Axelrod: Romney "the most secretive candidate we've seen probably since Richard Nixon"

If we set aside Obama for a moment. Like when people questioned whether Palin had reasonable experience to potentially be President if something happened to McCain, instead of saying Obama, Obama, Obama. Lets take a look at Mitt Romneys background for a moment.
Would people have voted for Nixon if they realized he had been undergoing psychotherapy throughout the 1950s? This information was withheld until just after the 1968 election. Would people have voted for Nixon if they had realized the scope of his connections to the Mafia?
Bain Capital was one division of an investment firm. Who gave Romney his money to get started? Who is providing the financial backing for Romney? Why is he so reticent to release his tax returns? These questions need to be answered, not just shouting Obama, Obama, Obama. We know Republicans hate Obama. The question is, are the independents who will decide the election, going to be able to make an informed decision, if Romneys background remains secret?
One fact given to us in the Wall Street Journal, Romney probably broke the law to get so much money into his IRA. If Romney is audited by the IRS, and if Romney were President, we would have to go through removal of Romney. Do we really want this?

reply to post by Matt1951


The Problem I think with your theory is that people, independents STILL have QUESTIONS about Obama!!!!!

Sure, they can research where Romney got his money, BUT are they really going to? How many voters do you honestly think is going to do ALL of that research! I'm on ATS, getting pounded by Romney haters left and right and I am not even going to do that research. Why?

1. I don't care where he got his money. He has his money. It's his now. Just because I know where he got his money doesn't mean I am NOT going to vote for him. In fact, I somewhat admire Bernie Madoff for fooling the system as long as he did! That's what you all wanna do right? Fight the system? Madoff did it in his own way, and Romney did it in his. And they both got rich doing it. Although, Romney's way is a grey area while Madoff's is technically illegal.

2. Romney is not Obama!!!! Obama was a black actor who seduced the black community into voting for him! he took their money and made them more dependent on the system, while successful black people that are not him are demonized throughout the media controlled by your highness! Romney seems to generally care about his country and wants to see people to succeed like him. He is not egoistical and does not tell you what is good for this country. He lays out plans and asks the American people if this is what they want? That is what a leader does. A ruler does what Obama is doing.

So before you go and say, Obama doesn't matter. Obama does matter!!!! Nobody is going to go research into Romney's past. Because if they do, they will actually find the info they are looking for, but if you go research into Obama's past. Which I have! Then you hit red tape after red tape after black tape after red tape with alien goo all over it. No Thanx!

Originally posted by jjf3rd77
reply to post by Matt1951

 

The Problem I think with your theory is that people, independents STILL have QUESTIONS about Obama!!!!!

Sure, they can research where Romney got his money, BUT are they really going to? How many voters do you honestly think is going to do ALL of that research! I'm on ATS, getting pounded by Romney haters left and right and I am not even going to do that research. Why?

1. I don't care where he got his money. He has his money. It's his now. Just because I know where he got his money doesn't mean I am NOT going to vote for him. In fact, I somewhat admire Bernie Madoff for fooling the system as long as he did! That's what you all wanna do right? Fight the system? Madoff did it in his own way, and Romney did it in his. And they both got rich doing it. Although, Romney's way is a grey area while Madoff's is technically illegal.

2. Romney is not Obama!!!! Obama was a black actor who seduced the black community into voting for him! he took their money and made them more dependent on the system, while successful black people that are not him are demonized throughout the media controlled by your highness! Romney seems to generally care about his country and wants to see people to succeed like him. He is not egoistical and does not tell you what is good for this country. He lays out plans and asks the American people if this is what they want? That is what a leader does. A ruler does what Obama is doing.

So before you go and say, Obama doesn't matter. Obama does matter!!!! Nobody is going to go research into Romney's past. Because if they do, they will actually find the info they are looking for, but if you go research into Obama's past. Which I have! Then you hit red tape after red tape after black tape after red tape with alien goo all over it. No Thanx!

I did not say Obama does not matter. I am saying, people like you cover up Romneys potential criminal background; anytime anyone questions Romneys past, you throw up a smoke screen saying Obama Obama Obama.
Really they should be separate threads. Put all your hate of Obama into one thread. But then lets have an honest investigation into Romney.
You don't care if the Wall Street Journal writes an article stating Romney probably had to break the law (tax evasion) with his IRA?
You don't care where he got his money?
Many of us do care.

Good grief, we know about Romney's vomiting dog and high school stories, we don't even know Obama's birth place or real father.

Originally posted by Matt1951

I did not say Obama does not matter. I am saying, people like you cover up Romneys potential criminal background; anytime anyone questions Romneys past, you throw up a smoke screen saying Obama Obama Obama.

Obama does matter on MY thread, because its showing the stupidity of Axelrod saying that Romney is the most secretive candidate we've had since Richard Nixon and not even mentioning Obama's hidden past! That's being hypocritical and that was the point of this thread.

The point of this thread is not to investigate Romney's past, otherwise I would say something like. "Axelrod and I both agree that Romney got rich using secretive grey area methods." I don't agree with Axelrod. That's why I made the thread.

I'm not throwing up a smokescreen at you. You are free to research Romney as much as you want. Make a few threads about him. IDC. But the point IS, you actually CAN and Will be able to research that info. With Obama. It's all blocked, faked, or generalized

Originally posted by jjf3rd77

Originally posted by Matt1951

I did not say Obama does not matter. I am saying, people like you cover up Romneys potential criminal background; anytime anyone questions Romneys past, you throw up a smoke screen saying Obama Obama Obama.

Obama does matter on MY thread, because its showing the stupidity of Axelrod saying that Romney is the most secretive candidate we've had since Richard Nixon and not even mentioning Obama's hidden past! That's being hypocritical and that was the point of this thread.

The point of this thread is not to investigate Romney's past, otherwise I would say something like. "Axelrod and I both agree that Romney got rich using secretive grey area methods." I don't agree with Axelrod. That's why I made the thread.

I'm not throwing up a smokescreen at you. You are free to research Romney as much as you want. Make a few threads about him. IDC. But the point IS, you actually CAN and Will be able to research that info. With Obama. It's all blocked, faked, or generalized

edit on 7-7-2012 by jjf3rd77 because: (no reason given)

Your thread could have been titled "Lets coverup for Romney by Throwing Mud at Obama". That would be more honest.
Axelrod has every right to question Romneys secrecy. Just like Gingrich did in the primary. We finally got one tax return out of Romney. Lets see 10 more.
Obama has been in an intense spotlight for the last 4-5 years. Romney will have to go though the same vetting.

reply to post by Matt1951


WRONG. The liberal media has never questioned Obama as much as they had with Romney!

Obama has millions too! Nobody questions where that money came from.

To suggest that the media will treat Romney the same way they treated Obama is ridiculous and laughable. They have to go to Romney's High School days 50 years ago and attack his religion/faith to find anything else negative to say about the man. They are a joke when it comes to vetting Obama.

Nobody read Obama's book.

Originally posted by jjf3rd77
reply to post by Matt1951

 

WRONG. The liberal media has never questioned Obama as much as they had with Romney!

Obama has millions too! Nobody questions where that money came from.

To suggest that the media will treat Romney the same way they treated Obama is ridiculous and laughable. They have to go to Romney's High School days 50 years ago and attack his religion/faith to find anything else negative to say about the man. They are a joke when it comes to vetting Obama.

Nobody read Obama's book.

Most of those books are fake, they are ghost written. I don't think anyone reads them, they are a way for wealthy donors to launder money to a President. The books probably end up in the garbage somewhere.
doubt there will be any attacks on Romneys religion, not from the Democrats anyway.

Obama does not begin to have the wealth Romney does. Mostly the wingnuts (right wing nuts) focus on things like Obamas birthplace, when they needed to move on a long time ago.

I never said Obama was good. I am saying, we need to carefully examine Romneys background, and it really is Axelrods job to say this.

Swiss bank accounts, offshore tax avoidance schemes, Romney is really on thin ice when it comes to an IRS audit.

Think of John Edwards as an example. The National Enquirer broke the story that Edwards had a mistress and was cheating on his dying wife, but the MSM ignored the story. If Edwards had won the nomination or been elected President, it would have been a disaster for the Democrats.

If Romney is hiding dirt, the sooner it comes out, the better it will be for everyone. The question is, what does he have to hide? Rhetorical question - Why does he not release his tax returns? (because he has something to hide)

A key item to investigate - who gave him the money to launch Bain Capital? Mexican drug lords?

yea, So it doesn't matter if Obama's book is fake?

I agree with your point that Romney's financials should all come out now, while most of the nation does not follow the election, and believe me the dems are trying their hardest to find the dirty.

However, Have you seen what the democrats are doing with the John Edwards trial? They are idolizing his mistress on national TV!!! She's writing books and making loads of money selling her story. Something tells me, the same would happen if Edwards was or was not Vice President.

If people actually try to research Obama they get stopped or cut off or alienated by their own party....

Originally posted by jjf3rd77
yea, So it doesn't matter if Obama's book is fake?

I agree with your point that Romney's financials should all come out now, while most of the nation does not follow the election, and believe me the dems are trying their hardest to find the dirty.

However, Have you seen what the democrats are doing with the John Edwards trial? They are idolizing his mistress on national TV!!! She's writing books and making loads of money selling her story. Something tells me, the same would happen if Edwards was or was not Vice President.

If people actually try to research Obama they get stopped or cut off or alienated by their own party....

Obama, Bush, Clinton, Reagan, all those books are fake. Fluff pieces that are bought by wealthy 'donors' to buy influence with a President. Most those books end up cluttering landfills.
Edwards was totally irresponsible running for President.

reply to post by Matt1951


So what? That just proves that Obama is just as fake as his book, since he put his name on it and he sold it as his story. If it IS fake then we really truly know nothing about the man that has been ruling over our country for the past 3.5 years!

To me, that is way more pressing than Romney's various money connections, that are not under his control during this nomination process anyway.

reply to post by jjf3rd77


I don't think it really matters. At all.
I think this is just a smoke screen for weak minded people to eat up.
We have MUCH bigger fish to fry than to watch two idiots accuse each other of being secretive.
Think about it... how does this rhetoric solve the REAL problems Americans face today?
How is this going to even matter in a week, or a month from now?
Your being distracted for a reason.
They don't want you to focus on what is important for this country.
No wonder they have blacked out Ron Paul. He talks too much about the real issues facing this country.
Wake up America!

reply to post by Allenb83


I Don't know why this was directed at me. If anything, his stupid comment is making more people look around. Either at Romney's past or Obama's...Personally I have more of a problem with Obama's so the choice is clear for me.

Originally posted by jjf3rd77
reply to post by Matt1951

 

Sure, they can research where Romney got his money, BUT are they really going to? How many voters do you honestly think is going to do ALL of that research! I'm on ATS, getting pounded by Romney haters left and right and I am not even going to do that research. Why?

1. I don't care where he got his money.

you should theft is in his blood


concerning "mitts"
better read this 1st though
and-lo-did-i-spy-danites-and-willard

It is not the purpose of this post to critique the religion as a whole but some material should be noted to put things in context.
***
The Danites were formed in 1838 as a paramilitary, underground organization to fight the "enemies" of the church. Their activities were sanctioned by church leaders. They were also known as the "Daughters of Zion" and "Avenging Angels". For a note of historical importance it should be noted that Sherlock Holmes inventor Sir Arthur Conan Doyle wrote a story in which the Danites featured entitled "A Study in Scarlet".
David Whitmer, one of the three witnesses to the Book of Mormon tells of the founding of this group and his persecution for trying to tell the leaders of the church of their folly in going ahead with this scheme. He eventually left the church and you can read about that here.1857massacre.com...
***
The sect was sanctioned to commit any treacherous act in defense of the Church including violence, lying and theft. The violence would also include murder as history would show.
***
Eventually the Church would split into two distinct groups. One of which eventually would find their way to Utah under Brigham Young. There was a lot of friction between the Mormons and state and federal authorities as well as persecution on some level from the people as well.
In 1857 we had the infamous Mountain Meadows massacre, (which occurred on September 11 FYI) largely carried out by the still extant Danites. Some question whether Church leadership and specifically Brigham Young had a direct hand in what happened. It seems clear to me that Young was intimately involved in the massacre.
There was a period of intense pressure being placed upon the Church by federal authorities especially in regards to the polygamous practices of the sect and to the virtual fiefdom ruled by Young in Utah. It is at this point that we see the emigration of some to Mexico including the grandfather of Willard Mitt Romney.
***
One of the first inclinations of the Mormons to move into the financial realm was with the Kirtland Safety Society Anti-banking Society in Ohio. Joseph Smith and Sidney Rigdon sought to get a charter for the bank but were turned down. This was an "anti-bank" that ran as a bank issuing it's own currency, even though it had no legal sanction to function as a bank.

This 3 dollar bill is believed by many to be the origin of the term; "Phony as a three dollar bill". The "anti-bank" issued currency in exchange for gold and silver. It folded and a large group of suckers were left holding the bag. This also was a blow to the church as most of the victims of the scam were Church members and many would leave the Church, disillusioned, over the fiasco. It seems that Smith had land speculation in mind when he started the "anti-bank". He and Rigdon fled Kirtland by night to avoid angry mobs of the defrauded.
The Mormon church would become one of the richest religious bodies with an incredible amount of land. In this TWENTY YEAR OLD STORY the amount of land and property owned by the Church was well over a billion dollars, and that was a less than thorough investigation. In that article you will notice that this is an issue of great secrecy in the Church as they do not reveal what they own or where, even to Church members. It is my contention that the "Avenging Angels" morphed into the financial wizards of the Church. It is because of the transition to acquisition that much of the real power in the LDS church would be focused in the financial sector. When we move forward in time we have the curious case of Howard Hughes.

no friend of mr hopey changey here
they are all trash
look into dr pauls dominionist connections

reply to post by jjf3rd77


Not true. Obama is all that matters on your thread.
Without Obama Romney couldn't win because he wouldn't have a plan and he wouldn't have someone to bash.

Romney's only chance is Obama doing bad, not Romney doing anything good or right.

I ask again, my question you won't touch , and I implore others to ask you as well. Why do you support Romney? What is his plan to fix the economy? What will he do to make the country better? How can you support someone that flip flops and actually refuses to tell you what their plan is.

Do you think just because he is a republican that he couldn't be everything you don't want? Obama could have run as a republican and you would have voted for him. That is absolutely true, because all the things he has done that run counter to conservative beliefs Romney has done those things as well (which is why we call him a flip flopper) and you still support him. So I would be standing here calling Obama a flip flopper and you would be supporting him. You honestly don't know why you support Romney, you have no reason to. I could insert any person into his position (including Obama), have them say what Romney says (flip flops and withholdings) and you would vote for him and defend him.

Please answer my question. What is Romney going to do and why do you support him (besides the fact that you don't like Obama)?

Click here for more information.

reply to post by GogoVicMorrow


I wrote down here many times why I am voting for Romney. STOP asking pointless questions that have already been answered. IN fact someone answered for you and I said, yup that falls along my same line of thinking. I also told someone how Romney is different than Obama in another post on this thread. I'm sorry you are too blind to see my answers.

Anyway, your statement about, Obama not existing Romney wouldn't have anything to run on blah blah blah is so old and hypothetical it doesn't even affect me anymore and is not worth going down the intellectual highway describing to you, how much better this country would be WITHOUT Obama.

Besides without Obama, McCain would be President. Meaning that the Democrats would be choosing Hilary to run against him in November. That would actually be a more interesting battle.

So let me make this clear to you ANYBODY BUT OBAMA!!!!!

reply to post by GogoVicMorrow


Look at Apple. Everyone in America lines up for their stupid shiny iPhones, and do ya think any of them, researches HOW they were made and by WHOM?

Nope, they were made by asian kids who live on $1 a day!

reply to post by jjf3rd77


No you never have. I wouldn't be asking if you have. You haven't even bothered linking a post where you had in the past, but how long does it take to answer that question? Rather than answer you are embarrassing yourself and the candidate you support by refusing to answer (just as romney did) the question that elections hinge on.

Just answer and I won't bring it up again. What is romney's plan for fixing the country? How will he crate jobs and fix the economy? You have never answered why you support Romney, but only stated why you are against Obama. Others here have called you out for avoiding the question. Why should anyone listen to you and why do you crate threads for discussion if you can't or won't answer and have no intention of learning or discussing, but only create threads to repeat a weak position and complain and ignore anyone elses opinion?

We don't need lies and parroting thrown our way repeatedly, we come to expand our knowledge not for propaganda and repeating of storied we can get elsewhere without your added bias. So please answer my question and ill stop asking and leave your thread.

Its simple. I just want to know why you support romney and what he is going to do for jobs and the economy. Not that he might be good for the job because his past, not that he's better than obama and obama did this and this bad. I want to know what romney plans to do and why you support him. If you don't know then tell me why you support someone without knowing what they are going to do? You don't know if you will like it so how can iu ask us to support it. Third time is a charm so I hope after two deflections where u ignored my and another posters plea for an answer u will finally answer this , what should be simple, question.