Should Romney demand that Obama release his college records in exchange for tax returns?

posted at 12:01 pm on August 7, 2012 by Ed Morrissey

That’s the suggestion from former Libertarian Party VP candidate Wayne Allen Root, who graduated in the same disciplines as Barack Obama at the same time (1983) from the same college, Columbia University.  If Harry Reid wants to play the “there must be something scary in those records” game, why not challenge Obama by offering to release 10 years of tax returns if Obama will release 10 years of college records?

Obama and his infamous strategist David Axelrod understand how to play political hardball, the best it’s ever been played. Team Obama has decided to distract America’s voters by condemning Mitt Romney for not releasing enough years of his tax returns. It’s the perfect cover. Obama knows the best defense is a bold offense. Just keep attacking Mitt and blaming him for secrecy and evasion, while accusing him of having a scandal that doesn’t exist. Then ask followers like Senator Harry Reid to chase the lead. The U.S. Senate Majority Leader appears to now be making up stories out of thin air, about tax returns he knows nothing about. It’s a cynical, brilliant, and vicious strategy. Make Romney defend, so he can’t attack the real Obama scandal.

This is classic Axelrod. Obama has won several elections in his career by slandering his opponents and leaking sealed documents. Not only do these insinuations and leaks ruin the credibility and reputation of Obama’s opponents, they keep them on the defensive and off Obama’s trail of sealed documents. …

My answer for Romney? Call Obama’s bluff.

Romney should call a press conference and issue a challenge in front of the nation. He should agree to release more of his tax returns, only if Obama unseals his college records. Simple and straight-forward. Mitt should ask “What could possibly be so embarrassing in your college records from 29 years ago that you are afraid to let America’s voters see? If it’s THAT bad, maybe it’s something the voters ought to see.” Suddenly the tables are turned. Now Obama is on the defensive.

My bet is that Obama will never unseal his records because they contain information that could destroy his chances for re-election. Once this challenge is made public, my prediction is you’ll never hear about Mitt’s tax returns ever again.

I admit that this scenario would give some satisfaction after Reid’s attack-dog McCarthyism of the past week or so.  There is precedent for release of both tax returns and college records; in 2004, both candidates released at least part of their college records, which showed that George W. Bush had a slightly better undergrad GPA than John Kerry, and both earned good grades in pursuit of their post-graduate degrees.  Other than that, the topic was completely uninteresting, because it had little to do with the issues in the election, and also because they came out early — well before either campaign could build a sustained narrative about them.

Tax returns hold the same cachet and relevance.  They’re usually dry affairs, especially for people who can afford to have professional preparation for their tax returns.  As I wrote earlier, they don’t really serve any purpose but to allow critics to seize on legal income and tax structuring in order to paint their opponents as too rich to trust.  That’s exactly what Barack Obama and David Axelrod want to do with Romney, which is why he’s balking at releasing any more of his returns.  The risk for Romney is that the refusal makes him look secretive, which Team Obama has already claimed, when in fact it’s no one’s business what’s in his tax returns.  Romney, just like all other politicians at the federal level, is required to make disclosures about his wealth in order to disclose potential conflicts of interest, which is what is actually relevant to the pursuit of public office.

People have criticized Obama for not releasing his college records, especially in 2008, when he ran as a super-intelligent outsider whose lack of experience was an asset to bringing a fresh perspective to Washington and policy.  Poor grades would certainly have been relevant at that time, but probably not so much today.  (Root argues in his piece that he thinks Obama scored scholarships as a “foreign exchange” student based on his years spent in Indonesia, but Obama had been in the US all through his high-school years, so that doesn’t seem very plausible.)

The problem for Romney in this kind of strategy is that it will serve as a distraction from his central premise: that Obama’s record as President shows that his policies have failed, and that the US needs new leadership, especially on the economy.  Even if he did adopt this strategy, the Obama campaign has Harry Reid playing Tail Gunner Joe on this issue, keeping a safe distance from the mud-slinging.  Even if, as Root supposes, Axelrod has been running Reid as a front man, a Romney challenge on Obama’s college records won’t shut Reid up.  Instead, Romney will end up punching below his weight, way off message, while Team Obama stays ostensibly on the sidelines and benefits from the derailing of Romney’s messaging. And by making the offer at all, Romney legitimizes the demand for the release of his tax returns.

In the end, Obama’s betting that people care more about Romney’s tax returns than their own pocketbooks.  If they stick with that strategy, they’re going to be in for a rude surprise in November — and the more the economy slides toward recession, the more the reminders of Romney’s business success might backfire on Obama.

Update: A couple of commenters are angry with me for using the term “McCarthyism,” claiming that the communist infiltration that Joe McCarthy claimed turned out to be real.  But that’s not what the term means.  As I wrote two years ago in another context, Joe McCarthy may have been right in general, but he ended up doing a lot of damage:

Note: People objected yesterday to the use of the word “McCarthyism” in my post, but I use it for two reasons.  First, it’s a term that the Left throws out with abandon any time people dissent from their orthodoxy and have the temerity to question their motivations.  Second, it is a clear, concise description that immediately conveys the kind of guilty-until-proven-innocent abuse of power from government officials when it occurs.

Some people objected because later information proved Joe McCarthy correct in general about Communist infiltration in the government, but that doesn’t acquit McCarthy of his abuse of power.  He accused people without evidence, many of them the wrong people, and did so as a representative of the government that is supposed to protect the individual presumption of innocence until evidence proves contrary.  McCarthy was a dangerous man, and perhaps even more for the discredit he heaped on the anti-Communist effort when the Soviet Union was at its most aggressive.

Specifically, McCarthy smeared people as Communists or Communist sympathizers when he didn’t have evidence to back up those claims, then demanded that they prove themselves innocent rather than him proving their guilt.  It was a despicable tactic then, and it’s a despicable tactic now.  No one should waste time trying to rehabilitate McCarthy.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 3 4 5

How did he structure his land deal with Tony Rezko?
Who is Harrison J Bounel, someone Obama says he never knew but whose name appeared on the title to Obama’s Chicago home?
I know nothing about the documents relating to any other Presidential candidate’s home purchases…

libfreeordie on August 7, 2012 at 1:16 PM

Lol, you know nothing and are not interested in Obama’s Home purchases (despite fhe fact that it was obviously he was involved in a shady deal with a felon) but you want Romney’s his tax returns lool :)…the irony of that :)….but then uou cannot be accused of having a sharp sense of irony…

jimver on August 7, 2012 at 3:41 PM

Only the fevered Obama haters care about his college transcripts. Romney couldn’t give a toss.

His one and only desperate concern is to keep his tax records hidden. Why? Because he knows the returns will cost him the election. He’d rather be beaten up from now until election day on the chance that he might still win by withholding his returns, rather than release them and seal his fate.

There’s no downside for the Obama campaign. They can pummel him whether he releases the info or not.

Two questions: “What grade did President Obama get in Tort Reform 101″
and
“What is Mitt Romney hiding?”

Neither Romney nor the public cares about the first question, which is merely a slam-dunk for the HotAir comment count. But the second question is a dagger in the side of the Romney campaign because the President has taken the economy off the table and sown seeds of suspicion amongst independent voters.

I think the Road Runner said it best: “Meep! Meep!”

chumpThreads on August 7, 2012 at 3:44 PM

It is highly unusual for the President of such a prestigious review such as HLR to only write one entry…and leave it unsigned.

Resist We Much on August 7, 2012 at 1:43 PM

There’s nothing unusual about the fact that Obama’s note in the Harvard Law Review was unsigned. See the HLR’s About page: “All student writing is unsigned. This policy reflects the fact that many members of the Review, besides the author, make a contribution to each published piece.”

I don’t know if it would have been unusual for Obama to write one piece for the HLR.

J.S.K. on August 7, 2012 at 3:44 PM

(Root argues in his piece that he thinks Obama scored scholarships as a “foreign exchange” student based on his years spent in Indonesia, but Obama had been in the US all through his high-school years, so that doesn’t seem very plausible.)

whoaaa! That Obama was in high school is not contested, but remember those records are also closed. It is arguable, based on his affection for pot at the time that his grades were bad, or barely passing but when all records of his education are closed, something is hidden.

Just because he went to high school in Hawaii does not mean he was a citizen, especially in Hawaii where that was not an unusual situation. Those records could show him to be a foreign student, or enrolled like every other kid with the assumption of citizenship. As long as he did not try to play sports where a birth certificate is required, who would know?

Where that would become a problem is if later, he claimed he was a foreign citizen. That brings up the question of how Obama went to college at all. His grandparents were not wealthy and he does not appear to have been awarded any scholarships when he graduated high school. Back then, as it was with me, it was still possible to work your way through college. He should have attended the college in Hawaii in that case.

We know he lived in Indonesia, that he had an Indonesian step-father, that his mother removed him from her passport, that he attended school in Indonesia and was registered as a citizen of Indonesia when he did. The removing him from his mother’s passport is a curious action that tends to support that he might have either been put on his stepfathers passport, or he had his own Indonesian passport, which also has some evidence of that being the case, at lest later. He had to have something as a passprot to return to Hawii after his mother removed him from hers.

If he was going to claim to be a foreign student, doing so in Hawii after having gone to high school as a U.S. citizen might have been difficult. However it would have been easy to have done so to Occidental. It is an expensive university that would have the foreign student programs, scholarships and grants and not too picky about the previous records.

If he did attend college at Occidental and Columbia as Berry Soetoro, as is likely the name on an Indonesian passport, at the age of eighteen he would not have been able to obtain a social security number, not a legal one anyway, and he would not have been allowed to register with selective service, which is also in question as a forgery.

Lots of good reasons to spend millions to hide those records, and at this time, he is not the only one that wants them hidden since it would be a disaster of biblical proportions if it was discovered he did not qualify for the office at this late date.

Franklyn on August 7, 2012 at 3:49 PM

Is it true that Mitt Romney paid no taxes up to age 11 ?

J_Crater on August 7, 2012 at 3:50 PM

Ed, Ed, Ed… More McCarthy references? Seriously, Venona proved McCarthy RIGHT. I’ll buy your linkage of Reid & McCarthy if 20 years from now Romney releases his tax returns and Reid’s found to be correct. Until then, would you mind NOT slandering the good name of those on our side?

RationalIcthus on August 7, 2012 at 1:16 PM

Can’t, McCarthy insults are a part of the RINO platform.

slickwillie2001 on August 7, 2012 at 3:52 PM

Late to the party as usual, however, my two cents worth -

Never play someone else’s game where you don’t know all the rules
and whereby the rules can be changed on a whim by your opponent.

A huge resounding “NO”!

Amjean on August 7, 2012 at 3:53 PM

His one and only desperate concern is to keep his tax records hidden. Why? Because he knows the returns will cost him the election.

chumpThreads on August 7, 2012 at 3:44 PM

Reid’s one and only desperate concern is to keep his source of the charge hidden. Why? Because he knows that the total collapse of the bogus charge will end his career.

MadisonConservative on August 7, 2012 at 3:54 PM

Two questions: “What grade did President Obama get in Tort Reform 101″
and
“What is Mitt Romney hiding?”

Neither Romney nor the public cares about the first question, which is merely a slam-dunk for the HotAir comment count. But the second question is a dagger in the side of the Romney campaign because the President has taken the economy off the table and sown seeds of suspicion amongst independent voters.

chumpThreads on August 7, 2012 at 3:44 PM

Wrong, the public cares about Romney’s tax returns as mich as they do about Obama’s ‘grade in Tort Reform 101′….just because media keeps it out there on orders from 0 and hos WH! doesn’t make the public any more interested in the fopic….you assume that just because people watch the Kardashians, they fail to notice that their wallets get thinner and thiner…wrong, am sure they can multitask :), which is watch the OBama kardashian-style circus and his pathetic attempt at distracting from the economy, all for its undoubtful entertainment value, while at the same time keeping a close eye on their wallets…come this Nov, it’s their wallets that it’s going to decide the elections, the entertainment part would be looked upon as a welcome addition to a thpically bpring amd predoctable gutter political campaign, but will not sway a single independent into 0′s camp….

jimver on August 7, 2012 at 4:01 PM

chumpThreads on August 7, 2012 at 3:44 PM

Yay America in decline!

tom daschle concerned on August 7, 2012 at 4:01 PM

His one and only desperate concern is to keep his tax records hidden. Why? Because he knows the returns will cost him the election.

chumpThreads on August 7, 2012 at 3:44 PM

.
So you don’t think what Obama is hiding is equally disqualifying ? He’s spent quite a bit of money to keep sealed important parts of his life he should be proud of…if he is who he says he is……. Now THAT would be disclosure-

Its not disclosure for Super Mitt- he’s rich guy. He has had offshore accounts that probably did rather well- tax exempt. He has taken advantage of loopholes in the Tax codes.
All that’s missing is a dollar amount for them democrites to run up a flag pole. Ocommies education… now tha’ts a real mystery.

FlaMurph on August 7, 2012 at 4:02 PM

Should have read
‘topic’, ‘
Typically boring and predictable ‘..

Typing on the ipad on my lap while waiting for my flight in the most boring airport on earth, not my idea of fun activity :)…

jimver on August 7, 2012 at 4:05 PM

Reid’s one and only desperate concern is to keep his source of the charge hidden. Why? Because he knows that the total collapse of the bogus charge will end his career.

MadisonConservative on August 7, 2012 at 3:54 PM

I notice you couldn’t refute the point I made.
If Romney had nothing to hide, he’d reveal his returns. It’s that simple.

chumpThreads on August 7, 2012 at 4:06 PM

Reid’s one and only desperate concern is to keep his source of the charge hidden. Why? Because he knows that the total collapse of the bogus charge will end his career.

MadisonConservative on August 7, 2012 at 3:54 PM

I notice you couldn’t refute the point I made.
If Romney had nothing to hide, he’d reveal his returns. It’s that simple.

chumpThreads on August 7, 2012 at 4:06 PM

Why??? It’s not required by the law!!!!! He does not need to show squat if it is not required by the law, obama can stick it.. What if next 0 and his campaign of patehtic minions want to see the ovulation chart
of ROmney’s wife from the times they were conceiving, I mean who knows, the’s potential or speculation there, Obama-style :)…..As in a credible source told Reid that their sons are not really theirs :)….people like you would go out there and shout that he has something to hide anyways, when will it stop….I say people like that should be starved and be given shite, nada, don’t feed the trolls and the frauds, a wise man once said :)…..no tax returns release, Mitt!!!

jimver on August 7, 2012 at 4:15 PM

Wrong, the public cares about Romney’s tax returns as mich as they do about Obama’s ‘grade in Tort Reform 101′
*snip*

jimver on August 7, 2012 at 4:01 PM

Nonsense on its very face. Obama has been President going on four years. The question of his grades only comes up as a red meat treat for comment padding on right-wing blogs. No one who’s not an Obama hater cares.

The question of Romney’s tax returns is a self-inflicted wound and it will fester increasingly as November approaches.

The public can reasonably ask:

“What is Mitt Romney hiding?”

You can bet the Obama campaign will continue to ask it right up until election day.

chumpThreads on August 7, 2012 at 4:18 PM

If Romney had nothing to hide, he’d reveal his returns. It’s that simple.

chumpThreads on August 7, 2012 at 4:06 PM

If Obama had nothing to hide, he’d reveal his college transcripts now, and most certainly the Fast and Furious documents.

But go ahead. Keep wishing that the guy who got elected as Governor of Massachusetts and twice ran for president hasn’t paid taxes in the last ten years, which has already been proven untrue.

Chump.

MadisonConservative on August 7, 2012 at 4:22 PM

Why??? It’s not required by the law!!!!! He does not need to show squat if it is not required by the law, obama can stick it.. *snip* no tax returns release, Mitt!!!

jimver on August 7, 2012 at 4:15 PM

No, it’s not required. I think adherence to the law will be cold comfort to Romney come election night if this issue proves decisive in his defeat.

I repeat, this is a win-win issue for the Obama campaign no matter what Romney does. If Romney had been smart, he’d have dumped his returns years ago and controlled the narrative to his advantage. Too late for that now.

chumpThreads on August 7, 2012 at 4:24 PM

Vetted HOW if nobody has ever seen his records?
What is Obama hiding?

dentarthurdent on August 7, 2012 at 12:20 PM

Obama did not release his college records (except for the obvious achievement of testing on to and being chosen as editor of the Harvard Law Review) and the electorate treated his refusal to share those records with a collective yawn and a lanslide electoral college victory. No one thought he was hiding anything. We’ll see if the same is true for Governor Romney

plewis on August 7, 2012 at 4:29 PM

But go ahead. Keep wishing that the guy who got elected as Governor of Massachusetts and twice ran for president hasn’t paid taxes in the last ten years, which has already been proven untrue.

MadisonConservative on August 7, 2012 at 4:22 PM

I’ve made no such wish. Your mind reading skills are pretty bad.

All I know is, he gave John McCain 23 years worth of returns. Why should voters have to settle for 2010 and a promised 2011?

chumpThreads on August 7, 2012 at 4:31 PM

If Obama had nothing to hide, he’d reveal his college transcripts now, and most certainly the Fast and Furious documents.

But go ahead. Keep wishing that the guy who got elected as Governor of Massachusetts and twice ran for president hasn’t paid taxes in the last ten years, which has already been proven untrue.

Chump.

MadisonConservative on August 7, 2012 at 4:22 PM

Reid actually said “for ten years” not “for the last ten years”. Senator McCain saw Governor Romney’s tax returns for 24 years – and then picked Governor Palin to be his running mate. What’s he hiding?

plewis on August 7, 2012 at 4:34 PM

I’ve made no such wish. Your mind reading skills are pretty bad.

chumpThreads on August 7, 2012 at 4:31 PM

My mind reading skills are bad. My reading skills, on the other hand:

Because he knows the returns will cost him the election.

chumpThreads on August 7, 2012 at 3:44 PM

…are pretty damned good.

Chump.

MadisonConservative on August 7, 2012 at 4:39 PM

I repeat, this is a win-win issue for the Obama campaign no matter what Romney does. If Romney had been smart, he’d have dumped his returns years ago and controlled the narrative to his advantage. Too late for that now.

chumpThreads on August 7, 2012 at 4:24 PM

.
well, besides, we all know this Romney character is a felon and should be behind bars with that Rezko fella… and Blago… and Ayres

FlaMurph on August 7, 2012 at 4:40 PM

Senator McCain saw Governor Romney’s tax returns for 24 years – and then picked Governor Palin to be his running mate. What’s he hiding?

plewis on August 7, 2012 at 4:34 PM

Yeah, because it couldn’t have been due to the fact that Romney was just as much of a moderate RINO hot mess as McCain was, and he was pandering to the completely uninspired conservative base.

See these? —> |||||

Those are straws. Please stop grasping at them.

MadisonConservative on August 7, 2012 at 4:41 PM

I’ve made no such wish. Your mind reading skills are pretty bad.

chumpThreads on August 7, 2012 at 4:31 PM

My mind reading skills are bad. My reading skills, on the other hand:

Because he knows the returns will cost him the election.

chumpThreads on August 7, 2012 at 3:44 PM

…are pretty damned good.

Chump.

MadisonConservative on August 7, 2012 at 4:39 PM

And exactly where did I express a wish or belief that Romney hasn’t paid taxes in 10 years? You seem to have a good grasp of the “quote” function, so please quote me directly.

Sorry to break it to you but you’ve got serious reading comprehension problems too (feel free to ask someone to explain my posts to you. There’s no shame in not understanding).

chumpThreads on August 7, 2012 at 4:46 PM

And exactly where did I express a wish or belief that Romney hasn’t paid taxes in 10 years?

chumpThreads on August 7, 2012 at 4:46 PM

Why will the returns cost him the election if they’re in order and his taxes are paid?

MadisonConservative on August 7, 2012 at 4:50 PM

well, besides, we all know this Romney character is a felon and should be behind bars with that Rezko fella… and Blago… and Ayres

FlaMurph on August 7, 2012 at 4:40 PM

If you are relying on such irrelevancies to comfort you through the election season, then drink your fill, pal.

chumpThreads on August 7, 2012 at 4:51 PM

I notice you couldn’t refute the point I made.
If Romney had nothing to hide, he’d reveal his returns. It’s that simple.

chumpThreads on August 7, 2012 at 4:06 PM

And, of course, your premise is wrong, and a simple mind would imagine that “it’s that simple”…innocent people do not open up everything to whomever requests it, it’s called a free society, free from false allegations, and trumped up charges.
Seeing as Mitt has met all of the legal requirements, all of them, and none of them point to any discrepancy, in fact quite the opposite.
You never let an opponent dictate the terms, if the terms are not within the rules.
If I asked you for all of your personal journals, all of your personal financial statements, you would give them to me, or whomever asked? Since you have nothing to hide…
It’s a witch hunt, the old trial by dunking…

If they floated they were guilty of witchcraft, if they sank they were innocent but would have usually drowned anyway.

Somewhere, Mitt invested in a company, that invested in a company, that knew about a company that invested in a company that broke some law…therefore he is guilty.

He left Bain in 1999, a company was closed in 2001, a person died in 2005…and they are blaming Mitt. Even running an ad…

Wake up and live in the real world…you are not innocent if you divulge everything to your opponent.

Now tell me, are you still molesting that neighbor child? Yes or No…

right2bright on August 7, 2012 at 4:53 PM

Why will the returns cost him the election if they’re in order and his taxes are paid?

MadisonConservative on August 7, 2012 at 4:50 PM

You didn’t answer my question. I suspect it’s because you didn’t understand it. That reading comprehension thing again, eh?

Not your day, is it?

chumpThreads on August 7, 2012 at 4:53 PM

Why should voters have to settle for 2010 and a promised 2011?

chumpThreads on August 7, 2012 at 4:31 PM

Because that is all that is required by law…that’s it, and seeing as there is no indication of any wrong doing, case closed.

right2bright on August 7, 2012 at 4:54 PM

Senator McCain saw Governor Romney’s tax returns for 24 years – and then picked Governor Palin to be his running mate. What’s he hiding?

plewis on August 7, 2012 at 4:34 PM

You think that is the only thing they looked at? Really? The only thing? Sheesh, we have some winners posting today.

right2bright on August 7, 2012 at 4:56 PM

Just saying, this Apache has no need of any paper work at all to know this guy is a full real deal hard core commie Democrat with a bad case of the thug going on.

Papers I don’t need no f’n papers.!

Know them by their deeds.

APACHEWHOKNOWS on August 7, 2012 at 5:02 PM

right2bright on August 7, 2012 at 4:53 PM

I’ve already said, Mitt Romney is not obligated to release any of his tax returns. Sure, it a little awkward for him since his own father released 12 years worth, but that doesn’t mean Mitt has to.

If he didn’t think his tax returns would be fatal to his campaign, he’d squelch the controvery and simply release them and take the hit for a few days, as Bill Kristol and other Republicans are urging him to do.

He won’t release them, ipso facto he has something to hide.
Bottom line: President Obama nails him either way.

Sheesh! How many times do I have to explain this! Just because you don’t like the obvious consequences of Romney’s actions doesn’t mean they won’t happen!

chumpThreads on August 7, 2012 at 5:04 PM

Excuse me,,,

“a bad case of the smug thug.”

APACHEWHOKNOWS on August 7, 2012 at 5:05 PM

So, this Obama guy, he produces 20 lbs of paper work from his birth cert. to all his high school, college and ACORN work.

How many of U.S. would follow him as our platoon Sgt. on a night patrol say in the mountains of Afganistain.

Be lots of us putting in paper work for a tranfer fast.

APACHEWHOKNOWS on August 7, 2012 at 5:08 PM

the President has taken the economy off the table

chumpThreads on August 7, 2012 at 3:44 PM

Thanks for admitting that your Boy Wonder can’t run on his own record.

So when are you guys going to release Romney’s returns? October?

A+++

PS: in 2008, O’bama won an alltime record 70% of the high school dropout vote. He’s going for the clean sweep this year because he knows he’ll need the rest of them this time.

Del Dolemonte on August 7, 2012 at 5:10 PM

Knows how to strut but does not know his stuff.
Got lots of talk but he will not take a walk at all.

APACHEWHOKNOWS on August 7, 2012 at 5:10 PM

I notice you couldn’t refute the point I made.

If O’bama had nothing to hide, he’d reveal his academic history, etc. It’s that simple.

chumpThreads on August 7, 2012 at 4:06 PM

See how easy it easy for 2 to play your childish game?

A+++

Del Dolemonte on August 7, 2012 at 5:12 PM

Leading from behind Harry Reid.
About as sorry as it gets.

Leader,,,??not.

APACHEWHOKNOWS on August 7, 2012 at 5:13 PM

Desperate Democrats can reasonably ask:

“What is Mitt Romney hiding?”

You can bet the Desperate Obama campaign will continue to ask it right up until election day.

chumpThreads on August 7, 2012 at 4:18 PM

Fixed.

Once again, thanks for admitting that your Boy Wonder can’t run on his own record as President.

Quick question for ya, Chimp: how come your friends at NBC had to oversample Democrats by 11 last week, and your friends at PEW had to oversample Democrats by 19 a few days later?

No hurry answering, take your time.

Del Dolemonte on August 7, 2012 at 5:15 PM

He won’t release them, ipso facto he has something to hide.

chumpThreads on August 7, 2012 at 5:04 PM

To your mind he has something to hide…but, and yes the majority does think like you, that is how Obama got elected, not the brightest but the most number voted.

And if you think it’s a couple of weeks of “hits” you are very, very, naive.
I gave you the likely scenario, since much of those investments he had no knowledge, they were in trust.

And I gave you the ad they are doing now, blaming him for something he had no part of…you don’t quite understand the dynamics of an election, and how an “innocent” event becomes a major catastrophe.

Just an innocent slip of the tongue sinks campaigns…so why give anything more than you have to, to an opponent who will lie and twist anything given to him.

What Obama has, he has to work with, and it isn’t enough, so he is crying foul…and it does work on weak minded people like you, you are easy to manipulate, you would fold yourself under pressure. You are weak.

Mitt should release nothing, let the children scream about nothing (btw, it’s the libs who are whining, they need something, anything, even a lie)…and of course there are people like you, but a leader do not count on people like you, businesses don’t count on people like you, if you want to get something done, they don’t count on people like you…they count on strong people to lead people like you.
Right now, you are being led by some journalists…Mitt is not focusing his attention on voters like you, but on people who want to change and move this country in a better direction.

right2bright on August 7, 2012 at 5:16 PM

Please, Obama sycophants at Columbia are either right now as we speak or have already created BEA-U-TI-FUL records for O, all A’s, perfect attendance, expemlary student! [que tada music]

This is a TRAP. When the doctored Columbia/Harvard records are released, all they will do is prove Obama is the 2nd coming, and he can say “gee, and I didn’t want to brag, but they amde me…”

All warfare is based on deception. Do not play Obama’s game. Romney can win because he’s squeaky clean and right for America. let’s win on THAT.

JustTruth101 on August 7, 2012 at 5:18 PM

This is chumpsTreads theory:

You are at war with an enemy, and they ask if you are going to attack a city, and of course you are not, and since you are not, you might as well tell him since you have nothing to hide…so they start a campaign saying you are going to attack a city you are not…ChumpThreads would give in and tell him he was not attacking.

No, you let the enemy gather the information…you don’t give him any information, none…it’s a war dummy.

Why, in heavens name, would you give anything, anything at all to the enemy you are trying to defeat…you don’t give him discarded plans, history, any past speeches, nothing, you make them work and spend resources to attack you…good grief, it’s amateur night on HotAir.

right2bright on August 7, 2012 at 5:23 PM

All I know is, he gave John McCain 23 years worth of returns.

chumpThreads on August 7, 2012 at 4:31 PM

And according to your favored “news source” the Huffington Post, those 23 years of returns had no smoking guns.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/17/mitt-romney-tax-returns_n_1680765.html

By the way, that same Huffington Post also notes that the obscenely Rich wife of the Idiot your Party ran for President in 2004 refused to release her tax returns.

In fact, Teresa Heinz Kerry’s unwillingness to provide her personal tax return data during the 2004 campaign became a point of friction on par with Romney’s own refusal in 2012. The heiress to the Heinz ketchup fortune would eventually relent, but not fully. She released two pages of her 1040 form, arguing that she had already provided plenty of relevant information through the financial disclosure reports that she and her husband filed as part of the ethics requirements for a U.S. senator.

Financial disclosure reports are less comprehensive than tax returns, explained Stan Brand, a prominent ethics lawyer in Washington, D.C.

-snip-

And if credit is given to politicians who release personal financial disclosure reports, than Romney deserves some as well. During his previous presidential bid, in 2008, he released a personal financial disclosure form for the fiscal year of 2006.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/04/18/mitt-romney-john-kerry-tax-returns_n_1435604.html

Del Dolemonte on August 7, 2012 at 5:23 PM

All warfare is based on deception. Do not play Obama’s game. Romney can win because he’s squeaky clean and right for America. let’s win on THAT.

JustTruth101 on August 7, 2012 at 5:18 PM

Exactly…all resources are spent defining the past 3.5 years…

right2bright on August 7, 2012 at 5:24 PM

All the stuff Obama has hidden, Fast and Furious, yet Romney is hiding something.

Why is ANY of it more important than jobs reports?

This is bizarro world.

Wagthatdog on August 7, 2012 at 5:24 PM

Senator McCain saw Governor Romney’s tax returns for 24 years – and then picked Governor Palin to be his running mate.

plewis on August 7, 2012 at 4:34 PM

McCain told the Huffington Post that those Romney tax returns had no smoking gun, and nothing to disqualify Romney from consideration. He also told PuffHo that those returns did not play a role in his passing Romney over.

You really need a shovel for each hand.

Del Dolemonte on August 7, 2012 at 5:25 PM

chumpThreads on August 7, 2012 at 4:53 PM

Nice dodge, chump. You said Romney knows that the returns will cost him the election. That directly implies that you think(or “know”) that they will cost him the election.

Then you denied wishing or believing that there was anything within them to validate Reid’s claims.

Which is it?

Answer: you’ve got a big mouth and you put your foot in it.

MadisonConservative on August 7, 2012 at 5:28 PM

Ok, I’ve said all I have to say.
Have a good evening.

chumpThreads on August 7, 2012 at 5:29 PM

Which is it?

Answer: you’ve got a big mouth and you put your foot in it.

MadisonConservative on August 7, 2012 at 5:28 PM

Ok, I’ve said all I have to say.
Have a good evening.

chumpThreads on August 7, 2012 at 5:29 PM

LOL. You are such a chump.

MadisonConservative on August 7, 2012 at 5:30 PM

Ok, I’ve said all I have to say.
Have a good evening.

chumpThreads on August 7, 2012 at 5:29 PM

I don’t blame you, I would run and hide after making a fool of myself like you have…

right2bright on August 7, 2012 at 5:34 PM

The REAL story of Joe McCarthy from a conservative site.

http://www.newsmax.com/RonaldKessler/mccarthy-conservatives/2008/04/07/id/323380

AngusMc on August 7, 2012 at 3:20 PM

Congratulations, you’re still an idiot.

The Unreal Ronald Kessler

M. Stanton Evans

Like many other critics of Joe
McCarthy, Ronald Kessler would be more persuasive if he knew something of the
subject.

Kessler’s Wall Street Journal essay (“The Real Joe McCarthy,”
April 22), attacking the Wisconsin senator and taking a sidewise shot at my
recent book about him, is an odd amalgam of unverifiable hearsay and a handful
of items checkable from the record. It’s noteworthy that, on the checkable
matters, Kessler is repeatedly, and egregiously, in error.

For openers, there is the bizarre
assertion in Kessler’s lead that, 54 years ago this April, McCarthy
“started his televised hearings on alleged Soviet spies and Communists in
the Army.” The point is twice repeated in subsequent paragraphs referring
to these sessions as McCarthy hearings.

In fact, the hearings that began 54
years ago this April weren’t hearings conducted by McCarthy, but hearings in
which he was the main defendant, brought on by charges lodged against
him by the Army. Kessler has obviously confused these sessions with the Fort Monmouth
inquest of the previous year run by McCarthy. Anyone who doesn’t know the
difference between these two sets of hearings can’t be taken seriously as an
authority on such topics.

Scarcely better is Kessler’s
repetition, as supposed fact, of the discredited notion that McCarthy claimed a
list of “205 Communists” in the State Department, then crawfished and
changed the number to 57. (McCarthy’s version was that he never claimed 205,
but had said 57 all along.) I devote two chapters to this issue, showing (a)
that the alleged documentation of McCarthy’s supposed lying about the numbers
was a backstage concoction of the State Department, and (b) that the charge of
McCarthy’s having claimed 205 was debunked in 1951 by investigators for a
Democratically controlled committee of the Senate. (Curiously, after the
investigators turned in a 40-page report that in essence backed McCarthy, their
memo would abruptly vanish—to be recovered later.)

Likewise with the face-value quote
of Army Counsel Joseph Welch’s lachrymose denunciation of McCarthy for
allegedly having outed Welch assistant Frederick Fisher as a former member of
the National Lawyers Guild, an officially cited Communist front. Omitted from
this Welchian morality play—and apparently unknown to Kessler, since he says
nothing of it—is that Fisher had already been outed to the press and
public as a former member of the Guild—by none other than Joe Welch, six weeks
before this set-to with McCarthy.

As to Kessler’s hearsay accounts of
what FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover supposedly said to William Sullivan or what
Robert Lamphere then said to Kessler, suffice it to note that these windy
generalizations about deceased third parties are uncheckable by their nature.
Somewhat more susceptible to proof are comments that McCarthy made false
accusations against a host of innocent people (specifics, please) and that the
FBI couldn’t find any Communists in the State Department to back his charges.

If that were true (which it isn’t),
then the Bureau was more incompetent than its worst enemies have imagined, as
there were indeed Communists in the State Department when McCarthy came along,
as shown by the official records. In my book I give a complete list of
McCarthy’s early suspects, plus now accessible data on many of these cases that
show Communist affiliation, hanging out with Moscow spies, identification as Soviet agents
in the Venona papers, and so on.

In one notable instance, it’s
possible to check out Kessler’s hearsay stories from the grave, as he quotes a
third-party account in which Willard Edwards of the Chicago Tribune allegedly said McCarthy picked up the
“205″ number concerning Communists in the State Department from a
rumor relayed by Edwards. This, however, is also wrong, as shown by a
memorandum on the matter from Edwards himself (provided by his son, Lee). This
says McCarthy may have picked up the number 57 (not 205)
from an Edwards article listing this number of suspects in the Federal
government—a speculation that supports McCarthy’s version of the numbers and
contradicts the Kessler version.

A final instance to be noted is
Kessler’s reliance on Senate associate historian Donald Ritchie, who edited the
McCarthy executive hearings for publication. Though Kessler quotes Ritchie as
an impartial expert, the facts of the matter are quite different. In numerous
comments, Ritchie has routinely stacked the deck against McCarthy—most
conspicuously and most often in McCarthy’s most famous case, that of Annie Lee
Moss.

Mrs. Moss, who appeared before
McCarthy in March of ’54, has been portrayed for 50 years as a
mistaken-identity victim because the committee supposedly collared the wrong
suspect. Ritchie’s treatment of the case, cited to secondary sources,
reinforces the standard image of Moss as victim and McCarthy as browbeating
tyrant. All of this, however, again is false, as shown by the extensive
archives of the FBI and other official records.

When I got Ritchie on the phone I
asked if he had by any chance checked out these official sources, rather than
simply citing other academics. When I offered to sum up the relevant data
proving McCarthy was right about the case, the historian grew irate, said
“I am growing very tired of this conversation” and quickly ended our discussion.
Such is the supposedly impartial authority quoted by Kessler—all too typical of
the recycled error that passes for historical knowledge of McCarthy.

SWalker on August 7, 2012 at 5:41 PM

Ok, I’ve been pwned.

Have a good evening.

chumpThreads on August 7, 2012 at 5:29 PM

A+++

Before the door slams your Lowereastside on the way out, a Simple Question for a Simple Mind.

If a senior Republican Senator took to the Senate Floor and made an unsupported claim about O’bama not being born in the US, would you demand that said Senator be censured for a breach of Senate Ethics?

Or would you give him the same Ethical Pass you’re giving Democrat Senate Majority Leader Hairless Reid?

Del Dolemonte on August 7, 2012 at 5:42 PM

“What is Mitt Romney hiding?”

Neither Romney nor the public cares about the first question, which is merely a slam-dunk for the HotAir comment count. But the second question is a dagger in the side of the Romney campaign because the President has taken the economy off the table and sown seeds of suspicion amongst independent voters.

I think the Road Runner said it best: “Meep! Meep!”

chumpThreads on August 7, 2012 at 3:44 PM

ChumP can see you have been chomped before this but ask yourself: If there were something shady about Romney’s tax returns don’t you think the IRS would be all over it?????????? I mean, really….

chai on August 7, 2012 at 6:21 PM

All Mitt, his team and his surrogates need to do in regards to Reid’s lies are to say something along these lines — “Does anyone believe that the IRS would allow me not to file or pay any tax due for 1 or 2 years let alone for 10? Anyone? Bueller?”.

Then ask a question of Reid, “How is it that you’ve become a multi-millionaire while working as a public servant?”…

Gohawgs on August 7, 2012 at 6:39 PM

Absolutely~!

Zcat on August 7, 2012 at 6:47 PM

Congratulations, you’re still an idiot.

SWalker on August 7, 2012 at 5:41 PM

If the facts aren’t on your side, attack attack attack the messenger. You’d fit right in with the Obama cult.

AngusMc on August 7, 2012 at 8:31 PM

Joe McCarthy may have been right in general, but he ended up doing a lot of damage

No, Joe had specifics too. See Blacklisted by History by Stanton Evans. However, yes, he did damage the cause by questioning Sec of State George Marshall. Arthur Herman’s book is also very good.

Root bets Barry registered as a foreign student and that is why is is all locked up.

AshleyTKing on August 7, 2012 at 8:33 PM

SWalker on August 7, 2012 at 5:41 PM

If the facts aren’t on your side, attack attack attack the messenger. You’d fit right in with the Obama cult.

AngusMc on August 7, 2012 at 8:31 PM

\

Nice try, but you’re still an idiot, as I proved the facts are on my side, and you are a fool who has been brainwashed by a bunch of Marxists. Shame you’re to indoctrinated to think for yourself and instead insist on parroting what the Marxist told you to think.

SWalker on August 7, 2012 at 9:22 PM

Obama said he was from Indonesia to get into Columbia…

MGardner on August 7, 2012 at 9:27 PM

Don’t feed the chump! He has no shame!
I’m also upset about this man who appeared in the ad. What was he thinking? Is he past thinking? How much are they paying him?
Sorry about his wife, but this is outright lying!

Bambi on August 7, 2012 at 10:06 PM

Why not do it, the Repubs must have someone like Reid. Boehner is a wuss figure like Reid, can’t he come out with outrageous statements. Everyone would believe him too, he’s a leader, like Reid. The Repubs have no imagination.

steveracer on August 7, 2012 at 10:08 PM

You can bet the Desperate Obama campaign will continue to ask it right up until election day.

chumpThreads on August 7, 2012 at 4:18 PM

I have it from an impeccable inside source that Mr. Obama forged his Columbia transcripts to get into Harvard, and that’s what will be discovered if he is forced to ante up — he added an extra year of classes he never took. It’s so easy when the college to which you are applying requires you to order the transcripts of the college from which you are transferring. You order a set for yourself, make the appropriate modifications, and then, after obtaining a new unused official envelope, reseal the transcript and insert it into the outgoing official mail. Viola! You have better grades and more classes….

The other thing that you’ll hear is where the money came from for his college career — a grant from the Indonesian Government to send one of its citizens to college in the USA.

As long as we are going to play he said she said, we may as well go there.

Just sayin’.

unclesmrgol on August 7, 2012 at 11:15 PM

Bottom line: Mitt won’t release his tax returns over ten years ago, because he paid for Obummer’s education and everything else this Clown In Chief has been handed. Let’s stop playing games and tell the truth about all the handouts this thug has recieved over the years from the backs of the American taxpayer.

Lynken on August 8, 2012 at 9:29 AM

Should Romney demand that Obama release his college records in exchange for tax returns?

No deals.

Romney should simply demand the release of those items.

EconomicNeocon on August 8, 2012 at 9:41 AM

Knows how to strut but does not know his stuff.
Got lots of talk but he will not take a walk at all.

APACHEWHOKNOWS on August 7, 2012 at 5:10 PM

Well said!

Mary in LA on August 8, 2012 at 2:39 PM

It’s STILL the economy and we’re not stupid. Focus, focus, FOCUS!!! Stay focused! Don’t let that D.C./Chicago thug machine change our focus…

StarLady on August 8, 2012 at 4:25 PM

No reason Mittens can’t make this kind of offer without giving up the economy as the Big Concern.

Olo_Burrows on August 9, 2012 at 5:06 PM

Comment pages: 1 3 4 5