Republicans are now accusing Reid of lying. Reid did not say Romney paid no taxes, he said someone told him that. Are the Republicans saying he's lying about Romney paying no taxes (that's Romney's reaction) or that he's lying about somebody telling him Romney paid no taxes.

If it's the latter, then they are calling him a liar with no evidence to back it up, because they can't produce transcripts of all Reid's conversations. If it's the former, then they are wrong because he did not, himself, assert that Romney paid no taxes. He implied it, and I admit that's kind of smarmy. It was clearly an intentional provocation to keep the tax issue front and center, but it's not lying.

Why is it okay for them to explicitly call Reid a liar, but not okay for Reid to say he has heard that Romney may have paid no taxes some years?

Anonymous wrote:pp, if Fox News existed back in the day of that Nixon cover, it would be hurling accusations of "BIAS!" at Time and demanding to know why the media wasn't sympathetically covering people lining up to preserve the tradition of "colored" water fountains.

I don't know about the water fountains, but the Nixon cover shows how far to the right we have gone. Back then, people were not lining up to defend someone who paid nearly zero in taxes. And those concerned about it were not accused of class warfare.

Back then an ordinary citizen could look at something without the aid of a flotilla of partisan operatives, and call a spade a spade.

I was vaguely interested in why Mitt hadn't released his tax returns before but now that he's doubling down and attacking anyone who asks about then I REALLY want to know what's in there. It had to be a campaign killer of he's decided it's better to take the heat of not releasing versus releasing.

I think it's brilliant that Harry Reid is throwing a bomb like this at Mitt because until he releases them you can suggest there's anything in there.

I think it's either wicked low taxes paid compared to what he made, a la Nixon, crazy off-shore accounts or investments in controversial companies (fetus disposal). And I think the Obama campaign knows there's something in there so they're going after it.

I bet it comes out in October.

pp, if Fox News existed back in the day of that Nixon cover, it would be hurling accusations of "BIAS!" at Time and demanding to know why the media wasn't sympathetically covering people lining up to preserve the tradition of "colored" water fountains.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I still think the ultimate killer would be that he did everything perfectly according to law and fared so well that there would be a virtual uprising demanding that the tax laws be changed, thereby costing him big bucks. Much more painful than any personal embarrassment -- he must have developed a pretty strong immunity to the sting of embarrassment by now, right?

This idea of punishing and creating pain for those that are successful seems to be a recurring wet dream for those on the left. Have you discussed this with a certified therapist?

NP. You seem to be confused. This is not about his gross. This is about how much he paid in taxes.

On the cover of this magazine, you can see exactly what America cares about. It was not Nixon's gross, which was not extraordinary at 250K. It was his tax paid, which was 878. It was a scandal then, and it would be a scandal now.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I still think the ultimate killer would be that he did everything perfectly according to law and fared so well that there would be a virtual uprising demanding that the tax laws be changed, thereby costing him big bucks. Much more painful than any personal embarrassment -- he must have developed a pretty strong immunity to the sting of embarrassment by now, right?

This idea of punishing and creating pain for those that are successful seems to be a recurring wet dream for those on the left. Have you discussed this with a certified therapist?

Well done! You get today's Karl Rove award for avoiding the issue by attacking the opponent rather than saying something relevant.

Anonymous wrote:I still think the ultimate killer would be that he did everything perfectly according to law and fared so well that there would be a virtual uprising demanding that the tax laws be changed, thereby costing him big bucks. Much more painful than any personal embarrassment -- he must have developed a pretty strong immunity to the sting of embarrassment by now, right?

This idea of punishing and creating pain for those that are successful seems to be a recurring wet dream for those on the left. Have you discussed this with a certified therapist?

Bridge to Mittens, Bridge to Mittens. your deflector shields are failing

I still think the ultimate killer would be that he did everything perfectly according to law and fared so well that there would be a virtual uprising demanding that the tax laws be changed, thereby costing him big bucks. Much more painful than any personal embarrassment -- he must have developed a pretty strong immunity to the sting of embarrassment by now, right?

It has to be very bad. Maybe it shows he has a few wives?

Anonymous wrote:Romney critiqued Ted Kenndy for not releasing his tax returns. Can this hypocrite remain a viable candidate. I think not

With an economy like this, it takes some doing for the challenger to lose. But Romney is looking like he's up to the task.

Romney critiqued Ted Kenndy for not releasing his tax returns. Can this hypocrite remain a viable candidate. I think not

I think Romney made charitable donations he doesn't want the public to see. Either he is giving gobs to the Mormon Church or he gave money to Planned Parenthood, which would make him the hypocrite of the century. I think he is more socially liberal than he lets on. He was governor of Massachusetts after all.

My favorite Romney quote today: "Put up or shut up". Really Mittens, you shouldn't be putting that thought into people's heads just now.

The bottom line is Mittens is taking a beating in every poll over this issue. Even the Foxies admit it