Romney is funny

[spence]

Originally Posted by detbuch

Nor do we understand much about the fortunes of the vast majority of members of Congress, including Pelosi and Reid who shout for the disclosure of Romney's tax records for the last 10 years instead of only the two years that he is submitting. They submit financial disclosures that are required by Congress, but not tax records which are far fuller and more detailed. Their claim is that they are not running for President. Well, they have as much to do with tax policies, and maybe more, as the President. Why shouldn't We the People know what venture capital firms they invest in and in what tax schemes they take advantage of and in which offshore tax shelters?

I'm not sure Harry Reid has that significant of a fortune so to speak. Pelosi is certainly loaded by comparison, although still nothing close to Romney.

The congressional disclosure might not be as clear as a tax return, but it does give a pretty good picture of where interests may lie. By contrast Romney is pretty much tight lipped saying his hundreds of millions are all in blind trusts. Go away, nothing to see here...

It's interesting as well he says he's said in the past that disclosing his returns isn't fair as it would show his tithing which is intended to be private, but yet he has disclosed some. So why not the others?

This really has nothing to do with privacy and everything to do with politics. Romney has largely built his fortune using tax schemes that even if legal are a prime example of the elite playing by a different set of rules than everybody else. Taxes are a big issue this election and under the GOP plan Romney would likely end up paying even LESS in a disproportionately dramatic manner.

If voters are going to make a decision based largely on trust, I'd like to see pretty much everything on the table.

-spence