There are 47 percent of the people who will vote for the president no matter what. All right, there are 47 percent who are with him, who are dependent upon government, who believe that they are victims, who believe the government has a responsibility to care for them, who believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing, to you-name-it. That that's an entitlement. And the government should give it to them. And they will vote for this president no matter what…These are people who pay no income tax.And then he says he can't "worry about those people" as he tries to win votes, because they will never be convinced. He's not saying he doesn't care about them as citizens and human beings, just that he won't devote any attention to trying to cull some of their votes.
Compare the statements Obama made to donors in 2008, which were leaked out — the famous "bitter clingers" remarks.
You go into some of these small towns in Pennsylvania, and like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing's replaced them," Obama said. "And they fell through the Clinton Administration, and the Bush Administration, and each successive administration has said that somehow these communities are gonna regenerate and they have not. And it's not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations."
Obama made a problematic judgment call in trying to explain working class culture to a much wealthier audience. He described blue collar Pennsylvanians with a series of what in the eyes of Californians might be considered pure negatives: guns, clinging to religion, antipathy, xenophobia.
पोस्ट्स
३१२ टिप्पण्या:
312 पैकी 1 – 200 नवीन› नवीनतम»Romney perfectly described the electorate as it stands today.
Of course this means the economy and foreign relations mean nothing now.
Its not October yet, is it?
Why so early with the "secret bombshell"?
So Willard stepped in it again. :::shock::: Hey, all I ask for is consistency.
No getting around this as Althouse had to post it eventually.
Breakin' ...
It was determined (6) years ago Romney was a, born w/a silver spoon, train wreck!
hmm, where are all the Willard apologists? Indeed as it's a full-time job so "we" know you're out there ...
Things Romney can't worry about: Convincing voters who won't vote for him ever to vote for him. Things Obama can't worry about: Attending his daily security briefing.
... Uh... So, point Romney?
"It was determined (6) years ago Romney was a, born w/a silver spoon, train wreck!"
Born with a silver spoon and still worked harder than Barry ever has. How sad is that I ask you?
Shiloh wrote:
So Willard stepped in it again. :::shock::: Hey, all I ask for is consistency.
No getting around this as Althouse had to post it eventually.
How is Willard stepping in anytying? He's describing a good portion of the electorate quite accurately.
Damn, finally some Willard apologists er Obama deflectors appear lol.
90% of life is just showing up ...
Romney did something he needs to apologize about? Something we need to apologize about on his behalf?
I think not.But keep wishing.
In the mean time, unemployment is still over 8% and our embassies are under attack and Barry is doing nothing about it.
I just don't see why this is so odd. Candidates, routinely, explain that they can't get everyone's vote. That some people just won't vote for them. this isn't really that shocking.
"but I don't see anything bad in there at all."
I am SHOCKED. There will be plenty, however, who will disagree with you.
Not a single reader of Mother Jones is going to vote for Romney, so it's a wash.
Then Mitt is in good company:
"The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public's money."
Alexis de Tocqueville
"I am SHOCKED. There will be plenty, however, who will disagree with you."
Who? Oh yes, the MSM. Liberals. And maybe some of the mooching class who are still a little embarrassed about it.
The folks paying for the moochers are probably just nodding their heads in agreement.
That was the comparison that came into my mind.
The Difference?
The Romster is merely stating facts, Zero is showing his - and his idolaters' - contempt for the mass of America.
shiloh said...
90% of life is just showing up ...
Now we know why the little animal hates the Romster so much.
He's the most craven of the 47%.
PS What the Romster said is intelligent people call astute analysis.
lol lol lol
:::::::train wreck:::::::
Mittens Althouse mama grizzly hyperbole
$R *K )V M(
The stunning hypocrisy is what Ann points out: no difference between what Romney says and what Obama said.
Romney is more honest and direct.
If nothing else, it's off/message, not that Willard ever had a rational message to begin with.
On the bright side, it lets Clint off the hook! :-P Also distracts from the Willard campaign in chaos meme lol.
Romney is a walkin'/talkin' distraction unto himself.
Not a single reader of Mother Jones is going to vote for Romney, so it's a wash.
Agreed...both of them will be writing in Ralph Nader.
You know, shiloh, you're just dumb.
I have no idea why you continue to come here.
It's a waste of your time and just about everybody here.
It's true. Romney and Obama say the same thing. The difference is that Romney knows the moochers are a bug. Obama thinks of them as a feature.
Shouting T
Feel free to ignore my posts ... if you can. Heck, I usually ignore yours.
Obviously, you don't, shiloh, because you just responded to it.
Your tone is juvenile. The name calling of Romney is incredibly stupid.
Why don't you just STFU, read the posts written by people who have an intellect, and cease with the idiot posts?
"Feel free to ignore my posts ... if you can. Heck, I usually ignore yours."
So you're just using Althouse as your virtual street corner? Shouting into the wind with no one listening?
shiloh, there are some Dems with a brain and the ability to make a sensible argument who post here.
Leave the posting to them. You don't have the ability to contribute.
I come here to hear all sides. But, a minimum level of intelligence helps.
shiloh said...
Romney is a walkin'/talkin' distraction unto himself.
As opposed to TOTUS?
Thought I'd post this here.
A good explanation of how Ras arrived at his R +4 skew.
As I say, this is why the little animal is camped out here so much.
He has to convince himself, as much as anyone else, his side is winning.
I watched it with my (more liberal) roommate and neither of us heard anything striking - but we didn't hear anything in Obama's comment that was inaccurate either.
Partisans are doing what partisans do:
Blowing nonsense into their particular pet peeve.
All it says to me is what I already know:
Election years - like times of war - are periods of madness, not serious discussions of the issues.
Much of what occurs here are fine examples of that,...
"Obviously, you don't"
Obviously ST doesn't understand the definition of "usually."
Lots of faux outrage by my liberal facebook friends who don't work in the public sector and were not going to vote for him anyway. Tis the season where people want to be outraged.
I mean to say.... Don't work In the private sector....
TWM said...
Romney did something he needs to apologize about? Something we need to apologize about on his behalf?
He told the truth about Democrat voters and for that, he can never be forgiven. The Party of Parasites hates being called parasites because, well, that's hurtful.
The thing is, he's wrong. What about the POOR Republicans? There ARE poor Republicans, aren't there? I know there are some in the southeast. They were hit hard by Katrina, for example. Now, they may not consider themselves victims (what a not kind thing to say by Romney, he has no idea), but they make very little, pay no income tax and vote Republican.
I know it's hard to fathom, but there are poor Republicans.
Leftists are constantly spying. It's gross.
"i know it's hard to fathom, but there are poor Republicans."
I don't make enough money to be liberal....perhaps Democrat, but certainly not liberal.
Millions of Americans receiving Social Security will not vote for Obama. Neither will millions of Americans on Medicare.
But you got the victimy thing down pat, Tosa.
Yes, like I say, he's not correct. Either he knows he's not, or he doesn't know he's not.
""Poor Republicans"""
Concept missed. Poor does not equal dependent. Not for any of our fellow citizens.
The pro-Obama Pro-democrat hack media will do thier best to spin this. I do not think it will hurt Romney, but the hack media will take bits out of context and lie, twist and whine as they do.
You guys don't get it. Here is the worst part of what Mitt said...
“My job is not to worry about those people,” Romney said. “I’ll never convince them they should take personal responsibility and care for their lives.”
So, the 47% of people who are going to vote for Obama "don't take personal responsibility and care for their lives"?
Would that include the firefighters and police officers whom you rely on?
How about the people who teach your kids?
How about the parents who hold down two jobs so they can give their kids a better life? You want to tell them they don't take personal responsibility?
How about the soldiers who are under attack in Afghanistan? They don't accept personal responsibility?????
This is the line that is absolutely going to kill him. Believe me, the ad is being written right now featuring people just like the ones I listed.
I just wake up every day and go to work and then work two other jobs when I am done with the first. I am not the problem HT
Concept not missed.
Romney said, "These are people who pay no income tax."
He maligned this group of people as kind of shiftless and dependent.
...thinking he was maligning Democrats only.
But, as I say, he's wrong.
What janmaxwell said, stick a fork in Willard, he's done, although he already was on life-support!
No pun intended ...
What I noticed about liberals of age who should know better is that they derive their sense of helping people byadvo advocating for more programs and taxes. They won't otherwise lift a finger to help the poor with their own time and money but since they "are concerned" then they did their fair share
Firefighters, policemen and teachers pay taxes.
So, jax, we know that you suffer from a reading comprehension deficit.
janmaxwell said...
You guys don't get it. Here is the worst part of what Mitt said...
“My job is not to worry about those people,” Romney said. “I’ll never convince them they should take personal responsibility and care for their lives.”
So, the 47% of people who are going to vote for Obama "don't take personal responsibility and care for their lives"?
Would that include the firefighters and police officers whom you rely on?
How about the people who teach your kids?
How about the parents who hold down two jobs so they can give their kids a better life? You want to tell them they don't take personal responsibility?
How about the soldiers who are under attack in Afghanistan? They don't accept personal responsibility?????
Christ, what nonsense.
Police and fire, and especially the military, are the mainstay of the Romster's support.
Non-union teachers will also vote for him.
It's the slugs, like the ones in Chi-town, he was addressing.
Jan - and that ad would be a total lie.
Romney was talking about the taker class. Not firefighters.
Will the pro-Obama press and the Obama campaign lie and take what Romney said out of context? Why - yes!
We can always play the whole context of "you didn't build that".
There are military personnel who qualify for food stamps.
What a fabulous rabble rouser you are, janmaxwell, to be sure. But what I wanna know is how do you look yourself in the mirror after spewing your tripe?
I really think that, as the Professor points out, if you were going to vote for Romney, this isn't going to give you any more heartburn than Obama's "bitter clingers" gave Obama voters.
There may be a few undecided voters who are going to work out the Venn logic and figure out that they're in a category to be pissed off about, but I doubt it.
And, janmaxwell, if you think unionized public servants like teachers, firemen, police officers, etc are somewhere high on the list of Republican voters favorite people, you need to read more right wing blogs & mags. That's about 25 years out of date. Yes, even the cops.
1. Denial and Isolation
2. Anger
3. Bargaining
4. Depression
5. Acceptance
And all that jazz ...
We lost six jets in Afghanistan over the weekend in addition to two Marines. A reasonable headline would be "US Suffers Worst Single Day Aircraft Losses Since Vietnam War". Now if anyone has seen that headline today, please let me know. I would think that would be something of an issue, but perhaps Mitt Romney did something more important for people to know about.
On a related note:
Who broke the Obama "bitter gate" story? Huffington Post
I see the little animal has set out his to do list for after the election.
Teachers and Firefighters certainly were not on the Republican's favorites list in Wisconsin.
The first step out of addiction is admitting you have a problem. That's what this was.
Oslo Negro,
I think the headline we are more likely to see is "Afghanistan combat results in uptick in aircraft replacement orders, boon for blue collar workers"
Happy days!
Sorry, edbutcher, but your beloved Rasmussen currently has Obama at 45%...so the 47% Mitt referred to must include EVERYONE who will vote for Obama.
And if you think that firefighers, police officers, and the military are ALL voting for Mitt...then I have a bridge to sell you.
When I read that Romney was planning to change his strategy, I didn’t realize that he intended to start calling (by his own numbers) 47% to 49% of the American public...moochers.
And what’s with citing 49% of the American public as completely unwilling to vote for you? That’s pretty close to saying “I’m going to lose and I know it”.
"Teachers and Firefighters certainly were not on the Republican's favorites list in Wisconsin."
Don't forget police, Allie. We need more police, firefighters and teachers. Lots more. Ten times more. A hundred times more.
I cant remember, Did huff post break the "bitter clingers" stuff before or after the dem convention?
The 47% number is a little high. Lots of gays and blacks are not dependent on the government. I'm comfortable with 42%.
Oh, boy! Secret videos! I love those.
Can't wait to see this one. Should be released any minute now.
Wayyy before the convention ...
Why did HP report it? It was news!
Janmaxwell, they tend to forget that there are many minorities serving in the military, who traditionally vote Democratic.
If you are not a net tax payer, and don't contribute in some other way equally, then NO, you are not taking responsibility for your life which includes contributing to the cost of government. You can't be using other people's money to cover your responsibilities and claim otherwise. On top of that, if you are an Obama voter, you are responsible for the malaise we are in right now. This recession should have been over 2 years ago like any other. You hired a completely unqualified inexperienced person with silly outdated and failed ideas. Take responsibility. Or continue to be a drain by wasting our time attacking some other guy who isn't even in office. You are the problem.
Yawn, another non story about what Romney said that was true. I have to rank this with the "I like to be able to fire people" comment taken out of context. Once I see it all I'm all "so what? Yeah he's not going to get the moocher vote"
Allie,
Minorities in the military may vote for democrats, but they despise freeloaders
Yeah, Shiloh, I knew that.
My point is that the fact huff post ran it was not just because it was news, but that someone else would gain politically from it (not McCain , think of someone more liberal and of the female persuasion)
Shiloh thinks honesty should somehow be replaced with telling lies. So instead of applauding Romney for his honesty, instead you get feigned horror at comments that describe and electorate, 47% or so, that doesn't pay federal income taxes, many of which are received SS and Medicare, others double dipping into SDI and Unemployment insurance. Are they going to vote for him no matter what he says to them. We are the suckers paying for these people. He's talking to the 53%'ers out there that are doing most of the heavy lifting.
Shiloh, no one is stopping your from giving more of your after tax income to these people. He's being fairly specific that his campaign and its money would be dropping that money into an empty hole that can never get filled or have a meaningful ROI.
AllieOop said...
Janmaxwell, they tend to forget that there are many minorities serving in the military, who traditionally vote Democratic.
It's democrat, not democratic, you human pin nail.
I have never seen any voting patterns reported by race within the military. Got a source for that?
I am genuinely surprised how poorly Romney's campaign is performing. The weak convention, the recent gaff-a-day and the reports of infighting are not what I predicted. This chaos is going to hurt Romney's chances. Much of his argument for election revolves around his attempt to show that he has greater executive experience and skills than Obama. Yet, in comparing both man's initial presidential campaigns, Obama has performed notably better.
I still think this election is Romney's to lose but he is making the inherently weak position of Obama look much better.
Actually, as an avid reader of HP in 2008, if anything, HP was slightly if not outright pro Obama.
One must remember Hillary voted for the Cheney/Bush misbegotten/illegal totally unnecessary Iraq War.
Most all the "liberal" pubs were on the Obama bandwagon after Obama won the Iowa caucus.
Plus many were not in favor of Bush/Clinton/Bush/Clinton.
Chip S. said...
I have never seen any voting patterns reported by race within the military. Got a source for that?
Are you familiar with todays military? It looks more like the Bronx than Manhattan.
And then he says he can't "worry about those people" as he tries to win votes, because they will never be convinced. He's not saying he doesn't care about them as citizens and human beings, just that he won't devote any attention to trying to cull some of their votes.
This is blatantly dishonest pro-Romney spin. The sentences that follow the quote Althouse excerpted is "[M]y job is not to worry about those people. I'll never convince them they should take personal responsibility and care for their lives." That's almost half the population of the country that he's dismissing as irredeemably irresponsible and careless. A noble sentiment for a would-be president! You, Althouse, ask us to compare his comments to Obama's infamous "bitter clingers." The main difference I see is that Obama never says "I can't reach those people, and I'll never even try."
Kovacs said...
The main difference I see is that Obama never says "I can't reach those people, and I'll never even try."
He doesn't have to since his economic policies have put many of them there to begin with. Unemployment is still ridiculously high, and that's not even from the job participation numbers, not to mention the levels of increase in food stamp entrants into the system. Romney isn't the POTUS. His policies haven't done this, but Urkel's has. See the difference or am I just wasting my time, like Romney has said.
Ah yes the concern trolls are out in force "I'm surprised how badly the Romney campaign is doing blah, blah boolshit, TPM talking point, sadly shaking head" Yeah, yeah I'm sure you are. Wall street will be tanking in a few weeks and we will be talking about how quickly we can get President Romney to take over.
" where are all the Willard apologists?"
Some of us don't encourage trolls.
Obama administration is negotiating with Egypt to transfer the Blind Sheikh there...just what the mobs were rioting for. You know the Blind Sheikh--serving a life sentence in the US for masterminding the World Trade Center bombings?
I'll see your video and raise you a treason.
A fair number of those 47% that Romney alluded to will vote Republican and an even larger number of them will not bother voting.....On the face of it, his statement is incorrect. He was probably just telling his audience what they want to hear. It doesn't sound so bad but give the Democrats a week to masticate it, digest it, and pass it through the colon and this remark will be as noisome as Marie Antoinette's reference to the price of bread.
One presumes the little animal has some reason to make a big deal of Puffington breaking the bitter clinger thing, but it looks an awful lot like flailing.
janmaxwell said...
Sorry, edbutcher, but your beloved Rasmussen currently has Obama at 45%...so the 47% Mitt referred to must include EVERYONE who will vote for Obama.
And if you think that firefighers, police officers, and the military are ALL voting for Mitt...then I have a bridge to sell you.
And if Maxwell thinks any sizable portion of them will be voting for Zero, I'll see that bridge and raise an island for $24 in glass beads.
What defines a troll ?
"shiloh said...
Shouting T
Feel free to ignore my posts ... if you can."
William said...
A fair number of those 47% that Romney alluded to will vote Republican and an even larger number of them will not bother voting.....
Excellent point. There was an item today that some black clergy are telling their congregations to stay home.
That sound you hear in the background is shilol's Depends giving way.
"Are you familiar with todays military? It looks more like the Bronx than Manhattan."
Seriously?
The military looks like Iowa. It looks a little bit like Alabama. Add a touch or two of New Mexico.
"So, the 47% of people who are going to vote for Obama "don't take personal responsibility and care for their lives"?
Would that include the firefighters and police officers whom you rely on?"
No my son is a firefighter and is Romney 100% I don't think he knows an Obama firefighter. Maybe some of the women.
"How about the people who teach your kids?"
You mean like gigantic Sharon Lewis in CHicago ? You call that teach ?
Romney's statement makes too much of a mish-mash of various income states and attitudes. His central point in identifying with his audience was that there should not be an open ended entitlement expectation. What the liberals see in the conservatives as mean however is just, on the 'conservative' side generally, that there should be a limit. In our history of the progressive state, one part of the edifice is something that, I think, is being missed by the conservative side as reflected in these remarks. In the VA, thee is something called Veterans Industries. This is a shop which gets contracted assembly jobs. Because it is for the disabled, they are allowed to pay very little, a dollar an hour?, but there were a surprising number of people who wanted the jobs. It seems minimum wage is putting people who are not sufficiently productive at higher paying work out of work.
"In the mean time, unemployment is still over 8%"
But really, we can't concern ourselves with those 8%. Because like another 39% of the population, they are people "who are dependent upon government, who believe that they are victims, who believe the government has a responsibility to care for them, who believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing, to you-name-it."
So why would we worry about them?
The problem with this is that a lot of the 47% are not Obama supporters either. Just like all the rich aren't in Romeny's corner. Some of those who are not well off plan on fixing that eventually, and would be willing to pay some tax, but politicians keep trying to buy them off. They at least have some moral footing - they aren't supporting higher taxes on other people, just because they unfairly benefit from them. They would rather benefit from a stronger economy and the self-supporting jobs that
creates.
"In the mean time, unemployment is still over 8% and our embassies are under attack and Barry is doing nothing about it."
Not true. Wasn't there that rumor about the Blind Sheik?
gk1 said...
Wall street will be tanking in a few weeks and we will be talking about how quickly we can get President Romney to take over.
The Dow Jones is up more than 60% during Obama's first term, one of the best performances for any president. Care to compare that to Bush's record.
"Teachers and Firefighters UNIONS certainly were not on the Republican's favorites list in Wisconsin."
FIFY
The teachers who have jobs because of Walker's reforms might not agree with you.
So I guess Romney is saying senior citizens won't vote for him? Because by and large they're the ones with the entitlements.
That awkward moment when the guy who is running to give himself millions in tax breaks says you want free stuff.
This isn't a big story.
If he says he hates campaigning in the south because the people are so low class it would be big but this isn't big.
Also, fags definitely don't rely on government, unless they are grossies and they don't count. All my fag friends are wealthy, have amazing jobs and SHOP! We tend to be rich, educated and successful. I don't want or need the government for anything.
Janmaxwell, another lefty newcomer, shows up in the nick of time to provide some balance to right-thinking blog but who--curiously--already sounds so familar (edbutcher?) and even attracts the same admirers.
Sorry to get so personal in advance.
My 401k has been doing incredibly well the past couple of years.
" AReasonableMan said...
gk1 said...
Wall street will be tanking in a few weeks and we will be talking about how quickly we can get President Romney to take over.
The Dow Jones is up more than 60% during Obama's first term, one of the best performances for any president. Care to compare that to Bush's record."
Do you know why the Dow is up ? Of course not. You've no idea of what inflation is. Do you know what people with money do when the dollar is going to talk ?
Of course you don't.
Romney's statement is just innacurate. Although he is correct that 47% will not vote against Obama, it's not becuase all of them are moochers. Streisand isn't a moocher, Springsteen isn't a moocher, 95% blacks aren't moochers. Some of that 47% are just stupid, or racist. I think that actually covers most of them, regardless of income.
Oh yeah we are in for a hair cut libtard. I just hope the whole ship doesn't go under. I won't disclose proprietary information but there is a nasty surpise coming in a few weeks on the heals of this QE3 fiasco. Wish it weren't so, but is coming. And president short pants will be packing. (PS. He knows too)
MSNBC is very fond of this story frame. Lawrence O'Donnell is committing his whole show to it.
Right now LO is saying Romney is trying to walk it all back. David Corn thinks that is hilarious. They are having a great party.
shiloh said...
There are military personnel who qualify for food stamps
Yes, and those are the ones that I am more than happy to support with my tax dollars. And you're point is?
hmm, MSNBC has Bob Ellison's attention lol. So much for a non-story ...
shiloh said...
1. Denial and Isolation
2. Anger
3. Bargaining
4. Depression
5. Acceptance
And all that jazz ...
yes, the 5 stages of grief that Shiloh will undergo when Romney wins.
Synova said...
The military looks like Iowa. It looks a little bit like Alabama. Add a touch or two of New Mexico.
This is fair up to a point. Blacks are overrepresented and whites are underrepresented in the military, which was my point.
Romney said it inartfully at what was a private event,
But, the issue is of grave importance. How can our nation survive when more and more people every year become dependent on the government. The amount of dependency increase under Obama is a disaster. Dems want dependency so they can stay in power, but dependency will mean even more poverty for those on the dole.
I hope this statement brings up this discussion. We cannot go on like this - where more people in a month sign ip for Social Security Disability than get a job. It is a disaster.
So, Romney has no intention of appealing to the 47 % of us he regards as parasites. That's a whole new way of campaigning for president. Good luck with that.
gk1 said...
I just hope the whole ship doesn't go under. I won't disclose proprietary information but there is a nasty surpise coming in a few weeks on the heals of this QE3 fiasco. Wish it weren't so, but is coming.
Another hater, betting against America.
"Much of his argument for election revolves around his attempt to show that he has greater executive experience and skills than Obama. Yet, in comparing both man's initial presidential campaigns, Obama has performed notably better."
_______________
Nothing Romney has done in has campaign compares with the disasterious leadership Obama has brought on this country. $5 trillion in Debt. 47 million on food stamps. 48 straight months of 8%+ unemployment. Doubling of gas prices. loss of $5000 per year for middle class families. Total disaster in the middle east with the take over of Libya and Egypt by terrorists.
But, hey, apparently Obama has a well managed campaign....please.
The main difference I see is that Obama never says "I can't reach those people, and I'll never even try."
You're right. He never actually says it.
http://campaignstops.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/11/27/the-future-of-the-obama-coalition/#
"This is fair up to a point. Blacks are overrepresented and whites are underrepresented in the military, which was my point."
Blacks are underrepresented in combat roles and whites are overrepresented in combat roles.
I suppose that your point is that black soldiers will vote for Obama exclusively, as black people in general are expected to do?
Still, you realize that if a conservative said anything remotely like "urban" they'd be accused of using a racial dog whistle, right?
I live in one of the three highest poverty regions in the USA. I know whereof he speaks--the takers. They think work is for suckers.
"yes, the 5 stages of grief that Shiloh will undergo when Romney wins."
Really?
Many of you cons seem to be a lot more "excitable" than Shiloh.
Many of you seem to be really angered by the POTUS, I worry about your mental health if BHO wins.
Worry about easygoing Shiloh? Not so much.
What's offensive is the notion that everyone who is for Obama is dependent on government, a victim, etc. while everyone who is for Romney is free standing, doesn't rely on subsidies, etc. Empirically that's just baloney. In particular, many red states are major consumers of government subsidies and get more in federal expenditures than they contribute in tax revenues.
And how about the statement that he would be doing better if his parents were Latino? What if the shoe were on the other foot and Obama said he would be doing better if his dad had been white?
"So, Romney has no intention of appealing to the 47 % of us he regards as parasites. That's a whole new way of campaigning for president. Good luck with that."
47% - the amount of partisan support for Obama - believe in the dependency nation. They believe that government should provide for people rather than people providing for themselves. Some of those people are dependents themselves, some are those who just want socialism. Romney should not expect to get their vote because Romney wants a nation of self worth, not a nation of dependency
Maybe I'm in the minority, but I don't expect any person to be perfect. I don't expect them to know everything, or be 100% correct in all their assumptions.
I expect them to make mistakes, and learn from them, and have a plan based on sound economics and leadership.
Romney meets those standards. Obama doesn't.
On a semi-related note, this is not the actions of a confident electorate:
http://www.campusreform.org/blog/?ID=4364
Breakin' ...
Willard is now retroactively using his etch-a-sketch to make the entire year of 2012 disappear.
He's trying to time warp back to high school when several of his close friends held a classmate down and Willard cut his hair.
Just like Obama gave a speech on race, Willard will give a speech on how not to run a presidential campaign er stupidity.
Romney is so totally out of his element it's beyond cringeworthy!
The other big theme on both Rachel Maddow's and Lawrence O'Donnell's shows was how funny it all is. Those conservatives are really funny, because they're losing like tricycle-riders in a dragster race, and they don't know it. So funny!
I consider Obama's victory a possibility. These people on MSNBC don't seem to consider Obama's defeat a possibility. Surprise!
Sloanasaurus said...
Nothing Romney has done in has campaign compares with the disasterious leadership Obama has brought on this country. $5 trillion in Debt. 47 million on food stamps. 48 straight months of 8%+ unemployment. Doubling of gas prices. loss of $5000 per year for middle class families. Total disaster in the middle east with the take over of Libya and Egypt by terrorists.
But, hey, apparently Obama has a well managed campaign....please.
Just making an apples to apples comparison. Given his poor performance on a relatively simple task, at least compared to the Presidency, it is not unreasonable to believe that Romney would have performed even more poorly than Obama as president.
PB&J is just another sockpuppet, and one of the more obvious.
Conservatives tend to have little patience for lies. We play by the rules and expect others to do the same.
That doesn't mean, should the unthinkable happen, we will not suck it up and move on.
It's the Lefties that foam at the mouth for years on end.
"Worry about easygoing Shiloh? Not so much."
As always, I feel their pain ...
One other thing: both Maddow and O'Donnell are pushing the notion that early, absentee, vote-by-mail voting is a big help for Obama, and a big hurt for Romney. Maddow did a long segment on how voting has already started in some places, including Ohio. They're voting now, and they will vote for Obama, of course, you silly conservatives!
Are we supposed to believe that none of the Romney voters have paid zero income tax?
Absurd.
There are low income cons who don't make enough dough to (after the earned income credit) pay income taxes, but they are hardcore R voters. I've personally met some of these folks.
And there are rich folks who support BHO. I know them too.
Romney would be complete toast if he gave away all of the poor (i.e. non-income-tax paying) cons who are supporting him. Dope.
Would that include the firefighters and police officers whom you rely on?
How about the people who teach your kids?
How about the parents who hold down two jobs so they can give their kids a better life? You want to tell them they don't take personal responsibility?
How about the soldiers who are under attack in Afghanistan? They don't accept personal responsibility?????
This is the line that is absolutely going to kill him. Believe me, the ad is being written right now featuring people just like the ones I listed.
______________________
No it won't because those people who don't support Obama (cops and firefighters) know what Romney was talking about. They know that Obama is seeding a dependency nation, that is slowly churning to a point of no return where a majority of voters are dependent on government, and more importantly, on the outcome of an election.
Government is not the solution to our problem, government is the problem.
Areasonable....I have worked commission sales in the past. Trust me, those who are good at selling things to people generally aren't good at running things.
Barry would be a great commission salesman ("you can't afford not to purchase this").
Mitt (aka, the grownup) is good as a leader and adminstrator.
"This is blatantly dishonest pro-Romney spin. The sentences that follow the quote Althouse excerpted is "[M]y job is not to worry about those people. I'll never convince them they should take personal responsibility and care for their lives."
I just listened to it. Didn't hear that. I will listen again.
Okay, it's there. But in context is exactly what Althouse said it was. Which is why I didn't hear it, because he was always talking about who was potentially willing to vote for him and not about, EVER, not worrying about people as *people*.
Not that taking that bit out that sounds as bad as possible is anything like *dishonest anti-Romney spin*, not at all.
Synova said...
I suppose that your point is that black soldiers will vote for Obama exclusively, as black people in general are expected to do?
No. I have recently had a lot of contact with veterans and I was surprised to find what a racially mixed group they were and what a range of politics views were represented. The common image of the military as rock-ribbed republicans does not reflect reality, at least in my neck of the woods.
"Government is not the solution to our problem, government is the problem."
Indeed as all Rep politicians should immediately resign, and Dutch who sarcastically posited ((( I'm from the govt. and I'm here to help ))) Reagan should have never run for political office.
Cons ad nauseam hypocrisy is somewhat amusing ...
AReasonableFacsimileofaHuman wrote...
Are you familiar with todays military? It looks more like the Bronx than Manhattan.
I've given you the benefit of the doubt up to now, despite your screen name. But the fact that you think this constitutes a coherent reply to my question about data on blacks' and whites' voting patterns in the military demonstrates to my satisfaction that you're not capable of thought.
One established fact is that the military vote is overwhelmingly conservative, which is why the Dems go to such lengths to suppress it. So the entire premise of your comment is faulty, not just its logic.
Chuck66 said...
I have worked commission sales in the past. Trust me, those who are good at selling things to people generally aren't good at running things.
Barry would be a great commission salesman ("you can't afford not to purchase this").
Mitt (aka, the grownup) is good as a leader and administrator.
Except that it is the organizational aspects that seem to be so fucked up in Romney's campaign. Both the set pieces, like the convention, and the rapid responses lack a lot in terms of execution.
Just making an apples to apples comparison. Given his poor performance on a relatively simple task, at least compared to the Presidency, it is not unreasonable to believe that Romney would have performed even more poorly than Obama as president.
Obama's dislike of business has caused the greatest harm to America. IN most recessions business sheds the workers they empoloy to help their business expand. IN most recoveries these workers are rehired as a positive view of the future returns. But, that has not happened this time. Most of that sour view of the future is due to Obama. His outright hatred of private business is the number one reason. After that its all his anti-business policies: Obamacare, the EPA, burdensome regulation, constant rhetoric about higher taxes, endless deficits, money printing, and endless uncertainty. Obama apparently cares a lot about the worker, but doesn't give a rip for people who create jobs. That is why no jobs are being created, and why the economy will continue in the crapper if Obama remains in office.
A Romney or McCain would have taken a more balanced approach to the recovery, and not just favored workers over business. Right now most businesses do not have a positive vision of the future and have not held such a view since the Stimulus was passed. Obamacare double-downed on anti0business and since then it has been hate business, hate business, hate business ever since
Repubs have spent years cutting income taxes and increasing things like the Child tax Credit. This means fewer people pay income taxes.
So whenever you hear a stat like "47% don't pay income taxes," remember: Reagan and Bush helped build that.
Although it's explainable, this IS a gaffe in the silly world of class warfare and politics, but it's still just one. Obama is way ahead on the gaffes so far. We just forget how many there have been. Just Google it - this is nothing by comparison, but Obama needs this gaffe to to make him look like he's not a whole lot dumber than Romney, which he is. No success running anything, ever.
"The common image of the military as rock-ribbed republicans does not reflect reality, at least in my neck of the woods."
The only numbers I've ever heard was about a 75%/25% split, but I don't know how that was determined. Mostly the military discourages a partisan political mindset *at all* no matter how much they push voting overseas. Most military people I've ever met are pretty much apolitical, no matter what they'd be if you *asked* them.
And that seems right to me.
Still, as much as it baffled some people that anyone in the military would vote for Bush in 2004, I'd say that's got to be double plus for Obama in 2008. I was actually sort of surprised to hear that it was Marines complaining that the Embassy in Cairo didn't issue their Marine guards ammunition. I'm not surprised if it's true, because as a normal policy is probably is true. I was shocked that it would be discussed openly. That seemed a departure from the no-politics military "normal" that I expect.
It never ceases to amaze me how ignorant the left is about the military, who serves, what part of the country they come from. I've been to many bases in the states and overseas and they are an awesome sight to see. And I can also confidently tell you they HATE the current POTUS, yeah even the african american ones. Deal with it bitches. They know a slacker who can't hack it when they see one. Did you check out obama's speech in Fort Bliss a few weeks ago? You could hear tumble weeds rumbling across the hangar it was so quiet during his "applause lines". Trust me he won't be on any more bases unless he can have more plants up front. They HATE him.
Continued...These tax cuts for the poor were partly in order to make further tax cuts for the rich political palatable. But now that fewer people pay income taxes as a result of GOP policies, they’re being called lazy and dependent. And thus the GOP's tax cuts are being used to make a case that the rich are overtaxed and that the less-rich are becoming dependent. Which leads to a policy agenda of tax cuts for the rich and cuts to social services for the non-rich. EK
Fun, fun, fun.
Chip -- Ask Reasonable about the beautiful architecture of "Europe" and why the United States ought to be like Europe. Because of the architecture, see, and because the United States had a civil war, unlike any country in Europe since 1861.
This person's lack of understanding about the world is both disgusting and frightening.
@Synova/
Re: racial composition of the armed services: An Army DI once was quoted as saying that "The Army is made up of only three kinds of people: southern whites, southern blacks--and all the rest.." LOL
It's true that Republicans share a lot of the blame for this unfair skewing of the tax burden over the years. I just find it reprehensible and immoral for so many people to not be paying taxes. How can we consider ourselves all in this together and united under such a system?
I think that nearly everyone should pay some tax. I would like it to be a minimum of 10%. I don't care if you are homeless, and panhandle $20 bucks a day. You should give $2 to the government. Maybe that should be in sales tax, but everyone needs to contribute something if they want to enjoy the trappings of our society. A person needs that to give them dignity, and worth. Everyone should be able to tell politicians and cops: "Listen up. I'm a god-damned tax payer! I pay your salary!"
Regarding the current presser, ifthe GOP wants to retain any dignity, now they have to stop blaming the media and start blaming the existence of recording devices.
Seven, thank God you are back. I heard about your health problems and didn't think you were going to make. Let go of the anger, man. It's killing you.
Gas prices are one of Obama's biggest failures. It's doubled in just four years. That is outrageous. The average person uses 750 gallons of gas year. But this amount is far higher for people living in places like MInnesota, Wisconsin, Ohio, Florida than people in New York and New Jersey.
Under Obama that average person is now spending an additional $1500 a year alone on gas. What a total waste. Most of this is caused by Obama's no drilling policies and his excessive speding and debt.
ALH: "Oso Negro," as in "black bear."
janmaxwell: "edutcher," not "edbutcher." Assuming that was a typo rather than snark.
shiloh, meanwhile, thinks it's amusing to call Romney "Willard." No doubt he spent the 2008 campaign saying "Barry Hussein Obama," and most of the 90s referring to William Jefferson Clinton, and for that matter never referred to "Jimmy Carter," only to "James Earl Carter, Jr." Had he been around ca. 1912, He would have made a point of calling the Democratic Presidential candidate "Thomas."
It is entertaining, though, to find someone who thinks "Willard" is a sillier name for a President than "Mitt."
You're stupid, bro.
"Except that it is the organizational aspects that seem to be so fucked up in Romney's campaign. Both the set pieces, like the convention, and the rapid responses lack a lot in terms of execution."
What was wrong with the convention? And was Romney in charge of it? I don't think he was.
What "rapid responses" were so bad? Not, could they be spun bad, but were bad?
Is anything Romney has done in his campaign as bad as Obama's lack of response to the recent unrest, his trip to Vegas, his failure to appear serious about violent outbreaks in the middle east, finding out that he'd rather not listen to someone give an intelligence briefing and we're supposed to trust that he read it all in secret? How about rumors that the Blind Shiek might be sent to Egypt?
Romney's "gaffe" is going to be the biggest story of the next few days.
Do you think that has some relation to actual reality?
In TRUTH nothing Romney has done *combined* approaches the explanation by Obama that Egypt is not our Ally followed by the explanation that Obama's staff hadn't prepared that statement for him because the question was not anticipated.
But this will be the biggest news in the whole wide world for the next couple of days.
Watch.
And then ask how you got the idea that Romney's campaign was inept.
Today, Mitt Romney Lost the Election
"So what's the upshot? "My job is not to worry about those people," he says. He also notes, describing President Obama's base, "These are people who pay no income tax. Forty-seven percent of Americans pay no income tax."
This is an utter disaster for Romney.
Romney already has trouble relating to the public and convincing people he cares about them. Now, he's been caught on video saying that nearly half the country consists of hopeless losers.
Romney has been vigorously denying President Obama's claims that his tax plan would raise taxes on the middle class. Now, he's been caught on video suggesting that low- and middle-income Americans are undertaxed.
(That one is especially problematic given the speculation about what's on Mitt's unreleased pre-2010 tax returns.)"
The Real Romney Captured On Tape Turns Out To Be A Sneering Plutocrat
"Presidential campaigns wallow so tediously in pseudo-events and manufactured outrage that our senses can be numbed to the appearance of something genuinely momentous. Mitt Romney’s secretly recorded comments at a fundraiser are such an event – they reveal something vital about Romney, and they disqualify his claim to the presidency.
Emphasis mine ...
You know it's not actually the poorest among us who play the victim. It's often those of us who have the most & feel threatened.
Every day, Shiloh reports eagerly at Althouse that Romney has lost the election.
What a strange psychological defect to have.
Actually MDT, 2008 used Barack Hussein Obama many times for emphasis, but usually just used Obama.
And have always used John McCain because I respect his service and sacrifice to country. Whereas Romney as mentioned up thread, not so much.
May Willard's campaign RIP !!!
Sloanasaurus said...
Gas prices are one of Obama's biggest failures. It's doubled in just four years. That is outrageous. The average person uses 750 gallons of gas year. But this amount is far higher for people living in places like MInnesota, Wisconsin, Ohio, Florida than people in New York and New Jersey.
Let's analyze why gas prices were so low when Obama was elected. Oh, I remember, we were in the middle of fucking global financial crisis and recession. Supply and demand, brother, supply and demand.
In the campaign, Obama has been doing little else but responding to the Romney message. Romney has been out in front of almost everything. The campaign is not Romney's problem, the density of Obama voters is. Mitt loves them all, but the slow kids take a lot more time, and some just can't learn at all, especially with the press telling them it's cool to be stupid. Time will tell if he can get through to them.
Today's report of Romney's demise is so exciting!!!
Let's use exclamation points!!!
Tomorrow we'll use more!!!!
If you think about it, Romney is like the ultimate Sith Lord. His fart is more newsworthy than the death of worlds.
Romney already has trouble relating to the public and convincing people he cares about them. Now, he's been caught on video saying that nearly half the country consists of hopeless losers.
Romney has been vigorously denying President Obama's claims that his tax plan would raise taxes on the middle class. Now, he's been caught on video suggesting that low- and middle-income Americans are undertaxed.
THis is such a lie. Romney is not against 47% of the people who are dependent on government. He said that 47% of the people who support Obama believe in dependency on government. The fact is that democrats want more people to be dependent on government - Romney is not going to get their votes.
Synova,
You forgot to be upset because BHO took so long to "plug the damn hole."
Ha ha.
Con outrage du jour is funny.
On the bright side for teabaggers, Super PACS can now pull their $$$ from Romney's death march and now totally concentrate down ballot to compensate for the Willard drag.
Seven, It's strange how these lovers of Europe and its splendors prefer to go through the major effort of transforming the US into its image rather than just moving there.
Oh, wait--they'd have to be able to find employment there to do that.
Yes bag, anyone who votes for BHO is dumb as well as poor.
Hopefully Romney will add this "dumb" tag to his next description of folks who don't agree w/ him.
I thought that what was interesting about what Romney said was that because 47% pay no income tax he can't get anywhere with talking about tax breaks for the middle class, that all people hear is more tax breaks for the rich because that's what the Democrats will claim he's saying. People who don't pay income taxes don't care about lower tax rates for the middle class.
That was an interesting point. Anyone who is paying income tax is, conceptually, the "rich".
"Funny" used to mean something humorous. On the left in this thread, it means something rightist.
Chip S. said...
Seven, It's strange how these lovers of Europe and its splendors prefer to go through the major effort of transforming the US into its image rather than just moving there.
Oh, wait--they'd have to be able to find employment there to do that.
Back to hating on Europe, this snobs, with their overpriced currency and great architecture.
PBJ fails to understand the concept of outrage du jour. This is because PBJ is a moron.
And also an Obama voter. And also not rich. Coincidence?
Let's analyze why gas prices were so low when Obama was elected. Oh, I remember, we were in the middle of fucking global financial crisis and recession. Supply and demand, brother, supply and demand.
Wait, isn't that also true of the stock market?
The fact is gas prices were at $2 a gallon for years up through 2006, but a nasty spike starting with Hurrican Katrina drove them up in 2007 until they collapsed with the rest of the market.
But what explains the rise in Gas prices under Obama. Now its back to $4 a gallon, in we have no growth???
Plug what hole?
The oil spill thing?
What does it matter how long it took him to plug the hole or how he couldn't manage to grease the wheels for oil clean up that wasn't completely perfect because it only got 98% of the oil out of the water. What does it matter that he got to say angry things about kicking ass?
The oil rigs up and left and people are still out of work. And he's still complicit in blocking the Keystone pipeline.
You people love him, and I have to wonder why. Is it just knee jerk you have to love whatever a conservative doesn't? Do you really decide what is right in your world by first assessing ME?
Show us the great European architecture after 1789, moron.
Also, just for fun, moron, try to figure out why I choose 1789.
Sloanasaurus said...
Let's analyze why gas prices were so low when Obama was elected. Oh, I remember, we were in the middle of fucking global financial crisis and recession. Supply and demand, brother, supply and demand.
Wait, isn't that also true of the stock market?
It's about time someone pointed that out. I've been sitting here wondering whether only the slow kids turned up for schooling today.
Sloan -- Gas prices are way up, see, because of supply and demand, because the huge economic slowdown has produced a spike in demand while supply has gone up because of shale production under Obama.
Therefore, as any fool most assuredly knows, prices are up.
Right, Reasonable? Bro?
Here, "reasonable" guy; some facts presented in easy-to-understand pictures.
You see, among sane people stating facts is not considered "hating".
You know, the "left" or at least the ones around here, were and do constantly accuse conservatives of never criticizing Bush. But conservatives criticized Bush all the time about a lot of things.
Can Obama do anything wrong? Can I even get someone to say that a sitting President saying in an interview that an ally isn't actually an *ally* might, perhaps count as a gaffe?
"Yes bag, anyone who votes for BHO is dumb as well as poor."
No, just dumb. Mitt will win most of the poor states. Most poor people don't intend to stay that way. They are smart enough to know they can change that. They're still Americans.
Romney's wrong about the 47%. About half of those don't want to be dependent on government, but Obama's economy has forced them to be so. Fight the good fight, Mitt.
Ho-hum. Yet another silly distraction. I hestitate to draw the attention of the smug lefties to this, as I think it's advantageous to our side to encourage their complacency, but DaTechGuy has taken a good look at the GOP/Dem registration numbers since 2004 and noticed something rather interesting: "At no time during the year (2012) do the Democrats have a registration advantage vs republicans, the gap closes in July & re-separates in August. The low point for the GOP was July for 34.9 and the high August at 37.6 For democrats the high was 34.0 in June & July the low was 32.4 in Feb "The Democrats won 2 election in this period 2006 & 2008 with a 6.9 advantage in 2006 & a 7.6 advantage in 2008. There is no example of the Democrats winning since 2004 with an advantage less that 6.9. The GOP won two elections in this period 2004 with a -1.6 disadvantage & 2010 with a 1.3 advantage. This means the GOP has proven it can win with not only a small lead but with an actual disadvantage. Additionally with an advantage of only 1.3 they pulled off the biggest house swing in my lifetime. I’ve covered a lot of national polls on this site over the last year and all those polls ABC, CBS, NBC, FOX have one thing in common. Not a single one of those polls had a sample with a GOP advantage." http://datechguyblog.com/2012/09/17/demoralized-as-hell-the-poll-the-media-isnt-talking-about-edition/ Am I positive R/R will win? No, since I am not a leftist, I don't go in for premature gloating. But I'm certainly sure that Obama is far from having it in the bag.
Synova said...
Can Obama do anything wrong? Can I even get someone to say that a sitting President saying in an interview that an ally isn't actually an *ally* might, perhaps count as a gaffe?
I often think Obama has made mistakes, however, this particular statement struck me as pretty shrewd. The US has a lot of leverage over Egypt, They need us a lot more than we need them. They seemed to get the message.
I thought Obama made a mistake expanding the war in Afghanistan. Since it seems to have lead to the much delayed killing of Osama I would give him a pass on this. I thought Obama made a mistake allowing Nancy Pelosi and the house Democrats such a large say in the passage of health care reform. This decision was saved by the Supreme court, but that was just dumb luck. I think he made a serious mistake in not breaking up the banks. No too big to fail meltdowns so far, but it's just a matter of time. I think the failure to aggressively prosecute the Wall Street executives at the center of the bank failures was a political mistake, although probably the right thing to do economically.
"I don't see anything bad in there at all."
What, you can't hear all the Mua-ha-ha's emanating from between all those teeth that are clenched around all those fancy cigarette holders?
What's wrong with that? You mean aside from the obvious fact that not everyone who pays no federal income taxes is a hard core Democrat? Or that the federal tax/no-tax divide is not static -- it's not the same people every year who have or do not have a net federal income tax burden -- so that Romney's characterization of the 47% actually applies to most Americans?
Well, according to a Tax Policy Center report last year, about 2/3 of that 47% actually have income of between $10,000 and $75,000 per year.
About 1/5 of that 47% are elderly whose tax burden is reduced to zero because of tax credits for the elderly.
About 15% of that 47% owe no federal income taxes because of tax credits for children and the working poor.
About 2.5% of that 47% owe no federal income taxes because of itemized deductions. About 2.8% of that 47% owe no federal income taxes because of education credits.
In fact, about 1.5% of that 47% actually have income of over $75,000 per year. Indeed, several hundreds of thousands of them have income in excess of $1 million per year.
That 47% who Romney dismisses as Obama voters "no matter what" is full of people who are raising children, who are working in low and middle income jobs, who are going to school, who are disabled, who are retired.
The vast majority of that 47% pay into the system this year and in past years with their Social Security taxes and unemployment, health, sales, state income and other taxes. It seems highly probable that most of them have paid federal taxes in past years.
But Romney's message for all those people is that they all are "dependent on government," that they all "believe that they are victims" who feel "entitled" to have the government "give" them everything, that none of them "take personal responsibility and care for their lives." That for that portion of the country, the only voting issue that matters is their sense of entitlement to government handouts paid for by the other half, including the very wealthiest for whom Romney so fervently wants to lower taxes.
Romney's portrayal of nearly half the nation strikes me as untrue, dismissive and insulting. Yet you say you see "nothing bad there at all." I'm at a loss to understand why.
So there you go, Synova, even the mistakes all turn out good. He's that good.
" AReasonableMan said...
Chip S. said...
Seven, It's strange how these lovers of Europe and its splendors prefer to go through the major effort of transforming the US into its image rather than just moving there.
Oh, wait--they'd have to be able to find employment there to do that.
Back to hating on Europe, this snobs, with their overpriced currency and great architecture."
Says the man who knows nothing about it. Watch the Euro, if you know how.
I'm at a loss
People who say this don't generally write entirely too long treatises in blog comment threads that nobody will read.
Make a note of it.
Thanks.
Also, unemployment is over eight percent and gas is over four dollars. And Guantanamo remains open. And the debt is beyond silly and unsustainable.
But the important thing is that no one feels disrespected. Right?
Did you see the photo of the LA Times building that Chip S. linked? Whoever added that ugly blister should be punished. It is a crime against architecture. I just now spelled architecture right the first time for the first time in my life. I did it by thinking Archy tec ture, and just knowing the y isn't right.
Rosinerne,
The real kicker here is that a large fraction of the 47% paying no net federal income tax are old people. They are predominantly Romney voters. It is hard to get much more tone deaf than this.
"About 1/5 of that 47% are elderly whose tax burden is reduced to zero because of tax credits for the elderly."
Hey, an investment advisor !
How about some advice, champ? I've been missing out on the elderly tax benefits and I'll be 75 next birthday. Most of my Social Security goes to taxes.
It'll be interesting to see if the Obama campaign itself uses this clip against Romney.
The risk for Obama is what it will say to independents about the Obama base.
Well, no, I don't see anything bad in there at all, either. Neither would any person who has eyes to see and a brain to think see anything wrong in there.
But the left is in denial. The left sees lots wrong in there because they bristle at the notion that Americans should live like Americans with personal responsibility and self reliance. This is Mother Jones. This is David Corn. They are lefties. They don't like the American idea.
Reasonable -- Tell us about how "Europe" hasn't had any civil wars since 1861, along with your stereotypes about elderly voters and your hilarious beliefs about Western European architecture that seem to have developed by looking at postcards.
I'll wait. Bro.
Well, no, I don't see anything bad in there at all, either. Neither would any person who has eyes to see and a brain to think see anything wrong in there.
But the left is in denial. The left sees lots wrong in there because they bristle at the notion that Americans should live like Americans with personal responsibility and self reliance. This is Mother Jones. This is David Corn. They are lefties. They don't like the American idea.
Romney's portrayal of nearly half the nation strikes me as untrue, dismissive and insulting. Yet you say you see "nothing bad there at all." I'm at a loss to understand why.
All that tells us is that the idea people might disagree with your opinions is a completely alien concept to you. :)
It is very clearly a problem when you have 47% of people who think they can vote themselves more government $$programs$$ without having to pay for it.
We should all pay something - even if its just a modest amount.
When you want bigger government and you vote for bigger government, you should be prepared to pay more for it.
This is nothing.
How about some more impeach BHO posts?
In addition to the crime of.....er.....whatever it is that InstaHouse is fussing about, maybe BHO should also be impeached because Romney hates poor people.
Now that makes sense.
“Give me your tired...your poor...your temporarily unemployed...your elderly...your sick...your students...so that I may call them moochers"
All the drive-by lefties are coming by for this one. And PBJ trying so hard to sound sophisticated. Still.
This one has to be the one that sinks Romney. Has to be. By golly, you've got him cornered this time. He's going to get soundly throttled. Because if we've learned nothing since 1980, it's that Americans love welfare queens and chomp at the bit to vote for candidates who support them.
Reasonable -- Tell us about how "Europe" hasn't had any civil wars since 1861, along with your stereotypes about elderly voters and your hilarious beliefs about Western European architecture that seem to have developed by looking at postcards.
Technically Europe - if you want to say the entire continent combined and leave out the conflicts in hte individual nations - has not had a civil war since 1861 (except for a few minor skirmishes like WWI and WWII, but other than those its been pretty peachy).
I watched Romney's press conference. He said the video was in response to a question about the process of winning the election. Romney urged the person to release the full video to put it into context. I am sure the chances of that are zero.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा