Fire Hydrant of Freedom

And if you think he disclosed or the media pushed him for disclosure on the plethora of wild, weird, and radical things and associates in his background , , ,

No one cared about the "wild" "weird" rumors and innuendo except a few zealots and right wing extreme bloggers.  In contrast, most of America in my opinion WILL care about disclosure of taxes. 

Or do you really think the subject of Romney's taxes will go away and that it's not relevant?   

Mitt Romney’s father, George Romney, in 1967, ahead of his presidential campaign, who released 12 years of tax returns, saying, when explaining why so many years he released, "One year could be a fluke, perhaps done for show." That was Mitt’s father, George Romney.

I suppose he doesn't have to release these records, but the clamor for him to do so will be become louder and louder and LOUDER. 

"I don’t know of any American president who has had a Swiss bank account," end-quote. That’s originally a comment made by Romney’s former Republican presidential rival, Newt Gingrich. 

"In 1994, (Mitts) Romney vigorously called for then Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-MA) to release his tax returns, in order to prove that he had “nothing to hide”

I'm not, nor is anyone else accusing him of doing anything illegal, but what is Romney hiding?

http://www.democracynow.org/2012/7/11/as_romney_evades_on_tax_returns

As for Obama, he released multiple years of his tax returns when he ran although he never made even close to the money Romney made.  What is your 2008 point?

Scooter Libby went to prison for not leaking.  Now THAT was an investigation.  They had the truth in the first 15 minutes and decided to run a year or so with the investigation. The zeal for getting at the truth and enforcing federal laws sadly depends upon the political implications.

Actually Scooter Libby was a Criminal.

Libby was indicted on five counts: Two counts of perjury, two counts of making false statements to federal investigators, and one count of obstruction of justice.

In the subsequent federal trial, United States v. Libby, the jury convicted Libby on four of the five counts in the indictment (one count of obstruction of justice, two counts of perjury, and one count of making false statements.

"They demonstrate with unassailable factual narrative..."   
surely you joke?

"...fractured America's resolve, damaged our troops' morale, and weakened the President's ability to prosecute the war."   

Thank the Lord; otherwise even more Americans would have been killed for naught.  You seem to forget, it's the American People who overwhelmingly wanted this/these worthless and pointless war(s) to end.  Thousands upon thousands have needlessly died, our daily life profoundly changed for the worse, it has drained our economy, billions upon billions, probably trillions of dollars has been spent all for what?  As I, and I think most Americans agree, these prolonged wars in the Middle East have been a terrible terrible mistake.

Further, opposing the wars or our President's policies is neither "despicable or treasonous", but rather our patriotic duty if we disagree with policy; this freedom of speech is guaranteed by the Constitution.

Odd, I note while Obama is our Commander in Chief, Republicans have no problem criticizing him.   

The article didn't miss it; t think the article very definitely points out that "war with Iran would be very serious business."

In fact, as the article also points out, many former Israeli intelligence officers are warning America to avoid a military clash with Iran because it would be try serious business.

If we take any military action against their "nuke program" there will be repercussions.  As the article points out, it's not Islam, it's our meddling in the middle east
that causes the deep seated animosity. 

And this sort of thing is exactly one of the key points of the Santorum candidacy and one of the reasons that most of us here sought alternatives to MR-- that MR simply would not be able to represent well on this issue.

"Did Rick Santorum have a point when he said that Romney is “the worst possible person in this field to put up [as nominee] on this most fundamental issue of this campaign?” Uh, yes."     
Good call Crafty!

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/07/05/romney-s-big-tax-bluff-why-it-will-haunt-him.html

Actually it was Bush gone for more than 1/3, not Reagan, but I agree, given modern communication, so what.  My parents lived a few doors down from Nixon's "White House" in San Clemente.  No one begrudged his "vacations" except maybe the locals since the Coast Guard took over the beach.  On that level, if you want to see someone, they come to you.  You don't have to be "in the office".  Not to mention modern communications allow you to be almost anywhere.  For example, as a "break", I'm doing work at a coffee shop at the moment.

I don't begrudge Romney his money.  But wrong or right, I do bet it will become an election issue.

I've read that Obama plays to a 16/17.  Although I wonder with that swing,    so my 10 handicap isn't much better.  I'ld like to think my swing looks better anyway, but maybe not.....  I do play strict rules; I've got a feeling Mulligans abound when the President plays.  You'ld think a few lessons would be in order...  
To be fair, I've read that, "The president is private about a lot of things he does during the day; he is fiercely private about his golf game, and rarely allows reporters anywhere near him when he’s on a course."  Maybe with that swing, that's good?   

The MacG compound sounds fabulous.  If I"m in MN or even nearby I might take you up on that kind offer.  As for "exorbitant property taxes" I think we had a discussion once before on property taxes so I remember I looked up MN.  You do pay a lot!  A lot more than Californian's pay as a percentage.  I figure taxes like much of life are like a balloon.  You push (tax) one place, you try to make it up elsewhere.  If I recollect your income taxes are lower in MN.  

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/07/03/q-a-with-michael-sandel-from-market-economy-to-market-society.html

Agree or Disagree; what a nice informative "dinner conversation" this has been.

I read a good joke


How to get people to buy/believe your product.

Two places, ADL and Geller, have competing restaurants next door to each other downtown.

Naturally, they both advertise quality.

ADL's establishment is highly successful with long queues of customers who can't get enough of the quality.

On the other hand, Geller's business is struggling badly. On the rare occasion a customer ventures in for food he never comes back a second time.

Geller is despairing that she can't make a living. But she has a bright idea.

She arranges for her cousin to take a job in the restaurant of the ADL, his mission - to find out the ingredients that go into these highly popular dishes.

After a week, the cousin returns declaring triumphantly that he has the information.

"Well, out with it already, what do they put in those dishes?" asks Geller.

"I'll tell you", "it's 50% camel dung and 50% meat!"

"Aha!" shrieks Geller, "so that's his secret,....ADL adds meat!"

Geller's product is all camel dung!   

In a 2009 op-ed published in USA Today, Romney urged Obama to work with Republicans on healthcare reform, and he held up the Massachusetts system and its use of “incentives” as a model.

“We established incentives for those who were uninsured to buy insurance. Using tax penalties, as we did, or tax credits, as others have proposed, encourages 'free riders' to take responsibility for themselves rather than pass their medical costs on to others,” Romney wrote in the article.

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-pn-romney-in-sticky-spot-on-health-reform-20120629,0,471209.story

http://www.thedailybeast.com/videos/2012/06/28/romney-praises-his-own-individual-mandate.html

If Obama is re-elected, repeal will never happen regardless if Republicans take control of the senate.

Even if Obama is not re-elected, it will be interesting to see if the Republicans will be able to overcome a filibuster.

Yes, in general I did say the site was "garbage".  It's terribly biased, filed with innuendo and not good reporting. 

I never did address the issue if Dearborn Muslims Christians and the Police.  Nor did I even watch the specific video.

However, while I don't know the truth, and I do believe in free speech, yet it should be recognized that he Christians were much at fault.
A few were even arrested.  The Police blamed the Christians for the problem; if I remember 4 Christians were arrested.  How you present
a story is important.  It seems other than a few right wing blogs, few if any news reporters actually blamed the Muslims.

There is two two sides to the story.  The largest newspaper in Detroit reported as follows.

http://www.freep.com/article/20120616/NEWS05/120616015/1001/rss01

So then, why were you so negative with the clip from Obj. of the Dearborn mob running off the Christians with threats and the throwing of various objects while the police stood by?

I'm sorry, I did search various ways and I could not find where I was negative towards a specific clip from Obj. regarding the Dearborn mob running off Christians while police stood by.
Could you give me a reference or link?  Thank you.

Their right to worship is protected.

And their desire to change the laws in accordance with their faith, if done legally, is also protected.
 
Many religions have political views.  Catholics for example have recently had strong opinions on birth control.

I may not entirely agree, but I respect their right to express their opinion and dictate to their members.

So did CCP on this site.  Something needs to be done; it's an epidemic. 

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/06/27/marco-rubio-is-the-ideal-candidate-to-fill-out-the-second-spot-on-romney-s-ticket.html

Cute story that a big Olympic star in a BIG money sport could get a break, but fhe unintended consequence of Title IX is that local girls here can no longer play for the University.

"the local girls can no longer play for the University".  Why not if they are good enough?  It they are not good enough, they can play for a smaller college.  Or even on Club teams.

"BIG money sport"?  Women's Basketball?  You must be kidding.    Nearly all women's sports lose money including Basketball. 

http://articles.businessinsider.com/2011-04-05/sports/30039309_1_program-revenue-national-championship-game

Women's equal opportunity law in sports....  The Ann Meyers Drysdale story.

http://www.latimes.com/sports/la-sp-pugmire-qa-20120625,0,6717823.story

In the forward to his memoir, Obama wrote that ‘for the sake of compression, some of the characters that appear are composites of people I’ve known, and some events appear out of precise chronology’.

That's why EVERYONE YAWNS including Maraniss.... 

In the interest of fairness I think it should be pointed out that Bush claimed Executive Privilege SIX times.

Ojjectivist1; perhaps it is semantics, but, they are the same, because people who believe in Islam are called Muslims.  Islam is a religion while Muslims are people who believe in it.  "The followers of Islam are called Muslims. For example those who follow Christianity are called Christian and those who follows Buddhism are called Buddhists."
The terms are inseparable.

Your misleading and IMHO untrue article that you posted goes to great lengths trying to prove that there cannot be a moderate Islam; aka a moderate Muslim; I beg to differ. 

You posted:

"Gaffney also makes the following bold statement:
Gaffney replied that such wasn’t the case and that he knows that there are millions of Muslims who don’t want to live under sharia — Muslims who came to the U.S. to get away from sharia-based governments.
So Frank, are you saying that about half the Muslims here do not want it? (Technically if they do not want Sharia they have apostated, but I will give you a pass on that for now.) Where is your proof? You are starting to sound like a Muslim sympathizer like ACT!’s Guy Rodgers.
I proudly stand with colleagues Pamela Geller and Mr. Spencer on the issue of “moderate Islam”.
Pamela Geller: I have long derided the “moderate Islam” meme as a theory with no basis in reality or history. It’s wishful thinking, dangerous, and suicidal."


While you say, "there are NO MOSQUES that teach moderate Islam, that there are "no other options", I find it incongruent that the majority of the billion Muslims, followers of Islam are peace loving and moderate.  They are not our enemy. 

Just like there are many Christians and Jews who choose not to follow strict old testament law.  I am one of those; I consider myself a Christian, a follower of Christianity, a "moderate" so to speak versus old testament fire and brimstone.  I have devoted Jewish friends who also don't follow all the original rules.  No different than a moderate Muslim who is a follower of Islam but perhaps doesn't insist that one's arm be cut off for stealing.

Bottom line?  Islam is NOT the problem.  Nor is being a Muslim - a follower of Islam.  Only radical elements; specifically as Doug pointed out, "those at war with us". 

I agree, there are no "present day Christian crusades".  But did you read the promises the Pope made?  No virgins, but He promised that God would grant them a full remission of their sins if they died while on crusade.  It was an orgy of death.  Yet I don't hold all Christians to blame.

I am not "trying to draw any moral equivalency between Christianity or Judaism and Islam."  I am merely pointing out that I disagree with your article; IMHO Islam itself is NOT the problem.  Radicals in any religion are the problem.

And you are right, I know little of the Islamic books, nor am I particularly interested, but I do know my Bible.

Maybe you couldn't find them, but here a just a few passages saying, "slay the unbelievers wherever you find them."  I found a lot more, the number was rather overwhelming.   


Anyone arrogant enough to reject the verdict of the judge or of the priest who represents the LORD your God must be put to death. Such evil must be purged from Israel. (Deuteronomy 17:12 NLT)

Whoever sacrifices to any god, except the Lord alone, shall be doomed. (Exodus 22:19 NAB)

They entered into a covenant to seek the Lord, the God of their fathers, with all their heart and soul; and everyone who would not seek the Lord, the God of Israel, was to be put to death, whether small or great, whether man or woman. (2 Chronicles 15:12-13 NAB)

Suppose you hear in one of the towns the LORD your God is giving you that some worthless rabble among you have led their fellow citizens astray by encouraging them to worship foreign gods. In such cases, you must examine the facts carefully. If you find it is true and can prove that such a detestable act has occurred among you, you must attack that town and completely destroy all its inhabitants, as well as all the livestock. (Deuteronomy 13:13-19 NLT)

If your own full brother, or your son or daughter, or your beloved wife, or you intimate friend, entices you secretly to serve other gods, whom you and your fathers have not known, gods of any other nations, near at hand or far away, from one end of the earth to the other: do not yield to him or listen to him, nor look with pity upon him, to spare or shield him, but kill him. (Deuteronomy 13:7-12 NAB)

"Romney doesn’t want to come out against leniency for those brought here illegally when they were under 16, who have since graduated high school or served in the military and are now under 30. He is trailing by as much as 3 to 1 among Hispanic voters. He got himself in a box during the Republican primaries by taking a hard line on illegal immigrants, calling on them to “self-deport” and vowing to veto the DREAM Act, among other things. He wants to edge back toward the center, but Obama has just blocked the easiest path, which would be wrapping himself around whatever Rubio proposes.

I thought the president’s move—an obvious election-year gambit--would spark an explosion on the Republican right. But the reaction has been muted, even on Fox News. That tells me that in purely political terms, Obama has outmaneuvered the opposition by putting a young face on the politically divisive immigration problem. Hence the Romney two-step."

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/06/17/romney-dances-on-immigration.html

It's seems Romney has quite the dilemma.   
What's he going to do?

The rock and the hard place......

Even the Republican blogs are taking him to task.....

http://www.alipac.us/content/romney-won-t-say-he-ll-overturn-immigration-order-641/

Obama did nothing illegal, although I do admit it was a stretch, nevertheless brilliant.

http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/obamas-immigration-policy-shift-was-legal-but-was-it-proper/