ASKING THE WRONG QUESTION (An Old Politician’s Trick): “Is It That Governor Romney’s 15% Effective Personal Tax Rate Means He Doesn’t Play By The Rules?” – Question Should Be: “Are Rules That Allow Gov. Romney To Pay 15% Tax Rate Fair?” How Sophists Trick You Into Irrelevant Thought Processes! The TRUTH Is The RULES ARE UNFAIR! Following Unfair Rules Romney Helped Create & We Did NOT Setup Is INHERENTLY UNFAIR To Middle Class! Example Of Political “Hocus Pocus”! If Republicans Misdirect You To Answer An Irrelevant Question, You Miss The Essentials!





Another Political Ploy



Buffett Blames Congress for Romney’s 15% U.S. Tax Rate


February 01, 2012, 8:50 AM EST


By Andrew Frye and Andrea Ludtke


(Updates with comments on debate in the sixth paragraph.)


Jan. 23 (Bloomberg) — Warren Buffett, the billionaire calling for more taxes on the rich, said Mitt Romney’s U.S. rate of about 15 percent reflects poor laws rather than failings by the candidate for the Republican presidential nomination.


“It’s the wrong policy to have,” Buffett told Bloomberg Television’s Betty Liu in an interview today. “He’s not going to pay more than the law requires, and I don’t fault him for that in the least. But I do fault a law that allows him and me earning enormous sums to pay overall federal taxes at a rate that’s about half what the average person in my office pays.”


Buffett, chairman and chief executive officer of Berkshire Hathaway Inc., supports Democratic President Barack Obama and said Congress needs to raise taxes on the wealthiest Americans to close the budget deficit. Romney has agreed to release his 2010 tax return tomorrow, under pressure from Republican opponents, after saying he pays about 15 percent. Romney co- founded Boston-based private-equity firm Bain Capital LLC.


“He makes his money the same way I make my money,” said Buffett, 81. “He makes money by moving around big bucks, not by straining his back or going to work and cleaning toilets or whatever it may be. He makes it shoving around money.”


Romney, a multimillionaire, reversed course and promised to speed up the release his tax disclosures after being dogged by questions during the South Carolina primary campaign. Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, one of Romney’s rivals for the nomination, earned $3.1 million in 2010 and paid an effective federal tax rate of about 32 percent, returns released by the candidate on Jan. 19 show. In a debate that day, Gingrich called on Romney to be more forthcoming.


South Carolina


Buffett said Romney “hurt himself” in his debate performance before the South Carolina vote and was unable to effectively answer the criticism about his taxes and disclosure. Romney, who won the New Hampshire primary this month, was second to Gingrich in South Carolina on Jan. 21.


“It was more Romney losing ground in the last 10 days than it was Newt gaining, although Newt made the most of it,” Buffett said. Romney “did not have a good answer on taxes and obviously the question was coming.”


“I don’t think that determines who should be president,” Buffett said.


“We just made a mistake in holding off as long as we did,” Romney said yesterday on “Fox News Sunday.”


Romney has also been criticized by rivals for his role at Bain, which made profits by buying and selling companies. Texas Governor Rick Perry, who dropped out of the race this month, said Romney had practiced “vulture capitalism.” Winning Our Future, a political action committee backing Gingrich, depicted Romney as “more ruthless than Wall Street” in a 30-minute film.


‘Perfectly Legitimate’


“I think that Mitt Romney did things in the private sector that lots of people do, and it’s perfectly legitimate to buy businesses,” Buffett said. “I don’t like buying businesses with lots of debt, but there’s nothing immoral about it or anything of the sort.


“In some businesses, they hired more people, in some they let people go,” Buffett said of Bain. “I don’t believe in businesses having more people than are needed, so I see nothing specific about him.”


Buffett has said his tax rate is the lowest among the about 20 employees at Berkshire’s headquarters in Omaha, Nebraska. Capital gains from most assets held for longer than a year are taxed at a top rate of 15 percent, while wage income is taxed at a top rate of 35 percent. The difference between those two accounts for Buffett’s lower rate.


–Editors: Dan Kraut, William Ahearn


To contact the reporters on this story: Andrew Frye in New York at; To contact the reporter on this story: Andrea Ludtke in New York at


To contact the editor responsible for this story: Dan Kraut at

TABACCO: Did you ever notice how Rich Folks always seem to stand together and protect one another when sh_T hits the fan? With all the Buffet quotes emanating from President Obama’s forked tongue (All Politicos are LIARS, but the Alternative to Obama is another Republican – I think NOT), I bet you thought Buffet was a “GOOD” Rich Guy – NOT! “Good Rich Guy” is an OXYMORON:


A figure of speech in which incongruous or contradictory terms appear side by side; a compressed paradox. Plural: oxymora or oxymorons. Adjective: oxymoronic or oxymoric.


·  Here are some common examples of oxymoronic expressions: act naturally, random order, original copy, conspicuous absence, found missing, alone together, criminal justice, old news, peace force, even odds, awful good, student teacher, deafening silence, definite possibility, definite maybe, terribly pleased, ill health, turn up missing, jumbo shrimp, loose tights, small crowd, and clearly misunderstood.

·  “Ralph, if you’re gonna be a phony, you might as well be a real phony.”
(Richard Yates, “Saying Goodbye to Sally.” The Collected Stories of Richard Yates. Picador, 2002)

·  Josh Parsons: Please, I didn’t kill anyone. I’m an extreme pacifist.
Dr. Temperance ‘Bones’ Brennan: That’s an oxymoron. You’re either extreme, or pacifist. You can’t be both.
(Andrew J. West and Emily Deschanel in “The Tough Man in the Tender Chicken.” Bones, 2009)

When you spread the BLAME onto CONGRESS (not even Democrats or Republicans), nobody gets Public Censure or Blame – particularly NOT MITT ROMNEY! SEE HOW THAT WORKS!









TABACCO: The question is NOT, “Why is this man so happy?” – The question is, “At whom is Romney laughing?” If you don’t know the answer, go into the bathroom and check that mirror on your medicine cabinet!


New York


It may sound illegal; it may sound like a tax dodge. But Mitt Romney’s declared tax rate of about 15 percent, well below that of most Americans, is perfectly legal and accepted by the Internal Revenue Service.

Related stories


How can that be?


Mr. Romney, who lists his wealth at as much as $250 million, still receives much of his income from Bain Capital, a Boston investment firm that he helped found in 1984.


When Romney was working for Bain, he would have received his compensation in two ways: First, a fee charged to clients and taxed as regular income, amounting to 2 percent of the value of the assets under management. Then, Romney also would have received 20 percent or more of any gains in an investment as long as Bain’s profit exceeded a pre-set rate of return.


RELATED: Election 101: Where the GOP candidates stand on the economy


However, Romney and his Bain partners did not put up 20 percent of the capital – that came from the firm’s clients, other investors such as pensions. From their profits, the client investors pay the Bain partners in what is called “carried interest,” which is taxed at the longterm capital gains rate of 15 percent.

What is carried interest?


It is simply a percentage of the profits of the underlying investment. Although it is unclear where the term comes from, Victor Fleischer, an associate professor of law at the University of Colorado, says one possible origin is from the oil and gas business where someone raising money to drill for oil did not put up much money but received a share of the income if oil was discovered. “Their interest is carried by other investors,” explains Mr. Fleischer.


How does this work?


Bain Capital made a lot of investments in companies. If they bought one company for $100 million and sold it three years later for $200 million, they would have a $100 million capital gain. Out of that gain, Bain could have received as much as $20 million to $25 million, says Fleischer. Bain would then divide its share among the partners who worked on the purchase and sale. Perhaps Romney got $2 million even though he never invested much of his own money. In other words, his interest was carried by the other investors and he is taxed at the longterm capital gains rate for his share of their profits.


Is this widespread?


Fleischer says other well-to-do investors who use this method to get their money are real estate partnerships, oil-and-gas partnerships, and publicly traded investment partnerships. Although hedge-fund managers make large sums of money, much of this money is short-term capital gains, which is taxed at 35 percent.


The Joint Committee on Taxation has estimated that taxing carried interest as regular wage and salary income would generate about $21 billion in additional revenues over ten years.


Has been there any effort by Congress to change the law?

Yes, the House of Representatives has passed legislation sponsored by Rep. Sander Levin (D) of Mich. to tax the money differently. President Obama has indicated he would support a change. But, the US Senate has not done anything, says Roberton Williams, a senior fellow at the Tax Policy Center in Washington.



“The question is how should it be taxed?” asks Mr. Williams. “Since it’s not all regular income, there must be some middle ground that makes logical sense.”


Isn’t it unfair for plumbers and policemen to pay a higher tax rate than investors such as Romney?

Fleischer says the law was originally enacted in 1954 to try to be flexible with small businesses. Now, he says, “it’s used by billionaire investment partners. That’s not what Congress had in mind.”

TABACCO: Congress is NOT STUPID and NEVER HAS BEEN! When Congress creates Legislation with LOOPHOLES, Congress knows exactly what it is doing! At least the Republicans in Congress know what they are doing – I’m not too sure about the Democrats! That’s why I love them so! Don’t you just love Mr. Magoo? How about Elmer Fudd!


I’d rather Magoo ran the country than Simon Legree or Cruella DeVille!


One of the critics of the law is Warren Buffet, the Omaha-based investor, who has said he pays a lower tax rate than his secretary since he receives carried interest.


However, opponents of making changes say Mr. Buffet should just write a check if he wants to pay higher taxes.

TABACCO: How snide, spiteful and pejorative Rich Folks can betoward their own kind if that kind attempts to do the right thing, which might cost those Rich Folks some ill-gotten gain.


Fleischer says it strikes him as important to change the law, which he says is utilized by sophisticated, knowledgeable people who can afford expensive lawyers. “The rest of us don’t get this kind of treatment,” he says.


However, in testimony before Congress in 2007, Adam Ifshin, then the chairman of the International Council of Shopping Centers Economic Policy Committee, argued that changing the law to increase taxes on carried interest would hurt real estate investment in economically distressed areas.


In addition, he argued that the general partners in real estate partnerships took on heavy risks that their deals would fail. “The general partner is taking risks beyond their investment in any given real estate project, and the carried interest is earned, in part, for taking that entrepreneurial risk,” he said.


Proponents of the current law argue the carried interest is not compensation. “It is a feature of an ownership interest,” said Bruce Rosenblum, managing director of the Carlyle Group, a private equity group, in testimony before Congress in 2007. “Its tax status is well settled and it is anything but a loophole.”


RELATED: Election 101: Where the GOP candidates stand on the economy







Tabacco: Conservative Republican Apologists are very clever at asking the WRONG QUESTION to solicit an IRRELEVANT, SELF-SERVING ANSWER!


“Why does President Obama deserve a 2nd term in view of the minimal increase in Jobs and GDP?” Another Scurrilous, Prejudicial Question posed by Conservative Talking Heads! Why? What is the ALTERNATIVE to a 2nd Obama term? Another Pro-Business, Supply-side, Conservative Republican like George W. Bush, whose Economic Policies created our Economic Crisis in the first place – that’s what!


Note that all Republicans want to defeat Obama! But that means electing another Republican! Which is better?


A)   Minimal Economic Growth under a Democrat or

B) Maximal Economic Decline under a Republican?


You tell me!


The relevant, utilitarian, valid, rational, logical, justifiable, credible, alternative question is,


“What would a Republican

in the White House,

instead of Obama,

mean to the country?”


The question is, “WHAT WILL A REPUBLICAN DO, not what the Nominee says he will do, but what will he do? We have over 100-years of historical precedent to analyze since Theodore Roosevelt. If you need a little help, here’s the GOP list:


William Howard Taft

Warren G. Harding

Calvin Coolidge

Herbert Hoover

Dwight D. Eisenhower

Richard M. Nixon

Gerald R. Ford

Ronald Reagan

George H. W. Bush

George W. Bush


Now name 1, who helped the working man, the Middle Class or the disenfranchised instead of Corporations & Have-Mores – go ahead, I dare you! Which 1 would be better for the Average American than Democrat, Barack Obama!


“We must get out of the frying pan!” means



Perhaps the “frying pan” is not all that bad afterall! Before you jump, maybe you should ask the RIGHT QUESTION FIRST – but quietly please because that’s one question No Republican wants to hear!





“Yes, Minister”, British Sitcom, Episode ‘The National Education Service’ – Conversation between 2 Civil Servants in British government regarding the Minister they both serve.


Sir Humphrey: Bernard, what did you think of the Minister’s Washington speech that Peter wrote? “The British government administration is a model of loyalty, integrity and efficiency. It’s a ruthless war on waste; we’re cutting bureaucracy to the bone, a lesson that Britain could teach the world”.


Bernard: But is it true? Can we prove it?


Sir Humphrey: Oh, Bernard! A good speech isn’t one where we can prove the Minister is telling the truth. It’s one in which nobody else can prove that he’s lying.



Tabacco: I consider myself both a funnel and a filter. I funnel information, not readily available on the Mass Media, which is ignored and/or suppressed. I filter out the irrelevancies and trivialities to save both the time and effort of my Readers and bring consternation to the enemies of Truth & Fairness! When you read Tabacco, if you don’t learn something NEW, I’ve wasted your time.


Tabacco is not a blogger, who thinks; I am a Thinker, who blogs. Speaking Truth to Power!


In 1981′s ‘Body Heat’, Kathleen Turner said, “Knowledge is power”.

T.A.B.A.C.C.O.  (Truth About Business And Congressional Crimes Organization) – Think Tank For Other 95% Of World: WTP = We The People





This entry was posted in Bush, class+war, compromise, deregulation, disaster+capitalism, GOP, hypocrisy, knowledge+is+power, Obama, outsourcing, political+ping+pong, Politics, socialism4richcapitalism4poor, sophistry, takebackamerica, warpeace and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

5 Responses to ASKING THE WRONG QUESTION (An Old Politician’s Trick): “Is It That Governor Romney’s 15% Effective Personal Tax Rate Means He Doesn’t Play By The Rules?” – Question Should Be: “Are Rules That Allow Gov. Romney To Pay 15% Tax Rate Fair?” How Sophists Trick You Into Irrelevant Thought Processes! The TRUTH Is The RULES ARE UNFAIR! Following Unfair Rules Romney Helped Create & We Did NOT Setup Is INHERENTLY UNFAIR To Middle Class! Example Of Political “Hocus Pocus”! If Republicans Misdirect You To Answer An Irrelevant Question, You Miss The Essentials!

  1. admin says:


    Sorry to disappoint you, but Romney is correct. He is an Expert at business!

    However what do business experts do?

    Expert CEOs cut Taxes for the Top 1%. You can bank on that if Romney wins the Presidency.

    Tax Cuts for the RICH alone will increase the DEFICIT! But he will also CUT SOCIAL PROGRAMS (MEDICARE, SOCIAL SECURITY & PUBLIC EDUCATION) for the rest of us since he will NEVER CUT WARS OR WAR SPENDING. And Rich Folks’ kids don’t need either a College Loan, College Scholarship or a Government Grant to attend the best Universities. Rich Kids can ask Daddy to sign a check – case solved!

    He will advance the Cause of War to reward the MILITARY INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX, which will in turn PAY BACK MITT ROMNEY.

    They minimize Corporate Healthcare costs by selecting Privatized Insurers, which deny Healthcare for preexisting conditions to lower premium costs to major corporations.

    They OUTSOURCE jobs abroad to minimize Fixed Costs and exploit US Tax Laws that reward Corporations for Outsourcing. Being a business expert means reducing the number of jobs here! Romney knows how to create jobs – just NOT IN USA!

    When there is a decision to be made between more PROFITS and Social Issues or Public Good, PROFITS win every time because that’s how Corporate CEOs get those humongous Benefits, Stock Options & Salaries – but not always. Even when Corporations FAIL, CEOs make out like BANDITS!

    Expert Businessmen AVOID TAKING RESPONSIBILITY for their own actions. Romney’s Healthcare Plan in Massachusetts is basically “Obamacare”, which Romney now says he will reverse once he is President. We will fight the Healthcare battle all over again! And this time Private Insurance will win everything and all those RESTRICTIONS will once again flood our PRIVATIZED HEALTHCARE SYSTEM!

    Expert businessmen are responsible for their own Corporations, not other guys’ Corporations. If the Rich flourish even more, Romney’s coffers will be overrun with Reelection Dollar$ even if the Middleclass ceases to exist under his reign. Bush served 2 terms didn’t he!

    And Expert businessmen have NO CONSCIENCE. Look at the LIES Romney tells about other Republicans in the Primary campaign. Yes, they lie about him too. So electing any SELFISH REPUBLICAN will only EXACERBATE OUR ECONOMIC CRISIS.

    Romney, as President, would reconstruct DEREGULATION (letting Wall Street write its own Rules), which would lead to ANOTHER ECONOMIC CRISIS and ANOTHER GOVERNMENT BAILOUT for the “TOO BIG TO FAILS”.

    As President, Romney would undo Rowe v. Wade and remove ABORTION FOR THE POOR to satisfy his Conservative Religious Right. Remember that killing US Abortion would ONLY APPLY TO THE POOR AND MIDDLE CLASS since Rich Folks would simply go ABROAD to achieve the same thing.

    And as George W. Bush blamed his BAD ECONOMY on Bill Clinton, Mitt Romney would blame his BAD ECONOMY on Barack Obama.

    Romney assumes the WRONG QUESTIONS and supplies the WRONG ANSWERS

    So much for a GOOD BUSINESSMAN in the WHITE HOUSE!



  2. I truly enjoy examining on this internet site , it contains excellent articles . “He who sees the truth, let him proclaim it, without asking who is for it or who is against it.” by Henry George.

  3. admin says:

    Excerpted from ‘Yes, Minister’, Episode “A Question Of Loyalty”


    After the Minister has publicly admitted something he shouldn’t have re saving money in government expenditures, he is taken to task by Sir Humphrey Appleby, his Civil Servant, Cabinet Secretary and Adviser.

    HUMPHREY: But couldn’t you have stalled a little more effectively?

    MINISTER, JIM HACKER: What do you mean “stall”?

    HUMPHREY: Well, blurred things a bit! You’re always so good at blurring the issue. You have a considerable talent for making things unintelligible, Minister!

    JIM HACKER: I beg your pardon! (offended)

    HUMPHREY: No, No I mean that as a compliment, I assure you! Blurring the issue is one of the basic ministerial skills.

    JIM HACKER: What are the others? (smiling quizzically)

    HUMPHREY: Delaying decisions, dodging questions, juggling figures, bending facts, and concealing errors!
    TABACCO: There you have it in a nutshell! This is why Republicans are, generally speaking, such successful politicians!

  4. Arnalda says:

    try to improve your posts so they can be more detailed.

    • admin says:


      I would love to comply with your request but you should “try to improve your comments so they can be more detailed”!

      You are vague in your comment; I am explicit in my Posts. What in tarnation are you trying to say???


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>