Here's the pitch... here's the swing

Homerun.

Now let's see that vaunted media bias in action....

Latest Rasmussen poll, Obama is now within 10 points.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/pa/pennsylvania_democratic_primary-240.html

Hillary Rambo Clinton has no time for these silly paper work distractions. She is busy engaging the enemy and ducking incoming sniper fire.

Hillary Rambo Clinton needs a Commander in Chief of Her Tax Records!!!!

THIS IS GREAT NEWS!!! FOR HILLARY!!!

Hillary's retort: Obama = Ken Starr.

I am waiting...

You know, to my mind this is a really big deal. Granted, I suppose that it does not matter what strikes me as a really big deal, because I live in MO, not PA or some upcoming state. Still, I would like to think that I am not so wildly unique that there are no folks in upcoming states who would share my view of what is important. Yesterday I was disgusted by (what I viewed as the) distractions of Clinton's "mis-statement." I am glad to see the focus shift back to the actual substance of the campaign. "Who is getting what from whom" is a very important question to ask about those to whom we entrust positions of very senior leadership, and there is no way not to conclude that Obama has been much more transparent about these issues than has Clinton.

For all her talk of being "vetted," there are many important details which we know about Obama but not about her. All such talk of "vetting" rings rather hollow in my ear so long as this remains the case. Sen Obama rightly should beat the drums on this issue, because it is (unlike so much else in the last few weeks) a matter of real and substantial merit that should matter to voters.

Incidentally, once again, I hope that everyone who has been berating Greg Sargent as a "hack" or a "shill" or a "flunky" for Clinton reads this thread.

Nice.
Now we can see how much Barack's money over the years went to Rev. Wright's church so that they could spew hatred and intolerance and print those nice Hammas pamphlets for thir congregation and beyond.

The first thing that leaps out at me here is the Obama family's charitable deductions. They hover at or below 1% never exceeding $4k, until 2005 when they suddenly soar to $77k.

Obama's critics will point to this as shameless cynicism - that a man who constantly speaks of all the ways in which America has blessed him, and of the power of Americans working together, was unwilling to donate more than a trivial portion of his family's considerable earnings to those less fortunate than himself. Unwilling, that is, until he was elected to the United State Senate and began to harbor presidential ambitions.

Obama's defenders are likely to note that in the period covered by these returns, Obama had just ascended to real prosperity for the first time in his life, that his grip on that prosperity was fragile at best, and that his first priority was to establish financial security for himself and his growing family. Prior to filing his 2005 returns, Obama received his enormous book advance and secured his place on the national stage, granting him for the first time in his life meaningful financial security, and enabling him to commence donating a greater proportion of his income to charitable causes. They might also note that Obama wasn't a hedge-fund manager - he and his wife earned their money by working for state and nonprofit institutions, sacrificing the potential for even greater earnings through their public service.

I flag this inevitable debate because media organizations always, always focus in on charitable donations. Remember, you read it here first.

Greg

I don't think majority of voters is as percerceptive or nuanced as you are. Most of them will go the drama of the day. I agree it should not be, but it is.

Hillary where are your tax returns, and while you are at it explain why you wanted to block the Nixon impeachment!

http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_jerry_ze_080325_1974_3a_hillary_lost_j.htm

Here's a link to the memo that accompanied the call, for anyone interested.

http://thepage.time.com/obama-camp-on-tax-returns-release/

Transparency we can believe in!!!!

Oh wait, you mean Obama has been demanding Hillary release her returns for months and he had not released his? Seems like something someone who has the press in his pocket and the limosine liberals would do. Can you say Hypocrite? Demand something of your opponent that you will not do yourself. Why not disenfranchise Florida and Michigan as well. Way to go to Obama and the limosine liberal members of the party, guarentee the loss of the general election.

THIS IS EXCELLENT NEWS!! FOR HILLARY!!!

Barack and Michelle did their own taxes until 2002. One more reason to vote for him in my book. At least he has a vague idea of what the rest of us are up against come April.

Amateur hour.

I just found these. Knew I had 'em somewhere...

Personal Financial Disclosure for Barack Obama (D-Ill)
http://www.opensecrets.org/pfds/candlook.php?txtName=obama

Hillary Clinton (D-NY) - 2006 Politician Profile Net Worth: From $10,360,009 to $51,021,998 Ranks 9th among all members of the Senate. Assets: 10 totaling $10,460,009 to $51,052,000. Liabilities: 2 totaling $30,002 to $100,000.

Hahaha

Did John McCain release his tax returns? Did any of the Republican candidates?

As to not itemizing your tithes, obviously some on here are more detail oriented to make sure all their deductions are counted. Do I? No! I don't particularly make that much money, so it seems an excercise in futility and I also do not itemize my donations to charity! I make what I make and give what I give, who is to criticize me. No one, I am my own worst critic!

Has anyone tried to view Obama's returns? It is frustratingly, laughably difficult to open them. Yes, I figured it out, but it's not user-friendly in the least and is clearly not intended for wide viewing by the general electorate. But by golly, they sure make it easy to find out whether you can send cash to BO!

Only ONE (UNO!) Democrat since FDR (who was elected in 1932) has been reelected as president. Of course, you all know who that is, right. For those that don't: its Big Bill Clinton.

That's technically true, but Truman served nearly all of Roosevelt's fourth term before being elected on his own, which makes it comparable to being re-elected (IMO).

JFK probably would have been re-elected had he not been murdered.

Since then, the Democrats' problem has been more about getting elected in the first place than getting re-elected.

I don't know what else they may contain that's embarassing or cause for concern or posturing. I do know this. Hillary is running as the one true friend of the (*cough*white*cough) working man and woman in Pennsylvania. The one thing she does not want to do is for people to be reminded of how much money she and Bill have been raking in since he left the White House until the last possible moment. And, in particular, she doesn't want people chewing over who's been paying Bill those hugacious speaking fees for weeks on end.

That kind of information doesn't change minds quickly. It is slow poison, the kind of thing that worms its way into the subconcscious and slowly eats away at the voter's perception of who the candidate is.

I have a question, which I hope someone can answer. Has Hillary ever committed to release of the information on money received by her husband for his library or on contributors to his insitute? I assume this wouldn't be in personal tax returns. Over the weekend, Ann Lewis for Clinton, said that Bill would not be a shadow president or veep, but would continue doing all his "good works" for his foundation. Doesn't this create problems if Hillz should win? Doesn't it open up the WH backdoor for friends of Bill?

Only ONE (UNO!) Democrat since FDR (who was elected in 1932) has been reelected as president.

How is that relevant to the this year's election?
Is Bill running for President?

~ Jess

Obama released his 2006 tax return last April:

http://taxprof.typepad.com/taxprof_blog/2007/04/baracj_obamas_2.html

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/politics/chi-070416obama-tax,0,445005.story

guys, guys. Hillary HAS released her tax returns, but she had to use them as a shield for herself, Chelsea and an 8-year old girl on the dash for the car. sadly, they were subsequently shredded in a hail of sniper fire.

granted they are for 2006 returns - fine, but that still doesn't account for the fact that she has more tax info public than Obama does. He's hiding the records while he was on the City Council - I am so sure he doesn't have any records of his calendars & meetings - yet he has the nerve to criticize Hillary for something that is going to be released anyway. The whole argument is dumb dumb dumb.

>>What was Phil Singer thinking? Why would they call for Obama to release taxes?

Probably the same reason Clinton has attacked Obama on his stance on Iraq -- I guess this is the "She blinded me with hypocrisy" offence. She learned it from Rove. It is similar to the "oh yeah? _Liberals_ are fascists!" offence. Black is white, up is down.

When your supporters compare you to Christ, you don't have to trifle with releasing tax returns.

Like your idol, you just got caught "misspeaking." On the city council! Heh.

If you're going to attempt to "slam" someone, do get your facts right first.

Of course, trying to slime Sen. Obama by comparing him with the uh, *ethically challenged* Hillary Clinton is a fool's errand, but hey go run with it if you wish.

Am I the only one who finds this carping by Obama's campaign about her tax returns a little damaging to his dignity?

I have trouble escaping a suspicion that he is being set up by the Clintons to keep demanding their release. Why did Singer insist today on Obama's putting his out? What possible motive can they have for doing that unless it was to provoke the Obamans to do just what they did do and again get on a soap box about Hillary's.

If her returns turn out to be anything less than a whole armory of smoking guns, we'll get the poor put-upon Hillary being persecuted by the mean male from that angry anti-white church on the South Side of Chicago.