Kishkumen wrote: And, of course, he did so to dodge paying taxes.
Big surprise.
Perhaps. But you also need to keep in mind if he was a non resident of Mass. he was a resident of Utah. One state is going to tax him as a resident. I do not know which state taxes more. My guess is not Utah but the rate there is high. The property tax issue may have been a motivation as well.
Well, he can't have it both ways.
"Petition wasn’t meant to start a witch hunt as I’ve said 6000 times." ~ Hanna Seariac, LDS apologist
Kishkumen wrote: And, of course, he did so to dodge paying taxes.
Big surprise.
Perhaps. But you also need to keep in mind if he was a non resident of Mass. he was a resident of Utah. One state is going to tax him as a resident. I do not know which state taxes more. My guess is not Utah but the rate there is high. The property tax issue may have been a motivation as well.
Kishkumen wrote:Well, he can't have it both ways.
I thought he was rich enough that he could. You can buy anything in this world for money.
"And the human knew the source of life, the woman of him, and she conceived and bore Cain, and said, 'I have procreated a man with Yahweh.'" Gen. 4:1, interior quote translated by D. Bokovoy.
isidewith is pretty flawed guys. Let's not go overboard here.
I'll quote an example from another message board of what I'm talking about:
I got Barack Obama, but I think that this quiz needs to account more for how much the candidates are lying. Especially the ones that have been lying to us for the last four years.
For instance: "Should the U.S. intervene in the affairs of other countries? - Barack Obama: Yes, but only in matters of national security or human rights violations. - Your similar answer: No."
That Obama answer is pretty much fine, except that it is obviously not his policy. Or there is so much wiggle room within the definition of "national security" that the question is meaningless.
Then he gets credit for agreeing with me about the theory of evolution, even though that his little do with his job. He gets 100% credit for agreeing that gay marriage should be allowed even though he just flip-flopped on that and has limited ability to do anything about that.
But I still get 82% Obama even though we are diametrically opposed on the 2009 Stimulus, the Bush tax cuts, drug legalization, farm subsidies, and have significant disagreements about the Patriot Act and bank bailouts
The site does a very bad job locating the heft and relevance of positions on things, even with its subjective rating system. It also does not always do a good job parsing what a candidate says their stance is with what we have reason to think their stance is.
krose wrote:I'm skipping over reading the last half of this thread (for now) to answer Seth Payne's question about why I resent Romney.
He is the most extreme example I have seen of a politician who will say whatever he thinks it will take to get him elected. He has taken almost every position available on nearly every issue. He ran to the left of Ted Kennedy in Massachusetts, then ran to the right of Santorum in this year's primaries.
But there was one action of his that turned me from simply opposing him based on his views to believing that he is a contemptible human being. That was his so-called "Kennedy moment," the speech he gave about religion in 2008.
What he did was far from being anything like JFK, who proclaimed his independence from Vatican influence, and affirmed his strong support for the principle of church-state separation. That would have been a very positive tactic to Romney to emulate.
But no. Romney's version of a speech to encourage religious tolerance (for Mormons and everyone else, which he was in an ideal position to advocate) turned out to be an appeal to the Christians who believe he is not one of them, that they should join him in united opposition against their common enemies, the atheists and secularists. What a statesman.
He revealed himself at that time to be a gigantic opportunistic tool, and he has done nothing since then that makes me change my mind about his character.
I must admit I am feeling this way more and more. Maybe I will vote for President Obama again. But as I have noted I may be sleeping on the couch for a while.
I must say that the medicare campaigning strategy of the Romney camp is especially gross to me. I'm not talking about the Ryan policy proposals per se. I don't agree with them, in significant part for the same reasons I do not agree with Obamacare, but I have no problem with debate over it. It's rather their Rovian way of disingenuously approaching the issue. It's depressing any positive will I had towards Ryan left. This is happening on numerous subjects, but on something as impactful as this it stirs me up more.
I understand this is just Romney/Ryan following their internal campaign strategists' advice, and top strategists on that side have been of the Atwater school for some time. Still, this mind-bending reality flipping is just painful. At least try to mislead in less obvious ways. You know, like Obama.
