Quantcast

Comments about ‘Letters: Omitted statement shows true intent of giving money’

Return to article »

Published: Tuesday, Aug. 28 2012 12:47 a.m. MDT

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

As a long time landlord I thought I'd heard it all, but Mitt's latest excuse for not releasing his tax returns takes the cake. Everyone knows Mitt's zillionaire status allows him to give millions to the LDS church, and it's an admirable act of charity, but to play the religion card as a reason to avoid revealing his "creative" tax returns strains credulity!

JoeBlow
Far East USA, SC

Have to agree Larry. The reasons given just dont pass the "smell test"

Mountanman
Hayden, ID

Does anyone actually believe that giving the government more money will actually improve their lives? Giving the government more money is like giving an alcoholic more booze to cure their addiction!

Esquire
Springville, UT

Unfortunately, the Romneys use tithing as a political tool. When it helps them, they scream it from the rooftops, but when not, they want to hide it. What does that tell you?

UtahBlueDevil
Durham, NC

It doesn't tell me much of anything. I too keep my tithing a secret. I pay mine directly to the church in SLC because I don't want people in my ward to know how much I make. I recently was asked to talk in church on financial issues, and I refused because I don't want people associating that topic with me. I make a good amount of money because I do what I love to do... not because I set out to be financially better than my neighbor.

So while I am no where a "comfortable" as is Mitt, I understand his logic here. Problem is, when you run for President of the United States, you elect to give up your right to that sort of privacy. If is for that reason, and about a million more, I would not put myself into a the position Mitt Romney has.

You sacrifice far too much to win the office of President. I don't see how it is worth it.

And I appreciate the further clarification of Ann's comments - makes more sense.

Hutterite
American Fork, UT

Maybe mitt's holding back a bit...

Mike Richards
South Jordan, Utah

Releasing tax returns in not a qualification to run for office.

Just like most of the things that liberals demand, their demand that Romney release his tax returns is based on their hot air. If they think that he owes taxes, then let them prosecute; otherwise, they show contempt for a citizen who HAS PAID ALL TAXES OWED.

They can't admit that Romeny is an honest man. They want us to believe otherwise, but because they know he is honest, they know that if they try to prove that he is dishonest, it will hurt their candidate, so they just continue to insinuate.

Cutting off Ann Romney's comment totally reversed its meaning. That was just one more deliberate attempt from the liberal media to change the meaning of something. The media can't handle the truth, so they make up their own and then pretend that they're innocent of wrong-doing. Is it possible that Dan Rather is teaching "ethics" to the liberal media?

RanchHand
Huntsville, UT

What is he hiding?

JoeCapitalist2
Orem, UT

Mitt is very rich. He earned his money legally. He is entitled to spend it any way he sees fit. He paid his taxes by following all the rules set forth in the tax code.

Too many people feel entitled to criticize rich people because they buy nice things or decide that they may be able to make better use of it than to give more of it to some government bureaucrat. They buy stuff at WalMart made in China because they feel that is where they get the best value for their dollar, but go wild when they hear rich people invest some of their money overseas.

I doesn't matter to me if Mitt uses HIS money to buy a dozen houses or blows it all on luxury items. Like most rich people, he may spend a small portion of his wealth on personal items, but the bulk of it will be put to productive use building stuff.

Give a dollar to the Mormon church = bad. Give that dollar instead to Barney Frank = good. Only the "Occupy Wall Street" crowd actually believes such actions will lift people out of poverty.

JoeBlow
Far East USA, SC

"Releasing tax returns in not a qualification to run for office"

Last I checked, neither was releasing birth certificates or school records but that does not preclude people from asking.

Do you respond to those people the same way? Consistency is all I ask for.

That said, people can choose to vote for or against a candidate for any reasons that they choose.

I believe that Romney is an honest man that has paid all of the taxes that he legally owed.
But then, I believe GE probably paid all of their legally owed taxes.

GE has used tax loopholes to get out of paying taxes. While probably legal, that surely has riled those on the right. I would like to see those loopholes closed. You?

Why is this different? Partisanship perhaps?

Moderate
Salt Lake City, UT

His excuse would make sense if he hadn't released ANY tax returns, but he's released one already. That showed a tithing amount didn't it? What more "damage" could be done by releasing more returns? I suspect tithing is the least of his worries.

Maybe Julian Assange could release the rest of Mitt Romney's tax returns...

Truthseeker
SLO, CA

I think it would be very interesting to find out how all the churches in the U.S. disperse/use the money donated to them.

Tax experts are now seeing questionable, possibly illegal, ways Bain has structured its finances to lessen its U.S. tax liability. While this probably wouldn't affect Mitt financially because he is beyond the statute of limitations it would show the extent he was willing to go to protect his wealth.

The most important issue is what policies Romney is proposing. He is proposing "doubling-down" on Bush era policies which will further lessen taxes for those at the top and increase taxes for those at the bottom. Several churches, which see poverty as a moral issue, have come out against these proposals. The LDS church is silent.

re:MikeRichards
We can't admit Romney is an honest man because we see the many gyrations on issues and even blatant lies about his opponent in his campaign ads and speeches.

NedGrimley
Brigham City, UT

Hmmmm. Maybe Obama is holding something back. What is HE hiding? Goose...gander

atl134
Salt Lake City, UT

I thought it was pretty clear in the article that she was happy to give it. Hence Mitt's joke of "crying, but for another reason".

The problem is... both Mitt and Ann have been upfront and open about giving 10% to their church and plenty to charity. Both noted that if you add that to their tax rates it goes well over 20%. It's readily available that Mitt's charity has donated millions. So he can't possibly want to keep charitable contributions hidden as an excuse for not wanting to disclose taxes... unless there was something problematic for him in there like maybe a dozen years ago when he was seeking out support from Planned Parenthood...maybe he gave them a donation.

Fact is Mitt is just using charitable giving as an excuse to hide something else in his tax returns. This is just a way to try and seem like the reason to not disclose more is modesty but that's false since he and Ann have been perfectly willing to disclose their charitable giving numbers.

JoeBlow
Far East USA, SC

Dwayne,

You believe that my post was uncivil? Really?

And it is because I believe that people do things for purely partisan reasons?

Wow.

RAB
Bountiful, UT

It is obvious what Mitt is hiding. He is hiding his pearls from the swine. He his hiding ammunition from the gnat-squinting fault-finders who will do anything to distract attention from Obama's failed presidency. He knows (as we all do) that any new information, regardless of what it is, can and will be used against him by his desperate opponents.

Personally, I enjoy watching Romney's enemies panic in their desperation to find fault in an obviously good, honest and sincere human being. Every anti-Romney post I read merely exposes unwarranted hate and prejudice. Romney could give a billion dollars to starving children and they would find a way to twist it into something dishonorable and unworthy of praise. Their criticism is hardly worth acknowledging anymore.

atl134
Salt Lake City, UT

@dwayne
"Tactics like those you are using here to intimidate and coerce private citizens into releasing private information about themselves"

This is a comment forum on a newspapers' website. My comments have 0 influence on Romney campaign decisions and I have the option, per the rules of this moderated comment forum, of criticizing what I think is an unlikely excuse being used to try and justify refusing to release more tax returns. It would seem you're interesting in coercing silence, however.

"It doesn't matter what the Romney's reasons are for picking and choosing what they wishes to reveal to the public"

It just does not make political sense to have "unwillingness to disclose charitable giving" be a reason not to release more tax returns when it's openly clear they donate large sums to their church and they openly state as much themselves that they give plenty to their church and other charities. Heck, it'd be a positive to disclose that and his advisors would be pushing for him to release his returns if that was all he was worried about... but it's not. It can't be. It makes no sense.

JoeBlow
Far East USA, SC

"gnat-squinting fault-finders"

RAB, regardless of whether or not I agree with your post, that term made me laugh out loud.

I have no idea what it means, but I gotta give you a "like" just for that.

Shaun
Sandy, UT

@Mountainman & Mike Richards. You guys both have stated in the past that 50 percent of taxpayers do not pay any federal income tax and in the same breath will state that Mitt Romney has paid all taxes legally required of him. Those 50 percent have done everything legally, tax wise, as well. But you guys are outraged at that fact that they have done everything legally.

Would you guys be outraged if Mitt happened to pay no tax but did everything legally? Are you outraged that those fifty percent still pay FICA taxes which is around seven percent but Mitt does not because his money comes from "investment" income? And please do not argue he made money that was taxed at ordinary income and then he invested it. That never happened. He is the beneficiary of a special loophole in the tax code lobbied by him and others that benefit from carried interest.

RedShirt
USS Enterprise, UT

TO "UtahBlueDevil" wow, you sound really arrogant. Who cares if somebody in your ward knows how much you make? Are they going to make you pay more for the friends of Scouting drives?

If you were asked to speak on finances, why wouldn't you want to be known as somebody who understands finances? Don't you think that others could use some advice when they are struggling with their own finances? Why do you want to "hide your light under a bushel"?

to comment

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