As a rule, family members of candidates shouldn't be considered political players, but once those family members become campaign surrogates and enter the political sphere making partisan arguments, there's nothing inappropriate about scrutinizing their comments.
Take Ann Romney's latest defense of her husband's secrecy, for example.
Ann Romney sat down with NBC's Natalie Morales and when the subject turned to the still-hidden tax returns, the Republican became quite agitated. Romney insisted that her husband's campaign has done "what's legally required of us," which is true, but fails to meet accepted norms, standards, and expectations.
She added, "There's going to be no more tax releases given." I assume that means outside of the 2011 returns Mitt Romney has promised to release, but has not yet disclosed, though Ann Romney didn't elaborate.
She went on to say, "There's nothing we're hiding." Except the tax returns, the tax rates paid, and the explanation for the Swiss bank account, the shell corporation in Bermuda, and the cash in the Cayman Islands. Other than hiding all of that, they're not hiding anything.
And why will the Romneys refuse all additional calls for disclosure, even from Republicans? According to Ann Romney, it's because Democrats might use the materials to make Mitt Romney look bad.
I continue to marvel at this deeply odd argument. As Dahlia Lithwick and Raymond Vasvari recently explained, "[Romney] isn't actually claiming that his opponents will lie. He's claiming he's entitled to hide the truth because it could be used against him.... These are tax returns. Factual documents. No different than, say, a birth certificate. But the GOP's argument that inconvenient facts can be withheld from public scrutiny simply because they can be used for mean purposes is a radical idea in a democracy."
And yet, this radical idea is now the Romneys' only talking point on the issue.
Leave a Comment:
I just don't understand. The Romney campaign argument for not releasing their tax returns is that there is stuff in their tax returns that they would be attacked for. Why isn't the immediate follow-up response from the reporter, "That's precisely why we want to see them"? Maybe the attacks would be unfair, but maybe the attacks would be deserved. The only way to know is for the tax returns to be released. As Senator Harry Reid said, Romney would not be confirmed as a Cabinet Secretary with this stance on his tax returns, so there's no reason for anyone to accept it from a Presidential candidate.
I keep wondering if the Romney campaign gets that... If you say you can't release something because you say you might get attacked, that implies that you know that there are parts of it that are open to attack or at least require significant effort to defend.
It's already an admission that there are problems.
And as candidates, the Romneys do come off as defensive, secretive and with that particular line of defense, rather wimpy. Mitt Romney's tax returns are probably not the most revealing ones anyway. His wife's returns are probably the ones where you see how they sheltered all their money.
My wish would be to see the mainstream media push more for the disclosure, not because Harry Reid is speculating about what was paid, but because Romney's finances are germaine to the discussion. The Republicans like to say the top 1% are job creators by virtue of their wealth, which gets turned into domestic investment. Ok, if you have all that wealth, how is it creating jobs in offshore bank accounts, etc.? Or would his tax returns show that he could contribute more without keeping him from his notable expenditures such as his high-tech car elevator garage? I'm sure he worked hard for his wealth, but what does he have to worry about if the Romneys contributed what most Americans (not just liberals) think is fair?
What I find truly disconcerting is when they talk about the "blind" trust and how they have no idea what is in it. Like it's a box they have never opened or looked into.
I know right! Would love to be his accountant.
It's Schrodinger's Investment...
Well, I guess that settles it then.
You guys are amusing! All this serious concern about Romney's tax returns. He provided what was required. We in America work hard to make and save ( keep ) our money. We give it to whom we want. Charities, etc. He's given more than many!! Paid a lot also. You just want to see the percentage so you can nitpick it!
IF YOU HAVE A SERIOUS CONCERN ABOUT SOMETHING BEING HIDDEN ASK MR. OBAMA WHY HE HAS SPENT MILLIONS OF DOLLARS TO KEEP HIS PAST LOCKED UP!!!!!!!!!!!!!! BY THE WAY WHAT HE HAS PROVIDED IS FAKE!!!
LOSERS, ALL OF YOU!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
You've definitely changed my mind about things.
Thanks, Don.
If you think for one moment that the 1st black president was not vetted thoroughly you are seriously deluded.
Oh, and why the hell aren't you asking for Romney's birth certificate or school records. Guess he's American by default.
Why do you need Obama's stuff to be fake? Do you think God will give you a better seat in heaven if you refuse to believe? I don't see what you get out of this mind set.
ok...so I get it. The Romney's are sooooo damn rich that their money is handled by a blind trust and they have NO IDEA how much there is?
Is that how he would run the budget?!
I know exactly how much money is in my checking acct. $0.00!
Another Ann, first name Marie, who used the same tone and proclaimed, "Let them eat cake!" when told there was no wheat for bread for the peasants. (currently referred to as "THOSE people" by this Ann. History didn't work out very well for that Ann either, as I recall.
Sorry, lady. your husband lies like a champ every day. No tax information and confirmation of its' legality, no vote!
Why would Romney be expected to break fore tradition and release his tax returns when he took all of his "personal" computer records when he left the Olympics and the Governorship of MA. As Ann implies -- We don't trust the American public to be fair and we don't trust them to know how much money we have and where it is.
Like the song goes -- "All we are asking, is give Mitt a chance."
I have a question, If Ann Romney and her husband have a blind trust and don't know what's in it, then how can she say, "they paid all their taxes that was require or how much she/they give in charity, etc."? Either she lying or covering for her husband....
IMO she just add fuel to the fire....