What a crock of shit. Part of the reason Clinton had a balanced budget was because he didn't come into office with a 1.2 trillion dollar deficit Part of the reason Clinton had a balanced budget was because he raised taxes Part of the reason for Clinton's good job creation record is because he didn't come into office losing 800,000+ jobs a month
Someone should tell Mitt this doesn't work <object width="420" height="245" id="msnbc6aedcc" classid="clsid27CDB6E-AE6D-11cf-96B8-444553540000" codebase="http://download.macromedia.com/pub/shockwave/cabs/flash/swflash.cab#version=10,0,0,0"><param name="movie" value="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32545640" /><param name="FlashVars" value="launch=48562160&width=420&height=245" /><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always" /><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true" /><param name="wmode" value="transparent" /><embed name="msnbc6aedcc" src="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32545640" width="420" height="245" FlashVars="launch=48562160&width=420&height=245" allowscriptaccess="always" allowFullScreen="true" wmode="transparent" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" pluginspage="http://www.adobe.com/shockwave/download/download.cgi?P1_Prod_Version=ShockwaveFlash"></embed></object><p style="font-size:11px; font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; color: #999; margin-top: 5px; background: transparent; text-align: center; width: 420px;">Visit NBCNews.com for <a style="text-decoration:none !important; border-bottom: 1px dotted #999 !important; font-weight:normal !important; height: 13px; color:#5799DB !important;" href="http://www.nbcnews.com">breaking news</a>, <a href="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3032507" style="text-decoration:none !important; border-bottom: 1px dotted #999 !important; font-weight:normal !important; height: 13px; color:#5799DB !important;">world news</a>, and <a href="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3032072" style="text-decoration:none !important; border-bottom: 1px dotted #999 !important; font-weight:normal !important; height: 13px; color:#5799DB !important;">news about the economy</a></p>
C'mon, Newt's logic and data are clearly overwhelming. The funny thing is that, pieces like this, between the lines, open the big question for the dems: why didn't you do the smart thing and nominate Hillary instead of this amateur who's proved to be a disaster? My take is that the liberal media loved the photogenic young black man and his good looking family and interesting story over that middle-aged white woman, and went the stupid AA route intead of doing their job honestly to serve the country with the truth.
Obama campaign aide accused of lying over anti-Romney ad, ties to steelworker By Judson Berger A top Obama campaign official is being accused of lying over what she knew about the man at the center of a damning super PAC ad tying his wife's death to Mitt Romney. Deputy Campaign Manager Stephanie Cutter appeared on CNN Wednesday morning to say, among other things, that "I don't know the facts" about the case of Joe Soptic, a steelworker who appeared in a controversial ad for the pro-Obama super-PAC Priorities USA. In the ad, Soptic, recounts how his wife died of cancer after he lost his health insurance when his plant was shuttered after a takeover by Bain Capital and other companies working with the private equity firm. Cutter said she didn't know when Soptic's wife fell ill, or about his health insurance. Yet in May of this year, Cutter herself hosted a conference call in which Soptic detailed his case to reporters. During the call, as he did in the ad, Soptic explained how his wife fell ill after he lost his job, and how he lost his health insurance. The call took place as Soptic began appearing in Obama campaign ads, and was featured in a profile on the Obama campaign website. The campaign profile listed Soptic as one of the "faces of Romney economics." Cutter wasn't the only Obama campaign official caught up in the controversy. "This is an ad by an entity that's not controlled by campaign. I certainly don't know the specifics of this man's case," campaign adviser Robert Gibbs said on MSNBC. Another Obama campaign spokeswoman separately told reporters that the campaign had no knowledge of the family involved. Super PACs and the presidential campaigns are technically separate organizations, or are supposed to be. Both presidential campaigns have in the past cited that separation whenever challenged on super PAC ads. Obama campaign spokesman Ben LaBolt again stressed Wednesday, in response to the criticism, that "we can't coordinate with super PACs and didn't produce" the ad. In an email to FoxNews.com, LaBolt also acknowledged the conference call but suggested that was beside the point. The email did not address the allegation that anybody had lied. "Joe Soptic suffered when he lost his job in the aftermath of the GST Steel plant closing, and no one is denying that he discussed that when he appeared in a campaign advertisement and on a conference call. The important point here is that Mitt Romney's campaign is based solely on his experience as a corporate buyout specialist, and while he has been quick to claim he created jobs, he refuses to accept responsibility for the jobs that were lost and workers that were impacted," he said. Romney's campaign, after decrying the ad on Tuesday, accused Obama's team Wednesday of flat-out "lying" about their familiarity with the case. "President Obama and his campaign are willing to say and do anything to hide the President's disappointing record. But they're not entitled to repeatedly mislead voters," Romney campaign spokesman Ryan Williams said in a statement Wednesday afternoon. Speaking to Fox News, Romney spokeswoman Andrea Saul also called the ad "disgusting" and "despicable." She said the ad "just shows the depth to which the Obama campaign and their allies will go to try to smear Mitt Romney." The ad did not reveal key details about the timeline of Soptic's case. First, Soptic's wife initially had her own health insurance after her husband lost his job. Second, Soptic's wife died in 2006, five years after her husband's company, GST, filed for bankruptcy. And long after Romney had left Bain Capital.
Liar-in-Chief Obama Tells Preposterous Lies by Jack Kelly Our first president was so revered for his integrity that most believed that even as a child, George Washington could not tell a lie. Can our current president tell the truth? Former Amb. Fred Eckert has filled a 188-page book, ¡°That¡¯s a Crock, Barack,¡± with ¡°untrue, duplicitous, arrogant and delusional¡± things Barack Obama has said. Constant practice has not made Mr. Obama a good liar. A good liar tells plausible lies, lies only when the truth could do him substantial harm. President Obama tells preposterous lies. He lies so often and so obviously about so many things it is doubtful lying for him is merely a tactic. It¡¯s an integral part of his character ¡ª or lack of it. A few caveats. Often when we say something that isn¡¯t true, we aren¡¯t lying, because we think it is true. We are ignorant or careless or both, but we aren¡¯t trying to deceive. When a politician says one thing while seeking office, but does the opposite in office, that isn¡¯t exactly a lie. Sometimes a new president learns stuff that causes him to alter stances he took during the campaign. This could be why Mr. Obama reneged on his pledge to close the prison at Guantanamo Bay. But when a politician promises ¡°an unprecedented level of openness,¡± and then runs the most secretive administration since Richard Nixon¡¯s, mendacity is suspected. Hypocrisy isn¡¯t a lie, but it¡¯s a close relative. Mr. Obama attacks Mitt Romney for outsourcing jobs. Mr. Obama invests through mutual funds in firms that outsource jobs; accepts contributions from outsourcers and hired an executive who had worked for Mr. Romney¡¯s firm as his budget director. An Obama supporter was in charge at that firm when the layoffs the president decries took place, according to Gateway Pundit. Even The Washington Post has criticized Mr. Obama¡¯s Bain attacks on Mr. Romney. Many things we thought we knew about Barack Obama are false. Ben Smith of BuzzFeed counted 38 instances in David Maraniss¡¯ biography of Mr. Obama in which Mr. Obama had written something false in his memoir ¡°Dreams From My Father.¡± Mr. Maraniss dismisses the falsehoods as literary license. But the British are steamed by Mr. Obama¡¯s claim that they tortured his grandfather in Africa during the British colonial era. When he was marketing Obamacare, Mr. Obama suggested frequently and falsely that his mother died because her insurance company wouldn¡¯t pay for a cancer treatment. Hers isn¡¯t the only health care horror story he made up to promote Obamacare. Among them: ¡öObamacare won¡¯t add to the deficit, he said. But according to actuaries for the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, Obamacare will ¡°add about $478 billion in cumulative health spending¡± through 2021. ¡ö Obamacare will ¡°bring down (health insurance) premiums by $2,500 for the typical family,¡± the president said. MIT economist Jonathan Gruber, who helped draft the law, says now Obamacare will increase premiums by 19 percent to 30 percent. ¡ö You can keep your private health insurance if you want to, he said. Obamacare may cause 30 percent to 50 percent of private employers to drop their health insurance plans, the management consulting firm McKinsey & Co. estimated last year. A survey in May indicated that 71 of the top 100 companies could drop their health plans. ¡ö ¡°If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor,¡± he said. Post-Obamacare, 83 percent of physicians are considering quitting medicine, according to a survey by the Doctor Patient Medical Association. Mr. Obama makes surreal claims for jobs ¡°created or saved¡± by his failed stimulus bill and his green energy boondoggles. He pretended to support the Keystone XL pipeline while he was killing it. Then there is this whopper: ¡°Since I¡¯ve been president, federal spending has risen at the lowest pace in nearly 60 years,¡± Mr. Obama said in May. According to CNSNews, ¡°In fiscal 2009, buoyed in part by the TARP [then-Sen.] Obama voted for and the stimulus he signed, the federal government spent 25.2 percent of GDP ¡ª an increase of 21.2 percent from the year before.¡± Mr. Obama has presided over three of the four fiscal years since World War II in which the federal government has spent more than 24 percent of GDP. Barack Obama often claims ¡°historic¡± achievements, so perhaps he¡¯ll be pleased to be remembered for more than being the president who attended the most fund-raisers and played the most golf. He may be the biggest liar ever to reside at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.
Romney: Obama Turning America into a âNation of Government Dependencyâ by Melanie Hunter (CNSNews.com) â Presumptive GOP presidential nominee Mitt Romney accused President Barack Obama Wednesday of cultivating a ânation of government dependencyâ by removing âthe requirement of work from welfare.â In July, the Department of Health and Human Services announced plans to forgo congressional approval and grant waivers to states from the work requirements that President Bill Clinton signed into law in 1996. Romney noted that Clinton worked with congressional Republicans to come up with a bipartisan welfare-to-work bill, which required welfare recipients to work in order to receive benefits. Despite the naysayers at the time, the policy was successful in moving half of recipients off of the welfare rolls and reducing poverty for four years straight, Romney said, speaking to supporters in Des Moines, Iowa. âAnd there were some who said, âOh, this will be terrible. There will be poor in the streets.â You know what happened? As a result of putting work together with welfare, the number of people on welfare was cut in half. Poverty was reduced four straight years. The level of poverty in this country came down. It was an extraordinary success,â he said. âBack at that time, then Senator Obama was opposed to putting work together with welfare. Now heâs president, and just a few days ago, he put that original intent in place with a very careful executive action â he removed the requirement of work from welfare. It is wrong to make any change that would make America more of a nation of government dependency,â Romney added. The White House has denied that the administration was trying to undermine the 1996 law, saying that the waiver proposal is similar to what GOP lawmakers supported in the past decade.
Obamaâs Bad Aim By Dick Morris Romney has proven remarkably resistant to Obamaâs negative attacks. While they are freezing the race in its current pattern, they are not eroding the Republican vote share. The GOP candidate needs to rebut these attacks by pointing to the good deeds he has done at Bain Capital, but the larger question is why arenât the Obama negatives working better? I believe that they are poorly aimed. If you believe all the garbage about Romney that the Obama campaign is broadcasting, what do you have? Youâve got a candidate who only cares about the rich. Youâd have to believe heâs hard-hearted and not conversant with the difficulties the average family faces. Thatâs not the real Mitt Romney. But neither is it a portrait of a candidate you canât vote for. You donât have to be warm and fuzzy to be a good president. You donât have to feel the pain of every American. Youâve got just to be a competent, smart, energetic, activist who has the right answers for the economy. And thereâs nothing in the Obama barrage that would disabuse anyone of that notion of Mitt Romney. Look at the negative campaigns that have worked at the presidential level. Each succeeded in depicting the target as a threat. Barry Goldwater, in 1964, came across as a man who might plunge the world into nuclear war. George McGovern, in 1972, was portrayed, successfully, as someone who would denude us of our military defenses. Walter Mondale, in 1984, was a man who would raise taxes to new heights. Mike Dukakis, in 1988, would release dangerous criminals back onto the streets where they might rape and kill again. John Kerry, in 2004, wasnât up to protecting American in the war on terror. His concern for civil liberties and his weakness, the negative ads suggested, would make another 9-11 more likely. But what is the threat that Mitt Romney represents in the Obama ads? That heâll give tax breaks to rich people? That heâll salt away money in his off-shore accounts? Thereâs no threat there. No looming danger. No worst case scenario. Why not? Because Romney is too elusive a target to make him a threat. Heâll repeal Obamacare, but people want that. Heâll cut government spending but that will reduce the deficit and thatâs popular. Obama can accuse him of gutting Medicare, but Romney has explicitly distanced himself from the intial Ryan Plan and embraced only the amended version that lets people keep their current Medicare if they wish. The price Obama has to pay for his dismal record is that he canât win merely by painting his opponent as hard hearted and out of touch. His supposed hands-on understanding of the problems of Americaâs families hasnât done them much good as unemployment continues and economic growth slows. Romney, on the other hand, has failed to transform his negative attacks on Obamaâs record into personal shortcomings. It is not enough to say that Obamaâs programs havenât worked and that he has not kept his promises. You must then say that he is incompetent and hasnât a clue about what to do. Romney needs to show that Obama is, indeed, an âamateurâ as Bill Clinton allegedly called him, in over his head, with no solutions. Romney needs to ask what skills Obama brought to the job of saving the economy? Heâs a lawyer, after all, and a community organizer after that. The failures of the Obama record need to become evidence of his incompetence for them to have their full effect. Oddly, even as both campaigns get more vicious, none is going for the jugular. Obama paints Romney as remote, cold, and out of touch, but not as a danger or a threat. Romney says Obama has bad ideas and ill conceived policies but he doesnât go the next step and call his competence in economics into question. But Obama has a problem. Romney is really not a threat and Obama really is incompetent.
'No Way' Obama Re-elected If Economy Stays Same By Jim Meyers and John Bachman Pollster and political analyst Scott Rasmussen tells Newsmax that if Americansâ satisfaction with their financial situation does not improve before November, there is âno wayâ President Barack Obama will be re-elected. He also warns that if Romney does not take Florida, he has âno chanceâ of winning the White House â but adds that Obama is in trouble there because of seniorsâ opposition to Obamacare. Rasmussen is founder and president of Rasmussen Reports and co-founder of the sports network ESPN. He has been an independent public opinion pollster for more than a decade, and most major news organizations cite his reports. His latest book is âThe Peopleâs Money: How Voters Will Balance the Budget and Eliminate the National Debt.â In an exclusive interview with Newsmax.TV on Wednesday, Rasmussen discussed the results of his presidential daily tracking poll that showed Obama with a lead over Romney for two days in a row for the first time since June. âFirst of all, an update: The numbers today are tied 45 percent for Romney, 45 percent for Obama, and the bounce for the president came following last Fridayâs jobs report. âThe initial reaction to it was, boy, it was better than expected â 163,000 jobs created, well above the projected numbers. What happened, though, in the last few days, is people have looked a little deeper. Perceptions of that report have declined. And this election is not really about Mitt Romney at all. Itâs about Barack Obama and the way heâs doing his job. And the biggest measure of that are opinions on the U.S. economy. âIf consumer confidence moves up between now and Election Day, the president will be a lot better off. As of this morning, though, confidence has fallen. Confidence in the U.S. economy has fallen to the lowest level of 2012.â Elaborating on the importance of consumer confidence, Rasmussen said itâs âone overall measure of how people look at the economy, and it does have some predictive value in terms of spending. So when confidence is lower, it means that in the future, youâre likely to see less spending, which creates a negative cycle. âIn the political sense, consumer confidence is one of those indicators very, very important to an incumbent. We happen to look at one particular number more than any other: The way the people rate their own personal finances. In a way it draws back to Ronald Reaganâs famous comment, âAre you better off than you were four years ago?â âFour years ago, in the fall of 2008, 43 percent of Americans said their finances were in good shape. That fell to 35 percent by the time Barack Obama took office. And itâs down to 33 percent today. If that number does not improve, President Obama will lose his job. Thereâs simply no way an incumbent president will be re-elected if people are feeling a little bit worse off than they were four years earlier.â There has been some good news recently regarding the housing market, and the stock market has seen a summer rally. As to why these economic data seem to conflict with consumer confidence, Rasmussen explained: âThereâs a couple of reasons why there may be a conflict, and one is a simple lag. When people hear good news, they want to see two or three months in a row of good news before they believe itâs real. When thereâs bad news, confidence drops right away. âWe have had four years of generally discouraging news. Itâs going to take a lot to turn that around. So right now in the housing market, most Americans still say itâs a bad time to sell your home. Only half of homeowners believe their house is worth more than the mortgage. âWhen you talk about jobs, only 24 percent say the jobs market is better than it was a year ago, 44 percent say itâs worse. What would turn that perception around would be if each of the next three jobs reports got better than the one we just had. On the other hand, if there is a single bad report or a downward revision of the July numbers, that would be very devastating to confidence. âWe do a monthly employee index where we talk to 9,000 workers across the country, find out what they are seeing. Only 20 percent report their firms are hiring, and 22 percent are reporting layoffs. Those are the weakest numbers we have seen in nine months.â President Obama has called on former President Clinton to speak at the Democratic National Convention, but Rasmussenâs data show that only 32 percent of Americans believe Clinton and Obama see eye to eye on how to fix the economy. Rasmussen commented: âYou have to recognize, first off, that Bill Clinton is seen as much closer to the political center. While 43 percent believe that Barack Obama is very liberal, only 14 percent see Bill Clinton as that far to the left. On top of that, Bill Clinton has a proven ability to connect with people, even in a center-right nation. And so my expectation is he will do a great job making the case for Barack Obama. âI would expect that even though there will be a difference between what he says and what President Obama says, his message, to the degree it gets through, will help the current president.â Rasmussen stressed the importance of the presidential race in Florida. âFlorida is a traditional swing state, one of the most important. For all intents and purposes, the presidential race is a tossup. âPresident Obama has a little bit of a challenge in Florida because his healthcare law is most unpopular among seniors. And bluntly, if Mitt Romney canât win this state, the state of Florida, he has no chance of winning the White House.â The pollster also offered his analysis of the presidential and congressional races in several other key states: In Ohio the White House race is âvery close,â and Ohio âwill be one of the four most important states on Election Day, along with Florida, North Carolina, and Virginia. North Carolina is moving slightly in Romneyâs direction, while the other three states remain tossups.â In Colorado, which has become a swing state, Romney and Obama are tied at 47 percent, according to Rasmussen, who said: âStates like Colorado could be key tie-breakers. Itâs very important to mention every swing state this year is a state that was won by Barack Obama four years ago. There are no states that John McCain won that the Obama camp is putting in play.â In Virginia, âwe are showing President Obama up 2 points. The Senate race there between Tim Kaine and George Allen is a tossup. I believe that whichever party wins the electoral votes in Virginia will also get that Senate seat.â Nevada has been a âvery tough state for Republicans in recent years and we continue to show President Obama with a modest lead there. But if Romney is doing very well nationally it might be very competitive.â The Senate race in Florida between incumbent Democrat Bill Nelson and GOP challenger Connie Mack is âgoing to come down to a team effort. If Mitt Romney is able to open up a pretty significant lead in Florida, and by that I mean four or five points, that might be enough to defeat the incumbent Nelson.â In Missouri, incumbent Democratic Sen. Claire McCaskill âis one of the senators most closely identified with President Obama and thatâs really hurting her in the state. She trails Congressman Todd Akin 47 percent to 44 percent, and that poll was taken before Akin won the primary. I suspect his numbers will do a little bit better when we start polling now that the primary has been decided.â In the Ohio Senate race between tea party favorite Josh Mandel and Democrat Sherrod Brown, âMandel is the underdog, but he is certainly competitive,â said Rasmussen. âItâs one of those states that if itâs a really good night for the Republicans, it might pull him across the finish line on top. But if itâs just a squeaker at the presidential level, then Mandel probably falls short and the Democrats keep that seat.â Overall in the Senate, Rasmussen added, âwhen you really get down to it, weâre going to be in a situation where the Republicans will probably pick up a seat in Nebraska, probably Missouri, probably North Dakota. That puts them right at 50 if they donât lose any other seats and that also means any one seat could put them over the top. âOur latest numbers in the Montana Senate race show Congressmen Denny Rehberg at 49 percent. Heâs the Republican. John Tester, the incumbent Democrat, is at 47 percent. The state generally leans in a Republican direction, and I suspect, barring a major shift in the economy, that Rehberg is the favorite there. âFor the most part itâs going to depend on those economic trends. If the trends get better nationally in the economy, perceptions of the economy improve, Democrats will do better everywhere. If it gets worse Republicans will do better everywhere.â
Romney: Obama, Allies Perpetuating Lies in Ads Newsmax Mitt Romney on Thursday accused President Barack Obama and his allies of launching personal attacks and perpetuating lies about him in TV ads. The Republican also rolled out a new commercial of his own that questioned Obama's values and accused the president of waging war on religious freedom. Obama's campaign disputed that charge. "I am seeing some of the ads out there. I don't know whatever happened to a campaign of hope and change," Romney said, alluding to Obama's previous campaign slogan, during an interview on Bill Bennett's radio program, "Morning in America." ''I thought he was a new kind of politician. But instead, his campaign and the people working with him have focused almost exclusively on personal attacks ... It's really disappointing." In the interview, Romney argued that Obama "keeps on just running" ads that various fact-checking organizations have called inaccurate. "They just blast ahead," he said, instead of pulling the ads off the air. But the candidate ignored the fact that he has kept his own ads assailing Obama on the air after these groups have found their claims to be false. Romney talked generally about ads in the interview but didn't directly refer to a commercial by a Democratic outside group that has dominated the campaign in the last two days. His campaign has called "despicable" an ad by Priorities USA Action that features a man whose wife died of cancer after he lost his health insurance when he was laid off from a company that was bought by the private equity firm Romney once ran. "I do not think Mitt Romney realizes what he's done to anyone, and furthermore I do not think Mitt Romney is concerned," the man, Joe Soptic, says in the ad. Obama's campaign has refused to ask the group to pull the spot, and a co-founder of the group has defended the ad. The back and forth over the commercial underscored the degree to which the White House campaign has become intensely negative and personal as polls show the race close three months before the Nov. 6 election. Negative commercials from both the candidates and their backers are flooding the roughly nine states that are the most competitive in the hunt to win the 270 Electoral College votes needed for victory. As controversy raged over the outside group's commercial, Romney's team rolled out one of its own Thursday that asks: "Who shares your values?" It continues: "President Obama used his health care plan to declare war on religion, forcing religious institutions to go against their faith." The spot revives a months-old debate over new health rules mandating insurance coverage for birth control without co-pays, which the ad says forces religious institutions to "go against their faith." Obama says exemptions for churches and compromise language on charities fully protects religious freedom. "When religious freedom is threatened, who do you want to stand with?" the ad asks and says the answer is Romney...
Mitt's Tax Returns by Fred Thompson Mitt Romney has said he will release and make public a total of two years of income tax returns. It looks as if the Obama-ites will have a collective fit if he doesnât release more. I say letâem. Politics â as in other parts of life â allows us to have an excuse for doing what we could not otherwise get away with. Just as sn adult watching movies every day during daylight hours would be frowned upon ⦠unless they were a movie critic, or a middle aged man poring over reams of pornographic material would be ostracized ⦠except he is a judge trying a case about that subject matter, a political race allows us, as âconcerned citizens,â to consume information about what a candidate did with his lunch money in junior high, as well as who his wife dated when she was a teen-ager. But as far as perennial guilty political pleasures go, none has achieved a greater and more predictable status than reviewing the tax return. The âFair Shareâ Game Politicians, especially those who have spent their adult life on a government salary, demand that their opponents disgorge their financial records and returns, preferably going back as far as that first suspect lemonade stand. The press invariably joins in the hounding. They demand to know, for example, how much the candidate gave away to charitable organizations. Giving to strangers, you see, rather than giving generously without the advantage of a tax write-off to loved ones in need or other individuals who may need assistance, reveals the size of oneâs heart (unless you are Joe Biden). But, mainly, the demand is made because candidates (rich ones especially) need to demonstrate that they have paid their âfair shareâ in taxes. What is a âfair share?â Never mind. Thatâs for the press corps and the opposition to decide. A person could have paid more in taxes than a gymnasium full of his detractors and it still would not be enough if he has made âtoo muchâ money in comparison to his tax bill. Also, never mind that unlike the common criminal, the burden is placed on the candidate to prove his innocence. A tax return can reveal that a tax payer (slightly over 50% of Americans, nowadays) has followed the law, paid all required taxes, and has done nothing improper or that his worse critics wouldnât have done.. And yet, in skilled hands, that tax return can be used as a hammer with which to beat a candidate over the head. Often times, the more successful a person has been the longer and more complicated his or her tax return will be. It is, therefore, that much more target rich for the opposition. The thought of the selective and misleading use of a ârich guyâsâ tax return makes the political ad manâs mouth water. The 30-Second Ad A small example: There is a provision in the tax law that allows a business owner, large or small, to set up a retirement account and not pay taxes on income that goes into that account until the money is drawn out, possibly years later. You must include and set aside money for your employees, too, although you can have as few as one employee . This deferral of taxes on the retirement contribution, of course, makes your taxable income less. This in turn lowers the current percentage of taxes paid on gross income. In everyday life, such retirement accounts are considered sound and responsible. In the political world, such retirement planning is tailor-made for the 30-second unscrupulous ad. The Democrats know this, and so does Mitt Romney, one reason why he and his campaign are standing strong against releasing more than they have. Tell Them To Go Fly A Kite But if you thought that the Dems just wanted to have issue of the non-release of the additional returns, I think youâre wrong. They also want the tax returns. To their way of thinking, the best outcome is a long, drawn out fight over release of the returns, with enough media pressue to force Romney to release them. That would made him look weak and they would still be able to go to work on his returns. Iâve been encouraged by the strong stand heâs taken. I know that others who have his best interest at heart have advised him to succumb, while others have said he must have something to hide. I disagree with both notions. Based on what I thought was appropriate at the time I have released my share of tax returns when running for office, and while I might have advised him differently a year ago, now I say go all in. I would not give one inch to an outfit that accuses me of killing a workerâs wife. Tell them to go fly a kite. Tell them that when Obama releases his grades and Harry Reid releases his tax returns you might consider it. Have some fun. Talk about the fragile future of this country and itâs role in the world, and let Harry and the boys talk about anonymous sources and tax returns. Mitt may take some flack but he will anyway no matter what he does. This year especially itâs the rich manâs burden. Embrace it and go on. There are bigger problems that a candidate could have. Like having led this country to the brink of second-rate status. Reid, The Senateâs Poster Boy Besides, the Romney campaign has been the recipient of a major stroke of luck in the form of Harry Reid. He is a classic example of the Peter Principle. I came of political age during the time of Sen. Howard Baker, Robert Byrd and George Mitchell. I served under the leadership of Bob Dole and Tom Daschle. When Reid was elevated to the position of Senate Majority Leader he achieved the level of his own incompetence. He has no concept of the responsibility that the position carries. He uses the Senate floor to slander opponents and degrade the Senate. Those who wonder why the Senate has become so acrimonious and partisan need look no further. The Senate Democrats have presented us with a poster boy for the problem. And he is now the face of the Romney âtax returnâ issue. The broader point here is that Reid and the tax return issue are simply a small part of a campaign of demagoguery and division by a party and president desperately trying to change the subject from the issues that will determine our fate as a nation. Letâs not let them.