In my last post on politics, I didn’t get to address the Supreme Court ruling on Obamacare. A couple of things surfaced from that event…

First, the Republican party wasn’t sure which statement they wanted to make as a result of the ruling. Was it that the penalty attached to NOT having coverage was ruled a tax or was it a betrayal by Chief Justice Roberts?

Mitt Romney remarked that the court ruled the law was Constitutional, but, didn’t say that it was good policy. That’s a valid point and should be illuminated. But, that’s another opportunity for the Romney camp, Republicans and conservatives to focus on the substance of this election instead of the criticisms and attacks on President Obama.

Then Senator Paul Ryan of Wisconsin said he was disappointed that Roberts chose to leave the decision about whether this law is a good step for Americans up to the voters. WTF. The last time I checked, the way a democracy decides good vs. bad politics was to vote on it. It just looked like Senator Ryan was manufacturing outrage.

Fact is, the Chief Justice back-handed the president and the Democratic Party. He got the call exactly right, striking the right balance, including no politics in the decision. He found a way to confirm the penalty while condemning it as a tax as well.

PBO and his team didn’t want the penalty to be called a tax. That makes them look tax-heavy. Republicans and conservatives should have been thanking Roberts for the way he handled the decision. Had he gone the other way, the decision would have looked typical; Liberals vs. conservatives and no one in-the-know would have respected it.

But, when we all stop and consider the balance of, “It’s good but flawed,” we see the genius. Why can’t the Republicans see a free pass when it comes their way?

I’ll tell you why… Negative campaigning. They can’t resist. And I’m blaming both sides – PBO is just as guilty – maybe more-so. He allows his henchmen to do the dirty work. He should be insisting that they take the high road like he said they would. But, I really think he tells them to just do it and don’t tell him. He gets to turn a blind eye… at least until he’s called on the carpet for it. Then he has no on to blame…

Let me also give Mitt Romney a moment of credit for how he handled an interview he did in Israel. Both ABC and CBS News asked him the requisite questions about foreign affairs and how he’d handle them if elected. He only spoke about what he would do and made no mention of PBO in any instance. He was actually quite respectful. No criticisms… No attacks… No finger-pointing. Congratulations Mitt Romney. Positive campaigning. Let’s have more of that from you and PBO…

I also need to take up for Romney on the issue of his tenure at Bain Capital. The word is that he was on a leave of absence from Bain between 1999 and becoming Governor of Massachusetts. SEC documents suggest he was still in charge at Bain during that time, but, everyone knows he was running the Olympics and then running for office. A leave of absence means you’re technically still an employee of the company, so, because of his significant role and stake in Bain, he would and should still have to sign – officially – for the company, even if he’s not in day-to-day management.

Democrats need to let that go. It’s as silly as the birther issue. Again, let’s focus on the fact that Bain was a huge outsourcer, a down-sizer and Romney profited greatly from both.

Which brings me to the story that’s just not going away: Mitt Romney’s tax returns and finances. He’s shooting himself in the foot.

First, I think we should add to the requirement to be POTUS a minimum number of years of financial disclosure. It’s become too big an issue for candidates. The current requirement to qualify to be POTUS are:

You must be a native born United States citizen
You must be 35 years of age or older
You must have lived in the United States for at least 14 years

These requirements are all Constitutional, so, a financial standard would likely need to be an unwritten rule or an agreement between the political parties – They just need to work it out. Voters don’t want a president with off-shore bank accounts…

Did I just come out and say that? I did. It’s true. We’re all wondering what it is that Mitt Romney is hiding and the more he hides it, the more suspect we become…

His father released 12 years of tax returns. PBO released 12 years. Don’t know why 12 years was the magic number – why not 14 years based on the residency requirement? I think they’re both excessive. But, as I’ve said, the IRS requires taxpayers to retain three years actively; Everyone running for office should release at least that much and site it as such. It’s likely some number in the middle makes more sense…

I personally don’t want to see anyone’s tax returns, but, I don’t want a president who’s millions of dollars are earning interest hidden in another country. That’s a valid concern. He wants us to believe he can fix the economy, but, he keeps his assets out of our economy? Just seems a bit out of line with the commitment to America and public service that a president should have. And it’s shady…

The big picture is this: Speaker of the House John Boehner recently said it’s likely that voters are not going to fall in love with Mitt Romney. He’s a Republican; I’m not sure Republicans are in love with him. His point was this election needs to be about the economy, not the person. Not so sure about that either…

Likability is a huge factor in winning an election and Mitt Romney’s disconnect with regular people is a huge disadvantage. And being defiant about his richness just makes him more unlikeable…

Republican vice presidential nominee is coming soon – stay tuned…