Posted on 01/18/2012 2:20:16 PM PST by Sub-Driver
“That’s a stupid comment that makes us look bad.”
####
If Romney is “breaking the law” he should be prosecuted. I never suggested otherwise.
Comments about making “us” look bad are invariably ignorant and made by clumsy, thespian conservatives of limited intelligence.
Exactly! There’s no suggestion of impropriety here from the underlying facts, yet they have to make it look like it’s underhanded or duplicitous by calling it ‘notorious.’
“Exactly!
There’s no suggestion of impropriety here from the underlying facts, yet they have to make it look like it’s underhanded or duplicitous by calling it ‘notorious.’”
####
And it worked. Even here on FR.
Thanks for perceiving the point I was making.
Just saw the report on Nightline. Then they plugged the report tomorrow with Gingrich’s former wife. Inquiring minds want to know when they are doing an investigative report on Hussein.....I won’t hold my breath.
There is nothing wrong per se with “parking money” in the Caymans.
If all taxes were paid according to the tax code, this is not a question of legality.
As a conservative, to me, it’s not a question of a “big evil rich guy”; conservatives do not begrudge anyone their legitimately earned income.
The whole concern - which is even a concern for conservatives - is what kind of President do we want.
As a conservative, I recognize that part of what is holding back the American economy is “big capital” investing overseas - instead of investing in the U.S.
Of course, why they do this is largely to avoid the drag on business in the U.S. that is a result of laws, regulations and unions that negatively affect business operations here.
Well, dumb ol’ me thinks that it may be smarter - in the long run - for “big capital” to use all of it’s BIG INFLUENCE in Washington - to, oh, I don’t know...
MAYBE GET SOME LAWS AND REGULATIONS ROLLED BACK SO WE (ALL BUSINESSES SMALL AND LARGE) CAN ACTUALLY OPERATE HERE IN A REASONABLE FASHION.
IMHO, Romney’s history in big capital worries me that he will not do much to reverse the investment capital flow out of the U.S., and that he will continue bailing out, providing help in various ways, to big business and big capital. Which is what Constitutional conservatives and small business folks do NOT like about 2008 until now...
right, as long as you file the proper forms and pay any taxes on income there, you are fine.
Whether you support Romneyy or not, this is NOT illegal, and just another way to protect your money from a GREEDY GRABBING Government who cannot stop spending and wants more and more of what you have worked for.
Another MSM attempt at throwing $hit on anyone other than the TRUE CULPRIT, which is OBOZO.
Precisely, this is just a BS liberal attack on a prosperous, hard-working businessman. This attack can be neutralized quickly by simply stating that Romney was following all the tax laws and also explaining that there are benefits to setting up corporations in the Cayman Islands that have nothing to do with the amount of taxes he’s had to pay. Then mention some of the many wealthy people and companies that have set up corporations in the Cayman Islands (including some Democrats).
To win the general election, our candidate just has to neutralize the accusations by Obama’s campaign and focus the public on all of BHO’s failures and serious policy errors as President. That’s the road to GOP control of the House, Senate, and White House, and the only road to stop an inflationary devaluation of the dollar that would be required to pay for all of Obama, Reid, and Pelosi’s massive spending plans through the stealth tax of inflation (if they retain power).
Personally I think Santorum, Gingrich, and Romney can all beat Obama in the general election, but Ron Paul would definitely lose to Obama and Perry would be a toss-up vs. Obama. So I’ll be happy if either Santorum, Grinrich, or Romney ends up as the GOP nominee and I’ll support our nominee as much as possible.
As a general point, it's a mistake to let the media / left define this issue of ‘electability’. The implication is that ‘conservative’ is a characteristic that is ‘not electable’. Why is it that the electability of the most liberal member of the Senate, with ties to a radical minister, Bill Ayers, and others was never a major discussion point? When this issue of ‘electability’ comes up for Republican candidates our ‘talking point’ should be to always bring up all of the ‘radical’ baggage that Obama brought with him, yet his electability was never questioned.
He has been chosen to lose to Obama.
I believe the Kennedy trust is located on Fiji. When was the first or last time one heard about that? Ah, never.
ABC is going all out to destroy both the GOP front runners. I hope they rot in hell. Someone said it better in an earlier post that is in Russia as the press you think of what can happen to you if you take on someone in power. Perhaps that needs to happen here a few times to get the point across. Perhaps it is just a coincidence that Ozero is visiting Disney soon too? Meanwhile, last election cycle mum on anything about the POS, NADA. It was as if he was born the day before election day.
We ALL KNOW that none of the LEFT would ever dream of doing this since they all LOVE to pay taxes and WANT to pay their fair share or more.
Not that I’m defending him.
I’d park money in offshore accounts if I knew how.
Any member of the Republican party supporting this turkey should probably become a registered Democrat...
I don't recall that. A low tax rate isn't an issue, and doesn't mean he did anything but follow the law. It will be an issue, though. In my opinion carried interest is used abusively, but legally.
“Romney says he pays 15% income tax, but pushes for a 35% tax rate for the “wealthy.” Then hides his own wealth offshore in tax havens?”
Not unlike George Soros, Michael Moore, John Kerry, and Warren Buffet.
The wealthy live by their own rules not the rules they inflict on us.
Mitt “Tony Montana” Romney!
“But still MSM should know the difference between income tax and capital gains tax. They are confusing the two and it annoys the heck out of me.”
OF COURSE they know the difference and OF COURSE they are making it confusing to any readers/listeners. And it surely does annoy the hell out of this 70’s-era Journalism grad, too!!
I found my alma mater had a Professor of Ethics in Journalism and questioned him, calmly and reasonably, about this “New Journalism”. Not surprisingly, he never answered any of my three emails.
All he has to say is that if taxes weren’t so high, he wouldn’t have to do it.
Hi.
Actually, I meant people in my extended family.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.