Strong answers win votes

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • BigRich Orem, UT
    Jan. 28, 2012 12:36 p.m.

    And by the way, Romney is running for president. Pretty much a full to overtime job. And Huntsman is making a lot of money and not working now too.

  • BigRich Orem, UT
    Jan. 28, 2012 12:34 p.m.

    We seem to be experts on what someone else should do with the money they've worked for and earned. Take a look at the other candidates, in fact any other politician, and you will be hard pressed to find anyone who pays his taxes as honestly as Romney. For example, Al Sharpton owes millions in back taxes. And, I doubt there are few in the same crowd who have given as much to charity. Can you safely assume that he hasn't given more? The figure out there is only what he has reported. Here is a guy who's given more than most, but is being criticized for not giving enough. Match it in amount or percentage, and then you can complain.

  • J Thompson SPRINGVILLE, UT
    Jan. 27, 2012 10:41 a.m.

    Re: RanchHand,

    What percentage of his income was represented in the "new home in California"? Was it 1%? Was it 2%? What was it?

    How much of your income did you tap to buy your house? 30%? 40%? How much?

    Start comparing apples to apples and you'll find that your level of "job creation", that your level of "charity", that your level of "civic responsibility", falls far short of the levels that Mitt Romney has set for himself.

  • RanchHand Huntsville, UT
    Jan. 27, 2012 8:24 a.m.

    Actually Mike Richards, Romney DID purchase a bigger house in California - to "have room for the family".

  • Mike Richards South Jordan, Utah
    Jan. 26, 2012 4:33 p.m.

    LDS Liberal,

    Wave the flag all you want, but EACH American pays for the military. EACH American pledges to do all that is required to keep America free.

    What JOBS have you created? Who depends on your largess for THEIR home, their clothing, their food?

    Mitt Romney has spent his money providing jobs for Americans. He didn't spend it on himself. He didn't wrap himself in the flag and beat his chest. He took all that he had and put it at risk so people, ordinary non-chest beating Americans could have a job and provide for their families.

    He COULD have purchased a bigger house and then claimed that his house was necessary for his enjoyment of life and as shelter for his family, but instead, he chose to help others by investing that money in their jobs.

    Don't try to divert the fact that you could have chosen to do likewise. You could have chosen to live in a smaller house and you could have invested the difference in a business or in the stock market to provide jobs for others.

    You chose the easy path. You spent the money on yourself. You have sufficient for yourself.

  • Midvaliean MIDVALE, UT
    Jan. 26, 2012 1:09 p.m.

    Lies win votes. To get the base of any party you have to bend the truth of what you are going to do to GET THE VOTERS to the polls. Either party has to "rally the base" of extreme people, how often are those promises kept... rarely is the answer. Therefore Lies= more voters.

  • Lagomorph Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 26, 2012 12:20 p.m.

    Tillett, referring to Gingrich: "Evidently strong positive answers win voters, not reasonable truths."

    No, strong diversionary tactics win voters. Gingrich's reply was not an answer to the question (let alone a positive one). It was a parry to deflect attention away from his infidelity.

  • Mark B Eureka, CA
    Jan. 26, 2012 11:59 a.m.

    Lyle's suggested "stonewall" comment for Mitt wouldn't have been adequate even when his father was a candidate. If Mitt had used it, the reaction would have been even more mistrust and probably a stack of rumors as well.

  • LDS Liberal Farmington, UT
    Jan. 26, 2012 10:59 a.m.

    Mike Richards | 9:56 a.m. Jan. 26, 2012
    South Jordan, Utah

    1. Living Will - I'm a Veteran, we "Servicemen" placed our lives to defend the Constitution. The Government expected we might die, so we were given legal counsel to and had "Living Wills" written.

    2. Yes - my house was an investment. But it didn't get ME rich. My money went to the already uber-rich, who made money from idiots like me and the other 99% who believed their lies about real estate being a good, safe "investment".

    Like I said, let the rich pay the poor.
    Since I can't do it any longer, they took my money.

    Trickle-UP economics.

    Truly I am Mahan, the master of this great secret, that I may... get gain.
    And Cain gloried in that which he had done, saying: I am free;
    [and nothing says "Freedom" like a having great wealth]

    And as to the poor, the wealthy Mahan says - Am I my brothers keeper?

    But go ahead and promote Babylon.
    Worship the "Idol" of Mammon.

    Treasures on Earth vs. Treasures in Heaven.


    BTW - I am at peace.
    I have sufficient for my needs.

  • Mike Richards South Jordan, Utah
    Jan. 26, 2012 9:56 a.m.

    Curmudgeon and LDS Liberal,

    What makes you exempt - while you are alive - from living what you are telling the rest of us to live?

    Living will! What a joke. If you believed it you would give away your possessions NOW, not when you are dead.

    You both seem to think that Mitt Romney has all of his money stuffed in some mattress or in a piggy bank. It is invested. Do you know what an investment is? Your home is your "investment". If it grows in value and you sell it, you will pay capital gains on the profit. If Mitt Romney sold his investments, he would pay capital gains on his profits.

    If he made 1$10 million in profits, he would have had to have about $100 million at risk.

    You have no right to demand that he sell his investments to help the poor until AFTER you have first sold your homes and anything else of value and have given that to the poor.

    It doesn't count if you wait until after you die. It would be no sacrifice if you enjoyed your possessions all your life while you knew that there were poor nearby.

  • goatesnotes Kamas, UT
    Jan. 26, 2012 9:56 a.m.

    For those of you who would impose your views of the law of consecration upon Mitt Romney, please remember that even Heavenly Father, who knows the end from the beginning, must still bow beneath the rod of moral agency and allow all His children the blessing of making their own choices with regard to their possessions. I'd rather have God pass judgments on Mitt's Romney's disposition of his wealth, rather than the arm chair disciples on this page, wouldn't you? He imposes His will on no one. Neither should we.

  • Curmudgeon Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 26, 2012 9:41 a.m.

    Mike Richards:

    You missed a nuance of my comment. I was not suggesting that Romney sell all that he has, but only that he allocate 90% of his wealth to charity, which would leave him with $15-25 million (assuming the estimates of his net worth are accurate). I think he could get by on that much. But nice try at diverting attention from your man Romney.

    The higher standard you articulated, as you know, did not originate with me. See Mark 10:21. And that counsel was given to one with "great possessions."

  • LDS Liberal Farmington, UT
    Jan. 26, 2012 9:36 a.m.

    Do you believe that ALL things come from God, Mike?

    If you did, you would know that some have been given much, others not so.

    God gives to some and not to others to see how we will respond.

    Are we selfish,
    Are we following him , and redistribute his blessings equally.

    In my family,
    I can give a bag of M&Ms to any of my children, and they will divy them out equally without an arguement -- because they know my gift is supposed to be redistrubuted equally.

    My "Living Will" has all my earthly possessions reditributed equally, and to strangers who are poor.

    Is God not our Heavenly Father?
    Do you seriously believe he gives to some - and not others - and doesn't expect us to redistribute his blessings to all of his children...equally?

    Zion = Having All things in Common.

    The further we move away from this,
    The further we slip away into Babylon.

  • Furry1993 Clearfield, UT
    Jan. 26, 2012 8:50 a.m.

    To Curmudgeon | 7:47 a.m. Jan. 26, 2012

    You're right. What you describe is what Jon Huntsman Sr. has already done, and what he plans to do with his fortune at his death. Somehow I don't think that Mitt Romney is cut from the same cloth.

  • Mike Richards South Jordan, Utah
    Jan. 26, 2012 8:46 a.m.

    If Curmudgeon owns his home, he has more wealth than almost anyone else on earth. Using his argument, why doesn't he sell all that he has and give it to the poor?

    There is no minimum economic level that anyone has to reach before he can "sell all that he has and give it to the poor".

  • one old man Ogden, UT
    Jan. 26, 2012 8:44 a.m.

    Looking at the line-up of Republican presidential wanna-bes is downright frightening. None of them should be President of the United States.

    Obama in 2012!

  • LDS Liberal Farmington, UT
    Jan. 26, 2012 8:43 a.m.

    Curmudgeon | 7:47 a.m. Jan. 26, 2012
    Salt Lake City, UT


  • homebrew South Jordan, UT
    Jan. 26, 2012 8:42 a.m.

    Romney pays around 14% on his capital gains. He doesnt work, he just collects money. He is No way qualified to be president. He will say anything, or change his veiw in a heartbeat, if he thinks that will get him elected. He is in the 1%, I am in the 99%. I'll vote for the man most interested in my plight President Obama. OBAMA 2012

  • Curmudgeon Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 26, 2012 7:47 a.m.

    I would like it if Romney would say: "The American free enterprise system and lack of constraints on how much a person can make have enabled me to make much more money than I will ever need to live an extravagant life style. Therefore, not only have I paid all the taxes required by law, and not only have I paid tithing to my church, but I am now announcing that I will transfer 90 percent of my fortune to a foundation to care for Americans who are less fortunate than myself--those who are sick, who are out of work through no fault of their own, who were not able to go to Stanford and Harvard on their parents' money. My religious faith compels me to clothe the naked, feed the hungry, and administer relief to the sick and afflicted, and that's what I'm going to do!"

    I'm not holding my breath.

  • Baron Scarpia Logan, UT
    Jan. 26, 2012 6:04 a.m.

    "When there is money left over, I invest it in our American industry which puts more people to work..."

    The problem is that Romney put is money in the Cayman Islands to avoid paying taxes to our great country. Is that the kind of man we want to lead our nation? Is that the behavior we patriotic Americans want in a leader? I don't think so.

    Yes, it is legal. But it is also shameful.

    Remember Romney's quote when he said that he didn't want illegals working as gardners on one of his estates. "I'm running for president for heaven's sake..." Perhaps he should have thought of that when sending his money to the Caymans. It might look good if your running for office in the Cayman Islands, but for President of the United States, we shouldn't have leaders that exploit the system to make even more money, and yet, enjoy the benefits and protections of living in America.