CV Rick wrote:
And it's also obvious that there's something there - - because if there wasn't, he wouldn't have a problem releasing them.
I don't know, I may disagree on this point. I don't really have a problem with the "I won't dignify that question with a response"--type response. If a claim is made without evidence it can be dismissed without evidence, right? I mean, if he had a bona fide meritorious position on this, I wouldn't have a problem with it. The problem is, he doesn't.
Now he has this ad (I think it was) where he admits asking Kennedy in the past for his tax returns was wrong and very conveniently now just realizes it? He's also taking the stance that it violates his privacy. Dude, you're running for president, you don't have privacy anymore.
This guy is just all over the place. As smart as he is, Obama is going to have a field day with him. And from watching Romney in the republican debates, even when he's winning he just comes off as a total asshole.
It seems that there are two competing claims at this point - one being that he paid a lot of taxes and one being that he paid nothing in taxes. The simple answer is the one that's going to resonate with the majority of voters - Let's just see the returns.
Reid's master stroke in making the accusation and then claiming it's from an unnamed source is that this is the exact kind of sourceless basis Fox News has been using to gin up a hundred stories over the past decade, but turned back around on the Republicans, they're going apeshit. I'm not in favor of using the "I was told" or "some people say" basis for a story, but I am in favor of giving someone a taste of their own medicine . . . and for using cliches in place of logic.