Two things I dont understand from Clintonistas

Obviously, the animosity between Obama supporters and Clinton supporters has gotten way out of hand.  It was childish of Obama supporters to rail against Clinton supporters for the past few months.  But similarly, its frustrating to see this site devolve into a frenzied Obama-bash.

As an Obama supporter, I'm not going to bash Clinton.  I'd just like to ask the Clinton supporters two simple questions because I simply don't understand the Clinton point of view on them.

1) Why won't Hillary Clinton release her tax returns?  
Obama has released his and I believe that McCain has done so as well.  I feel like the Clinton camp is stalling because there's something there that they don't want us to see.  It feels like the only explanation at this point.

2) If Hillary won't release her tax returns, how does that make her fully vetted?
Self-explanatory.


UPDATE: I've gotten comments suggesting that she will release them on April 15th and not on MY timetable. But since it's become a political issue (heck, Obama mentioned it in their last debate in Ohio), why not just release them? It seems like an easy way to handle what ought to be a silly bit of criticism?

The lack of disclosure makes me uncomfortable...


Display:


Passive aggressive, just like your candidate (2.00 / 2)

Maybe the tax returns are not completed.  Prior ones have been disclosed.

And I only counted one thing.


by lombard on Mon Mar 17, 2008 at 08:03:37 PM EST

Does ANYBODY actually think that is important? (2.00 / 1)

Just curious...


Universal healthcare IS a Democratic value
It's been defeated
Obama has the best $PIN that money can buy.
by architek on Mon Mar 17, 2008 at 08:32:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Does ANYBODY actually think that is important? (none / 0)

I probably wouldn't have, but the incessant delaying has piqued my interest.  

I hate to rely on "if you've nothing to hide" because it's such a GOP talking point for every blow to civil liberties.  BUT...the other candidates have done so, and it seems to have become somewhat of a tradition among Presidential candidates.

If she made a strong stand on the principle of privacy, I'd respect that.  Instead, we mostly get delays and excuses.  Makes me curious, and now those returns will be pored over in a way that they wouldn't have had she just released them in the first place.


Donate to Obama, Today!
by freedom78 on Mon Mar 17, 2008 at 11:37:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Passive aggressive, just like your candidate (none / 0)

Prior ones have not been disclosed as far as I know.


by marcotom on Mon Mar 17, 2008 at 08:33:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Prior Returns Have NOT Been Disclosed (none / 0)

BEtter check your facts.

And the most interesting returns should be for 2004-2006.


Bill Foster would agree, Barack Obama has coat tails.
by Walt Starr on Mon Mar 17, 2008 at 08:56:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Prior Returns Have NOT Been Disclosed (none / 0)

Why would those be so interesting? I'm curious?


by nikkid on Mon Mar 17, 2008 at 11:34:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Simple (2.00 / 1)

She should release them, however I don't see why she has to release them on your timetable. Apr. 15th or shortly thereafter seems fine to me. That's the date the IRS has for filing.


by sinclair on Mon Mar 17, 2008 at 08:04:45 PM EST

Re: Simple (none / 0)

April 15th can explain not releasing 2007 tax returns. How about 2006? 2005? 2004? Etc... Those should be readily available and should be made public without delay.


_____________
PUMA: Perverse Undemocratic McCain Adherents
by lizardbox on Mon Mar 17, 2008 at 09:14:19 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Two things I dont understand from Clintonistas (2.00 / 1)

First off.  McCain has not released his tax returns yet.  2nd HRC has said she will release her 2007 returns on april 15th.  The same day i will be sending mine in.

3rd, the Tax return issue is nonsense.  If you have some issue about HRC say it.  What about Vince Foster???  

david


by giusd on Mon Mar 17, 2008 at 08:07:21 PM EST

Vince Foster (none / 0)

Pure BS and you know it to bring that up. The original diarist is not trying to rehash conspiracy theories from the 90s.

What is the wait in releasing tax records for past years? I can understand not releasing them for the previous tax year.

Why are they saying "on or around" April 15? Sounds like they are trying to delay releasing before PA.

Why no info on donors to the Foundation?


by highgrade on Mon Mar 17, 2008 at 08:09:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Vince Foster (2.00 / 2)

Funny how the tax teturn issue sounds alot like FOX news in the 90's.  "We will be back in one minute on fox news to discuss the lastest scandel; why wont HRC release her tax returns?  What is she hinding?".

WORD.

david


by giusd on Mon Mar 17, 2008 at 08:19:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Vince Foster (2.00 / 0)

Nice Spin there, hey can I play: Hmm... talking aobut Obama's minister is a callback to the days of McCarthy.


by Socraticsilence on Mon Mar 17, 2008 at 09:40:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]

the only difference being (none / 0)

That there have already been documented cases where it appears that the Clinton's were willing to trade political favors/benefits (Pardon-gate) for donations to the presidential library.


by highgrade on Mon Mar 17, 2008 at 10:53:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Two things I dont understand from Clintonistas (2.00 / 2)

she said she's releasing them in april...


by nikkid on Mon Mar 17, 2008 at 08:07:39 PM EST

I was about to write a diary asking (none / 0)

Those very questions. THank you and prepare for some evasion.


by highgrade on Mon Mar 17, 2008 at 08:07:41 PM EST

Re: Two things (2.00 / 1)

It is a non-issue. So many nervous Americans who have not filed their tax yet will agree with me.


by praxis1 on Mon Mar 17, 2008 at 08:15:57 PM EST

Anyone want to make a bet (2.00 / 1)

that all we see on April 15 are the 2007 returns?

And that we never see 2001-2006 returns?


Bill Foster would agree, Barack Obama has coat tails.
by Walt Starr on Mon Mar 17, 2008 at 08:16:19 PM EST

Why won't ckd5555 release his tax returns? (2.00 / 1)

Please post all your tax returns on this site, or otherwise point us to a link where we can read them.  After all, you are a public figure, trying to influence people's opinion about a presidential election.

Since it has become a political issue (heck, I mentioned it in this comment), why not just release them? It seems like an easy way to handle what ought to be a silly bit of criticism?

Your lack of disclosure makes me uncomfortable...


by markjay on Mon Mar 17, 2008 at 08:16:41 PM EST

Re: Why won't ckd5555 release his tax returns? (none / 0)

Gee, I don't know is Ckd5555 a canidate for president?


by Socraticsilence on Mon Mar 17, 2008 at 09:41:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Why won't ckd5555 release his tax returns? (none / 0)

Gee, I didn't know that there was a law that presidential candidates release their tax returns.  I don't remember anybody clamoring for Bill Richarsdson, Chris Dodd, or Joe Biden to release their tax returns.  I didn't notice ckd5555's diary demanding that either.  I guess all of us have been asleep on the job.


by markjay on Mon Mar 17, 2008 at 11:58:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

You have got to be kidding? (2.00 / 2)

You know that almost anything you would find in the mysterious Clinton tax returns/documents can be found in her Senate disclosures, right?  You are making a huge issue out of nothing and it is really just starting to look like distraction from the desperate Obama campaign that cannot close the deal and is about to be destroyed by some rather... unsavory rhetoric from Wright.  Its funny and almost ironic- maybe words do matter really matter... for Obama.


by linc on Mon Mar 17, 2008 at 08:20:45 PM EST

Re: Are you the IRS ??? (2.00 / 1)

Are you the IRS ?

Who are you to tell Bill & Hillary when to release their Tax Returns.

Will Americans vote or not vote for Clinton based on their Tax Returns?

The most important question now is" How can Obama win in November"

How will White America vote for him after all this?

Its over.


by latinfighter on Mon Mar 17, 2008 at 08:22:17 PM EST

Re: Two things I dont understand from Clintonistas (2.00 / 1)

1. I doubt there's anything there, because ever since the Clintons left the White House they've always expected this day would come.  So I'm confident all of their tax returns were prepared with full knowledge that anything suspicious would have to see the light of day at some point.

I suspect it's just a strategic move to make the release of the tax returns into a bigger moment than it is.  It's awkward for the moment, but if they release them and nothing turns up, then it's a big story because of all the hype.  Conversely, if they had released them in a routine manner way back when, everyone just kinda shrugs and it's on to the next demand, like releasing the library donors.  In regards to the latter point, this also helps to run out the clock in a sense.

2. "Fully vetted" doesn't really mean a guarantee that nothing has come up in the past few years, although they'd certainly like to suggest that.  The more important point is that much of the public has scandal fatigue as far as the Clintons are concerned; you can try to bring up stuff, but it kinda sounds like more of the same to people and they tune it out.  All of the people who are receptive to hearing that the Clintons are sleazy have pretty much all come to that conclusion.


"Another problem we have...is that in election years we behave somewhat as primitive peoples do at the time of the full moon." --Harry Truman
by Steve M on Mon Mar 17, 2008 at 08:24:00 PM EST

Re: Two things I dont understand from Clintonistas (2.00 / 1)

OK,

As i have posted above the tax return issue is nonsense but the BO supporters seem to really want to push this and how much the clinton's make as if that is unseamly.

OK here is some other nonsense.  What was Michelle Obama doing to make $318k per year working for the University of Chicago Hospitals? And lets say for example i graduated from the UC and know a little bit about the medical school and the Hospital.  

$318k is twice as much as an Assocate Professor makes in the Department of Medicine.  Why would MO make twice as much as the internist taking care of patients???  Outreach to the local community?????  

You have got to be kidding me.  The UofC Hospital is barely surviving and treats a very large number of uninsured AA patients and the internists treating the ill make 1/2 someone who does outreach????

I tell you what i will show some outrage about HRC tax returns when some BO tells me just what one does to make twice as much as the physicians at the UofC doing outreach???

david


by giusd on Mon Mar 17, 2008 at 08:35:11 PM EST

Re: Two things I dont understand from Clintonistas (2.00 / 1)

She said she will release them on or around April 15th; what's your hurry? Also, Obama has only released his 2006 and has also not released any prior tax returns. Why don't you ask him to release his?


by yogi41 on Mon Mar 17, 2008 at 08:40:20 PM EST

Re: Two things I dont understand from Clintonistas (2.00 / 1)

why wont Michelle Obama  release her work calender so we know what she did to deserve $300,000 that could have saved several babies? What is she hiding?


by rocky on Mon Mar 17, 2008 at 09:24:33 PM EST

Re: Two things I dont understand from Clintonistas (2.00 / 1)

  Does anybody in his/her right mind really think that a skilled politician who is running for president would actually have anything to hide in her tax returns? After being the most investigated and vetted politician in the country? Man, I want some of that Kool-aid!
If people really want to find some new controversial material I'd suggest to look somewhere else.
by RC01 on Mon Mar 17, 2008 at 09:28:44 PM EST

Re: Two things I dont understand from Clintonistas (2.00 / 2)

She said she would release her 2004-2007 tax returns on 4/15.  But better yet, here is a quick way to get a look at what she's worth and where her money is...

http://money.cnn.com/galleries/2007/mone ymag/0712/gallery.candidates.moneymag/in dex.html

Simple enough.  However, if Obama wants all of Hillary's tax returns since leaving the Whitehouse, he should release more than just his 2006 return.

Talk about spin.


He that lives upon hope, will die fasting. -Ben Franklin
by TxDem08 on Mon Mar 17, 2008 at 10:34:39 PM EST

Well, I'm not a Clintonista... (2.00 / 1)

but I honestly don't care much about the tax returns of politicians -what the heck do you think there will be in them? I've never looked for tax info about any person I've ever voted for-have you? I'm not terribly obsesed with information gleaned from tax returns-I find them fairly boring-still haven't finished my own and this year I'm actually getting refunds.

Vetting goes more to your past then to your uneventful present. The present is more easily available. It's the past that typically haunts or having done something in secret that becomes known by virtue of constant surveillance-kind of like the Clintons have been under for years.

I will vote for whoever the D is. I'm just more concerned about how Obama will play out as he doesn't have a long public history of having every aspect of his life exposed. Now that it's starting it doesn't appear to look so good to most Americans-that is the kind of thing I fear-not what someone puts on a tax form that's going to the government.


berkshiretrueblue Commited to helping elect a Democrat as President "Hypocrisy: prejudice with a halo" Ambroise Bierce
by berkshiretrueblue on Mon Mar 17, 2008 at 11:04:48 PM EST

Re: Two things I dont understand from Clintonistas (none / 0)

The lack of disclosure makes me uncomfortable...

Fear not, concerned citizen. I'm sure Hillary will do her utmost to ease your considerable discomfort by April 15.


Support forced pregnancy? Vote John McCain 2008!
by sricki on Mon Mar 17, 2008 at 11:05:25 PM EST

Re: Two things I dont understand from Clintonistas (none / 0)

Okay if someone saw her tax returns from 2005, then did those have anything we need to worry about?

Did she contribute to al-queda? did she receive funds from hamas??? what??? what is everyone worried about???

She made $10 million on a book deal??? what? what?

She claimed .47 cents a mile for gas reimbursement when the legal amount was only .45cents???? WHAT!!!


by nikkid on Mon Mar 17, 2008 at 11:37:50 PM EST

Re: Two things I dont understand from Clintonistas (none / 0)

You won't 'bash' Clinton, but you sure will use a Limbaugh term for their supporters.

When you stop using the term "Clintonistas", come back with reasonable questions.  Until them, have a nice day.  ;-)


Hell's bells, even the GOP didn't have to crucify Eisenhower's record in order to make Reagan their 'saint'. We can have two great ones, you know?
by emsprater on Tue Mar 18, 2008 at 01:01:29 AM EST


You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.