Comments about ‘Kathleen Parker: Now the left is sounding nutty as the 'birthers'’

Return to article »

Published: Wednesday, July 18 2012 12:00 a.m. MDT

  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
liberal larry
salt lake City, utah

All of the pro-birther commenters have totally convinced me that President Obama was NOT born in the United States!
I encourage all of you to keep pressing this issue, and maybe you can even get Mitt Romney to address the nation and expose the evils of our cagey, Kenyan President.

Voice of Reason
Layton, UT


Ah, no...you missed the target. This whole issue is about releasing tax returns as candidates, but the vast majority of the years you listed were for returns revealed while the presidents were in office. Well, in that case, every single president except Ford released their tax returns while in the White House; this has always been pretty much procedural.

But of course, that's not the issue here. We're talking about CANDIDATES releasing their private tax returns. That list, the one everyone's referring to on this issue, is as follows:

Nixon: None.
Ford: None.
Carter: None.
Reagan: None.
Bush I: None.
Clinton: Released only one year prior to being president, his salary as Arkansas Governor, which was already public information anyway.
Bush II: One year prior to being president, his salary as Texas Governor, also already public.
Obama: Unprecedentedly released all since 2000, all public anyway as Legislator and Senator.

In other words, if Romney wins, he will be the first presidential candidate in history to release his PRIVATE tax return. In fact, all four of the candidates the Tax History project tracks as revealing their tax returns are Republicans. Apparently, not one Democrat.

Cinci Man

What about jobs and the economy? Sheez.

Salt Lake City, Utah

The facts so far: Romney made a statement at the NAACP that was not well accepted. Everyone knew that said statement would not be well accepted.

The interpretation: Romney purposely made the statement not to get the attention of those he was addressing but to get the attention of those who would hear about the poor reception the statement received.

This interpretation is considered by some as a whack-a-doodle interpretation.

The other possible interpretation is that Romney didn't/doesn't care enough about the group he is addressing to tailor his speech to them - he just gives the same speech no matter who is listening.

Hmmm - neither interpretation is favorable to Romney - but, whack-a-doodle or not, the first interpretation at least implies Romney has some connection to those who are receiving his message.

Voice of Reason
Layton, UT

Kalindra - Are you seriously suggesting that Romney should have avoided one of THE biggest reasons he's running against Obama just because his audience may have disagreed with him? I'm glad he had the courage and integrity to stand up for his principles - repealing the economy-killing Obamacare - even in the face of an overwhelmingly opposed audience. I think he shared his platform respectfully, and said what he always says as a candidate. The NAACP knew who he was, and knew his views, and still invited him. They knew what they were getting. If they didn't want to have their ears soiled by anti-Obamacare statements, then they shouldn't have invited the one man who is running largely on that very position. To the NAACP's credit they still did invite him. Too bad a few in the audience were disrespectful and booed...there's no need for that among adults in a democratic society with free speech.

Eric Samuelsen
Provo, UT

>Brother Chuck
Oh please please please please keep it up. I would love nothing more than to have this race focus on Obama's birth certificate. The nuttier the Right sounds, the better it is for Democrats. So please, keep it up.


"if Romney wins, he will be the first presidential candidate in history to release his PRIVATE tax return."

How many Democratic and Republican candidates in the general election have not served in any public office before running for president?

Do we have Romney's tax returns for the years he served as Gov. of MA?

Hillary Clinton waited until April to release tax records dating back to 2000 for herself and former President Bill Clinton. Sen. Chris Dodd, D-Conn., also released tax returns during the primary, but Joe Biden didn’t release his returns until September, when Obama selected him as a running mate. John Edwards did not release tax returns, though he had released a decade of returns in September 2004, when he became John Kerry’s running mate.

In the 2004 presidential campaign, Kerry released tax forms covering years 1999 through 2003.

Presidential candidates began releasing their returns consistently starting in the early 1970's according to the Tax History Project Director.

How many years of tax returns did candidate George Romney release?

Voice of Reason
Layton, UT

For most of those Democrat candidates, you must be getting your info from other sources besides the Tax History Project, since they say "...incoming presidents do not release returns for the year before they assumed office..." which isn't always true, but is generally the rule throughout history. The idea of candidates publicly releasing tax returns is a very new idea, mostly thanks to recent Republican candidates. Maybe Dodd, Edwards, Kerry, etc. really did, I don't know.

You can certainly see how much Romney made in his governor years. And while his father released quite a few returns, he didn't have to deal with a dishonest opponent who can be depended on to twist & distort facts to means something they don't. Such as trying to claim he was a felon and lied on his taxes, when everyone else - including the liberal MSM - have found that there's nothing to the accusations at all. Anything, anything to distract from Obama's actual record, I suppose. Which is why I think Romney was wrong in reacting so defensively to his Bain years, since Bain saved far, far more jobs than they ever "lost". It's not even close.

American Fork, UT

I don't think the left has it in 'em to be that far fetched and stupid.

West Valley City, Utah

Most Obama supporters will do anything they can do to ignore or divert attention from the fact that Romney was given a standing ovation and that "the boo" was a minor, very predictable, hardly newsworthy event.
This reality doesn't fit in their agenda of portraying Romney as a conniving, mean and rich racist. Ignore Obama's outsourcing. It is always easier to perceive the kookiness of the fringe on the other side. Especially when we have a mainstream media that will never point out the ideology blindness, inconsistencies and blatant use of double standards that can also exist within the left wing. Their daily focus is on branding the entire right wing as all being kooks, mean or stupid. All because they (media) tend to have their own limited, "group think" view of the world.

Casa Grande, AZ

I find it odd that so many people accept Joe Arpio as the last word in document authentication. He's not unbiases and he's definetly not a expert in the field.

What he is good at is self publicity.

Voice ofReason

"Oh please please please please keep it up. I would love nothing more than to have this race focus on Obama's birth certificate."

That, right there, is why Romney needs to stay on-message about Obama's record just as he is doing right now. The left wants nothing more than to focus on anything - anything - but his dismal record, since it basically ends the debate on whether leftist economic philosophy is bad for the country; there's really no question that it is after four years of Obamanomics.

And for you lefties who love to harp about the fact that some on the fringe are "birthers," I think somebody threw out that 30% of Repubs believe this (it's actually 23%, and 5% of Demos), just remember that 35% of Democrats still believe 9/11 was an inside job by Bush & Cheney, and 26% are “maybes”. Think about that - 61% of Democrats believe Bush/Cheney knew about 9/11 beforehand, or believe it’s a real possibility! Both sides have their fringe...it's just that the fringe is the mainstream on the left.

Provo, UT

You're exactly right!

Lay off the birther conspiracies

and lay off the tax fraud conspiracies.

What what do we talk about when we have no solutions to offer for the nations problems? Just pick one of the above.

Salt Lake City, Utah

@ VOR: "Are you seriously suggesting that Romney should have avoided one of THE biggest reasons he's running against Obama just because his audience may have disagreed with him?"

Of course I am not suggesting that - the idea of a political speaker tailoring his comments to his audience would be totally absurd!

Mike in Cedar City
Cedar City, Utah

Well, if Romney didn't intend to provoke, why did he refer to it as Obama care, or knowing has he did that mentioning repeal would provoke his audience, why was he not simply silent on the issue. Romney is very good about being silent on issues when he wants to do that.

Yes his comment was most likely a dog whistle to his extreme right wing supporters, a group that he knows he has a tenuous hold on at best.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments