your false assertions that Romney's tax returns are not an issue in this election (they indeed are) and that discussion of them diverts our attention from other issues in this election (it does not).

I offer as proof, the fact that polls indicate a majority of people think Romney should release his returns. I offer as proof the ongoing vigorous discussion of issues concerning taxes, federal spending, Medicare, Social Security, abortion, etc.* I personally continue to participate in discussions on all of these topics, and more, while participating in this one. Therefore this issue does not take away from the other issues. Indeed your claim relies on the hidden false premise that we can only entertain one issue in a presidential campaign.

*ETA: Including, BTW, fact-checking Ryan's speech from last night. What a pack of lies! That's occupied MUCH more of my time and energy today than this discussion of Romney's tax returns has.
__________________
"That is a very graphic analogy which aids understanding wonderfully while being, strictly speaking, wrong in every possible way." —Ponder Stibbons

Last edited by JoeTheJuggler; 30th August 2012 at 04:04 PM.
JoeTheJuggler is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th August 2012, 04:13 PM   #1324
Neally
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 3,665
Originally Posted by Bob001 View Post
Actually, since you brought it up, I would say if three women claimed to be Romney's mistresses in the face of his denials, and they claimed that he arranged regular trysts by phone, a request to examine his phone records might be reasonable. If I recall correctly, phone records played a part in Herman Cain's decline. But no such allegations have been made.
But allegations by our local tax-form-demanders and their lack of evidence is evidence of guilt claims somehow makes it reasonable?

The rest of your babble reminds me of the stream of questions or "anomalies" that the truthers try to use with their arguments.
Neally is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th August 2012, 04:14 PM   #1325
mhaze
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 15,718
Originally Posted by JoeTheJuggler View Post
....
*ETA: Including, BTW, fact-checking Ryan's speech from last night. What a pack of lies! That's occupied MUCH more of my time and energy today than this discussion of Romney's tax returns has.
Aw....are you getting really busy? I am quite sure that there will be many demands for your time in the next several months. Sort'a like...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Et3yaVWxeyY

Originally Posted by Neally View Post
But allegations by our local tax-form-demanders and their lack of evidence is evidence of guilt claims somehow makes it reasonable?

The rest of your babble reminds me of the stream of questions or "anomalies" that the truthers try to use with their arguments.
Well, ya. But the funny thing about this thread is that the tax conspiracy theorists have about a dozen times think they've hooked onto something, only to have the actual tax law explained to them in each case. And in each and every case, they were shown to be completely ignorant. Yes, some of these issues are quite complex, so that is expected.

But why do people WANT TO LOOK FOOLISH?

I just don't get it....

Originally Posted by TragicMonkey View Post
It does seem rather arrogant to insist everyone else take him on faith when he did not extend that faith to others. Either he's hiding something or he's just a jerk.
Or you are just a guy who wants to call a political opponent a jerk.

Last edited by mhaze; 30th August 2012 at 04:19 PM.
mhaze is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th August 2012, 04:21 PM   #1326
SezMe
post-pre-born
 
SezMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Santa Barbara, CA
Posts: 18,739
Originally Posted by IchabodPlain View Post
Politicians should be in the business of making claims they know to be false?
Pols lie during election season? Jesus, where are the smelling salts?
SezMe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th August 2012, 05:26 PM   #1327
Skeptic Ginger
formerly skeptigirl
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 44,989
Originally Posted by TragicMonkey View Post
It does seem rather arrogant to insist everyone else take him on faith when he did not extend that faith to others. Either he's hiding something or he's just a jerk.
Or both
__________________
(*Tired of continuing to hear the "Democrat Party" repeatedly I've decided to adopt the name, Pubbie Party, Repubs "Republics" and Republic Party in response.)
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th August 2012, 05:27 PM   #1328
Skeptic Ginger
formerly skeptigirl
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 44,989
Originally Posted by mikedenk View Post
...

Why would the tax returns make any difference at this point?
Because a large number of voters, on both sides and probably some on the fence, want to know.
__________________
(*Tired of continuing to hear the "Democrat Party" repeatedly I've decided to adopt the name, Pubbie Party, Repubs "Republics" and Republic Party in response.)
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th August 2012, 05:35 PM   #1329
Skeptic Ginger
formerly skeptigirl
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 44,989
Originally Posted by Neally View Post
But allegations by our local tax-form-demanders and their lack of evidence is evidence of guilt claims somehow makes it reasonable? ....
You keep ignoring the problem, not releasing the records is evidence.

You keep repeating it is not evidence of guilt, but people don't agree.

You are making a false analogy with the CTer/Truthers.

The alternative hypothesis: Romney is worried about being wrongly judged; is less likely than the hypothesis: Romney is hiding something significant and bad.

Give us something that supports your hypothesis: there is a reasonable reason to hide this information from the public. I suggested one for Obama's transcripts: if he took any classes with socialist or communist in the title it will be grist for the idiot-distortion mill. So give us a plausible reason something in Romney's tax record could be dishonestly distorted.
__________________
(*Tired of continuing to hear the "Democrat Party" repeatedly I've decided to adopt the name, Pubbie Party, Repubs "Republics" and Republic Party in response.)

Last edited by Skeptic Ginger; 30th August 2012 at 05:37 PM.
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th August 2012, 05:48 PM   #1330
Unabogie
Philosopher
 
Unabogie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 9,352
I think it's entirely reasonable to hold this against Romney.

We have this evidence: Romney will defy traditional norms of transparency to hide something that by his own admission is embarrassing.

Based on this, what can we deduce about how he'd actually be as President? Isn't it reasonable to assume he'd run his presidency in an opaque way and defy traditional norms of transparency there as well?

We also know that he was very secretive as Governor and actually destroyed the computer hard drives that contained the records of his time there. That also paints a picture.

Are we supposed to ignore all this? If so, why?
Unabogie is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th August 2012, 05:50 PM   #1331
TragicMonkey
Poisoned Waffles
 
TragicMonkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Monkey
Posts: 33,216
Originally Posted by mhaze View Post
Or you are just a guy who wants to call a political opponent a jerk.
I don't need excuses to do that, or allegations of possible tax improprieties. I'd say Romney's a jerk on several grounds, ranging from his business methods to his treatment of his dog to the sincerity of his sudden change in views since he began looking likely to be the nominee. But it's the tax thing that he seems to be the least forthcoming about, inexplicably so if there's nothing to hide. And give people something inexplicable and they'll start coming up with explications. It's human nature. And it's totally the Streisand Effect. Tell people you're not hiding anything in your Forbidden Closet of Mystery and they'll run a mile over broken glass to peer inside it.
__________________
One cannot expect wisdom to flow from a pumpkin.
TragicMonkey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th August 2012, 06:43 PM   #1332
Neally
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 3,665
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
Give us something that supports your hypothesis: there is a reasonable reason to hide this information from the public. I suggested one for Obama's transcripts: if he took any classes with socialist or communist in the title it will be grist for the idiot-distortion mill. So give us a plausible reason something in Romney's tax record could be dishonestly distorted.
Maybe because his accountant did such a good job that he only paid a few % in taxes and thus it will be grist for the idiot-distortion mill. But here's a better question, why the obsession with getting more years of Romneys taxes, other than the fallacious Appeal to tradition, or the "he must be guilty of hiding something really bad..." especially in light of the fact that you've totally ignored reviewing all the previous recent presidential candidate's tax returns?
Neally is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th August 2012, 06:47 PM   #1333
applecorped
Rotten to the Core
 
applecorped's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 12,210
I hope Romney releases a record. I'd buy it.
__________________
All You Need Is Love.
applecorped is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th August 2012, 06:48 PM   #1334
Skeptic Ginger
formerly skeptigirl
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 44,989
Originally Posted by Neally View Post
Maybe because his accountant did such a good job that he only paid a few % in taxes and thus it will be grist for the idiot-distortion mill.
No good. Romney already stated his minimum rate was 13% or more. So releasing records showing that fact would not be a reason to not release the tax records.

Originally Posted by Neally View Post
But here's a better question, why the obsession with getting more years of Romneys taxes, other than the fallacious Appeal to tradition, or the "he must be guilty of hiding something really bad..." especially in light of the fact that you've totally ignored reviewing all the previous recent presidential candidate's tax returns?
This has been explained ad nauseum. Either he has a reasonable reason (none has yet even been proposed, let alone evidence supported), or it is reasonable to assume he's hiding something bad.
__________________
(*Tired of continuing to hear the "Democrat Party" repeatedly I've decided to adopt the name, Pubbie Party, Repubs "Republics" and Republic Party in response.)
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th August 2012, 07:12 PM   #1335
mhaze
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 15,718
Originally Posted by TragicMonkey View Post
I don't need excuses to do that, or allegations of possible tax improprieties. I'd say Romney's a jerk on several grounds,.....
At least you are honest about it, instead of slithering around and hinting at vague evil things behind the bushes and under the rocks and deep in the mind of men, and deep in one particular Republican candidates' mind and past...

oh...wait.

You're still doing it.

I take back my comment about honesty.
mhaze is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th August 2012, 07:18 PM   #1336
BenBurch
Gatekeeper of The Left
 
BenBurch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: The Universe 35.2 ms ahead of this one.
Posts: 35,266
Originally Posted by applecorped View Post
I hope Romney releases a record. I'd buy it.
Man, it would be like that horrid thing William Shatner released.
__________________
For what doth it profit a man, to fix one bug, but crash the system?
BenBurch is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th August 2012, 07:21 PM   #1337
mhaze
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 15,718
Originally Posted by Neally View Post
....why the obsession with getting more years of Romneys taxes, other than the fallacious Appeal to tradition, or the "he must be guilty of hiding something really bad..." especially in light of the fact that you've totally ignored reviewing all the previous recent presidential candidate's tax returns?
well, the issue is they don't have much to run on in terms of positives, so they've gone negative early. As for the tactics, they were written about by the Greeks 2000 years back, nothing new there. After all, remember the Grecian columns of Obama 2008? Yes, that was a prelude to making America like Greece.

Now Greece is collapsing, and the image of those columns doesn't look too good. And the Obama Girl is gone gone gone. Can't run on jobs, economy, can't run on the rosy promise of stimuli, can't run on the Chevy Volt, Solandra, can't run on the SEIU union, can't run on the great vision of being a Community Organizer for Acorn, a cornerstone of the Trinity Baptist Church.

Yes, let's just raise a stink about them tax returns.

That'll work.

Yep.

Won't it?

Yep.

You think so?

Maybe.

Really?

F**************************
mhaze is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th August 2012, 07:24 PM   #1338
TragicMonkey
Poisoned Waffles
 
TragicMonkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Monkey
Posts: 33,216
Originally Posted by mhaze View Post
At least you are honest about it, instead of slithering around and hinting at vague evil things behind the bushes and under the rocks and deep in the mind of men, and deep in one particular Republican candidates' mind and past...

oh...wait.

You're still doing it.

I take back my comment about honesty.
I think you're confusing me with someone else. I'm not hinting at anything. I'm saying outright: Romney's got a heap of ill-gotten gains, some of which were illegally concealed in Swiss bank accounts. He's crookeder than an arthritic Nixon after falling off a cliff. His Swiss bank account was probably stuffed full of Holocaust-stolen gold and drug trafficking money, and I wouldn't trust him with a penny much less the nation. He's an excellent example of much that is wrong with America, from his pelf to his ridiculous out-of-touchedness to his treatment of people (and dogs) to his smug self-superiority to his vast political hypocrisy to his awful, awful hair and his fifty Howdy-Doody-looking freakshow children. Is that open enough for you, or would you like to hear my speculations about his sex life? I'll give you a hint: they're not flattering to him.

I don't pretend to be impartial. That doesn't mean I'm not right about some or all of it, though.
__________________
One cannot expect wisdom to flow from a pumpkin.
TragicMonkey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th August 2012, 07:41 PM   #1339
Bob001
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,895
Originally Posted by Neally View Post
But allegations by our local tax-form-demanders and their lack of evidence is evidence of guilt claims somehow makes it reasonable?

The rest of your babble reminds me of the stream of questions or "anomalies" that the truthers try to use with their arguments.
You are being deliberately obtuse. The issue here is not guilt -- or lack thereof -- of a crime. The question is where does his vast wealth come from and what has he done to get it and keep it? Who gained, and who was hurt? He is selling himself as a successful businessman who created hundreds of thousands of jobs. It is not wildly unreasonable to ask him to prove it. It sounds like you can't imagine any possible activity that would raise doubts about his integrity and judgment as long as he hasn't been convicted of something. Some of us want to know a little more about candidates before we trust them with our lives, the very same things that Romney himself demanded to know about his potential running mates, and the very same things that most of his opponents in the Republican primary demanded too.

There is substantial and growing evidence that Romney got rich by looting struggling American companies. Even Rick Perry called him a "vulture capitalist."
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics...#ixzz24w886Em1
Bob001 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th August 2012, 08:01 PM   #1340
mhaze
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 15,718
Originally Posted by TragicMonkey View Post
I think you're confusing me with someone else. I'm not hinting at anything. I'm saying outright: Romney's got a heap of ill-gotten gains, some of which were illegally concealed in Swiss bank accounts. He's crookeder than an arthritic Nixon after falling off a cliff. His Swiss bank account was probably stuffed full of Holocaust-stolen gold and drug trafficking money, and I wouldn't trust him with a penny much less the nation. He's an excellent example of much that is wrong with America, from his pelf to his ridiculous out-of-touchedness to his treatment of people (and dogs) to his smug self-superiority to his vast political hypocrisy to his awful, awful hair and his fifty Howdy-Doody-looking freakshow children. Is that open enough for you, or would you like to hear my speculations about his sex life? I'll give you a hint: they're not flattering to him.

I don't pretend to be impartial. That doesn't mean I'm not right about some or all of it, though.
And didn't he sell heroin to eight year old kids and teach them to hijack cars after school to pay for their hard liquer and gambling habits at casinos he had an interest in? Didn't he finance the gun trade in the Congo backing the faction that shipped all the diamonds to his companies as well as the boatloads of underage illegal sex workers to serve as consorts at the Republican convention?

Work on the lies a bit, dude. Spice them up. Make them fun to read. But they are still lies. You know it, I know it.
mhaze is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th August 2012, 08:09 PM   #1341
TheRedWorm
I AM the Red Worm!
 
TheRedWorm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 4,457
Originally Posted by mhaze View Post
And didn't he sell heroin to eight year old kids and teach them to hijack cars after school to pay for their hard liquer and gambling habits at casinos he had an interest in? Didn't he finance the gun trade in the Congo backing the faction that shipped all the diamonds to his companies as well as the boatloads of underage illegal sex workers to serve as consorts at the Republican convention?

Work on the lies a bit, dude. Spice them up. Make them fun to read. But they are still lies. You know it, I know it.

...the hell?
__________________
I'll be the best Congressman money can buy!

As usual, he doesn't understand the relevant sciences, can't Google for the right thing, and appears to rely on the notion that a word salad liberally sprinkled with Google Croutons will make his argument seem coherent. -JayUtah
TheRedWorm is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th August 2012, 09:16 PM   #1342
SezMe
post-pre-born
 
SezMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Santa Barbara, CA
Posts: 18,739
Originally Posted by applecorped View Post
I hope Romney releases a record. I'd buy it.
78 or 45 or 33⅓?
SezMe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st August 2012, 04:09 AM   #1343
remirol
Senior Wrangler
 
remirol's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 8,132
Originally Posted by SezMe View Post
78 or 45 or 33⅓?
13⅓. Duh.
__________________
Roguelike player? Info: http://sporkhack.com -- Public server: telnet://sporkhack.com
--
The church is near but the road is icy; the bar is far away but I will walk carefully. -- old Russian proverb
remirol is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st August 2012, 04:15 AM   #1344
TragicMonkey
Poisoned Waffles
 
TragicMonkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Monkey
Posts: 33,216
Originally Posted by mhaze View Post
You know it, I know it.
Don't presume to pretend to know what I think.
__________________
One cannot expect wisdom to flow from a pumpkin.
TragicMonkey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st August 2012, 04:44 AM   #1345
Bob001
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,895
Maybe not applicable to Romney directly, but some examples of why what's legal isn't always right:
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics...balls-20120815
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics...-fail-20120314
Bob001 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st August 2012, 08:05 AM   #1346
Silly Green Monkey
Cowardly Lurking in the Shadows of Greatness
 
Silly Green Monkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 3,819
Originally Posted by mhaze View Post
You know it, I know it.
Originally Posted by TragicMonkey View Post
Don't presume to pretend to know what I think.
Fear to know the thoughts of a monkey.
Silly Green Monkey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st August 2012, 08:07 AM   #1347
Neally
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 3,665
Originally Posted by Bob001 View Post
You are being deliberately obtuse. The issue here is not guilt -- or lack thereof -- of a crime.
Um no. The vast majority of the more-tax-returns demanders have been speculating on the tax rate he paid. Another large contingent has been speculating on various tax frauds or evasion that he might have done.

Quote:
The question is where does his vast wealth come from and what has he done to get it and keep it? Who gained, and who was hurt? He is selling himself as a successful businessman who created hundreds of thousands of jobs. It is not wildly unreasonable to ask him to prove it.
Here's a clue for you:
  • Check is Wikipedia listing to find out about his wealth and how he acquired it.
  • His tax returns won't tell "Who gained, and who was hurt"
  • His tax returns won't tell anything about jobs created.

Quote:
It sounds like you can't imagine any possible activity that would raise doubts about his integrity and judgment as long as he hasn't been convicted of something.
No, plenty of things are possible that would be damning yet legal, including having 3 mistresses. That doesn't justify a fishing trip into his personal records just because something may be possible and someone thinks we the voters need to know and that if he doesn't disclose it, it means he's hiding the truth.

Quote:
There is substantial and growing evidence that Romney got rich by looting struggling American companies.
Please, the whole "Bain Capital Vulture Corporate raider evil vulture capitalist" meme thing is nothing new and has nothing to do with the relentless tax return demands.
Neally is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st August 2012, 08:09 AM   #1348
Silly Green Monkey
Cowardly Lurking in the Shadows of Greatness
 
Silly Green Monkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 3,819
I know----positively relentless demands that he provide proof of his business acumen and fitness to lead!
Silly Green Monkey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st August 2012, 09:27 AM   #1349
Neally
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 3,665
Originally Posted by Silly Green Monkey View Post
I know----positively relentless demands that he provide proof of his business acumen and fitness to lead!
proof of his business acumen and fitness to lead<>more IRS forms
Neally is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st August 2012, 09:31 AM   #1350
BenBurch
Gatekeeper of The Left
 
BenBurch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: The Universe 35.2 ms ahead of this one.
Posts: 35,266
Originally Posted by Neally View Post
proof of his business acumen and fitness to lead<>more IRS forms
Your guy is a tax cheat. Get over it.
__________________
For what doth it profit a man, to fix one bug, but crash the system?
BenBurch is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st August 2012, 01:24 PM   #1351
Polaris
Philosopher
 
Polaris's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 8,607
Originally Posted by Silly Green Monkey View Post
Fear to know the thoughts of a monkey.
They're tragic, really...
__________________
"There's vastly more truth to be found in rocks than in holy books. Rocks are far superior, in fact, because you can DEMONSTRATE the truth found in rocks. Plus, they're pretty. Holy books are just heavy." - Dinwar

"Let your ears hear this beautiful song that's hiding underneath the sound," Ed Kowalczyk.
Polaris is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st August 2012, 01:37 PM   #1352
thaiboxerken
Penultimate Amazing
 
thaiboxerken's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 23,565
Originally Posted by TragicMonkey View Post
It does seem rather arrogant to insist everyone else take him on faith when he did not extend that faith to others. Either he's hiding something or he's just a jerk.
That, and he has a history of lying about his tax returns. Well, actually a history of telling lies about everything.
__________________
All national institutions of churches, whether Jewish, Christian or Turkish, appear to me no other than human inventions, set up to terrify and enslave mankind, and monopolize power & profit - Thomas Paine
thaiboxerken is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st August 2012, 02:28 PM   #1353
Neally
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 3,665
Originally Posted by BenBurch View Post
Your guy is a tax cheat. Get over it.
and the CIA was behind 9/11, and BO is a Kenyan Mooslim, and JFK...
Neally is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st August 2012, 02:47 PM   #1354
remirol
Senior Wrangler
 
remirol's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 8,132
Originally Posted by Neally View Post
and the CIA was behind 9/11, and BO is a Kenyan Mooslim, and JFK...
Debunked in detail.
__________________
Roguelike player? Info: http://sporkhack.com -- Public server: telnet://sporkhack.com
--
The church is near but the road is icy; the bar is far away but I will walk carefully. -- old Russian proverb
remirol is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st August 2012, 03:34 PM   #1355
Tricky
Briefly immortal
 
Tricky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 43,657
Originally Posted by BenBurch View Post
Your guy is a tax cheat. Get over it.
I doubt that. He's a tax opportunist. He cares more about his own wealth than he does about financially supporting the country he purports to love. Not illegal, but not particularly flattering either, and definitely not the sort of attitude I would want our President to hold.

He claims he'll make up lost revenues by closing loopholes. Who really believes an accomplished loophole navigator is going to do that?
Tricky is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st August 2012, 03:53 PM   #1356
Neally
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 3,665
Originally Posted by remirol View Post
Debunked in detail.
Wrong then, still wrong here's why.
Neally is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st August 2012, 03:55 PM   #1357
TragicMonkey
Poisoned Waffles
 
TragicMonkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Monkey
Posts: 33,216
Originally Posted by Tricky View Post
He claims he'll make up lost revenues by closing loopholes. Who really believes an accomplished loophole navigator is going to do that?
Oh, I believe he'll gladly close any loophole he himself doesn't have a need for. I have faith in humanity!
__________________
One cannot expect wisdom to flow from a pumpkin.
TragicMonkey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st August 2012, 04:06 PM   #1358
BenBurch
Gatekeeper of The Left
 
BenBurch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: The Universe 35.2 ms ahead of this one.
Posts: 35,266
Originally Posted by Tricky View Post
I doubt that. He's a tax opportunist. He cares more about his own wealth than he does about financially supporting the country he purports to love. Not illegal, but not particularly flattering either, and definitely not the sort of attitude I would want our President to hold.

He claims he'll make up lost revenues by closing loopholes. Who really believes an accomplished loophole navigator is going to do that?
Some people will defend doing anything with taxes you can get away with.

I think a person is a cheat if they use the code in a way not envisaged by the writers of the code. And it's not hard, in most cases, to determine where that line is.

It's called "gaming the system". When children do that with rules we have established, we discipline them.

Romney paid only 13% tax (that he admits to) in at least one of the years in question.

Therefore Romney is a cheat.

What remains to be seen is exact how he gamed the system.
__________________
For what doth it profit a man, to fix one bug, but crash the system?
BenBurch is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st August 2012, 04:20 PM   #1359
thaiboxerken
Penultimate Amazing
 
thaiboxerken's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 23,565
Originally Posted by BenBurch View Post
Your guy is a tax cheat. Get over it.
This can be easily debunked...if he released his tax records.
__________________
All national institutions of churches, whether Jewish, Christian or Turkish, appear to me no other than human inventions, set up to terrify and enslave mankind, and monopolize power & profit - Thomas Paine
thaiboxerken is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st August 2012, 06:17 PM   #1360
SezMe
post-pre-born
 
SezMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Santa Barbara, CA
Posts: 18,739
Originally Posted by Tricky View Post
He claims he'll make up lost revenues by closing loopholes. Who really believes an accomplished loophole navigator is going to do that?
I'm not a Romney fan and I don't believe the Romney/Ryan claim that they will aggressively close tax loopholes. But I think his own tax history and future will have anything to do with that. I actually think Romney is above that. What will keep the loopholes open (and even widened) is his identification with the financial industry, Wall Street, and the huge amount of money (read influence) they have given him. They're not stupid and they'll want a return on their investment. They will get it.

Last edited by SezMe; 31st August 2012 at 06:18 PM.
SezMe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:25 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2014, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.
This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.