Mitt Romney and Barack Obama: What a Contrast!

As Romney's Taxes PROVE...More Generous To The People, Thru Donations...
ODUMBO...Only Generous To UNIONS

Romney is generous with his own money. BHO is generous with the Taxpayer's money.

Romney Gives from the heart, Owebama has no heart and gives other people's money!

When did it become the sole point who is more generous? Has our country become a nation of bums with our hands out? If we are going to SURVIVE as a nation I hope not. There is more to being a President than throwing money out into the street.

it never was. yet, you guys tried to use his taxes to convict a guy for doing something wrong with no evidence.

i guess you guys failed...

throwing money out into the street? LOL! that's what Obama has done year after year, with no sign of relent.

Mitt gives most of his "charitable" contributions to the Mormon church which then fights civil rights for gays. Plus Mitt has tons of money off shore which is not getting taxed. Mitt is a fraud who is only interested in making the rich richer and that the middle class pays more.

you simply can't stop making stuff up, can you?

yes. he gives to the mormon church. he gives to a church. its deductible.

starting next year, overseas money gets taxed too. nowadays, it doesn't. what is illegal about that?

you and your candidate are the frauds...

when 1/1/13 rolls around, EVERYONE is going to pay more taxes. poor, middle class and rich. by a lot.

its convenient that you neglect to bring that up.

Shame that it might come to this. But then Tax cuts can be given to the middle class while letting the tax rates remain for the very rich. Since the republicans pledge their loyalty to no taxes, this is probably the only way out.

who's bright idea WAS it?

republicans are looking for no NEW taxes. try and stay on task. they want less spending. a world of difference.

lol, since when do republicans want less spending? When was the last time they cut the military industrial complex? When was the last time they wanted to end the war on drugs? Phony conservatives are worse than democrats when it comes to spending. GW showed that.

Anyway good chance the country will go off the cliff. Your rich folk may have to end up paying more taxes. You can insist on cutting the military by 40% which was proposed by a retired military officer. You may also push to eliminate the war on drugs. Will you? I doubt it.

forget GW. concentrate on Obama.

there need to be widespread cuts, if nothing else, just back to 2007 levels.

I agree there needs to be cuts but I don't think the cuts will be made where they should. Military should be cut at least by 40% and the war on drugs needs to end. Unfortunately too much easy money is made off of both so real cuts won't be made.

how do you arrive at 40%?

how do you just end it? by making them all legal? that's never going to happen.

we're spending a trillion dollars per year on welfare. something is wrong if we're spending a trillion dollars per year on welfare.

A retired military officer wrote a book not too long ago explaining why the military budget is bloated. I haven't read the book but he was on the radio stating how it could be easily cut by 40% and would result in a better military.

Ending the war on drugs? Someday it will happen but I agree that it probably won't be any time soon. Too much money is being made off other people's pain.

But it could be ended and it will be someday. You could first start with decriminalization. Some drugs like Pot I think should be just be made legal. Other drugs, like Crystal meth should not be widely available but throwing such users into jail is not going to work either. Those drugs should be decriminalized and the users subject to medical treatment instead of just thrown in jail.

Military spending is little more than welfare for the rich. Rather spend the country's assets helping people who are having a tough time of it than making pot holes around the world.

That's certainly what Pelosi wants ...........

http://nation.foxnews.com/pel...

Maybe the government doesn't have enough money for her Botox treatments?

yeah. so true.

MAN! have you seen her lately? holy mackerel!

Yep I have. And I have one 'word' .......

Ayn Rand spoke about charitable donations. She explained that everyone acted from a selfish perspective. She stressed the importance of understanding the benefits you expect from your charitable giving.

I do not know what either Obama or Romney expect in return for the donations so I cannot assess their "generosity".

There are some differences and the biggest one is Individual contributions to charities. A big gov't person thinks giving your money and time to charities is a good thing, However, they will not even help out their so called relative. Remember Charity begins at the home.

Much more generous.

The Democratic leftist communists talk the talk but are far from walking the talk.

True Romney was generous when he knew his tax returns would be subject to public scrutiny ... but what did he do when he wasn't running for president and he thought nobody was looking? It calls to mind the Mark 12:38-44.

Yeah, Romney should be more like Joe Biden and not worry about giving even when someone IS looking..lol

I do believe if the Obama's returns relative to their "generosity" is looked at, one may find that the level of "generosity" became more generous as their public and political exposure did the same.

But ole' 'bidin his time Joe?...He doesn't give a damn...but, he iS one hell of a political preacher about the "patriotism" of allowing the government to take one's money.

You seem to support left-wing, political slime, Mr. Ken.

Yet, you state to others that you are a lifelong, conservative Republican.

Weird.

Oh well, to each his own.

Yep his relatives in Africa can attest to that!

That all ya got?

Pathetic.

Contrast: Sorta like photo and negative.

12 years of tax returns vs. 2 years of tax returns
$800 Thousand of income vs. $14.9 million
20% tax rate vs. 14% tax rate
All the people vs. 47% freeloaders

It looks like we have a choice in this election; a choice between two very different men.

No...One man and a wimp...A man called Mitt Romney and a leftist wimp called Barack Obama.

Are you a leftist Mr. Ken?..I am only asking because you tout yourself to be a "lifelong, conservative Republican" on much of your commentary in the past.

Either you choose is fine if you prefer it...But, why the masquerade?..Just curious.

Does the comparisons you show really have anything to do with your favorability of Obama over Romney?

Didn't I read just a day or so ago where you stated Romney would be an "excellent" candidate for POTUS if "only" he had not reversed what he stood for to get the GOP nomination?

Hmmm...Sounds like you were lying.

no. Romney's 20 year effective rate was about 20%.

http://www.weeklystandard.com...

you really seem to have a problem with Romney, but you can't say why...

He disses conservatives, Tea Party supporters, George Bush, Republicans, Jews who support Israel, non-Jews who support Israel, Israel and it goes on and on.

Then you will find where he is self-described as a lifelong, conservative Republican.

I couldn't care less what he is or isn't.

But, the masquerading is rather foolish.

true that. all we can do is unmask him...

Based on what authority is Romney's effective tax rate 20%? Claims made by his campaign staff? I don't trust politicians but I trust their campaign staff even less. Needless to say until Romney provides evidence to the contrary, I will assume his effective tax rate is the approximately 14% on his 2010 and 2011 tax returns.

My problem with Romney is quite simple....we don't know what kind of president he will be....will he be the liberal Republican who was governor of Massachusetts, the conservative candidate who ran in the primaries, or the money grubbing banker who ran Bane Capital?

You state -

"My problem with Romney is quite simple....we don't know what kind of president he will be....will he be the liberal Republican who was governor of Massachusetts, the conservative candidate who ran in the primaries, or the money grubbing banker who ran Bane Capital?"


And in a previous comment on another poll you state -

"Romney would have been an excellent candidate if he hadn't reversed everything he stood for during the primary. Of course, if he had not reversed himself, he would not have won the Republican primaries."
http://www.sodahead.com/unite...


It seems from those comments you favor Romney's "liberalism" as former Governor of Mass.

You even use the word "excellent" candidate when you refer to his "liberalism".

Yet, YOU yourself claim to be a conservative. ...Weird.

This morning I woke up and got out of my bed on the left side. As I sit at my desk and look at the bed, I see it was the right side. Weird isn't it?

Coming from you?...No.

Then again, with your self-touted, sudden financial success to which you have repeatedly implied could be due to Obama-led economic policy, it would at least seem you would have your desk in a separate room from your bed..lol

But, hey, if you prefer it, or that's the best you can do -- that's all that matters.

If Obama has his way, most everyone except his inner circle and "party" members will be fortunate to have ONE room and a cot..Much less a desk.

If you don't understand the difference between left and right, how can you hope to understand the difference between conservative and liberal? These terms are relative not absolute and must be understood within the context in which they are used.

Taking statements using these terms out of the context in which they are presented makes the terms meaningless....anyone who does so has a poor grasp of the English language and logic. It is thus we have a politician campaigning on a platform of "conservative change"....so sophomoric but not uncommon among neo-conservatives.

"If you don't understand the difference between left and right, how can you hope to understand the difference between conservative and liberal? These terms are relative not absolute and must be understood within the context in which they are used."

_____________________________...

Oh I understand just fine the difference between left/right and conservative/liberal...

That's why it is so weird that you self-describe as a conservative while supporting and glorifying that which liberals themselves claim to be "liberal" and/or left.

I believe them to be pretty objective, absolute terms in this greatly divided USA of the present age, which is why I call you on your own self-masquerade.

I realize your "context" of calling yourself a "conservative" on some occasions is when you are asserting that "conservatives" are against "change"...Thus, you qualify your "conservatism" with the fact that you are against changing of the individual currently holding the office of the POTUS, aka, Barack Obama.

Yeah boy, that is "conservatism" (wink, wink).