33 thoughts on “Ann Romney thinks “you people” aren’t entitled to see more than two years of his tax returns

  1. Anne rommey knows WILLARD’S got a rocky road ahead! frankly I’m not tremendously getting jiggy about his tax statements it’s those bank accounts I’m interested in! YEAH those foreign bank accounts!

  2. What a great job she did against the liberal media and she is 100% correct with the YOU PEOPLE, the tax returns are being asked for by YOU PEOPLE just so you can make up more false bs.

    1. jwayne, why do you hate capitalism?

      I bought all of Reagan’s “trickle-down,” shtick. Wish I had known then what I know now. We’ve been lowering the MARGINAL tax rates on the 1% since the Eisenhower administrations.

      Top Marginal Tax rates 1916 – 2011


      NOTHING ever “trickled down.” The 1% just used those tax breaks to buy both parties and the media.

      Billionaire Nick Hanauer: “Raise Taxes on Rich to Reward True Job Creators:

      “……When businesspeople take credit for creating jobs, it is like squirrels taking credit for creating evolution. In fact, it’s the other way around.
      It is unquestionably true that without entrepreneurs and investors, you can’t have a dynamic and growing capitalist economy. But it’s equally true that without consumers, you can’t have entrepreneurs and investors. And the more we have happy customers with lots of disposable income, the better our businesses will do.
      That’s why our current policies are so upside down. When the American middle class defends a tax system in which the lion’s share of benefits accrues to the richest, all in the name of job creation, all that happens is that the rich get richer.
      And that’s what has been happening in the U.S. for the last 30 years. ….”


      1. John I’ll make this quick, you’re post is absolutely correct! George bush sr. said it best over 27yrs ago, regans trickle down economic theory is “zoodoo economics” enough said

    2. JWayne, Henry Ford was a capitalist. He knew that if he paid his workers a decent wage, they could afford to buy his Model-T. Capitalism is the Laws of Supply and DEMAND. When the 1% own 1/2 the country, DEMAND collapses.

    3. jwayne,

      Illuminate us on why WE THE PEOPLE should simply permit Mitt Romney to bypass the traditional vetting process for the highest office of the land? Why is that YOU PEOPLE are so unprincipled that you would even consider that someone who is running for the office of the President of the United States of America should not be subject to the same criticism as every other candidate who runs for every governing office in this country? You should be painfully ashamed of yourself for your irresponsible promotion of patently UnAmerican, UnPatriotic, UnCivilized, and UnDemocratic political improbity.

      1. Pj, YOU PEOPLE simply permitted Barack Hussein Obama to bypass the traditional vetting process in 2008. People are still trying to get his college records, his medical history but for whatever reason he continues to stonewall giving the American people what they need to find out who he really is.

        1. I always amazed at the people that keep beating this old worn out drum about Obama being some secret spy coming to destroy america! he’s been president for 4 yrs now what terrorist plot has he carried out? Name one? He’s bent over backwards trying to seek approval of the very people who hate him. He’s been Jackie robinson and then some! People like jwayne are never going to accept Obama period! it’s not really about birth certificates, school records, his church pastors comments, or about Bill ayres! It’s about him being a dem and being black. Lets just be honest!

          1. To compare Obama to Jackie Robinson is an insult to Mr Robinson. What that man had to endure to play majore league ball and to compare that to Obama is just an slap in the face to Mr Robinsons legacy. In the four years that he has stumbled as president he has suffered NONE of the indignities that Jackie Robinson did. Jackie Robinson was truly someone who historically did something for all black people.

            ANd like you said four years and your kind is still banging that worn out drum that it’s about race, the dislike that America has for him is not because of color but because he has been a failure of major perportions as a world leader.

        2. jwayne, even if your claims were accurate, they’re not, it wouldn’t justify Romney doing the same thing. Please respond to PJ’s question.

          1. I will let Nancy Pelosi answer. When asked if congress hsould play by the same rules she said, “There are no rules. There are no rules. There’s no rule about releasing his tax return, so what rules are you referring to?” she asked, growing clearly frustrated. Asked about the standard she had cited for a presidential candidate, Pelosi said: “It’s up to the American people. The American people are the judges of that.”

            SO there is no requirement for anyone to release tax returns, this is just a typical left wing witch hunt in hopes to make the AMerican people forget what a failure Obama has been for four years and how terrible shape they and America are really in

        3. JWayne,

          Your deference to Pelosi doesn’t answer the question. It does, however, make my very point. The American People have set the standard. The American people are asking Romney to release his tax returns. Democrats and Republicans alike are asking Mitt Romney to reveal the documents in question per standards previously established.

          WE THE PEOPLE are asking OUR Republican candidate for the office of the presidency of the United States to release his tax returns. No one has instantiated a legal requirement. We all know there is no legal requirement. That Romney and Conservatives in Congress have fallen back on “the letter of the law” is a sordid and beggarly deviation. It is a discernibly dishonest defense.

          The effort is entirely voluntary – which is why it speaks so deeply to Mitt Romney’s character; which is why it speaks to the question of sacred trust – the sacred trust that the American People will place in Romney should he be elected.

          Whether or not Obama has been a failure does not pertain to Mitt Romney releasing his taxes. That Conservatives defend Romney simply to oppose Obama is unprincipled and speaks less of Conservatives and Romney than it does of Obama.

          Romney’s response to WE THE PEOPLE as to why he refuses to release his returns is he does not want to give his opposition any reason to criticize him. I’m sure you realize, JW, that criticism is central to vetting? Vetting means careful, thorough examination. Vetting is meaningful criticism intended to evaluate suitability and fitness for office. Criticism is central to the political process. You claim that Romney not releasing his tax returns is defensible because you believe WE THE PEOPLE “will make up more false bs.” You are free to elaborate upon what you believe are false accusations, even if there have been false accusations leveled against Romney, that in itself, is not a defense for refusing to open himself to legitimate criticism. That YOU PEOPLE do not care to scrutinize Republican candidates speaks to the level of your demonstrably incautious and ill-considered irresponsibility.

          Let WE THE PEOPLE decide what is true and what is false in any criticism that is launched. When you take up Romney’s line about avoiding legitimate criticism for fear of illegitimate criticism, what you advocate for is Authoritarianism. Let the WE THE PEOPLE decide for ourselves what is meaningful and what is not. Let WE THE PEOPLE decide what is pertinent in Romney’s tax returns and what is not.

          Again, I ask: Illuminate for us the reason why WE THE PEOPLE should simply permit Mitt Romney to bypass the traditional vetting process for the highest office of the land?

          Why is it that YOU PEOPLE are so unprincipled that you would even consider that someone running for the office of the President of the United States of America should not be subject to the same criticism as every other candidate running for every other governing office in this country?

          Put another way: Why should Romney be immune from criticism?

          Put another way: To what advantage is it to any voter in this nation for Romney not to act with as much openness and transparency as other candidates running for the office of the presidency?

          Beyond traditional vetting, Romney has situated his campaign in an arena that render his tax returns pertinent to his fitness for office.

          Conservative obsession with Obama’s birth certificate, medical records, and college transcripts are propagandist red herrings. The President cannot take office without the former; the latter two are not within the sphere of the traditional vetting process, and neither pertain to the issue at hand: tax returns. Conservative obsession with superfluous documentation speaks not to RESPONSIBLE VETTING but to Injudicious POLITICAL WARFARE.

          If you insist upon your diversionary propagandism by trying to focus on Obama instead of Romney, you reiterate how Irresponsible Conservatives have become. I’m not an Obama supporter, but between Romney and Obama, Obama is the most fit for office. We can argue that one thoroughly, if you wish.

          But the issue at hand is still:

          Why should OUR REPUBLICAN CANDIDATE be unanswerable to WE THE PEOPLE?

          If digression from Romney really is the direction you insist upon, perhaps I should follow your lead. If we are to divert from Romney and make the point about IRRESPONSIBLE and IRRATIONAL candidate selection for the highest offices of the land, we should then discuss the repetitive pattern of selecting Conservative candidates exhibiting flagrant and ignominious corruption, furtiveness, and incompetence.

          The severe condition of this nation did not begin in 2008 when Obama took office. The origins are decades longer.

          Let’s have that conversation – How Conservatism Has Destroyed This Country.

          Let’s have that conversation – How Barack Obama embraced and implemented CONSERVATIVE POLICY. Yes, let’s talk about how Barack Obama has failed when the bulk of his policies were CONSERVATIVE SOLUTIONS.

          Let’s talk about how CONSERVATIVE SOLUTIONS HAVE FAILED.

          Let’s talk about how Conservative solutions have failed when implemented by both Republican and Democratic administrations.

  3. Zach, great one!


    It’s “YOU” dirty “little” effing hippies. You’re not OUR kind of “people.”


    GOP finding out how rigging your primary can backfire.

  4. Oh, I think there’s more than enough contempt dripping out in “you people” that no modifier is required.

    1. Ooh Different Sue, but what writhing elitist ooze pulsates so contemptibly from your comment. Yours necessitates many a modifier: Ignoble Apologist, Abhorrent Champion, and Odious Vindicator of Supercilious Pretention.

      Could you possibly be suggesting that Mitt Romney is immune from public scrutiny when he is running for the highest office of the land? Might you be defending the idea that the American people are undeserving of crystal clear, above board transparency on the part of Mitt Romney? Do you defend Ann Romney’s reprehensible assertion that the American people are unworthy of vetting her husband?

      Are you aware that Romney’s tithing to his church hasn’t any bearing at all on the issue of releasing his tax returns?

      1. eep! I was referring to Ann Romney’s contempt for us (as Charlie Pierce at Esquire reminds us, for the Romneys, there’s family, and the rest of us are merely “the help”)

        1. Please accept my apologies for misunderstanding you, Sue! Consider the modifiers rescinded and disregard my questions.


          1. We’re good. Since I’m not a frequent commenter with an established history of saying stuff here that you could have drawn on, I can see how my all-too-short statement could be misconstrued.

  5. So what is the problem Mr. Romney, are we the people not worthy of the truth ? Do you want the job or not? cough up the tax returns, please! or run your campagin as a canidate no one can trust? and here is a question for you no one can answer; and I ask this a lot. If the pro lifers get their way, and take away birth control, (and by the way are you not part of that?) Who will pay for the new baby boom? will the children be neglected? You wouldn’t do that to our children, will you Mr. Romney? What is your plan?

  6. Apparently some conservatives are now trying to change the narrative and say that Anne Romney didn’t say “you people,” but rather “our people.”

    I’ve listened to the video I posted above numerous times, and it sure sounds like she said “you people” to me.

  7. She did say you people, not sure what the big deal is, Obama has said it at the University of Colorado. “It shouldn’t be a Democrat/Republican issue,” Obama said. “America is not just about you people doing well.

    1. JWayne,

      Nice try with the false equivalency but context and accuracy matter. I read through the transcript of Obama’s speech from this past April at University of Colorado, and I watched the unedited video. Obama never used the phrase “you people.” Even if he had, and I missed it, his entire speech was made in the context of “we” and “our” and “us.” When he did use the word “you,” he used it with specificity – in the context of his audience specifically – in other words, inclusively. Inclusive comparison (President Obama) is not the same as exclusive contrast (Ann Romney).

      But maybe this isn’t the speech you are referencing. Let’s look at the speech to which you refer. Please post it.

      Here’s the video I watched. Let’s examine the concept of elitism in this speech versus Ann Romney’s interview.

      Need I say, however, you are making a propagandist diversion again rather than attending to the matter at hand: Mitt Romney releasing his tax returns.

      I ask you again: Why should Mitt Romney be granted the privilege of exemption from established practice?

      Aren’t you even concerned about the terrible precedent he sets with his refusal?

      How would you possibly compare apples to apples without comparing his returns to Obama’s returns? Or doesn’t that matter to you? You aren’t really interested in honestly evaluating Candidate Romney to Incumbent Obama?

    1. Cynthia, there is no way Ann Romney would accept your invitation. However, you do have a very interesting blog. I need to get back to work writing blog posts the next few days, and I’m also considering writing a couple of political books: one of the books that I’m planning to write is on gerrymandering, and I haven’t decided on the subject of the other book that I’m planning to write yet.

  8. Ok lets go back to Mitt. Why should he have to release them, there is no law saying he has too. Again the only reason libs want him to release them is so they can make a issue out of his wealth. I do not care how much money he has, I don’t care where he keeps his money, it has nothing to do with the office of president.

    I don’t care about Obamas tax return I don’t care about your tax return I don’t care about my neighbors tax return. The whole issue is liberals trying to continue the division of us vs them which they desperately need in order to retain the White House in November as Obama has no record to stand on in four years.

    But YOU PEOPLE are just going to continue to try and make this the issue this election year instead of looking at the failing economy and the continued deaths of US military personal in his wars.

    1. Shorter jwayne: “Taxes, like individual responsibility, are for the little people.”

  9. JWayne,

    First, Republicans and Democrats alike – yes, JWayne – Republicans and Democrats alike are calling for Mitt to release his returns because releasing tax returns is established practice in the vetting process. Releasing several years worth of tax returns is established practice because tax returns are very telling about a person’s character – they are telling of honesty, good judgement, and the nature of an individual’s business practices. Liberals and Conservatives both want him to release his returns for these very reasons. Surely, you must be aware of that? Or is your head so filled with right wing garbage you can’t think in terms other than hyper-partisan hatefulness? Where he keeps his money has everything to do with the office of the president. And where he keeps his money has everything to do with how he’s framed his own campaign. To judge him by his own standards, WE THE PEOPLE need to see his tax returns. But most importantly, Mitt Romney’s tax returns speak directly to the level of commitment (or lack thereof) he has to this country.

    If Liberals make an issue out of his wealth, so be it. Or would you just eliminate liberal opinion from our political discourse? That’s what it sounds like. So, people who disagree with you shouldn’t have a voice in government is that it? If you don’t care about his wealth, so be it. Ignore that criticism. Let the WE THE PEOPLE decide what to make of his tax returns.

    Your offhanded dismissal of releasing tax returns speaks to unprincipled, Radical Conservatism being painted into a corner – there’s no room for you to go if you don’t open your mind and give up your hyper-partisan position. Conservative, by the way, means to conserve tradition. Romney isn’t conserving tradition. He’s breaking tradition because following tradition – transparency – is potentially damaging. That you are too numbed to recognize it speaks ill of your judgement. Your “defense” isn’t rational and it is inaccurate. Your judgement cannot be trusted nor can Romney’s.

    The economy is an issue AND so is Mitt Romney’s tax returns. They are not mutually exclusive. Obama’s record on the economy is not germane to Mitt Romney’s taxes – at least until Mitt Romney releases as many years as Obama has. Mitt Romney’s tax returns will tell WE THE PEOPLE quite a lot about how fit he is to hold the highest office of the land. Every American citizen should be on the horn, signing petitions and making a stink about his tax returns. You better believe it, because Mitt Romney’s tax returns are germane to how he would handle the economy. It sheds light on how his tax policies benefit him personally – whether his tax policies reflect self-interest or public interest.

    I daresay you need a good lesson in civics, JWayne. And a good lesson in human decency. The rigid and unprincipled divisiveness you exhibit will be exactly the momentum that drives this nation into a second Civil War. Think about America rather than yourself. Try thinking FOR yourself rather than allowing your head to be filled with right wing propaganda. You and your right wing ilk have sufficiently damaged this country with your Anti-American ideologies which have no relation to history, facts, evidence, or critical thought. Maybe try some self-reflection, JWayne, before attitudes like yours irreversibly destroy America.

    You also need a good lesson in current events and recent history. The wars in which we are now embroiled are wars that the Left has opposed. These are Bush/Cheney wars – affected through lies and manipulation – credit where credit is due, after all. The blood is on Conservative hands when it comes to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

    Should Mitt Romney be subject to the same criticism that every other candidate running for executive office traditionally has?

    Your final answer is no. Because – why? Liberals might criticize him? And what does that tell us? It tells us that for you and for Romney, the only opinion that matters is Right Wing opinion. Healthy discourse and political debate might be too damaging for Romney. Shut down discussion, shut down debate, shut down thought. That’s typical Right Wing Authoritarian Thinking; it’s despicable, and it’s UnAmerican. You should be ashamed of yourself. And so should the Romneys.

    So, I take it you have no final answer for the question of Romney setting a terrible precedent because you simply can’t understand what the precedent was in the first place or why it has been critical to our traditional election process.

    Then there was the question regarding transparency – it would seem you, like the GOP have no regard for good government. Transparency is crucial for good government. Given your responses, what you indicate is that you are really only interested in narrow, right wing, authoritarian government. You are despicable.

  10. Yes PJ reported by CNBC today “While this quarter’s earnings reports have crossed a substantially lowered profit bar, future expectations through the year indicate a recession could be on the way.” But lets worry about how much money a candidate is worth. DEFLECTION!

    1. JWayne,

      You are deflecting again. Yes, indeed you are. You are deflecting yet again and again and again. Perhaps you require a definition since you are incapable of understanding what deflection means because it is is apparently inherent within your mode of thought. The issue at hand is whether or not Mitt Romney should be immune from the same form of criticism that candidates running for elected office have traditionally been subject. The issue at hand is not CNBCs report about this quarter’s earnings.

      The issue at hand is Mitt Romney’s Tax Returns. The amount of his worth is not the main consideration for examining tax returns. Releasing tax returns was established, in part, to determine whether or not a candidate has broken any laws. Your characterization of “But let’s not worry about how much money a candidate is worth….” is propagandist – it’s called false frame. You, clearly, have absorbed Right Wing Propaganda to the point that it prevents you from thinking about or rationally discussing anything, let alone the topic at hand – which is not CNBC’s quarterly earnings report. The topic at hand is: Why should Mitt Romney not follow the same standards as other candidates?

      The issue at hand is among many other things: transparency, honesty, and breaking the traditional vetting process when it is politically expedient. The issue at hand is operating with integrity by confronting potentially damaging criticism. The issue at hand is allowing the American people to decide for themselves what is worthy criticism and what is not. This issue at hand is not Obama, it is not CNBC’s quarterly report. It is Romney.

      What you are demonstrating time and time and time again is that you do not value freedom in any form. You are operating from a pre-determined answer about Romney’s worth as a candidate and you are advocating for the prevention of people other than those that occupy the inside of your head the freedom to look at all the data and the freedom to assess all the criticism so they can DECIDE FOR THEMSELVES what the data means and how it applies to the challenges this nation faces. Authoritarian governments, dictatorial governments, and autocratic governments operate under the values that you are expressing. Mitt Romney has not had a cozy relationship with the truth during this campaign. He has not shown that he is an honest man, quite the opposite. This latest nonsense with his tax returns reinforces his patterned dishonesty.

      I remind you: To be vetted for Vice-President, Romney handed over 24 years of tax returns to John McCain. That was Vice-President, JW. Romney is now running for president. He should be meeting the same standard or higher for public scrutiny – that he, himself, had previously aspired to. At the very least he should release the same amount as his opponent. But if wants to be the better candidate, he’d release more. I’d say his returns since 2008 + those that he had given McCain. By doing neither and by shifting gears from a tradition of good government to a poorer standard, possibly setting an inferior precedent, he is operating in a manner unbefitting a presidential candidate and unbecoming of a potential president.

  11. PJ said ” Mitt Romney’s tax returns are germane to how he would handle the economy. It sheds light on how his tax policies benefit him personally – whether his tax policies reflect self-interest or public interest.

    That is total bull. his past record as businessman, as a governor and as a person who ran the Olympic in Salt Lake City speak a LOT more to his talents than what a community organizer ever was able to do. TO say his tax returns will say how he will govern is just a dog and pony show by the left

  12. JWayne,

    Barack Obama has served as President of the United States. You may take issue with his policies – I certainly do – his governing approach has been to adopt Conservative solutions and Conservative policies which were originally devised and supported by Conservatives and Republicans. But as to experience, Obama has served as president. Romney has not. Obama is the more experienced. Romney’s primary experience has been in the private sector. He had a dubious stint as governor of Massachusetts – which is not the emphasis of his campaign – and with good reason. It doesn’t play in his favor.

    The last thing this country needs is a CEO. And certainly not a do-nothing CEO whose approach to the economy and to his own previous leadership position is hands-off, do-nothingness.

    You may like to believe that releasing tax returns is not important and does not speak to his fitness for office, but the standard was set for numerous purposes long, long before this election – I’ve named a few of those reasons. You may not like them and you may choose to disregard these but it’s not as if I’ve just come up with this on my own simply to debate you. The tradition stands for lots and lots of reasons. You may not understand those reasons because you are simply uninformed, but insisting the American people follow your standard of ignorance is pretty insane.

    I repeat: Romney cannot be taken seriously until he succumbs to at least the standards set by his opponent. Until then he’s just being dishonest, and given the intensive level of dishonesty he’s shown thus far, he really doesn’t have any wiggle room.

    And, by the way – you’re deflecting again.

    And, by the way – let the American people decide what is a dog and pony show and what is not. The only way to decide that is for Mitt Romney to release his taxes – then let the American people decide what is valuable criticism and what is not.

  13. P.S. If Romney does finally come down off his high horse and conforms to the standards of good government – here’s another thing to consider:

    If he releases a reasonable number of years – look at the timing of when he does it. The other issue at hand is releasing these documents in an honest manner – so there is sufficient time to examine them. In Romney’s case, it is already evident that his taxes are quite complex which would indicate Romney’s taxes probably require more time for examination than the average person. If he does release them but only at the 11th hour, he will be no more fit to hold office – such a move would indicate the opposite – that he is unfit, untrustworthy, and unreliable. It would indicate that he is politicking rather than making a sincere effort.

Comments are closed.