Financial Transparency:

Let's talk about taxes, Willard Romney's taxes to be more specific. On Friday the 13th Romney said he is unlikely to release more than two tax returns and that he is compliant with the law that requires disclosure for only one year. For the record, Willard's dad, George Romney, released 12 years of tax returns saying that one year could be a "fluke"; President Obama released 12 years, Kerry released 20 years (counting years in the Senate) and Bush released 8 years.

Alabama Governor, Robert Bentley (R) is urging Romney to release more tax returns. The problem with that is that Governor Bentley doesn't know what is in those tax returns. Only Willard Mitt Romney knows what will be found there.

As of yesterday at least eight Republicans were urging Romney to release his tax returns. A former McCain advisor says, "If you have something to hide, maybe you're doing something wrong…Release your tax returns." Republican pundit Bill Kristol chimes in with the same message. They want to get this tax thing behind them so they can move the agenda to other topics like jobs and the economy. But again, only Romney knows what tax loopholes his accountants and tax lawyers used, and why the money is stashed away in Bermuda and the Cayman Islands.

The American voters can easily ask, "What is Romney hiding?" By not being transparent, Willard gives the impression of hiding a large cache of cash. It causes people to wonder if he is a tax dodger. Did Romney engage in foreign investments and not report those investments? Did he invest in a company in China so he could outsource jobs to that company? (Answer: Yes he did in 1998).

So Willard Mitt Romney has a big decision to make: Will he continue to keep his finances secret and lose the election because he doesn't want the American voters to see how he made and invested his millions? Romney knows that releasing additional tax returns could be politically damaging. So I suspect he will keep his returns hidden at least until he is officially the GOP candidate and he is no longer the "presumptive nominee".

Currently Romney has not released enough tax information to meet the standards of a Senate confirmation hearing for a cabinet position. As a GOP presidential candidate Mitt will have to release more returns. To do so will likely be political suicide. Either way—hold them or release them; Willard Romney will lose.

President Obama wants to let the Bush tax cuts on income over $250,000 expire at the end of the year. By a two-to-one margin Americans believe it would make the tax system more fair, and help our economy.

By contrast, Mitt Romney wants to:

1) Keep the Bush tax cuts. 2) And give the wealthy an ADDITIONAL tax cut.

According to the Tax Policy Center, presidential candidate Romney's additional tax cut would: Cut the average one-percenter's taxes by $237,000 a year, and cut taxes for the top one-tenth of one percent of Americans by $1.2 million a year.

Of course, Romney refuses to specify how the cost of $500 Billion annually, would be paid for.

However, we know the ropes by now. The GOP/Romney/Koch/Norquist tax model = Tax cuts for rich Americans are paid for by raising taxes on the rest of us while cutting/dismantling our safety nets.

"Focus groups given an accurate description of Mr. Romney's policy proposals refused to believe that any politician would take such a position." (Krugman, NYT)

"If you were successful, somebody along the line gave you some help….Somebody helped to create this unbelievable American system that we have that allowed you to thrive."

That's the leader of the free world lecturing ungrateful plutocrats on the value of the government sponsored activities that enabled their success. Yes indeed, forget about that fantasy of achieving success because you worked hard to build a better mousetrap. What really brings the world beating a path to your door are roads and cops, teachers and firefighters, traffic lights and garbage men.

Good grief, we all value roads and cops and no one (except the president) is suggesting otherwise. But Obama thinks that somehow the more successful among us have not adequately contributed to that road being built or to that cop getting paid. Which is a rather odd position to take considering the top 10% of earners in this country pay 70% of the federal income taxes -- while the bottom 50% of earners pay none at all. So if you want to argue that "somebody along the line gave you some help" that "somebody" would be the folks at the top who have been and are continuing to provide quite a bit of help to about half the country. So I wonder if that half of the folks is grateful for the opportunity they have been given to thrive. And I wonder if the president had them in mind when lecturing about getting a helping hand.

The fact of the matter is an increasingly larger portion of our population has been getting significant help from a relatively small portion of our population for quite some time. And that help has been INCREASING over the years – in 1980 the top10% of earners only paid about 49% of federal income taxes while the bottom 50% paid 7 percent. So it is abundantly clear to anyone who bothers to look at real data that the most successful achievers among us have been bearing a larger and larger portion of the federal income tax load. And I daresay, building a few roads and paying for a few cops along the way.

So the issue isn't that the more successful among us haven't been doing their part to fund the "helping hand" of government. The issue is that in today's America far too many haven't used that help to improve their lives. Because while you can put two people on a brand new road to the mousetrap factory, you can't imbue either one of them with the drive or the creativity that will lead them to thrive once inside that factory. That sort of thing only comes from within and even our "unbelievable American system" can't light a fire where there is none.

But this president does light a fire when he inflames the sense of entitlement in the audiences to whom he panders. Yes indeed, the best way to achieve prosperity in Obama's America is to demand more from the rich then wait in line for your government check. The heck with meeting your destiny through personal responsibility and individual initiative, that's just a myth propagated by the monied elites. The tragedy is the folks the president stirs up the most will be helped the least as their dependency on government becomes institutionalized in his statist vision of cradle to grave benefits.

This man is hopelessly out of touch with what it means to be an American.

So I have been checking the first page of the NBC news site for the last couple of days for any stories on Obama's attack on small business over the weekend.

Nothing.

But there is a front page story on how the Obama's should get another try at some "Kiss-Cam" they were apparently on.

You just can't make this stuff up.

There may be a few asking for more tax returns released but if any political candidate is following the letter of the law as to financial disclosure during a campaign, then that is all that is necessary and the standard to be judged by. Others curiosity or "standards" set by others have nothing to do with the campaign. Live with it because it is the law.

It is a non-issue from a vast majority of the American people.

@BH -- What is your reaction to the latest CBO (which you point out all the time as being non-partisan) report on how the tax cuts show the wealthy paid more anyway??

@WCA -- She was a bit of a cold fish wasn't she?????

*** DISCLOSE Act gets blocked:

Very interesting... since there is file tape from MTP where the old Turtle McConnell goes on & on to Tim Russert about how much he favored disclosure & transparency...

What ever could of changed his mind..?

“There are a lot of wealthy, successful Americans who agree with me because they want to give something back. If you’ve been successful, you didn’t get there on your own. You didn’t get there on your own. I’m always struck by people who think, well, it must be because I was just so smart. There are a lot of smart people out there. It must be because I worked harder than everybody else. Let me tell you something -- there are a whole bunch of hardworking people out there. If you were successful, somebody along the line gave you some help. There was a great teacher somewhere in your life. Somebody helped to create this unbelievable American system that we have that allowed you to thrive. Somebody invested in roads and bridges. If you’ve got a business, you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen. The Internet didn’t get invented on its own. Government research created the Internet so that all the companies could make money off the Internet.”-Barack Obama

As if you needed any proof that this President doesn't have the slightest clue how the private sector and capitalism works, here it is. If Barack Obama had ever worked an honest day in his life, maybe he would understand that businesses don't spontaneously arise because "somebody else makes it happen" for the benefit of others. Instead they are created by the hard work, dicipline and sacrifice of people who have ideas and the wherewithal to implement them. If these "somebodies" really exist Mr. President, why don't you have them make some more businesses "happen" so that we can get some of the millions of people who are currently unemployed back to work?

By the way, touting the internet as a government innovation that "all the companies" make money off of, might not be such a good idea. It only reminds us that the Defense Department (developer of the internet) is currently being gutted by Obama and the Democrats through sequestration. And the all but defunct NASA? Well don't be expecting any innovations out of them anytime soon since our entire space program has been outsourced to Russia-- also by our wonderful President.

As for the arguement that because we use the infrastructure, we are somehow beholden to the government for the things that we accomplish, isn't that why 53% of us pay out a substantial part of our incomes in taxes? Oh that's right, Democratic politicians believe that money is better spent buying the votes of the people on the government dole. You know, those same people who don't pay federal income tax, but get to use the same infrastructure that we've paid for, for free?

Obama wouldn't have to make this arguement, had he not lied to the American people about taxing only "millionaires and billionaires" while all along planning to squeeze the middle class and small businesses for every dime that he can. Where I come from, making $200K a year does not make one a member of the uber-wealthy, in fact, you would need to make nearly twice this much to qualify as one of the much maligned 1% of income earners. Also, despite what the President says, raising taxes on those in this income bracket does indeed affect small business owners. The majority of any small businesses of substance make at least this much, and those that don't certainly aspire to.

Last of all, while perhaps a little off-topic, I would like to point out that it is not lost on us that the 46-47% of income earners who pay no federal income taxes still can vote for representatives who can dictate how much the rest of us are taxed as well as where those tax dollars are spent-- clearly a conflict of interests. This creates an ironic situation where scumbag liberal politicians can buy the votes of these very same people with the hard earned money of conservatives.

Here's Romney:

"We're accused, by the way - in our party - of being the party of the rich," Romney said. "And it's an awful moniker, because that's just not true. We're the party of people who want to get rich. And we're also the party of people who want to care to help people from getting poor. We want to help the poor.

http://news.yahoo.com/romney-says-gops-not-party-rich-those-want-012359242--abc-news-politics.html

Sheesh!

Bill in Fairfax wrote:

Good grief, we all value roads and cops

Republicans just don't want to pay for these things.

What are you hiding Mittens?

If McCain can review 23 years of tax reviews we the American public should be given the same access.

Under President Obama, taxes on the very wealthy are the lowest they've been in 80 years.

But Mitt Romney's first priority, given the chance, is to give this privileged group even MORE CASH. And at any price to the people of America. No suffering or hardship enacted upon we lesser-spotted Americans, is too much for Mr. Romney.

Romney: "It's about profits - that's the name of the game, right?"

Knowing that thousands of Bain victims lost jobs, family health care, pensions, College funds, housing, apartment, car, community & future plans, causing suicides and hopelessness where previously there had been stability, has not changed Mr. Romney's ways.

The incomes of venture capitalists like Mitt Romney are paid for by parting workers from their hard earned salaries & life long benefits.

Looks like Dem Sen. Patty Murray’s plan to hold the American economy hostage with threats to throw it off the fiscal cliff into recession if they don’t get their way on raising taxes is ALREADY having a negative impact. These Dem bastards are holding a gun to the American economies head and saying they WILL pull the trigger if the Republican’s don’t cave in to their demands. I wonder if they got their terrorist training in an Al Quada camp??

BTW, the following article is from the NY Times, so lefty liberals are required to believe it’s the truth. Also, it was written BEFORE Murray’s economic terrorist threats and so the dire predictions will probably be worse than stated in the article.

Fear of Year-End Fiscal Stalemate May Be Having Effect Now

ECONOMY, NEW YORK TIMES, NYT, FISCAL CLIFF, BUSINESS NEWS, TAXES,

The New York Times

| 12 Jul 2012 | 10:16 AM ET

With the economy having slowed in recent weeks, business leaders and policy makers are growing concerned that the tax increases and government spending cuts set to take effect at year’s end have already begun to cause companies to hold back on hiring and investments.

Economists say the magnitude of the effect remains unclear and the fiscal uncertainty is probably not the economy’s main problem, but is instead one of several factors — along with Europe’s troubles, the spike in oil prices this spring and a continuing hangover from the housing bubble — restraining growth.

A market index that economists consider to be a proxy for uncertainty — the Chicago Board Options Exchange Volatility Index, or the VIX — has risen more than 26 percent since the beginning of April, when the so-called fiscal cliff began to draw headlines.

A separate index meant specifically to track uncertainty over government policy, created by Nick Bloom, an economist at Stanford University, and Steven J. Davis, an economist at the University of Chicago, has risen approximately 56 percent during the same period.

The fiscal cliff refers to a combination of tax increases and spending cuts scheduled to start at the first of next year. Leaders of both parties say they do not want the changes to take effect as planned, with President Obama saying Monday that he favored a temporary extension of tax cuts on income below $250,000 and Republicans favoring the extension of all tax cuts.

But the two parties have so far been unable to agree on a plan to avoid the scheduled tax increases and spending cuts.

The expiration of the tax cuts — both President George W. Bush’s and additional tax cuts from Mr. Obama’s stimulus bill — would cause the tax bill for a typical middle-class household to rise by about $1,750. A series of automatic spending cuts, to both military and domestic programs, would also take effect on Jan. 1, a result of the failure of a special Congressional committee to reach a deficit deal last year.

If Congress does not act, the changes would cause roughly a 4 percent reduction in economic output, according to the Congressional Budget Office — and, some experts predict, would result in another recession .

Bill Fairfax: So if you want to argue that "somebody along the line gave you some help" that "somebody" would be the folks at the top who have been and are continuing to provide quite a bit of help to about half the country.

This is Obama's universe. It only extends to his belief that government is the origin of any success this country has ever had. Obama is so wrong. Obama isn't very smart, he has limited experience and knowledge of anything outside of government, so to him, for every problem, government is the answer. We've seen how that has worked out in his 3+ years, high unemployment, record deficits, record debt, low GDP, an endless recession, and more and more people (also known as Obama's base voters) on public assistance programs.

If Obama knows one thing, it is class warfare. Divide the country and blame others. That's not leadership, that's Illinois politics. And we see how well the pols in Illinois have run their state, not so well.

If you’ve got a business, you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen.

Just like clock work... the chimes go off...

Then again, we wouldn't expect RWNJ's to comprehend proper context!

How exactly does one build a business without employees & customers?

Don't Carry It All -- Thank you for posting Gov. Romney's accurate description of the Republican. I too agree -- sheesh why don't the democrats get it?

Other statement makes no sense because there is no one that doesn't want to pay for those services but they have to be addressed at the local, county and state levels.

Oh, we know the context of the president's statement from redistribution of wealth to this. This is the president's John Kerry's "I was for this before I was against it." It shows his true socialist policy leanings which are a dead loser with the American public who has worked so hard and receive no credit from this man.

The context of the Roanoke, VA speech:

If you were successful, somebody along the line gave you some help. There was a great teacher somewhere in your life. Somebody helped to create this unbelievable American system that we have that allowed you to thrive. Somebody invested in roads and bridges. If you’ve got a business — you didn’t build that (unbelievable American system). Somebody else made that happen. The Internet didn’t get invented on its own. Government research created the Internet so that all the companies could make money off the Internet. The point is, is that when we succeed, we succeed because of our individual initiative, but also because we do things together.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2012/07/13/remarks-president-campaign-event-roanoke-virginia

Feisty, in addition to outsourcing the torchbearer uniforms to Burma for the Salt Lake City games, the "United We Stand" pins were Made in China. Romney talks tough but words are not action. President Obama has acted and gotten tough with China. The results of his DOJ's suits filed against China for engaging in unfair trade practices has brought steel and tire manufacturing and several other previously outsourced manufacturing area jobs back to the USA. Action, Mitt Romney, speak much louder than words.

Prior to Memorial Day, a couple Iowa GOP politicians and wannabee legislators handed out little American flags--Made in China.  To say it was a bit embarrassing when the news reported this Oops would be an understatement.

Romney! Show us your tax returns or get out of the race. People don't like candidates with "little" secrets. No show taxes equals NO votes for you.

OBAMA IN 2012.

Bill in Fairfax wrote:

Which is a rather odd position to take considering the top 10% of earners in this country pay 70% of the federal income taxes -- while the bottom 50% of earners pay none at all.

Hey Bill, considering the top 20% owns roughly 85% of the wealth, they should pay a lot of taxes.

The rest of us have to share the remaining 15% of the wealth.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wealth_in_the_United_States

The context of the Roanoke, VA speech:

Thanks for that Dennis!

I see a whole bunch of *grasp meeting straws* this morning... lol

Like I said, lemmings...

That is not your call Tom. Any politician that follows the letter of the law as to financial disclosure has every right in the race. Your standard is wrong.

Oh, the American public can read the exact words, but it is the underlying socialistic, arrogant, talking down to them that has pissed them off. That will be his John Kerry moment. Mark my words.

WCA: But there is a front page story on how the Obama's should get another try at some "Kiss-Cam" they were apparently on.

The hard hitting Washington DC journalists have also uncovered an important characteristic of Obama:

http://www.politico.com/politico44/2012/07/obama-likes-thin-mints-best-129089.html

JiA: Looks like Dem Sen. Patty Murray’s plan to hold the American economy hostage with threats to throw it off the fiscal cliff into recession if they don’t get their way on raising taxes is ALREADY having a negative impact.

This is too funny. So Murray/Democrats are threatening to raise taxes if the Republicans don't agree with them, to raise taxes.

Go ahead Patty-cakes. Make our day.

My goodness, The libs seem a bit desperate this morning.

Screaming that Obama's words didn't mean what they said.

Don't you folks ever get tired of making excuses for Obama?

Joe In Albany,

It is very simple. Extend the tax cuts for those making under $250,000. and let the tax cuts expire for those making over $250,000.

Boehner could get this thing wrapped up by the August recess. Obama will sign the law. And everyone could then focus on the Olympics and relax.

Will Romney's pick be another Clown, go to zoo com ?

Which is a rather odd position to take considering the top 10% of earners in this country pay 70% of the federal income taxes -- while the bottom 50% of earners pay none at all.

Another great post, Bill. The above tax statistics led the OECD to conclude that out of the 24 countries included in it's study, the United States by far had the most progressive tax system. The number of income earners paying no federal income taxes here was strikingly higher than the number in the next highest country, which flies in the face of the liberal arguements that all of these supposedly poor people should continue being exempted from paying these taxes. This is especially true when one considers that we are still the wealthiest nation in the world and that here, the standards of living for all income levels is higher than those of these other countries.

Ben-- Romney saying he wants to get rich.... LOL! That's effing funny. You don't get it.

We're the party of people who want to get rich

What's the matter, the top 1% not good enough for him?

As far as redistribution, the money is flowing to the top not the bottom.

Guess Fairfax Bill missed Mitt Romney saying "we don't need more fire fighters, more police officers, more teachers...." The very fact that Mitt Romney's 59-point plan says he will cut more tax cuts for the wealthiest 2%, that the GOP demands an extension of the Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest 2% screams that infrastructure, space exploration, defense, fire, police and teachers are not needed. Where are all the jobs those wealthy job creators allegedly create? Bush despite the huge, unfunded tax cuts created 3 million jobs in 8 years and those 3 million and several million more disappeared before he left office. Tax cuts and more tax cuts for the multi-million/billionaires at the expense of American progress is delusional. If those million/billionaires can donate $10-100 Million each to elect legislators to keep their taxes low and pass legislation that favor them, THEY CAN afford to pay higher taxes.

Fools & Bill throw out the tried and true GOP talking point that the rich pay 70% of taxes while half the country pay little or none. Never occurs to them that the reason for that is that half the country's income earners make barely a living wage. Why is that? That is the question ALL should ask regardless of party affiliation. Why, in the supposedly richest country in the world, do we have so many of our citizens living just above, at or below the poverty line.

Don't Carry -- You are the one that doesn't get it from your own post. Where does Gov. Romney say "he wants to get rich?" I believe he is talking about a "party that wants to be rich." This is true and the governor is not saying he wants what he has already accomplished. Wrong on redistribution as well.

Jody -- When they talk about the 46% not paying federal income tax they fail to realize it was the Republicans tax cuts that allow this.

In 2000 32.6 million people paid no federal tax. In 2008 that figured had jumped to 51.6 million due to the tax breaks Bush and company, i.e. all Republicans, put in place. An increase of almost 60%.

Of course they also forget that these people pay state income tax, sales tax, property taxes, local taxes and sorts of fees. A greater percentage of their income is taken up in these taxes than a wealthy persons.

Ben -- He said the PEOPLE in the party. What say you on the FACT that the redistribution of the wealth is flowing to the top?

Jody -- Since you put an alleged statement from Gov. Romney in quotes, please provide his exact quotes as to the actual words he spoke. Thanks.

The first thought before posting this lame article should have been what idiot took the time to write it. No mention of the Obama job czar Jeffery Immelt outsourcing more then half of General Electrics 300K employees. Or that they have 277 plants in 43 countries other then the United States. Or that GE paid ZERO in federal taxes. How many billions did GE get from Obama again? Is zero what Obama feels is GE paying their fair share? How many billions has Obama paid out to donors and campaign workers in crony capitalism? No matter how many ways you try and spell liberal, it always comes out reading hypocrisy.

Jody, dynamite posts.

"If those million/billionaires can donate $10-100 Million each to elect legislators to keep their taxes low and pass legislation that favor them, THEY CAN afford to pay higher taxes."

This is the sticking point that ANYONE can understand.

From the perspective of the top income earners, it is not about the few cents more they would pay in taxes to make the system fairer.

It is about undermining the strength of the middle & working class ~ and compromising the fiscal stability of the United States. Thus it is about power.

I find this very interesting. Now getting a massage can qualify you for welfare. Another back door disgusting move by the most disgusting administrations of all times trying to keep people on the dole instead of providing incentives for betterment.

On Thursday, President Obama, through the Department of Health and Human Services, quietly released an official policy directive. Utilizing an obscure legal device from the original Social Security Act, the administration claimed the right to waive the work requirements for able-bodied people that formed the backbone of a generation of welfare reform. This directive could very well allow the welfare state to regress to its bloated worst.

The move is vintage Obama, and it contains several of his administration’s most dubious hallmarks. It is legally suspect, ignoring both the letter of the law and the clear intent of Congress to specifically shield welfare reform from willy-nilly rewriting at the hands of federal bureaucrats. It reflects the administration’s taste for the selective enforcement of the laws it is sworn to uphold. It cements executive orders and policy directives as the legislative instruments du jour, superseding boring, old-fashioned acts of Congress. And it even reminds us how much of the entitlement state now runs through Kathleen Sebelius and HHS.

But as with so much in this administration, the policy is even worse than the process.

Advertisement

After multiple iterations and intense negotiations, the Republican Congress passed, and in 1996 President Clinton signed, a transformational restructuring of the federal welfare state. What had been called “Aid to Families with Dependent Children” (AFDC), a vestige of the New Deal that over the decades had swollen to infamy by incentivizing single-motherhood and out-of-wedlock birth, was replaced with Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF).

It gave the states broad freedom to design and implement assistance programs that met their differing needs. But undergirding this flexibility was a set of tough but humane welfare-to-work standards that all states would have to meet. TANF placed a five-year lifetime limit on benefits, and able-bodied recipients were required to work, prepare for work, or at least look for a job as a condition for receiving aid. Robust, clear federal standards for what counts as “work” were vital to making this arrangement function, and to fending off claims from some states that everything from “exercise” to “journaling” counted toward gainful employment.

The reforms were not perfect, but they embodied the belief, not nearly so counterintuitive as it sounds, that welfare ought to be self-undermining. That is, a welfare program should be called successful if and only if it helps get people off of welfare. In the AFDC era, the dependency rolls never appreciably shrank. But in the years after reform took effect, 3.6 million people — and 2.9 million children — escaped poverty; childhood hunger was halved; employment among single mothers skyrocketed; and the rise in out-of-wedlock childbearing slowed. All of this happened even as the welfare caseload was cut in half.

These results flabbergasted left-wing wonks and stalwart Democrats, who predicted that reform would push millions into destitution and turn the war on poverty into a war on the poor. Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan perhaps ventured farthest into hyperbole, calling the bill “the most brutal act of social policy since Reconstruction.”

Rarely in the hurly-burly of politics and policy do both sides get an opportunity to test their ideas in the laboratory of reality and compare results, but that is exactly what happened with welfare reform. Defenders of the New Deal/Great Society legacy were forced to put their record up against a new approach that focused on strong families and personal responsibility. And they lost. What emerged was something close to a consensus, with opponents of TANF and its adjuncts either won over or silenced.

Which is what makes this president’s displayed preference for the Old Time Religion of the dole so astonishing. After spending years expanding the food-stamp rolls to unprecedented levels, he appears to have turned his sights on TANF, and is poised to fritter away 15 years of gains in the fight against poverty and dependency. Signing welfare reform was Bill Clinton’s greatest act of apostasy from the vantage point of the anti-reform liberal Democrats — it led to multiple resignations in his Department of Health and Human Services. Obama’s move, then, shows once again that he is well to Clinton’s left. Republicans should make a major issue of this latest evidence of the president’s unreconstructed liberalism.

http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/309583/farewell-welfare-reform-editors

My, my, my. Look at all the GREEDY people here trying to get hold of the last pennies the poor and middle classes have left.

Disgusting!

BEN -- I'm WAITING on an answer to WHY the WEALTH of this country is FLOWING to the TOP.

BTW Ben -- WSJ had an article on the welfare issue. It seems TWO REPUBLICAN governors requested the waivers.

FYI -- http://www.ers.usda.gov/amber-waves/2012-march/what’s-behind-the-rise-in-snap-participation.aspx

@Fiesty,

"

Ummm... last time I checked ones RIGHT to vote is NOT tied to ones income...

Anyone need further proof the scum-bags on the right want to limit voting to the rich, white & privileged?"

I'm not sure where the hell you pulled race out of that quote at all. What you're saying is the only people that pay taxes are rich, white and privileged? All that statement does is show how friggin ignorant and blind you are.

But since you're completely blind to any of obama's failings, that doesn't surprise me at all. Ignorance is bliss and you seem to be one happy person.

Bill in Fairfax,

The fact of the matter is an increasingly larger portion of our population has been getting significant help from a relatively small portion of our population for quite some time. And that help has been INCREASING over the years – in 1980 the top10% of earners only paid about 49% of federal income taxes while the bottom 50% paid 7 percent

So why do you think this is the case? Except for a blip during the Clinton years the top marginal tax rates and the capital gains tax have consistently gone down. In fact the tax rats on the wealthy are at historical lows.

The reason the percentage of taxes paid has increased for the wealthy is because their share of the wealth has increased even faster than tax rates have declined. In the 60's and 70's the wealthiest 1% received 10% of our total income. That has now more than doubled, in 2007 the wealthiest 1% received almost 25% of total US income.

Romney yesterday:

And we’re also the party of people who want to care to help people from getting poor. We want to help the poor.

Romney back in February:

I'm not concerned about the very poor

so which one is it Willard?

Bill, Fairfax

Yeah, sorry; but a $70,000 LOSS on your hobby horses pretty much undermines your entire point.

But do carry on,...you're nothing if not consistent in carrying the water.

(Bayllie - how does one utilize help from being poor, exactly? For a prep school elite,...this man makes word salad almost as tasty as Palin!)

Jody actually put it out there correctly. It's not alleged statement from Willard.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/post/mitt-romney-we-dont-need-more-cops-firefighters-or-teachers/2012/06/08/gJQAvOgDOV_blog.html

Clara KCMO

Yeah, sorry; but a $70,000 LOSS on your hobby horses pretty much undermines your entire point.

correction: one third of the horse is owned by Ann Romney. Two other people also own that horse (more tax deductions???)

I'm not at all shocked that by a 2 to 1 margin the American people think tax breaks and loopholes should be for those making less than 250,000 per year - I totally agree with that tax plan, if you make more than that per year you are wealthy, I don't car where you live and most likely my tax dollars are paying to keep you safe, put out the fire that could burn your house, pay for the ambulance that comes when you are injured, and paves the roads you drive your beemer to the mall in.

you seem to be one happy person

You're wrong!

I'm NOT happy... I'm ecstatic... watching the worse candidate in history implode right before your very eyes!

Thanks for your concern though... much appreciated! ;o)

White Collar Auto

Also missing is he FDA announcment that we now have an approved drug that when taken is extremely effective in preventing the user from getting Aids.

Seems the company that makes the drug, which was already in use to slow the progression of Aids, was headed by Donald Rumsfeld, a Republican.

Instead we get this weak article about hope for a aids vaccine.

I find it pretty common to know things 2 & 3 days before anything is written on this site. When I do, it has historically written with a lot of slant.

MSNBC only followers, under informed, misinformed. Will this sad state get any better after NBC took full control? Well, we'll see.

@bayllie,

For a bunch of liberals that are saying obama's words are being taken out of context, you seem to enjoy doing it with Romney. Back when he said that, he said he wasn't concerned about them because they're already pretty much taken care of. With the massive welfare system we have this country where they can live better than a working middle class family, I'm not real concerned about them either. My only concern with them is the fact that you libs want to keep them on the government tit for votes. You could do alot better working to instill some pride and sense of responsibility in them. But that would cause them to learn, get smart, and you'd lose votes.

Hey Ben -- Still waiting.........

The liberal argument on the rich paying taxes is that they use the roads and services to include police protection, fire protection, the military, etc... Well don't the poor use the same roads and services to include police protection, fire protection, the military, etc? Why is it that in the liberal mind, only the rich have to pay for such services? Shouldn't everyone have to pay taxes for these things?

We all know the liberals are referring to federal taxes since sales taxes are paid by all. If the bottom 50% of all wage earners pay no federal taxes, how can the liberals justify their use of roads and military protection? This is something even a liberal can't define because there is no definition for it. Again, I will point out the liberal stance is total and complete nonsense.

Personally I feel that liberals have rich envy. Isn't envy one of the seven deadly sins? Oh, wait, I can't talk about sins... liberals don't believe in them.

Hey Northstar, thanks, I'll take a pass.

Fact is Northstar the 'rich' already pay 40% of the taxes.

Nope, you all need to step up.

1% pays 40%. That's grossly in excess of 'fair share.'

But say gang, how about the GPD being revised down to 1.1% Holy hell nothing proves the stimulus was a giant waste than that.

And there is nothing you can say to counter that, hence the Bain crap.

Obama's is toast. These numbers are turgid.

Clara KCMO

(Bayllie - how does one utilize help from being poor, exactly? For a prep school elite,...this man makes word salad almost as tasty as Palin!)

they allow poor people to clean their homes, mow their lawns and wash their cadillacs.

OMG, Feisty and Jody, I thought it was weird the right wing didn't denounce the Olympic organizers for outsourcing the manufacture of their uniforms to China. It seemed like being against that action would be a no-brainer for the Republican presidential nominee and his surrogates. I was surprised they didn't give it their full throated umbrage. Now we know why! Romney himself outsourced Olympic uniforms to Burma!

Business has been boffo at Bill's Broccoli Emporium lately. Yes indeed, putting in those 16 hour days for more months than I care to count has finally paid off. It's the best broccoli in town and discriminating palates are flocking to my door.

But lest I become too enamored with my own talents, I must give thanks to all those who have helped me along the way. So let me take this opportunity to express my gratitude to my 6th grade teacher, Miss Brooks. Without her inspiration I would no doubt be slaving away in some obscure cardboard factory. And thanks also to Officer Brown who intervened when I was being mugged by a street urchin a few years ago. And how could I forget I-95. It might not be a highway to the stars, but it sure brings a lot of traffic to my store.

So I stand on the shoulders of the giants whose taxes funded the teachers, the cops and the infrastructure that have enabled my success. In turn, I am paying taxes that will hopefully enable the next generation of entreprenuers to enjoy the same success as I. So it puzzles me somewhat to hear our president suggest that somehow I'm not giving back to the system that allowed me to thrive. The fact is, the more I thrive the more I give back and I've been giving back quite a lot over the years. And if the president wants me to give back even more, I might have to rethink whether I want to continue putting in those 16 hour days. Because after all, busting my butt to provide for my family is one thing, but doing it to provide for everyone else is quite another.

I'm not sure the president understands that basic economic reality.
_____

The reason the percentage of taxes paid has increased for the wealthy is because their share of the wealth has increased even faster than tax rates have declined.

1) And your point is?

2) Excellent elucidation of how declining tax rates lead to increasing tax revenues. My compliments.

Gotta love the GOP, not only do they try to buy an election with corporate money, but they do it with HIDDEN corporate money. Since the wealthy hide their riches in foreign corporations and trusts, you gotta wonder how much is going to these 501c4 and 501c6 organizations.

Romney is very anti-china, except for the money they are using to buy his election, right ?

We'll never know, just as we'll never see how much fraud was in his tax returns.

@Job1 -- Here is the exact quote from the link you provided. Where is the "we don't need more fire fighters, more police officers, more teachers...." in the following?

Romney said of Obama, “he wants another stimulus, he wants to hire more government workers. He says we need more fireman, more policeman, more teachers. Did he not get the message of Wisconsin? The American people did. It’s time for us to cut back on government and help the American people.”

Amy,

you might even say he was the "Outsourcer in Chief"; probably got the whole thing started, eh?

BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

I just love to use the word Optics over and over and over and over and over! teehee, I'm with Feisty, this public implosion is down right delicious!

So Mr. Fairfax, it's ok for people like Mitt Romney to pay a pittance in taxes via government "loopholes" and expensive tax attorneys, but it's not fair for someone who earns $25,000.00 a year to take advantage of tax credits or "loopholes" put in place to help lower income families?

Ah the uniforms made in China. No I don't agree with that. But while you all are slamming Romney for his response, I guess you don't have any problem with obama running campaign events for donations in china... which isn't entirely legal.

Nah, you wouldn't have a problem with that at all! He's your golden boy!

@!$%#ing hypocrites.

Sorry, Mitt Romney, You Can't Be Chairman, CEO, And President Of A Company And Not Be Responsible For What It Does...

Henry Blodget | Jul. 12, 2012, 1:45 PM

Today's bombshell report by the Boston Globe that Mitt Romney may have remained in charge of Bain Capital for three years after he claimed to have left has the potential to destroy Romney's credibility.

The issue boils down to statements that, at first glance, appear to directly contradict one another:

• According to statements Bain filed with the SEC, Romney was the "chairman, CEO, and president" of Bain from 1999-2002.

• According to Romney, Romney left Bain in 1999 and had "no input on investments or management of companies after that point."

Beyond determining whether these statements are accurate--or whether Bain misled the SEC or Romney has been misleading the public--the reason this issue is important is that Romney wants to disavow responsibility for anything Bain or Bain companies did after early 1999.

And one of the things that Bain did after early 1999, as Dan Primack of Fortune points out, is invest in a company called Stericycle whose services included the disposal of aborted fetuses.

For obvious reasons, an investment in a company that performed this service might hurt Romney's standing with the right-to-life voters in the Republican party, even though Romney was pro-choice at the time the investment was made.

And Romney also wants to disavow responsibility for many layoffs that Bain engineered after 1999, an issue he has had to deal with since running for Governor.

The emphasis is mine.

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/sorry-mitt-romney-you-cant-be-chairman-ceo-and-president-of-a-company-and-not-be-responsible-for-what-it-does-2012-7#ixzz20ht4Qp5J

Beyond the obvious questions about truthfulness, how is it possible that one can be CEO, Chairman, Managing Director, and SOLE shareholder from 1999-2002 and not know anything about what transpired with YOUR company, and not have reasonable people question the veracity of your statements.

OR were the filings with the SEC inaccurate?

Romney's hate and lies come from his party is not working, President Obama campaigned for two years and has been President for more than three years, Voters know all about his past. If people disagree with his policies, fine. But if they cannot accept him as our President, that is their problem. The majority of voters has said that the right wing's attempt to make him appear anti-American is pure nonsense. Some people are so enraged over Obama's waxing of john McCain they continue to grasp at straws to delegitimize hm. It did not work in 2008 and will not in 2012 !!! "OBAMA GUARANTEED for 2012" PS - I'm going with Obama, the TeaConPubs did enough damage to our Nation !!!!!

"Reflecting its concerns about the slow pace of progress in reducing unemployment and the downside risks to economic growth, the committee made clear at its June meeting that it is prepared to take further action," Bernanke said in his prepared remarks on the Fed's semi-annual monetary policy report.

Read more: http://www.foxbusiness.com/business-leaders/2012/07/17/bernanke-fed-prepared-to-do-more-to-boost-economy/#ixzz20tJ1jKcV

You Libs just keep pushing that rope.

The Economy sucks and Obama owns it.

Alex, you might want to read this piece in this morning's Boston Globe. Both candidates are mining for funds overseas. Romney has sent two of his sons to Hong Kong for fundraisers, and will have at least two in London next week which he himself will attend. And then another in Isreal. The link will explain why both sides are doing this.

http://www.boston.com/news/politics/articles/2012/07/17/candidates_campaigns_hold_fund_raisers_overseas_to_draw_donations_from_expatriates/?s_campaign=8315

So, based on statements from Dont_Carry_it_all, the Bush tax cuts greatly benefited the middle class. I guess the Republicans are the party that wants to help the middle class. The dems seem to want to raise everybody's taxes. If they don't why would they not be pushing to make the Bush tax cuts for thos making less than $200k per year permanent?

Spanky,

Fact is that the tax cuts will expire on Dec 31 2012.

Therefore, Congress can just do nothing.

Or Congress can extend them all. Obama will veto that plan.

Or Boehner can pass extention for some and not others. What is on the table is let the tax cuts expire for those making over $250,000. Extend it for everyone else.

finally, Boehner can do it now or wait for the lame duck Congress to do its work.

either way the clock is ticking....

Spanky,

I am sure you will be able to figure out how to reduce your adjustable gross income to be under any magic number you want.

Va Ind -- You are correct. The Democrats are pushing for the middle class tax cuts. It's the REPUBLICANS screaming 46% of the people pay no federal income tax yet they are the ones that instituted the cuts. Make sense of that? BTW those people do pay federal PAYROLL taxes as well as state and local taxes and fees.

Gee Amy, about the only thing I want to denounce is Obama's outsourcing of our space program to the Russians. You do remember the space program don't you? Somehow I think the space program is a little more important than some Olympic uniforms.

white collar auto The economy sucks and Obama owns it.

The problem is the right has done a fine job blocking the President at evert turn. What ever comes out of the house is so one sided, your god would not accept it. No comprise with anyone. You guys think your right when you know its wrong.

My, my, how upset the libbies are that Romney won't release his tax returns. If you all are so damned concerned with taxes, can you tell me if Geithner ever paid his....or how about Obama's favorite tycoon, Warren Buffet? The old goat Buffet owed a cool $1 billion last I heard. Where's your righteous outrage, lib hypocrites?

WCA Of course, the economy is not great, look at the mess he was left with, the President acknowledges this, but it is moving slowly forward. Little of this movement can be attributed to anything the present Congress has done to help, nor can it be said that republicans have given encouragement to their wealthy donors to hire more people given their companies huge profits.

The Chamber of Commerce has been fundraising and pushing an anti Democrat agenda that has actively been discouraging its members from making any effort to move things along hoping that if Romney were to win, the floodgates of hiring and tax breaks will open and manna from heaven in the form of money and power will engulf the land and all will be well with the world. That's a heck of a way to solve the problem. Keep in mind, at least half the voting population support the President, that is you guys don't steal it, because as things stand right now that is the only way y'all will win. Then what???

When its programs that the right likes, like NASA and it get cut its outsourcing. When its something like cutting programs that help people its deficit reduction. How can you have it both ways?

Fact is that the tax cuts will expire on Dec 31 2012.

Therefore, Congress can just do nothing.

Or Congress can extend them all. Obama will veto that plan.

So what's different from 2010 when Obama caved? Here are the scenarios.

Obama wins, Democrats in congress agree to renew all the tax cuts in the lame duck session because they will not let the economy go over the fiscal cliff if there is a Democratic Administration.

Romney wins, tax cuts are renewed retroactively on January 20th, 2013.

Either way Democrats are bluffing and everybody knows it.

I'll give you 10-1 that all the tax cuts are renewed.

Bill -

Your little story was humourous but not very informing or factual.

If your "little Broccoli Emporium" nets you enough to pull in over $250,000 then the phase-out of Bush's "temporary" tax cuts is just a return to previous tax rates, not a huge increase.

I never stated tax revenues were increasing, only that the top 1% paid a higher share of overall taxes due to an increased share of the income.

I really don't understand the Conservative mentality - they wage war on the middle class by outsourcing jobs, reducing private union influence, fighting minimum wage increases, and eliminating public sector jobs then complain when around 50% of US workers don't earn enough to pay Federal Income Taxes.

Only a complete moron would not understand the correlation. Most of the hard-working Americans in that group would LOVE to find a job that pays them enough to reach the Federal Tax threshold - and I'll bet none of them would complain about their taxes!

Did Amy from Portland just crawl out from under a rock? The Olympic uniform debacle is old news. Just where in the US are garments even made any longer? Even your State of Maine beloved LL Bean's doesn't have anything on their rack that isn't made in China or some foreign country. Maybe the new LL Bean label should be sold in the US.

When the Romney run Olympics were asked why the uniforms were made in Myanmar and not the USA, they very starchily responded, 'they are not, they are made in Burma!!

For those of you not up on world geography, Myanmar = Burma.

Hardly nothing is made in America anymore. You can thank Rmoney and bain capitol the pioneers of outsourcing!

I caught the Lawrence O'Donnell show last night and it was a hoot! From the side-splitting remarks about Mitt Romney not knowing which way is up to Rush Limbaugh labeling the President a drug addict Communist who hates America because he attended a private school and elite Universities. He saved the best for last...

Segment devoted to Grover Norquist who is apparently pissed at Senator Tom Coburn (R) who has called his No Tax Pledge a fraud. Norquist has been quoted Coburn a liar and rambling on about all manners of nonsense and Non-sequitors to the extent that Lawrence thinks the poor man has lost his mind. It was priceless.

Get prepared for the real drug addict, El Rushbo to completely go off the deep end now that Coburn has called out Norquist.

The Republicans eat their own.

Spider - you DO know neither Buffet or Geitner are running for President, right? Please try to keep up.

Rick - clearly you're still under the rock. The Olympic garments is not "old news" by any means. And, there are still many clothes made in the US. You just have to look to find them. There will be more made here next year and the next. Now, just stay under your rock - perfect place for you!

Obama/Biden 2012

AlexM-3929653

For a bunch of liberals that are saying obama's words are being taken out of context, you seem to enjoy doing it with Romney.

I do because there is a huge difference between Romney and Obama. When Romney says he's not hiring illegals because he's running for president - that is the real reason why he cares about not hiring illegals. When Romney says people should get an education they can afford, he means: all you poor idiots stop dreaming about Harvard.

When Romney goes off script, Romney shows his true colors.

I have an issue with someone who while against women's LEGAL right to choose, is for making money on investing in a company that disposes aborted fetuses. That in it's core shows a man that will do anything for cash.

BTW, you just met Romney, really. You have no clue who this man is. I had the "pleasure" to have this hypocrite as my governor. And trust me, there is a reason why his approval rating was almost as low as GWB's.

Back when he said that, he said he wasn't concerned about them because they're already pretty much taken care of. With the massive welfare system we have this country where they can live better than a working middle class family,

ok, you keep telling yourself that. I have not met one Middle Class working family EVER that would give up their lifestyle to go on welfare.

. My only concern with them is the fact that you libs want to keep them on the government tit for votes.

I don't want to keep anyone welfare other than the people that face a temporary hardship and need some help to get back on their feet. But the reality is that you always have and always will have those that milk the system but guess what; Rich milk the system more than any welfare receipient will ever be able to.

You could do alot better working to instill some pride and sense of responsibility in them. But that would cause them to learn, get smart, and you'd lose votes.

you are under impression that 100% of population in this country is little Romney's running around. You will always have the poor. PERIOD. Not everyone can be a CEO of Bain Capital. Your future starts with the parents you are born to and the zipcode of where you live. That is the only reason why Romney is who he is. Had Romney not won this gene lottery, he would be as relevant as Joe the Plumber today.

I'm not real concerned about them either

you should care because from 1992 to 2007 the top 400 earners in the U.S. saw their income increase 392% and their average tax rate reduced by 37%. For someone to have more, someone else has to have less - that means the highest-paid Americans have been claiming a larger and larger share of earnings.

In the past, most countries wanted to be like us. Today, we want to be like Russia: few billionaires and a desperate population that earns pensions that are too low to provide a minimum standard of living.

Sheila...I agree. That was one of LOD's best and funniest shows. There is so much material out there nowadays it must be hard to choose what will be best.

Have a great day!

Spanky: 1% pays 40%. That's grossly in excess of 'fair share.

False equivalency, Spanky. And you know it is. Shame on you.

smitty are you kidding me you blame cheaper goods on a political party.your right about cheaper products from over seas but we are all to blame for that! who doesnt go out and price shop. little by little we all drove made in america products to overseas. by our own greed. everyone is guilty

our political system is so screwed up....

we need the smartest people doing the right thing in office... now more than ever...

and we've got Obama vs Romney

these guys are the most capable the USA has to offer?

not even close.... and you'll never see the most capable people up there as they wouldn't sell out...

sad , sin't it?

When it was announced NBC was taking over MSNBC - I knew this site was done for. Since the only worse reporting than MSNBC is NBC. And, once again, I'm proven correct.

We have a Liberal-oriented Media outlet, repeating only Liberals. Then we have Liberal sheep on this thread, repeating the same lies and half truths. Ho Hum......

Face it, we now have the same, bogus attack against Romney that we watched go through all the other GOP candidates earlier this year. Only thing, Romney isn't stupid enough to play their game. So in response, they crow even louder as a deflection for their Failure-in-Chief. A President whose record is so bad, he can't use it to make a creditable campaign. Instead, his PAC attacks Romney, who has created more jobs than Obama will ever be able to "spin." (You don't really believe the bogus "4 million" do you? (Oh wait, you folks believe everything this empty suit says....so sorry for you and for us who know better, but have to suffer through this man's Presidency.)

Feisty said:

I'm NOT happy... I'm ecstatic... watching the worse candidate in history implode right before your very eyes!

Yes, Obama is imploding before our very eyes, despite his "attempt" to appear "the man." He can implode himself right back to Chicago ASAP and go back to his life as a "community organizer."

Ben, and all those who caught my mistake, apologies for using quotes; I was paraphrasing Romney and failed to read or edit it after posting. I should have made the comment without the quotes. So, sue me. It is what conservatives do here every day.

Really Jody? How many lawsuits by conservatives are you involved with right now? Maybe it's just that conservatives disagree with your liberal ideas. Lord knows we hear enough of them on a daily basis to know exactly what you are programmed to believe.

Pity the poor right-wing narrative, battered and assailled from all sides, in a vicious pummelling of demolition derby destructiveness, with neither facts or revealed wisdom to defend itself. How bitter, shambling hapless, sackcloth and ashes accompanying the keening, woeful moans of denial and desperation. Pity.

Here's another way "somebody along the line gave you some help". It's that socialistic, capitalistic hybrid called the bank. The bank loans you depositor's (you know...somebody) money so your business gets the operating capital to succeed. That's how business is and that's why banks shouldn't gamble. Also...

Rombot.Has.Nothing.

With questions continuing to mount about Mitt Romney’s offshore investments and bank accounts and $100 million IRA, Romney yesterday responded by claiming that he did not know anything about his fortune being stashed overseas because his finances are purportedly taken care of by a blind trust. As reported by Talking Points Memo:

Mitt Romney disavowed any responsibility for investments in the Cayman Islands and Bermuda, saying his personal finances are part of a “blind trust” that’s out of his control.

Romney’s claim of ignorance, however, is questionable at best, given that his blind trust does not appear to be all that blind. As we’ve reported previously, Romney’s blind trust is run by R. Bradford Malt, his longtime lawyer who is the President of your Bermuda company Sankaty. While that alone may not be enough to demonstrate a lack of blindness, one of the investments that Mr. Malt made with the trust was to put $10 million into a company named Solamere, which was co-founded by Romney’s son Tagg and Romney’s National Finance Chair for his campaign, Spencer Zwick.

Well looks who is back...

Tick Tick, Jimmy, Jason, ObamaZeMao and all...

PLEASE DON'T FEED HIM - he will be gone soon enough!

"if you've got a business, you hire people then fire them making money. Somebody else made that happen". Romney

Well looks who is back...

Tick Tick, Jimmy, Jason, ObamaZeMao and all...

PLEASE DON'T FEED HIM - he will be gone soon enough!

Feisty,

GREAT CATCH!

“Boeing followed the textbook of outsourcing and dismantling the integrated design and manufacturing community" that had been a staple of the company,”

Hi Feisty,

I wonder how long it will be until this POS is gone? Oh well, place it on ignore and say good bye to another POS!

Oh well, place it on ignore and say good bye to another POS!

Done & Done! ;o)

Job1,

Love the ignore button.....

When one is ignored , talking to yourself gets boring or maybe not???

A full admission even,...

they just get brighter and brighter!

Psst,...also supports the case that Feisty is NOT an employee with any special priviledges,...Just a diligent poster who gets the early worm first,...most days!

bwwwaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahahahahahahahaha

NOT an employee

lolllllllllllllllllll

you mean after the split?

Concordia - if you hate this sh**ty site so much, why are you here?????

i feel obligated to offset the democratic detritus you and your fellow insolents spew

ObamaConcordia, and you "offset the democratic detritus" exactly how? One liner, out of context or anti-President Obama slurs do not "offset anything" except maybe to prove that the poster himself is "offset"a bit......

Other documents, signed by Romney, show that he was sole shareholder, chairman, CEO and president of Bain in 2000, 2001 and 2002.

Romney has said the confusion is due to the fact that it took some time for such disclosure documents to accurately reflect his role at Bain, an argument he took to the airwaves in a media blitz on Friday. Romney also defended the company he set up, saying, "there's nothing wrong with the fact that the firm went on and it was a successful enterprise."

Romney has also refused to release the board minutes from the period in question at Bain that could prove he had no role at the firm.

or Romneys Olympic shirts are made in China with Romneys help

Another company represented on the jobs board is Boeing, whose CEO, James McNerney, also chairs the President’s Export Council, the principal advisory committee on international trade. The aerospace giant has shed over 14,000 American jobs since 2008, according to a recent report by Public Campaign, a campaign reform advocacy group.

And your source is...?

google it.

we call it histroy.

I call it "history". I say "tomato", you say "tomatoe"!!

Lmao..... they dont live history they......do it the easy way, they invent history!

The Far right crazies and their make believe made up facts. When will they understand that we aren't the ones that believe the GARBAGE coming out of the dark hole of Fox Land and Rush Limpball.

I looked it up. Here it is.

http://nces.ed.gov/naal/lit_history.asp

Put on your dunce cap and head to the corner!

I call it "history". I say "tomato", you say "tomatoe"!!

most of this data is pretty black and white

For once, we agree. If you go to the site that I mentioned, you'll see that illiteracy decreased. NEXT!!!!

For once, we agree

i did read the stats and your article.

your article does contradict mine.

yours is certainly liberal slanted and mine is slanted the other direction.

either way... i think you would have to agree that our educational system has been in decline for sometime.

Facts are facts. They don't slant. The interpretation will, but the facts are etched in stone. Schools in poorer areas of major metropolitan areas have problems. The suburban school that my daughter attends, not so much.

Auntie - I could never understand that. There seems to be more money spent per student in the cities, and the city salaries are generally higher than rural, or even all but the wealthiest suburban salaries. The bulk of the grants, both public and private, are focused on those inner city schools. What will it take to change the disparity? Romney got a good reception (maybe the only good reception) at the NAACP when he supported Charter Schools. These schools are more tailored for the student's capabality, and don't hold back students that have a desire to learn. School Choice will go a long way toward creating "free market" competition that could force underperforming schools to bring their efforts up a notch. Why won't Obama support this?

California has the highest level of teacher compensation in the US and the worst test performance by its students. Throwing money at schools or teachers does not solve anything. Broken homes, parents that don't parent or are MIA can't be overcome with more cash. Social promotion from grade to grade and dumbing down the standards to accomodate a lot of people who shouldnt be here in the first place and teachers unions who make it almost impossible to get rid of bad teachers have accelerated the race to the bottom. Throwing more money at poor people may help them temporarily get by but does not address why they are poor in the first place. The latter usually has to do with lack of education, motivation, priorities or skills. Its a tough concept for liberals but some people's lack of success in life is simply their own fault and often their own choice.

easily refuted stats, there pgulrich - hyperbolic much?

http://www.statemaster.com/graph/edu_bes_edu_ind-education-best-educated-index

here is one with a picture, in case reading isn't your strong suit:

http://www.aip.org/press_release/state_outcomes_math_science_education_reveal_big_disparities.html