I Obviously Have Pursued The Wrong Career

National Review Online posted a story today about Harry Reid‘s wealth and some of his investment history. Harry Reid was a law student who worked part time to put himself through law school. He has been a public servant for all be two years of his work history. His current salary is $193,400, basically higher than it has been during his working life. Harry Reid’s current net worth is between 3 and 10 million dollars. Obviously, this man is an investment genius–he should be on Wall Street.

When Harry Reid began his career in the Nevada legislature in 1982, he was worth between 1 and 1 1/2 million dollars.

The article at National Review details some of Senator Reid’s strategies for acquiring wealth. They involve such things as questionable land deals and insider stock trading. The land deals are clearly at the edge of legality; the insider trading, although legal at the time for Congress, is now illegal.

The Democrats have attacked Mitt Romney for being rich. He has been accused of everything from soup to nuts. However, no one is disputing the fact that he made his money honestly through hard work and intelligence. It is also to his credit that he started from scratch–he did not inherit his father’s wealth. It is amazing to me that an honest, successful businessman would be so strongly attacked while the source of the Senate Majority Leader’s wealth is overlooked.

One of the things I would like to see happen in November is to have the voters elect a Congress that is interested in the prosperity of American citizens–not using the office to line Congressional pockets.

Enhanced by Zemanta

The Truth About Medicare

Paul Ryan is not going to end Medicare. His plan leaves it intact for those of us over age 55 and changes it for younger people to insure that it will be there for them. Of course, if you watch Democrat campaign ads or see the fund raising emails, you wouldn’t know that.

John Hinderaker at Power Line posted an article today on the Democrats ad campaign regarding Medicare. He mentions the much-overlooked fact that President Obama cut $716 billion from Medicare to finance Obamacare.

The Republicans are learning–the have produced the following ad:

Facts are such inconvenient things.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Quote Of The Week

This quote is from an article posted at Townhall.com today by Guy Benson. The article deals with the lies currently being told by Debbie Wasserman Shultz (DWS) about Paul Ryan‘s plan to save Medicare.

This is the quote:

Just a reminder: I do not pick on DWS because she’s an easy target.  I hold her to account because she is Barack Obama’s hand-picked leader of his party.  She’s not a fringe player.  She’s the DNC Chairwoman, installed at the request of the president of the United States.  This seems like a good commercial for Mitt Romney: “I picked Paul Ryan.  He picked Debbie and Joe.  I’m Mitt Romney and I approve this message.”

That works for me.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Preparing For The Coming (???) Attack On Paul Ryan

Actually the attack on Paul Ryan has already begun, but here’s some ammunition for present and future attacks.

Ed Morrissey posted an article at HotAir today about Erskine Bowles‘ comments on Paul Ryan’s budget proposal. As you remember, Erskine Bowles was the co-chair of Barack Obama’s deficit committee (the one that President Obama appointed and then totally ignored the conclusions of). Erskine Bowles is a Democrat budget wonk and a presidential adviser. His committee made serious recommendations about the deficit that were not even seriously discussed by President Obama.

HotAir posted what Erskine Bowles said about Paul Ryan’s budget plan:

“Have any of you met Paul Ryan? We should get him to come to the university. I’m telling you this guy is amazing, uh. I always thought that I was OK with arithmetic, but this guy can run circles around me. And, he is honest. He is straightforward. He is sincere.

And, the budget that he came forward with is just like Paul Ryan. It is a sensible, straightforward, serious budget and it cut the budget deficit by $4 trillion…just like we did.

The President came out with his own plan and the President came out, as you will remember, with a budget and I don’t think anyone took that budget very seriously. Um, the Senate voted against it 97 to nothing. He, therefore, after a lot of pressure from folks like me, he came out with a new budget framework and, in the new budget framework, he cut the budget deficit by $4 trillion over 12 years. And, to be candid, this $4 trillion cut was very heavily back-end loaded. So, if you looked at it on a 10 year basis and compared apples-to-apples, it was about a $2.5 trillion cut.”

Erskine Bowles did not come out in support of Paul Ryan’s budget, but his statement shows an obvious respect for the budget (and for Paul Ryan). At some point we have to stop accusing people of pushing granny over a cliff and actually start looking at where we are and what we need to do to avoid going over the cliff ourselves. I believe Paul Ryan would be a wonderful person to lead that discussion.

Enhanced by Zemanta

How You Answer When You Are Caught With Your Hand In The Cookie Jar

The Washington Free Beacon posted an article today which featured my nominee for the Quote of the Week.

Democratic National Committee chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz was being interviewed on Fox News Sunday. She was asked about the Obama ad accusing Mitt Romney causing the death of Joe Soptic’s wife. Ms. Wasserman Schultz  pointed out that the ad was produced by Priorities USA, an Obama-affiliated super PAC run by a former Obama White House staffer. She then stated, “I have no idea the political affiliation of the folks who are associated with that super PAC.” Wow. Did she think it was a pro-Romney ad?

When you listen to the entire interview, you begin to wonder if the Democrat‘s main objection to Mitt Romney is that he was successful as a businessman. I wonder how many people in America think that America needs a successful businessman to put the economy of America in order.

Please follow the link to the Washington Free Beacon to watch the video. This is how you avoid answering a question when you are caught with your hand in the cookie jar!

Enhanced by Zemanta

A Change Of Pace For The Weekend

This is going to be a politically noisy weekend. The left will be trying to define Paul Ryan as wanting to drive granny off the cliff and the right will be countering that effort. Some of the stories may be interesting, informative or entertaining, but right now I am taking a break.

 

This is Frito. He is our current foster cat. We provide foster care for cats from the local no-kill cat shelter. Frito is from Guatemala. I don’t know the full story of how he got here, but evidently as a black cat he was at some risk in that country and was brought here to safety. Frito is about three years old and he is very cute. He will make someone a wonderful pet.

What is my point? We are in the midst of the political silly season. A lot of the things we see and hear are not attractive, useful, or true. We need to remember that in the midst of making an informed decision about who we want to run our country, we have other basic priorities. Remember to love your friends and family during this time, even if you disagree with their politics!

Enhanced by Zemanta

One Of Many Reasons I Support Paul Ryan For Vice President

There are many reasons I support Paul Ryan as Mitt Romney‘s choice for Vice-President. This YouTube video is one of them:

Paul Ryan is like the nerd who sat behind you in Physics class in high school, understood everything the teacher said, and could explain it in less than 25 words. He is a humble, but strong, man who understands how numbers work and how the Washington numbers game is played. I seriously doubt anyone in Congress would even try to double talk him on any budget issue.

This is a great choice that will inflame the liberals in the Democrat party. I can’t wait for the debate between Paul Ryan and Joe Biden!

Enhanced by Zemanta

The Only Way To End This Type Of Campaign Ad Is To Vote For The Person Being Attacked

The Blaze reported yesterday on a video campaign ad put up by the American Sunrise PAC.

The article reports:

The American Sunrise PAC is responsible for the video.  The group was incidentally founded by the father of Congressman West’s general election opponent, Democrat Patrick Murphy, who has funneled $250,000 into the PAC. 

UPDATE: The group responsible for the West advertisement has disabled all comments and ratings on their video page.  The immense distaste for the ad may have pressured this move.  As Blaze reporter Jason Howerton noted: The video on YouTube currently has more than 12,000 views, with 252 “dislikes” and just 16 “likes.”  The move is ironic since the group responsible for the ad claims to work for “thoughtful”, “more open”, “brighter future” in politics.

What is the problem with the ad? It shows a caricature of Allen West wearing boxing gloves punching an old woman, a young lady and seemingly a family with children. He is then shown taking money from the family and laughing like a gremlin.

The only way to stop this sort of foolishness is to render it ineffective. If you live in Florida, please vote for Allen West.

 

Enhanced by Zemanta

At Least They Admitted They Lied

Yesterday I posted a story (rightwinggranny.com) about a recent political ad by a Political Action Committee (PAC) supporting President Obama that accused Mitt Romney of being responsible for the death of Joe Soptic’s wife. When confronted with the actual time line of the events, which totally discredited the ad, the Obama Administration denied knowledge of the specifics. Well, not so fast.

Politico reported today that the Obama Administration has stopped denying that they were familiar with Joe Soptic’s story.

The article reports:

Obama campaign spokeswoman Jen Psaki acknowledged Thursday that the campaign was no longer pleading ignorance about the story of a man who has appeared in both a super PAC ad and a campaign ad.

“No one is denying he was in one of our campaign ads. He was on a conference call telling his story,” Psaki told reporters on Air Force One.

Admittedly, the campaign is not supposed to coordinate with the PAC’s, so the ad cannot be traced directly to the President, but it would have been nice if he had denounced the ad when it was released.

I stand by my original statement that I am appalled by a husband that would choose to use the death of his wife for political purposes. This ad was totally beyond the pale. Unfortunately, I suspect we will see more of this behavior from the Obama Campaign and their supporters. I have heard very few Democrats denounce the ad. That is the action that is required.

Enhanced by Zemanta

A New Low In Political Ads

The group Priorities USA has produced a pro-Obama ad recently that essentially blames Governor Romney for the death of Joe Soptic’s wife. It seems that Mrs. Soptic died seven years after Governor Romney left Bain Capital. A company that Bain Capital had invested in during the time that Governor Romney led the company had gone out of business, and Mr. Soptic lost his health insurance. Thus Mr. Soptic blames that fact (and Mitt Romney) for his wife’s eventual death from cancer.

Breitbart posted an article yesterday explaining more of the timeline.

Breitbart reports:

The emotional thrust of the new ad is Soptic blaming Romney and Bain Capital for his wife’s death. He says she became ill “a short time” after he lost his job and his health care. But the timeline being presented in this ad is extremely misleading. According to a notice in the Kansas City Star uncovered by Politico, Soptic’s wife died in June 2006. That’s five years after the GST Steel plant was closed in 2001 and more than seven years after Romney left management of Bain to work on the 2002 Olympics in February 1999.

Politico asked Priorities USA to explain what Mitt Romney had to do with the death of a woman years after he’d left the company. Priorities strategist Bill Burton responded “We’re illustrating how long it took for communities and individuals to recover from the closing of these businesses.” But length of impact is clearly not what the ad tries to depict. It says the illness happened “a short time after” and then emphasizes the wife’s death just 22 days after being admitted to the hospital. In other words, the ad is intentionally misleading, suggesting to viewers that this happened shortly after the plant was closed, not years later.

The article further points out that Mrs. Soptic was still employed after her husband lost his job and still had health insurance until about 2002 or 2003.

I have a few comments on this. Why in the world would a husband exploit the death of his wife for political purposes when the facts don’t add up? What was the husband thinking? The ad is so outrageous to begin with, are the American voters supposed to take it seriously? Why lie about something that can be so easily checked? During my working career I worked for two different companies that were closed down, can I blame them for the fact that I was not able to save enough money so that I didn’t have to take out loans for my children’s college education?

I am truly sorry that Mr. Soptic lost his wife to cancer. That has to be a devastating experience. I also understand that ‘blame’ may be part of the grief process. However, this is ridiculous.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Coming Soon To A Hospital Or Doctor Near You

On Sunday The Wall Street Journal posted an article detailing what has happened in Massachusetts since the legislature reformed health care in 2006. It isn’t a pretty picture.

I don’t know if Obamacare was based on what was done in Massachusetts or not, but I do know that what was done in Massachusetts would have been considerably worse if Mitt Romney had not been Governor. Although he was not successful is stopping all of the policies that were put in place, he did stop some of the more drastic ideas. Governor Patrick has worked with the legislature to make things worse.

The article reports:

The claim then, as with the Affordable Care Act, was that health care would be less expensive if everyone had insurance. Soon Massachusetts Democrats leaked that their political strategy all along was to expand coverage only, because had RomneyCare seriously squeezed providers it never would have overcome industry opposition. “Bending the curve” on costs could be saved for another day, once a vast new government liability was locked in.

RomneyCare has increased state health spending in real terms by 59%.

The article also reports:

…79% of the newly insured are on public programs. Health costs—Medicaid, RomneyCare’s subsidies, public-employee compensation—will consume some 54% of the state budget in 2012, up from about 24% in 2001.

Spending on heath care in Massachusetts has increased dramatically since RomneyCare. Heath care costs are 27% higher than the national average–15% higher when adjusted for the states wage scale and academic medical centers and specialists.

Governor Patrick’s latest reforms are aimed at keeping costs down. The article reports:

But Massachusetts takes 360-degree surveillance and converts it into a panopticon prison. An 11-member board known as the Health Policy Commission will use the data to set and enforce rules to ensure that total Massachusetts health spending, public and private, grows no more than projected gross state product through 2017, and 0.5 percentage points lower thereafter. (And Paul Ryan‘s Medicare projections are unrealistic?)

This is the Massachusetts ‘death panel.’

Electing Mitt Romney as President won’t solve the health care problems in Massachusetts (currently being made worse by Governor Patrick), but it will end ObamaCare.

 

 

Enhanced by Zemanta

The New Definition of Independent and Non-Partisan

Today’s Weekly Standard posted an article about President Obama’s recent claim that an independent, non-partisan organization ran all the numbers on Governor Romney’s plan and concluded that any revenue-neutral individual income tax change that incorporates the features Governor Romney has proposed would provide large tax cuts to high-income households, and increase the tax burdens on middle- and/or lower-income taxpayers.

Well, everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but as Senator Moynihan used to say, ““Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.” Let’s take a look at this non-partisan, independent study. It was done by Samuel Brown, William Gale, and Adam Looney.

The article reports:

As Looney’s biography page at the Brookings Institution states, “Looney was the senior economist for public finance and tax policy with the President’s Council of Economic Advisers and has been an economist at the Federal Reserve Board.”

It gets even better. This is a copy of some of the White House visitor logs included in the article at the Weekly Standard showing William Gale visiting the White House twelve times:

If you believe that the study the President cited was an independent, non-partisan study, there’s a bridge I would like to sell you in Brooklyn.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Why Does Anyone Still Listen To This Man ?

Yesterday’s Washington Examiner posted an article about a recent statement by Senator Harry Reid.

Senator Reid stated:

“His poor father must be so embarrassed about his son,” Reid said, in reference to George Romney’s standard-setting decision to turn over 12 years of tax returns when he ran for president in the late 1960s. Saying he had “no problem with somebody being really, really wealthy,” Reid sat up in his chair a bit before stirring the pot further. A month or so ago, he said, a person who had invested with Bain Capital called his office.

“Harry, he didn’t pay any taxes for 10 years,” Reid recounted the person as saying.

“He didn’t pay taxes for 10 years! Now, do I know that that’s true? Well, I’m not certain,” said Reid. “But obviously he can’t release those tax returns. How would it look?

“You guys have said his wealth is $250 million,” Reid went on. “Not a chance in the world. It’s a lot more than that. I mean, you do pretty well if you don’t pay taxes for 10 years when you’re making millions and millions of dollars.”

There are a number of obvious problems with this statement. First of all, the article asks, “How would an investor in Bain Capital have access to Governor Romney’s tax returns?” Secondly, do you honestly believe that a public figure (as Governor Romney was after the Olympics) who earned the kind of money that Governor Romney earned would not have had his tax returns examined very carefully by the IRS.

The article also reminds us:

And in what Romney has released of his tax returns, he paid $6.2 million in taxes over two years.

This is the lowest form of sleaze so far in the campaign.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Look! A Shiny Object!

I was listening to the news this morning and heard the criticism of Governor Romney’s speech in Israel. I wondered what he had said that had caused the problem. The press reported that the Palestinians were upset because the Governor commented that the culture of Israel provides a fertile ground for economic prosperity. That statement really doesn’t seem all that offensive. I knew that the Governor had stated that Jerusalem was the capital of Israel, and wondered if that were the real source of the problem. Anyway, I went to Governor Romney’s campaign website to read the speech. The attacks on the speech are another example of the mainstream press’s “Look–a shiny object over here! Don’t look there!” campaign for President Obama.

Governor Romney’s speech outlined some of the political and cultural ideas that have allowed both America and Israel to prosper. Those ideas included democracy, the rule of law, God-given rights, and free enterprise. I can understand how the Palestinians would be upset at these concepts–generally speaking, these are foreign ideas to all of the Arab countries in the region.

One of the things that under-girds national prosperity is the rule of law as it applies to property rights. A man is less likely to improve his property if he does not own it. Also, property rights give the average citizen a means to acquire an asset that will increase in value (generally real estate increases in value) and gain some measure of wealth that he can pass on to his family.

Another thing not mentioned in the Governor’s speech that plays a very important role in a nation’s prosperity is the use of all human resources. When a country excludes women from participating in the work force and excludes the voices of women from government, it decreases by half the flow of ideas and innovation into the economy and into the government. I am not saying that every woman should work or be involved in government, but I am saying that every woman who has something to contribute should be allowed to contribute it.

The corrupt governments of the nations that surround Israel do not encourage prosperity for the average man. The well-connected steal the wealth of the country and the average citizen lives in poverty. The culture of respecting your fellow man and helping him become prosperous is not part of that society. That may be the biggest reason that the culture of Israel creates prosperity and the culture of the Arab nations surrounding Israel does not.

Enhanced by Zemanta

The Old Media Shows Why We Need The New Media

John Hinderaker at Power Line posted an article yesterday about the press coverage of Governor Romney’s trip to Europe. When he was interviewed by the British press, the Governor stated (in true CEO fashion) that he was concerned about some of the logistics issues surrounding the Olympics. He was soundly criticized by the British press for even implying that things might not be perfectly planned out. Although that statement has turned out to be accurate, there have been no apologies from the press or comments from the press stating that what he said turned out to be true.

The Governor then traveled to Israel where he was met with cheers (and raised $1 million from contributors). The press reported how upset the Palestinians were about his comments that the Israeli culture provides a fertile ground for economic prosperity.

The article at Power Line quotes an Associated Press (AP) report on Governor Romney’s trip:

It was all intended to demonstrate he was ready to handle foreign affairs smoothly and lead during dangerous times.

Instead, as he made his final stop of a three-nation tour in Poland late Monday, Republicans and Democrats alike were shaking their heads in the U.S. Though Republicans said they saw no lasting harm, Democrats raised questions about Romney’s ability to handle delicate topics with sensitivity on foreign soil, even under the friendliest conditions.

Any resemblance between what actually happened and what AP reported is purely coincidental. It really is a shame that the American press has forgotten that it is supposed to supply voters with accurate information–particularly during an election season.

 

Enhanced by Zemanta

More Chicago Thuggery

On Sunday I posted an article about the Obama Administration’s attack on Frank VanderSloot, a major donor to Governor Romney’s presidential campaign (rightwinggranny.com). Now the Obama campaign has turned its focus to Jack Gilchrist of Gilchrist Metal Fabricating of Hudson, New Hampshire.

Yesterday’s Union Leader reported:

The New Hampshire businessman (Jack Gilchrist) who appears in a Mitt Romney television ad accusing President Barack Obama of “demonizing” small business owners has gone to his local police after receiving two “harassing” telephone calls and, he says, hundreds of nasty emails.

The Obama campaign is getting out of hand.

The article reports the details:

But two profanity-laced telephone calls prompted Gilchrist to call the Hudson police.

One call came directly to his voice mail, while another went to the voice mail at the home of what Gilchrist called “a professional associate.”

Gilchrist emailed what he said were the voice mails to UnionLeader.com on Thursday.

One called him a “vile piece of (expletive),” among other things, and demanded he call Obama to apologize.

The caller was identified by Gilchrist through his caller ID. The man called from area code 630, which is the Chicago area. He has posted anti-Republican and anti-conservative messages on Twitter in the past, including a 2009 posts that said, “GOP needs to be eliminated,” and, “I am prepared to kill people. Let the tea bagers fire the first shot and I will pile up the bodies of the traitors.”

The other caller, to Gilchrist’s associate, names Gilchrist and calls him “a (expletive) liar,” a “(expletive) Republican piece of (expletive),” and told him to “burn in hell.”

Gilchrist said that between the emails and the calls, “I have to believe that this is an orchestrated effort. There are quite a few coincidences.”

This sort of activity has no place in a presidential campaign.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Let The Sunshine In (But Only In Some Places)

National Review posted an article today about the Obama Administration’s support of the DISCLOSE Act. The DISCLOSE Act seeks unprecedented disclosures from private individuals, organizations, and corporations as the price of participating in public debate.

The article reports:

But the administration and its congressional allies hardly need a statute to make public participation in civic life difficult for private citizens. The Obama Campaign and the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee have filed complaints against a major conservative social-welfare organization, Crossroads GPS, arguing it should be required to disclose it donors. Even worse, the IRS has responded to dozens of tax-exemption applications by tea-party groups with astonishingly intrusive document demands, seeking not only donor lists but also lists of volunteers.

Some recent problems with disclosing the names of everyone who chooses to take part in the public discourse:

It’s a sad reality of our decayed political discourse that too many dissenting citizens face similar dangers even today. Since 2008, we’ve seen intimidation of religious organizations, death threats, and extreme economic reprisals after disclosures of financial support for allegedly offensive causes. In recent months, formerly anonymous bloggers have been targeted for “SWATings” (where someone calls the police to fraudulently report a violent crime at a person’s home, resulting in a potentially dangerous police intervention). And frivolous lawsuits against controversial speakers have become so common that more than 20 states have adopted protective legislation.

No doubt the Obama administration would condemn the intimidation tactics its reckless “transparency” efforts enable. Yet the government still bears responsibility for the harm that results. The Supreme Court recognized this simple concept: “It is only after the initial exertion of state power . . . that private action takes hold.” In other words, without the government-mandated disclosure, bad actors would be on a tighter rein and have fewer targets.

Please note. My name is nowhere on this blog. The domain name is registered to someone other than myself. That was the agreement I made with my husband and children when I started the blog–they were afraid of repercussions if I said anything that upset anyone. They did not want to see some crazed political zealot attack a little old lady. I tend to share that opinion and thus went along with their request.

Generally transparency is a good idea, but when it endangers people who speak out, it needs to be stopped. See rightwinggranny.com for the story of  Frank VanderSloot, a major contributor to Mitt Romney‘s campaign. His is an example of government intimidation of a donor in a political campaign.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Ignoring The Law For The Sake Of Politics

Hot Air reported yesterday that Congressional Democrats are in the process of putting together a law requiring all presidential candidates be required to release ten years of tax returns.

The article reports:

In the House, Rep. Sander Levin (D-Mich.) is proposing legislation that would require presidential candidates to release 10 years worth of tax returns and disclose any overseas investments.

And in the Senate, Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) and Sen. Carl Levin (D-Mich) are proposing beefing up financial disclosure forms for all candidates for federal office to require disclosure of overseas investments, including Swiss bank accounts.

The House bill would also require new disclosure of off-shore investments but specifically targeted the tax return issue. Rep. Sander Levin said Romney should “set the example” for future candidates and release his returns. But then he said the law must be changed so release of tax information is not at the discretion of candidates.

“I don’t think there’s any question now in terms of the responsibility of the candidate,” he said. “I think the law ought to now reflect that responsibility.”

This is garbage. According to Askville by Amazon:

Tax Returns and Backup Documentation: Whether personal or business, the general rule is seven years. This may seem like a long time to hold onto these papers, but think of it as an annual cleaning out as new returns are filed. One in … one out and the old adage of “better safe than sorry” will apply. The IRS has 3 years to audit you from the date you file your taxes; however, there are exceptions — these include:

False Return – Tax may be assessed at any time, without limitation.
Willful attempt to avoid tax – Tax may be assessed at any time, without limitation.
No return – Tax may be assessed at any time, without limitation.
Extension by Agreement – Assessment period defined by agreement between IRS and taxpayer.
Tax resulting from changes in certain income or estate tax credits – No timeframe defined.
Tax resulting form distributions or terminations from a life insurance company – 3 years
Termination of private foundation status – Tax may be assessed at any time, without limitation.
Substantial omission of items (generally defined as over/under reporting of income by 25% – 6 years.
These Limitations of Assessment and Collection are defined in federal law. Please see 26 USC 6501.

Please note–unless there is suspicion of a crime or a serious problem, the IRS only requires people to even keep three years of tax returns. The maximum requirement of the IRS is 6 years. This law is aimed at one person and one person only. That fact alone is a threat to the American legal and political systems. It is law that targets Mitt Romney during a political campaign. This is disgusting.

Remember, these are the same people who haven’t been able to find the time to pass a federal budget during the past three years. I truly think they have their priorities a little backwards.

 

 

 

 

When Facing An Enemy Should You Hand Them Your Gun ?

There have been a lot of accusations directed at Mitt Romney lately complaining that he has not released nine hundred and seventy-two years of tax records. Mitt Romney was governor of Massachusetts. Does anyone actually believe that if he had done something illegal as far as taxes are concerned it would have gone unnoticed? I absolutely agree that Governor Romney should release anything asked for as soon as President Obama releases his college transcripts. Governor Romney has released the required forms, anything else is not necessary. President Obama has hidden all records of his past, why is no one challenging him?

Yesterday PJMedia posted an article stating the obvious:

Mark Levin is defending Mitt Romney’s refusal to release his tax returns, and he’s right for a couple of reasons.  First, if Obama had been entirely transparent (read: college transcripts and Fast and Furious, to name two), then Romney should play by the same rules.  But Obama’s murky academic past remains murky, and his administration’s lack of transparency has been astounding.

Second, if Romney releases his tax records, they will be descended upon by a pack of hyenas disguised as CPAs and a mischief of rats disguised as political consultants.  The benign will be presented as malignant by liars.  The cost of enabling liars is higher than the cost of the status quo.

This is simply another attempt by the Obama campaign to turn the talk away from the current state of the economy.

Signs Of A Backbone ???

I live in Massachusetts. I like Mitt Romney. He was not my choice in the Republican primary, but I will gladly vote for him. One of my gripes with Mitt Romney is that he has a tendency to be “too nice.” Sometimes nice is not the answer–“in your face” is appropriate at times.

CNS News reported some positive signs today, quoting a Mitt Romney appearance today on Fox New’s Fox & Friends:

“The Obama people keep on wanting more and more and more — more things to pick through, more things for their opposition research to try to make a mountain out of –and to distort — and to be dishonest about,” Romney replied.

“We’re going to put out two years of tax returns. We’ve put out one already. As soon as the most recent year is complete, we’ll put that out. It’s hundreds of pages of documents,” Romney said, noting that the law does not require candidates to release their tax returns.

He also recalled that Sen. John McCain released only two years of tax returns when he ran against Obama four years ago — and “somehow this wasn’t an issue.”

Notice–“John McCain released only two years of tax returns when he ran against Obama four years ago–and “somehow this wasn’t an issue.”” The obvious questions is, “Why is it an issue now?”

The article concludes:

Following Romney on “Fox and Friends,” Donald Trump — a Romney supporter — says Romney ought to be asking Obama to release his college records, something Obama has refused to do.

Sometimes Donald Trump hits the nail on the head!

Does Chicago Thuggery Win National Elections ?

Does Chicago thuggery win elections? I am afraid we are about to find out. Paul Mirengoff posted a story at Power Line yesterday about the recent attacks on Mitt Romney regarding his time Bain Capital and when he left the firm.

Politico reported yesterday:

Deputy campaign manager Stephanie Cutter laid out the issue as the Obama team sees it: “Either Mitt Romney, through his own words and his own signature, was misrepresenting his position at Bain to the SEC, which is a felony.”

The article at Power Line article explains what actually happened at Bain Capital:

The Romney campaign responds that their man gave up control over all investment decisions in 1999 because he would be taking charge of the Winter Olympics. His name remained on SEC filings because he was technically still the owner.

The article at Power Line further reports:

But, the SEC filings apparently don’t show involvement by Romney in Bain-related decisions after the 1999 date.

Sometimes when I read Democrat talking points, I wonder how some people sleep at night.

The article at Power Line concludes:

FactCheck goes on to demolish the other fragments of “evidence” cited by the Obama campaign. It concludes that Team Obama is “all wet” on this matter. That’s putting it kindly.

Please follow the link to the Power Line article to read the Fact Check information. The charges against Mitt Romney by Ms. Cutter are a new low in Presidential campaigning.

Enhanced by Zemanta

What Really Happened In Massachusetts

On July 6, Mona Charen posted an article at Townhall.com explaining what happened in Massachusetts regarding healthcare and how Obamacare is different from Romneycare.

The article points out that before Mitt Romney became governor, Massachusetts had a number of laws that resulted in a very expensive healthcare system. Governor Romney was attempting to rein in those costs. Unfortunately, he was dealing with an 85 percent Democratic legislature that totally twisted his ideas and passed something very different than what he had envisioned.

The article points out:

Romney’s idea was to permit Massachusetts insurers to sell catastrophic plans. As Avik Roy explained in Forbes, “Shorn of the costly mandates and restrictions originating in earlier state laws, these plans, called ‘Commonwealth Care Basic,’ could cost much less. Romney also proposed merging the non-group and small-group markets, so as to give individuals access to the more cost-effective plans available to small businesses.” Romney’s plan would also have involved a degree of cost sharing so that those receiving subsidies would have an incentive to minimize their consumption.

This is very different from the plan that was eventually passed. The law was later changed under Governor Deval Patrick, requiring insurance companies to offer three tiers of coverage — all of them far beyond catastrophic care.

The article further reminds us:

Romney’s proposed reforms included fraud prevention measures for Medicaid, requiring the income of both parents to be considered in children’s Medicaid eligibility, medical malpractice tort reform, and giving individuals the same treatment as small businesses in the purchase of health plans. He envisioned a system of increased competition and choice.

Had the bill that Governor Romney wanted passed, healthcare in Massachusetts would be a good example for the nation. The plan the legislature passed and Governor Patrick modified is a nightmare for the sate and the nation.

 

Enhanced by Zemanta

Beware Of Misleading Campaign Tweets

The economy is struggling right now, and many people are looking for a place to put their anger and frustration at being unemployed or underemployed. The Obama presidential campaign is fully prepared to direct this anger anyplace other than the man who has been in charge of the country’s economy for the past three and a half years. It has gotten so bad that even the Washington Post (not a bastion of conservatism) is fact-checking what the Obama campaign says and awarding the appropriate number of Pinocchios.

Mitt Romney is rich. He has earned his money. (The advantage of having a rich president is that he and his family spend less taxpayer money on vacations.) The Obama campaign put out the following tweet:

“FACT: In 2010 and 2011, Romney paid less than 15% in taxes on $42.5 million in income—much less than what many middle-class families pay.” (awarded Three Pinocchios by the Washington Post)

This was specifically designed to stir up envy and class warfare among voters. The problem with the tweet is that it is not true. The Washington Post awarded it three Pinocchios.

The Washington Post reports the actual facts:

Romney released his 2010 tax return and an estimate of his 2011 return earlier this year. He earned a little more than $20 million each year, a good chunk of it in capital gains and dividends, which are taxed at a preferential rate as low as 15 percent.

But that’s not the only reason why Romney’s tax rate is at that level. He also donates about 14 percent of his income to charity, which gives him a pretty big tax deduction. (As we have noted, President Obama in 2010 also gave about 14 percent of his income to charity.)

Indeed, Romney gives about as much to charity — $3 million — as he pays in taxes. Those itemized deductions are counted against income that would ordinarily be taxed at a 35-percent rate. We figure that without those donations to charity, his effective tax rate would be at least 19 percent.

Just in case you are buying into the lie that the rich don’t pay their fair share of taxes, the Washington Post also posted the following information:

Effective Tax Rates (taxes paid on tax return)

Bottom 20 percent (0-$17,000):         -5.8 percent

Second 20 Percent ($17,000-$33,500):  1.3 percent

Middle 20 percent ($33,500-59,500):  9.2 percent

Fourth 20 Percent ($59,000-$103,500): 12.9 percent

Top 20 Percent ($103,500+):  20.6 percent

 

Effective Tax Rates (also including payroll tax paid by employer)

Bottom 20 percent (0-$17,000):         1 percent

Second 20 Percent ($17,000-$33,500): 7.8 percent

Middle 20 percent ($33,500-59,500): 15.5 percent

Fourth 20 Percent ($59,000-$103,500): 18.7 percent

Top 20 Percent ($103,500+):  24.3 percent

We live in a country where almost 50% of the people do not pay taxes. Until this changes and all voters pay taxes, our tax system will probably not get fixed. Right now, the tax code is a tribute to special interests who have successfully lobbied Congress for tax breaks. The answer to the tax code is simplicity and transparency. It’s time to elect people who will make the necessary changes–not people who lie about what the tax code actually is.

 

Enhanced by Zemanta

Just A Short Rant (Well, Not So Short)

I am a registered Republican. I am not always in agreement with the Republican party (particularly here in Massachusetts), but it’s the best I can do at this particular moment. I will be voting for Mitt Romney unless the October surprise from the Obama campaign is proof that Mitt Romney is an alien ax murderer sent from the planet Zenon to invade the earth. Then I might possible rethink my vote–but I doubt it. Anyway, I listen to talk radio and I listen to the people around me, and I hear a lot of comments about Governor Romney and the fact that he was Governor of Massachusetts when the Massachusetts healthcare law was passed. I am not a fan of Massachusetts healthcare. I will tell you why.

I have had cataract surgery twice. Both times I had good medical insurance through my husband’s workplace. The first surgery cost me $250 out of pocket, and the second surgery cost me $2450 out of pocket. What was the difference? In both cases the lens of my eye was replaced with a prescription lens–I have worn thick glasses since I was a small child. Before Massachusetts healthcare was passed, the prescription lens was included. After Massachusetts healthcare was passed, the prescription lens was optional–I could have had them put in a clear lens and it would have cost me $250, but if I wanted the best possible outcome–being able to see without glasses, it was extra. Think about this–the medical care I needed was available–the lens with the cataract was replaced, but if I wanted the best outcome, it was not covered by insurance. That is what government insurance does–it saves money by compromising on the quality of care.

Now, about Mitt Romney and Massachusetts healthcare. The people of Massachusetts (after all, this is Massachusetts) wanted universal health coverage. Universal coverage was going to pass the legislation. There was no way Mitt Romney could have stopped it. He did attempt to curb some of its provisions, but there was no way it was going to be stopped. I don’t blame Mitt Romney for Massachusetts healthcare–I blame the voters of Massachusetts who are content with a one-party state that allows corruption at a level where it is routine for the Speaker of the House to serve jail time for his actions as speaker. This has happened often enough so that it is almost routine. Don’t blame Romney–blame to voters!

Enhanced by Zemanta

Obamanomics Has Not Worked

Yesterday John Hinderaker at Power Line posted an article about the current state of the manufacturing segment of the American economy–it’s shrinking again. It is understood that President Obama inherited a miserable economy when he took office, but he has been in office for 3 1/2 years–it is now his economy. The annual growth of the economy this year is expected to be about 1.5%. In contrast, the annual growth of the economy during the fourth year of the Reagan Administration was 7.3%. Reagan also inherited a miserable economy, but his policies turned it around. I believe that if Mitt Romney is elected, his policies will turn the economy around.

This is how the manufacturing sector has looked for the past 10 years:

Enhanced by Zemanta