Watched by his son Henry, Democratic Senate candidate Bob Kerrey delivers his concession speech at the Nebraska Democratic Party's election night gathering in La Vista.

Barrier to Romney Tax Disclosure Is the Candidate Himself

10:11 p.m. | Updated A revised version of this post is available here.

Mitt Romney has said it every way he can: He is not releasing any more of his tax returns.

Mr. Romney, the presumptive Republican nominee, is facing millions of dollars in searing ads from President Obama and a rising chorus of puzzled Republicans, all urging him to reveal more of his financial history.

But with each answer he gives, Mr. Romney seems more determined than ever that voters will not see any of his tax history before 2010.

“In the political environment that exists today, the opposition research of the Obama campaign is looking for anything they can use to distract from the failure of the president to reignite our economy,” Mr. Romney told National Review on Tuesday, explaining his opposition to a broader release of his personal tax data.

“I’m simply not enthusiastic about giving them hundreds or thousands of more pages to pick through, distort and lie about,” he said.

That follows an equally emphatic statement last Friday, when Mr. Romney brushed aside calls for him to make public more than the 2010 returns he has released and the 2011 documents he has said are coming soon.

“Those are the two years people are going to have, and that’s all that’s necessary for people to understand something about my finances,” Mr. Romney said in an interview on CNN.

The definitive nature of Mr. Romney’s statements appears to have all but shut down any public contemplation from his close advisers that he might reconsider. Kevin Madden, a senior adviser to Mr. Romney, declined to talk about internal discussions on the issue, but made clear who was in charge.

“I would point you to the governor’s statements,” Mr. Madden said. “That guides the campaign’s position.”

Another senior adviser to the campaign said Wednesday that he had “heard of no division in the inner circle on this.”

“He is determined not to release more, and they support him,” the adviser said of Mr. Romney and his aides. “Plus, there is no evidence that voters care about this. They think they know enough about Mitt Romney’s finances.”

But that answer has not satisfied a growing number of Republicans who have said that Mr. Romney’s refusal to release more of his tax returns threatens to do him lasting political damage as he nears the final stage of the presidential campaign.

On Tuesday, the editors of National Review wrote that the Republican campaign was “playing into the president’s hands” by refusing to release the tax returns. They predicted that Mr. Romney would eventually have to cave in to the demands.

“The only question is whether he releases more returns now, or later — after playing more defense on the issue and sustaining more hits,” they wrote. “There will surely be a press feeding frenzy over new returns, but better to weather it in the middle of July.”

In the last several days, similar calls have come from Republican pundits and governors, and from some of Mr. Romney’s former rivals for the party’s nomination.

“Politically, I think that would help him,” Representative Ron Paul of Texas told Politico. “In the scheme of things politically, you know, it looks like releasing tax returns is what the people want.”

George Will, the conservative commentator, said on ABC’s “This Week” on Sunday that Mr. Romney should release more tax returns quickly.

“If something’s going to come out, get it out in a hurry,” Mr. Will said. “I do not know why, given that Mitt Romney knew the day that McCain lost in 2008 that he was going to run for president again that he didn’t get all of this out and tidy up some of his offshore accounts and all the rest.”

Mr. Romney’s hard-and-fast refusals have also energized the Democratic attacks. Mr. Obama’s Chicago-based campaign is continuing to hammer him with new television ads, web videos and commentary from surrogates.

The Democratic National Committee on Wednesday released a video making fun of Mr. Romney by juxtaposing his statements on his tax returns with images of a man in a top hat doing a horse ballet.

“Do we really want a president who dances around the issues?” the video asks.

The horse featured in the video is Rafalca, and is owned by Ann Romney, who took some offense to the video in an appearance on ABC on Wednesday. By late Wednesday, the D.N.C. apologized and said it would no longer use the horse in videos or ads.

“Our use of the Romneys’ dressage horse was not meant to offend Mrs. Romney in any way, and we regret it if it did,” said Brad Woodhouse, the communications director for the D.N.C. “We were simply making a point about Governor Romney’s failure to give straight answers on a variety of issues in this race. We have no plans to invoke the horse any further to avoid misinterpretation.”

Mr. Woodhouse said the existing video, and a second similar one also released earlier Wednesday, will remain available online.

A television ad by Mr. Obama’s campaign went up in Pennsylvania on Tuesday, just as Mr. Romney held an event in the state. Titled “Makes you Wonder,” the ad raises the possibilities that Mr. Romney has additional overseas tax havens that would be revealed by releasing his tax returns.

“Makes you wonder if some years he paid any taxes at all,” the ad says. “We don’t know because Romney has released just one full year of his tax returns.”

Mr. Romney’s campaign has sought to change the subject, accusing the Democrats of going on the attack because of what they say are the failed economic policies of Mr. Obama’s administration.

Mr. Madden said that Mr. Romney had disclosed personal financial information “beyond what the law requires” and said that should be enough.

“What’s important to voters is the state of the economy and who’s going to fix it,” he said. “What they really want is a focus on the issues. That’s where the governor is focused.”

View the original article here

Democrats open fire on Senate candidate Tommy Thompson (Daily Caller)

Former Wisconsin Gov. Tommy Thompson officially entered the U.S. Senate race as a Republican candidate Tuesday. Already, Democrats are pouncing on his record, labeling him as a fiscally irresponsible spender and super lobbyist.

The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee (DSCC) released a one-page sheet on Thompson taking issue with his record as governor. According to the DSCC, spending in the state of Wisconsin increased 118 percent under Thompson’s tenure, and more than 8,500 employees were added to the government payroll.

It also highlights the fact that the state’s debt grew by $1.8 billion during Thompson’s tenure, and that spending grew at 39 percent higher than the rate of inflation.

“Even rank and file conservatives are disgusted with Thompson’s record as governor and his work as a DC super lobbyist,” said DSCC spokesman Matt Canter in a statement.

“As Wisconsin’s most fiscally irresponsible governor, Tommy Thompson doubled state spending, increased the state debt and expanded Wisconsin government by nearly 10,000 state workers,” he added. “Since then Tommy has cashed in on his cozy relationships within the Bush administration and joined the ranks of Washington, DC’s super lobbyists, greasing the wheels of government to benefit his special interest clients.”

After serving as governor of Wisconsin for an unprecedented four terms, Thompson was appointed as Secretary of Health and Human Services by President George W. Bush. In 2008, he ran for president only to drop out early after his poll numbers refused to climb.

Thompson may have a tough road in the campaign to replace Sen. Herb Kohl. In August, the conservative Club for Growth pre-empted his official bid by releasing a negative ad, aligning Thompson with President Obama’s health care bill.

Follow Amanda on Twitter.

Read more stories from The Daily Caller

Ted Turner: It's time for Rupert Murdoch 'to step down'

Limbaugh: Obama jobs bill is 'nothing more than a wet dream tax bill'

Poll: Warren narrowly leads Brown in Massachusetts U.S. Senate race

I Know How She Does It: With Olivia Munn! [SLIDESHOW]

Round 2: Linda McMahon running to replace Sen. Joe Lieberman

View the original article here

1st potential candidate for Giffords seat emerges (AP)

PHOENIX – Is Rep. Gabrielle Giffords running for re-election?

That's a question State Sen. Frank Antenori of Tucson wants to answer before the May 15 deadline for submitting nominating petitions. The first potential candidate to publicly declare an interest in running for the southern Arizona post, Antenori said Thursday he feels Democrats are exploiting a perception that she's running for re-election as a way to blunt attempts by the GOP to win the seat.

"You are not going to use this strategy for a political purpose and try to keep Republicans out of the race until May. Ain't gonna happen," Antenori said, explaining that such a late announcement by Giffords would leave GOP candidates flat-footed.

Giffords, who is in her third term in Congress but has spent the past eight months recovering from a gunshot wound she suffered during a meeting with voters, hasn't publicly said whether she'll seek re-election. She also has been mentioned as a potential candidate for a U.S. Senate seat next year.

Arizona Democratic Party spokeswoman Jennifer Johnson said the decision on whether Giffords will run is for the congresswoman and her family to make. "Her recovery isn't based on (Antenori's) political ambitions," Johnson said.

Speculation on Giffords' future has buzzed since her surprise return to Congress earlier this month to cast her first vote since the Jan. 8 shooting in Tucson that wounded 12 others and killed six people, including one of her aides. Her return to vote on the debt ceiling deal was celebrated as proof she could possibly return full-time to politics.

Giffords campaign chairman Michael McNulty didn't immediately return calls placed Thursday.

Some Republicans have privately expressed reluctance in speaking publicly about the future of the seat because of sensitivities of commenting on her career as she was recovering.

Antenori, who formed an exploratory committee for a potential congressional run, said three weeks ago he thought Giffords was going to run, but now is left to wonder after a loyal Giffords aide took another job and, he charges, the Democratic Party is testing the waters for other possible candidates for the post.

"If she is capable and has the physical ability to represent the district, I think she would be a formidable — almost unbeatable — foe," Antenori said. He's the only candidate so far who has said publicly he's even considering a run — but he also says he will probably cancel those plans if Giffords decides to make another bid for her seat.

Johnson said the party isn't shopping around possible candidates for the post. "Congresswoman Giffords is our incumbent," Johnson said. "If she decides not to run, then that's the only appropriate time for us to be discussing other Democratic candidates."

Antenori said he plans to announce whether he's running in January or February after the state finishes drawing new boundaries for the congressional district. He believes Giffords ought to make her announcement within the first two months of 2012, too.

Antenori, who served in the Army in Afghanistan and Iraq before retiring from the military in 2004, lost a 2006 run for the congressional post, finishing second to last in a primary field of five Republicans. He went on to win a 2008 state House race and crushed his Democratic opponent in a 2010 race for the state Senate.

If Giffords decides to run again, she will have plenty of goodwill and money at her disposal. Democratic colleagues have held several fundraisers on her behalf in recent months and many are also donating to her campaign. As of June 30, they had helped her campaign generate more than $639,000 in donations.

According to the latest quarterly report filed with the Federal Election Commission, Giffords' campaign has nearly $788,000 in the bank.

Bruce Merrill, a longtime pollster in Arizona and senior research fellow at Arizona State University's Morrison Institute for Public Policy, said Antenori is trying to put his name out to voters in case Giffords decides against running for re-election. "People should, rightfully, try to position themselves," Merrill said.

But Merrill, who believes the Democrat is unbeatable if she seeks re-election, also speculated that Giffords probably wants as much time as possible to assess her health and whether she wants to run again.

"There is no reason, in my opinion, for her to announce until May," Merrill said.

___(equals)

Associated Press writer Kevin Freking in Washington contributed to this report.

View the original article here

Democrats suggest third-party candidate viable in 2012 (Daily Caller)

Democratic pollster Stan Greenberg says new survey data shows voters are increasingly receptive to a third-party presidential candidate, who would likely draw more votes from the Republicans than President Barack Obama.

“The third-party candidate, with this data … might take more from the Republicans,” partly because he or she would draw disproportionate support from white voters without a college a degree, said Greenberg, a founder of the Quinlan Rosner polling firm.

His July survey of 1,481 likely voters showed that 58 percent of Republican-leaning voters and 70 percent of independents would consider backing a third-party candidate. The poll showed that 38 percent of Republicans and 25 percent of independents would reject the notion, Greenberg said in Friday briefing to reporters.

There “is clearly a space for such a candidate to come in” the 2012 race, Greenberg asserted. “More voters, particularly blue-collar voters, think a third party is an option.” (RELATED: Nader rules out another run but ‘almost 100 percent’ certain Obama will face primary challenge)

The prospect of a third-party candidate drew immediate interest from Democrats. The polling data suggesting voter receptivity to such a candidacy are “striking numbers,” said Democratic activist Will Marshall.

Greenberg is a Democrat. He worked as pollster for President Bill Clinton, and his wife is Connecticut Democratic Rep. Rosa DeLauro. The new study was done under a contract for the Democratic-affiliated Democracy Corps and the Women’s Voices, Women Vote Action Fund groups.

Greenberg has been doing polls for Democracy Corps for a decade and has “released all the data … people are free to judge the credibility,” he told The Daily Caller. The survey is posted at the firm’s website.

The poll’s results “are not very pretty results … the political class as whole gets hit, the Republicans more,” he said.

In numerous recent elections, Democratic activists have backed third-party candidates in the hope of draining votes from insurgent conservatives. For example, a Democrat, Jack Davis, ran as a third-party candidate in the May 24 race for New York’s 26th congressional district. Davis got 9 percent of the vote, helping the Democrat candidate edge the GOP nominee 47 percent to 42 percent.

In the 1992 presidential election, Ross Perot ran as a third-party candidate and won 19 percent of the vote. Pollsters argue over whether he helped Bill Clinton, who won election with 43 percent of the vote, compared to the 37.5 percent won by then-President George H.W. Bush.

Perot’s voters had a history of voting twice as much for Republican candidates, including President Ronald Reagan, rather than for Democratic candidates, Greenberg said.

If Perot’s votes had been divided 2 to 1 between Bush and Clinton, Bush would have won 50.1 percent of the vote, and Clinton would have won 49.3 percent of the vote. However, because swing voters usually break against an incumbent, especially in a tough economy, more of his voters would likely have voted for Clinton and given him the presidency if Perot had withdrawn.

Going into the 2012 election, Obama’s coalition is more solid that the GOP’s, Greenberg said. For example, only 39 percent of Democrats would consider a third-party candidate, he said. But, he continued, Obama “is stuck at 48 percent [approval]… all these numbers are heading towards a close difficult election.”

Read more stories from The Daily Caller

Democrats suggest third-party candidate viable in 2012

Maui madness: single GOP staffer to join Dems for Hawaii hearing

Hillary Clinton supporters: Donate $20.12 for 2012 challenge

Congressman: CBO can’t find any government spending that drives economic growth

Jon Huntsman's debate performance panned

View the original article here

'Average Joe' Candidate says Dems, GOP Manipulate the System (ContributorNetwork)

How can someone who considers himself an "average joe" run for president of the United States? Ask Matthew Gerwitz. With a conservative but non-conforming platform, the unknown "joe" has joined the 2012 race, as yet independent from any party affiliation.

In a previous Yahoo interview, Gerwitz gave his view of the U.S. Supreme Court and what to look for in a president. Today, he answers more questions.

Q: You state on your website that the two major parties manipulate the political election system for their own benefit. Can you give an example?

A: Say I was running Republican...if it even looked like any average joe could come close to winning, the GOP would probably change the rules so that I couldn't become the "establishment" candidate. They have a definite idea of whose "turn" it is. I feel that's how Bob Dole and George W. Bush got the nomination. What goes on in the two-party system has got to change.

Q: Do you think a conservative woman could ever win the presidency?

A: I think Palin or Michelle Bachmann could win, if they won the GOP nomination. Ideas win elections. We've seen that. Even though we think no one besides conservatives might vote for them, if one of them has the right message at the right time like President Obama had the message of change, they could win.

Q: Do you consider yourself a tea partier, or has any Tea Party affiliate approached you offering support?

A: I would consider myself a tea partier. No one has approached me yet, although I've sent some information about myself to Tea Party affiliates.

Q: You have a full plate at home, working three jobs--writer, guitar teacher, pastor--plus having helped your wife homeschool your children. What made you decide to run for president?

A: Even back when I was 18, I made jokes about running for office. But years later, after George W. Bush signed the prescription drug plan [2003, including prescriptions for seniors in Medicare but seen as a huge benefit to drug companies], I realized politicians would never change and began praying about what I could do.

On a sightseeing trip to Gettysburg, I stood at the historic location of a Civil War hospital. I could feel the death. More soldiers died at Gettysburg than in all the years of the Iraq war. Sadness overwhelmed me. I felt the Lord saying, "Are you going to be obedient?" But I ignored him.

The next Sunday, I was teaching a class at church about people needing a vision for their lives. Hosea 4:6 says, "Without vision, my people perish." The Lord asked me again to be obedient.

A week later, it just came tumbling out of my mouth. "I'm going to run for president."

Q: As a Christian pastor running for office, how would you address accusations of "homophobia" and "hate"?

A: Many people use the name "Christian" carelessly when they aren't really one [haven't actively accepted and professed Jesus as Lord, Saviour and leader over their life]. And they mistreat people in the name of what they think is Christianity.

A genuine, true follower of Christ knows what the Bible says about needing to love all people while not necessarily believing that everything people do is okay. Disagreeing is not hate. But many Christians haven't voiced this in the right manner. If we read in the Bible that something is a sin, and that sin hurts people, then we feel we are doing right by kindly telling someone so. If I correct my children for improper behavior, does that mean I hate them?

By the same token -- if the definition of "hate" is defined by those who make generalizations against Christians, then these others are acting just as "hateful" as the Christians they accuse.

See Gerwitz's July 4 You Tube video explaining the national debt ceiling, and stay tuned to the Yahoo Contributor Network for a third interview, discussing the pullout of troops from Afghanistan and other issues.

Sheryl Young has been freelance writing for newspapers, magazines, organizations and websites since 1997. Her specialty is American politics, education and society as they intersect with religion. Credits include Community Columnist for the Tampa Tribune Newspaper, Interview Columnist with Light & Life Magazine, and a National First Place "Roaring Lambs" Writing Award from the Amy Foundation.

(Disclosure of acquaintance: The writer and candidate are previous writing acquaintances, with the candidate inviting this writer to do the interviews. However, the writer is not receiving any form of remuneration from the candidate, nor is she working for, or personally endorsing, his campaign.)

View the original article here