Here's what caught my eye:

“We have been very transparent to what’s legally required of us,” Ann Romney told NBC’s Natalie Morales. “There’s going to be no more tax releases given.”

Wow. Have you ever seen a political spouse with such a poor grasp of English? Of course I don't think this reflects one way or the other on Mitt's candidacy, but still. The potential next First Lady has the linguistic skills of your average 10th grade dropout trying to sound more educated than she is.

Anonymous wrote:The more she talks, the less i like her.

I agree
She is not running for president. She should keep her mouth shut.

Absolute DQ. Wonder if Mrs. has ever heard of the "innocent spouse" exemption from penalties... LOL

The refusal to release as many tax returns as past presidents and candidates is a disqualifier for Romney.

Her body language alone shows how defensive she was taking about the tax returns. Paternalistic, really offensive. I don't trust them for one second.

A very simple question: If you have nothing to hide, Duh? Why keep it hidden?
Does this intelligent woman think the audience is filled with stupid, gullible, idiots?
I find her lack of respect for the intelligence of the citizens of the US offensive. We all know what "trust me" implies

Anonymous wrote:The more she talks, the less i like her.

I've never had any reason to not like her and don't think less of her for not having a paying job (I don't think choosing to raise a family and do volunteer work is deserving of criticism), but I don't think she did herself any favors with her response to the questions about their tax returns in the NBC interview. Her body leaned forward, and her finger was in the air. Very defensive behavior for someone whose husband is running for such a high office.

What I find particularly odd is that at least for the years he was in politics he did not think it worthwhile to plan his finances on the assumption that he'd be making his tax returns public. Whatever manipulations he did that he wants to keep secret must have been worth a hell of a lot for him to succumb to the temptation even though he hardly needed the extra bucks.

I'm sure its.nothing.....as in $0 taxes paid because of loopholes. All legal, of course.

Anonymous wrote:The more she talks, the less i like her.

no doubt

what they have to hide is information ... not illegality, almost surely ... but information ... which should be fair game, transparent, and out in the open ... if someone might be open to criticism for how they choose to use the tax laws, then they ought to be "man enough" to defend their position and rationale ... that tells people about whether they want that thinking as "leader of the free world" ...

They're so out of touch they didn't realize how out of touch they'd look if the details ever came out, as they were taking aggressive tax positions year after year ... tough luck.

Sunshine = disinfectant. Two yrs. of returns disclosed is a disgrace/insult.

The more she talks, the less i like her.

Of course it would be worse. I don't think they've done anything illegal, but I can pretty much guarantee they paid a lower tax rate than I did and they have enormous assets offshore. If the returns are released, the news will be non-stop with revelations of "elite" deductions like the hundreds of thousands spent on Rafalka. And probably way to little paid to domestic workers. It would be a circus.

What else is she going to say? That they are hiding something?

The Romneys are trying to make this into a non-issue, but I think we all know that they have determined it is better to weather this storm (i.e., uproar about not releasing) vs. the other storm (i.e., releasing and people realizing that the Romneys have in many years paid pretty much no taxes, widely used tax shelters and maybe even engaged in questionable tax practices). Of course, this is all speculation, but one of the few people who HAVE seen Romney's tax returns (Steve Schmidt) almost implied as much with his comments on the tax returns (pretty much stating that it would be worse if he disclosed them).

Ann Romney says there's nothing hidden in the other tax returns.

http://thehill.com/video/campaign/243739-ann-romney-on-blind-trust-ill-be-curious-to-see-whats-in-there-too

But, Mitt says releasing more tax returns will give his opposition "more ammunition."

If there's nothing hidden, how does that give the Dems ammunition?

Also, saying that you've met your legal obligation is the last refuge of a tax scoundrel.