dagblog - Comments for "Romney&#039;s epitaph: &quot;put up or shut up&quot;" http://dagblog.com/reader-blogs/romneys-epitaph-put-or-shut-14415 Comments for "Romney's epitaph: "put up or shut up"" en Maybe if they had known, http://dagblog.com/comment/160688#comment-160688 <a id="comment-160688"></a> <p><em>In reply to <a href="http://dagblog.com/comment/160659#comment-160659">Whatever the reason, it&#039;s</a></em></p> <div class="field field-name-comment-body field-type-text-long field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p>Maybe if they had <em>known, </em>Orlando. But the McCain campaign got the same information the IRS got, up to and including Mitt's 2007 return. In 2009, Swiss bank UBS was forced to tell the IRS the names of Americans hiding at least $10 billion in secret accounts. At least 3,000 very wealthy people took advantage of an amnesty program that same year to pay the taxes they had evaded and avoid criminal charges.</p> <p>Was Romney one of them? We don't know. All we know is that he does like offshore tax havens and so far has refused to release any pre-2010 tax returns. Even if you get pardoned for murdering a hobo, you still murdered a hobo.</p> </div></div></div> Tue, 07 Aug 2012 16:57:55 +0000 acanuck comment 160688 at http://dagblog.com Whatever the reason, it's http://dagblog.com/comment/160659#comment-160659 <a id="comment-160659"></a> <p><em>In reply to <a href="http://dagblog.com/reader-blogs/romneys-epitaph-put-or-shut-14415">Romney&#039;s epitaph: &quot;put up or shut up&quot;</a></em></p> <div class="field field-name-comment-body field-type-text-long field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p>Whatever the reason, it's nothing illegal. Somebody from the McCain campaign would have surely spilled those beans in the primary to avoid a catastrophe in the general. </p> </div></div></div> Tue, 07 Aug 2012 07:29:38 +0000 Orlando comment 160659 at http://dagblog.com My theory on sourcing: Its http://dagblog.com/comment/160578#comment-160578 <a id="comment-160578"></a> <p><em>In reply to <a href="http://dagblog.com/comment/160535#comment-160535">Reid&#039;s source is so likely</a></em></p> <div class="field field-name-comment-body field-type-text-long field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">My theory on sourcing: Its an IRS agent. It's a veridical account. The agent calls Reid claiming to be Bain investor for cover. Because it's true, Romney is well and truely fucked.</div></div></div> Mon, 06 Aug 2012 19:02:25 +0000 jollyroger comment 160578 at http://dagblog.com In both languages, the word http://dagblog.com/comment/160564#comment-160564 <a id="comment-160564"></a> <p><em>In reply to <a href="http://dagblog.com/comment/160554#comment-160554">acanuck! That is a great</a></em></p> <div class="field field-name-comment-body field-type-text-long field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p>In both languages, the word carries the two connotations: "on top of" and "better than." Quebec-based fur traders Radisson and des Groseilliers reached the lake around 1660. As far as I know, they didn't circle it, so they could hardly have known it was the biggest. When they called it "le lac superieur," I don't think they were even presuming to <em>name </em>it -- they were just describing it: "the uppermost lake" or "the furthest lake." Somehow, that caught on as its official name.</p> </div></div></div> Mon, 06 Aug 2012 08:46:37 +0000 acanuck comment 160564 at http://dagblog.com acanuck! That is a great http://dagblog.com/comment/160554#comment-160554 <a id="comment-160554"></a> <p><em>In reply to <a href="http://dagblog.com/comment/160537#comment-160537">Not only does Lake Superior</a></em></p> <div class="field field-name-comment-body field-type-text-long field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p>acanuck! That is a great story actually, I had no clue that is what the French meant, you know Americans are pretty sure Lake Superior is American and that is what makes it superior...</p> <p>Fine.. we'll  keep Mitt, but hopefully as merely a citizen and not as the President.</p> </div></div></div> Mon, 06 Aug 2012 03:41:40 +0000 tmccarthy0 comment 160554 at http://dagblog.com Not only does Lake Superior http://dagblog.com/comment/160537#comment-160537 <a id="comment-160537"></a> <p><em>In reply to <a href="http://dagblog.com/comment/160490#comment-160490">OMG, OMG was he born in a</a></em></p> <div class="field field-name-comment-body field-type-text-long field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p>Not only does Lake Superior have a Canadian side, tmac, it's the "superior" side of Lake Superior. All my life, I'd assumed the name simply meant it's the greatest of the Great Lakes. Until I started writing this comment, when it suddenly hit me: the French explorers who first named it Lac Superieur wouldn't have meant "biggest"; they meant "uppermost" -- closest to the headwaters.</p> <p>Thank you for triggering that particular neuron; it's always a joy to think, "Damn, I understand something now that I only thought I understood this morning."</p> <p>But no, you still have to keep Mitt.</p> </div></div></div> Sun, 05 Aug 2012 19:39:18 +0000 acanuck comment 160537 at http://dagblog.com Mitt is turning this campaign http://dagblog.com/comment/160536#comment-160536 <a id="comment-160536"></a> <p><em>In reply to <a href="http://dagblog.com/comment/160535#comment-160535">Reid&#039;s source is so likely</a></em></p> <div class="field field-name-comment-body field-type-text-long field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p>Mitt is turning this campaign into a pathetic 'game' of hide and seek, whether it's his taxes; campaign donors; specific processes for his 'plans' to fix what ails us and the list goes on ad nauseam. </p> <p>It seems simplistic - Mitt does indeed need to 'put up or shut up' - I believe it's more than arrogance that's the reason for all the 'hiding'.  Hopefully, we'll keep seeking and prevail. </p> </div></div></div> Sun, 05 Aug 2012 19:35:24 +0000 Aunt Sam comment 160536 at http://dagblog.com Reid's source is so likely http://dagblog.com/comment/160535#comment-160535 <a id="comment-160535"></a> <p><em>In reply to <a href="http://dagblog.com/comment/160524#comment-160524">If Mittens is consumed with</a></em></p> <div class="field field-name-comment-body field-type-text-long field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p>Reid's source is so likely exactly what Reid said it was.  A Bain investor.  If you run an investment company your big goal is to attract capital.  Current clients are your best bet.  If the CEO hasn't paid income taxes in 10 years, and it's legal, you damned well tell your investors about it.  It's a great way to start a conversation ("Would you like to not pay income taxes, legally?") that ends the way you want it to ("Also, we're raising a new buyout fund...")</p> </div></div></div> Sun, 05 Aug 2012 19:06:13 +0000 Michael Maiello comment 160535 at http://dagblog.com The odds given in bets http://dagblog.com/comment/160533#comment-160533 <a id="comment-160533"></a> <p><em>In reply to <a href="http://dagblog.com/comment/160528#comment-160528">Bets, theories and</a></em></p> <div class="field field-name-comment-body field-type-text-long field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p>The odds given in bets reflect the confidence a person has as to the right answer to a question or the likely hood of a prediction being correct  before the correct answer can be known. I think gambling intelligently by considering odds is a good metaphor for the calculated wagers, er uh, [hopefully] informed decisions we make every day of our life and for the answers we decide to believe. </p> </div></div></div> Sun, 05 Aug 2012 18:55:54 +0000 A Guy Called LULU comment 160533 at http://dagblog.com That would have been a nifty http://dagblog.com/comment/160530#comment-160530 <a id="comment-160530"></a> <p><em>In reply to <a href="http://dagblog.com/comment/160526#comment-160526">If that is the case, and it</a></em></p> <div class="field field-name-comment-body field-type-text-long field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">That would have been a nifty bit of forethought if the amnesty evolved as you speculate. BTW, on the residency scam, there were similar indignant denials sans easy documentary proof before they retroactively amended the state tax returns to slip under the residency limbo bar. Mitt is.a serial generator of STUPID lies.</div></div></div> Sun, 05 Aug 2012 18:16:05 +0000 jollyroger comment 160530 at http://dagblog.com