Associated Press
They're still not on the same page.
Texas Gov. Rick Perry (R) was a thorn in Mitt Romney's side during the Republican presidential nominating process, pressing the former governor for months to release his tax returns. Perry has since become a Romney ally, but he's apparently not finished causing trouble for the GOP nominee.
"No matter who you are or what office you are running for, you should be as transparent as you can be with your tax returns and other aspects of your life so that people have the appropriate ability to judge your background," Perry said yesterday, straying far from Romney's preferred line.
Perhaps more importantly, National Review has joined the growing chorus of Republicans urging Romney to come clean, publishing this editorial yesterday.
Romney protests that he is not legally obliged to release any tax returns. Of course not. He is no longer in the realm of the private sector, though, where he can comply with the letter of the law with the Securities and Exchange Commission and leave it at that. Perceptions matter.
Romney may feel impatience with requirements that the political culture imposes on a presidential candidate that he feels are pointless (and inconvenient). But he's a politician running for the highest office in the land, and his current posture is probably unsustainable. In all likelihood, he won't be able to maintain a position that looks secretive and is a departure from campaign conventions. The only question is whether he releases more returns now, or later -- after playing more defense on the issue and sustaining more hits. There will surely be a press feeding frenzy over new returns, but better to weather it in the middle of July.
National Review is not just another conservative media outlet. The magazine has unique influence and reflects the perspective of the conservative establishment. Howard Kurtz noted yesterday's piece and said, "If he's lost National Review, he's lost the right." Kurtz added this "feels like a turning point."
And yet, as of last night, Romney disagrees. He's heard the calls from within his own party, but, at least for now, the presidential hopeful says he simply doesn't care.
In an interview with the NBC affiliate in Pittsburgh late yesterday, Romney said Democrats would "look for anything they can find to distort, to twist, and to try and make negative," so he feels he has no choice but to keep the materials hidden from voters.
Of course, by that logic, Romney shouldn't give speeches or do interviews, either, since those rascally Democrats might try to distort, twist, and make negative the things he says out loud. This is not, in other words, much of an excuse for indefinite secrecy.
The Washington Post, meanwhile, reports today that while there are clear divisions within the Republican Party over Romney's handling of the issue, there are also divisions among the candidate's own staffers.
The political pressure on Mitt Romney to release more of his personal income tax returns is causing some divisions inside the GOP presidential candidate's camp, according to a Republican strategist close to the campaign.
Although some advisers are arguing privately that Romney needs to release additional filings to curb the political fallout, others are resisting that suggestion, reflecting the candidate's longtime reluctance to publicly disclose information about his personal finances.
For what it's worth, Matthew Dowd, a strategist with the Bush-Cheney 2004 campaign, said on NPR yesterday that Romney would have to do something to deal with his Bain/disclosure problems "within 48 hours."
And what happens if Romney doesn't? Dowd didn't say, but the implication seemed to be that the damage to the Republican's campaign would be lasting and significant.
Leave a Comment:
Mitt, without releasing more tax returns you better choose a running mate from the ranks of the blonde, blue eyed news babes from FOX if you have any hope of winning this fall. Otherwise you're toast politically.
Something tells me that when he does get to release his tax returns, they will be doctored. Too much hiding and no release. I bet that come September he'll finally release them and we won't see anything out of the ordinary in order to "prove that he had nothing to hide and that Democrats were throwing a fit over nothing" and gain the upper hand in the elections...of course, the IRS will have the final say in this.
I would think the tax returns Mitt released would have to match the original copies the IRS has, plus they have to match the information SEC has, not to mention W4's or any state tax returns. Cross checking would invalidate doctored returns.
One thing that I find interesting is that most of the news on candidate Romney's 1999-2002 time at Bain capital state that he earned 100,000 dollars annually. This is actually false. He earned over 100,000 dollars. the question is....how much over 100,000 dollars did he earn while he was just a figure head? 200,000? 1 million? 10 million? I believe that this may be one of the reasons why he is hesitant to release tax returns from this year. Time will tell of course. No responsibility and benefits abound!
I'm not sure what it means when you are getting political advice from Rick Perry. But one thing it DOESN'T mean is that you're winning.
Mitt's serene smile says it all. "The yammering hordes bother me not; the Little People always have something to complain about, but I do not allow such inconsequential nonsense to affect my vision for MY future."
"As my dear friend Barbara Bush said, 'Why should I waste my beautiful mind on something like that?'" (Good Morning America, March 18th, 2003)
It's not a "serene smile" it's a constant smirk. The smirk of a man who thinks he's putting one over on whoever he's talking to. What a scumbag.
There is a Spanish phrase that comes to mind: El ladrón juzga por su condición.
And the statement is also more proof that Romney thinks the American people are stupid.
How much more insult and lies are Democrats, liberals, progressives, and anyone else who isn't Mitt Romney expected to take?
We are citizens of the USA, not dog do under the expensive shoes of someone seeking public office. Mitt Romney is EXPECTED to lead the entire nation, not just those he approves of, a tiny list indeed.
What. An. Ass.
Willard is confident he can stonewall the issue so we don't see those embarrassing years when he paid no tax.
He is confident the Koch/Rove /Adelson money machine will bury Obama in negative ads and convince the stupids to vote for him.
They are used to the equation Money = Power = ability to win elections.
With the state of our MSM stenographer class news reporting , he may be right .
The MSM still needs a horse race to sell pharmaceuticals and Tide and by god we will get a horse race.
I hope he sticks to his guns. Every day he is answering questions about his taxes is a day lost to his campaign.
I read somebody who says he can wait until the Olympics. I hope that is what he thinks, because every day he waits is a lost day.
Ron, I'm not sure if that was a reference to hoping the Olympics change teh subject and once it goes away it is gone for good, or whether you think he will release them during the Olympics, but I am beginning to expect the latter. Probably while the Opening Ceremonies are taking place.
Except that the Olympics are only on one channel. And there's usually a break between different venues. Plenty of time to discuss any disclosures relating to Romney's taxes.
I get it now. Gov. Romney think he's George Washington and shouldn't have to bother running a campaign. He should win the Presidency by acclamation.
Romney's inaugural address, in its entirety: "L'etat, c'est moi."
I don't really care that much about Mitt Romney's tax returns.
What I want to know is what he will do to stop jobs moving out of the country and bring jobs back. And does he even think it is a problem. Plain and simple.
In a nutshell, this is how I understand the situation (greatly simplified):
The big problem facing this country is that the good-paying jobs, particularly in manufacturing but also other sectors, are being cut here and moved off shore.
This happened because it is more cost-effective for the businesses to use foreign workers - cheaper, fewer or no regulations. Lower cost of labor out-weighed added cost of shipping finished products.
The businesses were able to reduce the price of the products to the customers in the US.
The effect in this country was loss of those good-paying jobs - replaced to some extent with lower-paying jobs - and stagnation in wages for everyone. As corporate profits increase, no worker wants to push for a raise - too high a risk of losing everything.
The only reason the economy and our society has not collapsed is that as wages fell or stagnated, prices for many items - like clothing - also fell.
But this is not sustainable!!
My questions:
What does the future hold? What direction are we going?
Can we get back to the good old days where one full-time job is enough to support a family on? [Were we ever there?]
Do we really have to go back to wages that are so low, both parents need to work multiple jobs?
Do we really have to go back to jobs that are unsafe?
Do we really have to go back to the days where air and water pollution spewed out of factories?
Do we really have to go back to the days where the wealth and political power is concentrated in a few [aristocracy, monarchy, dictatorship, communist (like the USSR), complete the list with every other form of government before the United States of America was created]?
My opinion:
There is nothing in what I have learned about Mitt Romney that tells me that his experience and stated policies will do ANYTHING but perpetuate our slide to disaster. They are more of the same thinking that got us into this mess.
We have had some good times - such as during the Clinton years. Many of President Obama's policies are just going back to what worked! Some of them - specifically financial regulations - go back to what worked before deregulation.
President Obama's policies that were enacted since taking office, policies that were proposed but blocked and statements about what he believes is the right course give me HOPE!
There are answers to your questions. I grew up in the 1950's and 60's, and yes, for many people, one breadwinner could support a family. Not so today. But I can answer all your questions with just one answer. Unions.
Unions protected the American worker, guaranteeing that the workplace would be safe, that wages would be fair, the adequate health care and pensions would sustain people as they grew older. More often than not, because it was in both of their best interests, unions and management worked together. Sure, there were times when it was necessary to strike (withhold labor) to protect one's standard of living. There were corrupt union leaders, like Dave Beck and Jimmy Hoffa, both probably pushing up goalposts somewhere. But that was atypical then as it is now. Union membership has fallen to its lowest point since the 1930's. Laws passed since Reagan have damaged the unions and diminished their ability to protect the American worker.
I have been a union member and a business owner. I'm proud that I belonged to a union, and I sincerely hope that they begin to recover the ground that they have lost under the Republican rules. The individual, by themselves, doesn't stand a chance in negotiations with an employer. Think of it this way: the union simply acts in the same manner as you would if you were applying for a middle (or higher) management position with a company. You'd talk about salary, health benefits, pensions, stock shares, 401k's, a company car and opportunities for advancement. You'd work out a deal exchanging your talents and skills for a mutually satisfying offer from your new employer. That's exactly what unions do for you.
We need to bring unions back and reduce the wage/income inequalities that are turning our society into a race to the bottom.
If Mitt had any credibility on other issues he might earn a pass on his taxes and Bain. Running a campaign where your only point is distorting your opposition's accomplishments, and otherwise telling people to trust you because you have a plan that only can be shared after the election, is hardly convincing. Money does not equal credibility, morality, or wisdom.
this is getting interesting. he's so hiding something in those returns.
that is the whole thing with Willard, if you ask him any question about anything of substance at all, you never get an answer. His whole strategy is to pivot to Obama, I can't pay attention to that kind of deflection, Bane or no Bane. The tax thing is finally something he is getting pinned down on, but there is so many more things that he refuses to answer that are utterly relevant. It is the perfect storm here, black guy in office, bad econemy, if the GOP had a credible candidate and a congress that wasn't in block Obama mode, he would be winning by 15 points. That shows what a disaster he has been. Santorum could have done as well. Like him or not, you at least got honest answers out of Santorum.
You get an honestly insane answer out of Santorum - Romney may be the gold medal winner in the lying competition, but Santorum takes the silver with just a fraction of a difference. Remember when Santorum took what Pres. Obama said out of context and called him a snob for encouraging people to get an education? How about accusing Obama of having a "phony theology" and Santorum's lies about how "Obamacare" would have killed his daughter. The only difference with Santorum is that he uses religious indignation as a cover for his non-stop lying.
"...Romney said Democrats would "look for anything they can find to distort, to twist, and to try and make negative,"..."
Awwwwww, as if democrats could make Rawmoney look worse than he's already done all by himself! Mittens knows 1) McCain looked over his returns & picked Palin - which speaks volumes, and 2) if he does release more years of taxes - the GOTP base which just barely supports him will stay home in droves!!
And being the silver-spooned, foot-in-a$$hole, like to fire people type that he is he is so not going to "bow out gracefully"! It's Mittens, entitled til the very end!
The comments following the NR editorial are deliciously evil.
Thanks for the tip... here they are boys and girls
http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/309738/release-returns-editors#comment-bar
Romney just admitted that releasing his tax returns would sink his candidacy. Only liberal blogs will notice.
What no one else seems to have picked up on yet is that he also admitted that if he's elected, his administration will become mired in some kind of a scandal involving his past financial dealings before he's done.
It it is inconceivable to me how anyone who's undecided could really cast a vote for a guy who they have to know they will heartily, passionately, intensely hate with within months of electing him. But then, Kasich and Scott won their gubernatorial races.
"It it is inconceivable to me how anyone who's undecided could really cast a vote for a guy who they have to know they will heartily, passionately, intensely hate with within months of electing him. But then, Kasich and Scott won their gubernatorial races."
Here is a hint Baaaaa. (I hate wool-it makes me itch)
Rachel's segment on Adelson the other night and his desparate NEED to elect Mitt@!$%# in order to control the justice department and head off an investigation of his (Adelson's) dealings in China was like a cold bucket of water in the face. Then there is Mitt@!$%#'s passion to grease the skids of the 1% rush to total world dominance. Maybe, just maybe, the GOP power brokers are thinking that a Mitt@!$%# presidency could lead to the worst corruption scandal ever. And maybe the only avenue they see open to them is to join the chorus to release his tax returns and hope the resultant Mitt@!$%#Storm is sufficient to deny him the GOP nomination.
Or he'll pull a Palin and release them the Monday night before the election. Or a statement from his tax lawyer saying that he looked over the tax returns and they're all fine.
It's obvious: he lied to the SEC and now he's scared spitless.
No, he didn't lie to the SEC. He lied to the American people, which will be obvious when the tax returns are revealed, and that is what has him "scared spitless."
"Romney said Democrats would "look for anything they can find to distort, to twist, and to try and make negative," so he feels he has no choice but to keep the materials hidden from voters"
Who can expect any kind of fair treatment from this political Frankenstein?
It's no longer about his damn tax returns, it's about how he treats the citizens of his own country. He isn't fit to lead anyone with an ugly self-serving attitude like this.
We the People need to show this man who really has the power of government.
Exactly! Is this how he would conduct himself as president - being a scaredy-cat playing the victim card? It would be a disaster.
I like the suggestion over on David Frum's blog that Romney went very, very short in 2007/2008 (which may be how his IRA got go big) Seeing him make tens or hundreds of millions on the devastation of the US economy would not be ... well received, shall we say.
Romney's statements above are less interesting for the narrow issue of his taxes than for the much larger issue of why he is doing this to begin with. Romney doesn't really have a substantive reason for wanting to be President. He doesn't like the publicity, he doesn't like the rules, he doesn't like the shared control. It is simply the highest accomplishment he can see to pursue. I don't think most voters will find that compelling as a rationale.
i posted the following under "Voter ID laws", but it's probably more appropriate here:
A Strategy?: What if Romney's refusal to provide tax returns is just a diversion to take attention away from Voter ID laws? The tax return issue builds to a crescendo in the news media, meanwhile voter suppression stays under the radar until it's too late. Then Romney releases some tax returns that have no surprises.
Just a thought...
Mitt's tax returns are the Bain of his existence.
It is always the cover-up that causes all the damage. Mr Romney is committing political suicide by not disclosing all his financial records and the GOP big shots know it. Congratulations Mr Obama on another four years.