• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

“Makes You Wonder”

pbrauer

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 6, 2010
Messages
25,394
Reaction score
7,209
Location
Oregon
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Great new ad from the Obama campaign designed to get Mitt Romney to release more of his tax returns. This issue will dog him up to Nov 6.

[video=youtube;uMo5pykT4uw]http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=uMo5pykT4uw[/video]
 
pbrauer said:
Great new ad from the Obama campaign designed to get Mitt Romney to release more of his tax returns. This issue will dog him up to Nov 6.

Click to expand...

I think you're right. This is not going to go away. Some republicans agree. He should release his tax returns if he has nothing to hide.
 
Wonderful to see Democrats embracing the birther playbook
 
Zyphlin said:
Wonderful to see Democrats embracing the birther playbook
Click to expand...

I think it's a bit more than embracing.

Maybe my memory is a bit foggy, but didn't Obama at some time in the past complain about negative campaigning or suggest he wouldn't do such things?

Either way, it's funny for the left to think Romney is hiding anything in his taxes, considering Obama kinda controls the IRS at this point, so if there was anything illegal in there it would have already come out. And holy smokes, he actually takes advantage of legal breaks and loopholes that the system offers, as if that is a bad thing. The left is looking very desperate.
 
Zyphlin said:
Wonderful to see Democrats embracing the birther playbook
Click to expand...

So that's how it is, now? Any time someone refuses to disclose anything, relevant or not, about his qualifications for office it's exactly the same as birtherism? :roll:
 
AdamT said:
So that's how it is, now? Any time someone refuses to disclose anything, relevant or not, about his qualifications for office it's exactly the same as birtherism? :roll:
Click to expand...

What I think Zyphlin is referring to is the "I am just asking questions, and why not release it if he isn't hiding anything" concepts. In this case he is right. The commercial to me crosses a line into an area which is conspiracy theory and kinda shameful politics.
 

It's not funny. He's wrong. Full disclosure. He looks stupid now. And when he finally releases 3 or 4 years of taxes, forced out of him 'cause this story isn't going away, the media will want to see more. Big mistake.
 
MaggieD said:
It's not funny. He's wrong. Full disclosure. He looks stupid now. And when he finally releases 3 or 4 years of taxes, forced out of him 'cause this story isn't going away, the media will want to see more. Big mistake.
Click to expand...

Of course the media will continue to push the story. In a manner unlike they did for any story about Obama 4 years ago.

The 'media' is the last thing to be believed, and the last to have any credibility.
 

And more than that, the "...and if he doesn't release the things I want him to release then naturally all the highly negative implication I'm making towards him are obviously true". Is the conspiracy aspect of this anywhere near the level of Birthers or Truthers? No. However the methodology of how the attacks are being perpetrated and the likely outcome that will play out depending which way Romney goes with this are clearly evident in those two situations, as well as other similar situations where this method has been used.
 
Last edited:

But these concepts are always present when there is an issue of disclosure/non-disclosure. If a reasonable request for disclosure is turned down, people are naturally going to speculate that there must be something to hide. Even George Will has made this "birther" argument with respect to Romney's tax returns.

The issue to me is strictly related to the reasonableness of the requests. In Obama's case the birth certificate stuff was just silly, so it's reasonable to say, "I'm not going to cater to every silly request just to tamp down crazy conspiracy theories." In this case the request is at least arguably reasonable. Most candidates over the last 30 years have disclosed more, and few have had such complicated returns.

In other words, IF you concede that a request is reasonable and not overly burdensome, then I don't think there's any fallacy in thinking the person refusing the reasonable request may have something to hide.
 
AdamT said:
So that's how it is, now? Any time someone refuses to disclose anything, relevant or not, about his qualifications for office it's exactly the same as birtherism? :roll:
Click to expand...

excatly what qualifications are you referring to?

I don't recall releasing umpteen years of taxes as being a qualification for anything related to running for president. A president IS required to prove he is a natural born citizen, however.

So it looks like the dems are doing their best to make the birthers look good. And succeeded.
 
Last edited:
Lets just say Romney releases his tax returns, and it turns out he failed to pay something like...I don't know...$35K in taxes, would that disqualify him in Obama's mind from the presidency? If so, why is Obama's current Treasury Secretary still in his position?
 

Well if you want to base your choice on someone being a natural born citizen and at least 35 years of age, more power to you; but I think most people want a little more information that that. And to that end, most candidates over the last 30 years have released more than a couple years' tax returns.
 

Most presidents over the past 30 years have cheated on their wives... need everyone jump off the proverbial bridge?
 
AdamT said:
So that's how it is, now? Any time someone refuses to disclose anything, relevant or not, about his qualifications for office it's exactly the same as birtherism? :roll:
Click to expand...
Yep, why the hell not? Personally I imagine it is Romney who is pulling an Obama on this one. Obama waited until it got out of the basement of the tin foilers and when some prominant GOPers started calling for it wham! making them all look like fools.

I had no doubts about the legitimacy of Obama in qualifications as a citizen. Chicago is dirty politics for sure, but on the way up someone would have made damn sure he was legit. I cannot imagine with Romney being in business the way he is and having surrounded himself with politics and his family being in it that he didn't realize that Tax returns are something that are not going to be called for. The only thing people will find in his tax returns once they finally come out is that he made lots and lots of money and like just about every other person who makes that kind of money he found ways to not pay a lot in taxes by way of expenses and donations, and it will all be completely legal. Not that it makes it right, but that he never cheated the system, he merely used it.
 

Well, that is a rather convoluted explanation of a double standard.
 
hazlnut said:
Great false analogy.


I think the country wants to vet the candidate.
Click to expand...

The hilarious part is you don't even see what you did here....
 
I really don't care about tax returns for Obama or Romney, unless someone is making the case either broke the law. If they filed correct tax returns, paid what the law required (even if the amount is $0), then it is a non issue.
 
Redress said:
Well, that is a rather convoluted explanation of a double standard.
Click to expand...

That is a rather incorrect use of the term double standard. AFAIK, double standard suggests two standards for the same conduct, whereas I'm talking about the same standard for completetly different conduct. So, for example, if a cop pulls you over for speeding and asks to see your johnson, you might reasonably tell him no. But if he asks to see your license and registration, you should comply with his request. That's not a double standard.
 
Last edited:
mike2810 said:
I really don't care about tax returns for Obama or Romney, unless someone is making the case either broke the law. If they filed correct tax returns, paid what the law required (even if the amount is $0), then it is a non issue.
Click to expand...

I didn't care either, until his excuse for not showing them was less than credible. And the deer in the headlights look that he's had lately.

And I also realized that the majority of the Americans don't really understand how the super-wealthy pay (or get out of paying) their taxes.
 

Thats cute and all except what was asked of Obama to prove were his qualifications for office, what Romney is being asked to prove is not.

This more like a cop stopping you and asking to see your checkbook.
 
pbrauer said:
Great new ad from the Obama campaign designed to get Mitt Romney to release more of his tax returns. This issue will dog him up to Nov 6.

Click to expand...

The subliminal stimuli in propaganda these days is staggering. I like the exaggerated horizontal vacuum tube TV lines, or the greyed out picture of opponents to make them and their ideas look old and obsolete, where everything is clear and in color for your boy.

Goebbels would be proud. And the Nazis make their first appearance.

In case you think this doesn't matter, and I'm being a quaint old fuddy-duddy: the level of subliminal brainwashing in today's propaganda is way way WAY above and beyond what you will find in dystopian fiction like 1984, in Stalin's USSR, and in Nazi Germany.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…