Are Matt Damon and Bruce Springsteen HYPOCRITES for condemning 1%ers when they themselves are too?

Those of the 1% that want changes are not hypocrites. They are willing to pay more in taxes, close loopholes that allow vast sums to be held offshore, they also vote for people that want these measures. The 1% that make all the money in questionable practices, abuse the system, and buy Congressmen to keep the status quo are the ones at fault.

And they are still charging the big tickets to continue to make money. Pretty hypocritical, arrogant and disappointing.

Because unlike Mitt, they are not pushing for more. Mitt and friends apparently won't be happy until they have everything.

Not true...a cheap ticket out in the north forty to see Springsteen look like an ant on an anthill at one of his concerts costs $75. These 1%ers don't go cheap.
Not sure why you would characterize Mitt that way. Springsteen had a net worth of over $200 million (2011) and he is writing lyrics to shoot the '1% bastards'. Somebody is a hypocrite.

Concerts generally don't make that much money for the performers. With all the costs connected to putting on a concert, they are lucky if they break even.

Bruce is rich but he does not try to make the rich richer at the expense of the middle class like Mitt does.

who has Bruce gotten rich off then? the poor? he is worth over 200 million dollars. Really? wowee. he has become a hypocrite....and he isn't running for president. he is just influencing ppl. romney is not my first choice but its better than the liar in the white house now. another hypocrite.

I don't know anyone who is against people making money. What I am against however are people who expect other people to pick up the tab for services that allow them to succeed. As far as I know Bruce has not complained about his taxes and has paid them. Mitt on the other hand probably hasn't paid any or perhaps only have gotten money back.

what liar in the white house? The only liar in the white house was G W Biush. Need I remind you of some of his lies? Obama has not lied at least not very much. He fulfilled his promise to move the war on Terror back to Bin Laden and he did fulfill GW's promise of getting him dead or alive.

You said, Mitt probably hasn't paid taxes...Governor Romney’s tax returns show:

First, as a successful businessman, Governor Romney has not only added value to our economy through his investment and business activity, but he has paid millions in taxes every year to the U.S. government.

Second, the Romneys take to heart “to whom much is given, of him shall much be required.” Accordingly, they have been extraordinarily generous in their charitable giving, donating over $7 million from 2010-2011 – donating even more to charity than they paid in taxes.

Third, Mitt Romney has scrupulously complied with the U.S. tax code, and his income is reported and taxed at the applicable rates, and he has paid 100 percent of what he has owed.

As the law does not require the release of any tax returns, the release of these 500+ pages of tax returns goes above and beyond what is required.

In addition, Gov. Romney has released numerous financial disclosures since 2002, as required by law – which have also been posted on this site. There are 3 federal Public Financial Disclosures (from 2007, 2011, and 2012), and 6 Massachusetts Statements of Financial Interests (from 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, and 2007).

The liar in the White House is Obama. Bush? You want to deflect to Bush? O puhleeze. That is soooo old.

You sure about the taxes paid every year? Why hasn't he released his tax returns showing this? Someone recently came and and said he didn't pay any taxes for those 10 years. What is he hiding?

As for charity, He hasn't released his tax returns like his father did so how would you know? Also to give huge sums to the mormon church so that they can fight gay marriage is not something I would consider charitable giving.

He may have fully complied so why hasn't he released his tax returns? What exactly is he hiding?

He just did have a problem with his tax returns and with his residence. Did he live in Utah or did he live in Mass. Just curious would you be as generous if Obama didn't release his tax returns? Shame Mitt couldn't be like his father.

Here is something you should read prior to voting for this idiot:

http://www.alternet.org/elect...

Romney released his tax returns for the last 2 years.
http://www.mittromney.com/lea...
And there are all the disclosure links for federal, state, etc.

Obama has most of his records sealed.

The charitable contributions are there as well. Just go look.

10 THEORIES? WHAT? Are you kidding? I don't care if he tithes with his church. Most ppl do.

Joshua Holland?!? He's a blogger. Its his opinion at best. Good grief.

I will never vote for the guy in there right now. He has proven himself to be worse than I expected and I expected shoddy because he was my Senator when I lived in IL.

But Obama has released a decade of tax returns, Aren't you the least bit interested of what could be in them to cause Mitt to break from his father's example?

http://www.barackobama.com/ta...

I would never vote for a socialist for the rich whose main goal is to transfer wealth from the middle class to the very rich. Tell me why do you think the rich needs more money from the middle class?

i don't think the rich need more money but its theirs and i have no right to take it and i don't want what i haven't earned.
romney is in compliance and then some.

No one is saying take Mitt's money but if it is true that he has paid no taxes for the prior 10 years, I would like to know that. I think that is very relevant.

I frankly don't care if he is in compliance. I care that he has ditched his father's example and has given republicans a really bad name.

Obama is saying take Mitt's money. He says to tax the rich more. He has paid taxes.
There are financial disclosures back to 2002 and the tax return links for 2010 and 2011.
http://www.mittromney.com/lea...
i don't think he has given republicans a bad name. they did that themselves. they better shape up because we cannot depend on the dems to pull us out of this spin...that's for sure.

Well the democrats are pulling the country out of the mess the republicans put us in under the leadership of G W Bush.

I believe Mitt has not paid taxes for the 10 years prior to the tax returns he released. I just would like to know how he did it. I also believe he has illegitimate children listed in his tax returns.
This would really go over well with his Christian fundamentalist backers. :-)

you said...Well the democrats are pulling the country out of the mess the republicans put us in under the leadership of G W Bush.

truly...i have heard Bush blamed till i don't even hear it anymore. so sickening. i couldn't stand the guy when he was in office and the Dems are not pulling us out of anything. they are making it worse. Unemployment is higher now than when O took office, he lost 6.5 BILLION (or gave it away for influence) on failed green projects, etc.

romney will disclose the rest of the stuff after he is formally titled the repub candidate. this will turn out to be much ado about nothing. he has disclosed his financials back to 2002. did you say illegitimate children? o no...you aren't one of those crazies, are you?

Romney is following what he did back in 2002 when he ran for governor. Amazing how he hasn't updated anything.

Bush needs to be blamed more as the damage he did was astounding. Shame you are so susceptible to far right propaganda. Obama's job creation is a hell of a lot better than G W Bush.

You might want to read this: http://www.salon.com/2012/05/...

I think it is odd that the party that is suppose to be against government only was saved by government jobs during GW's first term and one of the reason Obama's job creation is so bad is cutting of government jobs. Umm at one time I would think republicans would have been for this but have long realized that republicans are little more than hypocrites.

Its baffling to me how ppl think i am a fan of Dub and I want to stick up for him. Never was, never will be but blaming him when the House and Senate were Democrat for 4 years and the Senate still is and the President is ...
is beyond me. Unemployment is higher than when Obama took office but you think its valid to continue to lay blame on Dub. It doesn't make sense that you have a president that is falling down on the job but you REFUSE to make him responsible for keeping his promises and accountable for the state of the nation NOW. sounds crazy. I don't see where blaming is helping the situation. This guy is a lousy president. Maybe you should look at what he has and hasn't done instead of trying to blame everything and everybody else for what is really Obama's shortcomings. He has no excuses....that's a child's ploy anyway. Blame the dog while your at it.

House and senate were basically democrat for only 2 years under GW. There was a short period around 1980 where the senate was in play but with VP holding the tie breaker vote, it was hardly democrat.

I find it amazing that anyone would not blame GW. What do you really think the economy was healthy prior to Obama coming in and then all of a sudden he ran i off a cliff? Let me remind you that GW inherited a relatively healthy economy with low unemployment and promptly screwed it up by giving tax cuts to the rich with the promise that the federal budget would stay balanced. That and the starting two wars off budget based upon lies are the proximate causes of the mess we are in.

House and Senate were Democrat for 4 years straight with 2 of those having the presidency also.
We should be making our back by now but we are flailing.
Obama doesn't even have a budget. Where do we stop spending? He is out of control. I said the same thing about Bush...spend, spend, spend.
He is making matters worse.

So what. Congress was controlled by slimy republicans for 6 years straight, the entire government. House, senate, Presidency, and supreme court. Why are you not angry at their taking the country straight to hell? Are you proud of the republican party, the party of so called fiscal responsibility taking the country from a balanced federal budget to deficit spending? What really makes this bad is that there is nothing to show for this spending. Way to go.

Going back 10 years and pointing fingers won't help us now. I am not going to waste my anger on it, that's why I am no longer angry about it.....this needs to be fixed now and playing the blame game is nothing but a waste of time.
Why would I be proud of the Republican Party? I am not a Republican! I was raised Democrat....and that party went to hell in a handbag years ago. Big disappointment. They decided THEY wanted to be what the Repubs were so that's what they became. The big Rich, greedy, fat cat, lying dinosaurs. And so they have.
Right now, the Repubs have the new blood and better ideas. I am an Independent.

Ignoring history will just result in the same mistakes being made over and over again. This is not the first time republicans have fought fiscal stimulus. By fighting it they drag out the recession for longer than it should be.

How did democrats go to hell in a handbag? They didn't take a balanced federal budget and promptly unbalanced it. They didn't lie this country into two wars. Finally they were not in control when the country went off a cliff again. Isn't interesting that most financial collapses occur under republican leadership. I am a democrat because I realize that republicans generally do the opposite of what they propose. Shame you can't see this.

I'm not ignoring history, nor am i willing to blame and rehash it. The country is changing and that includes the political parties.
The democrats went for the money. They lost their morals and values. There are more rich Dem politicians than Repubs anymore. They have no new blood. They want to be seen as a party of benevolence while evoking plantation mentality...just some of the ways they went to hell in a handbasket.
You are being loyal to a dead fish....Dem party.
I will go with the new ideas and the Teas for now. I feel like the Repub party has hijacked them but at least the Repubs recognized that they needed an infusion.
Hopefully, the days of the Old Parties are near gone.

Would love to see your stats on there being more rich democrats than republicans. Disagree with you on new blood. Obama is definitely new blood and is a lot better than Mitt who is nothing but a dishonest liar who is hiding a lot. Sorry but I am not going to vote for someone who is hiding everything they can prior to them becoming president. Can only assume Mitt if he becomes president will make Richard Nixon look like an open president.

The republicans just want to be seen as protecting everyone from some imaginary threat. Name the threat and chances are you will see republicans getting all worked up about it.

If Obama is the new blood of the party....good luck with that. Not much to look forward to.

Well lets see Obama took the stock market from the Bush lows of around 6500 up to over 13000 today. Keeps that record going we may be looking at the stock market being 26000. Of course if Mitt gets in we will probably see it sink back down to under 7000

yeah, Obama did that to the stock market....but when it goes down, he doesn't do it. its the stock market. it goes up and down but we still haven't pulled out of the spiral. i am not investing anymore...not in the market.

No when the market goes down, its Bush's fault. lol
Well I am fully invested and am moving close to my all time high which I think was in July 07. Thank God Obama got in. If republicans continued to control things the stock market would be below 5000 today.

i don't believe that.

Don't believe what exactly? July '07 was the height of the market and it went down soon after as that was when some new evaluation rule was suppose to be instituted.

i don't believe what you stated above about IF the repubs were in control.
anyway, i think Springsteen and Damon should move to France and pay 75% of their income in taxes. they could still afford to live and help soooooo many others.

Well during the 8 years of Bush the stock market moved from around 10000 to under 7000 at the Bush lows. Continue the downward line and under 5000 is not unreasonable. Just love phony conservative love it or leave it attitude. Well they are not going to move to France so get use to it.

yeah, ok, except i am not a Republican. never was.

Yes almost all your so called entertainers are, idiots like David Letterman, Jay Leno etc..

They are ,also I'm not sure if either of them donate or give time to charities,like farm aid or anything like that.

yeah they do but if they get their own way.....they won't be in a position to do that anymore. its a long way down.

LOL yes of course. They should give away all their money and join OWS.

You be the Ju8dge:

"Matt Damon is an American actor who is known for his role in such films as Good Will Hunting and The Departed, his net worth is $65 Million. "

Yeah...I suppose, but they're opinion only matters if we make it more relevant or more important than the ordinary American......and to me, they don't matter. Period. They're entertainers, and they merit no special recognition.
Call up the OWS'ers and tell them to picket Damon & Sprinsteen's estates. They need to share their wealth with those poor disenfranchised puppies.