What a farking catastrofark... Wasn't this guy vetted a couple of times? Every day, he somehow manages to get sleazier.

Anywho, long as Fartbongo keeps his nails sharp, all this shiat should make for interesting debates.

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

The Romney campaign spokeswoman Amanda Henneberg, said the allegation that Romney was personally involved in the Marriott's tax avoidance scheme and that he had a key role in the "scandal" was not only "overblown" but also "dishonorable and dishonest."

Read between the lines here. When your actual spokesman says it is "overblown", "dishonorable and dishonest" that is an actual validation of the story. If your spokesman says it is an outright law and categorically denies it, it is probably overblown/unfair. When they say it is overblown/dishonest, it it is spot on true.

TsarTom: What a farking catastrofark... Wasn't this guy vetted a couple of times? Every day, he somehow manages to get sleazier.

Anywho, long as Fartbongo keeps his nails sharp, all this shiat should make for interesting debates.

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Conservatives don't vet on issues like tax avoidance. That is admirable from their perspective. They check for secret abortions, male lovers and ensure they went hunting at least once. That's the vetting for a Conservative.

Wikipedia on Son of BOSS: The Obama campaign recently attacked Mitt Romney for his supposed role in this scheme. However, it has been proven by fact checkers to be completely false and untrue.

Wikipedia: slightly more trustworthy than the Daily KOS

How can the Rmoney campaign think that refusing to release his taxes is less damaging than actually releasing them when the heat gets turned up every single day? They have to know this is not going to go away. It's like they have a flamethrower trained on his ass and it's not some backpack tank it's hooked up to, no it's a mile long train of fuel tankers. This has gotten to a worst case scenario for him. If his taxes contain something worse than the allegations and enuendo he is total farked(pun intended).

serial_crusher: Wikipedia on Son of BOSS: The Obama campaign recently attacked Mitt Romney for his supposed role in this scheme. However, it has been proven by fact checkers to be completely false and untrue.

Wikipedia: slightly more trustworthy than the Daily KOS

You're really going to trust wikipedia on this today? That's a whole lot of edits in the last hour.

(cur | prev) 16:06, 10 August 2012 68.38.237.0(talk) . . (6,598 bytes) (-6) . . (undo)
(cur | prev) 16:05, 10 August 2012 68.38.237.0(talk) . . (6,604 bytes) (+167) . . (I do not know how to do citations. However, if you check the IRS website, no where does it say Romney is responsible or anything.) (undo)
(cur | prev) 16:03, 10 August 2012 Frecklefoot(talk | contribs) . . (6,437 bytes) (+6) . . (still need a ref for that) (undo)
(cur | prev) 16:03, 10 August 2012 Ceedub7(talk | contribs) . . (6,431 bytes) (-166) . . (Remove lines inaccurately stating that Mitt Romney was proven to have no role) (undo)
(cur | prev) 15:57, 10 August 2012 68.38.237.0(talk) . . (6,597 bytes) (+166) . . (undo)
(cur | prev) 15:57, 10 August 2012 68.38.237.0(talk) . . (6,431 bytes) (-60) . . (→2012 Presidential campaign) (undo)
(cur | prev) 15:56, 10 August 2012 Frecklefoot(talk | contribs) . . (6,491 bytes) (+3) . . (→References: where was this ref used?) (undo)
(cur | prev) 15:56, 10 August 2012 68.38.237.0(talk) . . (6,488 bytes) (+54) . . (→2012 Presidential campaign) (undo)
(cur | prev) 15:56, 10 August 2012 Frecklefoot(talk | contribs) . . (6,434 bytes) (+20) . . (→2012 Presidential campaign: completed ref) (undo)
(cur | prev) 15:55, 10 August 2012 Jesanj(talk | contribs) . . (6,414 bytes) (-147) . . (i am considering this vandalism) (undo)
(cur | prev) 15:55, 10 August 2012 Frecklefoot(talk | contribs) . . (6,561 bytes) (+3) . . (→2012 Presidential campaign: little bit of cleanup) (undo)
(cur | prev) 15:54, 10 August 2012 68.38.237.0(talk) . . (6,558 bytes) (+83) . . (→2012 Presidential campaign) (undo)
(cur | prev) 15:54, 10 August 2012 68.38.237.0(talk) . . (6,475 bytes) (+168) . . (undo)
(cur | prev) 15:53, 10 August 2012 71.205.252.234(talk) . . (6,307 bytes) (-82) . . (→2012 Presidential campaign) (undo)
(cur | prev) 15:52, 10 August 2012 72.224.63.88(talk) . . (6,389 bytes) (-1) . . (Undid revision 506742253 by Jesanj (talk)) (undo)
(cur | prev) 15:50, 10 August 2012 Jesanj(talk | contribs) . . (6,390 bytes) (-167) . . (unsourced) (undo)
(cur | prev) 15:49, 10 August 2012 68.38.237.0(talk) . . (6,557 bytes) (+169) . . (→2012 Presidential campaign) (undo)
(cur | prev) 15:47, 10 August 2012 Jesanj(talk | contribs) . . (6,388 bytes) (+91) . . (→2012 Presidential campaign: cleanup) (undo)
(cur | prev) 15:46, 10 August 2012 68.38.237.0(talk) . . (6,297 bytes) (+168) . . (undo)
(cur | prev) 15:45, 10 August 2012 205.135.164.254(talk) . . (6,129 bytes) (-168) . . (undo)
(cur | prev) 15:39, 10 August 2012 68.38.237.0(talk) . . (6,297 bytes) (+166) . . (undo)
(cur | prev) 15:39, 10 August 2012 68.38.237.0(talk) . . (6,131 bytes) (+170) . . (→2012 Presidential campaign) (undo)
(cur | prev) 15:38, 10 August 2012 Dcanmann(talk | contribs) m . . (5,961 bytes) (-167) . . (Somewhat added prejudicial political information in the introduction. I deleted this.) (undo)
(cur | prev) 15:35, 10 August 2012 Jesanj(talk | contribs) . . (6,128 bytes) (-185) . . (→U. S. 2012 Presidential Elections: tweak, statements like that don't stay here without sources) (undo)
(cur | prev) 15:32, 10 August 2012 68.38.237.0(talk) . . (6,313 bytes) (-13) . . (The article on cnn was written by 2 democrats. There is no proof that Mitt Romney single handely is reponsible for what happened or any evidence.) (undo)
(cur | prev) 15:27, 10 August 2012 69.203.7.237(talk) . . (6,326 bytes) (+14) . . (undo)
(cur | prev) 15:26, 10 August 2012 68.38.237.0(talk) . . (6,312 bytes) (+168) . . (→U. S. 2012 Presidential Elections) (undo)
(cur | prev) 15:26, 10 August 2012 68.38.237.0(talk) . . (6,144 bytes) (+81) . . (undo)
(cur | prev) 14:26, 10 August 2012 67.180.192.192(talk) . . (6,063 bytes) (-11) . . (→References) (undo)
(cur | prev) 14:26, 10 August 2012 67.180.192.192(talk) . . (6,074 bytes) (-650) . . (→References) (undo)
(cur | prev) 14:25, 10 August 2012 67.180.192.192(talk) . . (6,724 bytes) (+12) . . (→References) (undo)
(cur | prev) 14:25, 10 August 2012 67.180.192.192(talk) . . (6,712 bytes) (+670) . . (→References) (undo)
(cur | prev) 14:22, 10 August 2012 98.85.144.83(talk) . . (6,042 bytes) (-15) . . (→U. S. 2012 Presidential Elections) (undo)
(cur | prev) 14:21, 10 August 2012 67.180.192.192(talk) . . (6,057 bytes) (-35) . . (→References) (undo)
(cur | prev) 14:21, 10 August 2012 67.180.192.192(talk) . . (6,092 bytes) (+23) . . (→References) (undo)
(cur | prev) 14:20, 10 August 2012 65.31.66.198(talk) . . (6,069 bytes) (-82) . . (undo)
(cur | prev) 14:20, 10 August 2012 67.180.192.192(talk) . . (6,151 bytes) (+15) . . (→References) (undo)
(cur | prev) 14:20, 10 August 2012 98.85.144.83(talk) . . (6,136 bytes) (-168) . . (→U. S. 2012 Presidential Elections) (undo)
(cur | prev) 14:20, 10 August 2012 67.180.192.192(talk) . . (6,304 bytes) (-12) . . (→7. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-02- 22/romney-as-auditing-chairman-s aw-marriott-son-of-boss-tax-shelter-de fy-irs.html) (undo)
(cur | prev) 14:20, 10 August 2012 68.38.237.0(talk) . . (6,316 bytes) (+82) . . (→U. S. 2012 Presidential Elections) (undo)
(cur | prev) 14:20, 10 August 2012 67.180.192.192(talk) . . (6,234 bytes) (+1) . . (→==) (undo)
(cur | prev) 14:19, 10 August 2012 65.31.66.198(talk) . . (6,233 bytes) (-82) . . (→U. S. 2012 Presidential Elections) (undo)
(cur | prev) 14:19, 10 August 2012 67.180.192.192(talk) . . (6,315 bytes) (+10) . . (→References) (undo)
(cur | prev) 14:19, 10 August 2012 68.38.237.0(talk) . . (6,305 bytes) (-6) . . (undo)
(cur | prev) 14:18, 10 August 2012 67.180.192.192(talk) . . (6,311 bytes) (+3) . . (→References) (undo)
(cur | prev) 14:18, 10 August 2012 67.180.192.192(talk) . . (6,308 bytes) (+121) . . (→References) (undo)
(cur | prev) 14:18, 10 August 2012 65.31.66.198(talk) . . (6,187 bytes) (-82) . . (undo)
(cur | prev) 14:18, 10 August 2012 68.38.237.0(talk) . . (6,269 bytes) (+168) . . (→U. S. 2012 Presidential Elections) (undo)
(cur | prev) 14:17, 10 August 2012 68.38.237.0(talk) . . (6,101 bytes) (+168) . . (undo)
(cur | prev) 14:17, 10 August 2012 67.180.192.192(talk) . . (5,933 bytes) (-81) . . (undo)

serial_crusher: Wikipedia on Son of BOSS: The Obama campaign recently attacked Mitt Romney for his supposed role in this scheme. However, it has been proven by fact checkers to be completely false and untrue.

Wikipedia: slightly more trustworthy than the Daily KOS

Nothing but Fox is trustworthy, right?

sammyk: serial_crusher: Wikipedia on Son of BOSS: The Obama campaign recently attacked Mitt Romney for his supposed role in this scheme. However, it has been proven by fact checkers to be completely false and untrue.

Wikipedia: slightly more trustworthy than the Daily KOS

You're really going to trust wikipedia on this today? That's a whole lot of edits in the last hour.

(cur | prev) 16:06, 10 August 2012 http://68.38.237.0/(talk) . . (6,598 bytes) (-6) . . (undo)
(cur | prev) 16:05, 10 August 2012 68.38.237.0(talk) . . (6,604 bytes) (+167) . . (I do not know how to do citations. However, if you check the IRS website, no where does it say Romney is responsible or anything.) (undo)
(cur | prev) 16:03, 10 August ...

68.38.237.0?
Who dat dere? Dat you Tagg?

On screen and by narrator: "Did Romney pay 10% in Taxes? 5%? 0? WE DON'T KNOW."

This is still a stupid argument.

sammyk: serial_crusher: Wikipedia on Son of BOSS: The Obama campaign recently attacked Mitt Romney for his supposed role in this scheme. However, it has been proven by fact checkers to be completely false and untrue.
.......
Presidential campaign) (undo)
(cur | prev) 15:5 ...

So? Wikipedia does have employees who monitor edits to prevent political vandalism. That's probably who was doing much of the editing.

Besides, the information can be found elsewhere If I were the submitter I would have posted a ling to a news article, not a blog. It's not like this is a rumor or something. It was a case brought against Marriott by the IRS which was proven in court.

Avoision, subby. Tax Avoision.

vpb: sammyk: serial_crusher: Wikipedia on Son of BOSS: The Obama campaign recently attacked Mitt Romney for his supposed role in this scheme. However, it has been proven by fact checkers to be completely false and untrue.
.......
Presidential campaign) (undo)
(cur | prev) 15:5 ...

So? Wikipedia does have employees who monitor edits to prevent political vandalism. That's probably who was doing much of the editing.

Besides, the information can be found elsewhere If I were the submitter I would have posted a ling to a news article, not a blog. It's not like this is a rumor or something. It was a case brought against Marriott by the IRS which was proven in court.

I know and I feel sorry for that staff. They have a very busy 3 months ahead of them. But it is an example of how wikipedia can be useless for accurate info for some things. Until the article gets locked for editing it is a war between the political vandals and the moderators. IOW the whole article is suspect for the time being.

I don't think it's going to hurt Romney too much personally, this is just what corporations do. It will help for people to realize how badly they have been getting screwed over.

Quasar: On screen and by narrator: "Did Romney pay 10% in Taxes? 5%? 0? WE DON'T KNOW."

This is still a stupid argument.

And easily deflected...usually.

Quasar: On screen and by narrator: "Did Romney pay 10% in Taxes? 5%? 0? WE DON'T KNOW."

This is still a stupid argument.

It's not a stupid argument considering the history of both the usual conventions of presidential campaigns and Romney's personal history.

I know "prove a negative" and "I'm just asking questions" are typically the refuges of scoundrels, which is why Harry Reid was such a dick, for getting involved, but... well, sometimes you need a dick to fark an asshole.

serial_crusher: Wikipedia on Son of BOSS: The Obama campaign recently attacked Mitt Romney for his supposed role in this scheme. However, it has been proven by fact checkers to be completely false and untrue.

Wikipedia: slightly more trustworthy than the Daily KOS

So it's not only completely false, it's also untrue? That rarely happens.

sammyk:

You're really going to trust wikipedia on this today? That's a whole lot of edits in the last hour.

(cur | prev) 16:06, 10 August 2012 68.38.237.0(talk) . . (6,598 bytes) (-6) . . (undo)
(cur | prev) 16:05, 10 August 2012 68.38.237.0(talk) . . (6,604 bytes) (+167) . . (I do not know how to do citations. However, if you check the IRS website, no where does it say Romney is responsible or anything.) (un ...

Wooh. I think we now know who Romney's going to nominate for VP: Son of Boss tax scandal.

Sure, nominating "an abstract concept that is a collection of legal dealings" for VP is pretty unorthodox, but it really highlights Romney's entrepreneurial "think outside the box" mentality.

I'm beginning the think the entire Romney campaign is a scam.

FishyFred: I know "prove a negative" and "I'm just asking questions" are typically the refuges of scoundrels, which is why Harry Reid was such a dick, for getting involved, but... well, sometimes you need a dick to fark an asshole.

Taking the high road isn't always the best policy but I think Romney's going to crash and burn just fine without damaging the credibility of the left in the process.

"Did Romney take deductions for a baby-raping factory? Maybe, I dunno. If he released his tax statements we'd know. I'm just saying a source told me that."

There's a Fort Knox worth of things to legitimately attack Romney over. We shouldn't be looking for dirty pennies to throw.

TsarTom: Wasn't this guy vetted a couple of times?

When he was vetted last he lost out to Sarah Palin. Let that sink in.

I sense a slant to this article

Quasar: FishyFred: I know "prove a negative" and "I'm just asking questions" are typically the refuges of scoundrels, which is why Harry Reid was such a dick, for getting involved, but... well, sometimes you need a dick to fark an asshole.

Taking the high road isn't always the best policy but I think Romney's going to crash and burn just fine without damaging the credibility of the left in the process.

"Did Romney take deductions for a baby-raping factory? Maybe, I dunno. If he released his tax statements we'd know. I'm just saying a source told me that."

There's a Fort Knox worth of things to legitimately attack Romney over. We shouldn't be looking for dirty pennies to throw.

Yes, one of those legitimate things is his tax returns. Even if he wasn't a management consultant, it is normal practice for a Presidential candidate to release tax returns. Since minimizing tax liability is a part of what management consultants do, it's especially relevant in his case.

I doubt there is anything illegal in his returns, but there can't be much doubt that he exploited the hell out of every legal loophole there is, and maybe even used the Swiss account amnesty.

Romney is applying for a job and the voters are his prospective employer. If he doesn't want to show the standard background material for the job he is applying for, then he needs to GTFO.

But...Olympics, and stuff.

vpb: Romney is applying for a job and the voters are his prospective employer. If he doesn't want to show the standard background material for the job he is applying for, then he needs to GTFO.

vpb: Romney is applying for a job and the voters are his prospective employer. If he doesn't want to show the standard background material for the job he is applying for, then he needs to GTFO.

vpb: Romney is applying for a job and the voters are his prospective employer. If he doesn't want to show the standard background material for the job he is applying for, then he needs to GTFO.

/the bears
//they are many

TsarTom: What a farking catastrofark... Wasn't this guy vetted a couple of times?

McCain vetted him. And picked Palin.

impaler: sammyk:

You're really going to trust wikipedia on this today? That's a whole lot of edits in the last hour.

(cur | prev) 16:06, 10 August 2012 68.38.237.0(talk) . . (6,598 bytes) (-6) . . (undo)
(cur | prev) 16:05, 10 August 2012 68.38.237.0(talk) . . (6,604 bytes) (+167) . . (I do not know how to do citations. However, if you check the IRS website, no where does it say Romney is responsible or anything.) (un ...

Wooh. I think we now know who Romney's going to nominate for VP: Son of Boss tax scandal.

Sure, nominating "an abstract concept that is a collection of legal dealings" for VP is pretty unorthodox, but it really highlights Romney's entrepreneurial "think outside the box" mentality.

it's just nudging out Buffy season 6

serial_crusher: Wikipedia on Son of BOSS: The Obama campaign recently attacked Mitt Romney for his supposed role in this scheme. However, it has been proven by fact checkers to be completely false and untrue.

Wikipedia: slightly more trustworthy than the Daily KOS

That's not in there anywhere at the moment. Way to try and add it though.

Oddly enough, this sounds like something Romney would do.

doyner: TsarTom: Wasn't this guy vetted a couple of times?

When he was vetted last he lost out to Sarah Palin. Let that sink in.

I don't think that's a slight on Mitt Romney. The McCain campaign was looking for someone who wasn't an old rich white male, and even if they were, there were a couple of people ahead of Romney on the list. McCain went with Palin because of "maverickiness", not because he had to pass on Romney due to the tax stuff.

vpb: Quasar: FishyFred: I know "prove a negative" and "I'm just asking questions" are typically the refuges of scoundrels, which is why Harry Reid was such a dick, for getting involved, but... well, sometimes you need a dick to fark an asshole.

Taking the high road isn't always the best policy but I think Romney's going to crash and burn just fine without damaging the credibility of the left in the process.

"Did Romney take deductions for a baby-raping factory? Maybe, I dunno. If he released his tax statements we'd know. I'm just saying a source told me that."

There's a Fort Knox worth of things to legitimately attack Romney over. We shouldn't be looking for dirty pennies to throw.

Yes, one of those legitimate things is his tax returns. Even if he wasn't a management consultant, it is normal practice for a Presidential candidate to release tax returns. Since minimizing tax liability is a part of what management consultants do, it's especially relevant in his case.

I doubt there is anything illegal in his returns, but there can't be much doubt that he exploited the hell out of every legal loophole there is, and maybe even used the Swiss account amnesty.

Romney is applying for a job and the voters are his prospective employer. If he doesn't want to show the standard background material for the job he is applying for, then he needs to GTFO.

Romney's whole economic plan is based on the idea that "job creators" are taxed too much and that's why jobs aren't being created in the US. Romney is also running on his business credentials as a job creator. His taxes would be the perfect example of what a job creator is getting taxed and 13% is not what I'd call oppressive tax rate for $20 mil.

The issue is not the legality of the tax returns. The issue is that releasing 10 years of tax returns would destroy the whole "job creator" talking point.

Republicans try to make it about the legality of the tax returns to muddy the waters and avoid the real issue.

Kos is just RedState for the other side. Both cater to mouthbreathers.

Avoid taxes

Like a _{son of} BOSS!

Let me tell you, when I want reliable news, I go straight to the DailyKOS blog where I can see news articles that simply reiterate TV advertisements and verify them by copy/paste jobs from wikipedia.

Dear left,

Stop being stupid.

Hugs,
~Lenny

I thought Romneycare would be his Waterloo. Who knew it would be his taxes? Well, besides McCain, and the RNC, and his past campaign managers, and his principal strategist, and his billionaire backers...

SacriliciousBeerSwiller: McCain vetted him. And picked Palin.

And he wouldn't have seen the 2009 return, which would be the one that would potentially contain any amnesty for illegal foreign accounts. The last one McCain would have seen would have been the 2007 return.

So Romney may have used legal tax deductions advertized by many financial tax experts in the 1990s, then Congress seeing an unintended consequence closed those deduction paths...

I fail to see the outrage outside of "DURRRR OPPOSITION!" How about... I don't know... Following the path in the 90s of CLOSING THE DAMN TAX PATHS.

Seriously liberals, you look farking retarded on this issue (outside of Lennavan from an earlier thread). Blaming someone from playing by the rules while deriding others who wish to change the rules as legally expected makes you look stupid. This line of attack makes you look stupid. You would go to much greater lengths by arguing to change the tax code, not attacking those following the tax code.

First I've heard of it, but this seems like a clean hit. Even if the appeals didn't wrap up until 2009, Romney was the head of the audit committee when Marriott started using this obviously fraudulent "tax shelter."

How much more of this stuff is out there? We're still ~3 months away from the election, FFS.

This Romney guy is starting to sound more and more awesome. We need creative thinkers to get the country back on the right track.

FishyFred: sometimes you need a dick to fark an asshole.

impaler: serial_crusher: Wikipedia on Son of BOSS: The Obama campaign recently attacked Mitt Romney for his supposed role in this scheme. However, it has been proven by fact checkers to be completely false and untrue.

Wikipedia: slightly more trustworthy than the Daily KOS

So it's not only completely false, it's also untrue? That rarely happens.

It both rarely and hardly ever happens.

Lots of people need to learn how to read sarcasm though. Evidently they thought I was serious.
The KOS article cites that same Wikipedia page as its only source. Which is it libs, is Wikipedia a legitimate source or not?

Fuggin Bizzy: Kos is just RedState for the other side. Both cater to mouthbreathers.

Well, Redstate IS kind of a copy [a bad one] of Kos, so there is some truthiness to this.

But the whole "attack the messenger" thing you are doing doesn't really address the issue of Bruce Springsteen's kid and Romney, now does it?

MyRandomName: Seriously liberals, you look farking retarded on this issue (outside of Lennavan from an earlier thread). Blaming someone from playing by the rules while deriding others who wish to change the rules as legally expected makes you look stupid. This line of attack makes you look stupid. You would go to much greater lengths by arguing to change the tax code, not attacking those following the tax code.

Great argument...except for the fat that "the rules" woud be written by this guy that thinks the tax code is already too restrictive for people like him.

serial_crusher: impaler: serial_crusher: Wikipedia on Son of BOSS: The Obama campaign recently attacked Mitt Romney for his supposed role in this scheme. However, it has been proven by fact checkers to be completely false and untrue.

Wikipedia: slightly more trustworthy than the Daily KOS

So it's not only completely false, it's also untrue? That rarely happens.

It both rarely and hardly ever happens.

Lots of people need to learn how to read sarcasm though. Evidently they thought I was serious.
The KOS article cites that same Wikipedia page as its only source. Which is it libs, is Wikipedia a legitimate source or not?

Wikipedia is at best a secondary source and thus not legitimate.

Next.

Let's look at this logically:

1. If there wasn't anything damaging in his tax records, he would have released them
2. The Romney campaign believes that fueling endless speculation is less damaging than people knowing the truth
3. We must assume they're right

The bottom line is, anyone with any sense already knew Romney was a deceitful and disingenuous tool - now everyone knows it.

serial_crusher: The KOS article cites that same Wikipedia page as its only source.

Well, no. They also linked to the advertisement by the Obama Campaign.

But, really, let me google "Son of Boss" for you.

serial_crusher: Wikipedia on Son of BOSS: The Obama campaign recently attacked Mitt Romney for his supposed role in this scheme. However, it has been proven by fact checkers to be completely false and untrue.

Wikipedia: slightly more trustworthy than the Daily KOS


That is NOT what Wikipedia says, a-hole.

In a campaign advertisement released on August 9, 2012, incumbent President, Barack Obama made specific reference to his GOP opponent Mitt Romney and his presumed involvement in Son of BOSS tax avoidance as a Marriott International board member.[5][6][7]

You just make shiat up now?

Fuggin Bizzy: Kos is just RedState for the other side. Both cater to mouthbreathers.

Try Bloomberg from February.

During Romney's years on the board, Marriott's effective tax rate dipped as low as 6.8 percent, compared with the federal corporate statutory rate of 35 percent.

Oh Lawd....

MyRandomName: So Romney may have used legal tax deductions advertized by many financial tax experts in the 1990s, then Congress seeing an unintended consequence closed those deduction paths...

I fail to see the outrage outside of "DURRRR OPPOSITION!" How about... I don't know... Following the path in the 90s of CLOSING THE DAMN TAX PATHS.

Seriously liberals, you look farking retarded on this issue (outside of Lennavan from an earlier thread). Blaming someone from playing by the rules while deriding others who wish to change the rules as legally expected makes you look stupid. This line of attack makes you look stupid. You would go to much greater lengths by arguing to change the tax code, not attacking those following the tax code.

Have you seen the latest polls? Something is working.

U mad?