No, it doesn’t make work. If you want to assume that something is shady whenever someone doesn’t reveal his information, then why is it not assumed that Reid is up to something shady?
Making an accusation does not shift the burden of proof to the accused.
For Reid to throw out the accusation and expect Romney to try to rebut it is ridiculous. Reid has to prove what he is claiming is true.
At least to a fair-minded person. Obviously it is going to go over like gangbusters on the SDMB.
Fine. If that’s true, then Romney has no obligation to respond. Whether a lack of response will help him or not is a separate question.
However, he did respond. He (or his spokesman) said Reid was lying. That goes beyond not responding, and it goes beyond denying Reid’s charge. It accuses Reid of knowingly being untruthful.
So by your own assertion, the burden of proof is now on Romney to prove his accusation.
As for his tax returns, the burden was on Romney to release them the minute he chose to run for President in a time and place where it is customary for presidential candidates to release their returns, and not just for the year after they decide they are going to run.
It’s also proven (which trumps credible evidence doesn’t it?) that he has lied on his taxes before and lied to the public about what’s in his taxes before.
So why do you take the “other returns” being similar to the 2011 returns as stronger than “his past behaviour being similar to his current behaviour”?
They are stomping their feet for the same reason birthers do. There is no “win” in the birth certificate situation for Obama, since he technically has no piece of paper that says “birth certificate” As long as they keep stomping, they can continue to label him as “other.”
And the liberals are doing the same thing to Romney. No matter what is in those tax returns, they will simply cement him being RICH. And to continue to stomp your feet about them continues to keep that in the news cycle. He releases them, he proves that he is rich (which we know) with probably a lower proportional tax burden than a lot of the middle class. And opens himself up to months of tax accountants in the news cycle talking about perfectly legal tax dodges that you too could use if you wanted to protect hundreds of millions of dollars from the IRS. If he doesn’t release them, he must be hiding something. Its a win win for them and they’d be stupid not to use it.
But here is the thing I don’t get. Romney has been running for president for eight plus years. Releasing tax returns is an established part of the process. When he chose this as a career aspiration, he could have told his accountants “make my returns releasable to gain brownie points in an election, - get rid of the tax shelters the middle class won’t understand, don’t take every deduction available to me, and make sure that I get paid a salary that can get taxed at the highest bracket and I’m not just paid in LTCG” Yes, you’d pay more taxes than if you used legal tax shelters, but you’d have releaseable returns and if your ambition is to be president, maybe that’s worth an additional tax burden. But apparently, it isn’t and wasn’t.
America does not hate the rich. Everyone wants to be rich, and even personally distasteful rich men (such as Trump) can gain popularity in America purely by being rich.
If that is all the tax returns would show, then it would be a huge win for Romney to release them. Indeed, if that is all they show it might be good strategy to hold them until closer to the election, giving Obama time to continue attacking them, and then release them to make Obama look foolish.
The only reason to never release them would be that they show something a whole lot worse than “being rich.”
Personally, I think he’s hiding the fact that the Bain investor made it clear that if the comment was ever traced back to him he would deny having made it.
Under those circs, I would not have passed them along.
Rich allows Obama to paint Romney as out of touch. Remember Bush I never having seen a scanner at the store? Romeny “can’t understand your problems.” Americans like to elect “the guy they know.” Its what made both Clinton (who came across as kind of a Bubba) and GWB (who also came across as kind of a Bubba) very electable guys. Obama isn’t much of a Bubba, but he’s more of a Bubba than Romney.
(Bubba in this case = neighbor you toss a Miller Lite to while chatting over the fence. You can see Clinton drinking a Miller Lite. You can see GWB drinking one. And while Obama doesn’t look quite “right” with the Miller Lite in hand, he’s better at holding it and not looking like “what the hell did you hand me” than Romney. McCain - not a Miller Lite guy. John Kerry, yeah, can’t imagine him drinking domestic beer. Gore, Obama-ish in that he’d drink it to be polite and wouldn’t look quite right with it, but you wouldn’t feel like he was a snob about it, but lost to Bush, who - granted, had stopped drinking, but would be fine with a Miller light. For quite a while, the election has gone to “the guy most likely to drink cheap American beer.”)
America doesn’t hate rich, America can’t stand hypocrits.
Being rich and paying low taxes when you’re the mouthpiece for transfering as much tax as you can away from the rich and onto the “others”. And reduction of the deficit while paying less.
I recall prime time, hour long panel discussions on Faux discussing Obama’s
-ties to terriorists and terriorsts who mentored him
-his muslim religion
-his ties to white hating,radical panthers
-his birthplace conspiracy theories
One guy theorises on why Romney refuses to release his taxes and it’s a Dirty. Underhanded.
Sleazy. Where were these Honest Johns in 08?
I don’t think it’s out of the question that there is no investor, but Reid has come by credible information by some other means that he shouldn’t have had access to - so to protect the source he has invented the investor.
It could be someone from inside the Romney or McCain campaigns, one of Romney’s accountants, maybe even someone from inside the IRS that has spilled the beans to Reid.
But by the way that Reid is sticking to his guns, it seems that he, at least, believes what he has been told.
So Wayne Allyn Root claims to be a college classmate of Obama (Columbia class of '83) and fellow pre-law and Political Science major. He says he does not remember Obama (or as he was known at the time, Barry Soetero). He claims a Fox News survey of 400 fellow classmates, as published in a Wall Street Journal opinion piece in 2008, returned the same results - no one knew Barry.
And Root puts forth his own speculation - that Obama/Soetero was a poor student who rarely attended class and was admitted to Columbia as a foreign exchange student and this is the reason he does not want his college records released.
So… does Obama have to pony up his college records to prove this allegation untrue? If Obama did in fact claim to be a foreign citizen in an application to Columbia does that not say something about his honesty? And it goes to whether he meets the qualifications to hold the office of President?
I hold that it is up to Root to prove his allegations. He does cite a survey that, if true, might support a theory that Obama may not have attended class much or otherwise made himself memorable to his classmates. And Obama’s own words to the his biographer David Mendell, “For about two years there, I was just painfully alone and really not focused on anything, except maybe thinking a lot,” tend to support that he made few connections at Columbia.
But Root’s allegation that Obama applied to Columbia as a foreign exchange student? It’s up to Root to prove that. Just like it is up to Reid to prove his allegation.
But Obama could release his college records and clear this all up.
The problem with this case is that regardless of Reid Romney is doing wrong by trying to keep his records a secret. He needs to release them. If he does he will either prove or disprove Reid’s claims as a side effect of what he is obligated to do. Theres not a lot to be outraged of in this case. Were in an absurd situation created by an absurd politician. (Romney 2012: Trust me)
Not saying this didn’t happen - but I would love to be provided with some solid examples, backed up by credible documentation on the “several” elections he has won, and also on opponents he has “slandered” - which has a fairly precise legal meaning, that can be backed up by legal remedies.
Point being that Root can come out with a wild allegation. It isn’t up to Obama to prove that allegation false. Just like it is not up to Romney to prove Reid’s allegation false.
