Kerry's tax forms were NOT released to the public at all and McCain released just two years -- so, why the panic over Romney's taxes?????

Source: Hardball at MSNBC and Romney paid 14.1%, not 13.9 (link)

Of the several candidates who have run for the presidency,  two are the declared "wealthiest."  Of course,  Mitt Romney is one and the other . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . John Kerry.  Both are worth the same,  nominally speaking, but Kerry paid a lower effective tax rate than did Romney.  Why?  And, more importantly,  why does this not matter?    

There is no reason to believe that either man is a tax cheat. There is little reason to believe that the IRS does not care or has not looked into their business dealings,  dividend earnings,  tax deductions and so on.  

Understand that the Left wants 12 years of tax returns from Romney but did not make that requirement of John Kerry.  Romney claims Kerry released only two years of returns,  himself.  The foreigners at Think Progress say Kerry released 20 years,  but in their article,  "20" does not seem to be a real number.  In fact,  after reading this Think Progress article,  one has no idea how many returns were involved.  See that article here.  In a NY Times article,  the author concludes,   "Whatever the precise number  . . . .   it was more than two"  (link).  Soooooo, it could have been three or four???  

But, here is the real shocker.  When it was all said and done,  John Kerry's tax returns were not reported to the public [or, by extension,  to the Bush campaign], at all,  so says the National Affairs editor for New York Magazine,  the man who had access to these docs.(link) 

Did anyone care back in 2004?  Nope.  And most do not care,  today.  

John McCain released just two years.  No one complained then.  Mitt Romney released 23 years of tax docs to the McCain campaign during the vetting cycle. Understand this,  if there was a problem with Romney's taxes, something illegal,  we would have heard from the IRS.  

The critical issue, one that is being totally ignored is this:  

it is one thing to release your entire life as an adult money making machine to the IRS or to a friendly campaign;  it is quite another matter to release such information to those who have nothing but your total destruction in mind.  This is not about honesty,  it is about the thuggish tactics of a vicious community organizer who has an idiot's record as president and hopes to win by tearing down his opponent . . . . . . .   and nothing less. 

Referring to the chart, above,   does this [the chart] mean that Romney paid less taxes than Obama?  Of course not.  Instead,  he paid thousands if not  hundreds of thousands more.  The larger the source pool for income,  the more the opportunities for tax rate deductions.  Much,  if not most,  of Romney's money comes from dividend payments on high risk capital the man has invested.  Apparently,  Barry's investment concerns are minimal,  since he wouldn't  have a clue as to how to make money with risk capital.  The only "risk capital" our presidential genius spends,  is that of the taxpayer.  

Obama's added income sources never reported.  

Let's not forget that Obama is a multimillionaire.  He has earned more than $10 million since assuming his throne.    As president,  he travels at our expense, escaping an multi-million dollar expense for his personal campaign,   and does not claim such as income.  He lives rent free in our White House,  and,  again, does not count that as income.  His wife has taken 17 extended vacations at taxpayer expense.  That's four vacation per year.  What is the income value of that bit of fluff?  That 100 rounds of golf  -  I'll wager that that is a freeby, as well.  Those White House after-hours parties - all 900 of them,  what do you suppose that costs in terms of income paid-outs?? Don't you know that if Barack Obama figured all this potential income, as you and I would be required to do,  his effective tax rate would be nothing close to 27 %.  I am thinking more like 10%.