Fuck its silent in here.......

[J. Walter Weatherman]

Senator Lindsay Graham is right!  (Apologies for it being from HuffPo)  Very sorry.

Key quotes:

Mitt Romney shouldn't be criticized for using off-shore tax havens because "it's really American to avoid paying taxes, legally," Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) said Tuesday.

"As long as it was legal, I'm OK with it," Graham said. "I don't blame anybody for using the tax code to their advantage. I blame us for having it so complicated and confused. Pick a rate and make people pay it."

"I want to end the game," Graham said. "I want to make it so simple that you know what you owe, and if you don't pay, we're going to whack the heck out of you. It's a game, and people play the game to their advantage. Sometimes they lose when they play the game. I've got no problem with people playing the game, as long as they don't cheat."

Bravo.

Lindsey Graham finally said what needed to be said, even if no one wanted to hear it and even if there will be hell to pay for telling it like it is. You know, about how those clowns in Congress did it again. What a bunch of clowns!

Bravo, Lindsey. Bravo.

[Quality Start Machine]

What Romney is doing is completely legal, but this is hardly the political climate to try winning by saying, "What's a millionaire to do?"

[morpheus]

What Romney is doing is completely legal, but this is hardly the political climate to try winning by saying, "What's a millionaire to do?"

I anxiously await the handwringing over Debbie Wasserman Schultz's foreign investments.  This is all so pointless, and takes up space and time that honest debate over issues and policies would much better fill.

[Chuck to Chuck]

This is all so pointless, and takes up space and time that honest debate over issues and policies would much better fill.

Right.  Like either guy is interested in having an honest debate over issues and policies. Obama is playing the tax the 2% card while Romney is won't even get specific on what he ate for breakfast.

Helluva way we've devolved into choosing who gets to control $2 trillion of money every year.

[morpheus]

This is all so pointless, and takes up space and time that honest debate over issues and policies would much better fill.

Right.  Like either guy is interested in having an honest debate over issues and policies. Obama is playing the tax the 2% card while Romney is won't even get specific on what he ate for breakfast.

Helluva way we've devolved into choosing who gets to control $2 trillion of money every year.

Something something officials who want to serve.

[Quality Start Machine]

What Romney is doing is completely legal, but this is hardly the political climate to try winning by saying, "What's a millionaire to do?"

I anxiously await the handwringing over Debbie Wasserman Schultz's foreign investments.  This is all so pointless, and takes up space and time that honest debate over issues and policies would much better fill.

[Oleg]

What Romney is doing is completely legal, but this is hardly the political climate to try winning by saying, "What's a millionaire to do?"

I anxiously await the handwringing over Debbie Wasserman Schultz's foreign investments.  This is all so pointless, and takes up space and time that honest debate over issues and policies would much better fill.

1. When did Schultz enter the race for president?
2. Since when are off-shore bank accounts considered 'investments'?
3. Just how to you make such a large strawman on a fringe message board?  is there a youtube video for that?

[World's #1 Astros Fan]

What Romney is doing is completely legal, but this is hardly the political climate to try winning by saying, "What's a millionaire to do?"

I anxiously await the handwringing over Debbie Wasserman Schultz's foreign investments.  This is all so pointless, and takes up space and time that honest debate over issues and policies would much better fill.

1. When did Schultz enter the race for president?
2. Since when are off-shore bank accounts considered 'investments'?
3. Just how to you make such a large strawman on a fringe message board? is there a youtube video Can you construct Photoshop for that?

Let's accentuate people's positives'd.

[morpheus]

What Romney is doing is completely legal, but this is hardly the political climate to try winning by saying, "What's a millionaire to do?"

I anxiously await the handwringing over Debbie Wasserman Schultz's foreign investments.  This is all so pointless, and takes up space and time that honest debate over issues and policies would much better fill.

1. When did Schultz enter the race for president?
2. Since when are off-shore bank accounts considered 'investments'?
3. Just how to you make such a large strawman on a fringe message board?  is there a youtube video for that?

OK... so it's only bad to have money invested offshore if you're a Presidential candidate, or something?  Why is that acceptable for Presidential non-candidates but somehow the worst thing since poll taxes if you're a Presidential candidate?  I think my strawman may have some competition with your #1 "point" there, although I think "red herring" is the more appropriate fallacy.  Hey, look, Nancy Pelosi is also an active international investor!  Is that a strawman, too?

Why is it a big deal for anyone to have an offshore bank account?  And, since you don't consider a bank account an "investment" for some reason (I always have), I should also ask why you think anyone would bother putting their money in a bank at all, whether it's onshore or offshore? 

As for the idea that I somehow put up a strawman here... I guess I don't really understand the arguments of the financially uneducated, so perhaps it is possible that I misrepresented them (although I believe "strawman" is deliberate misrepresentation, of which I did no such thing).

So much time has been wasted on something that means nothing at all as far as who would make the better President.  Seriously, if this is the best that the Dems have, wow.  It's disappointing, really.

[Oleg]

What Romney is doing is completely legal, but this is hardly the political climate to try winning by saying, "What's a millionaire to do?"

I anxiously await the handwringing over Debbie Wasserman Schultz's foreign investments.  This is all so pointless, and takes up space and time that honest debate over issues and policies would much better fill.

1. When did Schultz enter the race for president?
2. Since when are off-shore bank accounts considered 'investments'?
3. Just how to you make such a large strawman on a fringe message board?  is there a youtube video for that?

OK... so it's only bad to have money invested offshore if you're a Presidential candidate, or something?  Why is that acceptable for Presidential non-candidates but somehow the worst thing since poll taxes if you're a Presidential candidate?  I think my strawman may have some competition with your #1 "point" there, although I think "red herring" is the more appropriate fallacy.  Hey, look, Nancy Pelosi is also an active international investor!  Is that a strawman, too?

Why is it a big deal for anyone to have an offshore bank account?  And, since you don't consider a bank account an "investment" for some reason (I always have), I should also ask why you think anyone would bother putting their money in a bank at all, whether it's onshore or offshore? 

As for the idea that I somehow put up a strawman here... I guess I don't really understand the arguments of the financially uneducated, so perhaps it is possible that I misrepresented them (although I believe "strawman" is deliberate misrepresentation, of which I did no such thing).

So much time has been wasted on something that means nothing at all as far as who would make the better President.  Seriously, if this is the best that the Dems have, wow.  It's disappointing, really.

Sure.

[CT III]

So much time has been wasted on something that means nothing at all as far as who would make the better President.  Seriously, if this is the best that the Dems have, wow.  It's disappointing, really.

He's right.  Everyone should concentrate on figuring out where these guys were actually born.

[morpheus]

So much time has been wasted on something that means nothing at all as far as who would make the better President.  Seriously, if this is the best that the Dems have, wow.  It's disappointing, really.

He's right.  Everyone should concentrate on figuring out where these guys were actually born.

I admit it, I LOLed.  That said, this seems like a good place to post this, in honor of the last birther I heard about:

[Internet Apex]

So much time has been wasted on something that means nothing at all as far as who would make the better President.  Seriously, if this is the best that the Dems have, wow.  It's disappointing, really.

He's right.  Everyone should concentrate on figuring out where these guys were actually born.

It's 11-on-11. Pick a tax rate and make people pay it.

[Gilgamesh]

What Romney is doing is completely legal, but this is hardly the political climate to try winning by saying, "What's a millionaire to do?"

I anxiously await the handwringing over Debbie Wasserman Schultz's foreign investments.  This is all so pointless, and takes up space and time that honest debate over issues and policies would much better fill.

1. When did Schultz enter the race for president?
2. Since when are off-shore bank accounts considered 'investments'?
3. Just how to you make such a large strawman on a fringe message board?  is there a youtube video for that?

OK... so it's only bad to have money invested offshore if you're a Presidential candidate, or something?  Why is that acceptable for Presidential non-candidates but somehow the worst thing since poll taxes if you're a Presidential candidate?  I think my strawman may have some competition with your #1 "point" there, although I think "red herring" is the more appropriate fallacy.  Hey, look, Nancy Pelosi is also an active international investor!  Is that a strawman, too?

Why is it a big deal for anyone to have an offshore bank account?  And, since you don't consider a bank account an "investment" for some reason (I always have), I should also ask why you think anyone would bother putting their money in a bank at all, whether it's onshore or offshore? 

As for the idea that I somehow put up a strawman here... I guess I don't really understand the arguments of the financially uneducated, so perhaps it is possible that I misrepresented them (although I believe "strawman" is deliberate misrepresentation, of which I did no such thing).

So much time has been wasted on something that means nothing at all as far as who would make the better President.  Seriously, if this is the best that the Dems have, wow.  It's disappointing, really.

Sure.

I think it matters when the Republican candidate's own father released 12 years of tax records when he ran for president.  I think it matters when the Republican candidate advocates increasing tax cuts (which we can't afford) that will primarily benefit people like him, i.e. wealthy people.  I think it matters that when the Republican candidate is running for the highest office in the land, he does everything within his legal power to take advantage of various loopholes in the tax code to reduce his personal tax burden.

I personally don't give a shit where Romney puts his money in all honesty, but I think that after 3.5 years of people in his party either overtly or furtively insinuating that his opponent wasn't born in the United States, or that his opponent is a socialist, Muslim, Kenyan, or that his opponent is actively hoping to make every person in the country dependent on food stamps (or is secretly destroying the country), I think this is a pretty mild charge to level at Mr. Romney.

[Eli]

I'm going to start prefacing sentences with, "I guess I don't really understand the arguments of the financially uneducated" just to see what it feels like to be a giant asshole.